content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction}
The Dirac electron system has attracted a great deal of attention from theoretical and experimental viewpoints.\cite{Novoselov_Nature}
A variety of materials with Dirac points in energy band structure have been developed.
\cite{Hirayama2018,Bernevig2018}
However, the number of systems where the Dirac point is located in the vicinity of Fermi level is still limited.
The Dirac electron systems in molecular conductors\cite{Kajita2014}
have been extensively studied, since the zero-gapped state with the Fermi level at the Dirac point was found in a two-dimensional molecular conductor, $\alpha$-(BEDT-TTF)$_2$I$_3$ (BEDT-TTF=Bis(ethylenedithio)tetrathiafulvalene).\cite{Katayama2006_JPSJ75}
Among them, we found a nodal line semimetal state in a single-component molecular conductor based on a metal dithiolene complex [Pd(dddt)$_2$] (dddt=5,6-dihydro-1,4-dithiin-2,3-dithiolate) under high pressure.\cite{Kato_JACS}
At ambient pressure, [Pd(dddt)$_2$] is a normal band insulator with fully occupied HOMO band and completely empty LUMO band. Since the metal dithiolene complexes with the square planar coordination geometry have a small HOMO-LUMO energy gap, enlargement of the bandwidth by the application of pressure can induce overlapping energy bands. Indeed, under pressure, the HOMO band and the LUMO band with opposite curvatures in [Pd(dddt)$_2$] overlap and induce
electron transfer from the HOMO band to the LUMO band.
The node of the HOMO-LUMO coupling, where the gap formation does not work, provides the Dirac point that is located around the Fermi level. The mechanism of the Dirac cone formation in this system can be understood using an effective model of 2 $\times$ 2 Hamiltonian.\cite{Kato2017_JPSJ,Tsumuraya2018_JPSJ,Liu2018}
Within the three-dimensional Brillouin zone, the Dirac point moves in a loop.
The topological number indicates that the system is a topological nodal line semimetal.
These results indicate that single-component molecular conductors can easily provide such a type of Dirac electron system.
Indeed, after our work, an ambient-pressure Dirac electron system based on a single-component molecular conductor [Pt(dmdt)$_2$]
(dmdt=dimethyltetrathiafulvalenedithiolate) was disclosed by the first principles DFT (Density Functional Theory) band calculation.\cite{Zhou2019}
We report here a tight-binding model for [Pt(dmdt)$_2$] and indicate that this system demonstrates a typical and simple example of the Dirac cone formation mechanism in the single-component molecular conductors.
We also discuss the nature of the open nodal line in terms of the parity of the wavefunctions at eight TRIMs (time reversal invariant momenta).
\section{Model}
\subsection{Crystal structure and intermolecular transfer integrals}
Crystal structure of [Pt(dmdt)$_2$] is very simple.\cite{Zhou2019}
The space group is $P\bar{1}$ and the unit cell
($a=6.620$\AA, $b$=7.611\AA, $c$=11.639\AA,
$\alpha$=86.05$^\circ$,
$\beta$=78.98$^\circ$,
$\gamma$=75.04$^\circ$)
contains only one molecule on the inversion center.
Molecular packing of [Pt(dmdt)$_2$] units within the $b$--$c$ plane exhibits
the stretcher bond arrangement with the face-to-face overlap between molecules of half a molecule, which forms a two-dimensional (2D) conduction layer
(Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a)).
Along the interlayer direction (parallel to the $a$ axis), [Pt(dmdt)$_2$]
molecules are arranged uniformly in the side-by-side manner
(Fig.~\ref{fig1}(b)).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{Fig.1.eps}
\caption{(Color online)
Crystal structure of [Pt(dmdt)$_2$]
and intermolecular couplings.
}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
Since the unit cell contains one [Pt(dmdt)$_2$] molecule with HOMO and LUMO, we consider one HOMO band and one LUMO band in the tight-binding model.
Calculations of molecular orbitals and intermolecular overlap integrals
($S$) between HOMOs and LUMOs by extended H\"uckel method
were carried out on the basis of crystal structure
data.~\cite{Zhou2019}
Reported sets of semi-empirical parameters for Slater-type atomic orbitals and valence shell ionization potentials
for H,~\cite{Hoffmann_1} C,~\cite{Hoffmann_1} S,~\cite{Clementi} and
Pt~\cite{Hoffmann_2} were used for the calculations.
Intermolecular transfer integrals, $t$ (eV),
were estimated using the equation $t = - 10S$ (Table~\ref{table1}).
Intralayer transfer integrals ($t_c$, $t_p$)
including HOMO-LUMO couplings
are found to be about 10 times greater than interlayer ones ($t_a$, $t_q$),
which indicates that the system has a 2D network parallel
to the $b$--$c$ plane with small but significant interlayer interactions.
An important point is that the transfer integrals for intralayer HOMO-HOMO and LUMO-LUMO couplings ($t_c$, $t_p$) have opposite signs
and thus the HOMO band is convex upward and the LUMO band is convex downward.
\begin{table}
\caption{
HOMO-HOMO (H), LUMO-LUMO (L), and HOMO-LUMO (HL) intermolecular transfer Integrals (meV)\\
}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular} {cccc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Transfer integral* & H & L & HL \\
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Intralayer \;\;$t_c$ & $67.1$ & $-62.9$ & $64.9$ \\
\;\; \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; \;\;$t_p$ & $53.4$ & $-49.8$ & $51.7$ \\
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Interlayer \;\; $t_a $ & $-6.2$ & $-6.5$ & $0.3 $ \\
\;\; \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; \;\;$t_q $ & $8.2$ & $-7.4$ & $-7.8 $ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
* See Fig.~1. Transfer integrals in this table are used in Eqs.~(2a)-(2c) with subscripts H, L, and HL, that represent HOMO-HOMO, LUMO-LUMO, and HOMO-LUMO couplings, respectively (for example,
$t_{\rm cH}$ means a transfer integral $t_{\rm c}$ between HOMO and HOMO).
\label{table1}
\end{table}
\subsection{Tight-binding model and energy band}
Using transfer integrals in Table~\ref{table1}, the band energies $E$($\bk$)
($\bk$ is given by
$\bk = k_x\bm{a}^* + k_y \bm{b}^* + k_z \bm{c}^*$ in terms of
the reciprocal lattice vectors $\bm{a}^*$, $\bm{b}^*$, and $\bm{c}^*$)
are obtained as eigenvalues of the following simple 2 $\times$ 2 Hermitian matrix.
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf H}(\bk)
&=&
\begin{pmatrix}
h_{\rm H} & h_{\rm HL} \\
\overline{h_{\rm HL}} & h_{\rm L}
\end{pmatrix} \ ,
\label{eq:eq1}
\end{eqnarray}
where the base is taken as HOMO and LUMO, and
the matrix elements are given by
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:eq2a}
h_{\rm H} &=& 2 [t_{\rm cH} \cos(\tz) + t_{\rm aH} \cos(\tx)
\nonumber \\
&+ & t_{\rm pH} \cos(\ty+\tz) + t_{\rm qH} \cos(- \tx -\tz)]
\; , \\
\label{eq:eq2b}
h_{\rm HL} &=& 2i [t_{\rm cHL} \sin(\tz) + t_{\rm aHL} \sin(\tx)
\nonumber \\
&+& t_{\rm pHL} \sin(\ty + \tz) + t_{\rm qHL} \sin(-\tx-\tz)]
\nonumber \\
& \equiv & i f(\bk) \; ,
\\
\label{eq:eq2c}
h_{\rm L}&=& 2[ t_{\rm cL} \cos(\tz) + t_{\rm aL} \cos(\tx)
\nonumber \\
& +& t_{\rm pL} \cos(\ty+\tz) + t_{\rm qL} \cos(- \tx -\tz)]
+ \Delta
\; .
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
The energy gap between HOMO and LUMO was taken as $\Delta$ = 0.25 eV
to reproduce the results of the first-principles calculation
in Ref.~\citen{Zhou2019}.
Matrix elements $h_{\rm H}$, $h_{\rm L}$, and $h_{\rm HL}$
are associated with HOMO-HOMO, LUMO-LUMO, and HOMO-LUMO couplings, respectively. The quantity $f(\bk)$
in Eq.~(\ref{eq:eq2b}) is defined for the later discussion.
Figures \ref{fig2}(a) and \ref{fig3}(a) show band dispersion
and Fermi surface of the tight-binding model.
A band crossing occurs at
$(k_x,k_y,k_z) = (0, \pm 0.334, \mp 0.118)$
on the $k_x=0$ plane and
a pair of Dirac points located symmetrically
to the $\Gamma$ point emerge (Fig.~\ref{fig4}(a)).
On the other hand, the Dirac points
appear at $(0, \pm 0.381, \mp 0.202)$
in the DFT calculation.
The energy at the Dirac points is slightly lower than the Fermi level,
which indicates the electron-like character of the Fermi surface.
Due to the interlayer interactions, the Dirac point draws a wavy curve
along the $k_x$ direction in the reciprocal lattice (Fig.~\ref{fig3}(b)).
Consequently, in contrast to the case of [Pd(dddt)$_2$] with the looped nodal line,
the present system has a pair of open nodal lines.
On the $k_x =0.5$ plane,
the Dirac points emerge at $(0.5, \pm 0.305, \mp 0.141)$,
while at $(0.5, \pm 0.326, \mp 0.160)$
in the DFT calculation. Depending on $k_x$,
the band energy $E$ (eV) at the Dirac point changes as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig3}(c)
and the $k_x$ dependence can be described as
$E(k_x) = - 0.125 \cos(2 \pi k_x)$.
Figure \ref{fig3}(c) indicates that the electron-like Fermi surface turns to the hole-like one at $k_x=\pm 0.25$ and
explains surviving density of states (DOS) at the Fermi level
in Fig.~\ref{fig3}(d).
The linear energy dispersion in the DOS around the Fermi level in the range of ca. $\pm$0.1eV is closely similar to the result of the DFT calculation.
We note the energy dispersion of the Dirac cone,
which is given on the $k_y$--$k_z$ plane with the fixed $k_x$.
The cross section close to the Dirac point shows an ellipse,
with a velocity $V_-$ ($V_+$) for the major (minor) axis, which is
rotated by
an angle $\theta$ from the $k_y$ ($k_z$) axis.
For $k_x$ = 0 (0.5), we obtain
$V_\pm \simeq C_\pm \times 10^{5}$ (m/s),
with $C_+$ = 2.1 (2.2), $C_-$ = 1.5 (1.2), and
$\theta$ = $-25^\circ$ ($-36^\circ$).
Thus, the anisotropy and the $k_x$ dependence of the cone
are moderately visible, while the velocity of the tight-binding
model is slightly
smaller than that of the DFT calculation
with the maximum velocity
$\simeq 4 \times 10^{5}$ (m/s).~\cite{Zhou2019}
All these results well reproduce the essential feature of the energy band structure obtained by the DFT calculations and indicate that this system is a nodal line semimetal.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\vspace{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=13cm]{Fig.2.eps}
\caption{(Color online)
Band dispersion and Fermi surface ($k_x =0$)
(a) with HOMO-LUMO couplings (pristine)
(b) without HOMO-LUMO couplings
$(|h_{\rm HL}| = 0)$.
N $(0, 0.334, -0.118)$ denotes a location of the Dirac point.
}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{Fig.3.eps}
\caption{(Color online)
Three-dimensional plot of (a) Fermi surface and (b) nodal line, where the hole-like character is indicated in red and the electron-like character in blue. (c) $k_x$ dependence of the band energy at the Dirac point. (d) Density of states (DOS) per unit cell. All of them correspond to the pristine energy band structure shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}(a).
}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{Fig.4.eps}
\caption{(Color online)
Band energy dispersion surface at $k_x=0$
(a) with HOMO-LUMO couplings (pristine)
(b) without HOMO-LUMO couplings $(|h_{\rm HL}| = 0)$.
These show the difference in the energy band between
Figs.~\ref{fig2}(a) and (b).
}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Dirac cone formation and nodal line}
We now discuss the Dirac cone formation in this single-component molecular conductor. The Dirac point emerges under the following conditions:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& h_{\rm H} = h_{\rm L} \; ,
\label{eq:eq3} \\
& & |h_{\rm HL}| = 0 \; .
\label{eq:eq4}
\end{eqnarray}
Equation (\ref{eq:eq3}) corresponds
to the HOMO-LUMO band crossing, and
Eq.~(\ref{eq:eq4}) gives a node of the HOMO-LUMO coupling.
When there is no HOMO-LUMO coupling, the HOMO and LUMO bands cross
each other (Figs.~\ref{fig2}(b) and \ref{fig4}(b)) and Eq.~(\ref{eq:eq3})
gives the intersection of the HOMO and LUMO bands as a distorted cylinder (green surface in Fig.~\ref{fig5}).
Since the HOMO band is fully occupied and the LUMO band is completely empty
originally, the intersection is located in the vicinity of the Fermi level.
This is an important and general feature of the single-component molecular conductor.
In general, an introduction of the HOMO-LUMO coupling removes the degeneracy at the intersection and opens a gap.
This means that the metallic state turns to a semiconducting one
due to the HOMO-LUMO coupling.
In this system, however, there exist surfaces
on which the HOMO-LUMO coupling that opens the gap is zero
(orange surface in Fig.~\ref{fig5})
given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:eq4}).
The intersection of these two surfaces that satisfies
$h_{\rm H} = h_{\rm L}$
and $|h_{\rm HL}| = 0$ provides the nodal line (black line in Fig.~\ref{fig5})
on which the conduction and valence bands touch each other
at one point with linear dispersion.
Here we note a property of $h_{\rm HL}$, i.e.,
$f(\bk)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:eq2b}).
Since $f(\bk)$ is real and satisfies $f(\bk) = -f(-\bk)$
owing to a different symmetry of
HOMO and LUMO,\cite{Tsumuraya2018_JPSJ}
we obtain $f(0) = 0$.
For small $\tx (= 2\pi k_x), \ty (=2\pi k_y)$
and $\tz (=2\pi k_z)$, $f(\bk)$ can be expressed as
a linear combination of $k_x$, $k_y$ and $k_z$, i.e.,
$f(\bk)/(4\pi) \simeq$ $ (t_{\rm aHL}-t_{\rm qHL})k_x
+ t_{\rm pHL} k_y
+ (t_{\rm cHL}-t_{\rm qHL}+t_{\rm pHL})k_z$.
Thus, the plane determined by $f(\bk)=0$ includes the $\Gamma$ point and
becomes almost perpendicular to the $k_y$--$k_z$ plane
for small interlayer transfer energies.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{Fig.5.eps}
\caption{(Color online)
Intersection of HOMO and LUMO bands ($h_H = h_L$),
nodal surface on which $|h_{\rm HL}|$ = 0,
and nodal line (see text).
}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
Requirements for the emergence of the single-component molecular
Dirac electron system are 1) HOMO-LUMO band crossing and
2) node of the HOMO-LUMO couplings.
In order to satisfy requirement 1), main HOMO-HOMO and LUMO-LUMO transfer
integrals should have opposite signs.
This depends on the molecular arrangement associated with the symmetry
of the frontier molecular orbitals.
From this viewpoint, the stretcher bond arrangement in the conduction layer
of the present crystal (Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a)) is quite suitable for the formation of
the crossing band structure.
In the metal dithiolene complex molecule [Pt(dmdt)$_2$],
HOMO has ungerade (odd) symmetry
and LUMO has gerade (even) symmetry.
Therefore, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig6},
the HOMO-HOMO and LUMO-LUMO couplings give overlap
and transfer integrals ($t_c$ and $t_p$) with opposite signs
in the stretcher bond arrangement, where each ligand overlaps
with the ligand on the opposite side of the adjacent molecule.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{Fig.6.eps}
\caption
HOMO-HOMO and LUMO-LUMO couplings in the stretcher bond arrangement
of the [Pt(dmdt)$_2$] molecule. Each frontier molecular orbital is represented using the p orbital of sulfur atom that governs intermolecular transfer integrals.
}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Open nodal line and parity}
We analyze the open nodal line
using the parity at the TRIMs ($\bm{k}= \bm{G}/2$
with $\bm{G}$ being the reciprocal lattice vector).
From Eq.~(\ref{eq:eq1}), energy $E_j$ and wavefunction $\Psi_j$ ($j$=1, 2)
at the TRIMs are calculated as
\begin{eqnarray}
\bm{H}(\bm{G}/2) \Psi_j(\bm{G}/2) = E_j(\bm{G}/2)\Psi_j(\bm{G}/2) \; ,
\label{eq:TRIM}
\end{eqnarray}
where $E_1(\bm{G}/2) > E_2(\bm{G}/2)$.
The parity is obtained from a spatial inversion
for $\Psi_j(\bm{G}/2)$,~\cite{Piechon2013}
using the inversion center
on the Pt atom at a lattice point.
Such a 2 $\times$ 2 inversion matrix
$\hat{P}_{\rm I}$ has only diagonal elements given by
$- 1$ and $+1$ for the base of HOMO and LUMO, respectively.
Since $[\bm{H}(\bm{G}/2), \hat{P}_{\rm I}(\bm{G}/2)]=0$,
both $\bm{H}(\bm{G}/2)$ and $\hat{P}_{\rm I}(\bm{G}/2)$ have a common
eigenfunction.
Thus, we obtain
$ \hat{P}_{\rm I}(\bm{G}/2) \Psi_j(\bm{G}/2)$
= $E_P(j,\bm{G}/2) \Psi_j(\bm{G}/2)$, ($j$=1 and 2), where
$E_P(j,\bm{G}/2) = \pm 1$.
In terms of $\Psi_j(\bm{G}/2)$, the parity eigenvalue $E_P(j,\bm{G}/2)$
is calculated as,
\begin{eqnarray}
E_P(j,\bm{G}/2) &=&
\Psi_j(\bm{G}/2)^\dagger \hat{P}_{\rm I}(\bm{G}/2 ) \Psi_j(\bm{G}/2)
\; ,
\label{eq:parity_c}
\end{eqnarray}
where
$\bm{G}/2$ = (0, 0, 0) ($\Gamma$), (1/2, 0, 0) (X), (0, 1/2, 0) (Y),
(1/2, 1/2, 0) (M), (0, 0, 1/2) (Z), (1/2, 0, 1/2) (D),
(0, 1/2, 1/2) (C), and (1/2, 1/2, 1/2) (E).
The parity $ E_P(j,\bm{G}/2)$ corresponding to
$E_j(\bm{G}/2)$ is summarized in Table \ref{table_2} for
both Eq.~(\ref{eq:eq1}) with HOMO-LUMO couplings (pristine, case (a)) and
that without HOMO-LUMO couplings ($|h_{\rm HL}| = 0$, case (b)).
Here we note a relation between the parity $E_P [= E_P(j,\bm{G}/2)]$
and these two types of energy bands
shown in Figs.~\ref{fig2}, ~\ref{fig4}, and ~\ref{fig7}.
Figures \ref{fig7}(a) and (b) show the energy bands connecting eight TRIMs
for the cases (a) and (b), where
the band crossing between HOMO and LUMO bands in the case (b)
is removed by the HOMO-LUMO couplings in the case (a) except for the nodal line (not shown here).
Noting that the HOMO (LUMO) band provides $E_P= -1 ( +1)$,
the case (b) in Table \ref{table_2} suggests that
$E_1(\bk)$ shows the HOMO ($E_P= -1$) band for the TRIMs of $\Gamma$
and X,
and the LUMO ($E_P= +1$) band for the rest of TRIMs.
Since such a property remains unchanged even for the case (a),
the band with the same parity is connected in the presence of
the HOMO-LUMO couplings. Then, such a possible distinction of the $E_P= +1$ and $E_P= -1$ bands is useful for understanding the open nodal line clearly.
\begin{table}
\caption{
Parity eigenvalue $E_{P}(j,\bm{G}/2) (= \pm 1)$
with the HOMO-LUMO coupling (pristine, case (a))
and without the HOMO-LUMO coupling ($|h_{\rm HL}| = 0$, case (b))
which corresponds to Figs.~\ref{fig2} and ~\ref{fig4}, respectively.
$E_{P}(j,\bm{G}/2) (= \pm 1)$ corresponds to
the eigenvalue of $E_j(\bm{G}/2)$ at the TRIMs($\bm{G}/2$)
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig7}.
}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular} {cccccccccc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
$E_P(j,\bm{G}/2)$ & & $\Gamma$ & Y& C & Z & X & M & E &D \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
case (a) & $j$=1 & \m & \p & \p & \p & \m & \p & \p & \p \\
& $j$=2 & \p & \m & \m & \m & \p & \m & \m & \m \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
case (b) & $j$=1 & \m & \p & \p & \p & \m & \p & \p & \p \\
& $j$=2 & \p & \m & \m & \m & \p & \m & \m & \m \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{table_2}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{Fig.7.eps}
\caption
Eight TRIMs in the Brillouin zone, which are associated with
the parity in Table \ref{table_2}. The energy bands connecting TRIMs
for the cases (a) and (b) are compared.
}
\label{fig7}
\end{figure}
Since there is a relation $\sum_{j} E_P(j,\bm{G}/2)$ = 0
for the respective $\bm{G}$,
the condition
for the Dirac point is written either by the occupied band or by
the empty band.
In terms of the empty band,
the explicit form of the condition~\cite{Fu2007_PRB76,Piechon2013}
is given by
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
P &=& P_0 P_1= \pm 1 \; ,
\label{Dirac_P}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
P_0 & =& E_P(1,\Gamma) E_P(1,Y) E_P(1,C) E_P(1,Z) \; ,
\label{Dirac_P_0}
\\
P_1 & =& E_P(1,X) E_P(1,M) E_P(1,E) E_P(1,D) \; .
\label{Dirac_P_1}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
TRIMs of $P_0$ are located on the plane of $k_x=0$, while
those of $P_1$ are located on the plane of $k_x=0.5$ (Fig. 7).
The quantity $P$, which denotes a product of
parity eigenvalues of all the empty bands,
provides an odd (or even) number of pair of Dirac points.
The present case is obtained as follows.
When $P = +1$, we obtain
open nodal line
($P_0 = -1$ and $P_1 = -1$)
or the absence of Dirac point
($P_0 = +1$ and $P_1 = +1$ ).
The former case corresponds to the present case of [Pt(dmdt)$_2$].
In fact, the nodal lines existing along the $k_x$ axis
pass through the plane of $k_x$=0
and $\pm 0.5$.
Note that $P = -1$ ($P_0 = \pm 1$, $P_1= \mp 1$)
gives the closed nodal line (i.e., loop).
The loop (closed line),
which is found for [Pd(dddt)$_2$]\cite{Kato2017_JPSJ},
corresponds to $P = -1$
with $P_0 = -1$ and $P_1= +1$, where $P_0$ ($P_1$)
consists of $\Gamma$, X, Y, and M (Z, D, C, and E), respectively.
Thus, the analysis in term of the parity provides
a clear distinction between the open and closed nodal lines.
\section{Summary}
We have studied the ambient-pressure molecular Dirac electron system in the single-component crystal of the metal dithiolene complex [Pt(dmdt)$_2$] using the tight-binding model based on the extended H\"uckel molecular orbital calculations.
The model well reproduces the essential feature of the results of first-principles DFT calculations including the emergence of the Dirac cones.
Opposite signs of intermolecular HOMO-HOMO and LUMO-LUMO transfer integrals are attributed to the stretcher bond arrangement of [Pt(dmdt)$_2$] molecules in the conduction layer, and lead to the HOMO-LUMO band crossing.
The intersection of the HOMO and LUMO bands forms a distorted cylinder in the Brillouin zone, when there is no HOMO-LUMO coupling.
The HOMO-LUMO coupling vanishes on the plane containing the $\Gamma$ point.
The Dirac point emerges at the point where these two surfaces meet, and describes the open nodal line.
The nature of the open nodal line can be analyzed in terms of the parity of the wavefunctions at eight TRIMs.
All these results obtained by the tight-binding model demonstrate that [Pt(dmdt)$_2$] is a typical and simple example of the Dirac electron system based on the single-component molecular conductors and promise the existence of next materials having similar electronic structures.
\acknowledgements
This work was supported
by JSPS KAKENHI Grant, JP16H06346.
|
\section{Introduction}
The Kaczmarz method \cite{kaczmarz1937angen} is a simple iterative method for solving a linear systems of equations $${\bf Ax=b},\quad \mbf A\in\mbbr^{m\times n}, \quad \mbf b\in\mbbr^m.$$ Due to its simplicity and numerical performance, the Kaczmarz method has found many applications in many fields, such as computer tomography \cite{natterer2001mathe,kak2001princ,herman2009funda}, image reconstruction \cite{popa2004kaczm,herman2008image}, digital signal processing \cite{byrne2004unifi,lorenz2015spars}, etc.
At each step, the method projects the current iterate onto one hyperplane defined by a row of the system. More precisely, assuming that the $i$th row $\mbf A_{i,:}$ has been selected at the $k$th iteration, then the $k$th estimate vector $\mbf x^k$ is obtained by $$\mbf x^k=\mbf x^{k-1}-\alpha_k\frac{\mbf A_{i,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_i}{\mbf A_{i,:}(\mbf A_{i,:})^\rmt}(\mbf A_{i,:})^\rmt,$$ where $(\mbf A_{i,:})^\rmt$ denotes the transpose of $\mbf A_{i,:}$, $\mbf b_i$ is the $i$th component of $\mbf b$, and $\alpha_k$ is a stepsize. Numerical experiments show that using the rows of the coefficient matrix in the Kaczmarz method in random order, rather than in their given order, can often greatly improve the convergence \cite{herman1993algeb,natterer2001mathe}. In a seminal paper \cite{strohmer2009rando}, Strohmer and Vershynin proposed a randomized Kaczmarz (RK) algorithm which exponentially converges in expectation to the solutions of consistent, overdetermined, full-rank linear systems. The convergence result was extended and refined in {various directions including inconsistent \cite{leventhal2010rando,needell2010rando,zouzias2013rando,dumitrescu2015relat,petra2016singl,needell2016stoch,haddock2019motzk}, underdetermined or rank-deficient linear systems \cite{ma2015conve,gower2015rando,razaviyayn2019linea,du2019doubl}, ridge regression problems \cite{hefny2017rows,liu2019varia}, linear feasibility problems \cite{loera2017sampl}, convex feasibility problems \cite{necoara2019rando}, block variants \cite{needell2014paved,needell2015rando,necoara2019faste}, acceleration strategies \cite{liu2016accel,richtarik2017stoch,bai2018greed,bai2018relax,bai2019greed,bai2019parti,zhang2019new}, and many others \cite{bai2018conve,popa2018conve,du2019tight,du2019new,haddock2019rando}.}
Let $\mbf A^\dag$ denote the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse\footnote{Every $m\times n$ matrix $\mbf A$ has a unique Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse. In particular, in this paper we will use the following property of the pseudoinverse: $\mbf A^\rmt=\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A\mbf A^\dag$.} \cite{ben2003gener} of $\mbf A$. In this paper, we are interested in the vector $\mbf A^\dag\mbf b$. Here we would like to make clear what $\mbf A^\dag \mbf b$ stands for different types of linear systems (see \cite{ben2003gener,golub2013matri}):
\bit
\item[(1)] If $\bf Ax=b$ is consistent with full-column rank $\mbf A$, i.e., $\rank(\mbf A)=n$, then $\mbf A^\dag\mbf b$ is the unique solution. In this case, we have $m\geq n$ and the linear system is overdetermined when $m>n$.
\item[(2)] If $\bf Ax=b$ is consistent with $\rank(\mbf A)<n$, then $\mbf A^\dag\mbf b$ is the unique minimum $\ell_2$-norm solution. In this case, we have $m\geq n$ or $m<n$, and the linear system is overdetermined (resp. underdetermined) when $m>n$ (resp. $m<n$). The matrix $\mbf A$ can be of full-row rank, i.e., $\rank(\mbf A)=m$, or rank-deficient, i.e., $\rank(\mbf A)<m$.
\item[(3)] If $\bf Ax=b$ is inconsistent with $\rank(\mbf A)=n$, then $\mbf A^\dag\mbf b$ is the unique least squares solution. In this case, we have $m\geq n$ and the linear system is overdetermined when $m>n$.
\item[(4)] If $\bf Ax=b$ is inconsistent with $\rank(\mbf A)<n$, then $\mbf A^\dag\mbf b$ is the unique minimum $\ell_2$-norm least squares solution. In this case, we have $m\geq n$ or $m<n$, and the linear system is overdetermined (resp. underdetermined) when $m>n$ (resp. $m<n$). The matrix $\mbf A$ can be of full-row rank, i.e., $\rank(\mbf A)=m$, or rank-deficient, i.e., $\rank(\mbf A)<m$.
\eit
If ${\bf Ax = b}$ is inconsistent, Needell \cite{needell2010rando} showed that RK does not converge to $\bf A^\dag b$. To resolve this problem, Zouzias and Freris \cite{zouzias2013rando} proposed a randomized extended Kaczmarz (REK) algorithm, which uses RK twice \cite{liu2016accel,du2019tight} at each iteration and exponentially converges in the mean square to $\bf A^\dag b$. More precisely, assuming that the $j$th column $\mbf A_{:,j}$ and the $i$th row $\mbf A_{i,:}$ have been selected at the $k$th iteration, REK generates two vectors $\mbf z^{k}$ and $\mbf x^{k}$ via two RK updates (one for $\bf A^\rmt z= 0$ from $\mbf z^{k-1}$ and the other for ${\bf Ax = b-z}^k$ from $\mbf x^{k-1}$): \begin{align*}\mbf z^k &= \mbf z^{k-1}-\dsp\frac{(\mbf A_{:,j})^\rmt\mbf z^{k-1}}{(\mbf A_{:,j})^\rmt\mbf A_{:,j}}\mbf A_{:,j},\\ {\bf x}^k &= {\bf x}^{k-1}-\dsp\frac{\mbf A_{i,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_i+\mbf z^k_i}{{\bf A}_{i,:}({\bf A}_{i,:})^\rmt}(\mbf A_{i,:})^\rmt.\end{align*} For general linear systems (consistent or inconsistent, full-rank or rank-deficient), the vector $\mbf x^k$ generated by REK exponentially converges to $\mbf A^\dag\mbf b$ if $\mbf z^0\in\mbf b+\ran(\mbf A)$ and $\mbf x^0\in\ran({\mbf A^\rmt})$ \cite{liu2016accel,du2019tight}.
To accelerate the convergence, the following projection-based block variants \cite{needell2014paved,needell2015rando} of RK and REK were developed. For a subset $\mcali\subset\{1,2,\ldots,m\}$ and a subset $\mcalj\subset\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, denote by $\mbf A_{\mcali,:}$ and $\mbf A_{:,\mcalj}$ the row submatrix of $\mbf A$ indexed by $\mcali$ and the column submatrix of $\mbf A$ indexed by $\mcalj$, respectively.
Assuming that the subset $\mcali_i$ has been selected at the $k$th iteration, the randomized block Kaczmarz (RBK) algorithm \cite{needell2014paved} generates the $k$th estimate $\mbf x^k$ via $$\mbf x^k=\mbf x^{k-1}-(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})^\dag(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_{\mcali_i}).$$ Assuming that the subsets $\mcalj_j$ and $\mcali_i$ have been selected at the $k$ iteration, the randomized double block Kaczmarz (RDBK) algorithm \cite{needell2015rando} generates the $k$th estimate $\mbf x^k$ via \begin{align*} \mbf z^k &= \mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}(\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j})^\dag\mbf z^{k-1},\\
{\bf x}^k &= {\bf x}^{k-1}-(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})^\dag(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_{\mcali_i}+\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i}).\end{align*}
Numerical experiments demonstrate that the convergence can be significantly accelerated if appropriate blocks of the coefficient matrix are used. {The main drawback of projection-based block methods is that they are not adequate for distributed implementations}.
Recently, Necoara \cite{necoara2019faste} proposed a randomized average block Kaczmarz (RABK) algorithm for consistent linear systems, which takes a convex combination of { several RK updates (i.e., the projections of the current iterate onto several hyperplanes)} as a new direction with some stepsize. Assuming that the subset $\mcali$ has been selected at the $k$th iteration, RABK generates the $k$th estimate $\mbf x^k$ via \beq\label{rabk}\mbf x^k=\mbf x^{k-1}-\alpha_k\l(\sum_{i\in\mcali}\omega_i^k\frac{\mbf A_{i,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_i}{\mbf A_{i,:}(\mbf A_{i,:})^\rmt}(\mbf A_{i,:})^\rmt\r),\eeq where the weights $\omega_i^k\in[0,1]$ such that $\sum_{i\in\mcali}\omega_i^k=1$, and the stepsize $\alpha_k\in(0,2)$. The convergence analysis reveals that RABK is extremely effective when it is given a good sampling of the rows into well-conditioned blocks. { A block version of RABK (i.e., parallel randomized block Kaczmarz), which takes a convex combination of the RBK updates, was proposed and studied by Richt\'{a}rik and Tak\'{a}\v{c} \cite{richtarik2017stoch}.} Shortly afterwards, Du and Sun \cite{du2019doubl} proposed a doubly stochastic block Gauss-Seidel (DSBGS) algorithm, which randomly chooses a submatrix of the coefficient matrix at each iteration. Assuming that the subsets $\mcali$ and $\mcalj$ have been selected at the $k$th iteration, DSBGS generates the $k$th estimate $\mbf x^k$ via $$\mbf x^k=\mbf x^{k-1}-\alpha_k \frac{\mbf I_{:,\mcalj}(\mbf A_{\mcali,\mcalj})^\rmt(\mbf I_{:,\mcali})^\rmt}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali,\mcalj}\|_\rmf^2} (\mbf A\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b),$$ where $\mbf I$ denotes the identity matrix, $\mbf A_{\mcali,\mcalj}$ denotes the submatrix that lies in the rows indexed by $\mcali$ and the columns indexed by $\mcalj$, and $\|\cdot\|_\rmf$ is the Frobenius norm. Exponential convergence of DSBGS for consistent linear systems was proved. By setting $\mcali\subset\{1,2,\ldots,m\}$ and $\mcalj=\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, DSBGS recovers a special case of RABK, i.e., RABK with weight $$\omega_i^k=\frac{\mbf A_{i,:}(\mbf A_{i,:})^\rmt}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali,:}\|_\rmf^2},\qquad i\in\mcali.$$ Note that both RABK and DSBGS are { very easy to implement on distributed computing units}, yielding remarkable improvements in computational time. We emphasize that convergence results in the mean square of RABK and DSBGS are obtained only for consistent linear systems.
In this paper, { based on the REK algorithm and the RABK algorithm, we present a simple} randomized extended block Kaczmarz (REBK) algorithm that exponentially converges in the mean square to the unique minimum $\ell_2$-norm (least squares) solution of a given general linear system (full-rank or rank-deficient, overdetermined or underdetermined, consistent or inconsistent). Our method is different from those projection-based block methods, for example, those in \cite{elfving1980block,arioli1992block,bramley1992row,popa1998exten,needell2014paved,needell2015rando,duff2015augme}. At each step, REBK, as a direct extension of REK, uses two {special RABK (which also can be viewed as special DSBGS)} updates (one for $\bf A^\rmt z= 0$ from $\mbf z^{k-1}$ and the other for ${\bf Ax = b-z}^k$ from $\mbf x^{k-1}$; see Section 2 for details). Compared with REK, REBK { usually has a better convergence rate and} can exploit the high-level basic linear algebra subroutine ({\tt BLAS2}), even fast matrix-vector multiplies (for example, if submatrices of $\mbf A$ have circulant or Toeplitz structures, then the Fast Fourier Transform technique can be used), and therefore could be more efficient. { Compared with RDBK, REBK can be implemented on distributed computing units}. We refer the reader to \cite{needell2014paved,necoara2019faste} for more advantages of block methods. Numerical examples are given to illustrate the efficiency of REBK.
{\it Organization of the paper}. In the rest of this section, we give some notation. In Section 2 we describe the randomized extended block Kaczmarz algorithm and prove its convergence theory. Both the exponential convergence of the norm of the expected error and the exponential convergence of the expected norm of the error are discussed. In Section 3 we report the numerical results. Finally, we present brief concluding remarks in Section 4.
{\it Notation}. For any random variable $\bm\xi$, let $\mbbe\bem\bm\xi\eem$ denote its expectation. For an integer $m\geq 1$, let $[m]:=\{1,2,3,\ldots,m\}$. Lowercase (upper-case) boldface letters are reserved for column vectors (matrices). For any vector $\mbf u\in\mbbr^m$, we use $\mbf u_i$, $\bf u^\rmt$, and $\|\mbf u\|_2$ to denote the $i$th element, the transpose, and the $\ell_2$-norm of $\mbf u$, respectively. We use $\mbf I$ to denote the identity matrix whose order is clear from the context. For any matrix $\mbf A\in\mbbr^{m\times n}$, we use $\mbf A^\rmt$, $\mbf A^\dag$, $\|\mbf A\|_\rmf$, $\ran(\mbf A)$, $\sigma_{1}(\mbf A)\geq\sigma_{2}(\mbf A)\geq\cdots\geq\sigma_{r}(\mbf A)>0$ to denote the transpose, the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse, the Frobenius norm, the column space, and all the nonzero singular values of $\mbf A$, respectively. Obviously, $r$ is the rank of $\mbf A$. For index sets $\mcali\subseteq[m]$ and $\mcalj\subseteq[n]$, let $\mbf A_{\mcali,:}$, $\mbf A_{:,\mcalj}$, and $\mbf A_{\mcali,\mcalj}$ denote the row submatrix indexed by $\mcali$, the column submatrix indexed by $\mcalj$, and the submatrix that lies in the rows indexed by $\mcali$ and the columns indexed by $\mcalj$, respectively. We call $\{\mcali_1,\mcali_2,\ldots,\mcali_s\}$ a partition of $[m]$ if $\mcali_i\cap\mcali_j=\emptyset$ for $i\neq j$ and $\cup_{i=1}^s\mcali_i=[m]$. Similarly, $\{\mcalj_1,\mcalj_2,\ldots,\mcalj_t\}$ denotes a partition of $[n]$ if $\mcalj_i\cap\mcalj_j=\emptyset$ for $i\neq j$ and $\cup_{j=1}^t\mcalj_j=[n]$. { We use $|\mcali|$ to denote the cardinality of a set $\mcali\subseteq[m]$}.
\section{The randomized extended block Kaczmarz algorithm}
In this section, based on given partitions of $[m]$ and $[n]$, we propose the following randomized extended block Kaczmarz algorithm (see Algorithm 1) for solving consistent or inconsistent linear systems. { We emphasize that this algorithm can be implemented on distributed computing units}.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular*}{150mm}{l}
\toprule {\bf Algorithm 1:} Randomized extended block Kaczmarz (REBK) \\
\hline
\qquad Let $\{\mcali_1,\mcali_2,\ldots,\mcali_s\}$ and $\{\mcalj_1,\mcalj_2,\ldots,\mcalj_t\}$ be partitions of $[m]$ and $[n]$, respectively.\\
\qquad Let $\alpha>0$. Initialize $\mbf z^0\in\mbbr^m$ and $\mbf x^0\in\mbbr^n$.\\
\qquad {\bf for} $k=1,2,\ldots,$ {\bf do}\\
\qquad\qquad Pick $j\in[t]$ with probability $\|{\bf A}_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2/\|{\bf A}\|_\rmf^2$\\
\qquad\qquad Set $\mbf z^k=\mbf z^{k-1}-\dsp\frac{\alpha}{\|{\bf A}_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2}\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}(\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j})^\rmt\mbf z^{k-1}$\\
\qquad\qquad Pick $i\in[s]$ with probability $\|{\bf A}_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2/\|{\bf A}\|_\rmf^2$\\
\qquad\qquad Set ${\bf x}^k={\bf x}^{k-1}-\dsp\frac{\alpha}{\|{\bf A}_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})^\rmt(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_{\mcali_i}+\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i})$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}
\end{center}
Here we only consider constant stepsize for simplicity. By choosing the row partition parameter $s=m$, the column partition parameter $t=n$, and the stepsize $\alpha=1$, we recover the well-known randomized extended Kaczmarz algorithm of Zouzias and Freris \cite{zouzias2013rando}. REBK uses two RABK updates (see (\ref{rabk})) at each step:
\bit
\item RABK update for $\bf A^\rmt z= 0$ from $\mbf z^{k-1}$
$$\mbf z^k=\mbf z^{k-1}-\alpha\l(\sum_{l\in\mcalj_j}\omega_l^k\frac{(\mbf A_{:,l})^\rmt\mbf z^{k-1}}{(\mbf A_{:,l})^\rmt\mbf A_{:,l}}\mbf A_{:,l}\r),\qquad \omega_l^k=\frac{(\mbf A_{:,l})^\rmt\mbf A_{:,l}}{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2};$$
\item RABK update for ${\bf Ax = b-z}^k$ from $\mbf x^{k-1}$
$$\mbf x^k=\mbf x^{k-1}-\alpha\l(\sum_{l\in\mcali_i}\omega_l^k\frac{\mbf A_{l,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_l+\mbf z_l^k}{\mbf A_{l,:}(\mbf A_{l,:})^\rmt}(\mbf A_{l,:})^\rmt\r), \qquad \omega_l^k=\frac{\mbf A_{l,:}(\mbf A_{l,:})^\rmt}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}.$$
\eit
{ We note that if $\mbf z^0=\mbf 0$ in REBK, then all $\mbf z^k\equiv\mbf 0$, which yields the update of $\mbf x^k$ is exactly the same as that of RABK.}
Before proving the convergence theory of REBK for general linear systems, we give the following notation. Let $\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\cdot\eem$ denote the conditional expectation conditioned on the first $k-1$ iterations of REBK. That is, $$\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\cdot\eem=\mbbe\bem\cdot|j_1,i_1,j_2,i_2,\ldots,j_{k-1},i_{k-1}\eem,$$ where $j_l$ is the $l$th column block chosen and $i_l$ is the $l$th row block chosen. We denote the conditional expectation conditioned on the first $k-1$ iterations and the $k$th column block chosen as $$\mbbe_{k-1}^i\bem\cdot\eem=\mbbe\bem\cdot|j_1,i_1,j_2,i_2,\ldots,j_{k-1},i_{k-1},j_k\eem.$$
Then by the law of total expectation we have $$\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\cdot\eem=\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\mbbe_{k-1}^i\bem\cdot\eem\eem.$$
\subsection{The exponential convergence of the norm of the expected error}
In this subsection we show the exponential convergence of the norm of the expected error, i.e., $${\|\mbbe\bem\mbf x^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\eem\|_2}.$$ The convergence of the norm of the expected error depends on the positive number $\delta$ defined as $$\delta:=\max_{1\leq i\leq r}\l|1-\frac{\alpha\sigma_i^2(\mbf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r|.$$ The following lemma will be used and its proof is straightforward (e.g., via the singular value decomposition).
\begin{lemma}\label{leqd} Let $\alpha>0$ and $\mbf A\in\mbbr^{m\times n}$ be any nonzero real matrix with $\rank(\mbf A)=r$. For every $\mbf u\in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$, it holds $$\l\|\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\bf A^\rmt A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k\mbf u\r\|_2\leq\delta^k\|\mbf u\|_2.$$
\end{lemma}
We give the convergence of the norm of the expected error of REBK in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{ner} For any given consistent or inconsistent linear system $\bf Ax=b$, let $\mbf x^k$ be the $k$th iterate of {\rm REBK} with {${\bf z}^0\in\mbbr^m$} and $\mbf x^0\in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$. It holds $$\|\mbbe\bem{\bf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\eem\|_2\leq\delta^k\l(\|{\bf x}^0-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2+\frac{\alpha k\|\mbf A^\rmt\mbf z^0\|_2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r).$$
\end{theorem}
\proof Note that { \begin{align*} \mbbe_{k-1}\bem \mbf z^k \eem &= \mbf z^{k-1} - \mbbe_{k-1}\bem \dsp\frac{\alpha}{\|{\bf A}_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2}\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}(\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j})^\rmt \eem\mbf z^{k-1} \\ &= \l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)\mbf z^{k-1},\end{align*} and therefore $$\mbbe\bem \mbf z^k\eem=\mbbe\bem\mbbe_{k-1}\bem \mbf z^k\eem \eem=\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)\mbbe\bem \mbf z^{k-1}\eem=\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k\mbf z^0.$$ }
By $\mbf A^\rmt\mbf b=\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A\mbf A^\dag\mbf b$, we have
\begin{align*}\mbbe_{k-1}\bem{\bf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\eem
&=\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\mbbe_{k-1}^i\bem{\bf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\eem\eem\\
&={\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\mbbe_{k-1}^i\bem{\bf x}^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag \mbf b-\dsp\frac{\alpha}{\|{\bf A}_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})^\rmt(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_{\mcali_i}+\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i})\eem\eem}\\
&={\mbbe_{k-1}\bem{\bf x}^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag \mbf b- \alpha\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt(\mbf A\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b+\mbf z^k)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\eem}\\
&= {\bf x}^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag \mbf b-\alpha\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\rmt\mbf b}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}- \alpha\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\mbf z^k\eem\\
&={{\bf x}^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag \mbf b-\alpha\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A\mbf A^\dag\mbf b}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}- \alpha\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\mbf z^k\eem}\\
&= \l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)(\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)- \alpha\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)\mbf z^{k-1}.\end{align*}
Taking expectation gives
\begin{align*}
\mbbe\bem{\bf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\eem&=\mbbe\bem\mbbe_{k-1}\bem{\bf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\eem\eem\\
&=\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)\mbbe\bem\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\eem- \alpha\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)\mbbe\bem\mbf z^{k-1}\eem\\
&=\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)\mbbe\bem\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\eem- \alpha\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A\mbf A^\rmt}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k\mbf z^0\\
&=\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)\mbbe\bem\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\eem- \alpha\dsp\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf z^0}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\\
&=\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^2\mbbe\bem\mbf x^{k-2}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\eem- 2\alpha\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf z^0}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\\&=\cdots\\
&=\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k(\mbf x^0-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)- \alpha k\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf z^0}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}.\end{align*}
Applying the norms to both sides we obtain \begin{align*}\|\mbbe\bem{\bf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\eem\|_2 &= \l\|\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k(\mbf x^0-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)- \alpha k\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf z^0}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r\|_2\\ &\leq \l\|\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k(\mbf x^0-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)\r\|_2+ \l\|\alpha k\l(\mbf I-\alpha\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r)^k\dsp\frac{\mbf A^\rmt\mbf z^0}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r\|_2
\\&\leq \delta^k\l(\|{\bf x}^0-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2+\frac{\alpha k\|\mbf A^\rmt\mbf z^0\|_2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r).\end{align*}
Here the last inequality follows from the fact that {$\mbf x^0\in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$, ${\bf A^\dag b}\in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$}, $\mbf A^\rmt\mbf z^0\in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$, and Lemma \ref{leqd}.
\qed
\begin{remark}\label{alpha} To ensure convergence of the expected error, it suffices to have $$\delta=\dsp\max_{1\leq i\leq r}\l|1-\frac{\alpha\sigma_i^2(\mbf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r|<1,$$ which implies $$0<\alpha<\dsp\frac{2\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}{\sigma_1^2(\mbf A)}.$$ {The optimal $\alpha$ in Theorem \ref{ner} is (see \cite{poljak1963gradi}) $$\frac{2\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}{\sigma_1^2(\mbf A)+\sigma_r^2(\mbf A)}=\argmin_{0<\alpha<\frac{2\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}{\sigma_1^2(\mbf A)}}\ \max_{1\leq i\leq r}\l|1-\frac{\alpha\sigma_i^2(\mbf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r| ,$$ and the corresponding convergence rate $\delta$ is $$\frac{\sigma_1^2(\mbf A)-\sigma_r^2(\mbf A)}{\sigma_1^2(\mbf A)+\sigma_r^2(\mbf A)}.$$}
\end{remark}
\subsection{The exponential convergence of the expected norm of the error}
In this subsection we show the exponential convergence of the expected norm of the error, i.e., $$\mbbe\bem\|\mbf x^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2\eem.$$ The convergence of the expected norm of the error depends on the positive numbers {$\eta$ and $\rho$ defined as $$\eta:=1-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali)\sigma_{r}^2(\bf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2},\qquad \rho:=1-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcalj)\sigma_{r}^2(\bf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2},$$ where $$\beta_{\max}^\mcali:=\max_{i\in[s]}\frac{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2},\qquad \beta_{\max}^\mcalj:=\max_{j\in[t]}\frac{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2}.$$}The following lemmas will be used extensively in this paper.
\begin{lemma}\label{leq} Let $\mbf A\in\mbbr^{m\times n}$ be any nonzero real matrix with $\rank(\mbf A)=r$. For every $\mbf u\in\ran(\mbf A)$, it holds $$\|{\bf A^\rmt}\mbf u\|_2^2\geq\sigma_r^2(\mbf A)\|\mbf u\|_2^2.$$
\end{lemma}
{\begin{lemma}\label{leqQ} Let $\mbf A\in\mbbr^{m\times n}$ be any nonzero real matrix. For every $\mbf u\in\mbbr^m$, it holds $$\mbf u^\rmt(\mbf A\mbf A^\rmt)^2 \mbf u\leq\|\mbf A\|_2^2\|\mbf A^\rmt\mbf u\|_2^2.$$
\end{lemma}
The proof of Lemma \ref{leq} is straightforward (e.g., via the singular value decomposition), and Lemma \ref{leqQ} follows from $$\mbf u^\rmt(\mbf A\mbf A^\rmt)^2 \mbf u=\mbf u^\rmt\mbf A(\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A)\mbf A^\rmt \mbf u\leq \|\mbf A^\rmt\mbf A\|_2\|\mbf A^\rmt\mbf u\|_2^2=\|\mbf A\|_2^2\|\mbf A^\rmt\mbf u\|_2^2.$$}In the following lemma we show that the vector $\mbf z^k$ generated in {\rm REBK} with ${\bf z}^0\in{\bf b}+\ran({\bf A})$ converges to $$\mbf b_\bot=:(\bf I-AA^\dag)b,$$ which is the orthogonal projection of $\mbf z^0$ onto the set $\{\mbf z\ |\ \bf A^\rmt z=0\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{estz} For any given consistent or inconsistent linear system $\bf Ax=b$, let $\mbf z^k$ be the vector generated in {\rm REBK} with ${\bf z}^0\in{\bf b}+\ran({\bf A})$. {Assume $0<\alpha<2/\beta_{\max}^\mcalj$.} It holds \beqs\mbbe\bem\|{\bf z}^k-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2\eem\leq\rho^k\|\mbf z^0- \mbf b_\bot\|_2^2.\eeqs
\end{lemma}
\proof By $(\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j})^\rmt \mbf b_\bot=\mbf 0$, we have \beq
{\bf z}^k-\mbf b_\bot={\bf z}^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot-\dsp\frac{\alpha}{\|{\bf A}_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2}\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}(\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j})^\rmt(\mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot).\label{zkup}\eeq By ${\bf z}^0-\mbf b_\bot=\mbf A\mbf A^\dag\mbf z^0\in\ran({\bf A})$ { and $\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}(\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j})^\rmt(\mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot)\in\ran(\mbf A)$}, we can show that ${\bf z}^k-\mbf b_\bot\in\ran(\bf A)$ by induction.
It follows from (\ref{zkup}) that \begin{align*}\|{\bf z}^k-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2
&=\|{\bf z}^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2-\frac{2\alpha\|(\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j})^\rmt(\mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot)\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2}\\
& \quad +\alpha^2(\mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot)^\rmt\l(\frac{\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}}{\|{\bf A}_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf}\l(\frac{\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}}{\|{\bf A}_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf}\r)^\rmt\r)^2(\mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot)\\
&\leq { \|{\bf z}^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2-\l(2\alpha-\alpha^2\frac{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2}\r)\frac{\|(\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j})^\rmt(\mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot)\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2}}\\ & \qquad (\rm by\ Lemma\ \ref{leqQ})\\
&\leq {\|{\bf z}^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2-(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcalj)\frac{\|(\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j})^\rmt(\mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot)\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2}}.\end{align*}
Taking the conditioned expectation on the first $k-1$ iterations yields
\begin{align*}\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\|{\bf z}^k-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2\eem &\leq \|{\bf z}^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcalj)\|\mbf A^\rmt(\mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot)\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A \|_\rmf^2}\\
&\leq {\|{\bf z}^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcalj)\sigma_r^2(\mbf A)}{\|\mbf A \|_\rmf^2}\|\mbf z^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2} \\ & {\qquad(\rm by\ Lemma\ \ref{leq}\ and\ 0<\alpha<2/\beta_{\max}^\mcalj)}\\
&= \rho\|{\bf z}^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2 \end{align*}
Taking expectation again gives
\begin{align*}\mbbe\bem\|{\bf z}^k-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2\eem &=\mbbe\bem\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\|{\bf z}^k-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2 \eem\eem\\
&\leq \rho\mbbe\bem\|{\bf z}^{k-1}-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2\eem\\
&\leq \rho^k\|{\bf z}^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2.\end{align*}
This completes the proof.\qed
We give the main convergence result of REBK in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{main} For any given consistent or inconsistent linear system $\bf Ax=b$, let $\mbf x^k$ be the $k$th iterate of {\rm REBK} with ${\bf z}^0\in{\bf b}+\ran({\bf A})$ and $\mbf x^0\in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$. {Assume that $0<\alpha<2/\max(\beta_{\max}^\mcali,\beta_{\max}^\mcalj)$}. For any $\ve>0$, it holds $${\mbbe\bem\|{\bf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem\leq(1+\ve)^k\eta^k\|{\bf x}^0-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2+\l(1+\frac{1}{\ve}\r)\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}\rho^{k-l}(1+\ve)^l\eta^l.}$$
\end{theorem}
\proof Let $$\wh{\mbf x}^k={\bf x}^{k-1}-\dsp\frac{\alpha}{\|{\bf A}_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})^\rmt\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}(\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b),$$ which is actually one RABK update for the linear system $\bf Ax = AA^\dag b$ from $\mbf x^{k-1}$. It follows from
$${\mbf x}^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k=\frac{\alpha}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})^\rmt(\mbf b_{\mcali_i}-\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf A^\dag\mbf b-\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i})$$ that
\begin{align}\|{\mbf x}^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2&=\frac{\alpha^2}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^4}\|(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})^\rmt(\mbf b_{\mcali_i}-\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf A^\dag\mbf b-\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i})\|_2^2\nn\\
&\leq {\frac{\alpha^2}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}\frac{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}\|\mbf b_{\mcali_i}-\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf A^\dag\mbf b-\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i}\|_2^2}\nn\\
&\leq {\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}\|\mbf b_{\mcali_i}-\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf A^\dag\mbf b-\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i}\|_2^2}. \label{xhat1} \end{align}
It follows from
\begin{align*} \mbbe_{k-1}\bem \|{\mbf x}^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2\eem &= \mbbe_{k-1}\bem\mbbe_{k-1}^i\bem\|{\mbf x}^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2\eem\eem\\
& \leq {\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\mbbe_{k-1}^i\bem\dsp\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}\|\mbf b_{\mcali_i}-\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf A^\dag\mbf b-\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i}\|_2^2\eem\eem \quad \quad(\mbox{by (\ref{xhat1})})}\\
&= {\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\dsp\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\|\mbf b -\mbf A \mbf A^\dag\mbf b-\mbf z^k \|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\eem}
\end{align*} that
\begin{align} \mbbe\bem \|{\mbf x}^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2\eem &= {\mbbe\bem\mbbe_{k-1}\bem \|{\mbf x}^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2 \eem\eem}\nn\\ &\leq{\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\mbbe\bem\|\mbf b -\mbf A \mbf A^\dag\mbf b-\mbf z^k \|_2^2\eem}\nn\\
&\leq {\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\rho^k}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot \|_2^2. \quad ({\rm by\ Lemma\ \ref{estz}})}
\label{xhat}\end{align}
By $\mbf x^0 \in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$, { ${\bf A^\dag b}\in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$, $(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})^\rmt(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_{\mcali_i}+\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i})\in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$, and $${\bf x}^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b={\bf x}^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b-\dsp\frac{\alpha}{\|{\bf A}_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})^\rmt(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf b_{\mcali_i}+\mbf z^k_{\mcali_i}),$$} we can show that $\mbf x^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\in\ran(\mbf A^\rmt)$ by induction. {By \begin{align*}\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2&= \|\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2-\frac{2\alpha\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}(\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}\\
&\quad+\alpha^2(\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)^\rmt\l(\l(\frac{\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf}\r)^\rmt\frac{\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf}\r)^2(\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)\\
&\leq\|\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali)\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}(\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2},\quad (\mbox{by Lemma \ref{leqQ}})\end{align*}
we have \begin{align*}\mbbe_{k-1}\bem\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem&\leq \|\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali)\|\mbf A(\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\\&\leq \|\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali)\sigma_r^2(\mbf A)\|(\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\\ &\quad \quad (\mbox{by Lemma \ref{leq}} \mbox{ and } 0<\alpha<2/\beta_{\max}^\mcali) \\ &= \eta \|{\bf x}^{k-1}-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2,\end{align*}
which yields \beq\label{la}\mbbe\bem\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem\leq\eta\mbbe\bem\|{\bf x}^{k-1}-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem.\eeq}
Note that for any $\ve>0$, we have \begin{align}\|\mbf x^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2&= \|\mbf x^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k+\wh{\mbf x}^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2 \nn \\ &\leq (\|\mbf x^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2+\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2)^2\nn \\&\leq \|\mbf x^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2+\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2+2\|\mbf x^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2\nn \\
&\leq\l(1+\frac{1}{\ve}\r)\|\mbf x^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2+(1+\ve)\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2.\label{ve}\end{align}
Combining (\ref{xhat}), (\ref{la}), and (\ref{ve}) yields {\begin{align*}\mbbe\bem\|{\mbf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem&\leq \l(1+\frac{1}{\ve}\r)\mbbe\bem\|{\mbf x}^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2\eem+(1+\ve)\mbbe\bem\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem\\
&\leq \l(1+\frac{1}{\ve}\r)\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\rho^k}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2 +(1+\ve)\eta\mbbe\bem\|{\bf x}^{k-1}-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem\\
&\leq \l(1+\frac{1}{\ve}\r)\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}(\rho^k+\rho^{k-1}(1+\ve)\eta)\\ &\quad +(1+\ve)^2\eta^2\mbbe\bem\|{\bf x}^{k-2}-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem\\
&\leq \cdots\\ &\leq \l(1+\frac{1}{\ve}\r)\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}\rho^{k-l}(1+\ve)^l\eta^l\\ &\quad +(1+\ve)^k\eta^k\|{\bf x}^0-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2
\end{align*}}This completes the proof.
\qed
\begin{remark}\label{rek8} For the case REBK with $s=m$, $t=n$ and $\alpha=1$ (i.e., REK), we have {$$\beta_{\max}^\mcali=\max_{i\in[m]}\frac{\|\mbf A_{i,:}\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{i,:}\|_\rmf^2}=1,\quad \beta_{\max}^\mcalj=\max_{j\in[n]}\frac{\|\mbf A_{:,j}\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{:,j}\|_\rmf^2}=1.$$ Therefore,
$$\eta=1-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali)\sigma_{r}^2(\bf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}=1-\frac{\sigma_r^2(\mbf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2},$$ and $$\rho=1-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcalj)\sigma_{r}^2(\bf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}=1-\frac{\sigma_r^2(\mbf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}.$$ It follows from $$\wh{\mbf x}^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b=\l(\mbf I-\frac{(\mbf A_{i,:})^\rmt\mbf A_{i,:}}{\|\mbf A_{i,:}\|_2^2}\r)(\mbf x^{k-1}-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)$$ and $${\mbf x}^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k=\frac{\mbf b_i-\mbf A_{i,:}\mbf A^\dag\mbf b-\mbf z^k_i}{\|\mbf A_{i,:}\|_2^2}(\mbf A_{i,:})^\rmt$$ that $$(\wh{\mbf x}^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b)^\rmt(\mbf x^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k)= 0.$$ Then we have $$\|\mbf x^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2=\|\mbf x^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2+\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2^2,$$ which yields the following convergence for REK (see \cite{du2019tight}): \begin{align*}\mbbe\bem\|{\mbf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem&= \mbbe\bem\|{\mbf x}^k-\wh{\mbf x}^k\|_2^2\eem+\mbbe\bem\|\wh{\mbf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem\\
&\leq \frac{\alpha^2\rho^k}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2 +\rho\mbbe\bem\|{\bf x}^{k-1}-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem\\
&\leq \frac{2\alpha^2\rho^k\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}+\rho^2\mbbe\bem\|{\bf x}^{k-2}-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem\\
&\leq \cdots\\ &\leq \rho^k\l(\frac{k\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}+\|{\bf x}^0-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\r).
\end{align*}
Actually our proof is a modification of that of Zouzias and Freris \cite{zouzias2013rando}. We reorganize the arguments used by Zouzias and Freris and refine the analysis to get a better convergence estimate.}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{rek9} {Let $
\wh\rho:=\max(\eta,\rho)$ and $\beta_{\max}:=\max(\beta_{\max}^\mcali,\beta_{\max}^\mcalj)$. Then we have $$\wh\rho=1-\frac{(2\alpha-\alpha^2\beta_{\max})\sigma_{r}^2(\bf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}.$$ By Theorem \ref{main}, we have
\begin{align*}\mbbe\bem\|{\mbf x}^k-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2\eem
&\leq(1+\ve)^k\eta^k\|{\bf x}^0-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2+\l(1+\frac{1}{\ve}\r)\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}\rho^{k-l}(1+\ve)^l\eta^l\\
&\leq(1+\ve)^k\wh\rho^k\|{\bf x}^0-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2+\l(1+\frac{1}{\ve}\r)\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\wh\rho^k\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}(1+\ve)^l\\
&\leq(1+\ve)^k\wh\rho^k\|{\bf x}^0-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2+\l(1+\frac{1}{\ve}\r)\frac{\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\wh\rho^k\frac{(1+\ve)^k-1}{\ve}\\
&\leq (1+\ve)^k\wh\rho^k\l(\|{\bf x}^0-{\bf A^\dag b}\|_2^2+\frac{(1+\ve)\alpha^2\beta_{\max}^\mcali\|\mbf z^0-\mbf b_\bot\|_2^2}{\ve^2\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}\r),
\end{align*}
which shows that REBK exponentially converges in the mean square to the minimum $\ell_2$-norm least squares solution of a given linear system of equations with the rate $(1+\ve)\wh\rho$ if $\dsp 0<\alpha<{2}/{\beta_{\max}}$. Setting $\alpha=1/\beta_{\max}$ yields $$\wh\rho=1-\frac{\sigma_{r}^2(\bf A)}{\beta_{\max}\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2},$$ which is better than the rate of REK (see Remark \ref{rek8}) $$\rho=\dsp1-\frac{\sigma_{r}^2(\bf A)}{\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}$$ if $\beta_{\max}<1$. A smaller $\beta_{\max}$ means a faster convergence in terms of iterations. Recalling that $$\beta_{\max}^\mcali:=\max_{i\in[s]}\frac{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:}\|_\rmf^2}\quad \mbox{ and }\quad \beta_{\max}^\mcalj:=\max_{j\in[t]}\frac{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_2^2}{\|\mbf A_{:,\mcalj_j}\|_\rmf^2},$$ we have $$\max_{i\in[s]}\frac{1}{|\mcali_i|}\leq\max_{i\in[s]}\frac{1}{\rank(\mbf A_{\mcali_i,:})}\leq\beta_{\max}^\mcali\leq 1$$ and $$\max_{j\in[t]}\frac{1}{|\mcalj_j|}\leq\max_{j\in[t]}\frac{1}{\rank(\mbf A_{:,\mcali_j})}\leq\beta_{\max}^\mcalj\leq 1.$$ Therefore, $$\max\l(\max_{i\in[s]}\frac{1}{|\mcali_i|},\max_{j\in[t]}\frac{1}{|\mcalj_j|}\r)\leq\beta_{\max} \leq 1,$$ which means that REBK is at least as fast as REK in terms of iterations. The numerical results in Section 3 show that the convergence of REBK with appropriate block sizes and stepsizes is much faster than that of REK both in the numbers of iterations and the computing times.}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} It was shown in \cite{gower2015rando} that the convergence of $\mbf x^k$ to $\mbf A^\dag\mbf b$ under the expected norm of the error (Theorem \ref{main}) is a stronger form of convergence than the convergence of the norm of the expected error (Theorem \ref{ner}), as the former also guarantees that the variance of $\mbf x^k_i$ (the $i$th element of $\mbf x^k$) converges to zero for $i=1,\ldots,n$. By Remark \ref{alpha}, we know $0<\alpha<{2\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}/{\sigma_1^2(\mbf A)}$ guarantees the convergence of the norm of the expected error. {By Remark \ref{rek9}, we know $0<\alpha<2/\beta_{\max}$ guarantees the convergence of the expected norm of the error. However, since the convergence estimate in Remark \ref{rek9} usually is not sharp, the stepsize $\alpha$ satisfying $2/\beta_{\max}\leq\alpha<{2\|\mbf A\|_\rmf^2}/{\sigma_1^2(\mbf A)}$ is also possible to result in convergence (see Figure \ref{fig1}, Tables \ref{t2} and \ref{t3} in Section 3).}
\end{remark}
\section{Numerical results}
In this section, we compare the performance of the randomized extended block Kaczmarz (REBK) algorithm proposed in this paper against the randomized extended Kaczmarz (REK) algorithm \cite{zouzias2013rando} and the projection-based randomized double block Kaczmarz (RDBK) algorithm \cite{needell2015rando} on a variety of test problems. We do not claim optimized implementations of the algorithms, and only run on small or medium-scale problems. The purpose is only to demonstrate that even in these simple examples, REBK offers significant advantages to REK. All experiments are performed using MATLAB (version R2019a) on a laptop with 2.7-GHz Intel Core i7 processor, 16 GB memory, and Mac operating system.
To construct an inconsistent linear system, we set $\bf b = Ax+r$ where $\mbf x$ is a vector with entries generated from a standard normal distribution and the residual $\mbf r\in \nul(\mbf A^\rmt)$. Note that one can obtain such a vector $\bf r$ by the MATLAB function $\tt null$. For all algorithms, we set $\mbf z^0=\mbf b$ and $\mbf x^0=\mbf 0$ and stop if the error $\|\mbf x^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2\leq10^{-5}$.
We report the average number of iterations (denoted as ITER) {and the average computing time in seconds (denoted as CPU)} of REK, RDBK, and REBK. { Note that {\tt A$\backslash$b} will usually not be the same as {\tt pinv(A)*b} when {\tt A} is rank-deficient or underdetermined. We use MATLAB's {\tt lsqminnorm} (which is typically more efficient than {\tt pinv}) to solve the small least squares problems at each step of RDBK.} We refer the reader to \cite{needell2014paved,needell2015rando} for more numerical aspects of RDBK. We also report the speed-up of REBK against REK, which is defined as $$\mbox{speed-up}=\frac{\mbox{CPU of REK}}{\mbox{CPU of REBK}}.$$
For the block methods, we assume that the subsets $\{\mcali_i\}_{i=1}^{s-1}$ and $\{\mcalj_j\}_{j=1}^{t-1}$ have the same size $\tau$ (i.e., $|\mcali_i|=|\mcalj_j|=\tau$). We consider the row partition $\{\mcali_i\}_{i=1}^s$: \begin{align*}\mcali_i &=\{(i-1)\tau+1,(i-1)\tau+2,\ldots,i\tau\},\quad i=1,2,\ldots,s-1,\\ \mcali_s &=\{(s-1)\tau+1,(s-1)\tau+2,\ldots,m\},\quad |\mcali_s|\leq\tau,\end{align*} and the column partition $\{\mcalj_j\}_{j=1}^t$: \begin{align*}\mcalj_j &=\{(j-1)\tau+1,(j-1)\tau+2,\ldots,j\tau\},\quad j=1,2, \ldots, t-1,\\ \mcalj_t &= \{(t-1) \tau+1,(t-1)\tau+2, \ldots, n\},\quad |\mcalj_t|\leq \tau.\end{align*}
\subsection{Synthetic data}
Two types of coefficient matrices are generated as follows.
\bit
\item Type I: For given $m$, $n$, $r = rank(\mbf A)$, and $\kappa>1$, we construct a matrix $\mbf A$ by $$\bf A = UDV^\rmt,$$ where $\mbf U\in\mbbr^{m\times r} $ and $\mbf V\in \mbbr^{n\times r}$. Entries of $\mbf U$ and $\mbf V$ are generated from a standard normal distribution, and then, columns are orthonormalized, $${\tt [U,\sim] = qr(randn(m,r),0);\qquad [V,\sim] = qr(randn(n,r),0);}$$ The matrix $\mbf D$ is an $r\times r$ diagonal matrix whose diagonal entries are uniformly distributed numbers in $(1,\kappa)$, $${\tt D = diag(1+(\kappa-1).*rand(r,1));}$$ So the condition number of $\mbf A$ is upper bounded by $\kappa$.
\item Type II: For given $m$, $n$, entries of $\mbf A$ are generated from a standard normal distribution, $$\tt A=randn(m,n);$$ So $\mbf A$ is a full-rank matrix almost surely.
\eit
{ In Figure \ref{fig1}, we plot the error $\|\mbf x^k-\mbf A^\dag \mbf b\|_2$ of REBK with a fixed block size ($\tau=10$) and different stepsizes ($\alpha$ from $0.75/\beta_{\max}$ to $2.62/\beta_{\max}$) for two inconsistent linear systems with coefficient matrices of Types I ($\bf A=UDV^\rmt$ with $m=500$, $n=250$, $r=150$, $\kappa=2$) and II ($\bf A=$ {\tt randn(500,250)}). It is observed that the convergence of REBK becomes faster as the increase of the stepsize, and then slows down after reaching the fastest rate.}
\begin{figure}[!htpb]
\centerline{\epsfig{figure=diffalp1.pdf,height=2.15in}\quad\epsfig{figure=diffalp2.pdf,height=2.15in}}
\caption{The average (10 trials of each case) error $\|\mbf x^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2$ of REBK with block size $\tau=10$ and different stepsizes $\alpha$ from $0.75/\beta_{\max}$ to $2.62/\beta_{\max}$ for two inconsistent linear systems. Left: Type I matrix $\bf A=UDV^\rmt$ with $m=500$, $n=250$, $r=150$, $\kappa=2$. Right: Type II matrix $\bf A=$ {\tt randn(500,250)}.} \label{fig1}
\end{figure}
{ In Tables \ref{t1} and \ref{t2}, we report the numbers of iterations and the computing times of the REK, RDBK, and REBK algorithms for solving inconsistent linear systems. For the block algorithms (RDBK and REBK), a fixed block size $\tau=10$ is used. For the REBK algorithm, empirical stepsizes $\alpha=1.75/\beta_{\max}$ and $\alpha=2.25/\beta_{\max}$ are used for Type I and Type II matrices, respectively. From these two tables, we observe: (i) in all cases, the RDBK and REBK algorithms vastly outperform the REK algorithm in terms of both the numbers of iterations and the computing times; (ii) for Type I matrix, the convergence rates of the RDBK and REBK algorithms are almost the same in terms of the numbers of iterations; (iii) for Type II matrix, REBK performs better than RDBK in terms of the numbers of iterations.}
\begin{table}[!htp]
\caption{The average (10 trials of each algorithm) {\rm ITER} and {\rm CPU} of {\rm REK}, {\rm RDBK}($\tau=10$), and {\rm REBK}($\tau=10$, $\alpha=1.75/\beta_{\max}$) for inconsistent linear systems with random coefficient matrices $\mbf A$ of Type I: ${\bf A=UDV^\rmt}$.}
\label{t1}
\begin{center} \footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c} \toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{$m\times n$}& \multirow{2}{*}{rank} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\kappa$} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{REK} & \multicolumn{2}{|c}{RDBK} & \multicolumn{4}{|c}{REBK}\\
\cline{4-11}&&&ITER &CPU & ITER &CPU &
$\alpha$ & ITER & CPU & speed-up\\
\hline
$ 250 \times 500 $ & 150 & 2 &5826 &0.26 &572 &0.21 &10.87 &586 &0.05 &4.90 \\ \hline
$ 250 \times 500 $ & 150 & 10 &65520 &2.87 &6166 &2.19 &9.36 &7365 &0.63 &4.59 \\ \hline
$ 500\times 1000$ & 250 & 2 &10068 &0.59 &1000 &0.43 &11.82 &991 &0.13 &4.60 \\ \hline
$ 500\times 1000$ & 250 & 10 &114297 &6.61 &10209 &4.29 &10.85 &10259 &1.23 &5.36 \\ \hline
$ 500\times 250$ & 150 & 2 &5755 &0.25 &562 &0.19 &10.70 &578 &0.03 &7.32 \\ \hline
$ 500\times 250$ & 150 & 10 &63741 &2.76 &5784 &1.90 &10.13 &6424 &0.36 &7.60 \\ \hline
$ 500\times 250$ & 250 & 2 &9971 &0.43 &940 &0.31 &12.47 &961 &0.06 &7.81 \\ \hline
$ 500\times 250$ & 250 & 10 &119182 &5.14 &11328 &3.73 &10.99 &10783 &0.61 &8.43 \\ \hline
$ 1000\times 500$ & 250 & 2 &9959 &0.55 &974 &0.39 &12.10 &987 &0.10 &5.53 \\ \hline
$ 1000\times 500$ & 250 & 10 &118134 &6.54 &11236 &4.44 &11.20 &10349 &1.03 &6.36\\ \hline
$ 1000\times 500$ & 500 & 2 &20188 &1.11 &2007 &0.80 &13.84 &2115 &0.21 &5.20 \\ \hline
$ 1000\times 500$ & 500 & 10 &254117 &14.01 &25361 &10.00 &12.67 &20432 &2.03 &6.92 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!htp]
\caption{The average (10 trials of each algorithm) {\rm ITER} and {\rm CPU} of {\rm REK}, {\rm RDBK}($\tau=10$), and {\rm REBK}($\tau=10$, $\alpha=2.25/\beta_{\max}$) for inconsistent linear systems with random coefficient matrices $\mbf A$ of Type II: ${\bf A=}$ {\tt randn(m,n)}.}
\label{t2}
\begin{center} \footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c} \toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{$m\times n$}& \multirow{2}{*}{rank} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\dsp\frac{\sigma_1(\mbf A)}{\sigma_r(\mbf A)}$} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{REK} & \multicolumn{2}{|c}{RDBK} & \multicolumn{4}{|c}{REBK}\\
\cline{4-11}&&&ITER &CPU &ITER &CPU &
$\alpha$ & ITER & CPU & speed-up\\
\hline
$ 250\times 120$ & 120 &5.25 &18060 &0.66 &1646 &0.50 &13.48 &1337 &0.06 &10.54 \\ \hline
$ 500\times 250$ & 250 & 5.73 & 41016 &1.79 &3811 &1.26 &14.50 &2885 &0.17 &10.81 \\ \hline
$ 750\times 370$ & 370 & 5.80 &59660 &2.91 &5929 &2.20 &16.23 &4115 &0.36 &8.07 \\ \hline
$ 1000\times 500$ & 500 &5.74 &83093 &4.61 & 8183 & 3.25 & 16.42 &5422 &0.55 &8.41 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
{ In Figure \ref{fig2}, we plot the error $\|\mbf x^k- \mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2$ and the computing times of REBK with block sizes $\tau=5,10,20,50,100,200$ and stepsize $\alpha=1.75/\beta_{\max}$ for two inconsistent linear systems with coefficient matrices of Types I ($\bf A=UDV^\rmt$ with $m=20000$, $n=5000$, $r=4500$, $\kappa=2$) and II ($\bf A=$ {\tt randn(20000,5000)}). The average numbers of required iterations are also reported. We observe: (i) increasing block size and using the empirical stepsize $\alpha=1.75/\beta_{\max}$ lead to a better convergence in terms of the numbers of iterations; (ii) with the increase of block size, the computing time first decreases, then increases after reaching the minimum value, and finally tends to be stable. This means that for sufficiently large block size the decrease in iteration complexity cannot compensate for the increase in cost per iteration. On the other hand, if a distributed version of REBK is implemented, a larger $\tau$ will be better.}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centerline{\epsfig{figure=diffalptau.pdf,height=2.15in}\quad\epsfig{figure=diffalptaucpu.pdf,height=2.15in}}
\centerline{\epsfig{figure=diffalptau2.pdf,height=2.15in}\quad\epsfig{figure=diffalptaucpu2.pdf,height=2.15in}}
\caption{The average (10 trials of each case) error $\|\mbf x^k-\mbf A^\dag\mbf b\|_2$ and CPU of REBK with different block sizes $\tau=10,50,100,200$ and stepsize $\alpha=1.75/\beta_{\max}$ for inconsistent linear systems. The average numbers of required iterations are also reported. Upper: Type I matrix $\bf A=UDV^\rmt$ with $m=20000$, $n=5000$, $r=4500$, and $\kappa=2$. Lower: Type II matrix $\bf A=$ {\tt randn(20000,5000)}.}\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
{In Figure \ref{fig3}, we plot the computing times of the REK, RDBK, and REBK algorithms for inconsistent linear systems with coefficient matrices of Types I ($\bf A=UDV^\rmt$ with $m=2000$, $4000$, $\ldots$, $20000$, $n=500$, $r=250$, $\kappa=2$) and II ($\bf A=$ {\tt randn(m,n)} with $m=2000$, $4000$, $\ldots$, $20000$, $n=500$). For all cases, the block size $\tau=10$ and the stepsize $\alpha=1.75/\beta_{\max}$ are used. We observe that both RDBK and REBK are better than REK, and REBK is the best.}
\begin{figure}[!htpb]
\centerline{\epsfig{figure=diffmI.pdf,height=2.15in}\quad\epsfig{figure=diffm2.pdf,height=2.15in}}
\caption{The average (10 trials of each algorithm) CPU of REK, RDBK($\tau=10$), and REBK($\tau=10,\alpha=1.75/\beta_{\max}$) for inconsistent linear systems. Left: Type I matrix $\bf A=UDV^\rmt$ with $m=2000,4000,\ldots,20000$, $n=500$, $r=250$, and $\kappa=2$. Right: Type II matrix $\bf A=$ {\tt randn(m,n)} with $m=2000,4000,\ldots,20000$ and $n=500$.}\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Real-world data}
Finally, we test REK and REBK {using eight inconsistent linear systems with coefficient matrices} from the University of Florida sparse matrix collection \cite{davis2011unive}. The eight matrices are {\tt abtaha1}, {\tt flower\_5\_1}, {\tt football}, {\tt lp\_nug15}, {\tt relat6}, {\tt relat7}, {\tt Sandi\_authors}, and {\tt WorldCities}. In Table \ref{t3}, we report the numbers of iterations and the computing times for the REK and REBK algorithms. { For each matrix, we tested two stepsizes of REBK, the first is $1/\beta_{\max}$ and the second is empirical.} We observe that REBK based on good choices of block size and stepsize significantly outperforms REK. Moreover, good stepsize and block size are problem dependent.
\begin{table}[htp]
\caption{The average (10 trials of each algorithm) {\rm ITER} and {\rm CPU} of {\rm REK} and {\rm REBK}($\tau,\alpha$) for inconsistent linear systems with coefficient matrices from \cite{davis2011unive}. For each matrix, two stepsizes of {\rm REBK} are tested: the first is $1/\beta_{\max}$, and the second is empirical.}
\label{t3}
\begin{center} \footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c} \toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{Matrix} & \multirow{2}{*}{$m\times n$}& \multirow{2}{*}{rank} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\dsp\frac{\sigma_1(\mbf A)}{\sigma_r(\mbf A)}$} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{REK} & \multicolumn{5}{|c}{REBK}\\
\cline{5-11}&&&&ITER &CPU &$\tau$ & $\alpha$ & ITER &CPU &speed-up\\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\tt abtaha1} & \multirow{2}{*}{$14596\times209$} & \multirow{2}{*}{209} & \multirow{2}{*}{12.23} & \multirow{2}{*}{276946} & \multirow{2}{*}{89.38} & \multirow{2}{*}{10} & 1.82 & 151395 & 68.30 & 1.31\\ \cline{8-11}&&&&&&&5 & 56064 &25.34 &3.53\\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\tt flower\_5\_1} & \multirow{2}{*}{$211\times201 $} & \multirow{2}{*}{179} & \multirow{2}{*}{13.70} & \multirow{2}{*}{135117} & \multirow{2}{*}{5.16} & \multirow{2}{*}{5} &1 & 136037 & 6.15 & 0.84 \\ \cline{8-11}&&&&&&& 4 &34381& 1.55 & 3.34 \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\tt football} & \multirow{2}{*}{$35\times35 $} & \multirow{2}{*}{19} & \multirow{2}{*}{166.47} & \multirow{2}{*}{810792} & \multirow{2}{*}{21.99} & \multirow{2}{*}{5} &1 & 858215 & 30.64 & 0.72 \\ \cline{8-11}&&&&&&& 2 & 409995 &14.63 & 1.50\\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\tt lp\_nug15} & \multirow{2}{*}{$6330\times22275$} & \multirow{2}{*}{5698} &\multirow{2}{*}{2.73} & \multirow{2}{*}{216924} & \multirow{2}{*}{220.64} & \multirow{2}{*}{20} & 3.53 & 40539 & 199.67 & 1.10 \\ \cline{8-11}&&&&&&&5 &31039 & 158.29& 1.39\\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\tt relat6} & \multirow{2}{*}{$2340\times 157$} & \multirow{2}{*}{137} & \multirow{2}{*}{7.74} & \multirow{2}{*}{34536} & \multirow{2}{*}{2.43} & \multirow{2}{*}{10} & 1& 34273 & 3.81 & 0.64 \\\cline{8-11}&&&&&&&2.5 &13971 & 1.56 &1.56 \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\tt relat7} & \multirow{2}{*}{$21924\times 1045$} & \multirow{2}{*}{1012} & \multirow{2}{*}{10.85} & \multirow{2}{*}{550810} & \multirow{2}{*}{283.69} & \multirow{2}{*}{10} & 1 & 542100 & 466.89 & 0.61 \\ \cline{8-11}&&&&&&&2.5 & 218287& 188.81 & 1.50\\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\tt Sandi\_authors} & \multirow{2}{*}{$86\times86 $} & \multirow{2}{*}{72} & \multirow{2}{*}{189.58} & \multirow{2}{*}{2525141} & \multirow{2}{*}{73.28} & \multirow{2}{*}{5} & 1 & 2533343 & 99.36 & 0.74 \\ \cline{8-11}&&&&&&&2.5 & 999294& 39.15 & 1.87 \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{\tt WorldCities} & \multirow{2}{*}{$315\times 100$} & \multirow{2}{*}{100} & \multirow{2}{*}{66.00}& \multirow{2}{*}{120699} & \multirow{2}{*}{4.32} & \multirow{2}{*}{5} & 1.13 & 105647 & 4.52 & 0.96 \\ \cline{8-11}&&&&&&&2.5 & 47372 & 2.02& 2.14 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Concluding remarks}
We have proposed a randomized extended block Kaczmarz (REBK) algorithm for solving general linear systems and prove its convergence theory. At each step, REBK uses two RABK (with special choice of weights) updates. The new algorithm can utilize efficient implementations on distributed computing units. Numerical experiments show that the crucial point for guaranteeing fast convergence is to obtain good block size and stepsize. Finding appropriate variable stepsize by the adaptive extrapolation \cite{necoara2019faste} and proposing more effective partitions based on the techniques of \cite{needell2014paved,drummond2015parti,torun2018ovel,necoara2019faste} should be valuable topics. { We also note that RABK allows the flexibility that the distributions from which blocks are selected do not require the blocks to form a partition of the columns, or rows. Designing variants of REBK based on RABK with random samplings that do not depend on the partitions is straightforward. We believe the technique used in the proof of Theorem \ref{main} still works for these variants. Although the analysis will be more complicated. Besides, developing parallel and accelerated variants of REBK based on the approach used by Richt\'{a}rik and Tak\'{a}\v{c} \cite{richtarik2017stoch} is also worth exploring. We will work on these topics in the future.}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
{The authors are thankful to the referees for their detailed comments and valuable suggestions that have led to remarkable improvements.} The research of the first author was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.11771364) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No.20720180008).
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:1}
The solution of a parametrized system of partial differential equations (PDEs) by means of a \textit{full-order model} (FOM), whenever dealing with real-time or multi-query scenarios, entails prohibitive computational costs if the FOM is high-dimensional. In the former case, the FOM solution must be computed in a very limited amount of time; in the latter one, the FOM must be solved for a huge number of parameter instances sampled from the parameter space.
Reduced order modeling techniques aim at replacing the FOM by a reduced order model (ROM), featuring a much lower dimension, still able to {express the} physical features of the problem described by the FOM. The basic assumption underlying the construction of such a ROM is that the solution of a parametrized PDE, belonging a priori to a high-dimensional (discrete) space, lies on a low-dimensional manifold embedded in this space. The goal of a ROM is then to approximate the \textit{solution manifold} -- that is, the set of all PDE solutions when the parameters vary in the parameter space -- through a suitable, approximated {\em trial manifold}.
A widespread family of reduced order modeling techniques relies on the assumption that the reduced-order approximation can be expressed by a linear combination of basis functions, built starting from a set of FOM solutions, called snapshots. Among these techniques, proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) -- equivalent to principal component analysis in statistics \cite{hastie2001theelements}, or Karhunen-Lo\`eve expansion in stochastic applications -- exploits the singular value decomposition of a suitable snapshot matrix (or the eigen-decomposition of the corresponding snapshot correlation matrix), thus yielding {\em linear} ROMs, in which the ROM approximation is given by the linear superimposition of POD modes. In this case, the solution manifold is approximated through a \textit{linear} trial manifold, that is, the ROM approximation is sought in a low-dimensional linear trial subspace.
Projection-based methods are linear ROMs in which the ROM approximation of the PDE solution, for any new parameter value, results from the solution of a low-dimensional (nonlinear, dynamical) system, whose unknowns are the ROM degrees of freedom (or generalized coordinates). Despite the PDE (and thus the FOM) {being} linear or not, the operators appearing in the ROM are obtained by imposing that the projection of the FOM residual evaluated on the ROM trial solution is orthogonal to a low-dimensional, linear test subspace, which might coincide with the trial subspace. Hence, no matter whether the PDE is linear or not, {the resulting ROM is {\em linear} since the reduced dynamics is obtained through a projection onto a linear subspace} \cite{benner2017model,benner2015asurvey,quarteroni2016reduced}. However, linear ROMs show severe computational bottlenecks when dealing with problems featuring coherent structures (possibly dependent on parameters) that propagate over time, namely in transport and wave-type phenomena, or convection-dominated flows. In these cases, the dimension of the linear trial manifold can easily become extremely large if compared to the intrinsic dimension of the solution manifold for the sake of accuracy, thus compromising the ROM efficiency. To overcome this bottleneck, {\em ad-hoc} extensions of the POD strategy have been considered, towards nonlinear approaches to build a ROM \cite{ohlberger2016reduced, pagani2018numerical}.
In this paper we propose a computational, non-intrusive approach based on deep learning (DL) algorithms to deal with the construction of efficient ROMs (which we refer to as DL-ROMs) in order to tackle parameter-dependent PDEs; in particular, we consider PDEs that feature wave-type phenomena. A comprehensive framework is presented for the global approximation of the map $(t, \boldsymbol{\mu}) \mapsto {\mathbf{u}}_h(t, \boldsymbol{\mu})$, where $t \in (0,T)$ denotes time, $\boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P} \subset \mathbb{R}^{n_{\mu}}$ a vector of input parameters and $ {\mathbf{u}}_h(t, \boldsymbol{\mu}) \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h}$ the solution of a large-scale dynamical system arising from the space discretization of a parametrized, time-dependent (non)linear PDE. Several recent works have shown possible applications of DL techniques to parametrized PDEs -- thanks to their approximation capabilities, their extremely favorable computational performances during online testing phases, and their relative easiness of implementation -- both from a theoretical \cite{kutyniok2019atheoretical} and a computational standpoint.
Regarding this latter aspect, artificial neural networks (ANN), such as feedforward neural networks,
have been employed to model the reduced dynamics in a data-driven \cite{regazzoni2019machinelearningfor}, and less intrusive way (avoiding, e.g., the costs entailed by projection-based ROMs), but still relying on a linear trial manifold built, e.g., through POD. For instance, in \cite{guo2018reduced, guo2019data, hestaven2018non-intrusive, san2018neural} the solution of a (nonlinear, time-dependent) ROM for any new parameter value has been replaced by the evaluation of ANN-based regression models; similar ideas can be found, e.g., in \cite{kani2017dr-rnn,mohan2018adeep,wan2018data}. Few attempts have been made in order to describe the reduced trial manifold where the approximation is sought (avoiding, e.g., the linear superimposition of POD modes) through ANNs, see, e.g., \cite{gonzalez2018deep, carlberg2018model}.
For instance, a projection-based ROM technique has been introduced in \citep{carlberg2018model}, in which the FOM system is projected onto a nonlinear trial manifold identified by means of the decoder function of a convolutional autoencoder neural network. However, the ROM is derived by minimizing a residual formulation, for which the quasi-Newton method herein employed requires the computation of an approximated Jacobian of the residual at each time step. A ROM technique based on a deep convolutional recurrent autoencoder has been proposed in \cite{gonzalez2018deep}, where a reduced trial manifold is obtained by means of a convolutional autoencoder; the latter is then used to train a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) neural network modeling the reduced dynamics. However, no explicit parameter dependence in the PDE problem is considered, apart from $\boldsymbol{\mu}$-dependent initial data, and the LSTM is trained on reduced approximations obtained through the encoder function of the autoencoder. Another promising application of machine and deep learning techniques within a ROM framework deals with the efficient evaluation of reduced error models, see, e.g., \cite{ freno2018machine, paganicarlbergmanzoni2019, parish2019time, trehan2017error}. \\
Our goal is to set up nonlinear ROMs whose dimension is nearly equal (if not equal) to the intrinsic dimension of the solution manifold that we aim at approximating. Our DL-ROM approach combines and improves the techniques introduced in \cite{gonzalez2018deep,carlberg2018model} by shaping an all-inclusive DL-based ROM technique, where we both {\em (i)} construct the reduced trial manifold and {\em (ii)} model the reduced dynamics on it employing ANNs. The former task is achieved by using the decoder function of a convolutional autoencoder; the latter task is instead carried out by considering a feedforward neural network {and the encoder function of a convolutional autoencoder}. Moreover, we set up a computational procedure performing the training of both network architectures simultaneously, by minimizing a loss function that weights two terms, one dedicated to each single task. In this respect, we are able to design a flexible framework capable to handle parameters affecting both PDE operators and data, which avoids both the expensive projection stage of \cite{carlberg2018model} and the training of a more expensive LSTM network.
In our technique, the intrusive construction of a ROM is replaced by the evaluation of the ROM generalized coordinates through a deep feedforward neural network taking only $(t, \boldsymbol{\mu})$ as inputs. The proposed technique is purely data-driven, that is, it only relies on the computation of a set of FOM snapshots -- in this respect, DL does not replace the high-fidelity FOM as, e.g., in the works by Karniadakis and coauthors \cite{raissi2018hidden, raissi2017physics1, raissi2017physics2, raissi2019physics, raissi2018deep}; rather, DL techniques are built upon it, to enhance the repeated evaluation of the FOM for different values of the parameters.
The structure of the paper is as follows. In \autoref{sec:2} we show how to generate nonlinear ROMs by reinterpreting the classical ideas behind linear ROMs for parametrized PDEs. In \autoref{sec:3} we detail the construction of the proposed DL-ROM, whose accuracy is numerically assessed in \autoref{sec:4} by considering three different test cases of increasing complexity (both with respect to the parametric dependence and the nature of the PDE). Finally, some conclusions are drawn in \autoref{sec:5}. A quick overview of useful facts about deep feedforward, convolutional and autoencoders neural networks is reported in \ref{sec:A} to make the paper self-contained.
\section{From linear to nonlinear dimensionality reduction}
\label{sec:2}
Starting from the well-known setting of linear (projection-based) ROMs, in this section we generalize this task to the case of nonlinear ROMs.
\subsection{Problem formulation}
We formulate the construction of ROMs in algebraic terms, starting from the high-fidelity (spatial) approximation of nonlinear, time-dependent, parametrized PDEs. By introducing suitable space discretizations techniques (such as, e.g., the Finite Element Method, Isogeometric Analysis or the Spectral Element Method) the high-fidelity, full order model (FOM) can be expressed as a nonlinear parametrized dynamical system. Given $\boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P}$, we aim at solving the initial value problem
\begin{equation}
\label{FOM}
\begin{cases}
\mathbf{\dot{u}}_h(t;\boldsymbol{\mu}) = \mathbf{f}(t, \mathbf{u}_h(t;\boldsymbol{\mu}); \boldsymbol{\mu}) \quad t \in (0, T)\\
\mathbf{u}_h(0;\boldsymbol{\mu})=\mathbf{u}_0(\boldsymbol{\mu}),
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where the parameter space $\mathcal{P} \subset \mathbb{R}^{n_{\boldsymbol{\mu}}}$ is a bounded and closed set, $\mathbf{u}_h:[0,T) \times \mathcal{P} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{N_h}$ is the parametrized solution of (\ref{FOM}), $\mathbf{u}_0 : \mathcal{P} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{N_h}$ is the initial datum and $\mathbf{f} : (0,T) \times \mathbb{R}^{N_h} \times \mathcal{P} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{N_h}$ is a (nonlinear) function, encoding the system dynamics. The FOM dimension $N_h$ is related with the finite dimensional subspaces introduced for the space discretization of the PDE -- here $h>0$ usually denotes a discretization parameter, such as the maximum diameter of elements in a computational mesh -- and can be extremely small whenever the PDE problem shows complex physical behaviors and/or high degrees of accuracy are required to its solution. The parameter $\boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P}$ may represent physical or geometrical properties of the system, like, e.g., material properties, initial and boundary conditions, or the shape of the domain. In order to solve problem (\ref{FOM}), suitable time discretizations are employed, such as backward differentiation formulas \cite{quarteroni2008matematica}.
Our goal is the efficient numerical approximation of the whole set
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{S}_h = \{ \mathbf{u}_h(t ; \boldsymbol{\mu} ) \; | \; t \in [0, T) \; \textnormal{and} \; \boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P} \subset \mathbb{R}^{n_{\mu}} \} \subset \mathbb{R}^{N_h},
\label{solution_manifold}
\end{equation}
of solutions to problem (\ref{FOM}) when $(t ; \boldsymbol{\mu} )$ varies in $[0, T) \times \mathcal{P} $, also referred to as {\em solution manifold} (a sketch is provided in \figurename~\ref{manifold}).
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{manifold.pdf}
\caption{Example of a two-dimensional manifold embedded in $\mathbb{R}^3$. Each curve represents the time-evolution of the first three components of the solution of a (nonlinear) parametrized PDE for a fixed parameter value $\boldsymbol{\mu}$. }
\label{manifold}
\end{figure}
Assuming that, for any given parameter $\boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P}$, problem (\ref{FOM}) admits a unique solution, for each $t \in (0,T)$, the intrinsic dimension of the solution manifold is at most $n_{\boldsymbol{\mu}} + 1 \ll N_h$, where $n_{\boldsymbol \mu}$ is the number of parameters (time plays the role of an additional coordinate). This means that each point $\mathbf{u}_h(t ; \boldsymbol{\mu} )$ belonging to $\mathcal{S}_h$ is completely defined in terms of at most $n_{\boldsymbol{\mu}} + 1$ intrinsic coordinates, or equivalently, the tangent space to the manifold at any given $\mathbf{u}_h(t ; \boldsymbol{\mu} )$ is spanned by $n_{\boldsymbol{\mu}} + 1$ basis vectors.
\subsection{Linear dimensionality reduction: projection-based ROMs}
The most common way to build a ROM for the efficient approximation of problem \eqref{FOM} relies on the introduction of a \textit{reduced linear trial manifold}, that is of a subspace $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}_n = \textnormal{Col}(V)$ of dimension $n \ll N_h$, spanned by the $n$ columns of a matrix $V \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times n}$. Hence, a linear ROM looks for an approximation $\mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h(t; \boldsymbol \mu) \approx \mathbf{u}_h(t; \boldsymbol \mu)$ in the form
\begin{equation}
\label{linear_reconstructed_solution}
\mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h(t; \boldsymbol \mu) = V\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}) ,
\end{equation}
where
$\mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h : [0,T) \times \mathcal{P} \rightarrow \tilde{\mathcal{S}}_n$.
Here $\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}) \in \mathbb{R}^n$ for each $t \in [0,T)$, $\boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P}$ denotes the vector of intrinsic coordinates (or degrees of freedom) of the ROM approximation; note that the map
\[
\boldsymbol{\Psi}_{h} : \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{N_h}, \qquad
\mathbf{s}_n \mapsto \tilde{\mathbf{s}}_h = V \mathbf{s}_n
\]
that, given the (low-dimensional) intrinsic coordinates, returns the (high-dimensional) approximation of the FOM solution ${\mathbf{u}}_h(t; \boldsymbol{\mu})$, is linear.
Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD) is one of the most widely employed techniques to generate the linear trial manifold \cite{quarteroni2016reduced}. Considering a set of $N_{train}$ instances of the parameter $\boldsymbol \mu \in \mathcal{P}$, we introduce the snapshot matrix $S \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times N_s}$ defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{snapshot_matrix}
S = \left[ \mathbf{u}(t^1; \boldsymbol \mu_1) \; | \; \ldots \; | \; \mathbf{u}(t^{N_t}; \boldsymbol \mu_1) \; | \; \ldots \; | \;
\mathbf{u}(t^1 ; \boldsymbol \mu_{N_{train}}) \; | \; \ldots \; | \; \mathbf{u}(t^{N_t} ; \boldsymbol \mu_{N_{train}}) \right],
\end{equation}
where we have introduced a partition of the time interval $[0,T]$ in $N_t$ time steps $\{t^k\}_{{k=1}}^{N_t}$, $t^k = k \Delta t$, of size $\Delta t =T/N_t$ {and $N_s = N_{train}N_t$}. Moreover, let us introduce a symmetric and positive definite matrix $X_h \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times N_h}$ encoding a suitable norm (e.g., the energy norm) on the high-dimensional space and admitting a Cholesky factorization $X_h = H^T H$. POD computes the Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) of $H S$,
\begin{equation*}
H S = U \Sigma Z^T,
\end{equation*}
where $U = [\boldsymbol{\zeta}_1| \ldots | \boldsymbol{\zeta}_{N_h}] \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times N_h}$, $Z = [\boldsymbol{\psi}_1| \ldots | \boldsymbol{\psi}_{N_s}] \in \mathbb{R}^{N_s \times N_s}$ and $\Sigma = \textnormal{diag}(\sigma_1, \ldots, \sigma_r) \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times N_s}$ with $\sigma_1 \geq \sigma_2 \geq \ldots \geq \sigma_r$, and $r \leq \min(N_h, N_s)$, and sets the columns of $V$ in terms of the first $n$ left singular vectors of $S$ that is, $V = [H^{-1} \boldsymbol{\zeta}_1 | \ldots | H^{-1} \boldsymbol{\zeta}_n]$.
By construction, the columns of $V$ are orthonormal (with respect to the scalar product $( \, \cdot \, , \, \cdot \,)_{X_h}$) and
among all possible $n$-dimensional subspaces spanned by the column of a matrix $W \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times n}$, $V$ provides the best reconstruction of the snapshots, that is,
\begin{equation}
\label{minimization_problem_POD}
\sum_{i=1}^{N_{train}} \sum_{k=1}^{N_t} \| \mathbf{u}(t^k;\boldsymbol \mu_i) - VV^T X_h \mathbf{u}(t^k;\boldsymbol \mu_i) \|_{X_h}^2 = \min_{W \in \mathcal{V}_{n}} \sum_{i=1}^{N_{train}}
\sum_{k=1}^{N_t} \| \mathbf{u}(t^k; \boldsymbol \mu_i) - WW^T X_h \mathbf{u}(t^k; \boldsymbol \mu_i) \|_{X_h}^2,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{V}_{n} = \{ W \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times n} : W^T X_h W = I \}$. For this reason, we refer to $V V^T X_h \mathbf{u}_h(t; \boldsymbol{\mu})$ as to the optimal-{POD} reconstruction of $\mathbf{u}_h(t; \boldsymbol{\mu})$ onto a reduced subspace of dimension $n < N_h$.
In order to model the reduced dynamics of the system, that is, the time-evolution of the generalized coordinates $\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu})$, we can replace $\mathbf{u}_h(t; \boldsymbol{\mu})$ by (\ref{linear_reconstructed_solution}) in system (\ref{FOM}),
\begin{equation}
\label{FOM_linear_reconstruction}
\begin{cases}
V \displaystyle \mathbf{\dot{u}}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}) = \mathbf{f}(t, V\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}); \boldsymbol{\mu}) \quad t \in (0, T) \\
V \mathbf{u}_n(0; \boldsymbol \mu) = \mathbf{u}_0(\boldsymbol \mu),
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
and impose that the residual
\begin{equation}
\label{residual}
\mathbf{r}_h(V\mathbf{u}_n (t; \boldsymbol{\mu})) = V \mathbf{\dot{u}}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}) - \mathbf{f}(t, V\mathbf{u}_n (t; \boldsymbol{\mu}); \boldsymbol{\mu})
\end{equation}
associated to the first equation of (\ref{FOM_linear_reconstruction}) is orthogonal to a $n$-dimensional subspace spanned by the column of a matrix $Y \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times n}$, that is, $Y^T \mathbf{r}_h(V\mathbf{u}_n) = {\bf 0}$. This condition yields the following ROM
\begin{equation}
\label{ROM}
\begin{cases}
Y^T V \mathbf{\dot{u}}_n(t;\boldsymbol{\mu}) = Y^T \mathbf{f}(t, V\mathbf{u}_n(t;\boldsymbol{\mu}); \boldsymbol{\mu}) \quad t \in (0, T)\\
\mathbf{u}_n(0;\boldsymbol{\mu})= (Y^T V)^{-1} Y^T\mathbf{u}_0(\boldsymbol{\mu}).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
In the case $Y=V$ a Galerkin projection is performed, while the case $Y \neq V$ yields a more general Petrov-Galerkin projection. Note that choosing $Y$ such that $Y^T V = I \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times N_h}$ does not automatically ensure ROM stability on long time intervals.
The RB method under the form of either Galerkin-POD or Petrov-Galerkin-POD methods has been successfully applied to a broad range of parametrized time-dependent (non)linear problems (see, e.g., \citep{pagani2018numerical,manzoni2016accurate}) however it provides low-dimensional subspaces of dimension $n \gg n_{\mu} + 1$ much larger than the intrinsic dimension of the solution manifold -- relying on a linear, global trial manifold thus represent a major bottleneck to computational efficiency \citep{ohlberger2016reduced,pagani2018numerical}. This is the case, for instance, of hyperbolic problems, for which the RB method is not able in practice to significantly decrease the dimensionality of the problem. The same difficulty might also affect the use of hyper-reduction techniques, such as the (discrete) empirical interpolation \cite{barrault2004anempirical, chaturantabut2010nonlinear}, mandatory in order to assemble the operators appearing in the ROM \eqref{ROM} without relying on expensive $N_h$-dimensional arrays. See, e.g., \cite{FGMQ_19} for further details.
\subsection{Nonlinear dimensionality reduction}
\label{sec:nonlinear_dimred}
A first attempt to overcome the computational bottleneck entailed by the use of a linear, global trial manifold is to build a {\em piecewise} linear trial manifold, using local reduced bases whose dimension is smaller than the one of the global linear trial manifold. Clustering algorithms applied on a set of snapshots can be employed to partition them into $N_c$ clusters from which POD can extract a subspace of reduced dimension; the ROM is then obtained by following the strategy described above on each cluster separately, see, e.g. \cite{amsallem2012nonlinear,Amsallem2015}. An alternative approach based on classification binary trees has been introduced in \cite{Amsallem2016}. These strategies have been employed (and compared) in \cite{pagani2018numerical} in order to solve parametrized problems in cardiac electrophysiology. Using a piecewise linear trial manifold partially overcomes the limitation of a linear dimensionality reduction technique as POD, yet employing local bases of dimension much higher than the intrinsic dimension of the solution manifold $\mathcal{S}_h$.
An approach based on a dictionary of solutions, computed offline, has been developed in \cite{abgrall_amsallem} as an alternative to using a truncated reduced basis based on POD, together with an online $L^1$-norm minimization of the residual.
Other possible options involving nonlinear transformations of modes might rely on a reconstruction of the POD modes at each time step using Lax pairs \cite{GerbeauLombardi2014}, on the solution of Monge-Kantorovich optimal transport problems \cite{PhysRevE.89.022923}, on a problem-dependent change of coordinates requiring the solution of an optimization problem repeatedly \cite{cagniart2019model}, on shifted POD modes \cite{reiss2018shifted} after multiple transport velocities have been identified and separated, or again basis updates are derived from querying the full model at a few selected spatial coordinates \cite{peherstorfer2018}. Despite providing remarkable improvements compared to the {\em classic} {(Petrov-)Galerkin-}POD approach, all these strategies exhibit some drawbacks, such as: {\em (i)} the high computational costs entailed during the online testing evaluation stage of the ROM -- which is not restricted to the intensive offline training stage; {\em (ii)} performances and settings are highly dependent on the problem at hand; {\em (iii)} the need to deal only with a linear superimposition of modes (which characterizes linear ROMs), yielding low-dimensional spaces whose dimension is still (much) higher than the intrinsic dimension of the solution manifold.
Motivated by the need of avoiding the drawbacks of linear ROMs and setting a general paradigm for the construction of efficient, extremely low-dimensional ROMs, we resort to nonlinear dimensionality reduction techniques. Similarly to \cite{gonzalez2018deep, carlberg2018model}, we build a nonlinear ROM to approximate $ \mathbf{u}_h(t; \boldsymbol \mu) \approx \mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h(t; \boldsymbol \mu)$ by
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h(t; \boldsymbol \mu) = \boldsymbol{\Psi}_h(\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu})),
\label{reconstructed_solution}
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_h : \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{N_h}$, $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_h : \mathbf{s}_n \mapsto \boldsymbol{\Psi}_h(\mathbf{s}_n)$, $n \ll N_h$, is a nonlinear, differentiable function. As a matter of fact,
the solution manifold $\mathcal{S}_h$ is approximated by a \textit{reduced nonlinear trial manifold}
\begin{equation}
\label{g}
\tilde{\mathcal{S}}_n = \{ \boldsymbol{\Psi}_h(\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}))
\; | \; \mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}) \in \mathbb{R}^{n}, \ t \in [0, T) \; \textnormal{and} \; \boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P} \subset \mathbb{R}^{n_{\mu}} \} \subset \mathbb{R}^{N_h}
\end{equation}
so that $\mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h : [0,T) \times \mathcal{P} \rightarrow \tilde{\mathcal{S}}_n$. As before, $\mathbf{u}_n: [0,T) \times \mathcal{P} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{n}$ denotes the vector-valued function of two arguments representing the intrinsic coordinates of the ROM approximation.
Our goal is to set a ROM whose dimension $n$ is as close as possible to the intrinsic dimension $n_{\boldsymbol{\mu}} + 1$ of the solution manifold $\mathcal{S}_h$, i.e. $n \geq n_{\boldsymbol{\mu}} + 1$, in order to correctly capture the solution of the dynamical system by containing the size of the approximation spaces \citep{carlberg2018model}.
To model the relationship between each couple $(t, \boldsymbol{\mu}) \mapsto \mathbf{u}_n(t, \boldsymbol{\mu})$, and to describe the system dynamics on the reduced nonlinear trial manifold $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}_n$ in terms of the intrinsic coordinates, we consider a nonlinear map under the form
\begin{equation}
\label{h}
\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol \mu) = \boldsymbol{\Phi}_n(t, \boldsymbol \mu),
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{\Phi}_n : [0, T) \times \mathbb{R}^{n_{\boldsymbol \mu} + 1} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{n}$ is a differentiable nonlinear function. No additional assumptions such as, e.g., the (exact, or approximate) affine $\boldsymbol{\mu}$-dependence as in the RB method, are needed.
\section{A deep learning-based reduced order model (DL-ROM)}
\label{sec:3}
We now detail the construction of the proposed nonlinear ROM. In this respect, we define the functions $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_h$ and $\boldsymbol{\Phi}_n$ in (\ref{reconstructed_solution}) and (\ref{h}) by means of deep learning (DL) algorithms, exploiting neural network architectures. This choice is motivated by their ability of effectively approximating nonlinear maps, and by their ability to learn from data and generalize to unseen data. On the other hand, DL models enable us to build non-intrusive, completely data-driven, ROMs, since their construction only requires to access the dataset, the parameter values and the snapshot matrix, but not the FOM arrays appearing in (\ref{FOM}).
The DL-ROM technique that we develop in this paper is composed by two main blocks responsible, respectively, for the \textit{reduced dynamics learning} and the \textit{reduced trial manifold learning} (see \figurename~\ref{architecture_DL-ROM}). Hereon, we denote by $N_{train}$, $N_{test}$ and $N_t$ the number of training-parameter instances, of testing-parameter instances and time instances, respectively, and we set $N_{s} = N_{train} N_t$. The dimension of both the FOM solution and the ROM approximation is $N_h$, while $n$ denotes the number of intrinsic coordinates, with $n \ll N_h$.
For the description of the system dynamics on the reduced nonlinear trial manifold (which we refer to as {\em reduced dynamics learning}), we employ a {\em deep feedforward neural network} (DFNN) with $L$ layers, that is, we
define the function $\boldsymbol{\Phi}_n$ in definition (\ref{h}) as
\begin{equation}
\label{h_learning}
\boldsymbol{\Phi}_n(t; \boldsymbol \mu, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}) = \boldsymbol{\phi}_n^{DF}(t; \boldsymbol \mu, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}),
\end{equation}
thus yielding the map
\[
(t, \boldsymbol \mu) \mapsto \mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol \mu, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}) = \boldsymbol{\phi}_n^{DF}(t; \boldsymbol \mu, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}),
\]
where $\boldsymbol{\phi}_n^{DF}$ takes the form (\ref{DFNN}), {with} $t \in [0,T]$, and results from the subsequent composition of a nonlinear activation function, applied to a linear transformation of the input, $L$ times. Here $\boldsymbol \mu \in \mathcal{P} \subset \mathbb{R}^{n_{\boldsymbol \mu}}$ and $\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}$ denotes the vector of {parameters} of the DFNN.
Regarding instead the description of the reduced nonlinear trial manifold $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}_n$ defined in \eqref{g} (which we refer to as {\em reduced trial manifold learning}), we employ the {\em decoder function of a convolutional autoencoder} (AE), that is, we define the function $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_h$ appearing in (\ref{reconstructed_solution}) and (\ref{g}) as
\begin{equation}
\label{g_learning}
\boldsymbol{\Psi}_h(\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, {\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}}); \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}) = \mathbf{f}_{h}^D(\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, {\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}}); \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}),
\end{equation}
thus yielding the map
\[
\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, {\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}}) \mapsto \tilde{\mathbf{u}}_h(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, \boldsymbol{\theta} ) = \mathbf{f}_{h}^D(\mathbf{u}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, {\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}}); \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}),
\]
where $\mathbf{f}_{h}^D$ results from the composition of several layers, some of which of convolutional type, overall depending on the vector $\boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}$ of parameters of the decoder function.
Combining the two former stages, the DL-ROM approximation is then given by
\begin{equation}
\label{DL-ROM}
\mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, \boldsymbol{\theta}) = \mathbf{f}_{h}^D (\boldsymbol{\phi}_n^{DF}(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}); \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}),
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{\phi}_n^{DF} (\cdot; \cdot, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}) : \mathbb{R}^{(n_{\boldsymbol{\mu}}+1)} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{n}$ and $\mathbf{f}_{h}^D (\cdot; \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}) : \mathbb{R}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{N_h}$ are defined as in (\ref{h_learning}) and (\ref{g_learning}), respectively, and $\boldsymbol{\theta} = (\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D})$ are the parameters defining the neural network. The architecture of DL-ROM is shown in \figurename~\ref{architecture_DL-ROM}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{online_AM.pdf}
\caption{DL-ROM architecture (online stage, testing).}
\label{architecture_DL-ROM}
\end{figure}
Computing the ROM approximation (\ref{DL-ROM}) for any new value of $\boldsymbol{\mu} \in \mathcal{P}$, at any given time, requires to evaluate the map $(t, \boldsymbol \mu) \rightarrow \mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, \boldsymbol{\theta})$ at the testing stage, once the parameters
$\boldsymbol{\theta} = (\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D})$ have been determined, once and for all, during the training stage. The training stage consists in solving an optimization problem (in the variable $\boldsymbol{\theta}$) after a set of snapshots of the FOM have been computed. More precisely, provided the parameter matrix $M \in \mathbb{R}^{(n_{\boldsymbol \mu} + 1) \times N_{s}}$ defined as
\begin{equation}
M = [(t^1, \boldsymbol{\mu}_1) | \ldots | (t^{N_t}, \boldsymbol{\mu}_1) | \ldots | (t^1, \boldsymbol{\mu}_{N_{train}}) | \ldots | (t^{N_t}, \boldsymbol{\mu}_{N_{train}})],
\end{equation}
and the snapshot matrix $S$, defined in (\ref{snapshot_matrix}), we solve the problem: find the optimal parameters $\boldsymbol{\theta}^*$ solution of
\begin{equation}
\label{minimization_problem_DL-ROM}
\mathcal{J}(\boldsymbol{\theta}) = \frac{1}{N_s}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{train}}\sum_{k=1}^{N_{t}} \mathcal{L}(t^k, \boldsymbol{\mu}_i; {\boldsymbol{\theta}}) \rightarrow \min_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{loss_DL-ROM}
\mathcal{L}(t^k, \boldsymbol{\mu}_i; {\boldsymbol{\theta}}) = \frac{1}{2}\| \mathbf{u}_h(t^k; \boldsymbol{\mu}_i) - \mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h(t^k; \boldsymbol{\mu}_i, \boldsymbol{\theta})\|^2 =
\frac{1}{2}\| \mathbf{u}_h(t^k; \boldsymbol{\mu}_i) - \mathbf{f}_{h}^D (\boldsymbol{\phi}_n^{DF}(t^k; \boldsymbol{\mu}_i, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}); \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D})\|^2.
\end{equation}
To solve the optimization problem (\ref{minimization_problem_DL-ROM})-(\ref{loss_DL-ROM}) we use the ADAM algorithm \cite{kingma2015adam} which is a stochastic gradient descent method \citep{robbins1951astochastic} computing an adaptive approximation of the first and second momentum of the gradients of the loss function. In particular, it computes exponentially weighted moving averages of the gradients and of the squared gradients. We set the starting learning rate to $\eta = 10^{-4}$, the batch size to $N_b = 20$ and the maximum number of epochs to $N_{epochs} = 10000$. We perform cross-validation, in order to tune the hyper-parameters of the DL-ROM, by splitting the data in training and validation and following a proportion 8:2. Moreover, we implement an early-stopping regularization technique to reduce overfitting \citep{goodfellow2016deep}. In particular, we stop the training if the loss does not decrease over 500 epochs. As nonlinear activation function we employ the ELU function \citep{clevert2015fast} defined as
\begin{equation*}
\sigma(z) =
\begin{cases}
z & z \geq 0 \\
\exp(z) - 1 & z < 0.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
No activation function is applied at the last convolutional layer of the decoder neural network, as usually done when dealing with autoencoders. The parameters, weights and biases, are initialized through the He uniform initialization \citep{he2015delving}.
As we rely on a convolutional autoencoder to define the function $\boldsymbol{\Psi}_h$, we also exploit the encoder function
\begin{equation}
\label{encoder}
{\mathbf{\tilde{u}}_n}(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{E}) = \mathbf{f}_{n}^E(\mathbf{u}(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}); \boldsymbol{\theta}_{E}),
\end{equation}
which maps each FOM solution associated to the pairs $(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}) \in Col(M)$ provided as inputs to the feed-forward neural network (\ref{h_learning}), onto a low-dimensional representation $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_n(t; \boldsymbol{\mu}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_E)$ depending on the parameters vector $\boldsymbol{\theta}_E$ defining the encoder function.
Indeed, the actual architecture of DL-ROM that is used only during the training and the validation phases, but not during testing, is the one shown in \figurename~\ref{architecture_encoder}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{offline_AM.pdf}
}
\caption{DL-ROM architecture (offline stage, training and validation).}
\label{architecture_encoder}
\end{figure}
In practice, we add to the architecture of the DL-ROM introduced above the encoder function of the convolutional autoencoder. This {produces} an additional term in the \emph{per-example} loss function (\ref{loss_DL-ROM}), thus calling the following optimization problem to be solved:
\begin{equation}
\label{minimization_problem_encoder}
\min_{\boldsymbol{\theta}} \mathcal{J}(\boldsymbol{\theta}) = \min_{\boldsymbol{\theta}} \frac{1}{N_s}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{train}} \sum_{k=1}^{N_t} \mathcal{L}(t^k, \boldsymbol \mu_i; \boldsymbol{\theta}),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{loss_encoder}
\mathcal{L}(t^k, \boldsymbol{\mu}_i; {\boldsymbol{\theta}}) = \frac{\omega_h}{2}\| \mathbf{u}_h(t^k; \boldsymbol{\mu}_i) - \mathbf{\tilde{u}}_h(t^k; \boldsymbol{\mu}_i, {\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_D})\|^2 + \frac{1-\omega_h}{2} \| \tilde{\mathbf{u}}_n(t^k; \boldsymbol{\mu}_i, \boldsymbol{\theta}_E) - {\mathbf{u}}_n(t^k; \boldsymbol{\mu}_i, {\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}})\|^2
\end{equation}
and $\boldsymbol{\theta} = (\boldsymbol{\theta}_{E}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D})$, with $\omega_h \in [0,1]$. The \emph{per-example} loss function (\ref{loss_encoder}) combines the reconstruction error (that is, the error between the FOM solution and the DL-ROM approximation) and the error between the {intrinsic coordinates} and the output of the encoder.
This further term allows to enhance the performance of the DL-ROM, as shown in Test 3 of \autoref{sec:4}.
\subsection{Training and Testing Algorithms}
Let us now detail the algorithms through which the training and testing phases of the networks are performed.
First of all, data normalization and standardization enhance the training phase of the network by rescaling all the values contained in the dataset to a common frame. For this reason, the inputs and the output of DL-ROM are normalized by applying an affine transformation in order to rescale them in the range $[0, 1]$. In particular, provided a training dataset $X = [\mathbf{x}^1 \, | \, \mathbf{x}^2 \, | \, \ldots \, | \, \mathbf{x}^{N_s}]^T \in \mathbb{R}^{N_s \times M}$, we define
\begin{equation}
\label{max_min}
X_{max} = \max_{i \in \{1, \ldots, N_s\}} \max_{j \in \{1, \ldots, M\}} X_{ij} \quad \textnormal{and} \quad X_{min} = \min_{i \in \{1, \ldots, N_s\}} \min_{j \in \{1, \ldots, M\}} X_{ij}
\end{equation}
so that data are normalized by applying the following transformation
\begin{equation}
\label{normalization}
X \mapsto \frac{X - X_{min}}{X_{max} - X_{min}}.
\end{equation} \\
Transformation (\ref{normalization}) is applied also to the validation and testing sets, but considering as $X_{max}$ and $X_{min}$ the values computed over the training set. We point out that the input of the encoder function, the FOM solution $\mathbf{u}_h = \mathbf{u}_h(t^k; \boldsymbol{\mu}_i)$ for a given (time, parameter) instance $(t^k, \boldsymbol{\mu}_i)$, is reshaped in a matrix. In particular, starting from $\mathbf{u}_h \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h}$ we apply the transformation $\mathbf{u}_h^R$=reshape$(\mathbf{u}_h)$ where $\mathbf{u}_h^R \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h^{1/2} \times N_h^{1/2}}$. If $N_h$ is not a square, the input $\mathbf{u}_h$ is zero-padded \citep{goodfellow2016deep}. For the sake of simplicity, we continue to refer to the reshaped FOM solution to as $\mathbf{u}_h$. The inverse reshaping transformation is applied to the output of the last convolutional layer in the decoder function, the ROM approximation. Moreover, we highlight that applying one of the functions (\ref{h_learning})-(\ref{g_learning})-(\ref{encoder}) to the matrix X means applying it row-wise.
The training algorithm referring to the architecture of DL-ROM depicted in \figurename~\ref{architecture_encoder} is reported in Algorithm \ref{training_algorithm}. During the training phase, the optimal parameters of the DL-ROM neural network are found by solving the optimization problem (\ref{minimization_problem_encoder})-(\ref{loss_encoder}) through the back-propagation and ADAM algorithms.
\begin{algorithm}[t!]
\caption{DL-ROM training algorithm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require Parameter matrix $M \in \mathbb{R}^{(n_{\boldsymbol{\mu}} + 1) \times N_s}$, snapshot matrix $S \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times N_s}$, training-validation splitting fraction $\alpha$, starting learning rate $\eta$, batch size $N_b$, maximum number of epochs $N_{epochs}$, early stopping criterion, number of minibatches $N_{batches} = (1 - \alpha)N_s/N_b$.
\Ensure Optimal model parameters $\boldsymbol{\theta}^*= (\boldsymbol{\theta}_E^*, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^*, \boldsymbol{\theta}_D^*)$.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\State Randomly shuffle $M$ and $S$ \;
\State Split data in $M = [M^{train}, M^{val}]$ and $S = [S^{train}, S^{val}]$ ($M^{val}, S^{val} \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times \alpha N_s}$)\;
\State Normalize data in $M$ and $S$ according to (\ref{normalization})\;
\State Randomly initialize $\boldsymbol{\theta}^0=(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{E}^0, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^0, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}^0)$\;
\State $n_{epochs} = 0$
\While{($\neg$early-stopping \textbf{and} $n_{epochs} \le N_{epochs}$)}
\For{$k = 1 : N_{batches}$}
\State Sample a minibatch $(M^{batch}, S^{batch}) \subseteq (M^{train}, S^{train})$\;
\State $S^{batch} =$ reshape$(S^{batch})$\;
\State $\widetilde{S}^{batch}_n(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{E}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k}) = \mathbf{f}_{n}^E(S^{batch}; \boldsymbol{\theta}_{E}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k})$\;
\State $S^{batch}_n(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k}) = \boldsymbol{\phi}_n^{DF}(M^{batch}; \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k})$\;
\State $\widetilde{S}^{batch}_h(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k}) = \mathbf{f}_{h}^D(S^{batch}_n(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k}); \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k})$
\State $\widetilde{S}^{batch}_h =$ reshape$(\widetilde{S}^{batch}_h)$\;
\State Accumulate loss (\ref{loss_encoder}) {on $(M^{batch}, S^{batch})$} and compute $\widehat{\nabla}_{\theta} \mathcal{J}$\;
\State $\boldsymbol{\theta}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k + 1} = \textnormal{ADAM}(\eta, \widehat{\nabla}_{\theta} \mathcal{J}, \boldsymbol{\theta}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k})$\;
\EndFor
\State Repeat instructions 9-13 on $(M^{val}, S^{val})$ with the updated weights $\boldsymbol{\theta}^{N_{batches} n_{epochs} + k + 1}$
\State Accumulate loss (\ref{loss_encoder}) on $(M^{val}, S^{val})$ to evaluate early-stopping criterion
\State $n_{epochs} = n_{epochs} + 1$
\EndWhile
\end{algorithmic}
\label{training_algorithm}
\end{algorithm}
At testing time, the encoder function is instead discarded, that is the DL-ROM architecture is the one shown in \figurename~\ref{architecture_DL-ROM} and the testing algorithm is the one pointed out in Algorithm \ref{testing_algorithm}. The testing phase corresponds to a forward step of the DL-ROM neural network in \figurename~\ref{architecture_DL-ROM}.
\begin{algorithm}[ht!]
\caption{DL-ROM testing algorithm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require Testing parameter matrix $M^{test} \in \mathbb{R}^{(n_{\boldsymbol{\mu}} + 1) \times (N_{test} N_t)}$ and optimal model parameters $(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^*, \boldsymbol{\theta}_D^*)$.
\Ensure ROM approximation matrix $\widetilde{S}_h \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h \times (N_{test} N_t)}$.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\State Load $\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^*$ and $\boldsymbol{\theta}_D^*$\;
\State $S_n(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^*) = \boldsymbol{\phi}_n^{DF}(M^{test}; \boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^*)$\;
\State $\widetilde{S}_h(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^*, \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}^*) = \mathbf{f}_{h}^D(S_n(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{DF}^*); \boldsymbol{\theta}_{D}^*)$
\State $\widetilde{S}_h=$ reshape$(\widetilde{S}_h)$\;
\end{algorithmic}
\label{testing_algorithm}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Numerical results}
\label{sec:4}
In this section, we report the numerical results obtained by applying the proposed DL-ROM technique to three parametrized, time-dependent PDE problems, namely {\em (i)} Burgers equation, {\em (ii)} a linear transport equation, and {\em (iii)} a coupled PDE-ODE system arising from cardiac electrophysiology, namely the monodomain equation; this latter is a system of time dependent, nonlinear equations, whose solutions feature a traveling wave behavior. For the time being, we deal with problems set in $d=1$ (spatial) dimension featuring up to $n_{\mu} = 2$ parameters; we will consider the extension to differential problems in $d=2$ and $d=3$ in a forthcoming publication. For this reason, our focus is now on the numerical accuracy of our DL-ROM technique rather than on its computational efficiency and, therefore, on its comparison with linear ROMs such as the RB method featuring linear (possibly, piecewise linear) trial manifolds built through POD.
To evaluate the performance of DL-ROM we rely on the loss function (\ref{loss_encoder}) and on the following error indicator
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{rel} = \frac{1}{N_{test}} \sum_{i = 1}^{N_{test}} \left(\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{ \sum_{k=1}^{N_t} || \mathbf{u}^k_h(\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test,i}) - \mathbf{\tilde{u}}^k_h(\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test,i}) ||^2}}{\sqrt{\sum_{k=1}^{N_t} || \mathbf{u}_h^k(\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test,i}) ||^2}} \right).
\label{relative_error}
\end{equation}
We implement the neural network required by our DL-ROM technique by means of the Tensorflow deep learning framework \citep{abadi2016tensorflow} and the numerical simulations are performed on a workstation equipped with an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 8 GB GPU.
\subsection{Test 1: Burgers Equation}
Let us consider the parametrized one-dimensional nonlinear Burgers equation
\begin{equation}
\label{Burgers}
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + u \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} - \frac{1}{\mu} \frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2} = 0, \quad & (x, t) \in (0, L) \times (0, T) \\
u(0, t) = 0, \quad & t \in (0, T) \\
u(L, t) = 0, \quad & t \in (0, T) \\
u(x, 0) = u_0(x), \quad & x \in (0, L),
\end{cases}
\end{equation} \\
where
\begin{equation*}
u_0(x) = \frac{x}{1 + \sqrt{1 / A_0} \exp( \mu x^2 / 4)},
\end{equation*}
with $A_0 = \exp(\mu / 8)$, $L = 1$ and $T =2$. System (\ref{Burgers}) has been discretized in space by means of linear finite elements, with $N_h =256$ grid points, and in time by means of the Backward Euler scheme, with $N_t = 100$ time instances. The parameter space, to which belongs the single ($n_{\mu} = 1$) parameter, is given by $\mathcal{P} = [100, 1000]$. We consider $N_{train} = 20$ training-parameter instances uniformly distributed over $\mathcal{P}$ and $N_{test} = 19$ testing-parameter instances, each of them corresponding to the midpoint between two consecutive training-parameter instances.
The configuration of the DL-ROM neural network used for this test case is the following. We choose a 12-layers DFNN equipped with 50 neurons per hidden layer and $n$ neurons in the output layer, where $n$ corresponds to the dimension of the reduced {trial} manifold. The architectures of the encoder and decoder functions are instead reported in \tablename s \ref{table_transposed_convolutional_layers_encoder} and \ref{table_transposed_convolutional_layers}, and are similar to the ones used in \citep{carlberg2018model}.
\begin{table}[ht]
{\small
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Layer & Input Dimension & Output Dimension & Kernel Size & $\#$ of Filters & Stride & Padding \\
\hline
1 & & & [5, 5] & 8 & 1 & SAME \\
\hline
2 & & & [5, 5] & 16 & 2 & SAME \\
\hline
3 & & & [5, 5] & 32 & 2 & SAME \\
\hline
4 & & &[5, 5] & 64 & 2 & SAME \\
\hline
5 & $N_h$ & 256 & & & & \\
\hline
6 & 256 & $n$ & & & &\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
\vspace{-0.25cm}
\caption{\textit{Test 1}: Attributes of convolutional layers and dense layers in the encoder $\mathbf{f}_n^E$.}
\label{table_transposed_convolutional_layers_encoder}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[ht]
{\small
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Layer & Input dimension & Output dimension & Kernel size & $\#$ of filters & Stride & Padding \\
\hline
1 & $n$ & 256 & & & &\\
\hline
2 & 256 & $N_h$ & & & &\\
\hline
3 & & & [5, 5] & 64 & 2 & SAME \\
\hline
4 & & & [5, 5] & 32 & 2 & SAME \\
\hline
5 & & & [5, 5] & 16 & 2 & SAME \\
\hline
6 & & & [5, 5] & 1 & 1 & SAME \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
\vspace{-0.25cm}
\caption{\textit{Test 1}: Attributes of dense layers and transposed convolutional layers in the decoder $\mathbf{f}_h^D$.}
\label{table_transposed_convolutional_layers}
\end{table}
Problem (\ref{Burgers}) does not represent a remarkably challenging task for linear ROM, indeed by considering for example POD and by applying it to the snapshot matrix (the latter built by collecting the solution of (\ref{Burgers}) for $N_s = N_{train}N_t$ training-parameter instances) it is sufficient to assemble a linear trial manifold of dimension 20 in order to capture more than the 99.99$\%$ of the energy of the system \citep{san2018neural, quarteroni2016reduced}. In order to assess the performance of our DL-ROM technique, we compute the DL-ROM solution by fixing the dimension of the nonlinear trial manifold to $n=20$. In \figurename~\ref{comparison_burgers} we show the DL-ROM and the optimal-POD reconstructions, along with the FOM solution, for the time instance $t = 0.02$ and for the testing-parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 976.32$, the testing value of $\mu$ for which the reconstruction task results to be the most difficult both for POD and DL-ROM, being the diffusion term in (\ref{Burgers}) smaller and the solution closer to the one of a purely hyperbolic system. In particular, for $\mu_{test} = 976.32$, employing the DL-based ROM technique presented in this work allows us to halve the error indicator $\epsilon_{rel}$ associated to the optimal-POD approximation of the FOM solution. Referring to \figurename~\ref{comparison_burgers}, the DL-ROM reconstruction is more accurate than the optimal-POD one, indeed it mostly fits the FOM solution, even in correspondence of its maximum, as shown in the zooms of \figurename~\ref{comparison_burgers}. Moreover, it does not introduce oscillations where a large gradient of the FOM solution is observed, as it happens instead by employing POD.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{1D_burgers_equation.pdf}
\vspace{-0.15cm}
\caption{\textit{Test 1}: FOM, optimal-POD and DL-ROM solutions for the testing-parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 976.32$ at $t = 0.02$, with $n=20$.}
\label{comparison_burgers}
\end{figure}
In \figurename~\ref{comparison_burgers_p=10} we show the same comparison of \figurename~\ref{comparison_burgers} but this time considering both for POD and DL-ROM a reduced dimension $n=10$. The difference in terms of accuracy provided by the two approaches is even more striking in this case.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.145]{1D_burgers_equation_p=10.png}
\vspace{-0.15cm}
\caption{\textit{Test 1}: FOM, optimal-POD and DL-ROM solutions for the testing-parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 976.32$ at $t = 0.02$, with $n=10$.}
\label{comparison_burgers_p=10}
\end{figure}
Finally, in \figurename~\ref{1D_burgers_convergence} we highlight the accuracy properties of both the DL-ROM and POD techniques by displaying the behavior of the error indicator $\epsilon_{rel}$, defined in (\ref{relative_error}), with respect to the dimension $n$ of the corresponding reduced {trial} manifold. For $n < 20$ the DL-ROM approximation is more accurate than the one provided by POD, and only for $n = 20$ the two techniques provide almost the same accuracy.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.135]{1D_burgers_convergence.png}
\vspace{-0.15cm}
\caption{\textit{Test 1}: Error indicator $\epsilon_{rel}$ vs. $n$ on the testing set.}
\label{1D_burgers_convergence}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Test 2: Linear Transport Equation}
We consider two tests for this set of parametrized differential models.
\subsubsection*{Test 2.1: $n_{\mu} = 1$}
First, we consider the parametrized one-dimensional linear transport equation
\begin{equation}
\label{Transport}
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + \mu \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} = 0, \quad & (x, t) \in \mathbb{R} \times (0, T) \\
u(x, 0) = u_0(x), \quad & x \in \mathbb{R},
\end{cases}
\end{equation} \\
whose exact solution is $u(x, t) = u_0(x - \mu t)$. We set $u_0(x) = (1/\sqrt{2 \pi \sigma}) e^{-x^2/2 \sigma}$ and $T = 1$.
The parameter (here $n_{\mu} = 1$) represents the velocity of the travelling wave and the parameter space is given by $\mathcal{P} = [0.775, 1.25]$. The dataset is built by uniformly sampling the exact solution in the domain $(0, L) \times (0, T)$, with $L = 1$, and by considering $N_h = 256$ degrees of freedom in the space discretization and $N_t = 200$ time instances in the time one. We consider $N_{train} = 20$ training-parameter instances uniformly distributed in the parameter space $\mathcal{P}$ and $N_{test} = 19$ testing-parameter instances such that $\mu_{test,i}= ( \mu_{train,i}+ \mu_{train,i+1})/2$, for $i = 1, \ldots, N_{test}$. This test case, and more in general hyperbolic problems, are examples in which the use of a linear approach to ROM generally yields poor performance in terms of accuracy. Indeed, the dimension of the linear trial manifold must be very large, if compared to the dimension of the solution manifold, in order to capture the variability of the FOM solution over the parameter space $\mathcal{P}$. We set $\sigma = 10^{-4}$ in order to assess the performance of DL-ROM in a scenario which is still remarkably challenging for ROM on linear trial manifolds.
\figurename~\ref{comparison_transport} shows the exact solution, which here plays the role of the FOM solution, and the DL-ROM one for the testing-parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 0.8625$; here, we set the dimension of the nonlinear trial manifold to $n = 2$, equal to the dimension of the solution manifold $n_{\mu} + 1$. Moreover, in \figurename~\ref{comparison_transport} we highlight the relative error $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_k \in \mathbb{R}^{N_h}$, for $k = 1, \ldots, N_t$, associated to a given $\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test} \in \mathcal{P} \subset \mathbb{R}^{n_{\mu}}$ (in this case $n_{\mu} = 1$),
defined as
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_k = \displaystyle \frac{ | \mathbf{u}^k_h(\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test}) - \mathbf{\tilde{u}}^k_h(\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test}) |}{\sqrt{\sum_{k=1}^{N_t} || \mathbf{u}^k_h(\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test}) ||^2}},
\label{error}
\end{equation}
which widens in proximity of the spike of the exact solution.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.325]{comparison_1D_transport_new_2D.png}
\vspace{-0.15cm}
\caption{\textit{Test 2.1}: Exact solution (left), DL-ROM solution with $n = 2$ (center) and relative error $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_k$ (right) for the testing-parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 0.8625$ in the space-time domain.}
\label{comparison_transport}
\end{figure}
In \figurename~\ref{comparison_transport_time} we report the exact solution and the DL-ROM one, obtained by setting $n = 2$, for three particular time instances. In order to compare the performance of the proposed nonlinear ROM with a linear approach, we perform the POD on the snapshot matrix and show, for the same testing-parameter instance, the optimal POD-reconstruction, i.e. the projection of the FOM (exact) solution onto the POD basis, in \figurename~\ref{comparison_transport_time}. For example, by considering $n = 2$, the error indicator, defined in (\ref{relative_error}), is $\epsilon_{rel} = 8.74 \cdot 10^{-3}$. By considering a linear ROM technique instead, even by considering a reduced trial manifold of dimension $n = 50$, built by means of the POD, the reconstructed solution presents spurious oscillations which result in a poor approximation of the FOM solution (see \figurename~\ref{comparison_transport_time}). Indeed, in order to achieve the same accuracy obtained through DL-ROM over the testing set one has to select 90 basis functions, i.e. a linear trial manifold of dimension $n = 90$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.15]{comparison_1D_transport_time_new.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 2.1}: Exact, DL-ROM and POD solutions for the testing-parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 0.8625$ at $t = 0.125, 0.5$ and 0.625.}
\label{comparison_transport_time}
\end{figure}
\figurename~\ref{relative_error_transport} shows the behavior of the error indicator (\ref{relative_error}) with respect to the reduced dimension $n$. By increasing the dimension of the nonlinear trial manifold there is a slight improvement of the performance of the DL-ROM neural network, i.e. the error indicator decreases. This improvement is not particularly {relevant} because by increasing $n$, the number of parameters of the DL-ROM neural network, i.e. weights and biases, is increased by a limited {quantity}. In this way the approximation capability of the neural network remains almost the same and so {does} the error indicator (\ref{relative_error}).
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.14]{1D_transport_rel_err.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 2.1}: Error indicator $\epsilon_{rel}$ vs. $n$ on the testing set.}
\label{relative_error_transport}
\end{figure}
\begin{rem} \textit{(Hyperparameters Tuning)}. The hyperparameters of the DL-ROM neural network are tuned by evaluating the loss function over the validation set and by setting each of them equal to the value minimizing the generalization error on the validation set. In particular, we show the tests performed to choose the size of the (transposed) convolutional kernels in the (decoder) encoder function, the number of hidden layers in the feedforward neural network and the number of neurons for each hidden layer. The hyperparameters evaluation starts from the default configuration in \tablename~\ref{1D_transport_starting_configuration}.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Kernel Size & $\#$ Hidden Layers & $\#$ Neurons \\
\hline
[3, 3] & 1 & 50 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.25cm}
\caption{\textit{Test 2.1}: Starting configuration of DL-ROM.}
\label{1D_transport_starting_configuration}
\end{table}
Then, the best values are found {iteratively} by studying the impact of the variation of a single hyperparameter at a time on the validation loss. {Once the best value of a hyperparameter is found, this value replaces the default value from that point on}. For each hyperparameter the tuning is performed in a range of values for which the training of the network is affordable regarding computational costs.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{1D_transport_kernel_size.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{1D_transport_n_layers.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{1D_transport_n_neurons.png}
}
\caption{\textit{Test 2.1}: Impact of the kernel size (left), the number of hidden layers (center) and the number of neurons (right) on the validation and testing loss.}
\label{kernel_size}
\end{figure}
In \figurename~\ref{kernel_size}, we show the impact of the size of the convolutional kernels on the loss over the validation and testing sets, the number of hidden layers in the feedforward forward neural network and the number of neurons in each hidden layer by varying the reduced dimension in order to find the best value of such hyperparameter over $n$. The final configuration of the DL-ROM neural network is the one provided in \tablename~\ref{1D_transport_final_configuration}.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Kernel Size & $\#$ Hidden Layers & $\#$ Neurons \\
\hline
[7, 7] & 4 & 200 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{\textit{Test 2.1}: Final configuration of DL-ROM.}
\label{1D_transport_final_configuration}
\end{table}
\end{rem}
\subsubsection*{Test 2.2: $n_{\mu} = 2$}
Here we consider again the parametrized one-dimensional transport equation
\begin{equation}
\label{Transport_2params}
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + \frac{\partial u}{\partial x} = 0, \quad & (x, t) \in \mathbb{R} \times (0, T) \\
u(x, 0) = u_0(x), \quad & x \in \mathbb{R}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The exact solution of (\ref{Transport_2params}) is $u(x, t) = u_0(x - t; \boldsymbol{\mu})$ but this time we set the initial datum equal to
\begin{equation}
u_0(x ; \boldsymbol{\mu}) =
\begin{cases}
0, \quad & \textnormal{if} \; x < \mu_1 \\
\mu_2, \quad & \textnormal{if} \; x \geq \mu_1, \\
\end{cases}
\label{initial_data}
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{\mu}=[\mu_1, \mu_2]^T$. The $n_{\mu}=2$ parameters belong to the parameter space $\mathcal{P} = \mathcal{P}_{\mu_1} \times \mathcal{P}_{\mu_2} = [0.025, 0.25] \times [0.5, 1]$. We build the dataset by uniformly sampling the exact solution in the domain $(0, L) \times (0, T)$, with $L = 1$ and $T=1$, and by considering $N_h = 256$ grid points for the space discretization and $N_t = 100$ time instances for the time one. We collect, both for $\mu_1$ and $\mu_2$, $N_{train} = 21$ training-parameter instances uniformly distributed in the parameter space $\mathcal{P}$ and $N_{test} = 20$ testing-parameter instances, selected as in the other test cases. Equation (\ref{Transport_2params}), completed {with} the initial datum (\ref{initial_data}), stands as one of the most challenging problems for linear ROM techniques because of the difficulty to accurately reconstruct the jump discontinuity of the exact solution as a linear combination of basis functions computed from the snapshots, for a testing-parameter instance. The architecture of the DL-ROM neural network used here is the one presented in the Test 2.1.
In \figurename~\ref{comparison_1D_transport_2params} we show the exact solution, which here again plays the role of the FOM solution, and the DL-ROM one, obtained by setting $n=3$, equal to the dimension of the solution manifold $n_{\mu} + 1$, for the testing-parameter instance $\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test} = (0.154375, 0.6375)$, along with the {relative error} $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_k$, defined in (\ref{error}), which is larger near the jump of the FOM solution.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{1D_transport_2params.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 2.2}: Exact solution (left), DL-ROM solution with $n = 3$ (center) and relative error $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_k$ (right) for the testing-parameter instance $\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test} = (0.154375, 0.6375)$ in the space-time domain.}
\label{comparison_1D_transport_2params}
\end{figure}
In \figurename~\ref{comparison_1D_transport_time_2params} we report the DL-ROM and optimal-POD reconstructions, together with the FOM solution, for the time instances $t = 0.245, 0.495$ and 0.745, and the testing-parameter instance $\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test} = (0.154375, 0.6375)$. The dimension of the reduced manifolds are $n = 3$ and $n = 50$ for the DL-ROM and POD techniques, respectively. By considering a linear ROM technique, even by setting the dimension of the reduced manifold equal to $n = 50$, the reconstructed solution presents spurious oscillations which lead to a poor approximation of the FOM solution. Moreover, the optimal-POD solution is not able to fit the discontinuity of the FOM solution in a sharp way. These oscillations are significantly mitigated by the use of our DL-ROM and the jump discontinuity is accurately fit by the DL-ROM solution, as shown in \figurename~\ref{comparison_1D_transport_time_2params}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.15]{1D_transport_2params_time.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 2.2}: Exact, DL-ROM and optimal-POD solutions for the testing-parameter instance $\boldsymbol{\mu}_{test} = (0.154375, 0.6375)$ at $t = 0.245, 0.495$ and 0.745.}
\label{comparison_1D_transport_time_2params}
\end{figure}
Finally, in \figurename~\ref{relative_error_transport_2params} we highlight the accuracy properties of both the DL-ROM and POD techniques. In particular, the same conclusions observed in Test 2.1, namely those {regarding} the behaviour of the error indicator (\ref{relative_error}) with respect to the reduced dimension $n$, still hold. The developed DL-ROM technique allows us to obtain a value for the error indicator equal to $\epsilon_{rel} = 2.85 \cdot 10^{-2}$ with $n = 3$, which instead is achieved by POD only by selecting 165 basis functions, i.e. by building a linear trial manifold of dimension $n = 165$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.14]{1D_transport_rel_err_2params.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 2.2}: Error indicator $\epsilon_{rel}$ vs. $n$ on the testing set.}
\label{relative_error_transport_2params}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Test 3: Monodomain Equation}
We now consider the following one-dimensional coupled PDE-ODE nonlinear system
\begin{equation}
\label{1DMonodomain}
\begin{cases}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\displaystyle \mu \frac{\partial u}{\partial t} - \mu^2 \frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2} + u(u-0.1)(u-1) + w = 0, \quad & (x, t) \in (0,L) \times (0,T) \\
\vspace{0.1cm}
\displaystyle \frac{d w}{d t} + (\gamma w - \beta u)=0, \quad & (x, t) \in (0,L) \times (0,T) \\
\vspace{0.1cm}
\displaystyle \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(0,t) = 50000 t^3 e^{-15t}, \quad & t \in (0,T)\\
\vspace{0.1cm}
\displaystyle \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(L,t) = 0, \quad & t \in (0,T)\\
u(x,0)=0, \; w(x,0)= 0, \quad & x \in (0,L),
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $L = 1$, $T = 2$, $\gamma = 2$ and $\beta = 0.5$. The parameter $\mu$ ($n_{\mu} = 1$) belongs to the parameter space $\mathcal{P} = 5 \cdot [10^{-3}, 10^{-2}]$. This system consists in a parametrized version of the Monodomain equation coupled with the FitzHugh-Nagumo cellular model which describes the excitation-relaxation of the cell membrane in the cardiac tisuue \citep{fitzhugh1961impulses, nagumo1962anactive}. In such a model, the ionic current is a cubic function of the electrical potential $v$ and linear in the recovery variable $w$. Eqs (\ref{1DMonodomain}) have been discretized in space through linear finite elements by considering $N_h = 256$ grid points. We use a one-step, semi-implicit, first order scheme similar to the one discussed in \cite{pagani2018numerical} for time discretization and the treatment of the nonlinear term\footnote{The \texttt{Matlab} library used to compute snapshots and the numerical results regarding the (local) RB method for problem (\ref{1DMonodomain}) is freely available at \texttt{https://github.com/StefanoPagani/LocalROM}}. The solution of the former problem consists in a parameter-depending travelling wave, which exhibits sharper and sharper fronts as the parameter $\mu$ gets smaller (see \figurename~\ref{fom_solution_1Dmonodomain}).
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.145]{fom_solution_1Dmonodomain.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: FOM solutions for different testing-parameter instances.}
\label{fom_solution_1Dmonodomain}
\end{figure}
We consider $N_{train} = 20$ training-parameter instances uniformly distributed in the parameter space $\mathcal{P}$ and $N_{test} = 19$ testing-parameter instances, each of them corresponding to the midpoint between two consecutive training parameter instances.
\figurename~\ref{comparison_1D_monodomain} shows the FOM solution and the DL-ROM one obtained by setting $n=2$, the dimension of the solution manifold, for the testing-parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 0.0062$. We also report in \figurename~\ref{comparison_1D_monodomain} the error indicator $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_k$ (\ref{error}), which is higher in correspondence of the large gradients of the FOM solution.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{comparison_1D_monodomain.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: FOM solution (left), DL-ROM solution with $n = 2$ (center) and error indicator $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}_k$ (right) for the testing-parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 0.0062$ in the space-time domain.}
\label{comparison_1D_monodomain}
\end{figure}
The accuracy obtained by our DL-ROM technique, with $n = 2$, on the testing set is $\epsilon_{rel} = 3.42 \cdot 10^{-3}$. In order to assess the performance of DL-ROM with respect to a linear ROM technique we point out in \tablename~\ref{tab:RB} the maximum number of basis functions among all the clusters, i.e. the dimension of the largest linear trial manifold, required by the (local) RB method in order to achieve the same accuracy obtained through DL-ROM. By increasing the number of clusters, the dimension of the largest linear trial subspace decreases; this does not hold as long as the number of clusters is larger than $k=32$. Indeed, the dimension of some linear subspaces become so small that the error increases with respect the one obtained with fewer clusters. In particular, in \figurename~\ref{1D_monodomain_RB} the RB solutions obtained by considering $n=2$ and $n=66$ basis functions are shown. In \figurename~\ref{comparison_1D_monodomain_time} we compare the FOM solution with the DL-ROM one, obtained for $n = 2$, and the FOM solution with the RB one by setting $n = 2, 20$ and 66, for $\mu_{test} = 0.0157$ at $t = 0.4962, 0.9975$ and 1.4987.
\begin{table}[ht!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
k= 1 & k = 2 & k = 4 & k = 8 & k = 16 & k = 32\\
\hline
66 & 68 & 55 & 34 & 26 & 20\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: Maximum number of basis functions for the (local) RB method.}
\label{tab:RB}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.15]{1D_monodomain_rb.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: RB solutions for the testing parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 0.0062$ with $n=2$ (left) and $n=66$ (right).}
\label{1D_monodomain_RB}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\center{
\includegraphics[scale=0.15]{comparison_1D_monodomain_time.png}
\hspace{0.3cm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.15]{comparison_1D_monodomain_RB_time.png}
}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: FOM and DL-ROM solutions (left) and FOM and RB solutions (right) for the testing-parameter instance $\mu_{test} = 0.0157$ at $t = 0.4962, 0.9975$ and 1.4987.}
\label{comparison_1D_monodomain_time}
\end{figure}
The convergence of the error indicator (\ref{relative_error}) as a function of the reduced dimension $n$ is shown in \figurename~\ref{1D_monodomain_convergence}. For the (local) RB method, by increasing the dimension of the largest linear trial manifold, the error indicator decreases, this occurs also by applying the DL-ROM technique for $n \le 20$. The decay of the error indicator in the latter case is not so remarkable for the same reason pointed out {in Test 2.1}. If we consider larger values of $n$, e.g. $n = 40$, overfitting occurs, meaning that the neural network model is too complex with respect to the amount of data provided it. For this reason, by considering, for example $n = 40$, the error indicator $\epsilon_{rel}$ increases.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.15]{1D_monodomain_error_vs_hat_N_.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: Error indicator $\epsilon_{rel}$ vs. $n$ on the testing set.}
\label{1D_monodomain_convergence}
\end{figure}
Finally, in \figurename~\ref{1D_monodomain_convergence_wrt_params} we report the behavior of the loss function and of the error indicator (\ref{relative_error}) with respect to the number of training-parameter instances, i.e. the size of the training dataset. By providing more data to the DL-ROM neural network, its approximation capability {increases, thus yielding a decrease in the generalization error and the error indicator. In particular, the decay of the loss function with respect to the number of training-parameter instances $N_{train}$ is approximately proportional to $1/N_{train}^3$ and the one of the error indicator (\ref{relative_error}) is about $1/N_{train}^2$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.15]{1D_monodomain_convergence_vs_params.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: Loss and error indicator $\epsilon_{rel}$ on the testing set vs. number of training-parameter instances of the parameter $\mu$.}
\label{1D_monodomain_convergence_wrt_params}
\end{figure}
\begin{rem}
(\textit{Hyperparameters Tuning}). In order to perform hyperparameters tuning we follow the same procedure used for Test 2.1. We start from the default configuration and we tune the size of the (transposed) convolutional kernels in the (decoder) encoder function, the number of hidden layers in the feedforward neural network and the number of neurons for each hidden layer. In Figure \ref{1D_monodomain_kernel_size} we show the impact of the different hyperparameters on the validation and testing losses. The final configuration of the DL-ROM neural network is the one provided in \tablename~\ref{1D_monodomain_final_configuration}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{1D_monodomain_kernel_size.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{1D_monodomain_n_layers.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{1D_monodomain_n_neurons.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: Impact of the kernel size (left), the number of hidden layers (center) and the number of neurons (right) on the validation and testing loss.}
\label{1D_monodomain_kernel_size}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Kernel Size & $\#$ Hidden Layers & $\#$ Neurons \\
\hline
[7, 7] & 1 & 200 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: Final configuration of DL-ROM.}
\label{1D_monodomain_final_configuration}
\end{table}
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}(\textit{Sensitivity with respect to the weight $\omega_h$}). For all the test cases analyzed we set the parameter $\omega_h$ in the loss function (\ref{loss_encoder}) equal to $\omega_h = 1/2$. In order to justify this choice we performed a sensitivity analysis for problem (\ref{1DMonodomain}) as shown in \figurename~\ref{sensitivity_weights}. For extreme values of $\omega_h$, the error indicator (\ref{relative_error}) worsens of about one order of magnitude. In particular, not considering the encoder function $\mathbf{f}_n^E$, that corresponds to the case $\omega_h = 1$, yields worse performance of the DL-ROM neural network, as highlighted in \figurename~\ref{sensitivity_weights}. Similarly, by taking $\omega_h = 0$, we would neglect the reconstruction error (that is, the first term in the per-example loss function \eqref{loss_encoder}); this is why the error indicator is large for $\omega_h = 0.1$. All the values of $\omega_h$ in the range $[0.2, 0.9]$ do not yield significant differences in terms of error indicator, so we decided to set $\omega_h = 1/2$ -- and, as a matter of fact, $ 1-\omega_h = 1/2$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.14]{sensitivity_weights.png}
\caption{\textit{Test 3}: Error indicator $\epsilon_{rel}$ vs. $\omega_h$.}
\label{sensitivity_weights}
\end{figure}
\end{rem}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:5}
In this work we have proposed a novel technique to build low-dimensional ROMs exploiting deep learning models in order to overcome the usual computational bottlenecks shown by classical, linear projection-based ROM techniques (such as the reduced basis method relying on proper orthogonal decomposition) when dealing with problems featuring coherent structures that propagate over time, such as transport and wave-type phenomena, or convection-dominated flows.
The proposed Deep Learning-based Reduced Order Model (DL-ROM) allows to approximate both the solution manifold of a given parametrized nonlinear, time-dependent PDE by means of a low-dimensional, nonlinear trial manifold, and the nonlinear dynamics of the generalized coordinates on such reduced trial manifold, as a function of the time coordinate and the parameters. Both {\em (i)} the nonlinear trial manifold and {\em (ii)} the reduced dynamics are learnt in a non-intrusive way, thus avoiding to query the arrays related to the FOM; the former is learnt by means of the decoder function of a convolutional autoencoder neural network, whereas the latter through a (deep) feedforward neural network, and the encoder function of the convolutional autoencoder.
The numerical results obtained for three different test cases show that the proposed DL-ROM technique provides sufficiently accurate solutions to the parametrized PDEs involving a low-dimensional solution manifold whose dimension is $n_{\mu}+1$. The proposed DL-ROM outperforms linear ROMs such as the RB method (relying on a global POD basis), as well as nonlinear approaches exploiting local POD bases, when applied both to {\em (i)} problems which are extremely challenging for linear ROMs, such as the linear transport equation or nonlinear diffusion-reaction PDEs coupled to ODEs, and {\em (ii)} problems which are more tractable using a linear ROM, like Burgers equation, however featuring POD bases with much higher dimension.
Regarding numerical accuracy, the proposed DL-ROM technique provides approximations that are orders of magnitude more accurate than the ones provided by linear ROMs, when keeping the same dimension. We do not obtain remarkable error decays when considering low-dimensional spaces of increasing dimensions, thus making the accuracy of both approximations comparable when dealing with $\mathcal{O}(10^2)$ POD basis functions -- a dimension which makes however linear ROMs infeasible when moving to more involved parametrized problems in higher space dimensions. Regarding computational efficiency, we deem not appropriate to perform comparisons with one-dimensional test cases (on meshes featuring no more than $\mathcal{O}(10^3)$ degrees of freedom). We will perform the assessment of the computational speedup of our DL-ROM technique compared to linear ROMs in future publications; we expect however to obtain remarkable computational gains when dealing with two and three-dimensional problems for which linear ROMs are not well-suited to approximate the solution to parametrized, nonlinear time-dependent PDEs. Numerical results shown that DL-ROM allows to generate approximation spaces of dimension close to the intrinsic dimension of the solution manifold, by providing also remarkably improvements in terms of efficiency, will be published in a forthcoming paper.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We gratefully acknowledge Prof. A. Quarteroni (MOX, Politecnico di Milano) for his stimulating discussions, Dr. S. Pagani (MOX, Politecnico di Milano) for his useful remarks and M. Salvador (MOX, Politecnico di Milano) for kindly sharing the code implementing the FOM of Test 1.
|
\section{{Conclusion}} \label{sec:disc}
In this paper, we have presented an efficient information dissemination system of 3D point cloud road map data (3D-MADS) for intelligent vehicles and roadside infrastructure integrated in a vehicular fog computing architecture. Our system aims to minimize the amount of cellular network unicast while maximizing the utility of short-range local broadcast transmissions by implementing fog-based opportunistic schedulers. We have also optimized the performance of 3D point cloud data dissemination and update by utilizing techniques such as index coding at roadside unit fog nodes and hashing of 3D point cloud data at vehicular nodes. The overall system was validated with empirical mobility traces, 3D LIDAR data, and an experimental multi-robotic testbed.
\section{{Fog-based Opportunistic Scheduling of Heterogeneous V2X Networks}} \label{sec:schedule}
The previous section considered the basic setting with static map data and the absence of capacity constraint, under the single meeting assumption. In this section, we present scheduling schemes that decide the transmission options for both static and dynamic map data from the LCD to intelligent vehicles, considering capacity constraint at RSU fog nodes. The scheduling schemes heuristically apply Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} at each junction.
\subsection{Downloading}
First, denote the starting and ending time of vehicle $c$'s trip plan by $t^{\sf s}_c$ and $t^{\sf d}_c$ respectively.
There are two modes of scheduling:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\bf Offline Mode}: All the trip plans of intelligent vehicles $\{{\sf P}^{c} \}_{c \in {\cal C}}$ are known in advance.
\item {\bf Online Mode}: Not all trip plans are known. Only the trip plans of intelligent vehicles started at the current time $t_{\sf now}$ or before (i.e., $\{{\sf P}^{c}\mid t^{\sf s}_c \le t_{\sf now} \}_{c \in {\cal C}}$) are known.
\end{enumerate}
As illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}, the LCD scheduler decides the download operations of map data to individual vehicles according to their GPS locations and trip plans. The map data are first downloaded via nearby RSUs (via short-range broadcast). In case of insufficient capacity at the RSU fog nodes, cellular network transmissions will be utilized.
Recall that static map data is denoted by $m^{\sf s}_e$ and dynamic data by $m^{\sf d}_e(t)$ for each road segment $e \in {\cal E}$. $m^{\sf s}_e$ should be downloaded to vehicle $c$ before or at time ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$, and $m^{\sf d}_e(t)$ should be downloaded to $c$ at some time between ${\sf t}^{c}_{e} - \tau$ and ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$. For each RSU $r \in {\cal R}$, let ${\cal C}_r(t) = \{c \in {\cal C} \mid t= {\sf t}^{c}_{r}\}$ be the set of vehicles that meet at junction $r$ at time $t$, and ${\cal D}_r(t)$ be the demand graph considering the vehicles in ${\cal C}_r(t)$.
Let $x^{\sf d}_r(t, e)$ and $x^{\sf s}_r(t, e)$ be the decisions of the scheduler to broadcast static and dynamic data respectively at RSU fog node $r$, for road segment $e$ at time $t$. Similarly, let $y_{\sf d}^c(t, e)$ and $y_{\sf s}^c(t, e)$ be the decisions of the scheduler to download static and dynamic data via cellular networks to vehicle $c$. Let ${\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t)$ and ${\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t)$ be the index coding schemes for static and dynamic data respectively at time $t$. Also, let us denote the single-junction scheme applied to RSU fog node $r$ for static data by ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$. Similarly, ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$ for the scheme applied to dynamic data in $[t - \tau, t]$ for a given time window $\tau$. We denote the size of the code by $|\cdot|$ (e.g., $|m^{\sf s}_e|$ and $|{\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal D}_r(t)]|$).
By the single meeting assumption, myopic scheduling of static data at the respective junction in an on-demand manner is optimal.
For dynamic data, the latest information is always more useful. Hence, myopic scheduling is also desirable. However, in the presence of capacity constraint, it may not be possible to schedule all required transmissions in an on-demand manner. In this case, we have to greedily pick a subset of vehicles at each junction to maximize the efficiency of transmissions. Formally, given a demand graph ${\cal D}_r(t) = ({\cal N}[{\cal D}_r(t) ], {\cal E}[{\cal D}_r(t)] )$, we define subgraph ${\cal H}_r = ({\cal N}, {\cal E})$, where ${\cal N}$ is a subset of ${\cal N}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$ and ${\cal E}$ is the induced subset of edges of ${\cal E}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$. Let ${\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$ be the set of source nodes (i.e., nodes with at least one in-coming directed edge).
For such a subgraph ${\cal H}_r$, we define $W({\cal H}_r)$ as the number of vehicles that can be satisfied by performing index coding on ${\cal H}_r$. We aim to find the best subgraph ${\cal H}_r$ that maximizes $W({\cal H}_r )$ subject to the capacity constraint ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}_r] \le {\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r$. Since the number of roads connecting a junction is small, this process can be performed efficiently. For each demand packet that cannot be accommodated by local broadcast, the scheduler will download it via the cellular network.
First, a greedy online opportunistic scheduling scheme is presented in Algorithm ${\sf ONLSchd}$, which schedules the local broadcast transmissions at RSU based on the arrival of vehicles in an online manner. Static map data will be scheduled before dynamic map data. If there is insufficient capacity at the RSU fog nodes, then the scheduler will download the remaining map data via the cellular network.
The greedy offline opportunistic scheduling scheme is presented in Algorithm ${\sf OFLSchd}$. At each RSU fog node, optimal single-junction index coding is employed, considering all autonomous vehicles that approach the junction at the current time. If there is any spare capacity at RSUs, the scheduler will download the undelivered static map data in advance at any RSU fog nodes with spare capacity. Finally, undelivered map data will be downloaded via the cellular network.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{\small ${\sf ONLSchd}[{\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})_{r \in {\cal R}}]$}
{\scriptsize
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\For {$r \in {\cal R}$}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Initialize RSU $r$ download capacity}}}
\LeftComment{{\em Download static map data via local broadcast by index coding}}
\State ${\cal H}_r \leftarrow {\rm argmax}_{{\cal H}} W({\cal H} )$ \newline \phantom{99} subject to ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}] \le {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now})$ and ${\cal H}$ is subgraph of ${\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Get max \# of vehicles whose demands can be satisfied}}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}_r]$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf {Perform Optimal Index Coding on ${\cal H}_r$}}}}
\State${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) - |{\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t_{\sf now})|$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t_{\sf now}), e \in {\sf P}^c \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$m^{\sf s}_e \in {\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal H}_r]$}
\State $x^{\sf s}_r(t_{\sf now},e) \leftarrow 1$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download static map data via local broadcast}}
\Else
\State $y_{\sf s}^c(t_{\sf now},e) \leftarrow 1$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download undelivered static map data via cellular networks}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\LeftComment{{\em Download dynamic map data via local broadcast by index coding}}
\State ${\cal H}'_r \leftarrow {\rm argmax}_{{\cal H}'} W({\cal H}' )$ \newline \phantom{99} subject to ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal H}'] \le {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now})$ and ${\cal H}'$ is subgraph of ${\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Get max \# of vehicles whose demands can be satisfied}}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal H}'_r]$\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf {Perform Optimal Index Coding on ${\cal H}'_r$}}}}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) - |{\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t_{\sf now})|$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t_{\sf now}), e \in {\sf P}^c \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$m^{\sf d}_e \in {\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal H}'_r]$}
\State $x^{\sf d}_r(t_{\sf now},e) \leftarrow 1$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download static map data via local broadcast}}
\Else
\State $y_{\sf d}^c(t_{\sf now},e) \leftarrow 1$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download undelivered dynamic map data via cellular networks}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
}
\label{alg:ONLSchd}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{\small ${\sf OFLSchd}[{\cal D}_r(t)_{t \in {\cal T}, r \in {\cal R}}]$}
{\scriptsize
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\For {$t \in {\cal T}, r \in {\cal R}$}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) \leftarrow {\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Initialize RSU $r$ download capacity}}}
\LeftComment{{\em Download static map data via local broadcast by index coding}}
\State ${\cal H}_r \leftarrow {\rm argmax}_{{\cal H}} W({\cal H} )$ \newline \phantom{99} subject to ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}] \le {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now})$ and ${\cal H}$ is subgraph of ${\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Get max \# of vehicles whose demands can be satisfied}}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}_r]$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf {Perform Optimal Index Coding on ${\cal H}_r$}}}}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) - |{\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t)|$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t), e \in {\sf P}^{c} \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$m^{\sf s}_e \in {\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal H}_r]$}
\State $x^{\sf s}_r(t,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download static map data via local broadcast}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\LeftComment{{\em Download dynamic map data via local broadcast by index coding}}
\State ${\cal H}'_r \leftarrow {\rm argmax}_{{\cal H}'} W({\cal H}' )$ \newline \phantom{99} subject to ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal H}'] \le {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now})$ and ${\cal H}'$ is subgraph of ${\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Get max \# of vehicles whose demands can be satisfied}}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal H}'_r]$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf {Perform Optimal Index Coding on ${\cal H}'_r$}}}}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) - |{\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t)|$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t), e \in {\sf P}^{c} \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$m^{\sf d}_e \in {\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal H}'_r]$}
\State $x^{\sf d}_r(t,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download dynamic map data via local broadcast}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndFor
\LeftComment{{\em Download static map data via local broadcast in advance, if sufficient capacity}}
\For {$t \in {\cal T}, c \in {\cal C}, r \in {\sf P}^{c}$}
\If{$\exists e \in {\sf P}^{c}$ and $\exists r \in {\sf P}^{c}$ and ${\sf t}^c_r < {\sf t}^c_e$ and $\prod_{t' \le {\sf t}^c_e} (1-x^{\sf s}_r(t',e))=0$ and ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r({\sf t}^c_r) \ge |m^{\sf s}_e|$}
\State $x^{\sf s}_r({\sf t}^c_r,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download static map data via local broadcast}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf s}_r({\sf t}^c_r) \leftarrow {\cal I}^{\sf s}_r({\sf t}^c_r) \cup \{m^{\sf s}_e \}$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Advanced static map data to be downloaded}}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) - |m^{\sf s}_e|$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\LeftComment{{\em Download undelivered map data via cellular networks}}
\For {$t \in {\cal T}, r \in {\cal R}$}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t), e \in {\sf P}^c \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$x^{\sf s}_r(t,e) \ne 1$}
\State $y_{\sf s}^c(t,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download undelivered static map data via cellular networks}}
\EndIf
\If{$x^{\sf d}_r(t,e) \ne 1$}
\State $y_{\sf d}^c(t,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download undelivered dynamic map data via cellular networks}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
}
\label{alg:OFLSchd}
\end{algorithm}
\section{{Fog-based Opportunistic Scheduling of Heterogeneous V2X Networks}} \label{sec:schedule}
The previous section considered the basic setting with static map data and the absence of capacity constraint, under the single meeting assumption. In this section, we present scheduling schemes that decide the transmission options for both static and dynamic map data from the LCD to intelligent vehicles, considering capacity constraint at RSU fog nodes. The scheduling schemes heuristically apply Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} at each junction.
\subsection{Downloading}
First, denote the starting and ending time of vehicle $c$'s trip plan by $t^{\sf s}_c$ and $t^{\sf d}_c$ respectively.
There are two modes of scheduling:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\bf Offline Mode}: All the trip plans of intelligent vehicles $\{{\sf P}^{c} \}_{c \in {\cal C}}$ are known in advance.
\item {\bf Online Mode}: Not all trip plans are known. Only the trip plans of intelligent vehicles started at the current time $t_{\sf now}$ or before (i.e., $\{{\sf P}^{c}\mid t^{\sf s}_c \le t_{\sf now} \}_{c \in {\cal C}}$) are known.
\end{enumerate}
As illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}, the LCD scheduler decides the download operations of map data to individual vehicles according to their GPS locations and trip plans. The map data are first downloaded via nearby RSUs (via short-range broadcast). In case of insufficient capacity at the RSU fog nodes, cellular network transmissions will be utilized.
Recall that static map data is denoted by $m^{\sf s}_e$ and dynamic data by $m^{\sf d}_e(t)$ for each road segment $e \in {\cal E}$. $m^{\sf s}_e$ should be downloaded to vehicle $c$ before or at time ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$, and $m^{\sf d}_e(t)$ should be downloaded to $c$ at some time between ${\sf t}^{c}_{e} - \tau$ and ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$. For each RSU $r \in {\cal R}$, let ${\cal C}_r(t) = \{c \in {\cal C} \mid t= {\sf t}^{c}_{r}\}$ be the set of vehicles that meet at junction $r$ at time $t$, and ${\cal D}_r(t)$ be the demand graph considering the vehicles in ${\cal C}_r(t)$.
Let $x^{\sf d}_r(t, e)$ and $x^{\sf s}_r(t, e)$ be the decisions of the scheduler to broadcast static and dynamic data respectively at RSU fog node $r$, for road segment $e$ at time $t$. Similarly, let $y_{\sf d}^c(t, e)$ and $y_{\sf s}^c(t, e)$ be the decisions of the scheduler to download static and dynamic data via cellular networks to vehicle $c$. Let ${\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t)$ and ${\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t)$ be the index coding schemes for static and dynamic data respectively at time $t$. Also, let us denote the single-junction scheme applied to RSU fog node $r$ for static data by ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$. Similarly, ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$ for the scheme applied to dynamic data in $[t - \tau, t]$ for a given time window $\tau$. We denote the size of the code by $|\cdot|$ (e.g., $|m^{\sf s}_e|$ and $|{\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal D}_r(t)]|$).
By the single meeting assumption, myopic scheduling of static data at the respective junction in an on-demand manner is optimal.
For dynamic data, the latest information is always more useful. Hence, myopic scheduling is also desirable. However, in the presence of capacity constraint, it may not be possible to schedule all required transmissions in an on-demand manner. In this case, we have to greedily pick a subset of vehicles at each junction to maximize the efficiency of transmissions. Formally, given a demand graph ${\cal D}_r(t) = ({\cal N}[{\cal D}_r(t) ], {\cal E}[{\cal D}_r(t)] )$, we define subgraph ${\cal H}_r = ({\cal N}, {\cal E})$, where ${\cal N}$ is a subset of ${\cal N}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$ and ${\cal E}$ is the induced subset of edges of ${\cal E}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$. Let ${\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal D}_r(t)]$ be the set of source nodes (i.e., nodes with at least one in-coming directed edge).
For such a subgraph ${\cal H}_r$, we define $W({\cal H}_r)$ as the number of vehicles that can be satisfied by performing index coding on ${\cal H}_r$. We aim to find the best subgraph ${\cal H}_r$ that maximizes $W({\cal H}_r )$ subject to the capacity constraint ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}_r] \le {\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r$. Since the number of roads connecting a junction is small, this process can be performed efficiently. For each demand packet that cannot be accommodated by local broadcast, the scheduler will download it via the cellular network.
First, a greedy online opportunistic scheduling scheme is presented in Algorithm ${\sf ONLSchd}$, which schedules the local broadcast transmissions at RSU based on the arrival of vehicles in an online manner. Static map data will be scheduled before dynamic map data. If there is insufficient capacity at the RSU fog nodes, then the scheduler will download the remaining map data via the cellular network.
The greedy offline opportunistic scheduling scheme is presented in Algorithm ${\sf OFLSchd}$. At each RSU fog node, optimal single-junction index coding is employed, considering all autonomous vehicles that approach the junction at the current time. If there is any spare capacity at RSUs, the scheduler will download the undelivered static map data in advance at any RSU fog nodes with spare capacity. Finally, undelivered map data will be downloaded via the cellular network.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{\small ${\sf ONLSchd}[{\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})_{r \in {\cal R}}]$}
{\scriptsize
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\For {$r \in {\cal R}$}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Initialize RSU $r$ download capacity}}}
\LeftComment{{\em Download static map data via local broadcast by index coding}}
\State ${\cal H}_r \leftarrow {\rm argmax}_{{\cal H}} W({\cal H} )$ \newline \phantom{99} subject to ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}] \le {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now})$ and ${\cal H}$ is subgraph of ${\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Get max \# of vehicles whose demands can be satisfied}}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}_r]$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf {Perform Optimal Index Coding on ${\cal H}_r$}}}}
\State${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) - |{\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t_{\sf now})|$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t_{\sf now}), e \in {\sf P}^c \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$m^{\sf s}_e \in {\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal H}_r]$}
\State $x^{\sf s}_r(t_{\sf now},e) \leftarrow 1$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download static map data via local broadcast}}
\Else
\State $y_{\sf s}^c(t_{\sf now},e) \leftarrow 1$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download undelivered static map data via cellular networks}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\LeftComment{{\em Download dynamic map data via local broadcast by index coding}}
\State ${\cal H}'_r \leftarrow {\rm argmax}_{{\cal H}'} W({\cal H}' )$ \newline \phantom{99} subject to ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal H}'] \le {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now})$ and ${\cal H}'$ is subgraph of ${\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Get max \# of vehicles whose demands can be satisfied}}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal H}'_r]$\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf {Perform Optimal Index Coding on ${\cal H}'_r$}}}}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now}) - |{\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t_{\sf now})|$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t_{\sf now}), e \in {\sf P}^c \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$m^{\sf d}_e \in {\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal H}'_r]$}
\State $x^{\sf d}_r(t_{\sf now},e) \leftarrow 1$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download static map data via local broadcast}}
\Else
\State $y_{\sf d}^c(t_{\sf now},e) \leftarrow 1$ \newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download undelivered dynamic map data via cellular networks}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
}
\label{alg:ONLSchd}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{\small ${\sf OFLSchd}[{\cal D}_r(t)_{t \in {\cal T}, r \in {\cal R}}]$}
{\scriptsize
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\For {$t \in {\cal T}, r \in {\cal R}$}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) \leftarrow {\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Initialize RSU $r$ download capacity}}}
\LeftComment{{\em Download static map data via local broadcast by index coding}}
\State ${\cal H}_r \leftarrow {\rm argmax}_{{\cal H}} W({\cal H} )$ \newline \phantom{99} subject to ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}] \le {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now})$ and ${\cal H}$ is subgraph of ${\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Get max \# of vehicles whose demands can be satisfied}}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf s}[{\cal H}_r]$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf {Perform Optimal Index Coding on ${\cal H}_r$}}}}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) - |{\cal I}^{\sf s}_r(t)|$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t), e \in {\sf P}^{c} \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$m^{\sf s}_e \in {\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal H}_r]$}
\State $x^{\sf s}_r(t,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download static map data via local broadcast}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\LeftComment{{\em Download dynamic map data via local broadcast by index coding}}
\State ${\cal H}'_r \leftarrow {\rm argmax}_{{\cal H}'} W({\cal H}' )$ \newline \phantom{99} subject to ${\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal H}'] \le {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t_{\sf now})$ and ${\cal H}'$ is subgraph of ${\cal D}_r(t_{\sf now})$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf Get max \# of vehicles whose demands can be satisfied}}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf 1J\mbox{-}IdxCd}^{\sf d}[{\cal H}'_r]$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{{\bf {Perform Optimal Index Coding on ${\cal H}'_r$}}}}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) - |{\cal I}^{\sf d}_r(t)|$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t), e \in {\sf P}^{c} \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$m^{\sf d}_e \in {\cal N}_{\rm src}[{\cal H}'_r]$}
\State $x^{\sf d}_r(t,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download dynamic map data via local broadcast}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndFor
\LeftComment{{\em Download static map data via local broadcast in advance, if sufficient capacity}}
\For {$t \in {\cal T}, c \in {\cal C}, r \in {\sf P}^{c}$}
\If{$\exists e \in {\sf P}^{c}$ and $\exists r \in {\sf P}^{c}$ and ${\sf t}^c_r < {\sf t}^c_e$ and $\prod_{t' \le {\sf t}^c_e} (1-x^{\sf s}_r(t',e))=0$ and ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r({\sf t}^c_r) \ge |m^{\sf s}_e|$}
\State $x^{\sf s}_r({\sf t}^c_r,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download static map data via local broadcast}}
\State ${\cal I}^{\sf s}_r({\sf t}^c_r) \leftarrow {\cal I}^{\sf s}_r({\sf t}^c_r) \cup \{m^{\sf s}_e \}$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Advanced static map data to be downloaded}}
\State ${\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) \leftarrow {\sf c}^{\downarrow}_r(t) - |m^{\sf s}_e|$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Update RSU $r$ download capacity}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\LeftComment{{\em Download undelivered map data via cellular networks}}
\For {$t \in {\cal T}, r \in {\cal R}$}
\For {$c \in {\cal C}_r(t), e \in {\sf P}^c \cap {\cal E}_r$}
\If{$x^{\sf s}_r(t,e) \ne 1$}
\State $y_{\sf s}^c(t,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download undelivered static map data via cellular networks}}
\EndIf
\If{$x^{\sf d}_r(t,e) \ne 1$}
\State $y_{\sf d}^c(t,e) \leftarrow 1$
\newline \phantom{99} \Comment{\textcolor{black}{\bf Download undelivered dynamic map data via cellular networks}}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
}
\label{alg:OFLSchd}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Formulation and Definitions} \label{sec:model}
In this section, we formally define the 3D road map data dissemination problem for intelligent vehicles. Consider a set of discrete time slots $t \in {\cal T}$, where $|{\cal T}|=T$, and a network of roads that is represented by graph ${\cal G}=({\cal N}, {\cal E})$, where each node $v \in {\cal N}$ represents a junction and each undirected edge $e \in {\cal E}$ represents a road segment. For each edge $e$ at time $t$, a set of map data is associated and denoted by $m_e(t)$. $m_e(t)$ consists of both static data set $m^{\sf s}_e $ and dynamic data set $m^{\sf d}_e(t)$, such that $m_e(t) = m^{\sf s}_e \cup m^{\sf d}_e(t)$. We consider an abstract representation, without specifying the elements in $m_e(t)$. That is, one may consider an element in $m_e(t)$ as a map data file. The dynamic data may be generated from roadside sensors, and perception from other vehicles. For practicality, we consider the dynamic data within a certain time window $\tau$ from the current time $t$, namely $m^{\sf d}_e(t') $ where $t' \in [t- \tau, t]$.
There is a set of vehicles ${\cal C}$ where each vehicle $c \in {\cal C}$ is associated with a trip plan ${\sf P}^{c}$, which is a path in ${\cal G}$. We represent ${\sf P}^{c}$ by a set of edges in ${\cal E}$, or a sequence of nodes in ${\cal N}$. Let the time of vehicle $c$ entering edge (i.e., road segment) $e \in {\sf P}^{c}$ be ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$, and the time of entering node (i.e., junction) $v \in {\sf P}^{c}$ be ${\sf t}^{c}_{v}$.
\subsection{Downloading}
Each vehicle $c \in {\cal C}$ downloads both static data $m^{\sf s}_e $ before ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$, and dynamic data $m^{\sf d}_e(t')$, for some $t' \in [{\sf t}^{c}_{e} - \tau, {\sf t}^{c}_{e}]$, at some time between $t'$ and ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$. The options for downloading are either using short-range broadcast transmissions at RSUs, or unicast transmissions via cellular networks. We assume that LTE cellular network transmissions have much larger capacity, whereas short-range broadcast transmissions are limited by local spectrum allocation. On the other hand, the short-range broadcast transmissions incur no or very low costs, whereas cellular network transmissions incur higher costs.
We assume that RSU fog nodes are only located at a subset of nodes in ${\cal G}$, denoted by ${\cal R} \subseteq {\cal N}$. Denote the set of edges connecting to RSU fog node $r \in {\cal R}$ by ${\cal E}_r \subseteq {\cal E}$. A vehicle $c$ can receive data from $r$, when entering edge $e \in {\cal E}_r$. At each RSU fog node $r \in {\cal R}$, there is a download capacity of ${\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r$ at $r$, whereas there is no capacity limit via cellular networks.
Let the data transmitted by RSU fog node $r$ using short-range broadcast at time $t$ be $x_r(t)$. A vehicle $c$ can also download data via cellular networks, which is denoted by $y^{c}(t)$. At the time $t$, let $X^{c}(t)$ be the union of all data that $c$ has received from the visited RSU fog nodes on its path before time $t$, namely,
\begin{equation}
X^{c}(t) \triangleq \bigcup _{e \in {\sf P}^{c} \wedge e \in {\cal E}_r \wedge {\sf t}^{c}_{e} \le t} \Big\{x_r({\sf t}^{c}_{e})\Big\}
\end{equation}
Also, let $Y^{c}(t)$ be the union of data that $c$ has received from cellular network transmissions before time $t$, namely,
\begin{equation}
Y^{c}(t) \triangleq \bigcup _{t'\le t } \Big\{y^{c}(t')\Big\}
\end{equation}
We denote a decoding function by ${\sf Dec}[\cdot]$, which decodes all the downloaded data to a set of map data, $M^{c}(t) = {\sf Dec}[X^{c}(t), Y^{c}(t)]$.
We aim to minimize the number of cellular network transmissions, subject to the constraints of timely delivery of static and dynamic data:
\begin{align}
& \min_{\{x_r(t), y^{c}(t)\mid t \in {\cal T}, c \in {\cal C}, r \in {\cal R} \}} \sum_{c \in {\cal C}}\big|Y^{c}(T)\big|\\
& \mbox{subject to\ } |x_r(t)| \le {\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r,\ \mbox{for all } t \in {\cal T}, r \in {\cal R}, \label{cons:dlcapacity} \\
& \ \qquad \qquad m^{\sf s}_e \in M^{c}({\sf t}^{c}_{e}), \ \mbox{for all } c \in {\cal C}, e \in {\sf P}^{c}, \label{cons:stdata}\\
& \ \qquad \qquad m^{\sf d}_e(t) \in M^{c}({\sf t}^{c}_{e}), \ \mbox{for all } c \in {\cal C}, e \in {\sf P}^{c}, \notag \\
& \ \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad \mbox{for some } t \in [{\sf t}^{c}_{e} - \tau, {\sf t}^{c}_{e}]. \label{cons:dydata}
\end{align}
In this problem, we assume that the trip plans of all vehicles are given a-priori. However, the online version is also discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:schedule}.
Cons.~\raf{cons:dlcapacity} represents the capacity constraint of local broadcast, whereas Cons.~\raf{cons:stdata} and Cons.~\raf{cons:dydata} represent the download constraint of static data and dynamic data, respectively.
\subsection{Uploading}
The previous section considers downloading map data from fog units (e.g., RSUs and base stations). In practice, intelligent vehicles are equipped with various sensors (e.g., LIDAR, RADAR, camera, inertial measurement unit (IMU), GPS unit, etc.), whose data can be uploaded to LCD via RSUs or base stations for sharing with other vehicles.
We consider the uploading of processed 3D LIDAR point cloud data in this paper, in which the operations can be optimized by uploading hash files of the perception data and differentially coded data to reduce the redundant data load to the network, as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:octree}.
\section{{Conclusion}} \label{sec:disc}
In this paper, we have presented an efficient information dissemination system of 3D point cloud road map data (3D-MADS) for intelligent vehicles and roadside infrastructure integrated in a vehicular fog computing architecture. Our system aims to minimize the amount of cellular network unicast while maximizing the utility of short-range local broadcast transmissions by implementing fog-based opportunistic schedulers. We have also optimized the performance of 3D point cloud data dissemination and update by utilizing techniques such as index coding at roadside unit fog nodes and hashing of 3D point cloud data at vehicular nodes. The overall system was validated with empirical mobility traces, 3D LIDAR data, and an experimental multi-robotic testbed.
\section{Information Exchange of 3D Road Map Data in V2X Networks}
{To implement efficient {road map data dissemination in a} vehicular fog network, we propose the 3D MAp Dissemination System ({3D-MADS}).} The general operation of {3D-MADS} includes intelligent vehicles, roadside units, local controllers and databases, which are all within the fog layer in Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}.
Overall, the system distributes map data among the parties in a timely manner, taking into account the characteristics of long-range unicast and short-range broadcast transmissions. Short-range broadcast normally has limited spectrum resources at lower transmission cost, while long-range unicast has large bandwidth capacity at higher transmission cost. We aim at optimizing these transmission options while satisfying the dynamic data demand of respectively vehicles. By referring to Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}, each component or module in 3D-MADS and its corresponding tasks are explained as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Intelligent Vehicles}
- {\em Uploading} enables sharing of on-board LIDAR data among vehicles via the vehicular fog network.
- {\em Coding \& Hashing} encodes and identifies differentiated data and redundant map information.
- {\em Downloading} delivers the most updated 3D road map data from local databases to intelligent vehicles via either cellular network or local broadcast at RSU fog nodes.
- {\em Perception} utilizes on-board sensors, e.g., LIDAR and GPS, to perceive the surrounding road environment as 3D point cloud data, from which we can detect and recognize objects and obstacles in the environment. The locally processed 3D point cloud data will be uploaded to RSUs or local controllers for further integration with the data from other vehicular and roadside nodes.
- {\em Inference \& Decision} allows intelligent vehicles to predict their movements for autonomous navigation and control based on the perceived and downloaded 3D road map data as well as position information.
- {\em Control \& Navigation} relies on driving feedback and manages the intelligent vehicles to move safely and appropriately in the environment.
\smallskip
\item {\bf Roadside Unit (RSU) Fog Nodes}
- {\em Perception} provides blind-spot views that cannot be detected by intelligent vehicles via the local sensors.
- {\em Integration} combines downloaded 3D road map data from the cloud with the local LIDAR sensor data before sending them to nearby intelligent vehicles.
- {{\em Index Coding} encodes 3D road map data according to the data demand and availability of nearby vehicles to improve the transmission efficiency.}
- {\em Broadcast} is the periodic transmission of {index-coded} data to nearby vehicles via local short-range broadcast.
\bigskip
\item {\bf Local Controllers and Databases (LCD)}
- {\em Integration} coordinates the data exchanged among intelligent vehicles and RSU by setting the locations and boundaries of each region of map data. It can also correct and realign the LIDAR data from different vehicles that may contain drifting inaccuracy.
- {\em Separation} differentiates static and dynamic objects in the integrated 3D road map data via segmentation. Additional annotations can be generated based on machine learning techniques \cite{wang2019vtc} to label the objects in the map data. Different coding and transmission schemes can be applied to data with different characteristics.
- {\em Scheduling} organizes the download and upload transmissions based on the trip plans of vehicles, given the options of using either the cellular network unicast or the short-range local broadcast transmissions.
\end{itemize}
With respect to Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}, we can see that 3D-MADS is an interdisciplinary system that requires the joint effort from multiple fields (e.g., communications, signal processing, computing, navigation and control, transportation engineering, etc.), which is our long-term goal. In this paper, we focus on investigating and discussing data exchange related modules (which include index coding, map download scheduling, and coding and hashing) to kick start the development of such system.
\section{Uploading 3D LIDAR Point Cloud Data} \label{sec:octree}
This section focuses on the discussion of 3D LIDAR point cloud data, and a common representation called Octree. We present differential coding and hashing schemes especially for uploading 3D LIDAR point cloud data.
\subsection{Octree Representation}
3D point cloud depicts objects and surfaces as a set of 3D points in the Cartesian coordinate system within a bounded region \cite{Rusu2008}. A common approach to encode 3D point cloud is using {\em Octree}, by which the 3D space is recursively partitioned into 8 cells ({\em voxels}) and a binary number is used to indicate the presence of an object in each cell. See an illustration of Octree representation of 3D point cloud in Fig.~\ref{fig:octree}.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure7.pdf}
\caption{\small An illustration of Octree representation of 3D point cloud.}\label{fig:octree}
\end{figure}
Octree is a tree-based data structure suitable for sparse 3D point data, where each node represents a cell or volume element (voxel). From the root, it is iteratively divided into eight children until a certain depth or level $L$ is achieved \cite{Kammerl2012} or if there is no more 3D point cloud to be partitioned. An occupied voxel contains a point or a set of points, and is labeled by `1', otherwise by `0'. A node labeled by `1' can be further decomposed into eight more child nodes, whereas there is no need to expand a node labeled by `0'. Accordingly, the larger the depth (i.e., higher value of $L$), the higher the resolution of the 3D object.
Two reference corners for the boundary of region of an Octree are denoted by $(x_1, y_1, z_1)$ and $(x_2, y_2, z_2)$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:octree}). One can represent an Octree by a bit string representation that encodes its contents by a fixed traversal order in the voxels of each layer. We can apply further coding schemes on the bit string representation. Note that different LIDAR sensors may produce different sets of 3D LIDAR point cloud data on the same objects in the region because of different sensing specifications. But the Octree representations can approximate closely with each other, under a suitable value of $L$. Hence, it is possible to compare different sets of 3D LIDAR point cloud data in Octree representations.
There are several proposals for point cloud compression \cite{Schnabel2006,Huang2008}. These techniques can be applied to our system, but note that they are mainly for storage and are not optimized for communication systems.
\subsection{Differentiation and Differential Coding} \label{sec:diff}
Autonomous vehicles can identify and upload the necessary dynamic map data to LCD using differentiation. Since dynamic map data is only detectable at the moment of departing from a road segment, the upload transmissions take place immediately through the nearby RSU fog node (in short-range broadcast), whenever possible. Otherwise, cellular network transmissions are employed.
Differentiation is particularly useful for identifying the dynamic components in 3D LIDAR point cloud data. We denote the differentiated data between observed point cloud $x_c(t)$ and reference point cloud $m_e(t-1)$ by:
\begin{equation}
{\sf Diff}_c(t) = \Big( x_c(t) \backslash m_e(t-1) \Big) \cup \Big( m_e(t-1) \backslash x_c(t) \Big)
\end{equation}
where $t = {\sf t}^{c}_{e}$ and $e \in P_c$.
To encode the differentiated data, we employ {\em differential coding} on Octree. Octree allows efficient identification of the differences by enumerating the voxels along the tree. Once the differences are identified, we can employ another Octree to encode the differentiated parts. However, the meanings of voxels are now different: `0' means no difference with respect to the reference 3D LIDAR point cloud data, whereas `1' means the binary content in the respective voxel should be flipped. See an illustration in Fig.~\ref{fig:differentiate}.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure8.pdf}
\caption{\small An illustration of differential coding on 3D point cloud.}\label{fig:differentiate}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Hashing 3D LIDAR Data} \label{sec:bloom}
Comparison through the hash files associated with 3D LIDAR point cloud data is more efficient than using the whole data set. The hash files should have certain desirable properties. For example, one can compare two hash files to identify which point cloud data consists of more contents (e.g., more observed objects). Second, one can check if the point cloud data contains certain known objects, without looking at the whole data set. A simple solution is to use a Bloom filter \cite{MMbook}, a compact lossy data structure representing the membership of a set of elements. The basic operations of a Bloom filter involve adding an element to the set and querying the membership of an element. It does not support element removal, therefore, upon query of an element membership, the Bloom filter output may only result in false positives, which can be minimized through parameter setting. In our system, each vehicle first communicates with RSU and LCD using Bloom filters before uploading the whole perception data.
{Recall that $x_c(t) = \{p_1, p_2 , ...\}$ is a set of 3D points. Note that each $p_i$ has a unique octary representation, such that each digit in the octary representation represents the order of the respective occupied voxel at each layer in Octree. We denote index `0' to represent the first voxel. For example, the four 3D points in the Octree of Fig.~\ref{fig:octree} can be represented in octary representation as $\{101, 105, 150, 155\}$. Next, we map each point in octary representation by a set of $K$ binary hash functions: $f_k(p_i) \mapsto \{0, 1\}$, where $k = 1,...,K$. Let $f_k(x_c(t)) = f_k(p_1)\vee f_k(p_2)\vee ...$ be the bitwise disjunction of all the points in $x_c(t) = \{p_1, p_2 , ...\}$. The $K$ output bits $\big(f_k(x_c(t))\big)_{k=1}^K$ will be a Bloom filter for $x_c(t)$, denoted by ${\sf BF}(x_c(t))$. Bloom filters have some desirable properties. If a 3D point cloud has more contents, then its Bloom filter contains more 1's. One can check if a 3D point cloud contains a set of known 3D points, by checking if its Bloom filter contains the corresponding hash values.}
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{here} have been a plenty of flourishing developments for intelligent vehicles in the past decade. In 2011, Google introduced a driverless car that is tested in real-world streets \cite{Hard2015}. Since then, there have been many self-driving car projects (e.g., Uber \cite{Uber2018}, Waymo \cite{Waymo2019}) gearing towards full driving autonomy.
Intelligent vehicles are equipped with a plethora of on-board sensors for sensing {the surrounding} environment, and a communication system capable of short-range broadcast and cellular {communications} for information sharing among intelligent vehicles and infrastructure {nodes,} such as roadside units (RSUs), base stations, local controllers, databases, and cloud servers. {Infrastructure nodes} are fixed-location systems that transmit and receive short- and long-range communications from vehicles for storage, processing, and information exchange. Collectively, intelligent vehicles and the infrastructure are the fundamental building blocks of a vehicular network.
In a vehicular network comprising of multiple intelligent vehicles and infrastructure {nodes}, sharing local surrounding information enables the delivery of various vehicular applications and services for improving road safety and travel convenience \cite{CMHC2016VTC}. To facilitate autonomous driving, accurate road map data depicting real-time road events are crucial and should be exchanged among intelligent vehicles and {the} infrastructure for driving perception, localization, route planning, and control. The road map data capture the static (e.g., buildings, road structures) and dynamic (e.g., presence of road accidents, traffic conditions) features of the road setup. A particular type of data that can accurately describe the road environment is the {\em 3D LIDAR point cloud data} \cite{kim2011urban}. An example is illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:pointcloud} \cite{ford}. This is a set of data points in a 3D coordinate system that represent the surfaces of physical objects in {the} 3D space. However, 3D LIDAR point cloud data {are usually huge in size}. Commercial LIDAR with 64 laser sensors can generate up to 2.2M points per second for the 3D representation of its surrounding environment \cite{velodynelidar}. Given this, the exchange of 3D map data from one vehicular node to another is a challenging task. Overcoming the bandwidth limitation in highly-dynamic vehicular networks for exchanging 3D point cloud data can enable collaborative perception among vehicular nodes for extending their sights to reach hidden and distant on-road objects or pedestrians.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure1.pdf}
\caption{\small A four-way junction 3D point cloud captured by a LIDAR.}\label{fig:pointcloud}
\end{figure}
The information exchanges {among} intelligent vehicles {and the} roadside infrastructure, as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:parties}, are supported by Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) communications (e.g., Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) and Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I)), which can be realized by either short-range local broadcast or long-range unicast via the cellular network. In Fig. \ref{fig:parties}, the Map Data Repository (MDR) is another roadside infrastructure that functions as a central database for all map data. It is a cloud computing server that stores the global view of map data over time, merges multiple map data sources, and extracts useful information to assist decision-making at individual vehicles.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{figs/Figure2.pdf}
\caption{\small Road map information exchange among an intelligent vehicle, a roadside unit, and the map data repository in a V2X network.}\label{fig:parties}
\end{figure}
Short-range local broadcast can be achieved by Dedicated Short-Range Communications (DSRC) \cite{kenney2011dedicated} {or 3GPP Cellular V2X (C-V2X) \cite{5g2016case}}, which has been proposed to broadcast basic safety messages (e.g., speed, heading, and location). However, local broadcast suffers from the limited available spectrum and restricted data transmission rate. On the other hand, long-range unicast via LTE may be inefficient to share common data among nearby transmitters, such as map data for vehicles in the vicinity. In addition, cellular networks incur {service charges} by mobile service operators.
Given the increasing number of vehicles on road, estimated over 1.3 billion worldwide in 2016 \cite{CarPop}, {there is an} abundant source of road map information {available, and hence the uploading and downloading of road map data among vehicles and the road infrastructure is time-consuming and takes up a huge amount of network resources}. {In addition, many V2X applications are time-critical and failure in transmission may} lead to accidents {and casualties} \cite{TeslaAcc}. {Therefore, how} to effectively manage the information exchange among vehicles and the infrastructure in a heterogeneous V2X network is a pivotal challenge. In such case, a new computing paradigm is needed to reduce latency in data {processing and communications} so that vehicles {and the} infrastructure can {acquire the required data on time for} making real-time on-road decisions.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.63]{figs/Figure3.pdf}
\caption{\small {The vehicular fog computing architecture.} Most information exchange {and computation take} place in the fog layer.}\label{fig:VFCarchi}
\end{figure*}
Fog computing, first coined and introduced by Cisco Systems in 2012, is a recent paradigm bringing cloud computing closer to the network {edges to reduce the latency in various real-time services} \cite{mahmud2018fog}. The incorporation of fog computing into vehicular networks establishes the Internet of Vehicles (IoV) concept or the vehicular fog computing (VFC) paradigm. Extensive fog computing surveys \cite{mouradian2017comprehensive,perera2017fog,huang2017vehicular} have outlined the possible application of such computing paradigm in vehicular networks. {In vehicular fog networks, {as depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}}, intelligent vehicles act as sensing devices that gather and pre-process surrounding data {before uploading. Some data coding and hashing techniques {can also be done at the network edges to} alleviate the traffic load as well. Intelligent vehicles may {serve as} mobile fog nodes for implementing localized computational tasks and can directly communicate with nearby vehicles via DSRC/C-V2X, especially {when} vehicles are {beyond} the infrastructure's coverage.} On the other hand, infrastructure {nodes}, such as roadside units (RSUs), traffic lights, base stations, can act as fog nodes for efficiently communicating with intelligent vehicles within its transmission range. These infrastructure {nodes can} also store huge amount of data and perform computationally-intensive processing and calculations instead of allowing the cloud to do it, {thereby, providing real-time and reliable vehicular applications, {e.g.,} autonomous driving in a dynamic environment.}
{Meanwhile, the data exchange among closely related infrastructure fog nodes in a local region is facilitated by a local controller. Local controllers determine the {transmission mode}, i.e., either long-range unicast (LTE) or short-range broadcast via DSRC or C-V2X. {They} also decide whether certain road map data are to be forwarded to the map data repository (cloud) \cite{liang2017integrated} or stored in {local} databases.} {The access of road information from other local regions is administrated by the super} software-defined networking (SDN) controller{, which is the network component with global intelligence \cite{wen2017fog} that} {orchestrates} data traffic and {manages} resources among local controllers and databases \cite{tomovic2017software}.} {The SDN controllers also perform scheduling of tasks among fog nodes.} Finally, the map data repository is a cloud {node with} global knowledge of an urban {area} for monitoring and control in a city-wide level \cite{huang2017vehicular}.
Overall, in a vehicular network employing the fog computing paradigm, we consider a scheduled information dissemination mechanism utilizing index coding, data hashing and heterogeneous transmission options. The {major contributions} of this {work} are summarized as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Under {the vehicular fog computing} framework, we {integrate the index coding algorithm to optimally disseminate high-definition 3D road map data {among} intelligent vehicles and {the} roadside infrastructure to reduce the number of {required} transmissions and data load while satisfying {the vehicular} demands.}
\item {We propose fog-based opportunistic scheduling algorithms based on vehicular trip plans {for map data downloading} in city-wide vehicular networks. These dynamic schedulers determine the mode of transmission (short-range broadcast or long-range unicast) based on the available resources at fog devices to reduce the overall operating cost of the network. In addition, differential coding and hashing techniques for 3D point cloud data uploading at the vehicular level is also proposed to avoid data redundancy, and hence reduce the processing and computation load of roadside fog nodes.}
\item Utilizing empirical mobility traces and 3D LIDAR data of city streets, {we rigorously evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithms and system.} We have also implemented our system in a multi-robotic vehicle testbed for practical evaluation.
\end{enumerate}
The paper is organized as follows. Section II {describes our proposed information dissemination system at the fog layer}. In Section III, {we formally define the information dissemination problem and discuss the downloading and uploading operations of 3D road map data.} Section IV {presents motivating examples on {utilizing} index coding {for vehicular data exchange, and derives the optimal index coding scheme for single road junction as well as the city-wide multi-junction scenario.} {The fog-based opportunistic scheduling problem is tackled in Section V, and} {the techniques for efficient uploading of 3D LIDAR point cloud data from vehicles is covered in Section VI.} {Sections VII to VIII {present experimental and simulation results obtained based on our multi-robotic vehicle testbed and empirical mobility traces, respectively.} Finally, Section IX concludes this paper.
\section{Index Coding for Local Broadcast at {RSU Fog Nodes}} \label{sec:index}
To reduce latency in the presence of numerous intelligent vehicles, the local broadcast operations at RSU {fog nodes} can be improved by index coding. Index coding is a variant of network coding \cite{ElRouayheb2010c,Bar-Yossef2011} applied to wireless communications. Nearby vehicles will likely receive common information by local broadcast, which also possess certain prior information (i.e., information received from other RSU fog nodes at previously traversed road segments). We show that smart data dissemination considering prior information can significantly reduce the number of broadcast transmissions needed.
This section only considers the dissemination of static data, without capacity constraint. In the next section, we will develop heuristics for the settings with capacity constraint and dynamic data. It is assumed that the local broadcast transmissions incur a very low cost, which is negligible.
\subsection{Motivating Examples}
We first present some motivating examples of index coding. The basic idea of using index coding to optimize transmissions at RSU fog nodes is by mixing the transmitted packets with prior information previously received.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figs/Figure4.pdf}
\caption{\small An example of index coding for map data dissemination with two opposite traveling intelligent vehicles.}\label{fig:2way}
\end{figure}
{\bf Example 1}:
We illustrate a simple example using index coding for map data dissemination in Fig.~\ref{fig:2way}. There are two intelligent vehicles traveling on opposite directions. Consider the static map data for two road segments, denoted by $m_1$ and $m_2$ in bit string representation. Both vehicles are now within the transmission range of a common RSU fog node and had obtained map data $m_1$ and $m_2$ correspondingly, before entering their respective road segments. The common RSU fog node can broadcast a coded packet $m_1{\oplus}m_2$, where $\oplus$ is a bitwise XOR operator, thereby, reducing the number of broadcast transmissions. To obtain the required map data, the vehicles can decode using the received data as follows: $m_1{\oplus}(m_1{\oplus}m_2) = m_2$ and $m_2{\oplus}(m_1{\oplus}m_2) = m_1$.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure5.pdf}
\caption{\small A four-way junction with three vehicles: $c_1$ with direction $m_1{\to}m_3$, $c_2$ with direction $m_2{\to}m_1$, and $c_3$ with direction $m_3{\to}m_1$.}\label{fig:junc}
\end{figure}
\smallskip
{\bf Example 2}:
We next consider an example of index coding for a four-way junction in Fig.~\ref{fig:junc}. There are three vehicles: $c_1$ moving from $m_1$ to $m_3$, $c_2$ moving from $m_2$ to $m_1$, and $c_3$ moving from $m_3$ to $m_2$. Note that we use $m_i$ to denote road segment $i$ as well as the map data of road $i$ for notation simplicity here. In this case, the RSU fog node only needs to broadcast two packets: $m_1\oplus m_3$ and $m_2\oplus m_1$. $c_1$ can obtain $m_3 =m_1{\oplus}(m_1{\oplus}m_3)$, $c_2$ can obtain $m_1 =m_2{\oplus}(m_2{\oplus}m_1)$, and $c_3$ can obtain $m_2 =m_3{\oplus}(m_2{\oplus}m_1)\oplus (m_1{\oplus}m_3)$.
\medskip
In the preceding examples, the vehicles are able to decode the required packets by bitwise XOR operation $\oplus$. Note that the bitwise XOR operator is a linear operator over the binary number field. Applying index coding in these scenarios can improve network throughput and reduce latency. {One mild drawback is that it generates overheads in the network. However, since only binary-coded packets are employed in our scheme, it can still be solved within polynomial time.} {The reader is referred to Section \ref{OHAnalysis} for the overall delay analysis based on the processing overheads and transmission delay in the proposed index coding scheme.}
\subsection{Optimal Index Coding for Single Junction}
In this section, we derive the general theories for constructing index coding schemes for a road network with a-priori trip plans of vehicles. We only consider linear index coding, i.e., the coding/decoding schemes only rely on bitwise XOR operator. In linear index coding, the encoding/decoding operations can sometimes be interpreted as unions and complemented intersections on a set of packets\footnote{For example, coding by $m_1\oplus m_3$ can be interpreted as union $m_1\cup m_3$, whereas decoding by $(m_1\oplus m_3) \oplus m_1 = m_3$ can be can be interpreted as complemented intersection $(m_1\cup m_3) \cap (m_1\cup m_3 \backslash m_1) = m_3$.}.
In general, a good index coding scheme for multiple junctions is a hard problem, because it is related to the multi-source network coding problem, which is an open problem \cite{ElRouayheb2010c,Bar-Yossef2011}. Instead, we focus on one single junction first, and then extend the single-junction scheme as a heuristic for multiple junctions. In fact, under the assumption of `single meeting' as depicted in the next subsection, this is an optimal solution. Note that we ignore the download capacity in this section, which will be considered in the general schemes in the next section.
To construct a good index coding scheme, we consider a particular RSU fog node at a single $n$-way junction, labeled as $r \in {\cal R}$. We represent the demands for map data by a directed graph (called {\em demand graph}) ${\cal D}_r$ with a set of $n$ nodes representing the set of connected road segments to $r$. Denote the map data for the ${k}$-th road segment by $m_{k}$, where $k \in \{1,...,n\}$. There is a directed edge $(m_{k_1}{\to}m_{k_2})$ in ${\cal D}_r$, if there is a vehicle moving from the ${k_1}$-th road segment to the ${k_2}$-th road segment, which needs to obtain $m_{k_2}$, given $m_{k_1}$ as prior information. The destination nodes in ${\cal D}_r$ (i.e., those with at least one in-coming directed edge) are called the {\em demanded packets}. Two examples of ${\cal D}_r$ for a four-way junction are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:4way}.
The uncoded packets $\{m_1,...,m_n\}$ are called {\em source packets}. A packet consists of $K$ source packets combined by bitwise XOR operator is called a {\em $K$-ary coded packets}. For example, $m_2{\oplus}m_1$ is a binary-coded packet. An index coding scheme, denoted by ${\cal I}$, is a set of coded or source packets. For convenience of analysis, we assume that each packet of map data has a uniform size. If packets have different sizes, padding will be used.
Given a set of demanded packets, we aim to construct an optimal index coding scheme using the minimal number of transmitted packets that can be decoded into the required information (i.e., destination nodes in ${\cal D}_r$). Note that the construction of a decodable index coding scheme is similar to a generalization of the set cover problem. Each coded packet is a cover, while the demanded packets are items to be covered by some coded packets. The decodability of coded packets requires that a combination of complemented intersections (i.e., XOR operations) of the received coded packets can generate the demanded packets.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:2-coded}
Given the demand graph ${\cal D}_r$, an optimal index coding scheme ${\cal I}$ can be constructed using source packets and binary-coded packets. In particular, each demand $(m_{k_1}{\to}m_{k_2})$ in ${\cal D}_r$ can be decoded by one of the following ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A source packet (i.e., $m_{k_2} \in {\cal I}$).
\item Or a sequence of connected binary coded packets, say $\{m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_r}, m_{k_r}{\oplus}m_{k_{r-1}}, ..., m_{k_3}{\oplus}m_{k_2}\} \subseteq {\cal I}$, such that the required packet can be decoded by $m_{k_1}$ and such a sequence of binary-coded packets.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
See two examples of optimal index coding schemes in Fig.~\ref{fig:4way}, where an arrow represents a demand, and a dashed enclosure represents a coded or source packet.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering \vspace{-5pt}
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{figs/Figure6.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption{\small Two examples of demand graph ${\cal D}_r$ and their optimal index coding schemes for a four-way junction. (a) Four vehicles with directions: $(m_1{\to}m_3)$, $(m_3{\to}m_2)$, $(m_2{\to}m_1), (m_2{\to}m_4)$, and an optimal index coding scheme is $\{m_1{\oplus}m_2, m_1{\oplus}m_3, m_4\}$. (b) Four vehicles with directions: $(m_1{\to}m_3)$, $(m_3{\to}m_1)$, $(m_2{\to}m_4)$, $(m_4{\to}m_2)$, and an optimal index coding scheme is $\{m_1{\oplus}m_3, m_2{\oplus}m_4\}$. }\label{fig:4way}
\end{figure}
By Theorem~\ref{thm:2-coded}, it suffices to consider binary-coded packets. We next present a polynomial-time algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} to identify the optimal index coding scheme, which first adds any demand $(m_{k_1}{\to}m_{k_2})$ as a coded packet, and then removes redundant packets in any cycles of coded packets, while ensuring the decodability of demanded packets.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{\small {\sf 1J-IdxCd}$[{\cal D}_r]$}
{\scriptsize
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State ${\cal I} \leftarrow \varnothing$
\For {$(m_{k_1}{\to}m_{k_2}) \in {\cal D}_r$}
\State ${\cal I} \leftarrow {\cal I} \cup \{ m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_2} \}$
\LeftComment{{\em Flag ${\sf lock}_{{k_1},{k_2}}$ prevents $m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_2}$ to be removed from ${\cal I}$}}
\State ${\sf lock}({k_1},{k_2}) \leftarrow {\sf False}$
\EndFor
\While{there exists cycle $\{m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_2}, m_{k_2}{\oplus}m_{k_3}$ $..., m_{k_r}{\oplus}m_{k_1}\} \subseteq {\cal I}$}
\For {$m_{k_t}{\oplus}m_{k_{t+1}} \in \{m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_2}, m_{k_2}{\oplus}m_{k_3}$ $..., m_{k_r}{\oplus}m_{k_1}\} $}
\If {${\sf lock}({k_t},{k_{t+1}}) = {\sf False}$}
\State ${\cal I} \leftarrow {\cal I} \backslash \{ m_{k_t}{\oplus}m_{k_{t+1}} \}$
\For {$(m_{k'_1}{\to}m_{k'_2}) \in {\cal D}_r$}
\If {there exists no path $\{m_{k'_1}{\oplus}m_{k'_r}, ..., m_{k'_3}{\oplus}m_{k'_2}\}$ \\
\quad \qquad \qquad $ \subseteq {\cal I} \backslash \{ m_{k'_1}{\oplus}m_{k'_{2}} \}$}
\State ${\sf lock}({k'_1},{k'_2}) \leftarrow {\sf True}$
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndWhile
\State \Return ${\cal I}$
\end{algorithmic}
}
\label{alg:1JIdxCd}
\end{algorithm}
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:1JIdxCdAlgo}
Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} produces an optimal index coding scheme for a single junction.
\end{theorem}
{Let us apply Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} to the example in Fig. \ref{fig:4way}(a). The initial index coding scheme is ${\cal I} \leftarrow \{(m_1\oplus m_2), (m_2\oplus m_3),(m_3\oplus m_1),(m_2\oplus m_4)\}$ and their corresponding locks, {\sf lock}($k_1,k_2$) are set to {\sf False}. These are defined by lines 2--5. Lines 6--18 remove the redundant and unnecessary coded packets. Coded packet $(m_2\oplus m_4)$ will be the first to be removed since {\sf lock}(2,4) is {\sf False} and there is no cycle that includes it. On the other hand, the combination of the coded packets $\{(m_1\oplus m_2), (m_2\oplus m_3),(m_3\oplus m_1)\}$ forms a cycle. Any one of the three coded packets can be removed since all their corresponding locks are false. For instance, we remove $(m_2\oplus m_3)$, then the locks {\sf lock}(1,2) and {\sf lock}(1,3) become {\sf True}. Therefore, Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} returns the final index coding scheme as ${\cal I} \leftarrow \{(m_1\oplus m_2), (m_3\oplus m_1)\}$.}
Note that Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} produces an index coding scheme with coded packets only. {\sf 1J-IdxCd} can be improved by replacing some coded packets by source packets, because the source packets are immediately decodable. One can replace any binary-coded packet that is only used to produce just one demanded packet by the corresponding source packet, although the size of ${\cal I}$ will remain the same. {For the example in Fig. \ref{fig:4way}(a), we add the source packet $m_4$ to the index coding scheme ${\cal I}$, making the optimal index coding scheme as ${\cal I} = \{m_1 \oplus m_2, m_1 \oplus m_3, m_4\}$.}
The reader is referred to the Appendix in \cite{Ho2019} for the proofs of Theorems 1 and 2.
\subsection{Extension for Multiple Junctions}
We next present an extension for multiple junctions. The basic idea is to adopt {\sf 1J-IdxCd} as a basis for multiple junctions. We assume that all trip plans, $\{{\sf P}^c\}_ {c \in{\cal C}}$, are given a-priori. We define a {\em meeting relation graph} among the vehicles by ${\cal G}_{\rm meet} = ({\cal N}_{\rm meet}, {\cal E}_{\rm meet})$, where the set of nodes ${\cal N}_{\rm meet}$ are subsets of vehicles $( \subseteq {\cal C})$ having intersected trip plans, and the set of directed edges ${\cal E}_{\rm meet}$ are the temporal ordering between meetings with a common vehicle. Namely,
\begin{align}
{\cal N}_{\rm meet} \triangleq & \Big\{ (c_1,...,c_r) \subseteq {\cal C} \mid \exists v \in \bigcap_{i=1}^r {\sf P}^{c_i} \mbox{\ and\ } {\sf t}^{c_1}_v = ...= {\sf t}^{c_r}_v \Big\} \\
{\cal E}_{\rm meet} \triangleq &\Big\{ (c_1,c_2,...,c_r) \to (c_1,c'_2,...,c'_s) \in {\cal N}_{\rm meet} \times {\cal N}_{\rm meet} \notag\\ & \qquad \mid \exists v_1 \in \bigcap_{i=1}^r {\sf P}^{c_i} \mbox{\ and\ }
\exists v_2 \in \bigcap_{i=1}^s {\sf P}^{c'_i} \mbox{\ and\ } {\sf t}^{c_1}_{v_1} < {\sf t}^{c_1}_{v_2} \Big\}
\end{align}
If two vehicles meet in their trip plans, then there are two cases: (1) traveling in different directions (e.g., meeting at a junction), or (2) traveling along with each other. Case (1) is utilized in index coding to broadcast mixed information (via bitwise XOR) to vehicles, and then the vehicles decode the mixed information using different prior information they received previously. However, there will be no impact by index coding for case (2).
\medskip
\begin{assumption}({\bf Single Meeting})
We assume that the trip plans of every pair of vehicles intersect at most {\em once}, namely, if they meet and depart, then they will never meet again. In practice, if the autonomous vehicles always follow the shortest paths and employ deterministic tie-breaking for the paths of equal distance, then the meeting with another autonomous vehicles of different source or destination is only at most once. Otherwise, this will contradict to the property of shortest paths. Since they meet at most once, each meeting event can be uniquely identified as a node in ${\cal N}_{\rm meet}$, and ${\cal G}_{\rm meet}$ is also a directed acyclic graph.
\end{assumption}
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:multijunc}
If the single meeting assumption (Assumption 1) holds, then applying Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} independently at each junction will produce an optimal index coding scheme for multiple junctions.
\end{theorem}
\medskip
The reader is referred to the Appendix in \cite{Ho2019} for the proof of Theorem 3. Note that even if the vehicles meet more than once, Theorem~\ref{thm:multijunc} still provides a heuristic to construct a good index coding scheme for multiple junctions with limited meetings among vehicles.
\section{{Robotic Testbed Evaluation}} \label{sec:testbed}
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{figs/Figure9.pdf} \vspace{-5pt}
\caption{\small (a) Robotic vehicles in (b) a single 4-way road junction scenario. (c) A moving object is introduced on Road B}\label{fig:Wifibot_City} \vspace{-5pt}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7, angle=0]{figs/Figure10.pdf}
\caption
{\small The 3D point cloud road map data captured by (a) car A, (b) car B and (c) the XOR-ed result of maps A and B.}\label{fig:3DPCDRepresentations}
\end{figure*}
{We implemented the single junction scenario and evaluated our proposed system in a practical testbed. In this set-up, as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}, two cases are studied:}
\begin{itemize}
\item {{\em Scenario 1}: Car A on Road A intends to turn into Road B with Car B. There is no time-sensitive data.}
\item {{\em Scenario 2}: Similar to scenario 1, but there is a moving object in front of Car B on Road B.}
\end{itemize}
{The robotic vehicles used in the testbed are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}(a). They represent the intelligent vehicles equipped with suite of sensors, including a Kinect camera {and LIDAR} for capturing its environment's 3D point cloud data and proximity sensors for collision detection. The experimental set-up is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}(b). The cardboard boxes represent buildings (see Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}). The 3D point cloud data is compressed to a 1 cm$^3$ resolution to achieve at least a 60$\%$ compression rate before being transmitted to the RSU fog node. Such Octree resolution offers a significant compression rate while maintaining an accurate representation of the sensed environment. The RSU fog node and robotic vehicles exchange information by using the IEEE 802.11 standard (WiFi).}
{In Scenario 1, at every five seconds, both vehicles captured their respective environment in form of 3D point cloud data, and performed Octree compression. The data are then transmitted to the RSU fog node along with their requests of road map data. Upon reception, the RSU fog node performs the {encoding $m_A$ $\oplus$ $m_B$, where $m_i$ is the map data for road segment $i$}, and broadcasts the encoded packets. The 3D point cloud data perceived by individual vehicle and the corresponding encoded {3D point cloud data} are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:3DPCDRepresentations}. After receiving the encoded packets ($m_A$ $\oplus$ $m_B$), car A decodes it via ($m_A$ $\oplus$ $m_B$) $\oplus$ $m_A$ to obtain its desired information regarding road segment B. Car B does the same to acquire information regarding road segment A. Since both road segments have no obstacles detected, each vehicle immediately turns to its desired road without the need of reducing its speed.}
{In Scenario 2, a small programmable mobile robot is added in front of car B to introduce a dynamic object to the environment. Such set-up is depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}(b). In order to detect obstacles that present on the road, we integrated a map filter for object extraction after the decoding process, and we search for the blocked information on the ground to determine the location of the object. Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}(c) illustrates the detected dynamic data by car A after map filtering and object detection. From the gathered information, car A reduces its speed and waits until the small robot moves past the junction before turning into Road B.}
{In summary, our robotic testbed manages to achieve cooperative autonomous driving through transmitting road map data between the two robot vehicles. It also experimentally demonstrates that an efficient 3D road map data dissemination based on the proposed index coding scheme is feasible in practice, especially when dealing with moving dynamic objects on road.}
\section{Simulation Studies} \label{sec:sim}
{In the previous section, we have demonstrated the feasibility of employing index coding in the dissemination of road segment data to nearby vehicles at a road junction. In this section, we present further evaluation of our proposed system by simulation studies using real-world 3D point cloud data of city streets and GPS mobility traces of vehicles.} We consider both scenarios of single and multiple road junctions for analyzing the effectiveness of the proposed schemes.
\subsection{Local Broadcast by Index Coding for Single Junction} \label{sec:SingJunc}
First, we consider the single-junction scenario. The simulation set-up is described as follows.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Simulation Set-up}
To study the performance on realistic 3D point cloud data, we consider the 3D point cloud static map data of a real-world junction depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata} (a), which is obtained by Ford Research campus in downtown Dearborn, Michigan \cite{ford}. It is partitioned into four separate views as perceived by the vehicles in each road segment connecting to the junction. In the dissemination process, the 3D point cloud data is compressed using Octree compression \cite{Schnabel2006}. The sizes of compressed 3D point cloud data packets of each road segment and binary-coded packets are shown in Table \ref{Tab:MapDataAtt}.
\begin{table}[htb!]
\caption{\small Sizes of compressed 3D point cloud data for the static map data shown in Fig. 9 (a).} \label{Tab:MapDataAtt}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\hline\hline
\centering Map Data & Number of Points & Data Size (MB) \\
\hline
\centering $m_1$ & 104,255 & 5.838 \\
\centering $m_2$ & 95,537 & 5.254 \\
\centering $m_3$ & 69,200 & 2.763 \\
\centering $m_4$ & 73,168 & 3.184 \\
\centering $m_1$$\oplus$$m_2$ & 63,607 & 2.126 \\
\centering $m_1$$\oplus$$m_3$ & 65,920 & 2.812 \\
\centering $m_1$$\oplus$$m_4$ & 61,738 & 2.630 \\
\centering $m_2$$\oplus$$m_3$ & 67,806 & 2.631 \\
\centering $m_2$$\oplus$$m_4$ & 66,072 & 2.363 \\
\centering $m_3$$\oplus$$m_4$ & 64,025 & 2.126 \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
To incorporate realistic vehicle mobility patterns, we consider the dataset of Beijing taxi GPS mobility traces \cite{Li2013} to simulate the mobility traces of autonomous vehicles at a junction. The Beijing taxi dataset contains seven days of GPS mobility traces (including longitude and latitude positions), timestamps of recorded positions, and vehicle IDs of 28,590 taxis traveling in Beijing City. Beijing City resembles a grid network geographically, consisting of mostly four-way junctions. In particular, we consider the junction between the {\em East 3rd Ring Road Middle} and {\em Jianguo Road}, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(b). There are 8,663 taxis on average traversing it daily. Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(b) depicts the empirical GPS mobility traces of 12 taxis. We assume that the RSU fog node is deployed near the junction center with a transmission range of 200 meters.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Evaluation of Download Operations}
To perform the download operations, a RSU fog node $r$ first scans the nearby vehicles in every sampling time $T_{\rm S}$. Once the vehicles reach within the proximity of $r$, it determines the vehicles' map data demands and constructs the demand graph ${\cal D}_r$. Next, RSU fog node $r$ applies {\sf 1J-IdxCd}$[{\cal D}_r]$ to perform local broadcast based on index coding.
\iffalse
\begin{equation}
{\bf D}_{t=k{T_{\rm S}}} =
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & \delta_{12}\alpha_{12} & \*\delta_{13}\alpha_{13} & \delta_{14}\alpha_{14} \\
\delta_{21}\alpha_{21} & 0 & \delta_{23}\alpha_{23} & \delta_{24}\alpha_{24} \\
\delta_{31}\alpha_{31} & \delta_{32}\alpha_{32} & 0 & \delta_{34}\alpha_{34} \\
\delta_{41}\alpha_{41} & \delta_{42}\alpha_{42} & \delta_{43}\alpha_{43} & 0 \\
\end{bmatrix}
\label{Eq D}
\end{equation}
where $k$ = 0,1,2,... and {$\delta_{ij},\alpha_{ij}$} $\in$ {\{0,1\}}. When $\delta_{ij}$ = 1, the vehicle on road segment $i$ wants to proceed to road segment $j$, otherwise $\delta_{ij}$ = 0. When $\alpha_{ij}$ = 1, the vehicle on road segment $i$ does not have the map data of road segment $j$, otherwise $\alpha_{ij}$ = 0. The main diagonal is zero since U-turning vehicles do not require the map data where it is currently on.
\fi
To study the performance of {\sf 1J-IdxCd}$[{\cal D}_r]$, we consider two benchmarks:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Random Broadcast ({\sf Rand}): It broadcasts all source packets in a random fashion.
\item Index Coding with Prior Information ({\sf 1J-IdxCd-PI}): It explores the scenario that some vehicles may have extra prior knowledge of a certain road segment. For example, a particular road segment is popular among all vehicles. The map data is likely to be pre-downloaded to the vehicles in advance.
\end{enumerate}
The evaluation results are depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:WeekTrans_3scheme}, which shows the daily total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted packets for {\sf Rand} and {\sf 1J-IdxCd} for seven days based on GPS mobility traces. The sizes of each transmitted packets are set according to Table~\ref{Tab:MapDataAtt}.
\iffalse
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6, angle=0]{figs/DynamicMapUpdate.pdf} \vspace{-20pt}
\caption{\small Daily total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted packets for {\sf Rand} and {\sf 1J-IdxCd} for seven days based on GPS mobility traces.}\label{fig:DynamicMapUpdate}
\end{figure}
\fi
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6, angle=0]{figs/Figure12.pdf}
\caption{\small Daily total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted packets for {\sf Rand}, {\sf 1J-IdxCd}, {\sf 1J-IdxCd-PI}.}\label{fig:WeekTrans_3scheme}
\end{figure}
It is observed that {\sf 1J-IdxCd} can effectively reduce the total number of transmissions by around 500 transmissions less when compared to the benchmark {\sf Rand}. For downloading static data, the benchmark requires a number of 7.75 transmissions on average to satisfy all vehicles' demands as compared to {\sf 1J-IdxCd} that requires only 5.94 transmissions on average. The average daily sizes of transmitted data for random transmission is 12.18 GB while that for {\sf 1J-IdxCd} is only 10.24 GB. {\sf 1J-IdxCd} transmits 6.00 MB on average within a period of $T_{\rm S}$, while {\sf Rand} transmits 5.46 MB on average. Overall, employing {\sf 1J-IdxCd} enables higher data rate with the fewest number of transmissions.
Next, we evaluate the effectiveness with extra prior information. {\sf 1J-IdxCd-PI} considers extra prior information for road segment 2. In this case, {\sf 1J-IdxCd-PI} preforms like {\sf 1J-IdxCd}, but it assumes every vehicle already has map data of road segment 2, and performs index coding incorporating such prior information. We observe that the availability of extra prior information considerably reduces the number of transmissions, and thus the required bandwidth, transmitting 5.01 MB on average by 4.49 transmissions.
\subsection{Applying Index Coding to Multiple Junctions}
After evaluating the performance of single-junction index coding, we consider index coding for multiple junctions.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Simulation Set-up}
We selected 40 junctions in Beijing, as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(c), and use the corresponding GPS mobility traces of taxis traversing these junctions to simulate the mobility patterns. The simulation parameters are listed in Table~\ref{Tab:MJSimParam}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(c), we visualize the average mobility patterns of these 40 junctions by circles of different sizes. The bigger the circle, the more number of taxis traversed the respective junction.
\begin{table}[htb!]
\centering
\caption{Simulation Parameters for Multiple Junctions in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(c).}
\label{Tab:MJSimParam}
\vspace{-5pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
\hline\hline
\textbf{\centering Simulation Attribute/Parameter} & \textbf{Value} \\
\hline
Total area (in $\approx$ km$^2$) & 50 \\
Number of observed days & 7 \\
Number of road segments per junction & {4} \\
Number of RSUs & 40 \\
RSU transmission range (meters) & 200 \\
Total number of taxis & 24,845 \\
Daily average number of taxi trips & 79,012 \\
Hourly average number of taxis in each junction & 466 \\
Total number of recorded time each day (hrs) & 24 \\
Sampling time of GPS traces (mins) & 2 \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Evaluation Results}
Fig.~\ref{fig:RSUs40Results} depicts the average number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted data when {\sf 1J-IdxCd} is applied independently at the 40 junctions. Note that the number of visits is not directly proportional to the average number of transmissions. In particular, RSU fog nodes 19 and 24 have relatively low volume of visits, whereas RSU fog nodes 9 and 25 have a relatively high number. However, RSU fog node 19 has fewer number of transmissions than RSU fog node 24. This is because the vehicles in RSU 19 arrive more regularly than those at RSU 24, hence more significant performance gain can be found in terms of the number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted data by {\sf 1J-IdxCd}. A similar phenomenon is observed at the high-volume RSU fog node 25.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6, angle=0]{figs/Figure13.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Average total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted data for each of the 40 RSU fog nodes situated in Beijing.}\label{fig:RSUs40Results}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:RSUs40Hourly} shows the RSU fog nodes located on {\em West 2nd Ring Road} (i.e., RSUs 8, 10, 18, 22, 26) and depicts the hourly performance of each RSU. The average volume of visits through these road sections are similar. The curve labeled by `Avg' indicates the average value of the 40 RSU fog nodes over a day. We observe that the information dissemination by the RSU fog nodes increased starting from 08:00h, because the peak traffic hours occur at 08:00h. From midnight to 06:00h, the traffic is relatively low.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7, angle=0]{figs/Figure14.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Hourly average total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted data for each RSU fog nodes located on {\em West 2nd Ring Road}.}\label{fig:RSUs40Hourly}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scheduling over Multiple Junctions}
In this section, we evaluate the performance of the proposed scheduling schemes over the selected 40 junctions. We employ both the online ({\sf ONLSchd}) and offline ({\sf OFLSchd}) opportunistic scheduling schemes for disseminating map data to vehicles.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Applying the Opportunistic Scheduling}
We assign each RSU fog node the same download capacity (${\rm C}^{\downarrow}$). The performance of various scheduling schemes are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:GreedySchdResults}, under various download capacity (${\rm C}^{\downarrow}$) based on the GPS mobility traces of taxis traversing the 40 junctions in Beijing in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(c).
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{figs/Figure15.pdf} \vspace{-5pt}
\caption{\small Performance of various scheduling schemes against download capacity (${\rm C}^{\downarrow}$).}\label{fig:GreedySchdResults}
\end{figure}
We observe that the RSU fog nodes reach the download capacity at a much faster rate by {\sf Rand}, because {\sf Rand} broadcasts a large amount of data (equal to the sum of all source packets of map data in a trip per vehicle), as compared to the opportunistic scheduling schemes per sampling time. This leads to heavier load on the cellular network when {\sf Rand} is used in scenarios with low download capacity (${\rm C}^{\downarrow} \leq$ 700 MB). Although {\sf ONLSchd} reduces the required cellular transmissions, it is still evident that it exhibits the same effect during low download capacity, i.e., more cellular transmissions than local broadcast transmissions. For a given set of map data, increasing the local broadcast download capacity can reduce the need for cellular network transmissions. This presents a design trade-off for the network administrator to balance the loads between local broadcast and cellular unicast.
Among the three schemes, {\sf OFLSchd} employs considerably less cellular network bandwidth even when the local broadcast download capacity is low. It relies almost totally on local broadcast transmissions as the download capacity is over 700 MB. This is because all of the vehicles' trip plans are known in advance, thus, enabling the RSU fog nodes to schedule map data dissemination more efficiently, {and less rely on the cellular download of road map data.}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs/Figure16.pdf} \vspace{-5pt}
\caption
{\small Comparing the {\sf OFLSchd} and {\sf Rand} methods on the distance of pre-downloaded remote data to requesting vehicles.}\label{Fig:PreDown}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{Fig:PreDown} shows the distance (in terms of the number of blocks away) of pre-downloaded remote data to a requesting vehicle at an RSU fog node. Since {\sf OFLSchd} knows the planned trips of the vehicles, it reduces the number of transmissions required to satisfy all vehicles, while providing pre-downloaded remote data up to five blocks away (when the RSU fog node download capacity is $\geq$ 900 MB). For example, RSU fog node 14 can transmit road segment data from remote RSU fog nodes such as 1, 10, 17, 32, etc. Such amount of advanced data will allow a vehicle to update its planned trip and alter its route if necessary. On the other hand, {\sf Rand} can only deliver data up to an average of 1.66 RSU blocks away from the requesting RSU fog node.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Meeting Frequency of Vehicles}
Theorem~\ref{thm:multijunc} shows that applying Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} independently at each junction produces an optimal index coding scheme for multiple junctions, under the single meeting assumption. In this section, we empirically examine the meeting frequency of vehicles based on GPS mobility traces.
We define that a meeting occurs when the taxis' routes (according to GPS traces) are within 200 m of each other. Given an observation window during the day, these frequencies of meetings are stored in the adjacency matrix ${\bf TM}$, defined below in (\ref{Eq:TM}):
\begin{equation}
{\bf TM} = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & x_{1,2} & \cdots & x_{1,n-1}& x_{1,n} \\
x_{2,1} & 0 & \cdots & \vdots & x_{2,n}\\
\vdots & \vdots &\ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\
x_{n-1,1} & \cdots & \cdots & \ddots & x_{n-1,n} \\
x_{n,1} & x_{n,2} & \cdots & x_{n,n-1} & 0
\end{bmatrix}
\label{Eq:TM}
\end{equation}
where $x_{i,j} \in$ $\{0, 1, 2, ...\}$ is the number of {times that} vehicles $i$ and $j$ met and $x_{i,j} = x_{j,i}$. The observation window is equal to $t_{\rm stop} - t_{\rm start}$. In this case, $t_{\rm stop} - t_{\rm start}$ = 24 hours, having a 2-min sampling interval.
The results are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:FreqofTaxiMeetings}. Any two given taxis from the mobility traces only met each other once 86$\%$ of the time, while the remaining 14$\%$ met more than once. From Fig.~\ref{fig:FreqofTaxiMeetings}, we know that any pair of taxis met at most once within a moderate time window. This shows limited meetings among vehicles with different trips in a city in practice. Hence, applying Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} independently at each junction still provides a heuristic to construct a good index coding scheme for a city-wide multiple junction scenario.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure17.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Meeting frequency between any pair of taxis.}\label{fig:FreqofTaxiMeetings}
\end{figure}
Finally, we {study} the scenarios that {the majority of the number} of meetings in the adjacency matrix {\bf TM} is more than one (i.e., $x_{i,j} \ge 2$). Note that the proposed scheme produces the best performance when $x_{i,j}$ = 1. The simulation results for 3,000 runs are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:SimFreqofTaxiMeetings}. We also compare the performance with a benchmark scheme, {\sf OnDemand} \cite{ali2017efficient}, which transmits the source packets of the most demanded road segment first, and then transmits binary-coded packets of the most demanded road segment data until all demands are satisfied.
We observe that as the number of meetings between any pair of vehicles increases, the total number of transmissions increases in all scheduling schemes (see the top figure of Fig.~\ref{fig:SimFreqofTaxiMeetings}). We note that both {\sf Rand} and {\sf OnDemand}, having equal number of transmissions, increase at a higher rate than {\sf 1J-IdxCd}. However, {\sf OnDemand} transmits fewer data than {\sf Rand} to satisfy all requesting vehicles. Overall, considering both performance metrics, {\sf 1J-IdxCd} outperforms the two benchmarks in the multiple junction scenario.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.1]{figs/Figure18.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Comparison of the three schemes in terms of the total number of transmissions (top) and total sizes of transmitted data (bottom) against the meeting frequencies between any pair of vehicles.}\label{fig:SimFreqofTaxiMeetings}
\end{figure}
\subsection{{Processing Overhead Analysis}} \label{OHAnalysis}
{We analyze in this subsection the processing overheads of the proposed index coding algorithm based on the overall data dissemination delay (including both the processing/encoding delay and transmission delay) from the RSU to the nearby vehicles. For the {\sf Rand} method, the overall delay only contains the transmission delay, while the {\sf 1J-IdxCd} scheme includes also the processing delay due to the XOR encoding of relevant road map data, which is proportional to the number of encoded packets generated. To compute for the transmission delay, we assume that the packet size is 1024 bytes and the data rate is 6 Mbps. On the other hand, the encoding processing delay is assumed to be fixed. For a given RSU fog node, the overall delay is computed every sampling time $T_S$ = 2 min.}
{Given a processing delay of 1 ms, Fig. \ref{fig:RSUOverallDelay} illustrates the overall delay averaged over seven days for RSUs 8, 10, 18, 22, and 26. {These five RSU fog nodes have a daily average of 8,100 taxis passing through, and there are 11--12 taxis connected to each RSU per $T_S$ on average.} We can observe that even if there is an additional processing time introduced by the {\sf 1J-IdxCd} method, its daily average overall delay is still less than that of the {\sf Rand} method by about 34\%. This is because the {\sf 1J-IdxCd} scheme has a much shorter transmission delay than the {\sf Rand} method by reducing the total number of required packets and the number of road segments at each intersection is limited. }
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure19.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Average overall delay of each RSU fog node under the two transmission schemes.}\label{fig:RSUOverallDelay}
\end{figure}
\section{Formulation and Definitions} \label{sec:model}
In this section, we formally define the 3D road map data dissemination problem for intelligent vehicles. Consider a set of discrete time slots $t \in {\cal T}$, where $|{\cal T}|=T$, and a network of roads that is represented by graph ${\cal G}=({\cal N}, {\cal E})$, where each node $v \in {\cal N}$ represents a junction and each undirected edge $e \in {\cal E}$ represents a road segment. For each edge $e$ at time $t$, a set of map data is associated and denoted by $m_e(t)$. $m_e(t)$ consists of both static data set $m^{\sf s}_e $ and dynamic data set $m^{\sf d}_e(t)$, such that $m_e(t) = m^{\sf s}_e \cup m^{\sf d}_e(t)$. We consider an abstract representation, without specifying the elements in $m_e(t)$. That is, one may consider an element in $m_e(t)$ as a map data file. The dynamic data may be generated from roadside sensors, and perception from other vehicles. For practicality, we consider the dynamic data within a certain time window $\tau$ from the current time $t$, namely $m^{\sf d}_e(t') $ where $t' \in [t- \tau, t]$.
There is a set of vehicles ${\cal C}$ where each vehicle $c \in {\cal C}$ is associated with a trip plan ${\sf P}^{c}$, which is a path in ${\cal G}$. We represent ${\sf P}^{c}$ by a set of edges in ${\cal E}$, or a sequence of nodes in ${\cal N}$. Let the time of vehicle $c$ entering edge (i.e., road segment) $e \in {\sf P}^{c}$ be ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$, and the time of entering node (i.e., junction) $v \in {\sf P}^{c}$ be ${\sf t}^{c}_{v}$.
\subsection{Downloading}
Each vehicle $c \in {\cal C}$ downloads both static data $m^{\sf s}_e $ before ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$, and dynamic data $m^{\sf d}_e(t')$, for some $t' \in [{\sf t}^{c}_{e} - \tau, {\sf t}^{c}_{e}]$, at some time between $t'$ and ${\sf t}^{c}_{e}$. The options for downloading are either using short-range broadcast transmissions at RSUs, or unicast transmissions via cellular networks. We assume that LTE cellular network transmissions have much larger capacity, whereas short-range broadcast transmissions are limited by local spectrum allocation. On the other hand, the short-range broadcast transmissions incur no or very low costs, whereas cellular network transmissions incur higher costs.
We assume that RSU fog nodes are only located at a subset of nodes in ${\cal G}$, denoted by ${\cal R} \subseteq {\cal N}$. Denote the set of edges connecting to RSU fog node $r \in {\cal R}$ by ${\cal E}_r \subseteq {\cal E}$. A vehicle $c$ can receive data from $r$, when entering edge $e \in {\cal E}_r$. At each RSU fog node $r \in {\cal R}$, there is a download capacity of ${\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r$ at $r$, whereas there is no capacity limit via cellular networks.
Let the data transmitted by RSU fog node $r$ using short-range broadcast at time $t$ be $x_r(t)$. A vehicle $c$ can also download data via cellular networks, which is denoted by $y^{c}(t)$. At the time $t$, let $X^{c}(t)$ be the union of all data that $c$ has received from the visited RSU fog nodes on its path before time $t$, namely,
\begin{equation}
X^{c}(t) \triangleq \bigcup _{e \in {\sf P}^{c} \wedge e \in {\cal E}_r \wedge {\sf t}^{c}_{e} \le t} \Big\{x_r({\sf t}^{c}_{e})\Big\}
\end{equation}
Also, let $Y^{c}(t)$ be the union of data that $c$ has received from cellular network transmissions before time $t$, namely,
\begin{equation}
Y^{c}(t) \triangleq \bigcup _{t'\le t } \Big\{y^{c}(t')\Big\}
\end{equation}
We denote a decoding function by ${\sf Dec}[\cdot]$, which decodes all the downloaded data to a set of map data, $M^{c}(t) = {\sf Dec}[X^{c}(t), Y^{c}(t)]$.
We aim to minimize the number of cellular network transmissions, subject to the constraints of timely delivery of static and dynamic data:
\begin{align}
& \min_{\{x_r(t), y^{c}(t)\mid t \in {\cal T}, c \in {\cal C}, r \in {\cal R} \}} \sum_{c \in {\cal C}}\big|Y^{c}(T)\big|\\
& \mbox{subject to\ } |x_r(t)| \le {\rm C}^{\downarrow}_r,\ \mbox{for all } t \in {\cal T}, r \in {\cal R}, \label{cons:dlcapacity} \\
& \ \qquad \qquad m^{\sf s}_e \in M^{c}({\sf t}^{c}_{e}), \ \mbox{for all } c \in {\cal C}, e \in {\sf P}^{c}, \label{cons:stdata}\\
& \ \qquad \qquad m^{\sf d}_e(t) \in M^{c}({\sf t}^{c}_{e}), \ \mbox{for all } c \in {\cal C}, e \in {\sf P}^{c}, \notag \\
& \ \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad \mbox{for some } t \in [{\sf t}^{c}_{e} - \tau, {\sf t}^{c}_{e}]. \label{cons:dydata}
\end{align}
In this problem, we assume that the trip plans of all vehicles are given a-priori. However, the online version is also discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:schedule}.
Cons.~\raf{cons:dlcapacity} represents the capacity constraint of local broadcast, whereas Cons.~\raf{cons:stdata} and Cons.~\raf{cons:dydata} represent the download constraint of static data and dynamic data, respectively.
\subsection{Uploading}
The previous section considers downloading map data from fog units (e.g., RSUs and base stations). In practice, intelligent vehicles are equipped with various sensors (e.g., LIDAR, RADAR, camera, inertial measurement unit (IMU), GPS unit, etc.), whose data can be uploaded to LCD via RSUs or base stations for sharing with other vehicles.
We consider the uploading of processed 3D LIDAR point cloud data in this paper, in which the operations can be optimized by uploading hash files of the perception data and differentially coded data to reduce the redundant data load to the network, as described in Sec.~\ref{sec:octree}.
\section{Index Coding for Local Broadcast at {RSU Fog Nodes}} \label{sec:index}
To reduce latency in the presence of numerous intelligent vehicles, the local broadcast operations at RSU {fog nodes} can be improved by index coding. Index coding is a variant of network coding \cite{ElRouayheb2010c,Bar-Yossef2011} applied to wireless communications. Nearby vehicles will likely receive common information by local broadcast, which also possess certain prior information (i.e., information received from other RSU fog nodes at previously traversed road segments). We show that smart data dissemination considering prior information can significantly reduce the number of broadcast transmissions needed.
This section only considers the dissemination of static data, without capacity constraint. In the next section, we will develop heuristics for the settings with capacity constraint and dynamic data. It is assumed that the local broadcast transmissions incur a very low cost, which is negligible.
\subsection{Motivating Examples}
We first present some motivating examples of index coding. The basic idea of using index coding to optimize transmissions at RSU fog nodes is by mixing the transmitted packets with prior information previously received.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figs/Figure4.pdf}
\caption{\small An example of index coding for map data dissemination with two opposite traveling intelligent vehicles.}\label{fig:2way}
\end{figure}
{\bf Example 1}:
We illustrate a simple example using index coding for map data dissemination in Fig.~\ref{fig:2way}. There are two intelligent vehicles traveling on opposite directions. Consider the static map data for two road segments, denoted by $m_1$ and $m_2$ in bit string representation. Both vehicles are now within the transmission range of a common RSU fog node and had obtained map data $m_1$ and $m_2$ correspondingly, before entering their respective road segments. The common RSU fog node can broadcast a coded packet $m_1{\oplus}m_2$, where $\oplus$ is a bitwise XOR operator, thereby, reducing the number of broadcast transmissions. To obtain the required map data, the vehicles can decode using the received data as follows: $m_1{\oplus}(m_1{\oplus}m_2) = m_2$ and $m_2{\oplus}(m_1{\oplus}m_2) = m_1$.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure5.pdf}
\caption{\small A four-way junction with three vehicles: $c_1$ with direction $m_1{\to}m_3$, $c_2$ with direction $m_2{\to}m_1$, and $c_3$ with direction $m_3{\to}m_1$.}\label{fig:junc}
\end{figure}
\smallskip
{\bf Example 2}:
We next consider an example of index coding for a four-way junction in Fig.~\ref{fig:junc}. There are three vehicles: $c_1$ moving from $m_1$ to $m_3$, $c_2$ moving from $m_2$ to $m_1$, and $c_3$ moving from $m_3$ to $m_2$. Note that we use $m_i$ to denote road segment $i$ as well as the map data of road $i$ for notation simplicity here. In this case, the RSU fog node only needs to broadcast two packets: $m_1\oplus m_3$ and $m_2\oplus m_1$. $c_1$ can obtain $m_3 =m_1{\oplus}(m_1{\oplus}m_3)$, $c_2$ can obtain $m_1 =m_2{\oplus}(m_2{\oplus}m_1)$, and $c_3$ can obtain $m_2 =m_3{\oplus}(m_2{\oplus}m_1)\oplus (m_1{\oplus}m_3)$.
\medskip
In the preceding examples, the vehicles are able to decode the required packets by bitwise XOR operation $\oplus$. Note that the bitwise XOR operator is a linear operator over the binary number field. Applying index coding in these scenarios can improve network throughput and reduce latency. {One mild drawback is that it generates overheads in the network. However, since only binary-coded packets are employed in our scheme, it can still be solved within polynomial time.} {The reader is referred to Section \ref{OHAnalysis} for the overall delay analysis based on the processing overheads and transmission delay in the proposed index coding scheme.}
\subsection{Optimal Index Coding for Single Junction}
In this section, we derive the general theories for constructing index coding schemes for a road network with a-priori trip plans of vehicles. We only consider linear index coding, i.e., the coding/decoding schemes only rely on bitwise XOR operator. In linear index coding, the encoding/decoding operations can sometimes be interpreted as unions and complemented intersections on a set of packets\footnote{For example, coding by $m_1\oplus m_3$ can be interpreted as union $m_1\cup m_3$, whereas decoding by $(m_1\oplus m_3) \oplus m_1 = m_3$ can be can be interpreted as complemented intersection $(m_1\cup m_3) \cap (m_1\cup m_3 \backslash m_1) = m_3$.}.
In general, a good index coding scheme for multiple junctions is a hard problem, because it is related to the multi-source network coding problem, which is an open problem \cite{ElRouayheb2010c,Bar-Yossef2011}. Instead, we focus on one single junction first, and then extend the single-junction scheme as a heuristic for multiple junctions. In fact, under the assumption of `single meeting' as depicted in the next subsection, this is an optimal solution. Note that we ignore the download capacity in this section, which will be considered in the general schemes in the next section.
To construct a good index coding scheme, we consider a particular RSU fog node at a single $n$-way junction, labeled as $r \in {\cal R}$. We represent the demands for map data by a directed graph (called {\em demand graph}) ${\cal D}_r$ with a set of $n$ nodes representing the set of connected road segments to $r$. Denote the map data for the ${k}$-th road segment by $m_{k}$, where $k \in \{1,...,n\}$. There is a directed edge $(m_{k_1}{\to}m_{k_2})$ in ${\cal D}_r$, if there is a vehicle moving from the ${k_1}$-th road segment to the ${k_2}$-th road segment, which needs to obtain $m_{k_2}$, given $m_{k_1}$ as prior information. The destination nodes in ${\cal D}_r$ (i.e., those with at least one in-coming directed edge) are called the {\em demanded packets}. Two examples of ${\cal D}_r$ for a four-way junction are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:4way}.
The uncoded packets $\{m_1,...,m_n\}$ are called {\em source packets}. A packet consists of $K$ source packets combined by bitwise XOR operator is called a {\em $K$-ary coded packets}. For example, $m_2{\oplus}m_1$ is a binary-coded packet. An index coding scheme, denoted by ${\cal I}$, is a set of coded or source packets. For convenience of analysis, we assume that each packet of map data has a uniform size. If packets have different sizes, padding will be used.
Given a set of demanded packets, we aim to construct an optimal index coding scheme using the minimal number of transmitted packets that can be decoded into the required information (i.e., destination nodes in ${\cal D}_r$). Note that the construction of a decodable index coding scheme is similar to a generalization of the set cover problem. Each coded packet is a cover, while the demanded packets are items to be covered by some coded packets. The decodability of coded packets requires that a combination of complemented intersections (i.e., XOR operations) of the received coded packets can generate the demanded packets.
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:2-coded}
Given the demand graph ${\cal D}_r$, an optimal index coding scheme ${\cal I}$ can be constructed using source packets and binary-coded packets. In particular, each demand $(m_{k_1}{\to}m_{k_2})$ in ${\cal D}_r$ can be decoded by one of the following ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A source packet (i.e., $m_{k_2} \in {\cal I}$).
\item Or a sequence of connected binary coded packets, say $\{m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_r}, m_{k_r}{\oplus}m_{k_{r-1}}, ..., m_{k_3}{\oplus}m_{k_2}\} \subseteq {\cal I}$, such that the required packet can be decoded by $m_{k_1}$ and such a sequence of binary-coded packets.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
See two examples of optimal index coding schemes in Fig.~\ref{fig:4way}, where an arrow represents a demand, and a dashed enclosure represents a coded or source packet.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering \vspace{-5pt}
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{figs/Figure6.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption{\small Two examples of demand graph ${\cal D}_r$ and their optimal index coding schemes for a four-way junction. (a) Four vehicles with directions: $(m_1{\to}m_3)$, $(m_3{\to}m_2)$, $(m_2{\to}m_1), (m_2{\to}m_4)$, and an optimal index coding scheme is $\{m_1{\oplus}m_2, m_1{\oplus}m_3, m_4\}$. (b) Four vehicles with directions: $(m_1{\to}m_3)$, $(m_3{\to}m_1)$, $(m_2{\to}m_4)$, $(m_4{\to}m_2)$, and an optimal index coding scheme is $\{m_1{\oplus}m_3, m_2{\oplus}m_4\}$. }\label{fig:4way}
\end{figure}
By Theorem~\ref{thm:2-coded}, it suffices to consider binary-coded packets. We next present a polynomial-time algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} to identify the optimal index coding scheme, which first adds any demand $(m_{k_1}{\to}m_{k_2})$ as a coded packet, and then removes redundant packets in any cycles of coded packets, while ensuring the decodability of demanded packets.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{\small {\sf 1J-IdxCd}$[{\cal D}_r]$}
{\scriptsize
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State ${\cal I} \leftarrow \varnothing$
\For {$(m_{k_1}{\to}m_{k_2}) \in {\cal D}_r$}
\State ${\cal I} \leftarrow {\cal I} \cup \{ m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_2} \}$
\LeftComment{{\em Flag ${\sf lock}_{{k_1},{k_2}}$ prevents $m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_2}$ to be removed from ${\cal I}$}}
\State ${\sf lock}({k_1},{k_2}) \leftarrow {\sf False}$
\EndFor
\While{there exists cycle $\{m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_2}, m_{k_2}{\oplus}m_{k_3}$ $..., m_{k_r}{\oplus}m_{k_1}\} \subseteq {\cal I}$}
\For {$m_{k_t}{\oplus}m_{k_{t+1}} \in \{m_{k_1}{\oplus}m_{k_2}, m_{k_2}{\oplus}m_{k_3}$ $..., m_{k_r}{\oplus}m_{k_1}\} $}
\If {${\sf lock}({k_t},{k_{t+1}}) = {\sf False}$}
\State ${\cal I} \leftarrow {\cal I} \backslash \{ m_{k_t}{\oplus}m_{k_{t+1}} \}$
\For {$(m_{k'_1}{\to}m_{k'_2}) \in {\cal D}_r$}
\If {there exists no path $\{m_{k'_1}{\oplus}m_{k'_r}, ..., m_{k'_3}{\oplus}m_{k'_2}\}$ \\
\quad \qquad \qquad $ \subseteq {\cal I} \backslash \{ m_{k'_1}{\oplus}m_{k'_{2}} \}$}
\State ${\sf lock}({k'_1},{k'_2}) \leftarrow {\sf True}$
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndWhile
\State \Return ${\cal I}$
\end{algorithmic}
}
\label{alg:1JIdxCd}
\end{algorithm}
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:1JIdxCdAlgo}
Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} produces an optimal index coding scheme for a single junction.
\end{theorem}
{Let us apply Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} to the example in Fig. \ref{fig:4way}(a). The initial index coding scheme is ${\cal I} \leftarrow \{(m_1\oplus m_2), (m_2\oplus m_3),(m_3\oplus m_1),(m_2\oplus m_4)\}$ and their corresponding locks, {\sf lock}($k_1,k_2$) are set to {\sf False}. These are defined by lines 2--5. Lines 6--18 remove the redundant and unnecessary coded packets. Coded packet $(m_2\oplus m_4)$ will be the first to be removed since {\sf lock}(2,4) is {\sf False} and there is no cycle that includes it. On the other hand, the combination of the coded packets $\{(m_1\oplus m_2), (m_2\oplus m_3),(m_3\oplus m_1)\}$ forms a cycle. Any one of the three coded packets can be removed since all their corresponding locks are false. For instance, we remove $(m_2\oplus m_3)$, then the locks {\sf lock}(1,2) and {\sf lock}(1,3) become {\sf True}. Therefore, Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} returns the final index coding scheme as ${\cal I} \leftarrow \{(m_1\oplus m_2), (m_3\oplus m_1)\}$.}
Note that Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} produces an index coding scheme with coded packets only. {\sf 1J-IdxCd} can be improved by replacing some coded packets by source packets, because the source packets are immediately decodable. One can replace any binary-coded packet that is only used to produce just one demanded packet by the corresponding source packet, although the size of ${\cal I}$ will remain the same. {For the example in Fig. \ref{fig:4way}(a), we add the source packet $m_4$ to the index coding scheme ${\cal I}$, making the optimal index coding scheme as ${\cal I} = \{m_1 \oplus m_2, m_1 \oplus m_3, m_4\}$.}
The reader is referred to the Appendix in \cite{Ho2019} for the proofs of Theorems 1 and 2.
\subsection{Extension for Multiple Junctions}
We next present an extension for multiple junctions. The basic idea is to adopt {\sf 1J-IdxCd} as a basis for multiple junctions. We assume that all trip plans, $\{{\sf P}^c\}_ {c \in{\cal C}}$, are given a-priori. We define a {\em meeting relation graph} among the vehicles by ${\cal G}_{\rm meet} = ({\cal N}_{\rm meet}, {\cal E}_{\rm meet})$, where the set of nodes ${\cal N}_{\rm meet}$ are subsets of vehicles $( \subseteq {\cal C})$ having intersected trip plans, and the set of directed edges ${\cal E}_{\rm meet}$ are the temporal ordering between meetings with a common vehicle. Namely,
\begin{align}
{\cal N}_{\rm meet} \triangleq & \Big\{ (c_1,...,c_r) \subseteq {\cal C} \mid \exists v \in \bigcap_{i=1}^r {\sf P}^{c_i} \mbox{\ and\ } {\sf t}^{c_1}_v = ...= {\sf t}^{c_r}_v \Big\} \\
{\cal E}_{\rm meet} \triangleq &\Big\{ (c_1,c_2,...,c_r) \to (c_1,c'_2,...,c'_s) \in {\cal N}_{\rm meet} \times {\cal N}_{\rm meet} \notag\\ & \qquad \mid \exists v_1 \in \bigcap_{i=1}^r {\sf P}^{c_i} \mbox{\ and\ }
\exists v_2 \in \bigcap_{i=1}^s {\sf P}^{c'_i} \mbox{\ and\ } {\sf t}^{c_1}_{v_1} < {\sf t}^{c_1}_{v_2} \Big\}
\end{align}
If two vehicles meet in their trip plans, then there are two cases: (1) traveling in different directions (e.g., meeting at a junction), or (2) traveling along with each other. Case (1) is utilized in index coding to broadcast mixed information (via bitwise XOR) to vehicles, and then the vehicles decode the mixed information using different prior information they received previously. However, there will be no impact by index coding for case (2).
\medskip
\begin{assumption}({\bf Single Meeting})
We assume that the trip plans of every pair of vehicles intersect at most {\em once}, namely, if they meet and depart, then they will never meet again. In practice, if the autonomous vehicles always follow the shortest paths and employ deterministic tie-breaking for the paths of equal distance, then the meeting with another autonomous vehicles of different source or destination is only at most once. Otherwise, this will contradict to the property of shortest paths. Since they meet at most once, each meeting event can be uniquely identified as a node in ${\cal N}_{\rm meet}$, and ${\cal G}_{\rm meet}$ is also a directed acyclic graph.
\end{assumption}
\medskip
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:multijunc}
If the single meeting assumption (Assumption 1) holds, then applying Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} independently at each junction will produce an optimal index coding scheme for multiple junctions.
\end{theorem}
\medskip
The reader is referred to the Appendix in \cite{Ho2019} for the proof of Theorem 3. Note that even if the vehicles meet more than once, Theorem~\ref{thm:multijunc} still provides a heuristic to construct a good index coding scheme for multiple junctions with limited meetings among vehicles.
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{here} have been a plenty of flourishing developments for intelligent vehicles in the past decade. In 2011, Google introduced a driverless car that is tested in real-world streets \cite{Hard2015}. Since then, there have been many self-driving car projects (e.g., Uber \cite{Uber2018}, Waymo \cite{Waymo2019}) gearing towards full driving autonomy.
Intelligent vehicles are equipped with a plethora of on-board sensors for sensing {the surrounding} environment, and a communication system capable of short-range broadcast and cellular {communications} for information sharing among intelligent vehicles and infrastructure {nodes,} such as roadside units (RSUs), base stations, local controllers, databases, and cloud servers. {Infrastructure nodes} are fixed-location systems that transmit and receive short- and long-range communications from vehicles for storage, processing, and information exchange. Collectively, intelligent vehicles and the infrastructure are the fundamental building blocks of a vehicular network.
In a vehicular network comprising of multiple intelligent vehicles and infrastructure {nodes}, sharing local surrounding information enables the delivery of various vehicular applications and services for improving road safety and travel convenience \cite{CMHC2016VTC}. To facilitate autonomous driving, accurate road map data depicting real-time road events are crucial and should be exchanged among intelligent vehicles and {the} infrastructure for driving perception, localization, route planning, and control. The road map data capture the static (e.g., buildings, road structures) and dynamic (e.g., presence of road accidents, traffic conditions) features of the road setup. A particular type of data that can accurately describe the road environment is the {\em 3D LIDAR point cloud data} \cite{kim2011urban}. An example is illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:pointcloud} \cite{ford}. This is a set of data points in a 3D coordinate system that represent the surfaces of physical objects in {the} 3D space. However, 3D LIDAR point cloud data {are usually huge in size}. Commercial LIDAR with 64 laser sensors can generate up to 2.2M points per second for the 3D representation of its surrounding environment \cite{velodynelidar}. Given this, the exchange of 3D map data from one vehicular node to another is a challenging task. Overcoming the bandwidth limitation in highly-dynamic vehicular networks for exchanging 3D point cloud data can enable collaborative perception among vehicular nodes for extending their sights to reach hidden and distant on-road objects or pedestrians.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure1.pdf}
\caption{\small A four-way junction 3D point cloud captured by a LIDAR.}\label{fig:pointcloud}
\end{figure}
The information exchanges {among} intelligent vehicles {and the} roadside infrastructure, as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:parties}, are supported by Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) communications (e.g., Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) and Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I)), which can be realized by either short-range local broadcast or long-range unicast via the cellular network. In Fig. \ref{fig:parties}, the Map Data Repository (MDR) is another roadside infrastructure that functions as a central database for all map data. It is a cloud computing server that stores the global view of map data over time, merges multiple map data sources, and extracts useful information to assist decision-making at individual vehicles.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{figs/Figure2.pdf}
\caption{\small Road map information exchange among an intelligent vehicle, a roadside unit, and the map data repository in a V2X network.}\label{fig:parties}
\end{figure}
Short-range local broadcast can be achieved by Dedicated Short-Range Communications (DSRC) \cite{kenney2011dedicated} {or 3GPP Cellular V2X (C-V2X) \cite{5g2016case}}, which has been proposed to broadcast basic safety messages (e.g., speed, heading, and location). However, local broadcast suffers from the limited available spectrum and restricted data transmission rate. On the other hand, long-range unicast via LTE may be inefficient to share common data among nearby transmitters, such as map data for vehicles in the vicinity. In addition, cellular networks incur {service charges} by mobile service operators.
Given the increasing number of vehicles on road, estimated over 1.3 billion worldwide in 2016 \cite{CarPop}, {there is an} abundant source of road map information {available, and hence the uploading and downloading of road map data among vehicles and the road infrastructure is time-consuming and takes up a huge amount of network resources}. {In addition, many V2X applications are time-critical and failure in transmission may} lead to accidents {and casualties} \cite{TeslaAcc}. {Therefore, how} to effectively manage the information exchange among vehicles and the infrastructure in a heterogeneous V2X network is a pivotal challenge. In such case, a new computing paradigm is needed to reduce latency in data {processing and communications} so that vehicles {and the} infrastructure can {acquire the required data on time for} making real-time on-road decisions.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.63]{figs/Figure3.pdf}
\caption{\small {The vehicular fog computing architecture.} Most information exchange {and computation take} place in the fog layer.}\label{fig:VFCarchi}
\end{figure*}
Fog computing, first coined and introduced by Cisco Systems in 2012, is a recent paradigm bringing cloud computing closer to the network {edges to reduce the latency in various real-time services} \cite{mahmud2018fog}. The incorporation of fog computing into vehicular networks establishes the Internet of Vehicles (IoV) concept or the vehicular fog computing (VFC) paradigm. Extensive fog computing surveys \cite{mouradian2017comprehensive,perera2017fog,huang2017vehicular} have outlined the possible application of such computing paradigm in vehicular networks. {In vehicular fog networks, {as depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}}, intelligent vehicles act as sensing devices that gather and pre-process surrounding data {before uploading. Some data coding and hashing techniques {can also be done at the network edges to} alleviate the traffic load as well. Intelligent vehicles may {serve as} mobile fog nodes for implementing localized computational tasks and can directly communicate with nearby vehicles via DSRC/C-V2X, especially {when} vehicles are {beyond} the infrastructure's coverage.} On the other hand, infrastructure {nodes}, such as roadside units (RSUs), traffic lights, base stations, can act as fog nodes for efficiently communicating with intelligent vehicles within its transmission range. These infrastructure {nodes can} also store huge amount of data and perform computationally-intensive processing and calculations instead of allowing the cloud to do it, {thereby, providing real-time and reliable vehicular applications, {e.g.,} autonomous driving in a dynamic environment.}
{Meanwhile, the data exchange among closely related infrastructure fog nodes in a local region is facilitated by a local controller. Local controllers determine the {transmission mode}, i.e., either long-range unicast (LTE) or short-range broadcast via DSRC or C-V2X. {They} also decide whether certain road map data are to be forwarded to the map data repository (cloud) \cite{liang2017integrated} or stored in {local} databases.} {The access of road information from other local regions is administrated by the super} software-defined networking (SDN) controller{, which is the network component with global intelligence \cite{wen2017fog} that} {orchestrates} data traffic and {manages} resources among local controllers and databases \cite{tomovic2017software}.} {The SDN controllers also perform scheduling of tasks among fog nodes.} Finally, the map data repository is a cloud {node with} global knowledge of an urban {area} for monitoring and control in a city-wide level \cite{huang2017vehicular}.
Overall, in a vehicular network employing the fog computing paradigm, we consider a scheduled information dissemination mechanism utilizing index coding, data hashing and heterogeneous transmission options. The {major contributions} of this {work} are summarized as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Under {the vehicular fog computing} framework, we {integrate the index coding algorithm to optimally disseminate high-definition 3D road map data {among} intelligent vehicles and {the} roadside infrastructure to reduce the number of {required} transmissions and data load while satisfying {the vehicular} demands.}
\item {We propose fog-based opportunistic scheduling algorithms based on vehicular trip plans {for map data downloading} in city-wide vehicular networks. These dynamic schedulers determine the mode of transmission (short-range broadcast or long-range unicast) based on the available resources at fog devices to reduce the overall operating cost of the network. In addition, differential coding and hashing techniques for 3D point cloud data uploading at the vehicular level is also proposed to avoid data redundancy, and hence reduce the processing and computation load of roadside fog nodes.}
\item Utilizing empirical mobility traces and 3D LIDAR data of city streets, {we rigorously evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithms and system.} We have also implemented our system in a multi-robotic vehicle testbed for practical evaluation.
\end{enumerate}
The paper is organized as follows. Section II {describes our proposed information dissemination system at the fog layer}. In Section III, {we formally define the information dissemination problem and discuss the downloading and uploading operations of 3D road map data.} Section IV {presents motivating examples on {utilizing} index coding {for vehicular data exchange, and derives the optimal index coding scheme for single road junction as well as the city-wide multi-junction scenario.} {The fog-based opportunistic scheduling problem is tackled in Section V, and} {the techniques for efficient uploading of 3D LIDAR point cloud data from vehicles is covered in Section VI.} {Sections VII to VIII {present experimental and simulation results obtained based on our multi-robotic vehicle testbed and empirical mobility traces, respectively.} Finally, Section IX concludes this paper.
\section{Simulation Studies} \label{sec:sim}
{In the previous section, we have demonstrated the feasibility of employing index coding in the dissemination of road segment data to nearby vehicles at a road junction. In this section, we present further evaluation of our proposed system by simulation studies using real-world 3D point cloud data of city streets and GPS mobility traces of vehicles.} We consider both scenarios of single and multiple road junctions for analyzing the effectiveness of the proposed schemes.
\subsection{Local Broadcast by Index Coding for Single Junction} \label{sec:SingJunc}
First, we consider the single-junction scenario. The simulation set-up is described as follows.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Simulation Set-up}
To study the performance on realistic 3D point cloud data, we consider the 3D point cloud static map data of a real-world junction depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata} (a), which is obtained by Ford Research campus in downtown Dearborn, Michigan \cite{ford}. It is partitioned into four separate views as perceived by the vehicles in each road segment connecting to the junction. In the dissemination process, the 3D point cloud data is compressed using Octree compression \cite{Schnabel2006}. The sizes of compressed 3D point cloud data packets of each road segment and binary-coded packets are shown in Table \ref{Tab:MapDataAtt}.
\begin{table}[htb!]
\caption{\small Sizes of compressed 3D point cloud data for the static map data shown in Fig. 9 (a).} \label{Tab:MapDataAtt}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\hline\hline
\centering Map Data & Number of Points & Data Size (MB) \\
\hline
\centering $m_1$ & 104,255 & 5.838 \\
\centering $m_2$ & 95,537 & 5.254 \\
\centering $m_3$ & 69,200 & 2.763 \\
\centering $m_4$ & 73,168 & 3.184 \\
\centering $m_1$$\oplus$$m_2$ & 63,607 & 2.126 \\
\centering $m_1$$\oplus$$m_3$ & 65,920 & 2.812 \\
\centering $m_1$$\oplus$$m_4$ & 61,738 & 2.630 \\
\centering $m_2$$\oplus$$m_3$ & 67,806 & 2.631 \\
\centering $m_2$$\oplus$$m_4$ & 66,072 & 2.363 \\
\centering $m_3$$\oplus$$m_4$ & 64,025 & 2.126 \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
To incorporate realistic vehicle mobility patterns, we consider the dataset of Beijing taxi GPS mobility traces \cite{Li2013} to simulate the mobility traces of autonomous vehicles at a junction. The Beijing taxi dataset contains seven days of GPS mobility traces (including longitude and latitude positions), timestamps of recorded positions, and vehicle IDs of 28,590 taxis traveling in Beijing City. Beijing City resembles a grid network geographically, consisting of mostly four-way junctions. In particular, we consider the junction between the {\em East 3rd Ring Road Middle} and {\em Jianguo Road}, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(b). There are 8,663 taxis on average traversing it daily. Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(b) depicts the empirical GPS mobility traces of 12 taxis. We assume that the RSU fog node is deployed near the junction center with a transmission range of 200 meters.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Evaluation of Download Operations}
To perform the download operations, a RSU fog node $r$ first scans the nearby vehicles in every sampling time $T_{\rm S}$. Once the vehicles reach within the proximity of $r$, it determines the vehicles' map data demands and constructs the demand graph ${\cal D}_r$. Next, RSU fog node $r$ applies {\sf 1J-IdxCd}$[{\cal D}_r]$ to perform local broadcast based on index coding.
\iffalse
\begin{equation}
{\bf D}_{t=k{T_{\rm S}}} =
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & \delta_{12}\alpha_{12} & \*\delta_{13}\alpha_{13} & \delta_{14}\alpha_{14} \\
\delta_{21}\alpha_{21} & 0 & \delta_{23}\alpha_{23} & \delta_{24}\alpha_{24} \\
\delta_{31}\alpha_{31} & \delta_{32}\alpha_{32} & 0 & \delta_{34}\alpha_{34} \\
\delta_{41}\alpha_{41} & \delta_{42}\alpha_{42} & \delta_{43}\alpha_{43} & 0 \\
\end{bmatrix}
\label{Eq D}
\end{equation}
where $k$ = 0,1,2,... and {$\delta_{ij},\alpha_{ij}$} $\in$ {\{0,1\}}. When $\delta_{ij}$ = 1, the vehicle on road segment $i$ wants to proceed to road segment $j$, otherwise $\delta_{ij}$ = 0. When $\alpha_{ij}$ = 1, the vehicle on road segment $i$ does not have the map data of road segment $j$, otherwise $\alpha_{ij}$ = 0. The main diagonal is zero since U-turning vehicles do not require the map data where it is currently on.
\fi
To study the performance of {\sf 1J-IdxCd}$[{\cal D}_r]$, we consider two benchmarks:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Random Broadcast ({\sf Rand}): It broadcasts all source packets in a random fashion.
\item Index Coding with Prior Information ({\sf 1J-IdxCd-PI}): It explores the scenario that some vehicles may have extra prior knowledge of a certain road segment. For example, a particular road segment is popular among all vehicles. The map data is likely to be pre-downloaded to the vehicles in advance.
\end{enumerate}
The evaluation results are depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:WeekTrans_3scheme}, which shows the daily total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted packets for {\sf Rand} and {\sf 1J-IdxCd} for seven days based on GPS mobility traces. The sizes of each transmitted packets are set according to Table~\ref{Tab:MapDataAtt}.
\iffalse
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6, angle=0]{figs/DynamicMapUpdate.pdf} \vspace{-20pt}
\caption{\small Daily total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted packets for {\sf Rand} and {\sf 1J-IdxCd} for seven days based on GPS mobility traces.}\label{fig:DynamicMapUpdate}
\end{figure}
\fi
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6, angle=0]{figs/Figure12.pdf}
\caption{\small Daily total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted packets for {\sf Rand}, {\sf 1J-IdxCd}, {\sf 1J-IdxCd-PI}.}\label{fig:WeekTrans_3scheme}
\end{figure}
It is observed that {\sf 1J-IdxCd} can effectively reduce the total number of transmissions by around 500 transmissions less when compared to the benchmark {\sf Rand}. For downloading static data, the benchmark requires a number of 7.75 transmissions on average to satisfy all vehicles' demands as compared to {\sf 1J-IdxCd} that requires only 5.94 transmissions on average. The average daily sizes of transmitted data for random transmission is 12.18 GB while that for {\sf 1J-IdxCd} is only 10.24 GB. {\sf 1J-IdxCd} transmits 6.00 MB on average within a period of $T_{\rm S}$, while {\sf Rand} transmits 5.46 MB on average. Overall, employing {\sf 1J-IdxCd} enables higher data rate with the fewest number of transmissions.
Next, we evaluate the effectiveness with extra prior information. {\sf 1J-IdxCd-PI} considers extra prior information for road segment 2. In this case, {\sf 1J-IdxCd-PI} preforms like {\sf 1J-IdxCd}, but it assumes every vehicle already has map data of road segment 2, and performs index coding incorporating such prior information. We observe that the availability of extra prior information considerably reduces the number of transmissions, and thus the required bandwidth, transmitting 5.01 MB on average by 4.49 transmissions.
\subsection{Applying Index Coding to Multiple Junctions}
After evaluating the performance of single-junction index coding, we consider index coding for multiple junctions.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Simulation Set-up}
We selected 40 junctions in Beijing, as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(c), and use the corresponding GPS mobility traces of taxis traversing these junctions to simulate the mobility patterns. The simulation parameters are listed in Table~\ref{Tab:MJSimParam}. In Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(c), we visualize the average mobility patterns of these 40 junctions by circles of different sizes. The bigger the circle, the more number of taxis traversed the respective junction.
\begin{table}[htb!]
\centering
\caption{Simulation Parameters for Multiple Junctions in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(c).}
\label{Tab:MJSimParam}
\vspace{-5pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
\hline\hline
\textbf{\centering Simulation Attribute/Parameter} & \textbf{Value} \\
\hline
Total area (in $\approx$ km$^2$) & 50 \\
Number of observed days & 7 \\
Number of road segments per junction & {4} \\
Number of RSUs & 40 \\
RSU transmission range (meters) & 200 \\
Total number of taxis & 24,845 \\
Daily average number of taxi trips & 79,012 \\
Hourly average number of taxis in each junction & 466 \\
Total number of recorded time each day (hrs) & 24 \\
Sampling time of GPS traces (mins) & 2 \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Evaluation Results}
Fig.~\ref{fig:RSUs40Results} depicts the average number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted data when {\sf 1J-IdxCd} is applied independently at the 40 junctions. Note that the number of visits is not directly proportional to the average number of transmissions. In particular, RSU fog nodes 19 and 24 have relatively low volume of visits, whereas RSU fog nodes 9 and 25 have a relatively high number. However, RSU fog node 19 has fewer number of transmissions than RSU fog node 24. This is because the vehicles in RSU 19 arrive more regularly than those at RSU 24, hence more significant performance gain can be found in terms of the number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted data by {\sf 1J-IdxCd}. A similar phenomenon is observed at the high-volume RSU fog node 25.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6, angle=0]{figs/Figure13.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Average total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted data for each of the 40 RSU fog nodes situated in Beijing.}\label{fig:RSUs40Results}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:RSUs40Hourly} shows the RSU fog nodes located on {\em West 2nd Ring Road} (i.e., RSUs 8, 10, 18, 22, 26) and depicts the hourly performance of each RSU. The average volume of visits through these road sections are similar. The curve labeled by `Avg' indicates the average value of the 40 RSU fog nodes over a day. We observe that the information dissemination by the RSU fog nodes increased starting from 08:00h, because the peak traffic hours occur at 08:00h. From midnight to 06:00h, the traffic is relatively low.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7, angle=0]{figs/Figure14.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Hourly average total number of transmissions and sizes of transmitted data for each RSU fog nodes located on {\em West 2nd Ring Road}.}\label{fig:RSUs40Hourly}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scheduling over Multiple Junctions}
In this section, we evaluate the performance of the proposed scheduling schemes over the selected 40 junctions. We employ both the online ({\sf ONLSchd}) and offline ({\sf OFLSchd}) opportunistic scheduling schemes for disseminating map data to vehicles.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Applying the Opportunistic Scheduling}
We assign each RSU fog node the same download capacity (${\rm C}^{\downarrow}$). The performance of various scheduling schemes are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:GreedySchdResults}, under various download capacity (${\rm C}^{\downarrow}$) based on the GPS mobility traces of taxis traversing the 40 junctions in Beijing in Fig.~\ref{fig:juncdata}(c).
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{figs/Figure15.pdf} \vspace{-5pt}
\caption{\small Performance of various scheduling schemes against download capacity (${\rm C}^{\downarrow}$).}\label{fig:GreedySchdResults}
\end{figure}
We observe that the RSU fog nodes reach the download capacity at a much faster rate by {\sf Rand}, because {\sf Rand} broadcasts a large amount of data (equal to the sum of all source packets of map data in a trip per vehicle), as compared to the opportunistic scheduling schemes per sampling time. This leads to heavier load on the cellular network when {\sf Rand} is used in scenarios with low download capacity (${\rm C}^{\downarrow} \leq$ 700 MB). Although {\sf ONLSchd} reduces the required cellular transmissions, it is still evident that it exhibits the same effect during low download capacity, i.e., more cellular transmissions than local broadcast transmissions. For a given set of map data, increasing the local broadcast download capacity can reduce the need for cellular network transmissions. This presents a design trade-off for the network administrator to balance the loads between local broadcast and cellular unicast.
Among the three schemes, {\sf OFLSchd} employs considerably less cellular network bandwidth even when the local broadcast download capacity is low. It relies almost totally on local broadcast transmissions as the download capacity is over 700 MB. This is because all of the vehicles' trip plans are known in advance, thus, enabling the RSU fog nodes to schedule map data dissemination more efficiently, {and less rely on the cellular download of road map data.}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs/Figure16.pdf} \vspace{-5pt}
\caption
{\small Comparing the {\sf OFLSchd} and {\sf Rand} methods on the distance of pre-downloaded remote data to requesting vehicles.}\label{Fig:PreDown}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{Fig:PreDown} shows the distance (in terms of the number of blocks away) of pre-downloaded remote data to a requesting vehicle at an RSU fog node. Since {\sf OFLSchd} knows the planned trips of the vehicles, it reduces the number of transmissions required to satisfy all vehicles, while providing pre-downloaded remote data up to five blocks away (when the RSU fog node download capacity is $\geq$ 900 MB). For example, RSU fog node 14 can transmit road segment data from remote RSU fog nodes such as 1, 10, 17, 32, etc. Such amount of advanced data will allow a vehicle to update its planned trip and alter its route if necessary. On the other hand, {\sf Rand} can only deliver data up to an average of 1.66 RSU blocks away from the requesting RSU fog node.
\medskip
\subsubsection{Meeting Frequency of Vehicles}
Theorem~\ref{thm:multijunc} shows that applying Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} independently at each junction produces an optimal index coding scheme for multiple junctions, under the single meeting assumption. In this section, we empirically examine the meeting frequency of vehicles based on GPS mobility traces.
We define that a meeting occurs when the taxis' routes (according to GPS traces) are within 200 m of each other. Given an observation window during the day, these frequencies of meetings are stored in the adjacency matrix ${\bf TM}$, defined below in (\ref{Eq:TM}):
\begin{equation}
{\bf TM} = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & x_{1,2} & \cdots & x_{1,n-1}& x_{1,n} \\
x_{2,1} & 0 & \cdots & \vdots & x_{2,n}\\
\vdots & \vdots &\ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\
x_{n-1,1} & \cdots & \cdots & \ddots & x_{n-1,n} \\
x_{n,1} & x_{n,2} & \cdots & x_{n,n-1} & 0
\end{bmatrix}
\label{Eq:TM}
\end{equation}
where $x_{i,j} \in$ $\{0, 1, 2, ...\}$ is the number of {times that} vehicles $i$ and $j$ met and $x_{i,j} = x_{j,i}$. The observation window is equal to $t_{\rm stop} - t_{\rm start}$. In this case, $t_{\rm stop} - t_{\rm start}$ = 24 hours, having a 2-min sampling interval.
The results are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:FreqofTaxiMeetings}. Any two given taxis from the mobility traces only met each other once 86$\%$ of the time, while the remaining 14$\%$ met more than once. From Fig.~\ref{fig:FreqofTaxiMeetings}, we know that any pair of taxis met at most once within a moderate time window. This shows limited meetings among vehicles with different trips in a city in practice. Hence, applying Algorithm {\sf 1J-IdxCd} independently at each junction still provides a heuristic to construct a good index coding scheme for a city-wide multiple junction scenario.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure17.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Meeting frequency between any pair of taxis.}\label{fig:FreqofTaxiMeetings}
\end{figure}
Finally, we {study} the scenarios that {the majority of the number} of meetings in the adjacency matrix {\bf TM} is more than one (i.e., $x_{i,j} \ge 2$). Note that the proposed scheme produces the best performance when $x_{i,j}$ = 1. The simulation results for 3,000 runs are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:SimFreqofTaxiMeetings}. We also compare the performance with a benchmark scheme, {\sf OnDemand} \cite{ali2017efficient}, which transmits the source packets of the most demanded road segment first, and then transmits binary-coded packets of the most demanded road segment data until all demands are satisfied.
We observe that as the number of meetings between any pair of vehicles increases, the total number of transmissions increases in all scheduling schemes (see the top figure of Fig.~\ref{fig:SimFreqofTaxiMeetings}). We note that both {\sf Rand} and {\sf OnDemand}, having equal number of transmissions, increase at a higher rate than {\sf 1J-IdxCd}. However, {\sf OnDemand} transmits fewer data than {\sf Rand} to satisfy all requesting vehicles. Overall, considering both performance metrics, {\sf 1J-IdxCd} outperforms the two benchmarks in the multiple junction scenario.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.1]{figs/Figure18.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Comparison of the three schemes in terms of the total number of transmissions (top) and total sizes of transmitted data (bottom) against the meeting frequencies between any pair of vehicles.}\label{fig:SimFreqofTaxiMeetings}
\end{figure}
\subsection{{Processing Overhead Analysis}} \label{OHAnalysis}
{We analyze in this subsection the processing overheads of the proposed index coding algorithm based on the overall data dissemination delay (including both the processing/encoding delay and transmission delay) from the RSU to the nearby vehicles. For the {\sf Rand} method, the overall delay only contains the transmission delay, while the {\sf 1J-IdxCd} scheme includes also the processing delay due to the XOR encoding of relevant road map data, which is proportional to the number of encoded packets generated. To compute for the transmission delay, we assume that the packet size is 1024 bytes and the data rate is 6 Mbps. On the other hand, the encoding processing delay is assumed to be fixed. For a given RSU fog node, the overall delay is computed every sampling time $T_S$ = 2 min.}
{Given a processing delay of 1 ms, Fig. \ref{fig:RSUOverallDelay} illustrates the overall delay averaged over seven days for RSUs 8, 10, 18, 22, and 26. {These five RSU fog nodes have a daily average of 8,100 taxis passing through, and there are 11--12 taxis connected to each RSU per $T_S$ on average.} We can observe that even if there is an additional processing time introduced by the {\sf 1J-IdxCd} method, its daily average overall delay is still less than that of the {\sf Rand} method by about 34\%. This is because the {\sf 1J-IdxCd} scheme has a much shorter transmission delay than the {\sf Rand} method by reducing the total number of required packets and the number of road segments at each intersection is limited. }
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure19.pdf} \vspace{-10pt}
\caption
{\small Average overall delay of each RSU fog node under the two transmission schemes.}\label{fig:RSUOverallDelay}
\end{figure}
\section{Information Exchange of 3D Road Map Data in V2X Networks}
{To implement efficient {road map data dissemination in a} vehicular fog network, we propose the 3D MAp Dissemination System ({3D-MADS}).} The general operation of {3D-MADS} includes intelligent vehicles, roadside units, local controllers and databases, which are all within the fog layer in Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}.
Overall, the system distributes map data among the parties in a timely manner, taking into account the characteristics of long-range unicast and short-range broadcast transmissions. Short-range broadcast normally has limited spectrum resources at lower transmission cost, while long-range unicast has large bandwidth capacity at higher transmission cost. We aim at optimizing these transmission options while satisfying the dynamic data demand of respectively vehicles. By referring to Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}, each component or module in 3D-MADS and its corresponding tasks are explained as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Intelligent Vehicles}
- {\em Uploading} enables sharing of on-board LIDAR data among vehicles via the vehicular fog network.
- {\em Coding \& Hashing} encodes and identifies differentiated data and redundant map information.
- {\em Downloading} delivers the most updated 3D road map data from local databases to intelligent vehicles via either cellular network or local broadcast at RSU fog nodes.
- {\em Perception} utilizes on-board sensors, e.g., LIDAR and GPS, to perceive the surrounding road environment as 3D point cloud data, from which we can detect and recognize objects and obstacles in the environment. The locally processed 3D point cloud data will be uploaded to RSUs or local controllers for further integration with the data from other vehicular and roadside nodes.
- {\em Inference \& Decision} allows intelligent vehicles to predict their movements for autonomous navigation and control based on the perceived and downloaded 3D road map data as well as position information.
- {\em Control \& Navigation} relies on driving feedback and manages the intelligent vehicles to move safely and appropriately in the environment.
\smallskip
\item {\bf Roadside Unit (RSU) Fog Nodes}
- {\em Perception} provides blind-spot views that cannot be detected by intelligent vehicles via the local sensors.
- {\em Integration} combines downloaded 3D road map data from the cloud with the local LIDAR sensor data before sending them to nearby intelligent vehicles.
- {{\em Index Coding} encodes 3D road map data according to the data demand and availability of nearby vehicles to improve the transmission efficiency.}
- {\em Broadcast} is the periodic transmission of {index-coded} data to nearby vehicles via local short-range broadcast.
\bigskip
\item {\bf Local Controllers and Databases (LCD)}
- {\em Integration} coordinates the data exchanged among intelligent vehicles and RSU by setting the locations and boundaries of each region of map data. It can also correct and realign the LIDAR data from different vehicles that may contain drifting inaccuracy.
- {\em Separation} differentiates static and dynamic objects in the integrated 3D road map data via segmentation. Additional annotations can be generated based on machine learning techniques \cite{wang2019vtc} to label the objects in the map data. Different coding and transmission schemes can be applied to data with different characteristics.
- {\em Scheduling} organizes the download and upload transmissions based on the trip plans of vehicles, given the options of using either the cellular network unicast or the short-range local broadcast transmissions.
\end{itemize}
With respect to Fig. \ref{fig:VFCarchi}, we can see that 3D-MADS is an interdisciplinary system that requires the joint effort from multiple fields (e.g., communications, signal processing, computing, navigation and control, transportation engineering, etc.), which is our long-term goal. In this paper, we focus on investigating and discussing data exchange related modules (which include index coding, map download scheduling, and coding and hashing) to kick start the development of such system.
\section{{Robotic Testbed Evaluation}} \label{sec:testbed}
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{figs/Figure9.pdf} \vspace{-5pt}
\caption{\small (a) Robotic vehicles in (b) a single 4-way road junction scenario. (c) A moving object is introduced on Road B}\label{fig:Wifibot_City} \vspace{-5pt}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7, angle=0]{figs/Figure10.pdf}
\caption
{\small The 3D point cloud road map data captured by (a) car A, (b) car B and (c) the XOR-ed result of maps A and B.}\label{fig:3DPCDRepresentations}
\end{figure*}
{We implemented the single junction scenario and evaluated our proposed system in a practical testbed. In this set-up, as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}, two cases are studied:}
\begin{itemize}
\item {{\em Scenario 1}: Car A on Road A intends to turn into Road B with Car B. There is no time-sensitive data.}
\item {{\em Scenario 2}: Similar to scenario 1, but there is a moving object in front of Car B on Road B.}
\end{itemize}
{The robotic vehicles used in the testbed are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}(a). They represent the intelligent vehicles equipped with suite of sensors, including a Kinect camera {and LIDAR} for capturing its environment's 3D point cloud data and proximity sensors for collision detection. The experimental set-up is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}(b). The cardboard boxes represent buildings (see Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}). The 3D point cloud data is compressed to a 1 cm$^3$ resolution to achieve at least a 60$\%$ compression rate before being transmitted to the RSU fog node. Such Octree resolution offers a significant compression rate while maintaining an accurate representation of the sensed environment. The RSU fog node and robotic vehicles exchange information by using the IEEE 802.11 standard (WiFi).}
{In Scenario 1, at every five seconds, both vehicles captured their respective environment in form of 3D point cloud data, and performed Octree compression. The data are then transmitted to the RSU fog node along with their requests of road map data. Upon reception, the RSU fog node performs the {encoding $m_A$ $\oplus$ $m_B$, where $m_i$ is the map data for road segment $i$}, and broadcasts the encoded packets. The 3D point cloud data perceived by individual vehicle and the corresponding encoded {3D point cloud data} are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:3DPCDRepresentations}. After receiving the encoded packets ($m_A$ $\oplus$ $m_B$), car A decodes it via ($m_A$ $\oplus$ $m_B$) $\oplus$ $m_A$ to obtain its desired information regarding road segment B. Car B does the same to acquire information regarding road segment A. Since both road segments have no obstacles detected, each vehicle immediately turns to its desired road without the need of reducing its speed.}
{In Scenario 2, a small programmable mobile robot is added in front of car B to introduce a dynamic object to the environment. Such set-up is depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}(b). In order to detect obstacles that present on the road, we integrated a map filter for object extraction after the decoding process, and we search for the blocked information on the ground to determine the location of the object. Fig.~\ref{fig:Wifibot_City}(c) illustrates the detected dynamic data by car A after map filtering and object detection. From the gathered information, car A reduces its speed and waits until the small robot moves past the junction before turning into Road B.}
{In summary, our robotic testbed manages to achieve cooperative autonomous driving through transmitting road map data between the two robot vehicles. It also experimentally demonstrates that an efficient 3D road map data dissemination based on the proposed index coding scheme is feasible in practice, especially when dealing with moving dynamic objects on road.}
\section{Uploading 3D LIDAR Point Cloud Data} \label{sec:octree}
This section focuses on the discussion of 3D LIDAR point cloud data, and a common representation called Octree. We present differential coding and hashing schemes especially for uploading 3D LIDAR point cloud data.
\subsection{Octree Representation}
3D point cloud depicts objects and surfaces as a set of 3D points in the Cartesian coordinate system within a bounded region \cite{Rusu2008}. A common approach to encode 3D point cloud is using {\em Octree}, by which the 3D space is recursively partitioned into 8 cells ({\em voxels}) and a binary number is used to indicate the presence of an object in each cell. See an illustration of Octree representation of 3D point cloud in Fig.~\ref{fig:octree}.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure7.pdf}
\caption{\small An illustration of Octree representation of 3D point cloud.}\label{fig:octree}
\end{figure}
Octree is a tree-based data structure suitable for sparse 3D point data, where each node represents a cell or volume element (voxel). From the root, it is iteratively divided into eight children until a certain depth or level $L$ is achieved \cite{Kammerl2012} or if there is no more 3D point cloud to be partitioned. An occupied voxel contains a point or a set of points, and is labeled by `1', otherwise by `0'. A node labeled by `1' can be further decomposed into eight more child nodes, whereas there is no need to expand a node labeled by `0'. Accordingly, the larger the depth (i.e., higher value of $L$), the higher the resolution of the 3D object.
Two reference corners for the boundary of region of an Octree are denoted by $(x_1, y_1, z_1)$ and $(x_2, y_2, z_2)$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:octree}). One can represent an Octree by a bit string representation that encodes its contents by a fixed traversal order in the voxels of each layer. We can apply further coding schemes on the bit string representation. Note that different LIDAR sensors may produce different sets of 3D LIDAR point cloud data on the same objects in the region because of different sensing specifications. But the Octree representations can approximate closely with each other, under a suitable value of $L$. Hence, it is possible to compare different sets of 3D LIDAR point cloud data in Octree representations.
There are several proposals for point cloud compression \cite{Schnabel2006,Huang2008}. These techniques can be applied to our system, but note that they are mainly for storage and are not optimized for communication systems.
\subsection{Differentiation and Differential Coding} \label{sec:diff}
Autonomous vehicles can identify and upload the necessary dynamic map data to LCD using differentiation. Since dynamic map data is only detectable at the moment of departing from a road segment, the upload transmissions take place immediately through the nearby RSU fog node (in short-range broadcast), whenever possible. Otherwise, cellular network transmissions are employed.
Differentiation is particularly useful for identifying the dynamic components in 3D LIDAR point cloud data. We denote the differentiated data between observed point cloud $x_c(t)$ and reference point cloud $m_e(t-1)$ by:
\begin{equation}
{\sf Diff}_c(t) = \Big( x_c(t) \backslash m_e(t-1) \Big) \cup \Big( m_e(t-1) \backslash x_c(t) \Big)
\end{equation}
where $t = {\sf t}^{c}_{e}$ and $e \in P_c$.
To encode the differentiated data, we employ {\em differential coding} on Octree. Octree allows efficient identification of the differences by enumerating the voxels along the tree. Once the differences are identified, we can employ another Octree to encode the differentiated parts. However, the meanings of voxels are now different: `0' means no difference with respect to the reference 3D LIDAR point cloud data, whereas `1' means the binary content in the respective voxel should be flipped. See an illustration in Fig.~\ref{fig:differentiate}.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{figs/Figure8.pdf}
\caption{\small An illustration of differential coding on 3D point cloud.}\label{fig:differentiate}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Hashing 3D LIDAR Data} \label{sec:bloom}
Comparison through the hash files associated with 3D LIDAR point cloud data is more efficient than using the whole data set. The hash files should have certain desirable properties. For example, one can compare two hash files to identify which point cloud data consists of more contents (e.g., more observed objects). Second, one can check if the point cloud data contains certain known objects, without looking at the whole data set. A simple solution is to use a Bloom filter \cite{MMbook}, a compact lossy data structure representing the membership of a set of elements. The basic operations of a Bloom filter involve adding an element to the set and querying the membership of an element. It does not support element removal, therefore, upon query of an element membership, the Bloom filter output may only result in false positives, which can be minimized through parameter setting. In our system, each vehicle first communicates with RSU and LCD using Bloom filters before uploading the whole perception data.
{Recall that $x_c(t) = \{p_1, p_2 , ...\}$ is a set of 3D points. Note that each $p_i$ has a unique octary representation, such that each digit in the octary representation represents the order of the respective occupied voxel at each layer in Octree. We denote index `0' to represent the first voxel. For example, the four 3D points in the Octree of Fig.~\ref{fig:octree} can be represented in octary representation as $\{101, 105, 150, 155\}$. Next, we map each point in octary representation by a set of $K$ binary hash functions: $f_k(p_i) \mapsto \{0, 1\}$, where $k = 1,...,K$. Let $f_k(x_c(t)) = f_k(p_1)\vee f_k(p_2)\vee ...$ be the bitwise disjunction of all the points in $x_c(t) = \{p_1, p_2 , ...\}$. The $K$ output bits $\big(f_k(x_c(t))\big)_{k=1}^K$ will be a Bloom filter for $x_c(t)$, denoted by ${\sf BF}(x_c(t))$. Bloom filters have some desirable properties. If a 3D point cloud has more contents, then its Bloom filter contains more 1's. One can check if a 3D point cloud contains a set of known 3D points, by checking if its Bloom filter contains the corresponding hash values.}
|
\section{Introduction}
Database management systems (DBMS) based on the relational model~\cite{Codd1970} are a central component in many applications, since they allow efficiently storing and retrieving data.
They have been extensively tested by random query generators such as SQLsmith{}~\cite{sqlsmith}, which have been effective in finding queries that cause the DBMS process to crash (\emph{i.e.}{}, by causing a buffer overflow).
Also fuzzers such as AFL~\cite{afl} are routinely applied to DBMS.
However, these approaches cannot detect \emph{logic bugs}, which we define as bugs that cause a query to return an incorrect result, for example, by erroneously omitting a row, without crashing the DBMS.
Logic bugs in DBMS are difficult to detect automatically.
A key challenge for automatic testing is to come up with an effective \emph{test oracle}, that can detect whether a system behaves correctly for a given input~\cite{Howden:1978}.
In 1998, Slutz proposed to use \emph{differential testing}~\cite{mckeeman1998differential} to detect logic bugs in DBMS, by constructing a test oracle that compares the results of a query on multiple DBMS, which he implemented in a tool RAGS~\cite{slutz1998massive}.
While RAGS detected many bugs, differential testing comes with the significant limitation that the systems under test need to implement the same semantics for a given input.
All DBMS support a common and standardized language \emph{Structured Query Language (SQL)} to create, access, and modify data~\cite{Chamberlin:1974}.
In practice, however, each DBMS provides a plethora of extensions to this standard and deviates from it in other parts (\emph{e.g.}{}, in how \texttt{NULL} values are handled~\cite{slutz1998massive}).
This vastly limits differential testing, and also the author stated that the small common core and the differences between different DBMS were a challenge~\cite{slutz1998massive}.
Furthermore, even when all DBMS fetch the same rows, it cannot be ensured that they work correctly, because they might be affected by the same underlying bug.
In order to efficiently detect logic bugs in DBMS, we propose a general and principled approach that we termed \emph{Pivoted Query Synthesis{}}, which we implemented in a tool called SQLancer{}.
The core idea is to solve the oracle problem for a single, randomly-selected row, called the \emph{pivot row{}}, by synthesizing a query whose result set must contain the pivot row{}.
By considering only a single row, our approach is simple to understand and implement.
We synthesize the query by randomly generating expressions for \texttt{WHERE} and \texttt{JOIN} clauses, evaluating the expressions based on the pivot row{}, and modifying each expression to yield \texttt{TRUE}.
If the query, when processed by the DBMS, fails to fetch the pivot row{}, a bug in the DBMS has been detected.
We refer to this oracle as the \emph{containment} oracle.
Listing~\ref{lst:illustrativex} illustrates our approach on a test case that triggers a bug that we found using the containment oracle{} in the widely-used DBMS SQLite{}.
The \texttt{CREATE TABLE} statement creates a new table \texttt{t0} with a column \texttt{c0}.
Subsequently, an index is created and four rows with the values \texttt{0}, \texttt{1}, \texttt{2}, \texttt{3}, and \texttt{NULL} are inserted.
We select the pivot row{} \texttt{c0=NULL} and construct the random \texttt{WHERE} clause \texttt{c0 IS NOT 1}.
Since \texttt{NULL IS NOT 1} evaluates to \texttt{TRUE}, we can directly pass the query to the DBMS, expecting the row with value \texttt{NULL} to be contained in the result.
However, due to a logic bug in the DBMS, the partial index was used based on the incorrect assumption that \texttt{c0 IS NOT 1} implied \texttt{c0 NOT NULL}, resulting in the pivot row{} not being fetched.
We reported this bug to the SQLite{} developers, who stated that it existed since 2013, classified it as critical and fixed it shortly after we reported it.
Even for this simple query, differential testing would have been ineffective in detecting the bug.
The \texttt{CREATE TABLE} statement is specific to SQLite{}, since, unlike other popular DBMS, such as PostgreSQL{} and MySQL, SQLite{} does not require the column \texttt{c0} to be assigned a column type.
Furthermore, both MySQL and PostgreSQL{} lack an operator \texttt{IS NOT} that can be applied to integers.
All DBMS provide an operator \texttt{IS NOT TRUE}, which, however, has different semantics; for SQLite{}, it would fetch only the value \texttt{0}, and not expose the bug.
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption={Illustrative example, based on a \emph{critical} SQLite{} bug that we reported.}, label=lst:illustrativex]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0);
CREATE INDEX i0 ON t0(1) WHERE c0 NOT NULL;
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES (0), (1), (2), (3),
(NULL);
SELECT c0 FROM t0 WHERE t0.c0 IS NOT 1; -- unexpected: NULL is not contained
\end{lstlisting}
\sloppy{}
To demonstrate the generality of our approach, we implemented it for three popular and widely-used DBMS, namely SQLite{}~\cite{sqlite}, MySQL~\cite{mysql}, and PostgreSQL{}~\cite{postgres}.
In total, we found 99{} bugs, namely 65{} bugs in SQLite{}, 25{} bugs in MySQL, and 9{} in PostgreSQL{}, demonstrating that the approach is highly effective and general.
Out of these bugs, we found 61{} bugs with the containment oracle{}.
We found 34{} bugs by causing DBMS-internal errors, such as database corruptions, and for 4{} bugs we caused DBMS crashes (\emph{i.e.}{}, \texttt{SEGFAULT}s).
One of the crashes that we reported for MySQL was classified as a security vulnerability (CVE-2019-2879).
Detailed information on the bug reports and fixes can be found at \url{https://www.manuelrigger.at/pqs}{}.
We designed our approach to mainly detect logic bugs that cannot be found by fuzzers, which is confirmed by the evaluation.
Since our method is general and applicable to all DBMS, we expect that it will be widely adopted to detect bugs that have so far been overlooked.
In summary, we contribute the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item A general and highly-effective approach to finding bugs in DBMS termed \emph{Pivoted Query Synthesis{}}.
\item An implementation of this approach in a tool named SQLancer{}, used to test SQLite{}, MySQL, and PostgreSQL{}.
\item An evaluation of SQLancer{}, which uncovered a total of 99{} bugs.
\end{itemize}
\section{Background}
This section provides important background information on relational DBMS, SQL, the DBMS we tested, and their characteristics.
\vspace{1em}{}
\sloppy{}
\normalpar{Database management systems}
DBMS are based on a \emph{data model}, which abstractly describes how data is organized.
In our work, we primarily aim to test DBMS based on the \emph{relational data model} proposed by Codd~\cite{Codd1970}, on which most widely-used databases, such as Oracle, Microsoft SQL, PostgreSQL{}, MySQL, and SQLite{} are based.
A relation $R$ in this model is a mathematical relation $R \subseteq S_1 \times S_2 \times ... \times S_n$ where $S_1$, $S_2$, ..., $S_n$ are referred to as domains.
More commonly, a relation is referred to as a \emph{table} and a domain is referred to as a \emph{data type}.
Each tuple in this relation is referred to as a row.
Note that rows in $R$ are unordered.
While the original relational model did not allow duplicate rows, most DBMS use bags of tuples, which allow duplicate values.
The approach we present in Section~\ref{sec:approach} works for both sets of tuples and bags of tuples.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Structured query language (SQL)}
Structured Query Language (SQL)~\cite{Chamberlin:1974}, which is based on relational algebra~\cite{codd1972relational}, is the most commonly used language in DBMS to create tables, insert rows, and manipulate and retrieve data.
ANSI first standardized SQL in 1987, and it has since been developed further.
In practice, however, DBMS lack functionality described by the SQL standard and deviate from it, making it difficult to test DBMS using differential testing.
SQL statements can be roughly categorized as belonging to the Data Definition Language (DDL), Data Manipulation Language (DML), and Data Query Language (DQL).
DDL statements allow creating, changing, or removing elements such as tables or indexes in a database.
For example, \texttt{CREATE TABLE} allows creating a new table in database with a given \emph{schema} that defines the columns, their data types, and constraints.
\texttt{CREATE INDEX} creates an index, which is a supplementary data structure used to improve the speed of querying data.
\texttt{ALTER TABLE} can be used to change a table's schema.
\texttt{DROP} statements allow removing elements such as tables or indexes.
DML statements allow adding, changing, or removing data.
For example, \texttt{INSERT} inserts data into tables, \texttt{UPDATE} allows changing values in existing rows, and \texttt{DELETE} removes rows from a table.
The Data Query Language (DQL) allows fetching rows from a database using the \texttt{SELECT} statement.
Although these statements are supported by all the DBMS that we investigated, the syntax and semantics of these statements depend significantly on the respective DBMS.
In fact, many bugs that we found were caused by the implementation of features unique to the respective DBMS.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Important DBMS}
We focused on three popular and widely-used open-source DBMS: SQLite{}, MySQL, and PostgreSQL{} (see Table~\ref{tbl:dbmsoverview}).
According to the DB-Engines Ranking~\cite{dbengines} and the Stack Overflow's annual Developer Survey~\cite{stackoverflowsurvey}, these DBMS are among the most popular and widely-used DBMS.
Furthermore, the SQLite{} website speculates that SQLite{} is likely used more than all other databases combined; most mobile phones extensively use SQLite{}, it is used in most popular web browsers, and many embedded systems (such as television sets).\footnote{https://www.sqlite.org/mostdeployed.html}
All DBMS have been maintained and developed for about 20 years.
SQLite{} is developed by only three developers, MySQL is mainly developed commercially (by Oracle), and PostgreSQL{} is developed by volunteers coordinated by five people who form the core team.
\vspace{1em}{}
\begin{table}
\small{}{}
\caption{The DBMS we tested are popular, complex, and have been developed for a long time.}
\label{tbl:dbmsoverview}
\begin{tabular}{l >{\RaggedLeft}p{0,8cm} >{\RaggedLeft}p{1,1cm} >{\RaggedLeft}p{0,5cm} >{\RaggedLeft}p{1cm} >{\RaggedLeft}p{1,0cm} }
\toprule{}
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{Popularity Rank} & & \\
\cmidrule(r){2-3}
DBMS & DB-Engines & Stack Overflow & LOC & Released & Age (years) \\
\midrule
SQLite{} & 11 & 4 & 0.3M & 2000 & 19 \\
MySQL & 2 & 1 & 3.8M & 1995 & 24 \\
PostgreSQL{} & 4 & 2 & 1.4M & 1996 & 23 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
{}
\end{table}
\normalpar{Unique Features of the DBMS}
Each DBMS provides its own distinct set of features and characteristics.
SQLite{} runs in the application process, and thus is mostly used for local data storage for individual applications and devices.
It provides a limited set of language constructs since it strives to be compact.
However, due to SQLite{}'s type-related features, we perceived it to be the most flexible DBMS.
For example, unlike other DBMS, SQLite{} allows data types to be omitted for columns and performs implicit conversions when a value does not have the expected data type.
MySQL and PostgreSQL{} are conventional DBMS where the server runs in its own process and is accessed by a client over a network connection.
Both DBMS provide significantly more features than SQLite{}; for example, they provide high-level data types such as arrays and json files.
Examples of unique features to MySQL include unsigned data types, and that one of various non-standard storage engines can be assigned to a table (\emph{e.g.}{}, a CSV-based engine).
Distinct PostgreSQL{} features include object-oriented tables using \emph{table inheritance}, and that it performs only few implicit conversion.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Test Oracles}
Having an effective \emph{test oracle} is crucial for automatic testing approaches~\cite{Howden:1978}.
A test oracle can determine for a given test case whether the test case has passed or failed.
Manually written test cases encode the programmer's knowledge who thus acts a test oracle.
In this work, we are only interested in automatic test oracles, which would allow comprehensively testing a DBMS.
The most successful automatic test oracle for DBMS is based on \emph{differential testing}~\cite{slutz1998massive}.
Differential testing refers to a technique where a single input is passed to multiple systems that implement the same language to detect mismatching outputs, which would indicate a bug.
In the context of DBMS, the input corresponds to a database as well as a query, and the systems to multiple DBMS---when their fetched result sets mismatch, a bug in the DBMS would be detected.
However, as argued above, DBMS provide different features, making it difficult to use differential testing effectively.
Furthermore, differential testing is not an \emph{precise} oracle, as it fails to detect bugs that are shared by all the systems.
\vspace{1em}{}
\section{Pivoted Query Synthesis{}}
\label{sec:approach}
We propose \emph{Pivoted Query Synthesis{}} as an automatic testing technique for detecting logic bugs in DBMS.
Our core insight is that verifying the correctness of the DBMS one row at a time is simpler than checking the complete result set, and enables creating a simple test oracle.
Specifically, our idea is to select a random row, to which we refer as the pivot row{}, from a set of tables (and views) in the database.
For this pivot row, we semi-randomly generate a set of expressions for which we ensure that they evaluate to \texttt{TRUE} based on an Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) interpreter.
By using these expressions in \texttt{WHERE} and \texttt{JOIN} clauses of an otherwise randomly-generated query, we can ensure that the pivot row{} must be contained in the result set.
If it is not contained, a bug has been found.
By repeatedly checking a single row, we speculate that this technique is similarly effective as one that verifies the correctness of the complete result set.
Basing the approach on an AST interpreter provides us with an exact oracle.
While implementing this interpreter requires moderate implementation effort for complex operators (such as regular expression operators), other challenges that a DBMS has to tackle, such as query planning, concurrent access, integrity, and persistence can be disregarded by it.
Furthermore, the AST interpreter can be naively implemented without affecting the tool's performance, since it only operates on a single record, whereas the DBMS has to potentially scan through all the rows of a database to process a query.
\subsection{Approach Overview}
Figure~\ref{fig:overview} illustrates the detailed steps of our approach.
First, we create a database with one or multiple random tables, which we fill with random data (see step \circled{1}).
We ensure that each table holds at least one row.
We then select a random row from each of the tables (see step \circled{2}), to which we refer as the pivot row{}.
We verify the correctness of the DBMS based on this pivot row{}, and also provide a test oracle.
We randomly create expressions based on the DBMS' SQL grammar and valid table column names (see step \circled{3}).
We evaluate these expressions, substituting column references by the corresponding values of the pivot row{}.
Then, we modify the expressions so that they yield \texttt{TRUE} (see step \circled{4}).
We use these expressions in \texttt{WHERE} and/or \texttt{JOIN} clauses for a query that we construct (see step \circled{5}).
We pass this query to the DBMS, which returns a result set (see step \circled{6}), which we expect to contain the pivot row{}, potentially among other rows.
In a final step, we check whether the pivot row{} is indeed contained in the result set (see step \circled{7}).
If it is not contained, we have likely detected a bug in the DBMS.
For the next iteration, we either continue with step \circled{2} and generate new queries for a newly-selected pivot row{}, or continue with \circled{1} to generate a new database.
Our core idea is given by how we construct the test oracle, which is given by steps \circled{2} to \circled{7}.
Thus, Section~\ref{sec:qgeneration} first explains how we generate queries and check for containment, assuming that the database has already been created.
Section~\ref{sec:dbge} then explains step \circled{1}, namely how we generate the tables and data.
While working on the database generation, we found another applicable test oracle to detect bugs, namely by checking for unexpected errors returned by the DBMS.
We refer to this oracle as \emph{error oracle{}} and also explain it in Section~\ref{sec:dbge}.
Section~\ref{sec:impl} provides important implementation details.
\subsection{Query Generation \& Checking}
\label{sec:qgeneration}
The core idea of our approach is to construct a query for which we anticipate that the pivot row{} is contained in the result set.
We randomly generate expressions to be used in a condition of the query, and ensure that each expression evaluates to \texttt{TRUE} for the pivot row{}.
This subsection describes how we generate random expressions that we rectify and then use in a query (\emph{i.e.}{}, steps \circled{3} to \circled{5}).
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Random Condition Generation}
In step \circled{3}, we randomly generate Abstract Syntax Trees (ASTs) up to a specified maximum depth by constructing a random expression tree based on the database's schema (\emph{i.e.}{}, the column names and types).
Generating these expression trees is implemented similarly to RAGS~\cite{slutz1998massive} and SQLsmith{}~\cite{sqlsmith}.
However, while these systems directly use the generated expressions in query conditions (\emph{e.g.}{}, in a \texttt{WHERE} clause), our approach requires the conditions to yield \texttt{TRUE} for the pivot row{}, which is ensured in the subsequent steps.
For SQLite{} and MySQL, SQLancer{} generates expressions of any type, because they provide implicit conversions to boolean.
For PostgreSQL{}, which performs few implicit conversions, the generated root node must produce a boolean value, which we achieve by selecting one of the appropriate operators (\emph{e.g.}{}, a comparison operator).
\vspace{1em}{}
Listing~\ref{alg:astgen} illustrates how generating the expressions is implemented for MySQL and SQLite{}.
The input parameter \texttt{depth} ensures that when a specified maximum depth is reached, a leaf node is generated.
The leaf node can either be a randomly-generated constant, or a reference to a column in a table or view.
If the maximum depth is not yet reached, also other operators are considered (e.g., a unary operator such as \texttt{NOT}).
Note that generating these expressions is dependent on which operators the respective DBMS supports.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{overview.pdf}
\caption{Overview of the Approach implemented in SQLancer{}. Dotted lines indicate that a result is generated.}
\label{fig:overview}
{}
\end{figure*}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{The \texttt{generateExpression()} function generates a random AST.}
\label{alg:astgen}
\SetKwFunction{FMain}{generateExpression}
\SetKwProg{Fn}{Function}{:}{}
\Fn{\FMain{int depth}}{
$node\_types \leftarrow \{LITERAL$, $COLUMN\}$\\
\uIf{depth $<$ maxdepth}{
$node\_types \leftarrow node\_types \cup \{UNARY$, \ldots{}$\}$\\
}
$type \leftarrow random(node\_types)$\\
\Switch{type}{
\uCase{LITERAL} {
\KwRet\ Literal(randomLiteral());
}
\uCase{COLUMN} {
\KwRet\ ColumnValue(randomTable().randomColumn());
}
\uCase{UNARY} {
\KwRet\ UnaryNode(generateExpression(depth+1), UnaryNode.getRandomOperation());
}
\uCase{\ldots{}} {
\ldots{}
}
}
}
\end{algorithm}
\normalpar{Expression Evaluation}
After building a random expression tree, we must check whether the condition yields \texttt{TRUE} for the pivot row{}.
To this end, every node provides an \texttt{execute()} method that computes the node's result.
Leaf nodes directly return their assigned constant value.
Column nodes are assigned the value that corresponds to their column in the pivot row{}.
For example, in Figure~\ref{fig:overview} step \circled{3}, the leaf node \texttt{t0.c1} returns \texttt{TRUE}, and the constant node \texttt{3} returns an integer \texttt{3}.
Composite nodes compute their result based on the literals returned by their children.
For example, the \texttt{NOT} node returns \texttt{FALSE}, because its child evaluates to \texttt{TRUE} (see Algorithm~\ref{alg:notimpl}).
The node first executes its subexpression, and then casts the result to a boolean; if the result is a boolean value, the value is negated; otherwise \texttt{NULL} is returned.
Note that our implementation is simpler than AST interpreters for programming languages~\cite{Wurthinger2013}, since all nodes operate on literal values (\emph{i.e.}{}, they do not need to consider mutable storage).
Since the bottleneck of our approach is the DBMS evaluating the queries rather than SQLancer{}, all operations are implemented naively and do not perform any optimizations.
Some operations require moderate implementation effort nevertheless; for example, the implementation of the \texttt{LIKE} regular expression operator has over 50 LOC in SQLancer.
\vspace{1em}{}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{The execute() implementation of a \texttt{NOT} node.}
\label{alg:notimpl}
\SetKwFunction{FMain}{NotNode::execute}
\SetKwProg{Fn}{Method}{:}{}
\Fn{\FMain{}}{%
$value \leftarrow child.execute()$\\
\Switch{asBoolean(value)}{
\uCase{TRUE} {
$result \leftarrow$ $FALSE$
}
\uCase{FALSE} {
$result \leftarrow$ $TRUE$
}
\uCase{NULL} {
$result \leftarrow$ $NULL$
}
}
\KwRet\ result;
}
\end{algorithm}
\normalpar{Expression Rectification}
After generating random expressions, step \circled{4} ensures that they evaluate to \texttt{TRUE}.
SQL is based on a three-valued logic.
Thus, when evaluated in a boolean context, an expression either yields \texttt{TRUE}, \texttt{FALSE}, or \texttt{NULL}.
To rectify the expression to yield \texttt{TRUE}, we use Algorithm~\ref{alg:rect}.
For example, in Figure~\ref{fig:overview} step \circled{4}, we modify the expression by adding a preceding \texttt{NOT}, so that the expression evaluates to \texttt{TRUE}.
Note that our approach works also for other logic systems (\emph{e.g.}{}, four-valued logic), by adjusting this step.
\vspace{1em}{}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{The expression rectification step applied to a randomly-generated expression.}
\label{alg:rect}
\SetKwFunction{FMain}{rectifyCondition}
\SetKwProg{Fn}{Function}{:}{}
\Fn{\FMain{randexpr}}{
\Switch{randexpr.execute()}{
\uCase{TRUE} {
$result \leftarrow$ $randexpr$
}
\uCase{FALSE} {
$result \leftarrow NOT$ $randexpr$
}
\uCase{NULL} {
$result \leftarrow randexpr$ $ISNULL$
}
}
\KwRet\ result;
}
\end{algorithm}
{}
\normalpar{Query generation}
In step \circled{5}, we generate targeted queries that fetch the pivot row{}.
The expressions evaluating to \texttt{TRUE} are used in \texttt{WHERE} clauses, which restrict which rows a query fetches, and in \texttt{JOIN} clauses, which are used to join tables.
Note that \texttt{SELECT} statements typically provide various keywords to control the query's behavior, for example, all DBMS provide a keyword to fetch only distinct values.
We randomly select appropriate keywords when generating these queries.
Note that our approach can also be used to partially test aggregate functions, which compute values over multiple rows, when only a single row is present in a table.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Checking containment}
After using the DBMS to evaluate the query in step \circled{6}, checking whether the pivot row{} is part of the result set is the last step of our approach.
While the checking routine could have been implemented in SQLancer{}, we instead construct the query so that it checks for containment, effectively combining steps \circled{6} and \circled{7}.
Each DBMS provides various operators to check for containment, such as the \texttt{IN} and \texttt{INTERSECT} operators.
For example, for checking containment in Figure~\ref{fig:overview} step \circled{7}, we can check whether the row \texttt{(3, TRUE, -5)} is contained in the result set using the query \texttt{SELECT (3, TRUE, -5) INTERSECT SELECT t0.c0, t0.c1, t1.c0 FROM t1, t2 WHERE NOT(NOT(t0.c1 OR (t1.c0 > 3)))} in SQLite{}, which returns a row if the pivot row{} is contained.
\vspace{1em}{}
\subsection{Random State Generation}
\label{sec:dbge}
\sloppy{}
In step \circled{1}, we generate a random database state.
We use the \texttt{CREATE TABLE} statement to create tables, and \texttt{INSERT} to insert data rows.
Furthermore, by generating additional DDL and DML statements, we can explore a larger space of databases, some of which exposed DBMS bugs.
For example, we implemented \texttt{UPDATE}, \texttt{DELETE}, \texttt{ALTER TABLE}, and \texttt{CREATE INDEX} commands for all databases, as well as DBMS-specific run-time options.
A number of commands that we implemented were unique to the respective DBMS.
Statements unique to MySQL were \texttt{REPAIR TABLE} and \texttt{CHECK TABLE}.
The statements \texttt{DISCARD} and \texttt{CREATE STATISTICS} were unique to PostgreSQL{}.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Error handling}
We attempt to generate statements that are correct both syntactically and semantically.
However, generating semantically correct statements is sometimes impractical.
For example, an \texttt{INSERT} might fail when a value already present in an \texttt{UNIQUE} column is inserted again; preventing such an error would require scanning every row in the respective table.
Rather than checking for such cases, which would involve additional implementation effort and a run-time performance cost, we defined a list of error messages that we might expect when executing the respective statement.
Often, we associated an error message to a statement depending on presence or absence of specific keywords; for example, an \texttt{INSERT OR IGNORE} is expected to ignore many error messages that would appear without the \texttt{OR IGNORE}.
If the DBMS returns an expected error, it is ignored.
However, we found a number of cases where an error message was unexpected.
For example, in SQLite{} a \emph{malformed database disk image} error message is always unexpected, since it indicates the corruption of the database.
Based on this observation, we propose a secondary error oracle, which we termed \emph{error oracle{}}, and which detects a bug when an unexpected error is caused.
\subsection{Important Implementation Details}
\label{sec:impl}
This section explains implementation decisions, which we consider significant for the outcome of our study.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Performance}
We optimized SQLancer{} to take advantage of the underlying hardware.
We parallelized the system by running each thread on a distinct database, which also resulted in bugs connected to race conditions being found.
To fully utilize each CPU, we decreased the probability of SQL statements being generated that cause low CPU utilization (such as \texttt{VACUUM} in PostgreSQL{}).
Typically, SQLancer{} generates 5,0000 to 20,000 statements per second, depending on the DBMS under test.
We implemented the system in Java.
However, any other programming language would have been equally well suited, as the performance bottleneck was the DBMS executing the queries.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Number of rows}
We found most bugs by restricting the number of rows inserted to a low value (10--30 rows). A higher number would have caused queries to time out when tables are joined without a restrictive join clause. For example, in a query \texttt{SELECT * FROM t0, t1, t2}, the largest result set for 100 rows in each table would already be $|t0|*|t1|*|t2|=1,000,000$, significantly lowering the query throughput.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Database state} For the generation of many SQL statements, knowledge of the database schema or other database state is required; for example, to insert data, SQLancer{} must determine the name of a table and its columns.
We query such state dynamically from the DBMS, rather than tracking or computing it ourselves, which would require additional implementation effort.
For example, to query the name of the tables, both MySQL and PostgreSQL{} provide an information table \texttt{information\_schema.tables} and SQLite{} a table \texttt{sqlite\_master}.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Expressions on columns}
While our initial implementation only checked the containment of the pivot row, we subsequently extended it to also check whether expressions on columns are evaluated correctly.
To achieve this, we allow the randomly-generated query to not only refer to a column, but also to randomly-generated expressions that are potentially based on column references.
Thus, rather than checking whether the pivot row is contained in the result set, we evaluate the expressions based on the pivot row to check whether the expression results are contained in the result set.
\vspace{1em}{}
\section{Evaluation}
We evaluated whether the proposed approach is effective in finding bugs in DBMS.
We expected it to detect logic bugs, which cannot be found by fuzzers, rather than crash bugs.
This section overviews the experimental setup, bugs found, and characterizes the SQL statements used to trigger the bugs.
We then present a DBMS-specific bug overview, where we present interesting bugs and bug trends.
To put these findings into context, we measured the size of SQLancer{}'s components and the coverage it reaches on the tested DBMS.
\subsection{Experimental Setup}
To test the effectiveness of our approach, we implemented SQLancer{} and tested SQLite{}, MySQL, and PostgreSQL{} in a period of about three months.
Typically, we enhanced SQLancer{} to test a new operator or DBMS feature, let the tool run for several seconds up to a day, and then report any new bugs found during this process.
Where possible, we waited for bug fixes before continuing testing and implementing new features.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Baseline}
Note that there is no applicable baseline to which we could compare our work.
RAGS~\cite{slutz1998massive}, which was proposed more than 20 years ago, would be the closest related work, but is not publicly available and might be outdated.
Due to the small common SQL core, we would expect that RAGS could not find most of the bugs that we found.
Khalek et al. worked on automating testing DBMS using constraint solving~\cite{khalek2008,khalek2010querygen}, with which they found a previously unknown bug.
Also their tool is not available publicly.
SQLsmith~\cite{sqlsmith}, AFL~\cite{afl} as well as other random query generators and fuzzers~\cite{Poess2004} only detect crash bugs in DBMS.
Thus, the only potential overlap between these tools and SQLancer would be the crash bugs that we found, which are not the focus of this work.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{DBMS versions}
For all DBMS, we started testing the latest release version, which was SQLite{} 3.28, MySQL 8.0.16, and PostgreSQL{} 11.4.
For SQLite{}, we switched to the latest trunk version (\emph{i.e.}{}, the latest non-release version of the source code) after the first bugs were fixed.
For MySQL, we also tested version 8.0.17 after it was released.
For PostgreSQL{}, we switched to the latest beta version (PostgreSQL{} Beta 2) after opening duplicate bug reports.
Eventually, we continued to test the latest trunk version.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Bug reporting}
In the SQLite{} bug tracker, bugs can only be created by SQLite{} developers, so initially we reported bugs on the public mailing list.
Later, we were offered access to the bug tracker and proceeded to report bugs there.
For MySQL, we reported non-security MySQL bugs on the public bug tracker.
For PostgreSQL{}, we reported non-security bugs on the public mailing list, since PostgreSQL{} lacks a public bug tracker.
We reported crash bugs privately, because we were unsure whether they were security relevant; however, we did not investigate any of the bugs in terms of their security impact, as the focus of this work were logic bugs.
The test cases that we used in our bug reports were reduced ones; SQLancer{} automatically deletes SQL statements that are unnecessary to reproduce a bug, and we also manually shortened them were possible.
Note that all bug reports are documented at \url{https://www.manuelrigger.at/pqs}{}.
\subsection{Bug Reports Overview}
\begin{table}
\small{}{}
\center
\caption{Total number of reported bugs and their status}
\label{tbl:nrfoundbugs}
\begin{tabular}{l r r r r r}
\toprule
& & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Closed} \\
\cmidrule(r){4-5}
DBMS & Fixed & Verified & Intended & Duplicate \\
\midrule
SQLite{} & 65 & 0{} & 4{} & 2{}\\
MySQL & 15 & 10{} & 1{} & 4{} \\
PostgreSQL{} & 5 & 4{} & 7{} & 6{} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
{}
\end{table}
Table~\ref{tbl:nrfoundbugs} shows the number of bugs that we reported (123{} overall).
We considered 99{} bugs as true bugs, because they resulted in code fixes (77{} reports), documentation fixes (8{} reports), or were confirmed by the developers (14{} reports).
We opened 24{} bug reports that we classified as false bugs, because behavior exhibited in the bug reports was considered to work as intended (12{} reports) or because bugs that we reported were considered to be duplicates (12{} reports, \emph{e.g.}{}, because a bug had already been fixed on the latest non-release version).
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Severity levels}
Only for SQLite{}, bugs were assigned a severity level by the DBMS developers.
14{} bugs were classified as \emph{Critical}, 8{} bugs as \emph{Severe}, and 14{} as \emph{Important}.
For 13{} bugs, we reported them on the mailing list and no entry in the bug tracker was created.
The other bug reports were assigned low severity levels such as \emph{Minor}.
While the severity level was not set consistently, this still provides evidence that we found many critical bugs.
For the other DBMS, we lack data on how severe the bugs were.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{SQLite{} bug handling}
For SQLite{}, the main developers reacted to most of our bug reports shortly after reporting them, and fixed issues typically within a day, which is why is why no \emph{verified} and \emph{open} bugs are listed.
The developers' quick responses was a significant factor for the high number of bugs that we reported for SQLite{}, which led us to focus our testing efforts on this DBMS.
For SQLite{}, we also tested \texttt{VIEWS}, non-default \texttt{COLLATE}s (which define how strings are compared), floating-point support, and aggregate functions, which we omitted for the other DBMS.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{MySQL bug handling}
For MySQL, bug reports were typically verified within a day by a tester.
This tester also evaluated whether the bug could be reproduced on other MySQL versions than the one we specified.
MySQL's development is not open for the general public.
Although we tried to establish contact with MySQL developers, we could not obtain any information that went beyond what is visible on the public bug tracker.
Thus, it is likely that some of the verified bug reports will subsequently be considered as duplicates or classified to work as intended.
Furthermore, although MySQL is available as open-source software, only the code for the latest release version is provided, so any bug fixes could be verified only with the subsequent release.
This was a significant factor that restricted us in finding bugs in MySQL; due to the increased effort of verifying whether a newly found bug was already reported, we invested limited effort into testing MySQL.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{PostgreSQL{} bug handling}
For PostgreSQL{}, we received feedback to bug reports within a day, and it typically took multiple days or weeks until a bug was fixed, since possible fixes and patches were discussed intensively on the mailing list.
As we found less bugs for PostgreSQL{} overall, this did not significantly influence our testing efforts.
Note that not all confirmed bugs were fixed.
For example, for one reported bug, a developer decided to ``put this on the back burner until we have some consensus how to proceed on that''; from the discussion, we speculate that the changes needed to address the bug properly were considered too invasive.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Test oracles}
Table~\ref{tbl:oracles} shows the test oracles that we used to detect the true bugs.
The containment oracle{} accounts for most of the bugs that we found, which is expected, since our approach mainly builds on this oracle.
Perhaps surprisingly, the error oracle{} also contributed a large number of bugs.
We believe that this observation could be used when using fuzzers to test DBMS, for example, by checking for specific error messages that indicate database corruptions.
Our approach also detected a number of crash bugs, one of which was considered a security vulnerability in MySQL.
These bugs are somewhat less interesting, since they could also have been found by traditional fuzzers.
\vspace{1em}{}
\begin{table}
\small{}{}
\caption{The oracles and how many bugs they found.}
\center
\label{tbl:oracles}
\begin{tabular}{l r r r}
\toprule{}
DBMS & Contains & Error & SEGFAULT \\
\midrule
SQLite{} & 46{} & 17{} & 2{}\\
MySQL & 14{} & 10{} & 1{}\\
PostgreSQL{} & 1{} & 7{} & 1{}\\
Sum & 61{} & 34{} & 4{} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
{}
\end{table}
\subsection{SQL Statements Overview}
\normalpar{Test case length}
Our test cases typically comprised only a few SQL statements (3.71{} LOC on average).
Note that we reduced test cases before reporting them.
Figure~\ref{fig:cumloc} shows the cumulative distribution of the number of statements in a test case to reproduce a bug.
For 13{} test cases, a single line was sufficient.
Such test cases were either \texttt{SELECT} statements that operated on constants, or operations that set DBMS-specific options.
As an example, Listing~\ref{lst:suberr} shows a bug in SQLite{} where subtracting an integer from a \texttt{TEXT} value resulted in an incorrect result.
As another example, Listing~\ref{lst:option} shows a bug in MySQL where setting an option nondeterministically failed with an error.
The maximum number of statements required to reproduce a bug was 8{}.
A PostgreSQL{} crash bug that had already been fixed when we reported it required even 27 statements to be reproduced.
\vspace{1em}{}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=Bug in SQLite{} where subtracting an integer from a string produces an incorrect result, label=lst:suberr]
SELECT '' - 2851427734582196970; -- actual: -2851427734582196736, expected: -2851427734582196970
\end{lstlisting}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=Bug in MySQL where setting an option nondeterministically failed with an error,label=lst:option]
SET GLOBAL key_cache_division_limit = 100; -- ERROR 1210 (HY000): Incorrect arguments to SET
\end{lstlisting}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics{loc.pdf}
\caption{The cumulative distribution of LOC needed to reproduce a bug.}
\label{fig:cumloc}
{}
\end{figure}
\normalpar{Statement distribution}
Figure~\ref{fig:statementdistr} shows the distribution of statements.
Note that for some bug reports, we had to select the simplest test case among multiple failing ones, which might skew these results.
The \texttt{CREATE TABLE} and \texttt{INSERT statements} are part of most bug reports for all DBMS, which is expected, since only few bugs can be reproduced without manipulating or fetching data from a table.
90.0{}\% of the bug reports included only a single table.
The \texttt{SELECT} statement also ranks highly, since the containment oracle{} relies on it.
In all DBMS, the \texttt{CREATE INDEX} statements rank highly; especially for SQLite{}, we reported a number of bugs where creating an index resulted in a malformed database image or in a row not being fetched.
We found that statements that compute or recompute table state were error prone, for example, \texttt{REPAIR TABLE} and \texttt{CHECK TABLE} in MySQL, as well as \texttt{VACUUM} and \texttt{REINDEX} in SQLite{} and PostgreSQL{}.
DBMS-specific options, such as \texttt{SET} in MySQL and PostgreSQL{}, and \texttt{PRAGMA} in SQLite{} also resulted in bugs being found.
For PostgreSQL{}, bug reports contained \texttt{ANALYZE}, which gathers statistics to be used by the query planner.
\vspace{1em}{}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics{statements.pdf}
\caption{The distribution of the SQL statements used in the bug reports to reproduce the bug. A non-white filling indicates that a statement of the respective category triggered the bug, which was exposed by the test oracle as indicated by the filling (\emph{i.e.}{}, it was the last statement in the bug report).}
\label{fig:statementdistr}
{}
\end{figure*}
\normalpar{Column Constraints}
Column constraints, which can be used to restrict the values stored in a column, were often part of test cases.
The most common constraint was \texttt{UNIQUE} (appearing in 22.2{}\% of the test cases).
Also \texttt{PRIMARY KEY} columns were frequent (17.2\%).
Typically, the DBMS enforce \texttt{UNIQUE} and \texttt{PRIMARY KEY} by creating indexes; explicit indexes, created by \texttt{CREATE INDEX} were more common, however (28.3\%).
Other constraints were uncommon, for example, \texttt{FOREIGN KEY}s appeared only in 1.0{}\% of the bug reports.
\subsection{Bugs in SQLite{}}
\normalpar{Features}
In SQLite{}, many bugs resulted from a combination of unique language features.
17{} bug reports included indexes, 11{} included COLLATE sequences, and 5{} \texttt{WITHOUT ROWID} tables.
For example, Listing~\ref{lst:sqlitefirstbug} shows a test case for the first bug that we found with our approach, where these features were combined, and where SQLite{} failed to fetch a row.
The bug was classified as \emph{Severe} and goes back to when \texttt{WITHOUT ROWID} tables were introduced in 2013.
As another example, Listing~\ref{lst:rtrimissue} shows a test case that detected an 11 years old \emph{Important} bug.
This test case uses a \texttt{COLLATE}, and \texttt{WITHOUT ROWID} to expose a bug where \texttt{RTRIM} was implemented incorrectly.
As mentioned initially, SQLite{} allows storing values of any type in a column, irrespective of its declared type; we discovered 8{} bugs related to this feature.
For example, Listing~\ref{lst:likeopt} shows a minor bug where an optimization for the \texttt{LIKE} operator was implemented incorrectly when applied to \texttt{INT} values.
\begin{lstlisting}[label=lst:sqlitefirstbug,caption={The first bug that we found with our approach involved a \texttt{COLLATE} index, and a \texttt{WITHOUT ROWID} table.}]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 TEXT PRIMARY KEY) WITHOUT ROWID;
CREATE INDEX i0 ON t0(c1 COLLATE NOCASE);
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES ('A');
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES ('a');
SELECT * FROM t0; -- unexpected: only one row is fetched
\end{lstlisting}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[label=lst:rtrimissue,caption=This test case demonstrates an 11 years old \texttt{RTRIM} bug.]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 COLLATE RTRIM, c1 BLOB UNIQUE, PRIMARY KEY (c0, c1)) WITHOUT ROWID;
INSERT INTO t0 VALUES (123, 3), (' ', 1),
(' ', 2), ('', 4);
SELECT * FROM t0 WHERE c1 = 1; -- expected: ' ', 1, actual: no row is fetched
\end{lstlisting}
\normalpar{Incorrect optimizations}
A number of bugs could be traced back to incorrect optimizations.
For example, Listing~\ref{lst:skipscan} shows a test case that demonstrated that the skip-scan optimization, where an index is used even if its columns are not part of the \texttt{WHERE} clause, was implemented incorrectly for \texttt{DISTINCT} queries.
The bug was classified as \texttt{Severe}.
As another example, we found 4{} minor bugs in the implementation of an optimization for \texttt{LIKE} and no-text affinity.
Listing~\ref{lst:likeopt} demonstrates an example where an exact string match incorrectly yielded \texttt{FALSE}.
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=SQLite{}'s skip-scan optimization was implemented incorrectly for \texttt{DISTINCT},label=lst:skipscan]
CREATE TABLE t1 (c1 , c2, c3, c4,
PRIMARY KEY (c4, c3));
INSERT INTO t1(c3) VALUES (0), (0), (0), (0), (0), (0), (0), (0), (0), (0), (NULL), (1), (0);
UPDATE t1 SET c2 = 0;
INSERT INTO t1(c1) VALUES (0), (0), (NULL),
(0), (0);
ANALYZE t1;
UPDATE t1 SET c3 = 1;
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM t1 WHERE t1.c3 = 1; -- expected: |0|1|, 0||1|, ||1|, actual: |0|1|
\end{lstlisting}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[label=lst:likeopt,caption={We discovered 4{} bugs in a \texttt{LIKE} optimization, one demonstrated by this test case.}]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 INT UNIQUE COLLATE NOCASE);
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES ('./');
SELECT * FROM t0 WHERE t0.c0 LIKE './'; -- unexpected: fetches no rows
\end{lstlisting}
\normalpar{Language Deficiencies}
2{} bug reports uncovered issues in SQLite{}'s SQL dialect.
The test case shown in Listing~\ref{lst:sqllanguagechange} caused the SQL developers to disallow strings in double quotes when creating indexes.
SQLite{} allows both single quotes and double quotes to be used to denote strings; depending on the context, either can refer to a column name.
In the example, after the \texttt{RENAME} operation, it is ambiguous whether the index refers to a string or column, and the \texttt{SELECT} fetches C3 as a value for the column c3, which is incorrect in either case.
As another example, Listing~\ref{lst:malformedschema} shows a test case that causes the database schema to disagree with the database content, because the behavior of the \texttt{LIKE} operator could be controlled by a run-time flag.
The developers stated that this was ``a defect in the design of SQLite, not a defect in the implementation''.
Seven options to tackle this were outlined, but eventually the issue was merely documented and a new compile-time option to disable the \texttt{PRAGMA} was added.
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=This bug report caused the SQLite{} developers to disallow double quotes in indexes.,label=lst:sqllanguagechange]
CREATE TABLE t0(c1, c2);
INSERT INTO t0(c1, c2) VALUES ('a', 1);
CREATE INDEX i0 ON t0("C3");
ALTER TABLE t0 RENAME COLUMN c1 TO c3;
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM t0; -- fetches C3|1 rather than a|1
\end{lstlisting}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[label=lst:malformedschema,caption={The \texttt{PRAGMA case\_sensitive\_like} can cause mismatches between the database schema and database content.}]
CREATE TABLE test (c0);
CREATE INDEX index_0 ON test(c0 LIKE '');
PRAGMA case_sensitive_like=false;
VACUUM;
SELECT * from test; -- Error: malformed database schema (index_0) - non-deterministic functions prohibited in index expressions
\end{lstlisting}
\normalpar{Bugs found with the error oracle{}}
We discovered 17{} bugs using the error oracle{}, the most severe ones being those that corrupted the database, which happened in 4{} cases, as indicated by \emph{malformed database schema} errors.
For example, Listing~\ref{lst:malformedreal} shows a test case where manipulating values in a \texttt{REAL PRIMARY KEY} column resulted in a corrupted database.
The bug was introduced in 2015, and went undetected until we reported it in 2019; it was assigned a \emph{Severe} severity level.
Another common trigger was \texttt{REINDEX}, which detected violated constraints, resulting in errors such as \texttt{UNIQUE constraint failed}, with which we found 6{} bugs.
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[label=lst:malformedreal,caption={We found 4{} malformed database errors using the error oracle, such as this one.}]
CREATE TABLE t1 (c0, c1 REAL PRIMARY KEY);
INSERT INTO t1(c0, c1) VALUES (TRUE, 9223372036854775807), (TRUE, 0);
UPDATE t1 SET c0 = NULL;
UPDATE OR REPLACE t1 SET c1 = 1;
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM t1 WHERE (t1.c0 IS NULL); -- database disk image is malformed
\end{lstlisting}
\subsection{Bugs in MySQL}
\normalpar{Engine-specific bugs}
MySQL provides various engines that can be assigned to tables, a feature that is not provided by the other DBMS we tested.
The default engine is the \texttt{InnoDB} engine; an example for an alternative engine is the \texttt{MEMORY} engine, which stores data in-memory rather than on disk.
We found 5{} bugs that were triggered only using such alternative engines.
Listing~\ref{lst:enginespecific} shows a test case where a row is not fetched using the \texttt{MEMORY} engine.
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[label=lst:enginespecific,caption={We found 5{} bugs using non-default engines}]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 INT);
CREATE TABLE t1(c0 INT) ENGINE = MEMORY;
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES(0);
INSERT INTO t1(c0) VALUES(-1);
SELECT * FROM t0, t1 WHERE (CAST(t1.c0 AS UNSIGNED)) > (IFNULL("u", t0.c0)); -- expected: row is fetched, actual: no row is fetched
\end{lstlisting}
\normalpar{Unsigned integer bugs}
Unlike the other DBMS, MySQL provides unsigned integer data types.
We found 4{} bugs related to this feature.
For example, also Listing~\ref{lst:enginespecific} relies on a cast to \texttt{UNSIGNED}.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Value range bugs}
We found a number of bugs where queries were handled incorrectly depending on the magnitude of an integer or floating-point number.
For example, Listing~\ref{lst:mysql} shows a bug where the MySQL-specific \texttt{<=>} inequality operator, which yields a boolean value even when an argument is \texttt{NULL}, yielded \texttt{FALSE} when the column value was compared with a constant that was greater than what the column's type can represent.
Before the release of MySQL version 8.0.17, we were informed that this would be fixed for 8.0.18.
As another example, we found that small double values (\emph{e.g.}{}, \texttt{0.5}) stored in \texttt{TEXT} columns incorrectly evaluated to \texttt{FALSE} when used in a boolean context.
One such bug was fixed for version 8.0.17.
\vspace{1em}{}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=Custom comparison operator results in incorrect result,label=lst:mysql]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 TINYINT);
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES(NULL);
SELECT * FROM t0 WHERE NOT(t0.c0 <=> 2035382037);
\end{lstlisting}
\normalpar{Duplicate bugs}
In one case, which we considered as a duplicate, a bug seems to have been fixed already in a version not released to the public (see Listing~\ref{lst:mysqldoubleneg}).
Applying \texttt{NOT} to a non-zero integer value should yield 0, and negating 0 should yield 1.
However, it seems that MySQL optimized away the double negation, which would be correct for boolean values, but not for other data types, resulting in the row not being fetched.
We believe that the implicit conversions provided by MySQL (and also SQLite{}) is one of the reasons that we found more bugs in these DBMS than in PostgreSQL{}.
\vspace{1em}{}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=Double negation bug,label=lst:mysqldoubleneg]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 INT);
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES(1);
SELECT * FROM t0 WHERE 123 != (NOT (NOT 123)); -- expected: row is fetched, actual: row is not fetched
\end{lstlisting}
\normalpar{Segfault}
We found one \texttt{SEGFAULT} bug in MySQL, which was triggered when executing a sequence of SQL statements using multiple threads (see Listing~\ref{lst:mysqlcve}).
To trigger this bug, the \texttt{CHECK TABLE} statement had to be used, which is unique to MySQL.
After reporting this error to Oracle, it received a CVE entry (CVE-2019-2879) and was classified as a medium security vulnerability (CVSS v3.0 Base Score 4.9).
\vspace{1em}{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=SEGFAULT bug in MySQL,label=lst:mysqlcve]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 INT);
CREATE INDEX i0 ON t0((t0.c0 || 1));
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES(1);
CHECK TABLE t0 FOR UPGRADE;
\end{lstlisting}
\subsection{Bugs in PostgreSQL{}}
In PostgreSQL{}, using our containment oracle{}, we found only 1{} bug that was fixed.
The bug was related to table inheritance, a feature that only PostgreSQL{} provides (see Listing~\ref{lst:tableinheritance}).
Table \texttt{t1} inherits from \texttt{t0}, and PostgreSQL{} merges the \texttt{c0} column in both tables.
As described in the PostgreSQL{} documentation, t1 does not respect the PRIMARY key restriction of t0.
This was not considered when implementing the \texttt{GROUP BY} clause, which caused PostgreSQL{} to omit one row in its result set.
\vspace{1em}{}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=Table inheritance bug in PostgreSQL{}, label=lst:tableinheritance]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 INT PRIMARY KEY, c1 INT);
CREATE TABLE t1(c0 INT) INHERITS (t0);
INSERT INTO t0(c0, c1) VALUES(0, 0);
INSERT INTO t1(c0, c1) VALUES(0, 1);
SELECT c0, c1 FROM t0 GROUP BY c0, c1; -- expected: 0|0 and 0|1, actual: 0|0
\end{lstlisting}
We found the other 7{} bugs using the error oracle{}.
For example, Listing~\ref{lst:negativebitmap} shows a test case where a \texttt{WHERE} condition triggered a bug resulting in an error \emph{negative bitmapset member not allowed}.
After we reported the bug, on the same day, another independent bug report was created based on a finding of SQLsmith{}, which caused PostgreSQL{} to crash based on the same underlying bug.
This provides further evidence that DBMS are being extensively tested and fuzzed.
Note that we also found and reported two structurally different crash bugs that exposed this issue, which we later classified as duplicates.
\vspace{1em}{}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=Negative bitmapset member error in PostgreSQL{},label=lst:negativebitmap]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 serial, c1 boolean);
CREATE STATISTICS s1 ON c0, c1 FROM t0;
INSERT INTO t0(c1) VALUES(TRUE);
ANALYZE;
CREATE INDEX i0 ON t0(c0, (t0.c1 AND t0.c1));
SELECT * FROM (SELECT t0.c0 FROM t0 WHERE (((t0.c1) AND (t0.c1)) OR FALSE) IS TRUE) as result WHERE result.c0 IS NULL; -- unexpected: ERROR: negative bitmapset member not allowed
\end{lstlisting}
\normalpar{Multithreaded bugs}
4{} reported bugs (including closed/duplicate ones) could only be reproduced when running multiple threads.
For example, Listing~\ref{lst:unexpectednull} shows a bug that was triggered only when another thread opened a transaction, holding a snapshot with the \texttt{NULL} value.
In order to reproduce such bugs, we had to record traces of all executing threads.
In some cases, reducing or reproducing a bug was impractical; for example, we encountered a memory leak that could be observed only after running PostgreSQL{} for a long time.
\vspace{1em}{}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=Unexpected null value bug in PostgreSQL{},label=lst:unexpectednull]
CREATE TABLE t0(c0 TEXT);
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES('b'), ('a');
ANALYZE;
INSERT INTO t0(c0) VALUES (NULL);
UPDATE t0 SET c0 = 'a';
CREATE INDEX i0 ON t0(c0);
SELECT * FROM t0 WHERE 'baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa' > t0.c0; -- unexpected: ERROR: found unexpected null value in index "i0"
\end{lstlisting}
\normalpar{False positives}
7{} bug reports were closed since they were not considered to be bugs, which is a larger number than for the other DBMS.
We believe that this is partly due to the PostgreSQL{} developer's pragmatic approach towards handling and fixing bugs.
For example, we found that running \texttt{VACUUM FULL} on distinct databases can cause deadlocks to occur.
We created a test case that runs 32 threads to reproduce the deadlock quickly.
Responses on the mailing list concluded that routine use of \texttt{VACUUM FULL} should be avoided, even more so running 32 threads at once.
Listing~\ref{lst:vacuum} shows another issue that we reported that requires another thread holding a snapshot of the value \texttt{2147483647} in the table.
We found that the \texttt{VACUUM} fails with an error caused by an integer overflow, which was surprising to us, since we did not expect \texttt{VACUUM} to fail.
As explained by a PostgreSQL{} developer, an optimization caused the index to not be built for that row, so that the issue only surfaced when using the \texttt{VACUUM}.
Although this was admitted to be somewhat surprising, addressing this would have had other downsides that the developers wanted to avoid.
\vspace{1em}{}
{}
\begin{lstlisting}[caption=VACUUM issue in PostgreSQL{}, label=lst:vacuum]
CREATE TABLE t1(c0 int);
INSERT INTO t1(c0) VALUES(2147483647);
UPDATE t1 SET c0 = 0;
CREATE INDEX i0 ON t1((1 + t1.c0));
VACUUM FULL; -- unexpected: ERROR: integer out of range
\end{lstlisting}
\normalpar{Duplicates}
6{} bugs were classified as duplicates.
We reported two structurally-different crash bugs for the latest beta release (12beta2), which were due to the same underlying bug and had already been fixed in the latest trunk version.
The other two were crash bugs and duplicates of the bug triggered by Listing~\ref{lst:negativebitmap}.
As previously explained, a crash bug on the same issue was reported independently.
We believe that these duplicates show that our approach can find bugs that are relevant in practice, and are reported by other users or developers.
\vspace{1em}{}
\subsection{Implementation Size and Coverage}
\normalpar{Implementation effort}
It is difficult to quantify the effort that we invested for implementing support for each DBMS, since, for example, we got more efficient in implementing support over time.
The LOC of code of the individual testing components (see Table~\ref{tbl:locimpl}) reflects our estimates that we invested the most effort to test SQLite{}, then PostgreSQL{}, and then MySQL.
The code part shared by the components is rather small (\numprint{918{}} LOC), which provides some evidence for the different SQL dialects that they support.
We believe that the implementation effort for SQLancer{} is small when compared to the size of the tested DBMS.
Note that the LOC in this table were derived after compiling the respective DBMS using default configurations, and thus include only those lines reachable in the binary.
Thus, they are significantly smaller than the ones we derived statically for the entire repositories in Table~\ref{tbl:dbmsoverview}.
\vspace{1em}{}
\begin{table}
\small{}{}
\caption{The size of SQLancer{}'s components specific and common to the tested databases.}
\label{tbl:locimpl}
\begin{tabular}{l r r r r r}
\toprule{}
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{LOC} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Coverage} \\
\cmidrule(r){2-4}\cmidrule(r){5-6}
DBMS & SQLancer{} & DBMS & Ratio & Line & Branch\\
\midrule
SQLite{} & \numprint{6501{}} & \numprint{49703} & 13.1{}\% & 43.0\% & 38.4\%\\
MySQL & \numprint{3995{}} & \numprint{707803} & 0.6\% & 24.4\% & 13.0\% \\
PostgreSQL{} & \numprint{4981{}} & \numprint{329999} & 1.5\% & 23.7\% & 16.6\%\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
{}
\end{table}
\normalpar{Coverage}
To obtain an estimate on how much code of the DBMS we tested, we instrumented each DBMS and ran SQLancer{} for 24 hours on it (see Table~\ref{tbl:locimpl}).
The coverage appears to be low (less than 50\% for all DBMS); however, this is expected, because we were only concerned about testing data-centric SQL statements.
MySQL and PostgreSQL{} provide features such as user management, replication, and database maintenance functionalities, which we did not test.
Furthermore, all DBMS provide consoles to interact with the DBMS and programming APIs.
Furthermore, SQLancer{} still lacks support for many common DBMS features.
For example, we currently do not test many data types, language elements such transaction savepoints, many DBMS-specific functions, configuration options that can only be set at server start-up time, and operations that might conflict with other threads running on a distinct database.
The coverage for SQLite{} is the highest, reflecting that we invested most effort in testing it, but also that it provides fewer features in addition to its SQL implementation.
\vspace{1em}{}
\section{Discussion}
\normalpar{Number of Bugs and Code Quality}
The number of bugs that we found in the respective DBMS depended on many, difficult-to-quantify factors.
We found most bugs in SQLite{}.
A significant reason for this is that we focused on this DBMS, because the developers quickly fixed all bugs.
Furthermore, while the SQL dialect supported by SQLite{} is compact, we perceived it to be the most flexible one, as, for example, column types are not enforced, leading to bugs that were not present in PostgreSQL{}, and to a lesser degree in MySQL.
MySQL's release policy made it difficult to test it efficiently, limiting the number of bugs that we found in this DBMS.
In PostgreSQL{}, we found the least number of bugs, and we believe that a significant reason for this is that the SQL dialect support is strict, and, for example, only performs few implicit conversions.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Existing test efforts}
All three DBMS are extensively tested.
For example, SQLite{}, for which we found most bugs, has 662 times as much test code and test scripts than source code~\cite{sqlitetesting}.
The core is tested by three separate test harnesses.
The TCL tests comprise 45K test cases, the TH3 proprietary test harness contains about 1.7 million test instances and provides 100\% branch test coverage and 100\% MC/DC test coverage~\cite{KellyJ2001}, and the SQL Logic Test runs about 7.2 million queries based on over 1 GB of test data.
SQLite{} uses various fuzzers such as a random query generator called \emph{SQL Fuzz}, a proprietary fuzzer \emph{dbsqlfuzz}, and it is fuzzed by Google's OSS Fuzz project~\cite{ossfuzz}.
Other kinds of tests are also applied, such as crash testing, to demonstrate that the database will not go corrupt on system crashes or power failures.
Considering that SQLite{} and other DBMS are tested this extensively, we believe that it is surprising that SQLancer{} could find any bugs.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Reception}
The DBMS developers appreciated our work and effort.
For example, for one DBMS, the developers reached out to actively support us in finding new bugs.
As an anecdote, after a bug that we reported was not fixed within 2 weeks, they also contacted us to ask whether we had stopped testing the DBMS; it turned out that the bug report was overlooked, but then quickly fixed, indicating the importance of our work.
For another DBMS, we were told that it is ``not often we get that many true positives from a tool. We do run fuzzers, but it's not common to find that many bugs in such a short time.''
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Relational databases}
Although relational DBMS are the most common form of DBMS, other models also exist, many to which our approach could be applied.
NoSQL DBMS are based on various non-relational, or partly-relational data models~\cite{Cattell2011}.
For example, MongoDB~\cite{mongodb} is a popular, document-oriented DBMS, and thus stores \emph{documents} rather than rows, where each document describes the data (rather than a schema) and holds the data.
Our technique could be applied to such a DBMS by selecting random data in a randomly-selected document and then constructing a query so that the data should be selected.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Implementation effort}
Since the supported SQL dialects differ vastly between DBMS, we had to implement DBMS-specific components in SQLancer{}.
It could be argued that the implementation effort is too high, especially when the full support of a SQL dialect is to be tested, which could arguably be similar to implementing a new DBMS.
Indeed, we could not test complex functions such as SQLite{}'s \texttt{printf}, which would have required significant implementation effort.
However, we still argue that the implementation effort is reasonably low, and allows testing significant parts of a DBMS.
Most significantly, our approach effectively evaluates only literal expressions, and does not need to consider multiple rows.
This obviates the need of implementing a query planner, which typically is the most complex component of a DBMS~\cite{giakoumakis2008testing}.
Furthermore, the performance of the evaluation engine is insignificant; the performance bottleneck was the DBMS evaluating the queries, rather than SQLancer{}.
Thus, we also did not implement any optimizations, which typically require much implementation effort in DBMS~\cite{Graefe:1993}.
Finally, we did not need to consider aspects such as concurrency and multi-user control as well as integrity.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Checking a single row}
By checking one row at a time, rather than all the rows, our approach is simple to implement.
To compute and evaluate a \texttt{WHERE} condition, only operations on constants need to be performed, based on the pivot row{}.
Nevertheless, our approach is, in principle, mostly as effective as an approach that checks all rows, considering that the same SQL statements can be generated for all rows in a table, albeit requiring multiple steps.
The only obvious conceptual limitation is that we cannot detect logic bugs where a DBMS erroneously fetches duplicate rows.
\vspace{1em}{}
\section{Related Work}
\normalpar{Testing of Software Systems}
This paper fits into the stream of testing approaches for important software systems.
Differential testing~\cite{mckeeman1998differential} is a technique that compares the results obtained by multiple systems that implement a common language; if results deviate, one or multiple of the systems are likely to have a bug.
It has been used as a basis for many approaches, for example, to test C/C++ compilers~\cite{Yang2011,Zhang2017}, symbolic execution engines~\cite{Kapus2017}, and PDF readers~\cite{Kuchta2018}.
Metamorphic testing~\cite{Chen1998}, where the program is transformed so that the same result as for the original program is expected, has been applied to various systems; for example, \emph{equivalence modulo inputs} is a metamorphic-testing-based approach that has been used to find over one thousand bugs in widely-used compilers~\cite{Le2014}.
As another example, metamorphic testing has been successfully applied to test graphic shader compilers~\cite{Donaldson2017}.
We present \emph{Pivoted Query Synthesis{}} as a novel approach to testing DBMS, which solves the \emph{oracle problem} in a novel way, namely by checking whether a DBMS works correctly for a specific query and row.
We believe that our approach can also be extended to test other software systems that have an internal state, of which a single instance can be selected.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Differential Testing of DBMS}
Slutz proposed an approach \emph{RAGS} for finding bugs in DBMS based on differential testing~\cite{slutz1998massive}.
In \emph{RAGS}, queries are automatically generated and evaluated by multiple DBMS.
If the results are inconsistent, a bug has been found.
As stated in his paper, the approach was very effective, but is applicable to only a small set of common SQL statements.
In particular, the differences in NULL handling, character handling, and numeric type coercions were mentioned as problematic.
Our approach can detect bugs also in SQL statements unique to a DBMS, but requires separate implementations for each DBMS.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Database Fuzzing}
SQLsmith{} is a popular tool that randomly generates SQL queries to test various DBMS~\cite{sqlsmith}.
SQLsmith{} has been highly successful and has found over 100 bugs in popular DBMS such as PostgreSQL{}, SQLite{} and MonetDB since 2015.
However, it cannot find logic bugs found by our approach.
Similarly, general-purpose fuzzers such as AFL~\cite{afl} are routinely applied to DBMS, and have found many bugs, but also cannot detect logic bugs.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Queries satisfying constraints}
A number of approaches improved upon random query generation by generating queries that satisfy certain constraints, such as cardinalities or coverage characteristics.
The problem of generating a query, whose subexpressions must satisfy certain constraints, has been extensively studied~\cite{Bruno2006,Mishra2008}; since this problem is complex, it is typically tackled by an approximate algorithm~\cite{Bruno2006,Mishra2008}.
An alternative approach was proposed by Bati et al. where queries are selected and mutated based on whether they increase the coverage of rarely executed code paths~\cite{bati2007}, increasing the coverage of the DBMS component under test.
Rather than improved query generation, Lo et al. proposed an approach where a database is generated based on specific requirements on test queries~\cite{Lo2010framework}.
While these approaches improve the query and database generation, they do not help in automatically finding errors, since they do not propose an approach to automatically verify the queries' results.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{DBMS testing based on constraint solving}
Khalek et al. worked on automating testing DBMS using constraint solving~\cite{khalek2008,khalek2010querygen}.
Their core idea was to use a SAT-based solver to automatically generate database data, queries, and a test oracle.
In their first work, they described how to generate query-specific data to populate a database and enumerate the rows that would be fetched to construct a test oracle~\cite{khalek2008}.
They could reproduce previously-reported and injected bugs, but discovered only one new bug.
In a follow-up work, they also demonstrated how the SAT-based approach can be used to automatically generate queries~\cite{khalek2010querygen}.
As with our approach, they provide a test oracle, and additionally a targeted data generation approach.
While both approaches found bugs, our approach found many previously undiscovered bugs.
Furthermore, we believe that the simplicity of our approach could make it wider applicable.
\vspace{1em}{}
\normalpar{Performance Testing}
Rather than trying to improve the correctness of DBMS, several approaches were proposed to measure and improve the DBMS optimizer's performance.
Poess. et. al proposed a template-based approach to generating queries suitable to benchmark DBMS, which they implemented in a tool QGEN~\cite{Poess2004}.
Similarly to random query generators, QGEN could also be used to test DBMS.
Gu. et al presented an approach to quantify an optimizer's accuracy for a given workload by defining a metric over different execution plans for this workload, which were generated by using DBMS-specific tuning options~\cite{Gu2012}.
They found significant accuracy differences for optimizers of multiple commercial database systems.
\section{Conclusion}
We have presented an effective approach for detecting bugs in DBMS, which we implemented in a tool SQLancer{}, with which we found over 99{} bugs in three popular and widely-used DBMS.
The effectiveness of SQLancer{} is surprising, considering the simplicity of our approach, and that we only implemented a small subset of features that current DBMS support.
There are a number of promising directions that could help uncovering additional bugs, which we regard as future work.
SQLancer{} generates tables with a low number of rows to prevent timeouts of queries when multiple tables are joined with non-restrictive conditions.
By generating targeted queries with conditions based on table cardinalities~\cite{Bruno2006,Mishra2008}, we could test the DBMS for a large number of rows, better stressing the query planner~\cite{giakoumakis2008testing}.
Some language elements are difficult to test with our approach, for example, aggregate functions that compute results over multiple rows.
To efficiently test those, metamorphic testing~\cite{Chen1998} could be applied by defining metamorphic relations based on set operations.
Finally, we could also generate conditions and check that the pivot row{} is not contained in the result set, which might uncover additional bugs.
\section{Acknowledgments}
We want to thank all the DBMS developers for responding to our bug reports as well as analyzing and fixing the bugs we reported.
We especially want to thank the SQLite developers, D. Richard Hipp and Dan Kennedy, for taking all bugs we reported seriously and fixing them quickly.
\balance
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
Pieces of evidence from various astrophysical observations like gravitational lensing effects in the bullet cluster, anomalies in the galactic rotation curves have confirmed the existence of dark matter (DM) in the Universe. Since the SM does not have enough particle to play the role of DM, we must go beyond the SM in search of new physics.
The recent LHC Higgs signal strength data~\cite{Sirunyan:2017khh, Sirunyan:2018koj} also suggests that one can have rooms for the new physics beyond the SM.
In order to address DM within BSM, various possibilities have been proposed in~\cite{Tanabashi:2018oca,ArkaniHamed:2008qn} and references therein. Extension of the SM with new fields is widespread in the literature, under which the lightest and stable particle due to the imposed discrete $Z_n$ and/or $Z_n$-type ($n\ge 2, integer$) plays the role of dark matter \cite{Dasgupta:2014hha,Babu:2009fd}.
Rich literature on minimal models of DM considering scalar and fermion multiplets are available today~\cite{Burgess:2000yq,Deshpande:1977rw,Ma:2008cu,Araki:2011hm,Ma:2006km}. In particular, the addition of singlet scalar and fermion singlet, as well as doublet in a minimal model, have rich demand in DM study. The mixing of fermion doublet and singlets reduces the coupling to weak gauge bosons. This transform DM from a Dirac into a Majorana particle, yielding the correct relic density with allowed direct detection cross-section~\cite{Cohen:2011ec}.
It is known that the direct detection experiments eliminate a significant portion of the parameter space in the dark matter mass versus dark matter-nucleon cross-section plane. However, these experimental constraints are marred by the uncertainties stemming from the assumption that the Earth is flying through a uniform dark matter cloud of significant density.
The clumpy nature of dark matter leaves open the possibility that the
density of dark matter in the cosmologically tiny region surrounding
the Earth, which has not been directly measured so far, is
very small.
This makes the option that dark matter may be produced
directly at a high-energy collider like the LHC/ILC even more
attractive.
Weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs), i.e., the dark matter in this model can indeed be produced by the proton-proton collisions at
the LHC which escape the detector, leading to the celebrated
missing energy signal.
As backgrounds are somewhat better
understood in a manmade laboratory, it is not unreasonable
to argue that a collider might be the best bet in revealing the
true nature of DM particles. It is also possible to explain the observations in various indirect dark matter detection experiments for some regions (low-mass) of the parameter space. In this paper, however, we do not discuss such details, as such estimations involve proper understanding of the astrophysical backgrounds and an assumption of the dark matter halo profile which contain some arbitrariness.
Concrete experimental signature of existence of dark matter is hitherto unknown, however, recent Xenon-1T experiment~\cite{Aprile:2018dbl} puts stringent bounds on the dark matter portal interaction strength(s). In the basic hypothesis, there exist non-negligible but little interaction between DM with the SM particles which assures that DM is in equilibrium with a thermal bath.
Eventually, it `freeze-out' from the hot plasma of the SM particles, and we can calculate the current relic density of the DM candidate. DM detection experiments indicate that either dark matter may interact with the nucleus very feebly (detection cross-section could reach beyond the line of neutrino floor~\cite{Vergados:2008jp,Boehm:2018sux}) or the interaction is ultimately zero.
Hence, the dark matter annihilation into the SM particles via $s$-channels may absent. On the other hand, if Nature has only one-component dark matter, then the $H$- and $Z$-bosons portal light dark matter models may not be the right one to give the exact relic density. It is already clear from the literature \cite{Camargo:2019ukv, Restrepo:2015ura, Ahriche:2017iar, Fiaschi:2018rky} that in the presence of other particles one can get the exact relic density via the co-annihilation channels. There may have interactions in such a way that the dark matter can annihilate into the SM particles via $t$- or $u$-channels. This might help to modify the effective annihilation cross-section to give the exact relic density. These types of scenarios can be achieved in the proposed minimal model, which gives the correct dark matter density satisfying the other theoretical and experimental constraints.
In the model-building prospect, models that can address more SM shortfalls are much appealing and well-motivated also.
A working model is said to be completed when it can simultaneously explain light neutrino observable and dark matter \cite{Ahriche:2017iar,Babu:2009fd,Baumholzer:2018sfb,Baumholzer:2019twf,Bhattacharya:2017sml,Das:2019ntw,Kashiwase:2015pra}.
The framework that is popular in accommodating both dark matter and neutrino mass at loop level is known as the $scotogenic$ model. It was first proposed by E. Ma~\cite{Ma:2006km}, where the dimension-5 operator is realized at the one-loop level. The notable feature of this framework is the way it connects neutrino and DM. Due to the additional $Z_2$ discrete symmetry, new fields that contribute to the loop to produce sizable neutrino mass, acquire opposite parity to the SM fields. Hence, the new field becomes stable and can be addressed as a viable dark matter candidate. Due to its impressive features in addressing neutrino mass and dark matter, the scotogenic model has gained popularity over time~\cite{GonzalezFelipe:2003fi,Fraser:2014yha, Merle:2015ica, Law:2013saa,Mahanta:2019gfe, Klein:2019iws}. In order to get relic density of the singlet scalar dark matter and allowed from the direct detection, one has to take the dark matter particle to be heavy or else take the Higgs portal couplings to be small near the Higgs resonance region.
This spoils the testability of the theory at the collider. Hence, one need to extend the model model with a vector-like fermions (to cancel effect of the anomaly), which can be probed at the collider
experiments. In this model we found a large region of the dark matter parameter spaces in the presence of the vector-like fermions allowed by the all theoretical and experimental constants. Here, we have not only introduced a viable dark matter candidate but also comment on the possible explanation of tininess of neutrino mass generation under a single framework with minimum particle content. Initially, we will be starting with just a single generation of fermion doublet that interacts with the lepton doublet and check whether it is sufficient to address both the neutrino parameters and dark matter or not.
Keeping these in view, we consider a minimal model of DM comprise of a vector-like singlet and doublet lepton along with a singlet scalar. We introduce an additional $Z_2$ symmetry, under which all new fields are assigned odd, which restricts its interaction with SM particles.
The viable DM candidate in the extended singlet scalar model is the lightest $Z_2$-odd singlet scalar $S$.
In the presence of the Yukawa couplings, a considerable improvement to the region of the dark matter parameter space is noticed in this present work. Depending upon the size of the Yukawa couplings, one can get a dominant DM annihilation through $t$- and $u$-channels. The interference between the $s$-channel and cross-channel (2-singlet,2-Higgs scalar vertex), and $t,u$-channels played a crucial role in achieving the correct DM density. The co-annihilation channels also played an essential role in getting a viable region of allowed dark matter parameter space.
The lepton flavour violating processes ($\mu \rightarrow e \gamma$), electron and muon anomalous magnetic moment are also a striking indication of BSM. As there is a discrepancy between the measured value and the SM predictions~\cite{Bennett:2006fi, Parker:2018vye}:
$\delta a_{\mu}=a_{\mu}^\text{exp}-a_{\mu}^\text{SM}=(2.74\pm 0.73)\times 10^{-9}$
and
$\delta a_{e}=a_{e}^\text{exp}-a_{e}^\text{SM}=-(8.8\pm 3.6)\times 10^{-13}$.
Among the popular works on the discrepancy of the muon magnetic moment, some of them are due to the addition of extra Higgs boson\cite{Abe:2017jqo,Chun:2016hzs}, introducing a light $Z^{\prime}$ gauge boson associated with an extra $U(1)_{L_{\mu}-L_{\tau}}$ symmetry \cite{Baek:2001kca}, or a light hidden photon \cite{Endo:2012hp}, imposing discrete symmetries \cite{Abe:2019bkf}. In those models, the muon magnetic moment is enhanced with a smaller coupling strength via loop mediator process. In this proposed minimal model, we will also try to comment on the discrepancy of the muon anomalous magnetic moment mediated via a vector-like fermion.
In the present paper, we have identified the parameter space relevant to dark matter, lepton flavour violation and neutrino masses. In future, if this type of model turns out to be the dark matter model realized in Nature, our study could help in estimating a better parameter space.
Moreover, the interaction of vector-like fermions with SM fields makes them more comfortable to probe in collider searches \cite{Bhattacharya:2017sml,Bhattacharya:2018cgx,Cynolter:2008ea}. We look for collider signature for the lightest charged fermion in the context of 14 TeV LHC experiments with a future luminosity of 3000 ${\rm fb^{-1}}$ for $pp\rightarrow E_1^{\pm}E_1^{\mp}$ event processes which yield dilepton plus large transverse missing energy $\slashed{E}_T$ (arising from the dark matter) in the final state.
We get significant results from the collider searches for the discovery of dark matter in future 14 TeV run with the said luminosity.
The projected exclusion/discovery reach of direct heavy charged fermion searches in this channels is analyzed by performing a detailed cut based collider analysis.
The projected exclusion contour reaches up to $1050-1380~{\rm GeV}$ for a light dark matter $\mathcal{O}(10)$ GeV from searches in the $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp, E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S \rightarrow ll + \slashed{E}_T$ channel.
To the best of our knowledge, detailed analysis of this model has not yet been done in the literature, which motivates us to carry out the analysis.
The rest of the work is organized as follows. We have given the complete model description in section~\ref{sec2}. Constraints from various sources on this model are discussed in section~\ref{s3}. Numerical analysis for dark matter, neutrino and collider searches are discussed under section~\ref{s5}. Finally, we conclude our work in section~\ref{conc}.
\section{Model framework}\label{sec2}
\begin{table}[h!]
\begin{tabular}{|c|ccc|}
\hline
Fields$\rightarrow$ &$S$&$F_D$&$E_S$\\
Charges$\downarrow$ &&&\\
\hline
$SU(2)$&1&2&1\\
$U(1)_Y$&0&-1&-2\\
$Z_2$&-1&-1&-1\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Particle content and their charge assignments under $SU(2)$, $U(1)_Y$ and $Z_2$ groups.}\label{modelt}
\end{table}
The model addressed here, contains (i) a real singlet scalar ($S$), (ii) a vector-like charged fermion singlet $E_S^-$ and (iii) a vector-like fermion (VLF) doublet,
$F_D=(X_1^0~~E_D^-)^T$ \cite{Bhattacharya:2017sml, Bhattacharya:2018cgx,Gu:2018kmv}.
The charge profile of the particle content are shown in table \ref{modelt}.
It is to be noted that these additional fermions are vector-like, and hence, they do not introduce any new anomalies in theory ~\cite{ano1,ano2}.
The chiral gauge anomaly free condition coming from the one loop triple gauge boson vertex, which
reads \cite{Pal:1690642}:
\begin{equation}
\sum_{rep}= Tr[\{T^a_L,T^b_L\}T^c_L]-Tr[\{T^a_R,T^b_R\}T^c_R]=0. \label{vl}
\end{equation}
Here, $T$ denotes the generators for the SM gauge group and $L, R$ denotes the interactions of
left or right chiral fermions with the gauge bosons. From Eq. \eqref{vl} it is clear that the SM satisfies the anomaly free condition because of the presence of a quark family to
each lepton family \cite{Pal:1690642, Kannike:2016fmd}. On the other hand, the additional vector-like fermions introduced here, have the left chiral components transforming similarly to the right chiral ones under the SM gauge
symmetry. Therefore, the model is anomaly free.
All the BSM particles are considered odd under the discrete $Z_2$ symmetry, such that this BSM field does not mix with the SM fields. As a result, the lightest and neutral particle is stable and considered to be a viable dark matter candidate. Let us now elaborated on the model part in detail. The Lagrangian of the model read as,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=\mathcal{L_{\rm SM}}+\mathcal{L_S}+\mathcal{L_F}+\mathcal{L}_{int},
\end{equation}
where,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L_S}&=&\frac{1}{2}|\partial_{\mu}S|^2-\frac{1}{2}kS^2\phi^2-\frac{1}{4}m_S^2S^2-\frac{\lambda_S}{4!}S^4\label{eq:scalar},\\
\nonumber \mathcal{L_F}&=&\overline{F}_D\gamma^{\mu}D_{\mu}F_D+\overline{E}_S\gamma^{\mu}D_{\mu} E_S-M_{ND}\overline{F}_DF_D - M_{NS}\overline{E}_SE_S,\\
\mathcal{L}_{int}&=&-Y_{N}\overline{F}_D\phi E_S - Y_{fi} \overline{L}_i F_D S + h.c.~,\label{lint}
\end{eqnarray}
$D_{\mu}$ stands for the corresponding covariant derivative of the doublet and singlet fermions. The SM Higgs potential is given by, $V^{SM}(\phi)=-m^2\phi^2+\lambda\phi^4$, with,
$\phi=( G^+, \frac{H+v+iG}{\sqrt{2}})^T$ is the SM Higgs doublet. $G$'s stand for the Goldstone bosons and $v=246.221$ GeV being the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs $H$ fields. The mass matrix for these charged fermion fields is given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{M}=\begin{pmatrix}
M_{ND}&M_X\\M_X^{\dagger}&M_{NS}\\
\end{pmatrix},
\label{eq:mass}
\end{eqnarray}
where, $M_X=\frac{Y_{N}v}{\sqrt{2}}$. The charged component of the fermion doublet ($E_D^\pm$) and the singlet charged fermion ($E_S^\pm$) mix at tree level.
The mass eigenstates are obtained by diagonalizing the mass matrix with
a rotation of the ($E_D^\pm$ $E_S^\pm$) basis,
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{pmatrix}
E_1^\pm\\E_2^\pm\\
\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}
\cos\beta&\sin\beta\\-\sin\beta&\cos\beta\\
\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}
E_D^\pm\\E_S^\pm\\
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{eqnarray}
The mixing angle $\beta$ between the fermions can be written as,
\begin{equation}
\tan 2 \beta = \frac{2 M_X}{M_{NS}-M_{ND}}.\nonumber
\end{equation}
Diagonalization of eqn.~\ref{eq:mass} gives the following eigenvalues for the charged leptons ($M_{NS}-M_{ND} \gg M_X$) as,
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{E_1^\pm} &=& M_{ND} - \frac{2 (M_X)^2}{M_{NS}-M_{ND}}, \nonumber\\
M_{E_2^\pm} &=& M_{NS} + \frac{2 (M_X)^2}{M_{NS}-M_{ND}}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The masses of the neutral fermion scalar fields can be calculated as,
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{X_1^0}=M_{ND}, \, M_S^2=\frac{m_S^2+kv^2}{2}~ \ \text{and}~\ M_H^2= 2\lambda v^2. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Hence, in this model, neutral fermion can not be the DM candidate as $M_{E_1^\pm}<M_{X_1^0}<M_{E_2^\pm}$. Only the scalar fields $S$ for $M_S < M_{E_1^\pm}$ can behave as a viable DM candidate. We keep $M_{E_2^\pm}=1500$ GeV and $\cos\beta=0.995$ fixed through out the analysis. We will provide a detailed discussion on the new region of the allowed parameter spaces and the effect of the presence of additional $Z_2$-odd fermion in the dark matter section~\ref{dm1}.
The parameter space of this model is constrained by various bounds arising from theoretical considerations like absolute vacuum stability and unitarity of the scattering matrix, observation phenomenons like dark matter relic density. The LHC also puts severe constraints on this model. In the following section, we discuss constraints associated with the model.
\section{Constraints on this models}\label{s3}
Scotogenic model parameter space is constrained from theoretical considerations like absolute vacuum stability, perturbativity and unitarity of the scattering matrix. The direct search limits at LEP and electroweak precision measurements put severe restrictions on the model.
The recent measurements of the Higgs invisible decay width and signal strength at the LHC put additional constraints.
The requirement that the dark matter (DM) saturates the DM relic density all alone restricts the allowed parameter space considerably. Although some of these constraints are already discussed in the literature. We discuss a few constraints considered in our model in the following subsections.
\subsection{Constraints on scalar potential couplings from stability, perturbativity and unitarity}
Most severe constraints come from the `bounded from below' of the potential, which ensures the absolute stability of the electroweak vacuum. The potential bounded from below signifies that there is no direction in field space along which the potential tends to minus infinity. In unitary gauge, for $H,S>>v$, the scalar potential of equation~(\ref{eq:scalar}) can be further simplified as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber V(H,~S) = \frac{1}{4}\left\lbrace \sqrt{\lambda} H^2+ \sqrt{\frac{\lambda_S}{6}} S^2 \right\rbrace^2 + \frac{1}{4}\left\lbrace\kappa + \sqrt{\frac{2 \lambda \lambda_S}{3}}\right\rbrace H^2 S^2.
\label{scalpotstability}
\end{eqnarray}
The necessary conditions for the scalar potential are given by,
\begin{equation}
\lambda(\Lambda) > 0, \quad \lambda_S(\Lambda) > 0 \quad {\rm and} \quad \kappa(\Lambda) + \sqrt{\frac{2 \lambda(\Lambda) \lambda_S(\Lambda)}{3}} > 0.
\nonumber
\end{equation}
Here, all the coupling constants in this model are evaluated at a scale $\Lambda$ using RG equations \cite{Garg:2017iva}.
However, these conditions become non-functional if the Higgs quartic coupling $\lambda$ becomes negative at some energy scale to contribute to the electroweak vacuum metastable. In this situation, we need to handle metastability constraints on the potential difference, shown in Ref.~\cite{Khan:2012zw}.
Besides, for the radiatively improved Lagrangian of our model to be perturbative, we have~\cite{Lee:1977eg, Cynolter:2004cq},
\begin{equation}
\lambda (\Lambda)\,
<\, \frac{4\pi}{3} \, ; \,\,\, |\kappa(\Lambda)|\, < \,8\pi \,;\,\,\, |\lambda_{S}(\Lambda)|\, < \, 8\pi.
\end{equation}
The couplings of the scalar potential ($\lambda,\kappa$ and $\lambda_S$) of this model are constrained by the unitarity of the scattering matrix (S-matrix). At very high field values, one can obtain the S-matrix by using various scalar-scalar, gauge boson-gauge boson, and scalar-gauge boson scatterings. Using the equivalence theorem, we reproduced the S-matrix for this model. The unitarity demands that the eigenvalues of the S-matrix should be less than $8\pi$. The unitary bounds are given by~\cite{Cynolter:2004cq},
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda \leq 8 \pi ~{\rm and}~ \Big| 12 {\lambda}+{\lambda_S} \pm \sqrt{16 \kappa^2+(-12 {\lambda}+{\lambda_S})^2}\Big| \leq 32 \pi.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{LHC diphoton signal strength bounds}
At one-loop level, the physical charged fermion $E_1^{\pm}$ and $E_2^{\pm}$ add extra contribution to the decay width as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma(H\rightarrow \gamma\gamma)=A\Big| \sum_i Q_i^2 Y_{Ni} F_{1/2}(\tau_{E_i^\pm}) + C \Big|,\,\,\,\,
\end{eqnarray}
where, $A=\frac{\alpha^2M_h^3}{256\pi^3v^2}$, $C$ is the SM contribution, $ C=\sum_fN_f^cQ_f^2y_fF_{1/2}(\tau_{E_i^{\pm}})+y_WF_1(\tau_W)$ and $\tau_x=\frac{M_H^2}{ M_X^2}$. $Q$ denote electric charge of corresponding particles and $N_f^c$ is the color factor. Higgs $H$ coupling to $f\overline{f}$ and $WW$ is denoted by $y_f$ and $y_W$. $Y_{N1}= \sqrt{2} \cos\beta \sin\beta Y_{N}$ and $Y_{N2}= -\sqrt{2} \cos\beta \sin\beta Y_{N}$ stand for corresponding couplings $H \, E_i+E_i^-$ ($i=1,2$) and the loop function $F_{(0,1/2,1)}(\tau)$ can be found in Ref~\cite{Djouadi:2005gj}.
In this analysis, we find that $M_{E_{1,2}^\pm}>200$ GeV for $Y_N=\mathcal{O}(1)$ is still allowed from the LHC di-photon signal strength $\mu_{\gamma\gamma}=\frac{\Gamma(H\rightarrow\gamma\gamma)_{BSM}}{\Gamma(H \rightarrow\gamma\gamma)_{SM}}$ data.
\subsection{Bounds from electroweak precision experiments}
Bounds from electroweak precision experiments are added in new physics contributions via self-energy parameters $S,T,U$ from EW precision experiments does put bounds on new physics contributions~\cite{Baak:2014ora, Peskin:1991sw}.
The $S$ and $T$ parameters allow the new physics contributions to the neutral and the difference between neutral and charged weak currents, respectively. However, the $U$ parameter is only sensitive to the mass and width of the $W$-boson. Thus in some cases, this parameter is neglected.
The NNLO global electroweak fit results from the Gfitter
group~\cite{Baak:2014ora} gives, $\Delta S_{BSM}<0.05\pm0.11$, $T_{BSM}<0.09\pm0.13$ and $\Delta U_{BSM}<0.011\pm0.11$.
In this model, a tiny mass difference $\Delta M \sim 20$ GeV between the charged and neutral fermions of the doublet $F_D$~\cite{Peskin:1991sw, Cynolter:2008ea} with $M_{ND}>200$ GeV and heavy singlet charged fermion mass $\mathcal{O}(1)$ TeV are considered to evade these bounds. We also keep fixed $\cos\beta=0.995$ and $M_{E_2^\pm}=1500$ GeV throughout the analysis to avoid the bounds from the Electroweak Precision Parameters.
\subsection{Dark matter}
The lightest stable $Z_2$ odd particle, $S$ behaves like a proper DM candidate in our model. As per our choice of parameter space, DM relic density constraints should satisfy current results from Planck and WMAP~\cite{Aghanim:2018eyx},
\begin{equation} \Omega_{DM}h^2 \, = \, 0.1198 \, \pm \, 0.0012 .\end{equation}
Recent direct-detection experiments like the Xenon-1T~\cite{Aprile:2018dbl} and invisible Higgs decay width data including indirect Fermi-LAT data~\cite{fermilat1} have restricted the arbitrary Higgs portal coupling and the dark matter mass~\cite{Khan:2012zw,Athron:2017kgt,indirect2}. It is also possible to explain various observations in the indirect DM detection experiments from this model. However, we do not discuss these here, as these estimations involve proper knowledge of the astrophysical backgrounds and an assumption of the DM halo profile, which contains some arbitrariness.
In our study, we use {\tt FeynRules}~\cite{Alloul:2013bka} along with {\tt micrOMEGAs}~\cite{Belanger:2018mqt} to compute the relic density of the scalar DM. We present a comprehensive discussion on dark matter in the numerical analysis section.
\subsection{Lepton flavour violation ($\mu\rightarrow e\gamma$) and anomolus magnetic moment}
It is a well-known lepton flavour violation (LFV) process that put severe constraints on the LFV couplings and, in general, on the model parameter space. The size of the LFV is controlled by the lepton number violating couplings $Y_{fi} ~(i=1,2,3)$. Since the observed dark matter abundance is typically obtained for $\kappa=\mathcal{O}(0-1)$ and $Y_{fi}=\mathcal{O}(0-1)$ through $s$-channel, $t$-channel annihilation and the combination of these two processes (co-annihilation, i.e., mass differences can also play a crucial role). The lepton flavour observables are expected to give additional stringent constraints on the parameter spaces.
Among the various LFV processes, the radiative muon decay
$\Gamma(\mu\rightarrow e \gamma)$ is one of the popular and restrictive one, which in the present model is mediated by charged particles $E_1^\pm, E_2^\pm$ present in the internal lines of the
one-loop diagram~\ref{lfv}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.95]{nmass2}
\caption{ Muon and electron anomolus magnetic moment and LFV process $\mu\rightarrow e\gamma$ decay diagrams mediated by charged particles $E_1^{\pm}$ and $E_2^{\pm}$. }\label{lfv}
\end{figure}
The corresponding expression for the branching ratio is given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
{\rm BR} (\mu\rightarrow e \gamma) = \frac{3 \alpha_{em}}{64 \pi G_F^2} \Big | \cos^2\beta \, Y^\dagger_{f1} Y_{f2} \frac{ F(M_{E_{1}^\pm}^2/M_S^2) }{ M_S^2}+ \sin^2\beta \, Y^\dagger_{f1} Y_{f2} \frac{ F(M_{E_{2}^\pm}^2/M_S^2) }{ M_S^2}\Big |^2 ,
\label{eq:fl}
\end{eqnarray}
where, $
F(x)=\frac{x^3-6 x^2 +3 x+ 2 + + x ln(x)}{6 \, (x-1)^4}
$.
The most recent experimental bounds for LFV could be found in Ref.~\cite{Baldini:2018nnn}. Throughout this analysis we keep fixed $Y_{f2}=\mathcal{O}(10^{-3})$ and put constraints to the other parameters from the flavour violating decay~\cite{Baldini:2018nnn} $ {\rm BR} (\mu\rightarrow e \gamma) < 4.2 \times 10^{-13}$ at $90\%$ CL.
Due to the presence of vector-like fermion, the new contribution to anomalous magnetic moment can be written as~\cite{Harnik:2012pb},
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta \alpha_{i}&=\frac{ m_i \, m_{E_1^{\pm} } \, A_{f2}^2 }{ 256\, \pi^2 \, m_S^2} \Big( 2 \, \text{ln}\, \frac{m_s^2 }{ m_{E_1^{\pm}}^2} -3 \Big) + \frac{ m_i \, m_{E_2^{\pm} } \, B_{f2}^2 }{ 256\, \pi^2 \, m_S^2} \Big( 2 \, \text{ln}\, \frac{m_s^2 }{ m_{E_2^{\pm}}^2} -3 \Big)
\end{eqnarray}
where $A_{fi}=Y_{fi}\cos\beta$ and $B_{fi}=Y_{fi}\sin\beta$.
The discrepancy between the theoretical SM predictions and the experimental values are given by~\cite{Bennett:2006fi, Parker:2018vye}:
$\delta a_{\mu}=a_{\mu}^\text{exp}-a_{\mu}^\text{SM}=(2.74\pm 0.73)\times 10^{-9}$
and
$\delta a_{e}=a_{e}^\text{exp}-a_{e}^\text{SM}=-(8.8\pm 3.6)\times 10^{-13}$.
With the choices of appropriate parameters in this model, we can explain the electron anomalous magnetic moment, still not the muon anomalous magnetic moment (we have $\delta a_{\mu}\sim 10^{-14}$) at the same time. The parameters which satisfy the discrepancy of muon anomalous magnetic moment violates the LFV data. We will not focus on this further.
\subsection{Neutrino mass via one loop process}\label{s4}
In this section, we will try to give a brief overview of the neutrino mass generation at the one-loop level.
The neutral $Z_2$-odd scalar and fermion involved in the radiative neutrino mass generation after the EWSB, which is shown in Fig.~\ref{numass}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.95]{nmass}
\caption{ \rm One-loop contribution to neutrino mass generation with a scalar $S$ and fermion $X_1^0$.}\label{numass}
\end{figure}
Summing over all the two-point function contributions, we arrive at the neutrino mass matrix component as~\cite{FileviezPerez:2009ud},
\begin{eqnarray}
(M_{\nu})_{ij}=\frac{1}{16\pi^2} (Y_{fi}^\dagger Y_{fi}) ( \, \kappa v^2 ) I (M_N, M_{DM}),
\label{eq:n1}
\end{eqnarray}
where, $i,j=1,2,3$ stand for the lepton generation index. $M_N$ is the mass for the neutral heavy fermion. $I (M_N, M_{DM}) $ is the loop function, defined as~\cite{FileviezPerez:2009ud},
\begin{eqnarray}
I (M_N, M_{DM}) = 4 M_N \frac{M_{DM}^2 -M_N^2 + M_N \, log(\frac{M_N^2}{M_{DM}^2})}{(M_{DM}^2-M_N^2)^2}.
\label{eq:n2}
\end{eqnarray}
To get the neutrino mass eigenvalues, we have to diagonalize the above mass matrix using the well established PMNS matrix as: $ m_{Diag}=U_{\rm PMNS}^\dagger M_\nu U_{\rm PMNS}$. It is also essential to ensure that the choice of Yukawa couplings, as well as other parameters
involved in light neutrino mass, are consistent with the current neutrino oscillation data.
From the above equations~\ref{eq:n1} and~\ref{eq:n2}, light neutrino masses, and mixing angles can be visualized by adjusting the coupling and mass parameters present in equation \eqref{eq:n1}. For a few hundred GeV dark matter and heavy neutral fermions, one can choose small $\kappa$ of $\mathcal{O}(10^{-6})$ to get the small neutrino masses. From Eq. \eqref{eq:n1} it is clear that, in the limit $\kappa v^2\rightarrow0$, light neutrino mass vanishes. This limit also signifies the fact that the vanishing neutrino masses are quite obvious as $\kappa$ in the scalar potential breaks lepton number by two units, when considered together with the SM-singlet fermions Lagrangian. Hence, the smallness of $\kappa$ is technically natural in the 't Hooft sense~\cite{tHooft:1980xss}, as adjusting $\kappa\rightarrow0$ allows us to define global $U(1)$ lepton number symmetry.
At the same time, by adjusting both the real and imaginary parts of the Yukawa couplings, the mixing angles could be produced. This smallness of the Higgs portal coupling enhances the allowed region of the parameter space, and the relic density could produce via the other channels, which we will discuss in detail in the dark matter numerical analysis section. The analysis of neutrino mass carried out in this work is more of a perfunctory rather than being comprehensive
\section{Numerical analysis}\label{s5}
\subsection{Dark matter}\label{dm1}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{11}}
\hskip 1pt
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{2}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{3}}
\hskip 1pt
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{4}}
\caption{ \it The DM annihilation diagrams give the relic density. $V$ stands for gauge bosons $W,Z$, $f'$ represents the SM leptons and $f$ are SM leptons and quarks.}
\label{fig:DarkAn}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{5}}
\hskip 1pt
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{6}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{7}}
\hskip 1pt
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{8}}
\caption{ \it The Co-annihilation and annihilation diagrams of the DM and the other $Z_2$-odd fermion fields. $f$ are SM leptons and quarks.
}
\label{fig:DarkCoan}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As pointed out in the previous section, the viable DM candidate in this model is the lightest $Z_2$-odd singlet scalar $S$. The production mechanism of this DM candidate depends upon the Higgs portal couplings $\kappa$ through $s$- and cross-channels (see Figs.~\ref{fig:DarkAn}-(a), ~\ref{fig:DarkAn}-(b) and ~\ref{fig:DarkAn}-(c)).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.43]{PlotSchannel.png}}
\caption{ \it The dark matter relic density through $s$- and cross- channels only, with direct detection and other theoretical and experimental constraints. The $3\sigma$ relic density $\Omega h^2=0.1198\pm 0.0012$ constraint is shown
as the blue band. The Yukawa couplings $Y_{fi}$ and $Y_N$ are taken to be zero.}
\label{fig:DarkAnS}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.43]{PlotTchannel.png}}
\caption{ \it The dark matter relic density through $t$- channels only, with direct detection and other theoretical and experimental constraints. The $3\sigma$ relic density $\Omega h^2=0.1198\pm 0.0012$ constraint is shown
as the blue band. The Higgs portal couplings $\kappa$ is taken to be zero.}
\label{fig:DarkAnT}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
It is to be noted that in presence of the Yukawa couplings $Y_{fi}$ and $Y_N$, a huge improvement to the region of the dark matter parameter space is noticed here. Depending upon the size of the Yukawa couplings $Y_{fi}$, one can get a dominant DM annihilation through $t$- and $u$-channels (see Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAn}-(d)) in our model.
The interference between the $s$-channel, cross-channel and $t,u$-channels also played a crucial role to achieve the correct DM density\footnote{It is to be noted that the Sommerfeld enhancement don't play any role to enhance the current dark matter phenomenology \cite{ArkaniHamed:2008qn} and $M_{E_{1,2}^{\pm}}>M_{DM}$.}. The co-annihilation channels (e.g., see Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkCoan}) also played an important role in getting a viable region of allowed dark matter parameter space.
\begin{table*}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|p{1.6cm}|p{1.2cm}|p{1.1cm}|p{1.2cm}|p{1.2cm}|c|p{4.7cm}|}
\hline
\hline
Channel & $M_{DM}$ (GeV) &~~ $\kappa~~~$& $M_{E_1^\pm}$ (GeV) &$Y_{f}$&$\Omega_{DM}h^2$&~~~~~~~~~~Percentage \\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S\rightarrow W^\pm W^\mp)~~~47\%$ \\
~~BP-a1&570&0.1703&2000~~&0.0&0.1198&$\sigma(S S\rightarrow HH)\quad~24\%$ \\
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S\rightarrow ZZ)\quad23\%$\\
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S\rightarrow t\bar{t})\quad6\%$\\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S\rightarrow \nu \nu)\quad~98\%$\\
~~BP-b1&10&0.0&500~~&0.1665&0.1198& $\sigma(SS \rightarrow ll)\quad 2 \%$\\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S\rightarrow \nu \nu)\quad~98\%$\\
~~BP-b2&60&0.0&500~~&0.1640&0.1198& $\sigma(SS \rightarrow ll)\quad 2 \%$\\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S\rightarrow \nu \nu)\quad~98\%$\\
~~BP-b3&100&0.0&500~~&0.1677&0.1198& $\sigma(SS \rightarrow ll)\quad 2 \%$\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The benchmark points allowed by all the theoretical and experimental constraints. The density of the dark matter $S$ is dominated by either $s$- or $t,u$-channel annihilation processes. We consider $Y_{f1}=Y_{f3}=Y_f$ to avoid flavour violating decay processes.}
\label{tabDM:1}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.43]{PlotKappaVsMDMlow.png}}
\caption{ \it The coupling $y_f=0.05$ and second charged fermion mass $M_{E_2^\pm}=1500$ GeV are fixed. $M_{DM}$, $\kappa$ and $M_{E_1^\pm}$ parameters are varied in this plot. These red points satisfy the relic density at $3\sigma$ C.L. with $\Omega h^2=0.1198$ $\pm0.0012$, satisfying all the theoretical and experimental bounds.} \label{fig:DarkAnr}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.43]{PlotKappaVsyfforMass500.png}}
\caption{ \it The first and and second charged fermion masses $M_{E_1^\pm}=500$ GeV and $M_{E_2^\pm}=1500$ GeV are fixed. $M_{DM}$, $\kappa$ and $y_f$ parameters are varied in this plot. These red points satisfy the relic density at $3\sigma$ of $\Omega h^2=0.1198$ $\pm0.0012$ and pass all the theoretical and experimental bounds.}
\label{fig:DarkAll1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.43]{PlotKappaVsyfforYf500.png}}
\caption{ \it The first and and second charged fermion masses $M_{E_1^\pm}=500$ GeV and $M_{E_2^\pm}=1500$ GeV are fixed. $M_{DM}$, $\kappa$ and $y_f$ parameters are varied in this plot. These red points satisfy the relic density at $3\sigma$ of $\Omega h^2=0.1198$ $\pm0.0012$ and pass all the theoretical and experimental bounds. The core one gives the overabundant relic density on the other hand, the outer ring gives the under-abundent relic density for the given dark matter mass. Here, for large $\kappa$, it will violate the direct detection cross section. It is to be noted that, the interference effect of the s-channel ($\kappa$) and t-channel ($Y_f$) will play important role in relic density calculation.}
\label{fig:DarkAll2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
It is already evident that if we neglect the effect of other $Z_2$-odd fermions, {\it i.e.}, annihilation through $t$-channels and other co-annihilation processes, a very small $low$-DM mass region around $55{\text{GeV}}<M_{DM}<70$GeV for Higgs portal coupling $\kappa\sim 0.005$ is giving the exact relic density, allowed by the direct detection~\cite{Aprile:2018dbl} and LHC data. The main dominant channels for $low$-DM mass region is $SS \rightarrow b \bar{b}$.
For $M_{DM} > 100$ GeV, $SS \rightarrow V V$, where $V=W^\pm,Z$ gauge bosons~\cite{McDonald:1993ex} dominates over other DM annihilation channels. Under the approximation
$M_{DM} >> M_V, M_H$ , in the non-relativistic limit one can get the DM annihilation cross-section as $\sigma (SS \rightarrow W^+ W^-) \propto \frac{k^2}{M_{DM}^2}$. The allowed relic density (dominated by $s$- and cross-channels only) for the $high$-DM mass region in $\kappa-M_{DM}$ plane is displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAnS}. We also present corresponding benchmark points BP-1a and the percentage of different annihilation channel's contributions in the Tab.~\ref{tabDM:1}. As usual, the main dominant channels are $SS \rightarrow YY$ with $Y=W,Z$ and $H$ for the $high$-DM mass region.
The $3\sigma$ relic density $\Omega h^2=0.1198\pm 0.0012$ constraint is shown
as the blue band. One can get the exact relic density for the DM-mass region 70 GeV$< M_{MD} < 450$ GeV, however, it is ruled out by the present direct detection cross-section~\cite{Aprile:2018dbl}
So far, we do not have any direct signature of DM in the direct detection experiments, which suggest that we may have the dark matter with a $tiny$ or $zero$ Higgs portal coupling. Furthermore, the remaining effective cross-section $<\sigma_{eff} v>$ can be adjusted by the other annihilation and co-annihilation processes to achieve the exact dark matter density. In this model, we adopted such scenarios to achieve our goals.
For example, various dark matter masses can get the exact density with vanishing Higgs portal coupling ($\kappa$) by adjusting the charged fermion mass and Yukawa couplings $Y_{fi}$.
We portrait such variation in $Y_f-M_{DM}$ plane in Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAnT} for two different values of charged fermion mass $M_{E_1^\pm}=500$ GeV and $M_{E_1^\pm}=1000$ GeV. We also consider $Y_{f1}=Y_{f3}=Y_f$ and $Y_{f2}=\mathcal{O}(10^{-3})$ to avoid the flavour violating decay processes (see eqn.~\ref{eq:fl}).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.43]{PlotKappaVsyfforMass1000.png}}
\caption{ \it The first and and second charged fermion masses $M_{E_1^\pm}=1000$ GeV and $M_{E_2^\pm}=1500$ GeV are fixed. $M_{DM}$, $\kappa$ and $y_f$ parameters are varied in this plot. These red points satisfy the relic density at $3\sigma$ of $\Omega h^2=0.1198$ $\pm0.0012$ and pass all the theoretical and experimental bounds.}
\label{fig:DarkAll3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
It can be noticed from Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAnT} that one could get exact relic density for the dark matter mass as low as $M_{DM} = 10$ GeV.
As $\kappa=0$, the parameter space $M_{DM}<\frac{M_H}{2}$ is not restricted by the Higgs decay width and direct detection cross-section constraints. These data points also passed through other experimental constraints such as Higgs signal strength, electroweak precision test (EWPT) and theoretical bounds, viz., stability, unitarity, etc. The same $3\sigma$ relic density $\Omega h^2=0.1198\pm 0.0012$ constraint is shown
as the blue band.
The main dominant $t,u$-channel annihilation processes are $SS \rightarrow \nu \nu$ (see BP-b1,b2 and b3 in Tab.~\ref{tabDM:1}) and $SS \rightarrow l l$, where $l=e, ~\tau$ and $\nu=\nu_e,~\nu_\tau$ only as $Y_{f2}=\mathcal{O}(10^{-3})$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.43]{PlotKappaVsyfforYf1000.png}}
\caption{ \it The first and and second charged fermion masses $M_{E_1^\pm}=1000$ GeV and $M_{E_2^\pm}=1500$ GeV are fixed. $M_{DM}$, $\kappa$ and $y_f$ parameters are varied in this plot. These red points satisfy the relic density at $3\sigma$ of $\Omega h^2=0.1198$ $\pm0.0012$ and pass all the theoretical and experimental bounds. The core one gives the overabundant relic density on the other hand, the outer ring gives the under-abundent relic density for the given dark matter mass. Here, for large $\kappa$, it will violate the direct detection cross section. It is to be noted that, the interference effect of the s-channel ($\kappa$) and t-channel ($Y_f$) will play important role in relic density calculation.}
\label{fig:DarkAll4}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|p{1.6cm}|p{1.2cm}|p{1.3cm}|p{1.2cm}|p{1.2cm}|c|p{4.7cm}|}
\hline
\hline
Channel & $M_{DM}$ (GeV) &~~~ $\kappa~~~$& $M_{E_1^\pm}$ (GeV) &$Y_{f}$&$\Omega_{DM}h^2$&~~~~~~~~~~Percentage \\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S \rightarrow W^\pm W^\mp)\quad4\%$ \\
~~BP-c1&501&-0.0384&582&-0.05&0.1233&$\sigma(S S \rightarrow HH)\quad 2\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(S S \rightarrow ZZ)\quad2\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(E_1^\pm E_1^\pm \rightarrow W^\pm W^\pm ) 65\%$ \\
&&&&&&$\sigma(E_1^\pm E_1^\mp\rightarrow ZH)\quad20\%$\\
&&&&&& $\sigma(E_1^\pm E_1^\pm \rightarrow t\bar{t})\quad 3 \%$\\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S \rightarrow W^\pm W^\mp)\quad19\%$ \\
~~BP-c2&501&-0.087&586.2&-0.05&0.1162&$\sigma(S S \rightarrow HH)\quad 10\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(S S \rightarrow ZZ)\quad9\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(SS \rightarrow t\bar{t})\quad 3 \%$\\
&&&&&& $\sigma(E_1^\pm E_1^\pm \rightarrow W^\pm W^\pm ) 42\%$ \quad$\sigma(E_1^\pm E_1^\mp\rightarrow ZH)\quad13\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(E_1^\pm E_1^\pm \rightarrow t\bar{t})\quad 2 \%$\\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S \rightarrow W^\pm W^\mp)\quad26\%$ \\ ~~BP-c3&501&-0.122&589.5&-0.05&0.1234&$\sigma(S S \rightarrow HH)\quad 15\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(S S \rightarrow ZZ)\quad13\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(SS \rightarrow t\bar{t})\quad 4 \%$\\
&&&&&& $\sigma(E_1^\pm E_1^\pm \rightarrow W^\pm W^\pm ) 30\%$ \quad$\sigma(E_1^\pm E_1^\mp\rightarrow ZH)\quad9\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(E_1^\pm E_1^\pm \rightarrow t\bar{t})\quad 1 \%$\\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S \rightarrow W^\pm W^\mp)\quad44\%$ \\
~~BP-c4&501&-0.148&595&-0.05&0.1166&$\sigma(S S \rightarrow HH)\quad 26\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(S S \rightarrow ZZ)\quad22\%$ \\
&&&&&&$\sigma(S S \rightarrow t\overline{t})\quad7\%$\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The benchmark points allowed by all the theoretical and experimental constraints. The density of the dark matter $S$ is dominated by either annihilation or co-annihilation or combined effect of these processes. We consider $Y_{f1}=Y_{f3}=Y_f$ to avoid flavour violating decay processes.}
\label{tabDM:2}
\end{table*}
We now perform scans over the three dimensional parameter space. The mass parameter $M_{E_1^\pm}$ is varied from $200$ GeV (to avoid the experimental constraints) to $1000$ GeV with a step size $0.25$ GeV and $\kappa$ from $-0.35$ to $0.35$ with a step size $0.002$. The dark matter mass $M_{DM}$ from $\sim 200$ GeV to 1000 GeV with a step size $2$ GeV.
The effect is almost negligible for the second charged fermion mass $M_{E_2^\pm}=1500$ GeV with $\cos\beta=0.995$. We fixed the coupling $Y_f$ at $0.05$ for the region $M_{E_1^\pm}>200$ GeV to reduce the contributions through the $t,u$ annihilation channel in the relic density.
For $\Delta M^{\pm,0}<0.1 M_{DM}$ \cite{Griest:1990kh} ($\Delta M^\pm= M_{E_1^\pm}-M_{DM}$ and $\Delta M^0= M_N-M_{DM}$), the co-annihilation channels (Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkCoan}) play an important role for the dark matter density calculation.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAnr}, we display the allowed parameters in the $\kappa-M_{DM}$ plane.
These red points satisfy the relic density at $3\sigma$ C.L. with $\Omega h^2=0.1198$ $\pm0.0012$. The co-annihilation channels mainly dominate the two middle bands close to $\kappa \sim \pm0.03-\pm0.10$. For example, we present two such benchmark points (BP-c1 and BP-c2) and the corresponding contributions in Tab.~\ref{tabDM:2}. The other two bands in Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAnr} are mainly dominated by the dark matter annihilation through $s+cross$-channels (see Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAn}(a,b and c)). It also have small contribution from the dark matter annihilation through $t+u$-channels (see Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAn}(d)). Large Higgs portal coupling, such as $\kappa=0.148$ (BP-c4) are mainly dominated by the annihilation through $s+cross$-channels. However, the relic density for the point BP-c3 is coming due to the combined contributions of $s+cross$-channels and $t+u$-channels.
\begin{table*}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|p{1.6cm}|p{1.2cm}|p{1.1cm}|p{1.2cm}|p{1.2cm}|c|p{4.7cm}|}
\hline
\hline
Channel & $M_{DM}$ (GeV) & ~~$\kappa~~~$& $M_{E_1^\pm}$ (GeV) &~~$Y_{f}$&$\Omega_{DM}h^2$&~~~~~~~~~~Percentage \\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(SS\rightarrow \nu \nu)\quad 72\%$ \\
~~BP-d1&325&0.05&1000& 0.225 &0.1173& $\sigma(SS\rightarrow W^\pm W^\mp) \quad 12\%$ \\
&&&&&& $\sigma(SS\rightarrow HH)\quad7\%$\\
&&&&&& $\sigma(SS\rightarrow ZZ)\quad6\%$\\
&&&&&&$\sigma(SS\rightarrow t\bar{t})\quad 4\%$ \\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(SS\rightarrow \nu \nu)\quad 88\%$ \\
~~BP-d2&500&0.05&1000& 0.250 &0.1219&$\sigma(SS\rightarrow W^\pm W^\mp) \quad5\%$\\
&&&&&& $\sigma(SS\rightarrow ZZ)\quad3\%$\\
&&&&&& $\sigma(SS\rightarrow HH)\quad3\%$\\
\hline
&&&&&&$\sigma(SS\rightarrow \nu \nu)\quad 96\%$ \\
~~BP-d3&675&0.05&1000& 0.280 &0.1169& $\sigma(SS\rightarrow W^\pm W^\mp) \quad3\%$\\
&&&&&& $\sigma(SS\rightarrow ZZ)\quad1\%$\\
&&&&&& $\sigma(SS\rightarrow HH)\quad1\%$\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The benchmark points allowed by all the theoretical and experimental constraints. $\sigma(SS\rightarrow \nu \nu)$ is mainly dominated by the $t+u$-channel annihilation processes whereas $\sigma(SS\rightarrow YY),\,Y=W,Z,H,t$ dominated by the $s+cross$-channel annihilation processes. We consider $Y_{f1}=Y_{f3}=Y_f$ to avoid flavour violating decay processes.}
\label{tabDM:3}
\end{table*}
We also scan in the other three dimensional parameter space. The dark matter mass $M_{DM}$ is varied from 5 GeV to 540 GeV and $\kappa$ from $-0.35$ to $0.35$ with a step size $0.002$ and $Y_f$ from $-0.35$ to $0.35$ GeV with a step size $0.005$ GeV with fixed $M_{E_1^\pm}=500$ GeV. It is noted that the co-annihilation effect are completely absent here as $\Delta M^{\pm,0}> 0.1 M_{DM}$. We display the allowed parameters $\kappa-M_{DM}$ plane in Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAll1}.
One can see, in the presence of DM annihilation via $t,u$-channel as most of the region is giving the correct DM density, which is also allowed by other experimental constraints. For $\kappa\neq 0$, the $s$-channel annihilation dominates near Higgs resonance region $\sim \frac{M_H}{2}$. This region gives overabundance of dark matter density in our study. For a small $\kappa \sim 0$, the $t+u$-channels helps to get the correct relic density at $3\sigma$ C.L.
We show the $\kappa-Y_f$ plane in Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAll2} for the same data points as in Fig.~\ref{fig:DarkAll1}. We get two circular ring-type structures here. The empty region violates one of the constraints, such as the relic density of the dark matter, direct detection, and Higgs decay width for the DM mass $<\frac{M_H}{2}$.
Nonetheless, in presence of the co-annihilation processes with/or a different choice of the $M_{E_1^\pm}$, the gaps between these two circular rings could be filled. We also display similar plots in $\kappa-M_{DM}$ and $\kappa-Y_f$ planes in Figs.~\ref{fig:DarkAll3} and~\ref{fig:DarkAll4} for the $M_{E_1^\pm}=1000$ GeV, where we change the variation for DM mass $M_{DM}$ from 5 GeV to 1000 GeV. We get a similar type of plot with a large region of the parameter spaces allowed by all the experimental and theoretical constraints. Few BMPs and their corresponding contributions are presented in Tab.~\ref{tabDM:3}. $\sigma(SS\rightarrow \nu \nu)$ is mainly dominated by the $t+u$-channel annihilation processes whereas $\sigma(SS\rightarrow YY),\,Y=W,Z,H,t$ dominated by the $s+cross$-channel annihilation processes.
\subsection{Neutrino mass and mixing}
In this minimal model, with the choice of parameter space we discuss some numerical insights to neutrino phenomenology.
Using equation \eqref{eq:n1}, with the masses for subsequent fields $M_{DM}=110$ GeV $M_N=800$ GeV and choice of Yukawa parameters $|Y_{f1}|=0.8 |,~ Y_{f2}|=10^{-4},|Y_{f3}|=0.282$, we get the sum of the neutrino masses of the order of sub-eV range ($\sim0.03$ eV) for Higgs portal coupling $\kappa<10^{-6}$. This smallness of neutrino mass does satisfy current upper bound on sum of the active neutrino masses \cite{Giusarma:2016phn, Vagnozzi:2017ovm}, and the tiny $\kappa$ is also directly associated with dark matter relic density via the $t$-channel process.
We are able to generate mixing angles $\theta_{12}=32.7^{\circ}$, $\theta_{13}=8.4^{\circ}$, $\theta_{23}=44.71^{\circ}$ and mass differences $\Delta m_{21}^2=7.44\times10^{-5}$ eV$^2$ and $\Delta m_{31}^2=4.9\times10^{-4}$ eV$^2$ with phases $\alpha=\delta=45^{\circ}$. Although $\Delta m_{21}^2$ is within the present 3$\sigma$ bound yet, $\Delta m_{31}^2$ is deviate from the actual range for this choice of the parameters. For the other choice of the parameters (mainly $Y_{f2}$),
we can get $\Delta m_{31}^2$ is within the present 3$\sigma$ bound yet, $\Delta m_{21}^2$ is deviate from the actual range for this choice of the parameters. We have also opted for Casas-Ibarra parametrization \cite{Casas:2001sr} extended to radiative model \cite{Toma:2013zsa} to solve this inconsistency, however, in that case also exactly similar kind of problem arises. As a conclusive remark we obtained from this study is that, within the scotogenic model, it is unable to explain all the neutrino oscillation parameters with just a single generation of fermion doublet. One must introduce an additional field that interact with the lepton doublet to successfully explain the neutrino mass.
We are adding an extra fermion doublet $F$ as {\it ad hoc} basis in the model with mass $M_F=2500$ GeV to test the inconsistency. The interaction Lagrangian of Eq. \eqref{lint} will be slightly modified as $\sum\limits_{{\scalebox{0.5}{i={1,2,3}}, ~ \scalebox{0.5}{j=1,2}}} Y_{fij} \bar{L_i} F_{Dj} S $. The Yukawa couplings are set as $|Y_{f11}|=0.1, |Y_{f12}|=5\times10^{-4}, |Y_{f13}|=5\times10^{-3}, |Y_{f21}|=4\times 10^{-2}, |Y_{f22}|=4.2\times 10^{-3}$ and $|Y_{f23}|=4.9\times 10^{-2}$ to observed exact 3$\sigma$ bounds on the light neutrino parameters. These set of couplings give rise to $\Delta m_{21}^2=7.08\times10^{-5}$ eV$^2$ and $\Delta m_{31}^2=2.5\times10^{-3}$ eV$^2$ with phases $\alpha=28.6479^{\circ}$ and $\delta=42.9718^{\circ}$, which satisfies the current bound on the parameters space \cite{Esteban:2020cvm}. Even though the inclusion of this {\it ad hoc} particle with low mass could explain the neutrino parameters completely, anyhow it could also affect dark matter parameter space in this model itself. However we check that the choice of $M_F=2500$ GeV and with a small mixing parameters from $\sum\limits_{\scalebox{0.5}{j=1,2}} Y_{N_j}\overline{F}_D\phi E_S$ have a very tiny effect on the relic density calculation. It will also have negligibly small affect on the collider search results for first generation of heavy fermion. To get the collider signature of this heavy particle we need a very large luminosity $>1~{\rm ab^{-1}}$ (ab=attobarn) at LHC with energy $\sqrt{s}=14$ TeV.
\subsection{Collider Searches}
We perform a search for the lightest charged fermion $E_1^\pm$ in the context of 14 TeV LHC experiments with integrated luminosity of 3000 fb$^{-1}$ for event's process $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp$, where a SM leptons $l$ is produced through decays of the charged fermion as $E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S$. Hence, in the final state, events have two
same flavours opposite sign (SFOS) leptons, including significant missing transverse energy coming from the LSP $S$.
Here, processes like $pp \rightarrow WW~ (W \rightarrow l \nu)$, $pp\rightarrow ZW~(Z \rightarrow ll, W\rightarrow l \nu )$ and $pp\rightarrow ZZ ~(Z \rightarrow ll, Z\rightarrow \nu \overline{\nu})$ can add to the SM background if additional charged leptons get misidentified or remain unreconstructed. Also other reducible backgrounds like $pp\rightarrow t\overline{t}, t \rightarrow W b, W \rightarrow l \nu$ may also produce two leptons and jets in the final state.
Similarly the Drell–Yan process $pp \rightarrow Z^*, \gamma^* \rightarrow ll ~jets$ ($jets$ misidentified in our case) can also contribute to the SM background.
Multi-jets final state events would hugely affected by this background due to the large production cross-section. The additional cuts on number of jets reduce these backgrounds to be less than one. This channel $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp, E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S \rightarrow ll + \slashed{E}_T$ is analyzed by performing a detailed cut based collider analysis. We will show the projected exclusion/discovery reach of direct heavy charged fermion and dark matter as transverse missing energy searches in this channels by performing a detailed cut based collider analysis.
We use {\tt FeynRules}~\cite{Alloul:2013bka} to get the input codes for {\tt MadGraph-2.6.5}~\cite{Alwall:2014hca}. Using the particle spectrum into the {\tt MadGraph-2.6.5}, we calculate the production cross-section of the heavy charged fermions.
We also verified the results using {\tt SARAH-4.8.6}~\cite{Staub:2012pb,Staub:2015kfa} including {\tt SPheno-4.0.3}~\cite{Porod:2011nf} mass spectrum into the {\tt MadGraph-2.6.5}. We use {\tt MadGraph-2.6.5} to generate the
signal as well as background events and {\tt PYTHIA-8.2}~\cite{Sjostrand:2014zea} for showering and hadronization. All generated signal and background events are processed through a fast simulation package {\tt Delphes-3.4.1}~\cite{deFavereau:2013fsa} and we choose ALTAS configuration card for the analysis.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.63]{crossvsmass1}
\end{center}
\caption{Production cross-section for the heavy charged fermions $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp$ at the 14 TeV LHC experiment.}
\label{fig:crossMe1}
\end{figure}
The events are selected with two same flavours opposite sign (SFOS) isolated electron. Total number of muon is very less in the final state events as $Y_{f2}\sim 0$. Anyways, we consider both the electron and muon in the final state with transverse momentum $p_T$ larger than 30 GeV. The charged lepton isolation requires that there is no other charged particle with $p_T > 0.5$ GeV/c within a cone of
$\Delta R = \sqrt{\Delta\Phi^2 +\Delta \eta^2} < 0.5$ centered on the cell-associated to the charged lepton. Besides, the ratio of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all tracks to $p_T$ of the lepton (chosen for isolation) is less than $0.12$ ($0.25$) for the electron (muon). Here $p_T$, $\Phi$ and $\eta$ are the transverse momentum, polar angle and pseudo-rapidity of charged leptons respectively.
The charged lepton candidates are required to be within a pseudorapidity range of $|\eta| < 2.5$. Number of light and $b$-jets in the final state are taken to be zero.
A variety of kinematic variables have been used to design the optimized signal regions. Out of them, the invariant mass $M_{ll}$ and transverse missing energy $\slashed{E}_T$ can be a
useful probe to search for the charged fermion $E_1^\pm$ of this model.
First and foremost, the invariant mass of the two final state $l$, $M_{ll} \equiv M_{l_{1}l_{2}}$ ($l_{1}$ and $l_{2}$ represents the $p_{T}$ ordered leading and sub-leading $l$ in the final state) is used to discriminate the background.
For the signal process, the $l$ pair is produced from the decay of the $E_1^\pm$ and thereby no peaks around $\sim 110-115~{\rm GeV}$. On the other hand, the $M_{ll}$ distribution for the most dominant $ZZ/WZ$ background has a peak roughly around $\sim 110-115~{\rm GeV}$ and the distribution smoothly falling after $115$ GeV since the two $l$ are produced from the decay of $Z$ boson.
The transverse missing energy $\slashed{E}_T$ can also be a
useful probe to search for the charged fermion $E_1^\pm$ of this model where the only contribution to $\slashed{E}_T$ comes from the $\nu$ produced by the leptonically decaying $W$ for the background and the dark matter itself behave as $\slashed{E}_T$ for the signal process.
\begin{table}[htpb!]
\begin{center}\scalebox{1.0}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\hline
Signal Region &\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ Various Cuts }\\
\cline{2-3}
& ~~~~$M_{ll}$ [GeV]~~~~& $~~~~\slashed{E}_T$ [GeV]~~~~\\
\cline{1-3}
\rule{0pt}{1ex}
SR-1 & 100.0 & 100.0 \\
\rule{0pt}{1ex}
SR-2 & 110.0 & 140.0 \\
\rule{0pt}{1ex}
SR-3 & 120.0 & 200.0 \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\caption{The three optimized signal regions (SR-1, SR-2 and SR-3).}
\label{table:sr}
\end{table}
Signal events have been generated for various combinations of $M_{E_1^\pm}$ and $M_S$. $M_{E_1^\pm}$ has been varied from $150~{\rm GeV}$ to $1600~{\rm GeV}$ with a step size of $30~{\rm GeV}$, while $M_S$ has been varied between $10~{\rm GeV}$ to $M_{E_1^\pm}$ with a step size of $30~{\rm GeV}$. It is to be noted that to avoid the bounds from the Electroweak Precision Parameters $S,T$ and $U$ we took large $\cos\beta=0.995$ and $M_{E_2^\pm}=1500$ GeV and fixed $Y_f=0.165$.
\begin{table}[htpb!]
\begin{center}\scalebox{1.0}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\hline
BMPs & Cross-Sections [fb] & Backgrounds & Cross-Sections [fb]\\
\cline{1-4}
\rule{0pt}{1ex}
BMP-1 & 303.1 & $ pp \rightarrow WW $& 28.2102\\
\rule{0pt}{1ex}
BMP-2 & 4.806 & $ pp \rightarrow WZ$ & 12.5581\\
\rule{0pt}{1ex}
BMP-3 & 2.91 & $ pp \rightarrow ZZ$ &30.0432\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\caption{The cross-section for the process $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp, E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S$ for three benchmark points (BMP-1, BMP-2 and BMP-3).}
\label{tab:cs}
\end{table}
Three different signal regions are chosen, SR-1, SR-2 and SR-3 (see table~\ref{table:sr}), aimed at maximizing the significance of signal events with small, intermediate and large mass difference, respectively~\cite{Barman:2020azo}.
The selection cuts for SR-1, SR-2 and SR-3 have been chosen by performing a cut based analysis for the three representative benchmark points: BMP-1: $M_{E_1^\pm}= 150~{\rm GeV}$, $M_S = 50~{\rm GeV}$, BMP-2: $M_{E_1^\pm}= 450~{\rm GeV}$, $M_S = 300~{\rm GeV}$ and BMP-3: $M_{E_1^\pm}= 500~{\rm GeV}$, $M_S = 30~{\rm GeV}$, respectively.
\begin{table}[htpb!]
\begin{center}\scalebox{1.0}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\hline
Signal&Total &\multicolumn{6}{c|}{ Benchmark points: ($M_{E_1^\pm}$, $M_S$) in GeV }\\
\cline{3-8}
Region&number of& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{ BMP-1~(150, 50) }&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ BMP-2~(450, 300) }&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{ BMP-3~(500, 30) }\\
\cline{3-8}
&Backgrounds& ~~$\#$ events~~& ~~Significance&$\#$ events~~& ~~Significance&$\#$ events~~& ~~Significance\\
\cline{1-8}
\rule{0pt}{1ex}
SR-1 & 5260.9856& 52768.92 & 178.414 & 2296.05 & 23.42 & 1883.05 & 19.6\\
\rule{0pt}{1ex}
SR-2 & 2361.8417 & 10320.5& 91.64 & 1613.35 & 25.5887 & 1718.07& 26.9\\
\rule{0pt}{1ex}
SR-3 &668.5 & 1909.42 & 37.6 & 705.755 &19.038 & 1464.02 & 31.6978\\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\caption{The signal significance for the three benchmark signal points ( BMP-1, BMP-2 and BMP-3) corresponding to the three optimized signal regions (SR-1, SR-2 and SR-3) are shown. In addition, the total background yield and the total signal yield is also given.}
\label{table:signal_significance}
\end{table}
We show the cross-section of the process $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp$ for different mass in the Fig.~\ref{fig:crossMe1}.
The values of $\sigma_{pp \to E_1^\pm E_1^\mp, E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S}$ for BMP-1, BMP-2 and BMP-3 have been listed in Table~\ref{tab:cs}.
The signal yield ($S$) has been computed as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
S = \sigma_{pp \to E_1^\pm E_1^\mp, E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S} \times \mathcal{L} \times \varepsilon_{Eff}.
\label{Eqn:signal_yield}
\end{eqnarray}
where, $\mathcal{L}$ is the integrated future LHC luminosity ($\mathcal{L}=3000~ {\rm fb^{-1}}$) and $ \varepsilon_{Eff}$ represents the efficiency of the signal region. $ \varepsilon_{Eff}$ is the ratio of the number of signal events which pass through a certain signal region ($\rm N_{initial}$) to the total number of generated signal events ($\rm N_{final}$); $ \varepsilon_{Eff}$ = ${\rm N_{final}/ N_{initial}}$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{Inva14TeV.png}}
\caption{ \rm The invariant mass distribution of the two same flavour opposite sign (SFOS) leptons for the signal $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp, E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S \rightarrow ll + \slashed{E}_T$ and $ pp \rightarrow VV, V=W,Z$ backgrounds. The distributions for BMP-1, BMP-2 and BMP-3 have been illustrated as red, blue and magenta solid colors while the $pp \rightarrow VV, V=W,Z$ background has been shown in brown color.}
\label{fig:coll1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{Miss14TeV.png}}
\caption{ \rm The transverse mass energy distribution for the signal $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp, E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S \rightarrow $ $ ll + \slashed{E}_T$ and $ pp \rightarrow VV, V=W,Z$ backgrounds. The distributions for BMP-1, BMP-2 and BMP-3 have been illustrated as red, blue and magenta solid colors while the $pp \rightarrow VV, V=W,Z$ background has been shown in brown color.}
\label{fig:coll2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The $M_{ll}$ distribution for the signal benchmark points (BMP-1, BMP-2 and BMP-3) and the total background $pp \rightarrow VV, V=W,Z$ has been shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:coll1}.
The distributions for BMP-1, BMP-2 and BMP-3 in Figs.~\ref{fig:coll1} have been illustrated as red, blue and magenta solid colors while the $pp \rightarrow VV, V=W,Z$ background has been shown in brown color.
We show the transverse missing energy $\slashed{E}_T$ distributions in Fig.~\ref{fig:coll2} for the same benchmark points.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{ConturCol3000.pdf}}
\caption{ \rm The exclusion plot for the signal $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp, E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S \rightarrow $ $ ll + \slashed{E}_T$ and $ pp \rightarrow VV, V=W,Z$ backgrounds at $\sqrt{s}=14$ TeV with integrated luminosity $L=3000~{\rm fb^{-1}}$.}
\label{fig:cont}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The optimized selection cuts corresponding to SR-1, SR-2 and SR-3 are given in table~\ref{table:sr}. The signal yields for BMP-1, BMP-2 and BMP-3, along with the corresponding background yields obtained after application of selection cuts listed in SR-1, SR-2 and SR-3, respectively, have also been shown in Table~\ref{table:signal_significance}. It should be noted that the signal significances have been obtained without assuming any systematic uncertainty. The signal significance is computed as $S/\sqrt{S+B}$, where $S$ and $B$ are the signal and background yields. SR-1 results in a signal significance of $178.414$ for BMP-1, while SR-2 and SR-3 has a signal significance of $25.5887$ and $31.6978$ for BMP-2 and BMP-3, respectively.
We also derive the projected exclusion limits in the $M_{E_1^\pm}-M_S$ plane from direct heavy charged-fermion searches at 14 TeV LHC experiments with an integrated luminosity of 3000 ${\rm fb^{-1}}$ in the $2l+\slashed{E}_T$ search channel. The value of signal significance is computed for the three optimized signal regions (SR-1, SR-2 and SR-3) and the maximum among them is considered in deriving the projection regions. The projected exclusion and discovery region corresponds to the sector with signal significance $> 2\sigma$ and $> 5\sigma$, respectively. They have been represented in light blue and dark blue colors, respectively, in Fig.~\ref{fig:cont}.
It can be observed from Fig.~\ref{fig:cont} that in this model, direct heavy charged-fermion searches at 14 TeV LHC experiments with an integrated luminosity of 3000 ${\rm fb^{-1}}$ in the $2l+\slashed{E}_T$ search channel has a potential exclusion (discovery) reach up to $\sim 1380~{\rm GeV}$ ($\sim 1050~{\rm GeV}$) for the dark matter mass $M_S <10~{\rm GeV}$.
It is to be noted that the stransverse $m_{T2}$~\cite{Lester:1999tx, Cho:2007qv} cut in this analysis is not included, and we also agree if we include it may exclude larger region of the parameter space. The ATLAS~\cite{Aad:2019vnb} collaboration done such analysis including $m_{T2}$ cut from direct slepton searches in the $ ll + \slashed{E}_T$ final state at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with integrated luminosity $\mathcal{L}=3000~{\rm fb^{-1}}$ within a simplified R-parity conserving Supersymmetry framework.
It is also true that one can include further kinematic variables (such as different $p_T,\Delta \eta_{ll}, \Delta \Phi_{ll}$ etc. in different region) and/or more signal regions to maximize the exclusion contour on the same plane. Further analysis by including more number of cuts may lead to a better and improved results. However in this simplified model, the minimum sets of cut $M_{ll}$ ans $\slashed{E}_T$ with three signal region are enough to probe this model at future collider analysis.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}{
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{ConturCol13TeV.pdf}}
\caption{ \rm The exclusion plot for the signal $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp, E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S \rightarrow $ $ ll + \slashed{E}_T$ and $ pp \rightarrow VV, V=W,Z$ backgrounds at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$.}
\label{fig:cont3000s13}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
It would also be good to see, how much this model is already probed by current
data, following the outline in the ATLAS search at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with integrated luminosity 139 fb$^{-1}$~\cite{Aad:2019vnb}. Including the invariant mass $M_{ll}$ and transverse missing energy $\slashed{E}_T$, they used the stransverse $m_{T2}$~\cite{Lester:1999tx, Cho:2007qv} and other cuts (see Table 2 of the Ref.~\cite{Aad:2019vnb}). They choose various final state. To compare with our analysis, we stick with ``SR-SF-0J" (same flavor opposite sign leptons without $jets$) final state. We generate the events for different combinations of $M_{E_1^\pm}$ and $M_S$. $M_{E_1^\pm}$ has been varied from $150~{\rm GeV}$ to $800~{\rm GeV}$ with a step size of $40~{\rm GeV}$, while $M_S$ has been varied between $10~{\rm GeV}$ to $M_{E_1^\pm}$ with a step size of $30~{\rm GeV}$.
For the same signal region as in Table 2 of the Ref.~\cite{Aad:2019vnb}, one can also get the similar exclusion contour plot (shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cont3000s13}) for the direct heavy charged-fermion searches at 13 TeV LHC experiments with an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. We find the exclusion (discovery) reach up to $\sim$ 700 GeV
($\sim$ 500 GeV) for the dark matter mass $M_S < 10$ GeV.
\section{Conclusion}\label{conc}
In this work, we study the possibility of singlet scalar dark matter and neutrino mass in the minimal scotogenic model. The structure of the model projected here uses a minimum number of the field content. On the top of the SM field content, this model contains vector-like one neutral and two charged fermions along with a singlet scalar field. With the minimal choice of field content, we are unable to afford all the neutrino oscillation parameters at the right ballpark. Hence, one extra fermion doublet is added in the model as {\it ad hoc} basis to complete the neutrino framework. In the presence of other particles, one can get the correct relic density via co-annihilation, or one may have the interaction term such that the dark matter can annihilate into SM particles through additional cross-channel, $t$- and $u$-channels. The constructive or destructive interference among these channels helps to modify the effective annihilation cross-section and give the right relic density of the dark matter in our model.
The vector-like fermions have an interaction term with the Higgs scalar fields for which give rise to a mass difference between the degenerate neutral and charged fermions of the doublet at tree-level. The interaction term with singlet scalar helps to generate the neutrino mass and mixing angles via a 1-loop level through the radiative seesaw mechanism. Both of these interactions terms also help to get the exact relic density of the Universe for large ranges $0.1-100$ TeV ($M_{DM}\gtrsim 100$ TeV violates the unitary bounds~\cite{Griest:1989wd, Smirnov:2019ngs}) of the dark matter mass. The Higgs portal coupling $\mathcal{O}(10^{-5})$ along with these Yukawa couplings $\mathcal{O}(10^{-1})$ can explain the neutrino mass and mixing angles where the relic density is achieved via the $t$- and $u$-channel annihilation or other co-annihilation processes.
These new Yukawa couplings also play the lead role in explaining the discrepancy of the muon anomalous magnetic moment.
We also performed collider analysis to search the lightest charged fermion $E_1^\pm$ in the context of 14 TeV LHC experiments with integrated luminosity of 3000 fb$^{-1}$ for process $ pp \rightarrow E_1^\pm E_1^\mp$ where, a SM leptons $l$ is produced through decays of the charged fermion as $E_1^\pm\rightarrow l^\pm S$.
We have only analyzed the familiar $2l+\slashed{E}_T$ final states to get the signature at the future collider. The leptonic final states produce relatively clean signals which are easy to identify in a hadron-rich environment like the LHC experiment. We choose benchmark points that ensure the relic density and neutrino parameters. We further optimized the selection cuts to enhance the $2l+\slashed{E}_T$ signal significance over the SM backgrounds. Our collider study showed that the dilepton final state gives promising results for the discovery of the heavy charged particle at 14 TeV LHC experiments with an integrated luminosity of 3000 ${\rm fb^{-1}}$, which may be an indication of the dark matter at the collider.
We have also shown the projected exclusion and discovery limits in the $M_{E_1^\pm}-M_S$ plane from direct heavy charged-fermion searches at 14 TeV LHC experiments with an integrated luminosity of 3000 ${\rm fb^{-1}}$ in the $2l+\slashed{E}_T$ search channel. The projected exclusion and discovery region corresponds to the sector with signal significance $> 2\sigma$ and $> 5\sigma$, respectively.
It can be observed that in this model, direct heavy charged-fermion searches at 14 TeV LHC experiments with an integrated luminosity of 3000 ${\rm fb^{-1}}$ in the $2l+\slashed{E}_T$ search channel has a potential exclusion (discovery) reach up to $\sim 1380~{\rm GeV}$ ($\sim 1050~{\rm GeV}$) for the dark matter mass $M_S <10~{\rm GeV}$.
One can also put bound on the Yukawa coupling as larger Yukawa coupling may violate the stability of the scalar potential any of the direction the scalar fields at any scale (at least up to the Planck scalar $1.22 \times 10^{19}$ GeV). In this model, we work with such a choice of the Yukawa couplings and $\kappa$ (especially $\lambda_S$) so that there is no new minima arise along any of the scalar field directions. In the future, we will elaborate on the details stability and/or metastability analysis for various regions of the parameter space, which could also explain all the neutrino masses and mixing angles, exact relic density and baryon-asymmetry of the Universe altogether.
In the concluding remark: if nature selects a single component WIMP dark matter candidate, which interacts with the nucleus feebly through $s$-channel, helps to get the neutrino mass of order $\mathcal{O}(0.1)$ eV. On the assumption that the relic density can achieve via $t$-channel annihilation processes and we may have to think of a new way to detect dark matter in the direct-detection experiments. In that case, collider searches with high luminosity are better options to detect dark matter.
\section{Acknowledgement}
The authors would like to acknowledge Narendra Sahu from IIT Hydrabad for fruitful discussion. The research work of P.D. and M.K.D. is supported by the Department of Science and Technology, Government of India under the project grant EMR/2017/001436. NK would like to thank Biplob Bhattacharjee for the help on collider analysis and to Dilip Kumar Ghosh for his support at IACS.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
\bibliographystyle{utphys}
|
\section{Introduction}
The uniform, high quality Gaia stellar photometry provides a stable photometric reference frame over the whole sky. The density of Gaia calibrators is high enough that individual CCD images from ground based surveys can be calibrated to $\sim$ 1mmag precision. Ongoing testing of Gaia DR2 suggests that the systematic floor in this calibration is currently at comparable or even lower levels than one can achieve with self-calibration techniques in surveys like DES. In the following sections we demonstrate a mapping from the Gaia photometry to the DES $g/r/i/z$ bands and present first results of a test for bandpass variations in the DECam focal plane.
\section{Gaia transformed to DES}
We used the Gaia DR2 \citep{2018A&A...616A...4E} and DES DR1 \citep{2018ApJS..239...18A} photometry data of stars to create a transformation function between the broad band Gaia G band filter and the relatively narrow band DES $(g/r/i/z)$ filter system using Gaia G, BP, RP and independently calibrated DES photometry of stars covering the Euclid Deep Field South (EDFS). EDFS covers an RA range of 55.10$^{\circ}$ to 67.40$^{\circ}$ and a DEC range of -51.90$^{\circ}$ to -45.10$^{\circ}$ and has been chosen for a Euclid science survey. We used the DES DR1 data from the EDFS field with 11,500 stars overlapping with Gaia DR2 data to construct the transformation function. A polynomial function ($T_{func}$) of order 10 is found to be a good fit for the Gaia to DES $g/r/i/z$ filter transformation as shown in the equation below and in Figure \ref{fig1}.
\begin{displaymath}
DESmag(g/r/i/z) = Gaia\ Gmag + {T_{func}}(BP-RP)
\end{displaymath}
\articlefigure[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig1.pdf}{fig1}{The transformation between Gaia G and DES $g/r/i/z$ magnitudes as a function of Gaia BP-RP color can be fit with a polynomial function of order 10. Points are color coded with DES g (blue), r (green), i (yellow) and z (red) with corresponding NMAD scatter about the transformation function of 1.3, 0.9, 0.9 and 1.4 mmag, respectively.}
\section{Zeropoint computation for DES single epoch images}
\articlefigure[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig2a.pdf}{fig2}{The distribution of Gaia calibrated zero point uncertainties (statistical only, using NMAD scatter presented in Figure \ref{fig1}) for SE catalogs. Bins are color coded for each DES band as in Figure \ref{fig1}.}
Our primary goal is the calibration of individual CCD images (SE images) in DES $(g/r/i/z)$ using the associated catalogs and the Gaia data. We can achieve this by computing the zeropoint (zp) for SE images using the transformation function and the Gaia G, BP, RP and DES $(g/r/i/z)$ instrumental magnitude (DESim) of stars in SE catalogs as shown below.
\begin{displaymath}
zp\ =\ median[DESim(g/r/i/z) - Gaia\ Gmag - T_{func}(BP-RP)]_{N stars}
\end{displaymath}
The characteristic statistical uncertainty in the zp is the scatter about the transformation function divided by $\sqrt{N}$, where N is the number of stars. The uncertainty distributions for zero points computed for DES $(g/r/i/z)$ SE images in the EDFS field are shown in Figure \ref{fig2}. We are effectively calibrating DES $g/r/i/z$ data using Gaia photometry at $\sim$ 1 mmag level uncertainty. Current estimates of the systematic floor in the Gaia photometry is 1.8 mmag.
\section{Bandpass variation across DECam focal plane}
The DECam focal plane consists of 62 2K $\times$ 4K pixel CCDs arranged in a hexagonal pattern. The transformation functions between Gaia and DES provide an opportunity to predict the DES $(g/r/i/z)$ magnitude of stars lying in any region of the CCD in the DECam focal plane using the Gaia DR2 G, BP, RP magnitude information of stars. The DES $(g/r/i/z)$ filter bandpass can show spatial variations across the focal plane, which we can quantify using the transformation function. Any deviation from the predicted DES $(g/r/i/z)$ magnitude with respect to the observed magnitude can be an indication of the change in transformation function due to band pass variation. We quantify the deviation between predicted and observed DES $(g/r/i/z)$ magnitudes of stars in all SE catalogs for a given CCD. This deviation is found to vary with the BP-RP color of stars for each CCD. An example of the variation in the $i-$band across a single CCD subregion is shown in Figure \ref{fig3}. The best fit relation is shown in red and the slope of relation (color term) is an indication for the DES filter bandpass variation. We divided the CCD into four subregions and the focal plane map of color term variations in the DES $(g/r/i/z)$ filters are shown in Figure \ref{fig4}. There exist statistically significant color term variations (and therefore bandpass variations) across the focal plane for the DES $(g/r/i/z)$ filters.
\articlefigure[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig3.pdf}{fig3}{The deviation of DES observed and predicted magnitude of stars from SE catalogs in a subregion for a single CCD is plotted against the Gaia BP-RP color. Any color dependence in this deviation provides evidence for a bandpass difference between this CCD region and the average transformation function shown in Figure 1. The best fit relation is
shown in red.}
\articlefigurefour{focal_plane_with_4_subregions_band_g_EDFS_slope.pdf}{focal_plane_with_4_subregions_band_r_EDFS_slope.pdf}{focal_plane_with_4_subregions_band_i_EDFS_slope.pdf}{focal_plane_with_4_subregions_band_z_EDFS_slope.pdf}{fig4}{The focal plane maps of color term variation across 62 CCDs for DES $(g/r/i/z)$ filters are shown. Each CCD is divided into four subregions. Variations from zero indicate that the bandpass for the CCD subregion differs from the average DECam bandpass.}
\acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the Euclid Consortium, the European Space Agency and the support of a number of agencies and institutes that have supported the development of Euclid. A detailed complete list is available on the Euclid web site (http://www.euclid-ec.org). In particular the Academy of Finland, the Agenzia Spaziale Italiana,
the Belgian Science Policy, the Canadian Euclid Consortium, the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales, the Deutches Zentrum f\"ur Luft- and Raumfahrt, the Danish Space Research Institute, the Funda\c{c}\~{a}o para a Ci\^{e}nca e a Tecnologia, the Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Netherlandse Onderzoekschool Voor Astronomie, the Norvegian Space Center, the Romanian Space Agency, the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI) at the Swiss Space Office (SSO), and the United Kingdom Space Agency.
|
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work is supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11834014), the National Key R$\&$D Program of China (2018YFA0305800), and the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDB28000000). S.J.R. is also supported by Beijing Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 1192005 and No. Z180013) and by the Academy for Multidisciplinary Studies, Capital Normal University.
|
\section{Introduction}
By a {\em digraph} $\Gamma$, we mean an ordered pair $(V, A)$ where the vertex set $V$ is a non-empty set and the arc set $A \subseteq V \times V$ is
a binary relation on $V$. The elements of $V$ and $A$ are called vertices and arcs of $\Gamma$, respectively. For simplicity, we write $V(\Gamma):=V$ and $A(\Gamma):=A$.
An automorphism of $\Gamma$ is
a permutation $\sigma$ of $V$ fixing $A$ setwise, that is, $(x^\sigma , y^\sigma ) \in A$ for every $(x, y) \in A$. The
digraph $\Gamma $ is a {\em graph} if the binary relation $A$ is symmetric.
A digraph is called {\em regular} if each vertex has the same out-valency and the same in-valency.
Throughout this paper, all groups and digraphs are finite, and all digraphs are regular.
Let $G$ be a group and let $S$ be a subset of $G$.
The {\em Cayley digraph} $\G:=\Cay(G,R)$ is the digraph with $V(\Gamma):=G$ and with
$A(\G):=\{(g,rg) ~|\ g\in G,r\in R\}$.
The right regular representation of $G$ gives rise to an embedding of $G$ into $\Aut(\Gamma)$ and we identify $G$ with its image under this permutation representation. We say that a group admits a {\em (di)graphical
regular representation} (resp. GRR or DRR for short)
if there exists a Cayley (di)graph $\G$ over
$G$ such that $\Aut(\G)= G$.
Babai~\cite{Babai} proved that, except for $Q_8$, $\mz_2^2$,
$\mz_2^3$, $\mz_2^4$ and $\mz_3^2$, every finite group admits a DRR. It is clear that, if
a group $G$ admits a GRR, then $G$ admits a DRR, however
the converse is not true. Indeed, despite the natural argument used by Babai for the classification of groups admitting a DRR, the classification of groups admitting a GRR has required considerable more work. For some of the most influential papers along the way we refer to~\cite{Imrich,ImrichWatkins,NowitzWatkins1,NowitzWatkins2}.
Watkins~\cite{Watkins} observed that there are two infinite
families of graphs admitting no GRR:
generalised dicyclic groups, and abelian groups of exponent
greater than two. Then, Hetzel~\cite{Hetzel} has proved that besides these two infinite families, among soluble groups, there are only 13 more groups admitting no GRR. Finally, Godsil~\cite{Godsil} has put the last piece into the puzzle and has shown that every non-solvable group admits a GRR, and so completed the classification of groups admitting a GRR.
Once the classification of DRRs and GRRs was completed, researchers proposed and investigated various natural generalisations. For instance, Babai and Imrich~\cite{BabaiI} have classified finite groups admitting a tournament regular representation, TRR for short. Morris and Spiga~\cite{MorrisSpiga1,MorrisSpiga3,Spiga}, answering a question of Babai~\cite{Babai}, have classified the finite groups admitting an oriented regular representation, ORR for short.
For more results, generalising the classical DRR and GRR classification in various direction, we refer to
\cite{DSV,DFS1,DFS,MSV,Spiga2,Spiga3,Xiaf}.
We now describe the generalisation we intend to investigate in this paper. Let $G$ be a permutation group on a set $\Omega$ and let $\omega \in \Omega$. Denote by $G_\omega$ the stabilizer of $\omega$ in $G$, that is, the subgroup
of $G$ fixing $\omega$. We say that $G$ is {\em semiregular} on $\Omega$ if $G_\omega = 1$ for every $\omega \in \Omega$, and {\em regular} if it is semiregular and transitive.
An $m$-Cayley (di)graph $\Gamma$ over a group $G$ is defined as a (di)graph which has a semiregular group of automorphisms
isomorphic to $G$ with $m$ orbits on its vertex set. When $m = 1$, $1$-Cayley (di)graphs are the usual Cayley (di)graphs.
We say that a group $G$ admits a (di)graphical $m$-semiregular representation (D$m$SR and G$m$SR, for short),
if there exists a regular $m$-Cayley (di)graph $\Gamma$ over $G$ such that $\Aut(\Gamma)\cong
G$. In particular, D$1$SRs and G$1$SRs are the
usual GRRs and DRRs. For each $m\in\mathbb{N}$, we have classified in~\cite{DFS} the finite groups admitting a D$m$SR and the finite groups admitting a G$m$SR. In this paper we propose a natural variant of this problem.
A {\em bipartite} $2$-Cayley (di)graph (over a group $G$, where the two parts of the bipartition are the two orbits of $G$) is known as {\em Haar (di)graph} in the literature. We say that a finite group $G$ admits a {\em Haar (di)graphical representation} (resp. HDR or HGR for short),
if there exists a Haar (di)graph over $G$ such that its automorphism group isomorphic to $G$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theo=main}
With the only exceptions of $\mz_1$, $\mz_2$, $\mz_3$, $\mz_2^2$ and $\mz_2^3$, every finite group admits a $\mathrm{HDR}$.
\end{theorem}
Du {\em et al}~\cite[Lemma 2.6(i)]{Duxu} have shown that Haar graphs over abelian groups are Cayley graphs. Hence, abelian groups do not admit HGRs. Est\'elyi~\cite[Proposition~$11$]{Estelyi} has proved that the dihedral group of order $2n$ admits a HGR if and only if $n\ge 8$. To end this section, we propose the following problem.
\begin{problem}\label{question}
Classify finite groups admitting a $\mathrm{HGR}$.
\end{problem}
We are not sure what the answer to this problem might be, but besides the finite abelian groups we are aware of no infinite family of groups admitting no HGR. For instance, every generalised quaternion group of order $4n$ with $4\le n\le 100$ admits a HGR.
\section{Preliminaries and notation}
In what follows, we describe some preliminary results which will be used later.
We start by recalling Babai's classification of DRRs.
\begin{theorem}\label{prop=DRR} {\rm \cite[Theorem 2.1]{Babai}}
A finite group $G$ admits a $\mathrm{DRR}$ if and only if $G$ is not isomorphic to one of the following five groups $Q_8$, $\mz_2^2$, $\mz_2^3$, $\mz_2^4$ or $\mz_3^2$.
\end{theorem}
We recall that a tournament is a digraph $\Gamma$ such that, for every two distinct vertices $x, y \in V(\Gamma)$, exactly one of
$(x, y)$ and $(y, x)$ is in $A(\Gamma)$. Observe that the Cayley digraph $\Cay(G,R)$ is a tournament if and only if $R\cap R^{-1}=\emptyset$
and $R\cup R^{-1}=G\setminus \{1\}$. In particular, finite groups of even order have no TRR.
\begin{theorem}\label{prop=TRR} {\rm \cite[Theorem 1.5]{BabaiI}}
A finite group of odd order admits a $\mathrm{TRR}$ if and only if it is not isomorphic to $\mz_3^2$.
\end{theorem}
Let $G$ be a group. Consistently throughout the whole paper, for not making our notation too cumbersome to use,
we denote the element $(g, i)$ of the Cartesian product $G \times \{0,1\}$ simply by $g_i$. In particular, we write $G_0=G\times \{0\}=\{g_0\mid g\in G\}$ and $G_0=G\times \{1\}=\{g_1\mid g\in G\}$.
Let $S$ and $T$ be subsets of $G$. We define $$\Haar (G,S,T)$$ to be the digraph having vertex set $G\times\{0,1\}=G_0\cup G_1$ and having arc set the union of $\{(g_0, (sg)_1)~|~g\in G, s\in S\}$ and $\{(g_1, (tg)_0)~|~g\in G, t\in T\}$.
Now, $G$ induces a subgroup of $\Aut(\Haar (G,S,T))$ by defining:
\begin{center}
$(h_i)^{g}= (hg)_i$,\,\,\, for every $g,h\in G$ and $i\in\{0,1\}$.
\end{center}
For not making the notation too cumbersome, we identify $G$ with this subgroup of $\Aut(\Haar(G,S,T))$.
Clearly, $G$ acts semiregularly with two orbits $G_0$ and $G_1$ on $V(\Haar (G,S,T))$. In particular, $\Haar (G,S,T)$ is a Haar digraph over $G$. It is not hard to see that every Haar digraph over $G$ is isomophic to $\Haar(G,S,T)$, for some suitable subsets $S$ and $T$ of $G$.
For every automorphism $\a$ of $G$
and for every $x,y\in G$, we define two permutations $\delta_{\a,x}$ and $\sigma_{\a,y}$ of $G_0\cup G_1$ by setting
\begin{align}\nonumber
\delta_{\a,x}&:
\begin{cases}g_0\mapsto (g^{\a})_0,&\forall g\in G,\\
g_1\mapsto (xg^{\a})_1,&\forall g\in G,\\
\end{cases}\\\label{eq:3}
\sigma_{\a,y}&:
\begin{cases}
g_0\mapsto (g^{\a})_1,&\forall g\in G,\\
g_1\mapsto (yg^{\a})_0,&\forall g\in G.
\end{cases}
\end{align}
The permutation $\delta_{\a,x}$ will play little role in this paper, but $\sigma_{\a,y}$ will be rather important. Then, we define
\begin{align*}
X&:=\{\delta_{\a,x}~|~S^{\a}=x^{-1}S \textrm{ and }T^{\a}=Tx\},\\
Y&:=\{\sigma_{\a,y}~|~~S^{\a}=y^{-1}T\textrm{ and }T^{\a}=Sy\}.
\end{align*}
We conclude this section by reporting a result describing the normaliser in $\Aut(\Haar(G,S,T))$ of $G$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop=normalizer} {{{\rm (\cite[Theorem 1]{Arezoomand} and \cite[Lemma 2.1]{Hujdurovic})}}}
Let $G$ be a finite group and let $S$ and $T$ be subsets of $G$, then $$\norm{\Aut(\mathrm{Haar}(G,S,T))}{G}=GL=\{g\ell\mid g\in G,\ell\in L\},$$ where $L=X\cup Y$ and $L\cap G=1$.
\end{prop}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{theo=main}}
In this section, we prove Theorem~\ref{theo=main}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem=S=T}
Let $G$ be a finite group and let $S$ be a subset of $G$. The Haar digraph $\Haar(G,S,S)$
is vertex transitive and hence $\Haar(G,S,S)$ is not a $\mathrm{HDR}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\G:=\Haar(G,S,S)$ and let $\phi$ be the permutation of $V(\G)=G_0\cup G_1$ with $g_0\mapsto g_{1}$ and $g_1\mapsto g_0$,
for each $g\in G$.
For every $g \in G$ and $s\in S$, $(g_0,(sg)_1)^{\phi}=(g_1,(sg)_0)$ and $(g_1,(sg)_0)^{\phi}=(g_0,(sg)_1)$
are arcs of $\G$ and hence $\phi$ is an automorphism of $\G$ interchanging $G_0$ and $G_1$.
As $G$ is transitive on $G_0$ and $G_1$, we deduce that $\langle G,\phi\rangle$ is transitive on $V(\G)$. Hence $\G$ is vertex transitive and $\G$ is not a HDR.
\end{proof}
\begin{notation}\label{notation:1}{\rm Let $G$ be a finite group and let $\phi \in \Sym(G)$ be a permutation of $G$.
We let $\phi'$ be the permutation of $G_0\cup G_1$ defined by $$(g_i)^{\phi'}=(g^{\phi})_i,\,
\textrm{ for each }g\in G \textrm{ and for each } i\in\{0,1\}.$$}
\end{notation}
\begin{lem}\label{lem=automorphism}
Let $G$ be a finite group and let $\phi \in \Sym(G)$.
Then, $\phi'\in\Aut(\Haar(G,S,T))$
if and only if $\phi\in \Aut(\Cay(G,S))\cap\Aut(\Cay(G,T))$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}Let $\Sigma_1:=\Cay(G,S)$, $\Sigma_2:=\Cay(G,T)$ and $\G:=\Haar(G,S,T)$.
The permutation $\phi$ lies in $\Aut(\Cay(G,S))\cap\Aut(\Cay(G,T))$ if and only if $$(g,sg)^{\phi}=(g^{\phi},(sg)^{\phi})\in A(\Sigma_1) \textrm{ and }(g,tg)^{\phi}=(g^{\phi},(tg)^{\phi})\in A(\Sigma_2),$$ for each $g\in G$, $s\in S$ and $t\in T$. This happens if and only if, for each $s\in S$ and $t\in T$, there exist $s'\in S$ and $t'\in T$ with $$(sg)^{\phi}=s'g^{\phi} \textrm{ and }(tg)^{\phi}=t'g^{\phi}.$$
In turn, this happens if and only if $(g_0,(sg)_1)^{\phi'}=((g^{\phi})_0,((sg)^{\phi})_1)=((g^{\phi})_0,(s'g^{\phi})_1)\in A(\G)$
and $(g_1,(tg)_0)^{\phi'}=((g^{\phi})_1,((tg)^{\phi})_0)=((g^{\phi})_1,(t'g^{\phi})_0)\in A(\G)$,
that is, $\phi'\in \Aut(\G)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem=noDRR}
Let $G$ be a finite group admitting no $\mathrm{DRR}$. Then $G$ admits a $\mathrm{HDR}$ except when $G$ is isomorphic to either $\mz_2^2$ or $\mz_2^3$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} By Theorem~\ref{prop=DRR}, $G$ is isomorphic to one of the following groups: $Q_8$, $\mz_3^2$, $\mz_2^2$, $\mz_2^3$ or $\mz_2^4$. It can be verified with the computer algebra system \textsc{Magma}~\cite{magma} that $\mz_2^2$ and $\mz_2^3$ admit no HDR.
When $G=\langle a\rangle\times\langle b\rangle\times\langle c\rangle\times \langle d\rangle\cong \mz_2^4$, it can be verified with \textsc{Magma} that $$\Haar(G,\{1,a,b,c,d,ab\},\{1,a,c,bd,abc,bcd\})$$ is a HDR.
Similarly, when $G=\langle a,b~|~a^4=b^4=1,b^2=a^2,a^b=a^{-1}\rangle\cong Q_8$,
$$\Haar(G, \{1,a,b\},\{a^2,b^3,ab\})$$ is a HDR and, when
$G=\langle a\rangle\times\langle b\rangle\cong \mz_3^2$, $$\Haar(G,\{1,a,b\},\{a,b^2,ab\})$$ is a HDR.
\end{proof}
\begin{notation}\label{notation:2}
{\rm Let $\Gamma$ be a digraph and let $v$ be a vertex of $\Gamma$. We denote by $\Gamma^+(v)$ and by $\Gamma^-(v)$ the out-neighbourhood and the in-neighbourhood of $v$ in $\Gamma$.}
\end{notation}
\begin{lem}\label{lem=A+}
Let $G$ be a finite group and let $R$ be a subset of $G$ with $\Cay(G,R)$ a $\mathrm{DRR}$ of $G$, $1\notin R$ and $|R|<|G|/2$.
Let $L$ be a subset of $G\setminus (R^{-1}\cup\{1\})$ with $|L|=|R|$
and let $\G:=\Haar(G,R\cup\{1\},L\cup\{1\})$.
Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{eqle:0}$\Gamma^+(g_i)\cap \Gamma^-(g_i)=\{g_{1-i}\}$, for every
$g\in G$ and for every $i\in\{0,1\}$,
\item\label{eqle:1} $|\Aut(\G):G|\le 2$,
\item\label{eqle:2} $\G$ is a $\mathrm{HDR}$ if and only if $R^{\a}\neq L$ for each $\a\in \Aut(G)$, and
\item\label{eqle:3} the subgroup of $\Aut(\G)$ fixing $G_0$ and $G_1$ setwise is $G$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} From the definition of the arc set of $\Haar(G,R\cup\{1\},L\cup\{1\})$, for every $g\in G$, we have
\begin{align*}
\Gamma^+(g_0)&=(Rg\cup \{g\})_1=\{(rg)_1~|~r\in R\cup\{1\}\},\\
\Gamma^-(g_0)&=(L^{-1}g\cup \{g\})_1=\{(l^{-1}g)_1~|~l\in L\cup\{1\}\}.
\end{align*}
Applying this with $g:=1$, we obtain
$$\Gamma^+(1_0)=\{r_1~|~r\in R\cup\{1\}\} \textrm{ and }\Gamma^-(1_0)=\{(l^{-1})_1~|~l\in L\cup\{1\}\}.$$
Since $L\subseteq G\setminus (R^{-1}\cup\{1\})$, we have $(R\cup\{1\})\cap (L^{-1}\cup\{1\})=\{1\}$ and hence $$\Gamma^+(1_0)\cap \Gamma^-(1_0)=\{1_1\}.$$
With a similar argument, we have $\G^+(1_1)\cap \Gamma^-(1_1)=\{1_0\}$. Now, since $G$ is transitive on $G_0$ and on $G_1$, we deduce~\eqref{eqle:0}.
In particular, each automorphism of $\G$ fixing $g_i$ must fix also $g_{1-i}$.
Let $A:=\Aut(\G)$ and let $A^{+}$ be the subgroup of $A$ fixing $G_0$ and $G_1$ setwise. Clearly, $|A:A^{+}|\leq 2$.
Observe that each element $\varphi$ of $A^+$ is uniquely determined by a pair $(\varphi_0,\varphi_1)$ of permutations of $G$, where $\varphi_0$ and $\varphi_1$ are defined by the rules $(g^{\varphi_0})_0=(g_0)^\varphi$ and $(g^{\varphi_1})_1=(g_1)^\varphi$, for each $g\in G$. From~\eqref{eqle:0}, we deduce that, for each $\varphi\in A^+$, we have $\varphi_0=\varphi_1$ and hence, using Notation~\ref{notation:1}, every element of $A^+$ is of the form $\phi'$, for some $\phi\in \Sym(G)$.
Let $\phi'\in A^+$, for some $\phi\in \Sym(G)$. By Lemma~\ref{lem=automorphism}, $\phi$ induces an automorphism of $\Cay(G,R\cup\{1\})$ and hence $\phi\in \Aut(\Cay(G,R\cup\{1\}))=\Aut(\Cay(G,R))=G$, because $\Cay(G,R)$ is a DRR. Therefore $A^{+}\leq G$ and hence $A^{+}=G$. This proves~\eqref{eqle:1} and~\eqref{eqle:3}.
Suppose there exists $\a\in \Aut(G)$ with $R^{\a}= L$. Then the mapping $\sigma_{\a,1}$ defined in~\eqref{eq:3} is an automorphism of $\G$ interchanging $G_0$ and $G_1$. Hence $A=\langle G,\sigma_{\a,1}\rangle>G$ and $\G$ is not a HDR.
Conversely, suppose $\G$ is not a HDR. Since $A^+=G$ and $|A:A^+|\le 2$, we deduce $|A:A^+|=2$, $\G$ is vertex transitive and $G\unlhd A$. In particular, there exists $\phi\in A$ with $1_0^{\phi}=1_1$. From~\eqref{eqle:0}, we deduce $1_1^\phi=1_0$. As $\phi\in A=\norm A G$, by Proposition~\ref{prop=normalizer},
there exist $y\in G$ and $\a\in \Aut(G)$ with $\phi=\sigma_{\a,y}$. Now, $1_0=1_1^\phi=1_1^{\sigma_{\a,y}}=y_0$ and hence $y=1$.
Furthermore, the definition of $\sigma_{\a,y}$ in~\eqref{eq:3} gives $(R\cup\{1\})^{\a}=y^{-1}(L\cup\{1\})=L\cup\{1\}$ and hence $R^\a=L$. Now,~\eqref{eqle:2} is also proven.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem=oddorder}
Let $G$ be a finite group of order at least $4$ admitting a $\mathrm{DRR}$.
Then $G$ has a subset $R$ with $\Cay(G,R)$ a $\mathrm{DRR}$, $1\notin R$
and $|R|<(|G|-1)/2$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Let $R$ be a subset of $G$ of cardinality as small as possible with $\Cay(G,R)$ a DRR.
Since $$\Aut(\Cay(G,R\cup\{1\}))=\Aut(\Cay(G,R))=G,$$
we have $1\notin R$. Similarly, since $$\Aut(\Cay(G,G\setminus(R\cup\{1\})))=\Aut(\Cay(G,R))=G,$$ we have $|R|\le |G\setminus(R\cup\{1\})|$, that is, $1\leq |R|<|G|/2$. If $|G|$ is even, then $|R|<(|G|-1)/2$. Therefore, we may assume $|G|$ is odd and $|G|\ge 5$. In particular, $G$ is solvable by
the Odd Order Theorem~\cite{FeitThompson}.
If $G$ is cyclic (generated by $a$ say), then $\Cay(G,\{a\})$ is a directed cycle. Thus $\Cay(G,\{a\})$ a DRR over $G$ and $1= |\{a\}|<(|G|-1)/2$.
Suppose $G$ is not cyclic. Let $M$ be a maximal normal subgroup of $G$. As $G$ is solvable, $G/M$ is cyclic of order $p$, for some odd prime $p$. Let $g\in G\setminus M$ and observe that $$G=\langle M,g\rangle.$$
Assume $M\cong \mz_3^2$. Then $G=\langle a,b,g\rangle$ with $o(a)=o(b)=3$, $ab=ba$
and $p$ dividing $o(g)$. From~\cite[Lemma~$3.4$]{Babai} and from the proof of~\cite[Lemma~$3.1$]{Babai}, $G$ has a subset $R$ with $\Cay(G,R)$ a DRR, $1\notin R$ and $|R|=9$. Clearly, $|R|=9<(|G|-1)/2$, because $|G|=9p\ge 27$.
Assume $M\ncong \mz_3^2$. By Proposition~\ref{prop=TRR}, $M$ has a subset $S$ such that
$\Cay(M,S)$ is a TRR. In particular, $|S|=(|M|-1)/2$ and $S\cap S^{-1}=\emptyset$.
Let $R:=S\cup \{g\}$, let $\Sigma:=\Cay(G,R)$ and let $B:=\Aut(\Sigma)$. For every $s\in S$, neither $(g,s)$ nor $(s,g)$
is an arc of $\Sigma$ and, for every $s_1,s_2\in S$, exactly one of $(s_1,s_2)$ and $(s_2,s_1)$
is an arc of $\Sigma$. Therefore, $g$ is the unique isolated vertex in the neighbourhood of $1$ in $\Sigma$.
Then, the vertex stabiliser $B_1$ fixes $g$ and fixes $S$ setwise. Therefore, $B_1$ fixes $M=S\cup S^{-1}\cup \{1\}$ setwise and
hence $B_1$ induces a group of automorphisms on $\Sigma[M]$ (the subgraph induced by $\Sigma$ on $M$).
Since $\Sigma[M]= \Cay(M,S)$ is a TRR, we deduce $B_1=1$ and hence $\Sigma$ is a DRR over $G$ with $|R|=(|M|-1)/2+1<(|G|-1)/2$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~$\ref{theo=main}$] We divide the proof in various cases.
\smallskip
\noindent\textsc{Case 1: }$G$ has no DRR.
\smallskip
\noindent By Lemma~\ref{lem=noDRR},
$G$ has a HDR except when $G$ is isomorphic to $\mz_2^2$ or $\mz_2^3$.~$_\blacksquare$
\smallskip
For the rest of the proof, we may suppose that $G$ admits a DRR.
\smallskip
\noindent\textsc{Case 2: }$G$ is a elementary abelian $2$-group, that is, $G\cong\mz_2^m$, for some $m\ge 0$.
\smallskip
\noindent By Proposition~\ref{prop=DRR}, $m\in \{0,1\}$ or $m\geq 5$. A direct inspection shows that $\mz_2^0=\mz_1$ and $\mz_2^1=\mz_2$ admit no HDR. In particular, we may suppose that $G=\langle a_1,\ldots,a_m\rangle$ with $m\ge 5$.
When $m=5$, a computation with {\sc Magma} shows that $$\Haar(G,\{1,a_1,a_2,a_3, a_4, a_1a_2, a_5\},\{1,a_1,a_3, a_2a_4, a_1a_2a_3, a_2a_3a_4, a_5\})$$ is a HDR. Suppose then $m\ge 6$ and let $$R:=\{a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_m\}\cup\{a_1a_{2}, a_2a_3,\ldots, a_{m-1}a_m\}\cup
\{a_1a_2a_{m-2}a_{m-1}, a_1a_2a_{m-1}a_m\}.$$
By \cite{Imrich1}, the Cayley graph $\Cay(G,R)$ is a GRR over $G$ with $|R|=m+(m-1)+2=2m+1$.
Let $H:=\langle a_2,\ldots,a_m\rangle$ and
observe that $$|H\setminus R|=2^{m-1}-(2m-2)>2m+1,$$ because $m\ge 6$. Therefore, there exists a subset $L\subseteq H\setminus (R\cup\{1\})\subseteq G\setminus(R\cup\{1\})=G\setminus (R^{-1}\cup\{1\})$ with $|L|=|R|$.
Let $\G:=\Haar(G,R\cup\{1\},L\cup\{1\})$. Since $\langle L\rangle\neq G$ and $\langle R\rangle=G$, we have $R^{\a}\neq L$ for each $\a\in \Aut(G)$. In particular, Lemma~\ref{lem=A+} gives that $\G$ is a HDR.~$_\blacksquare$
\smallskip
In what follows, we assume $G$ is not an elementary abelian $2$-group and hence $G$ has an element of order at least $3$.
\smallskip
\noindent\textsc{Case 3: }$G$ is cyclic of order $3$.
\smallskip
\noindent An easy inspection shows that $G$ admits no HDR.~$_\blacksquare$
\smallskip
For the remaining cases, from Lemma~\ref{lem=oddorder}, we see that $G$ admits a DRR $\Cay(G,R)$ with $1\notin R$ and $1\le |R|<(|G|-1)/2$. We partition the set $R$ into two subsets. We let $J:=\{x\in R\mid x^{-1}\notin R\}$ and $K:=R\setminus J$. Observe that $R\setminus J=K$ is inverse-closed, that is, $K^{-1}=\{x^{-1}\mid x\in K\}=K$. Summing up,
\begin{equation*
R=J\cup K,\,\,R\cap R^{-1}=K=K^{-1} \textrm { and }J\cap J^{-1}=J\cap K=\emptyset.
\end{equation*}
\smallskip
\noindent\textsc{Case 4: }There exists a subset $L$ of $G\setminus (R^{-1}\cup\{1\})$ with $|L|=|R|$ and with $R^\a\ne L$, for every $\a\in \Aut(G)$.
\smallskip
\noindent By Lemma~\ref{lem=A+}, $\Haar(G,R\cup\{1\},L\cup\{1\})$ is a HDR.~$_\blacksquare$
\smallskip
For the rest of the proof, we may suppose that, for every subset $L$ of $G\setminus (R^{-1}\cup\{1\})$ with $|L|=|R|$, there exists $\a\in \Aut(G)$ with $R^\a= L$.
Let $$H:=G\setminus (\{1\}\cup R\cup R^{-1}).$$
Observe that $G=\{1\}\cup (R\cup R^{-1})\cup H$ is a partition of $G$ and
\begin{align*}
|H|&=|G|-1-|R\cup R^{-1}|=|G|-1-(|R|+|R^{-1}|-|R\cap R^{-1}|)=|G|-1-(2|R|-|K|).
\end{align*}
Since $2|R|<|G|-1$, we deduce $|H|>|K|$.
\smallskip
\noindent\textsc{Case 5: }There exists $x\in H$ with $o(x)\geq3$.
\smallskip
\noindent Let $U$ be any subset of $H$ with $x\in U$ and $x^{-1}\notin U$ (observe that this is possible because $|H|>|K|$) and let $L:=J\cup U$. Then $|L|=|R|$ and $L\subseteq G\setminus (R^{-1}\cup\{1\})$. Since
\begin{align*}
|\{y\in R\mid y^{-1}\notin R\}|&=|J|,\\
|\{y\in L\mid y^{-1}\notin L\}|&\ge |J\cup\{x\}|>|J|,
\end{align*} there is no automorphism $\a$ of $G$ with $R^{\a}= L$, which is a contradiction.~$_\blacksquare$
\smallskip
\noindent\textsc{Case 6: }No element in $H$ as order at least $3$, that is, each element in $H$ has order $2$.
\smallskip
\noindent Suppose that $K$ contains an element $x$ having order at least $3$. Let $U$ be any subset of $H$ with $|U|=|K|$ and let $L:=J\cup U$. Then $|L|=|R|$ and $L\subseteq G\setminus (R^{-1}\cup\{1\})$. No element in $J$ has order $2$ and hence $$|\{y\in R\mid o(y)=2\}|= |\{y\in K\mid o(y)=2\}|\le |K\setminus\{x\}|=|K|-1.$$
On the other hand, $\{y\in L\mid o(y)=2\}=U$ and hence $|\{y\in L\mid o(y)=2\}|=|U|=|K|$. Therefore, there is no automorphism $\a$ of $G$ with $R^{\a}= L$, which is a contradiction.
Suppose that every element in $K$ has order $2$.
Since $G$ is not an elementary abelian $2$-group and $$G=(R\cup R^{-1})\cup H\cup \{1\}=J\cup J^{-1}\cup K\cup H\cup \{1\},$$ we have $J\neq \emptyset$.
Let $x\in J$, let $U$ be any subset of $H$ with $|U|=|K|+1$ (observe that this is possible because $|H|>|K|$) and let $L:=U\cup (J\setminus\{x\})$. Then $|L|=|R|$ and $L\subseteq G\setminus (R^{-1}\cup\{1\})$. However, since $L$ has more involutions than $R$, there is no automorphism $\a$ of $G$ with $R^{\a}= L$, which is our final contradiction.
\end{proof}
\medskip
\f {\bf Acknowledgement:} This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11571035, 11231008, 11271012) and by the 111 Project of China (B16002).
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
In a pair of groundbreaking papers published in 2005, Charles Kane and Eugene Mele argued that graphene becomes a two-dimensional topological insulator (2D TI) at sufficiently low temperature \cite{Kane05_1,Kane05_2}.
In other words, a flake of graphene cooled down to cryogenic temperature will essentially behave as a band insulator everywhere except on its boundaries, where special metallic edge states will appear.
Such states are immune to scattering against impurities or disorder, and therefore realize a perfect dissipationless conductor with great potential for future technological applications.
The reason behind this striking robustness is rooted in the mathematical concept of topology, hence the name \emph{topological insulators} \cite{Haldane17_Nobel}.
Unfortunately, the band gap opened by spin-orbit coupling (SOC) in graphene is actually too small to give rise to any measurable effect \cite{Yao07}.
To realize the first 2D TI --- or quantum spin Hall insulator (QSHI) --- it was therefore necessary to resort to quantum-well heterostructures, which indeed showed the much anticipated signatures of topologically protected transport in non-local multi-terminal measurements \cite{Konig07,Knez11}.
With the rising awareness that the realm of monolayer 2D materials is actually much larger than initially thought, several new QSHIs have been reported in other 2D monolayers than graphene in recent years \cite{Reis17,Wu18_WTe2_exp,Kandrai19,Cucchi19}.
It is, however, not fully understood to what extent the ideas of topological protection can materialize into the next generation of electronic devices, due to some inconsistency between theory and experiments.
Time-reversal symmetry (TRS) forbids electron backscattering on the edge of 2D TIs, since counter-propagating modes have opposite spin polarization --- they are therefore termed \emph{helical edge states}.
The defining feature of such a pair of protected states is a well defined quantized conductance plateau at $G_0 = 2 e^2/h$, which is, however, difficult to attain in the lab. The few successful attempts are all limited to very low temperature ($\sim 1$K in quantum-well heterostructures \cite{Konig07,Knez11}) or very short channels ($\sim 100$nm for the case of monolayer WTe$_2$ \cite{Wu18_WTe2_exp}).
Attempts to understand this discrepancy at the model level have focused on many diverse backscattering mechanisms driven by electron-electron interactions, charge puddles, embedded nuclear spins, coupling to phonons and electromagnetic noise \cite{Wu06,Xu06,Maciejko09,Strom10,Tanaka11,Budich12,Schmidt12,Vayrynen13,Hsu17_nuclear-spins,Hsu18_nuclear-spins,Groenendijk18,Vayrynen18,Novelli19}.
Nonetheless, the question is still much debated and deserves a careful analysis from a different and more realistic point of view.
Here we report for the first time a full first-principles study of topologically protected transport at the edge of novel QSHIs.
We use newly developed computational 2D materials databases \cite{Mounet18,Haastrup18}, containing existing structures as well as hitherto unknown monolayers, to identify a family of large-gap QSHIs ideally suited for the current study.
We then explore the electronic band structure of such candidates at the level of density functional theory (DFT), both as infinite bulk monolayers and in different nanoribbon geometries. For nanoribbons, we highlight the emergence of robust metallic states whose eigenvalues cross the region of the bulk gap, and investigate the robustness of their transport properties in the framework of the non-equilibrium Green's functions (NEGF) formalism \cite{Brandbyge02}, with full account of spin-orbit interactions.
Our calculations show that naturally occurring native defects at the edge can spontaneously acquire a magnetic moment, thereby violating TRS and leading to a suppression of edge transport.
This result reveals the mechanism that is most likely to affect edge conduction in 2D topological insulators.
Interestingly, we find that chemical saturation of vacancy defects (e.g.\ by Hydrogen) is sufficient to remove the magnetic moment, thereby providing a strategy to restore topological protection at the edge.
Perhaps more surprisingly, even non-magnetic impurities may be detrimental for transport.
We indeed show that multiple non-magnetic impurities may create a channel for inter-edge scattering between opposite edge states in relatively wide ribbons, thereby affecting transport properties even when they do not represent a threat to transport individually.
The structure of this paper is as follows.
In Section \ref{sec:bandstructure} we illustrate the family of topological materials studied in this work and present their band structure in the zigzag nanoribbon geometry.
In the subsequent Sections \ref{sec:edge_defect} and \ref{sec:bulk_defect} we calculate the transport properties of topological nanoribbons in the presence of impurities, and discuss the defect-induced intra-edge and inter-edge backscattering mechanisms.
A similar formalism is then applied to zigzag MoS$_2$ nanoribbons in Section \ref{sec:non-topological}, thereby providing an insightful comparison with the transport properties of topologically trivial edge states.
Finally, Section \ref{sec:conclusions} summarizes the main results of this paper.
Appendix \ref{sec:methods} is dedicated to technical details about DFT calculations.
\section{Electronic structure of topological nanoribbons}
\label{sec:bandstructure}
The aim of this work is to address the problem of topologically protected transport by going beyond the simple model approximation, and to perform full transport calculations of realistic topological compounds from first principles.
Thanks to the application of automated high-throughput methods in the context of material science, the portfolio of theoretically proposed 2D materials is nowadays expanding at a remarkable pace \cite{Mounet18,Haastrup18}.
This has lead to the identification of several new candidates for 2D topological insulators \cite{Marrazzo18,Olsen19,Marrazzo19_Z2}, some of which are now being tested in the lab \cite{Kandrai19,Cucchi19,Marrazzo19_dual_topo}.
We choose here to focus on Bismuth and Antimony halides, i.e. binary compounds BiX and SbX with X = (F, Cl, Br, I), whose topological nature has already been investigated in earlier work \cite{Song14_BiX_SbX,Liu14_BiX,Olsen19}.
The reason for our choice is threefold:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] They are simple binary compounds of Bi/Sb and a halogen element, with a rather small number of valence electrons per unit cell. This allows us to deal with bigger devices without extreme computational effort (compared to other candidates).
\item[(ii)] They are dynamically stable and thermodinamically meta-stable, in the sense that their heat of formation is negative with respect to the pure elemental form and not much larger than other competing phases (see Ref.~\cite{Haastrup18} for further discussion about thermodynamic stability of 2D materials). This means that the compound might be synthesizable, although this is not an essential aspect of our work. Indeed, we expect our conclusions to be universally applicable to any QSHI.
\item[(iii)] Their bandgap is predicted to be in the range $0.4-1.0$ eV, which is significantly larger than most other candidates and allows for an easy distinction between topologically protected transport mediated by in-gap edge states and trivial bulk transport.
\end{itemize}
Monolayer Bismuth (Antimony) halides consist of a hexagonal lattice of Bi (Sb) atoms sandwiched between two layers of halogen atoms (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:zig_bands}). Halide atoms are disposed above and below the central layer in an alternate fashion, so that each Bismuth (Antimony) is bonded to one halogen only --- a similar structure occurs for the so-called \emph{graphane} \cite{Sofo07,Elias09}.
Lattice parameters and band structures for infinite 2D monolayer are all reported in the Supplemental Material \cite{Supp_Mat}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{fig1.pdf}
\caption{
Top: a Bismuth or Antimony halide zigzag nanoribbon of width $W=8$. Dark purple dots denote the positions of Bi or Sb atoms, while halogen atoms (F, Cl, Br or I) are denoted in red. The shaded region corresponds to the unit cell used to represent the infinite ribbon.
Bottom: Band structure of BiBr and SbBr zigzag nanoribbons of different width $W$. Topological edge states are highlighted in green. Energy is measured with respect to the Fermi energy.}
\label{fig:zig_bands}
\end{figure*}
Being band insulators with non-trivial topological invariant $\mathbb Z_2 = 1$ \cite{Song14_BiX_SbX,Olsen19}, the interface between BiX/SbX and a trivial insulator (e.g.\ vacuum) should host a pair of helical edge states.
We confirm this by investigating the electronic structure of zigzag-terminated ribbons of different widths, such as the one shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:zig_bands}.
Since materials with the same group-15 element but different halogens behave in a qualitatively similar fashion, we will focus on BiBr and SbBr, and show results for the remaining materials in the Supplemental Material \cite{Supp_Mat}.
Figure \ref{fig:zig_bands} shows the band structure of BiBr and SbBr zigzag nanoribbons across half of the 1D Brillouin zone.
In stark contrast with infinite 2D structures, all nanoribbons are gapless and show robust metallic states lying the region of the bulk gap, which is of the order of 0.8 eV for BiBr and 0.4 eV for SbBr.
Such states, highlighted in green in Fig.\ \ref{fig:zig_bands}, are remarkably stable as the width of the ribbon is increased, as opposed to the remaining valence and conduction states which become more and more dense and are displaced in energy as we move towards larger ribbons. We thus conclude that metallic in-gap states are localized on the edge, a fact which is also confirmed by inspecting the corresponding wavefunction (see Fig.\ S4 in Supplemental Material \cite{Supp_Mat}).
Note that the spectrum is spin degenerate owing to the presence of inversion symmetry, but metallic bands with opposite spin are located on opposite edges.
It is worth noticing that the presence of edge states is attributed to the non-trivial topological character of the bulk bands, and not to the particular edge termination. Indeed, we observe qualitatively similar features in both zigzag and armchair nanoribbons, with the latter reported in the Supplemental Material for completeness \cite{Supp_Mat}.
\section{Breakdown of edge transmission due to magnetic edge defects}
\label{sec:edge_defect}
To calculate edge transport properties of Bismuth and Antimony halides we make use of the software package QuantumATK \cite{Smidstrup17,Smidstrup19}, which allows to simulate transport devices in the framework of the NEGF formalism \cite{Brandbyge02}.
We will focus on the zero-bias transmission spectrum (TS) of a two-terminal device over an energy window of 3 eV that includes the bulk gap. This is straightforwardly linked to the two-terminal conductance of a real device through the well known Landauer formula $G = \frac{e^2}{h} T(E_\mathrm{F})$ \cite{Nazarov}.
Our setup is illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge} and is made as follows.
For any given material, we create two identical, semi-infinite, pristine electrodes by repeating the nanoribbon unit cell shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:zig_bands}.
We then create a central scattering region by considering a finite-length portion of TI nanoribbon, and remove one or more halogen atoms to account for the presence of vacancy defects (denoted as $\mathrm{V_{X}}$, X being the missing atom).
By connecting together left electrode, central scattering region and right electrode we obtain a two-terminal device setup for transport calculations.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{fig2.pdf}
\caption{
Top: Sketch of the setup used for transport calculations. Two semi-infinite electrodes (in gray) are connected to the scattering region in the middle (light green). The latter is a finite-size nanoribbon with one or more vacancy defects. A central region with an edge defect is shown to the right.
Bottom: Transmission spectrum (TS) of BiBr and SbBr zigzag nanoribbons of width $W=8$ in presence of one of the following edge defects: magnetic edge defect (b and f); Hydrogen-saturated edge defect (c and g); non-magnetic edge defect (d and h). The TS for a pristine ribbon is also shown for comparison in each panel, and its band structure is reported in panels a and e from Fig.\ \ref{fig:zig_bands}.
The energy region of insulating bulk is highlighted in yellow.
}
\label{fig:TS_edge}
\end{figure*}
Let us first focus on the case of a halogen vacancy on the edge (hereafter named \emph{edge defect}), as shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge}.
Transmission spectra for $W=8$ zigzag nanoribbons with edge defects are reported with red dashed lines in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge}, where we also report the band structure and TS of pristine ribbons.
As shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge}b, introducing an edge defect in BiBr does not lead to any observable effect in the region of edge states dispersion, where the transmission exactly equals the number of bands.
On the other hand, it does give a partial suppression of transmission for bulk valence and conduction states. Such a behavior is indeed the hallmark of 2D TIs, whose edge states conduction is protected even in the presence of disorder as long as time reversal symmetry is not broken.
However, the same consideration does not hold for the case of SbBr (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge}f), which shows an unexpected and well pronounced anti-resonance in the TS around 0.4 eV and therefore a failure of topological protection. A similar feature, although much less pronounced, can be also observed around $-0.5$ eV.
To investigate the origin of the transmission dip we have checked the distribution of magnetic moments for the entire device. It shows that the configuration is almost entirely non-magnetic, except for a magnetic moment of $0.9 \mu_\mathrm{B}$ which is exactly localized at the Sb site underneath the Br vacancy. On the other hand, the BiBr nanoribbon have a negligible small magnetic moment at the Br vacancy.
We thus attribute the suppression of edge conductance in SbBr nanoribbons to the spontaneous magnetization of the edge impurity, which invalidates topological protection and allows for intra-edge back-scattering.
This is a recurrent feature for all Antimony halides, for which we systematically observe an anti-resonance in a narrow energy window around 0.2--0.5 eV due to the formation of localized magnetic moments (see Supplemental Material \cite{Supp_Mat}).
It is interesting to notice that a similar mechanism has been proposed very recently in the framework of the Kane-Mele-Hubbard model in graphene, where the breakdown of time reversal symmetry at vacancy defects is shown to lead to a corresponding breakdown of conductance quantization \cite{Novelli19}. The present \emph{ab-initio} calculations support this picture and also bear similarities with simple theoretical models in which magnetic scatterers, such as magnetic adatoms or ferromagnetic gates, are introduced in 2D TIs \cite{Dang16,Zheng18}.
The magnetization of edge defects originates from the presence of a dangling bond at the vacancy site, which makes the configuration chemically unstable and drives the formation of a localized magnetic moment, as reported in earlier work \cite{Nair13,Khan17,He10,Li16,Chen11,Azevedo09}. We thus conjecture that the chemical saturation of the dangling bond with a suitable element should eliminate any magnetic structure at the defect and restore a perfect transport at the edge. Indeed, we find that saturation with Hydrogen restores the perfect transmission, as shown in Figs.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge}c and \ref{fig:TS_edge}g.
We have also calculated the TS for a non-magnetic configuration of the halogen vacancy (we manually set all magnetic moments to zero), which we report in Figs.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge}d and \ref{fig:TS_edge}h. As expected, there's no backscattering in this case since time reversal symmetry is not violated. However, we find rather small energy difference between the magnetic and non-magnetic configurations, which might be beyond the accuracy of DFT calculations.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{fig3.pdf}
\caption{
Transmission spectrum (TS) of an SbBr zigzag nanoribbon of width $W=8$ in presence of multiple non-magnetic edge defects as shown in the bottom panel: single edge defect, reported from Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge}h (b); double edge defect (c); triple edge defect (d).
The TS for a pristine ribbon is also shown for comparison in each panel, and its band structure is reported from Fig.\ \ref{fig:zig_bands} in panel a.
The energy region in which the nanoribbon bears 3 pairs of edge states in highlighted in yellow, while the region $4 \leq T(E) \leq 6$ is highlighted in cyan.
A graphical interpretation of the results in terms of open and closed channels on each edge is given in the bottom right panel, where metallic edge states with opposite spin polarization are represented with different colors (red and blue).
}
\label{fig:TS_edge_multiple}
\end{figure*}
There is however one last puzzling question emerging from Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge}, which is the unexpected back-scattering observed in SbBr nanoribbons between $-0.2$ and 0.0 eV, that is where $T(E) = 6$ (see panels f and h). We attribute this result to the following mechanism. Due to the presence of non-monotone energy dispersion of the edge states, the nanoribbon actually hosts three pairs of metallic states per edge in this energy range, whose direction of motion can be easily inferred from the slope of the bands.\footnote{A similar effect, although much less pronounced, occurs for BiBr around $-0.4 \mathrm{eV}$.} Thus, it becomes possible for an electron to scatter into a state with same spin but different direction of motion, as schematically depicted in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge_multiple}.
This mechanism can never lead to the total suppression of edge conductance, as there will always be a pair of helical edge states which are not accompanied by the corresponding counter-propagating states. In other words, in the presence of impurities or disorder, whatever odd number of edge states pairs is practically equivalent to a single pair, which is a manifestation of the binary nature of the $\mathbb Z_2$ topological invariant.
This implies that the TS in the region between $-0.2$ and 0.0 eV may approach $T(E)=4$ as the impurities become more and more abundant, since the three transport channels on the bottom edge will be accompanied by only one surviving pair on the disordered top edge.
To check this, we have investigated different non-magnetic configurations of SbBr nanoribbons with multiple edge defects, which are all reported in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge_multiple} together with the single-impurity configuration previously discussed.
Indeed, the resulting TS never drops below 4 in the aforementioned region, supporting our interpretation.
In passing, it is worth noting that we have also calculated the TS for smaller ribbons ($W=4$) and for all remaining materials in the presence of similar edge defects, obtaining qualitatively similar results --- that is, sharp anti-resonance in the conductance due to the formation of magnetic defects, and intra-edge backscattering when the structure carries three helical pairs per boundary. These results are shown in the Supplemental Material \cite{Supp_Mat}.
\section{Inter-edge scattering mediated by non-magnetic bulk defects}
\label{sec:bulk_defect}
We now turn our attention to halogen vacancies located away from the edge, which will be denoted \emph{bulk defects}.
As for the case of edge defects, we have studied both magnetic and non-magnetic configurations. However, we will only present results for non-magnetic bulk defects in BiBr for the sake of clarity.
We have explored a scenario where two halogen atoms are simultaneously removed from a BiBr nanoribbon of width $W=8$, leaving a couple of bulk vacancy defects in the central region.
As shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_bulk_multiple}, both vacancies are symmetrically placed at a distance $d=\sqrt{3}a$ from the edge, with the defect-defect distance being $d'=5a/\sqrt{3}$ (i.e.\ $d=9.46$ \AA\ and $d'=15.76$ \AA\ for BiBr).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{fig4.pdf}
\caption{
Transmission spectrum (TS) of a BiBr zigzag nanoribbon of width $W=8$ in presence of multiple non-magnetic bulk defects as sketched in the bottom panel: single bulk defect (b); double bulk defect (c); Hydrogen-saturated double bulk defect (d).
The TS for a pristine ribbon is also shown for comparison in each panel, and its band structure is reported in panel a from Fig.\ \ref{fig:zig_bands}.
The energy region of insulating bulk is highlighted in yellow.
}
\label{fig:TS_bulk_multiple}
\end{figure*}
The TS of such a configuration is reported in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_bulk_multiple}. While both impurities do not affect transport properties in the bulk gap region individually, which is demonstrated by the perfect TS in the region $-0.5 \mathrm{eV} \lesssim E \lesssim 0.5 \mathrm{eV}$ in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_bulk_multiple}b, they do suppress transport at energy $E \approx 0$ when they are simultaneously present, which is reflected in the sharp anti-resonance in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_bulk_multiple}c.
The corresponding scattering event is of inter-edge nature, as intra-edge scattering is forbidden by TRS (we are considering a non-magnetic structure). An electron traveling along the top boundary from left to right can hop on the closest defect state, whose energy actually lies in the bulk gap range. From there, it has a finite possibility of reaching the second impurity, due to a non-zero matrix element between localized states at the impurities. Finally, it tunnels into the bottom edge states, where it propagates back towards the left electrode without having to flip the spin polarization.
This analysis is further confirmed by the behavior of the local density of states shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:LDOS}, which clearly demonstrates that the impurity states occupy a large transverse portion of the nanoribbon, while also having a substantial overlap between them.
In this scenario, it is the co-operation between multiple impurities that creates a path for inter-edge scattering, even in such cases where they would not represent any threat to transport if considered individually.
Such a mechanism has been frequently neglected in the literature, which rather focus on the effect of single impurities on the transport properties of 2D TIs. Nevertheless, it could play a major role when the defect concentration exceeds a certain threshold \cite{Tiwari19,Chang14}, or when opposite edge states are deliberately funneled through a narrow constriction \cite{Strunz20}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{fig5.pdf}
\caption{Local density of states (LDOS) for the configuration in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_bulk_multiple}. Side and top views of the surface $\mathrm{LDOS}(x,y,z) = 0.02 \,\mathrm{\AA}^{-3} \mathrm{eV}^{-1}$ are shown in panels a and b respectively. Panel c shows the LDOS in the transverse direction $y$ averaged over the $xz$ plane, with the spatial region spanned by the edge states highlighted in cyan.}
\label{fig:LDOS}
\end{figure*}
It is worth noting that chemical saturation of the dangling bonds with Hydrogen removes the energy levels of the defects from the bulk gap region. The corresponding TS, which we show in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_bulk_multiple}d, is basically unaffected, thus suggesting a strategy to minimize the impact of impurity-mediated inter-edge scattering on transport.
Finally, we mention that we have observed signatures of inter-edge scattering for different disordered configurations and nanoribbon widths, as reported in the Supplemental Material \cite{Supp_Mat}.
In particular, opposite edge states in narrow nanoribbons ($W=4$) can be coupled together by one single bulk impurity, since the spatial extension of the defect wavefunction becomes comparable with the nanoribbon width \cite{Supp_Mat}.
\section{Comparison with non-topological edge states}
\label{sec:non-topological}
So far, we have discussed two mechanisms that lead to the failure of conductance quantization in 2D TIs.
In this section, we illustrate how the results presented up to now are clearly related to topology, and how edge states would behave in the absence of topological protection.
We thus focus here on the transport properties of a MoS$_2$ nanoribbon, whose crystal structure is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge_MoS2}.
Such structures are known to host metallic edge states at the zigzag termination which are however not due to topology, but rather to polar discontinuity at the interface between MoS$_2$ and the vacuum \cite{Gibertini14,Gibertini15}.
We will therefore call these \emph{trivial edge states}, to indicate that they are not generated as boundary states between materials with different topological invariants.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{fig6.pdf}
\caption{
Top: Top and lateral view of an MoS$_2$ zigzag nanoribbon of width $W=8$. Atoms removed to create defects are denoted with different colors.
Bottom: Transmission spectrum (TS) of MoS2 zigzag nanoribbons of width $W=8$ in presence of one of the following edge defects shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge_MoS2}: Mo vacancy (b); S vacancy (c); Oxygen-saturated S vacancy (d). The TS for a pristine ribbon is also shown for comparison in each panel, and its band structure is shown in panel a. The energy region of insulating bulk is highlighted in yellow.}
\label{fig:TS_edge_MoS2}
\end{figure*}
In Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge_MoS2}a we show the band structure of a pristine MoS$_2$ nanoribbon of width $W=8$. The metallic edge states, indicated with a different color in the figure, are clearly visible.
We then create two different defect configurations by removing an atom on the edge (either Mo or S).
We calculate the TS for such structures neglecting the contribution from SOC, which is known to have a negligible effect in this case, and compare them to the TS of a pristine nanoribbon.
Figures \ref{fig:TS_edge_MoS2}b and \ref{fig:TS_edge_MoS2}c show that the presence of an edge defect has a dramatic consequence for the transmission properties of the nanoribbon.
Generally, we observe a much larger effect of backscattering as compared to the case of topologically protected materials.
The conductance is basically halved over the entire energy range $0.0-1.0$eV when we remove a single Mo atom from the edge, and is completely blocked in the range $1.0-1.3$eV when the edge defect is a Sulfur vacancy.
We conclude that the trivial edge states of MoS$_2$ nanoribbons are much more prone to backscattering than the topologically protected edge states in the Bi (Sb) halides.
Finally, we have also calculated the TS for the case of Oxygen-saturated S vacancy, which is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge_MoS2}d.
Once again, chemical saturation seems to be beneficial to edge transport, as we recover an almost perfect transmission. However, the TS still deviates by 3\% from the pristine value in the region $0.5-1.3$ eV. In contrast, the TS for H-saturated edge defects in BiBr and SbBr nanoribbons never deviates more that 0.1\% from the corresponding quantized values.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig7.pdf}
\caption{Graphical representation of different backscattering mechanisms: intra-edge scattering due to magnetic edge impurities (a); inter-edge scattering through a single non-magnetic bulk defect (b); inter-edge scattering mediated by multiple bulk impurities (c). Metallic edge states with opposite spin polarization are represented with different colors (red and blue).}
\label{fig:discussion}
\end{figure}
In summary, we have performed \emph{ab-initio} transport calculations of two-terminal TI nanoribbons using the NEGF formalism. By accounting for the presence of both edge and bulk defects, we have pinpointed two sources of backscattering which lead to the breakdown of conductance quantization:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] \emph{Intra-edge scattering due magnetic edge impurities.} The dangling bond originated by the removal of one atom at the edge may in some cases drive the formation of a localized magnetic moment at the impurity site. This local breaking of TRS allows for backscattering events involving spin-flip (as sketched in Fig.\ \ref{fig:discussion}a).
This basically blocks electrical conduction through one of the edges, while leaving the opposite one unperturbed. The corresponding transmission function drops from 2 to 1 when the energy of the incoming electron resonates with the defect level.
\item[(ii)] \emph{Inter-edge scattering due to (multiple) bulk impurities.} In a narrow nanoribbon, a single non-magnetic bulk impurity can open a backscattering channel between opposite edge states without breaking TRS (Fig.\ \ref{fig:discussion}b). Although this can be obviously avoided by increasing the nanoribbon width, large nanoribbons will be still affected by inter-edge scattering above a certain threshold of defect concentration, when multiple bulk impurities generate a backscattering path across the structure (Fig.\ \ref{fig:discussion}c).
\end{itemize}
Finally, it's worth mentioning that our results are by no means limited to the particular class of materials chosen in this work. Rather, we expect them to be relevant for all QSHIs.
We also anticipate that similar mechanisms may deteriorate surface conduction of three-dimensional time-reversal invariant TIs.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We thank Nicola Marzari for stimulating discussions, Mads Brandbyge and Tue Gunst for useful discussions and technical help.
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Sk\l{}odowska-Curie grant agreement No.\ 754462. (EuroTechPostdoc).
KST acknowledges funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant No.\ 773122, LIMA).
The Center for Nanostructured Graphene is sponsored by the Danish National Research Foundation, Project DNRF103.
\end{acknowledgments}
\section{Band structure of Antimony and Bismuth halides}
\label{subsec:bulk}
\subsection{2D monolayers}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{lattice.pdf}
\caption{Lattice structure of monolayer BiX and SbX (X = F, Cl, Br, I). The unit cell is marked with a shaded region. The corresponding Brillouin zone in shown on the right, and the path used for band structure calculations is reported with dashed colored lines. We use the conventional $\mathrm{\Gamma M K \Gamma}$ path for materials with hexagonal unit cell, while the path $\mathrm{\Gamma Y H H_1 X \Gamma}$ is used for the case of monoclinic cell (such as SbI).}
\label{fig:lattice}
\end{figure}
The crystal structure of monolayer Bismuth (Antimony) halides consists of a low-buckled layer of Bismuth (Antimony) sandwiched between two layers of halogen atoms, which are disposed in an alternated fashion with respect to the central layer (see Figure \ref{fig:lattice}). Seven structure out of 8 have hexagonal unit cell, with both inversion symmetry and a three-fold rotational symmetry. SbI is the only exception, having monoclinic structure with broken rotational symmetry.
\begin{table
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
material & a (\AA) & a' (\AA) & d (\AA) & h (\AA) & $\Delta_\mathrm{GPAW}$ (eV) & $\Delta_\mathrm{ATK}$ (eV) \\
\hline
BiF & 5.32 & & 2.09 & 0.42 & 0.99 & 1.02\\
%
BiCl & 5.45 & & 2.52 & 0.21 & 0.90 & 0.90\\
%
BiBr & 5.46 & & 2.67 & 0.17 & 0.86 & 0.83\\
%
BiI & 5.48 & & 2.87 & 0.10 & 0.78 & 0.86\\
%
SbF & 5.10 & & 1.97 & 0.28 & 0.36 & 0.34\\
%
SbCl & 5.22 & & 2.40 & 0.11 & 0.43 & 0.40\\
%
SbBr & 5.24 & & 2.57 & 0.09 & 0.44 & 0.41\\
%
SbI & 5.05 & 5.36 & 2.78 & 0.02 & 0.49 & 0.43\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Lattice parameters and band gap of monolayer BiX and SbX (X = F, Cl, Br, I). a: hexagonal lattice constant; a': 2nd lattice constant (for materials with monoclinic structure); d: Bi-X or Sb-X distance; h: buckling height; $\Delta_\mathrm{GPAW}$: electronic band gap obtained with GPAW \cite{Enkovaara10}; $\Delta_\mathrm{ATK}$: electronic band gap obtained with QuantumATK \cite{Smidstrup17,Smidstrup19}.}
\label{tab:params}
\end{table}
Structural parameters for all materials --- such as lattice constants $a$ and $a'$, Bi(Sb)-halogen distance $d$, buckling height $h$ --- are reported in Table \ref{tab:params}, together with the corresponding 2D band gap. Results are in good agreement with previous work \cite{Song14_BiX_SbX}.
The band structure of 2D monolayers is reported in Fig.\ \ref{fig:bulk}. Here we have calculated electronic bands both without and with spin-orbit coupling (SOC). In the absence of SOC, all materials are semi-metals with a Dirac cone at the K point (slightly shifted for the monoclinic structure SbI). However, SOC has an essential role here as it opens a gap of $0.3-0.4$eV for Antimony-based materials, and $0.8-1.0$eV for Bismuth-based materials.
The presence of a SOC-induced band gap is indeed a characteristic feature of topological materials \cite{Qi11}.
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{bulk-XF.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{bulk-XBr.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{bulk-XCl.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{bulk-XI.pdf}
\caption{Band structure of bulk 2D monolayers along the path shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:lattice}. We plot the eigenvalues both without and with the inclusion of spin-orbit coupling (SOC). Note that BiI has actually a hexagonal unit cell, but we use the monoclinic path for a better comparison with SbI.}
\label{fig:bulk}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
\subsection{Zigzag nanoribbons}
Here we report the band structure of zigzag nanoribbons for all materials that have not been shown in the main text. All structures are gapless with a pair of metallic in-gap states that is quite stable with respect to the width $W$.
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{zig-XF.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{zig-XCl.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{zig-XI.pdf}
\caption{Band structure of BiX and SbX zigzag nanoribbons (X = F, Cl, I) of different width $W$. Topological edge states are reported in green. The energy scale is referred to the Fermi energy.}
\label{fig:zig}
\end{figure}
The fact that such states are localized along the edge is confirmed by looking at their associated wavefunction, which we show in Fig.\ \ref{fig:wavefunction}. The figure clearly shows that Bloch eigenstates for the in-gap states are sharply localized near the edge of the nanoribbon, while electronic states deep into the conduction band are spread over the entire width of the ribbon.
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{wavefunction-zig_8-SbBr.pdf}
\caption{Wavefunctions of an SbBr nanoribbon of width $W=8$ for the electronic states indicated in the left panel. The figure shows the surface of constant wavefunction amplitude $|\psi(x,y,z)| = 0.05 \mathrm{\AA}^{-3/2}$, while the color scale indicates the phase.}
\label{fig:wavefunction}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
\subsection{Armchair nanoribbons}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{ribbon_armchair.pdf}
\caption{Top view of a Bismuth or Antimony halide armchair nanoribbon of width $W=8$. Dark purple dots denote the positions of Bi or Sb atoms, while halogen atoms (F, Cl, Br or I) are denoted in red. The shaded region corresponds to the unit cell.}
\label{fig:ribbon_armchair}
\end{figure}
In this section we show the electronic band structure for armchair nanoribbons of different width, whose crystal structure is depicted in Fig.\ \ref{fig:ribbon_armchair}.
As reported in Figure \ref{fig:arm}, all structures show the presence of additional metallic edge states with respect to the infinite bulk monolayer.
Note that the spectrum is still gapped for small armchair nanoribbons ($W=4-12$). This is due to hybridization between wavefunctions on opposite edges.
Indeed, in our notation, armchair nanoribbons of width $W$ are actually narrower by a factor $\sqrt{3}$ with respect to zigzag nanoribbon with identical $W$.
However, it is still interesting to note that the magnitude of the gap does not seem to decrease linearly with increasing $W$, especially for Antimony-based materials.
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{arm-XF.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{arm-XCl.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{arm-XBr.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{arm-XI.pdf}
\caption{Band structure of BiX and SbX armchair nanoribbons (X = F, Cl, Br, I) of different width $W$. Topological edge states are reported in green. The energy scale is referred to the Fermi energy.}
\label{fig:arm}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
\section{Transmission spectra for large ($W=8$) and narrow ($W=4$) ribbons}
\label{subsec:TS}
\subsection{Topological insulator nanoribbons}
In this section we report the transmission spectrum of all BiX and SbX zigzag nanoribbons of width $W=4$ and $W=8$ in the presence of either edge or bulk defects --- some of which have already been shown in the main text.
For all materials considered, we report three transmission spectra corresponding to the following three configurations:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathrm{V_X},\ (\mu \ne 0)$: single edge/bulk defect with (possibly) non-vanishing magnetic moments.
\item $\mathrm{V_X + H},\ (\mu = 0)$: Hydrogen saturated edge/bulk defect, with no magnetic moment.
\item $\mathrm{V_X},\ (\mu = 0)$: single edge/bulk defect with all magnetic moments set to zero.
\end{itemize}
Figures\ \ref{fig:TS_edge-zig_8} and \ref{fig:TS_edge-zig_4} pertain to edge defects in nanoribbons of width $W=8$ and $W=4$ respectively. Similarly, Figs.\ \ref{fig:TS_bulk-zig_8} and \ref{fig:TS_bulk-zig_4} consider bulk defects in nanoribbons of width $W=8$ and $W=4$ respectively.
Data shown here do not add new physics, but further demonstrate the phenomena already discussed in the main text for the case of BiBr and SbBr. In particular:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] SbX nanoribbons with edge defects show a partial suppression of the transmission in the form of a localized anti-resonance, due to the formation of a magnetic moment at the vacancy --- see panels f in Figs.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge-zig_8} and \ref{fig:TS_edge-zig_4} for nanoribbons of width $W=8$ and $W=4$ respectively.
\item[(ii)] Bulk defects do not affect transport for $W=8$, but lead to inter-edge scattering for $W=4$ which is driven by the partial overlap of the impurity state with the edge modes --- see Figs.\ \ref{fig:TS_bulk-zig_8} and \ref{fig:TS_bulk-zig_4}.
\item[(iii)] For the case of Antimony-based materials, transport is not fully protected in the energy range where three pairs of edge states form at each interface. This is a manifestation of the underlying $\mathbb Z_2$ invariance, as we discuss in the main text. Note that the transmission spectrum never drops below 4.
\item[(iv)] Chemical saturation of the dangling bonds with Hydrogen is generally sufficient to restore topological protection, since spurious magnetic moments are removed and the energy level of the defect are moved away from the bulk gap region.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_edge-zig_8-XF.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_edge-zig_8-XCl.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_edge-zig_8-XI.pdf}
\caption{Transmission spectrum (TS) of BiX and SbX (X = F, Cl, I) zigzag nanoribbons of width $W=8$ in presence of one of the following edge defects: simple edge defect (b and f); Hydrogen-saturated edge defect (c and g); edge defect with zero magnetic moment (d and h). The TS for a pristine ribbon is also shown for comparison in each panel, and its band structure is reported in panels a and e.
The energy region of insulating bulk is highlighted in yellow.}
\label{fig:TS_edge-zig_8}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_edge-zig_4-XF.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_edge-zig_4-XCl.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_edge-zig_4-XBr.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_edge-zig_4-XI.pdf}
\caption{Transmission spectrum (TS) of all zigzag nanoribbons of width $W=4$ in presence of one of the following edge defects: simple edge defect (b and f); Hydrogen-saturated edge defect (c and g); edge defect with zero magnetic moment (d and h).
The TS for a pristine ribbon is also shown for comparison in each panel, and its band structure is reported in panels a and e.
The energy region of insulating bulk is highlighted in yellow.}
\label{fig:TS_edge-zig_4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.2\linewidth]{bulk_defect_W8.pdf}\\
\vspace{5mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_bulk-zig_8-XF.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_bulk-zig_8-XCl.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_bulk-zig_8-XBr.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_bulk-zig_8-XI.pdf}
\caption{Transmission spectrum (TS) of all zigzag nanoribbons of width $W=8$ in presence of one of the following bulk defects: simple bulk defect (b and f); Hydrogen-saturated bulk defect (c and g); bulk defect with zero magnetic moment (d and h).
The TS for a pristine ribbon is also shown for comparison in each panel, and its band structure is reported in panels a and d.
The energy region of insulating bulk is highlighted in yellow.
A sketch of the structure with the position of the defect is shown in the upper panel.}
\label{fig:TS_bulk-zig_8}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.2\linewidth]{bulk_defect_W4.pdf}\\
\vspace{5mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_bulk-zig_4-XF.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_bulk-zig_4-XCl.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_bulk-zig_4-XBr.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{TS_bulk-zig_4-XI.pdf}
\caption{Transmission spectrum (TS) of all zigzag nanoribbons of width $W=4$ in presence of one of the following bulk defects: simple bulk defect (b and f); Hydrogen-saturated bulk defect (c and g); bulk defect with zero magnetic moment (d and h).
The TS for a pristine ribbon is also shown for comparison in each panel, and its band structure is reported in panels a and d.
The energy region of insulating bulk is highlighted in yellow.
A sketch of the structure with the position of the defect is shown in the upper panel.}
\label{fig:TS_bulk-zig_4}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
\subsection{Non-topological (MoS$_2$) nanoribbons}
In Fig.\ \ref{fig:TS_edge-zig_4-MoS2} we report the transmission spectrum for an MoS$_2$ zigzag nanoribbon of width $W=4$. As for the case of $W=8$, both Mo and S vacancies lead to a very strong suppression of the transmission spectrum, while chemical saturation with Oxygen restores the transport properties of pristine nanoribbons, although not perfectly.
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{TS_edge-zig_4-MoS2.pdf}
\caption{Transmission spectrum (TS) of MoS2 zigzag nanoribbons of width $W=4$ in presence of one of the following edge defects: Mo vacancy (b); S vacancy (c); Oxygen-saturated S vacancy (d). The TS for a pristine ribbon is also shown for comparison in each panel, and its band structure is shown in panel a. The energy region of insulating bulk is highlighted in yellow.}
\label{fig:TS_edge-zig_4-MoS2}
\end{figure}
\FloatBarrier
\section{Disordered configurations}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{disorder.pdf}
\caption{Transmission spectrum (TS) of BiBr zigzag nanoribbons of different widths in presence of multiple non-magnetic bulk defects. Positions of the impurities (denoted d1 and d2) are reported in the corresponding structures. In all cases, we compare the TS in the presence of d1 only, d2 only, and d1 and d2 simultaneously.}
\label{fig:disorder}
\end{figure}
In this section we compare the transmission function of different nanoribbon configurations with a pair of non-magnetic bulk defects.
The structure in Fig.\ \ref{fig:disorder}a corresponds to the one discussed in the main text, while panels b, c, and d pertain to different disordered configurations and nanoribbon widths.
In all cases a single bulk impurity is not sufficient to generate inter-edge backscattering. Panels a, b and d show instead that multiple impurities generate a dip in the transmission function around $E \approx 0$ due to inter-edge coupling.
In panel c, the two Br vacancies appear to be too far from each other to generate backscattering.
\FloatBarrier
\section{Local density of states}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{LDOS.pdf}
\caption{Local density of states (LDOS) for different nanoribbon widths and disordered configurations according to the legend. For each panel, the first and second columns show side and top views of the surface $\mathrm{LDOS}(x,y,z) = 0.02 \,\mathrm{\AA}^{-3} \mathrm{eV}^{-1}$ respectively. The third column corresponds to the LDOS in the transverse direction $y$ averaged over the $xz$ plane, while the last column shows the LDOS along three different lines as reported on the left. The spatial region spanned by the edge states is highlighted in cyan in the last two cases.}
\label{fig:LDOS}
\end{figure}
To compare the spatial extension of edge and defect states, we study here the local density of states (LDOS) for different device configurations.
As demonstrated by Fig.\ \ref{fig:LDOS}a and \ref{fig:LDOS}b, a single bulk defect state cannot overlap significantly with both edge states in a wide nanoribbon, so that impurity-mediated backscattering through one single vacancy is not permitted.
On the other hand, a significant overlap is present in the cases of multiple impurities (panel c) or narrow structures (panel d).
\FloatBarrier
\section{Magnetic moments of edge and bulk impurities}
\label{subsec:add}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{defect_mag_mom.png}
\caption{Magnetic moments of an SbBr zigzag nanoribbon of width $W=8$ calculated from a Mulliken population analysis. Sb atoms are in purple, while Br atoms are in red. A yellow arrow denotes the local spin direction and the magnitude of the magnetic moment.}
\label{fig:mag_mom}
\end{figure}
Here we report the magnetic moments of all the magnetic device configurations we have found.
We have extracted the magnetic moments from a Mulliken population analysis by subtracting the number of spin down electrons from the number of spin up electrons at each site.
We interpret the number obtained in this way as the local magnetic moment in units of the Bohr magneton $\mu_\mathrm{B}$.
Note that the Mulliken population for this particular case of non-collinear spin calculation is a four component spin tensor, which is separately diagonalized at each site to give a local spin direction.
Generally, magnetic moments are zero everywhere except in the immediate vicinity of the defect, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:mag_mom}. Therefore, we only show the magnitude of the magnetic moment at the Bimsuth (Antimony) site closest to the vacancy. The corresponding results are given in Table \ref{tab:magnetic_moments}.
\begin{table
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
material & W & $\mu$ edge defect ($\mu_\mathrm{B}$) & $\mu$ bulk defect ($\mu_\mathrm{B}$)\\
\hline
BiF & 4 & 0.015 & 0.042\\
BiF & 8 & 0.017 & 0.072\\
\hline
BiCl & 4 & 0.018 & 0.370\\
BiCl & 8 & 0.018 & 0.401\\
\hline
BiBr & 4 & 0.001 & 0.298\\
BiBr & 8 & 0.000 & 0.361\\
\hline
BiI & 4 & 0.010 & 0.289\\
BiI & 8 & 0.015 & 0.319\\
\hline
SbF & 4 & 0.658 & 0.491\\
SbF & 8 & 0.651 & 0.539\\
\hline
SbCl & 4 & 0.960 & 0.710\\
SbCl & 8 & 0.945 & 0.661\\
\hline
SbBr & 4 & 0.933 & 0.752\\
SbBr & 8 & 0.916 & 0.702\\
\hline
SbI & 4 & 0.860 & 0.689\\
SbI & 8 & 0.857 & 0.627\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Magnetic moments calculated at the Bi (Sb) sites closest to the vacancy defect. Two different nanoribbon widths are considered here ($W=4$ and $W=8$).}
\label{tab:magnetic_moments}
\end{table}
We note that Antimony-based structures always show a sizable magnetic moment of the order of $0.5-0.9 \mu_\mathrm{B}$. On the other hand, Bismuth-based structures behave quite differently depending on the position of the impurity. They are almost non-magnetic in the edge defect configuration, with $\mu \approx 0.01 \mu_\mathrm{B}$, while they bear a magnetic moment $\mu = 0.3-0.4 \mu_\mathrm{B}$ in the bulk defect configuration --- the only exception being a bulk defect in BiF, with a much smaller moment $\mu = 0.04-0.07 \mu_\mathrm{B}$.
|
\section{Introduction}
\noindent
In \cite{linliu95} and \cite{linliu}, Fang-Hua Lin and Chun Liu consider the following system, which reduces to the classical Navier-Stokes system in the case $d\equiv 0$ (here we have set various parameters equal to one for simplicity):
\begin{equation}\label{maineq}
\!\!\boxed{\begin{array}{rcl}
u_t - \Delta u + \nabla^T \cdot [u\otimes u+\n d \odot \n d ]+ \nabla p & = & 0\\\\
\nabla \cdot u & = & 0\\\\
d_t -\Delta d + (u\cdot \nabla)d +f(d) &=&0
\end{array}}
\end{equation}
with $f=\n F$ for a scalar field $F$ given by $$F(x) := (|x|^2-1)^2\, ,$$
so that
$$f(x)= 4(|x|^2-1)x$$
(and in particular $f(0) = 0$). We take the spatial dimension to be three, so that for some $\Omega \subseteq \R^3$ and $T>0$, we are considering maps of the form
$$u,d : \Omega \times (0,T) \to \R^3\, , \quad p: \Omega \times (0,T) \to \R\, ,$$
and here
$$F:\R^3 \to \R \, , \quad f:\R^3 \to \R^3$$
are fixed as above. As usual, $u$ represents the velocity vector field of a fluid, $p$ is the scalar pressure in the fluid, and, as in nematic liquid crystals models, $d$ corresponds roughly\footnote{In principle, for $d$ to only represent a ``direction'' one should have $|d|\equiv 1$. As proposed in \cite{linliu95}, F(d) is used to model a Ginzburg-Landau type of relaxation of the pointwise constraint $|d|\equiv 1$. For further discussions on the modeling assumptions leading to systems such as the one above, see e.g. \cite{linwang14} or the appendix of \cite{linliu95} and the references mentioned therein.} to the ``director field'' representing the local orientation of rod-like molecules, with $u$ also giving the velocities of the centers of mass of those anisotropic molecules.
\\\\
In (\ref{maineq}), for vector fields $v$ and $w$, the matrix fields $v\otimes w$ and $\n v \odot \n w$ are defined to be the ones with entries
$$(v\otimes w)_{ij} = v_i w_j \quad \textrm{and} \quad (\n v \odot \n w)_{ij}=v_{,i}\cdot w_{,j}:= \frac{\partial v_k}{\partial x_i}\frac{\partial w_k}{\partial x_j}$$
(summing over the repeated index $k$ as per the Einstein convention), and for a matrix field $J= (J_{ij})$, we define\footnote{Many authors simply write $\n \cdot J$, which is perhaps more standard.} the vector field $\n^T \cdot J$ by
$$(\n^T \cdot J)_i:=J_{ij,j}:= \frac {\partial J_{ij}}{\partial x_j}$$
(summing again over $j$). We think formally of $\n$ (as well as any vector field) as a column vector and $\n^T$ as a row vector, so that each entry of (the column vector) $\n^T \cdot J$ is the divergence of the corresponding {\em row} of $J$. In what follows, for a vector field $v$ we similarly denote by $\n^T v$ the matrix field with $i$-th row given by $\n^T v_i:=(\n v_i)^T$, i.e.,
$$(\n^T v)_{ij}=v_{i,j}:=\frac{\partial v_i}{\partial x_j}\, ,$$
so that for smooth vector fields $v$ and $w$ we always have
\begin{equation}\label{vecprodrule}
\n^T \cdot (v\otimes w) = (\n^T v)w + v(\n \cdot w)= (w\cdot \n)v + v(\n \cdot w)\, .
\end{equation}
For a scalar field $\phi$ we set $\n^2 \phi:= \n^T (\n \phi)$,
and for matrix fields $J=(J_{ij})$ and $K=(K_{ij})$, we let $J:K:=J_{ij}K_{ij}$ (summing over repeated indices) denote the (real) Frobenius inner product of the matrices ($J:K=\mathrm{tr} (J^T K)$). We set $|J|:=\sqrt{J:J}$ and $|v|:=\sqrt{v\cdot v}$, and to minimize cumbersome notation will often abbreviate by writing $\n v:=\n^T v$ for a vector field $v$ where the precise structure of the {\em matrix} field $\n^T v$ is not crucial; for example, $|\n v|:=|\n^T v|$.
\\\\
We note that by formally taking the divergence $\n \cdot$ of the first line in (\ref{maineq}) we obtain the usual ``pressure equation''
\begin{equation}\label{preseqa}
-\D p = \n \cdot (\n^T \cdot [u\otimes u+\n d \odot \n d ])\, .
\end{equation}
As in the Navier-Stokes ($d\equiv 0$) setting, one may formally deduce (see Section \ref{motivation} for more details) from (\ref{maineq}) the following global and local energy inequalities which one may expect ``sufficiently nice'' solutions of (\ref{maineq}) to satisfy:\footnote{For sufficiently regular solutions one can show that equality holds. }
\begin{equation}\label{globenineq}
\displaystyle{\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega} \left[ \frac{|u|^2}2 +\frac{|\n d|^2}2 + F(d) \right]\, dx + \int_{\Omega}\left[|\n u|^2 + |\D d-f(d)|^2 \right]}\, dx\leq 0
\end{equation}
for each $t\in (0,T)$, as well as a localized version\footnote{Note that in \cite{linliu}, the term ``$-\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)$'' in (\ref{locenineq}) actually appears incorrectly as ``$+\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)$''. See Section \ref{motivation} for more details.\label{minussign}}
\begin{equation}\label{locenineq}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle{\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega}\left[\left(\frac{|u|^2}{2} + \frac{|\n d|^2}2 \right)\phi \right] \, dx + \int_{\Omega}\left(|\n u|^2+ |\n^2 d|^2\right)\phi \, dx}
\\\\
\qquad \qquad \qquad
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle{\leq \int_{\Omega} \bigg[\left(\frac{|u|^2}{2}+ \frac{|\n d|^2}{2}\right)(\phi_t + \D \phi) +\left(\frac{|u|^2}2 +\frac{|\n d|^2}2 + p\right)u\cdot \n \phi} \\\\
\displaystyle{ \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad +\ \ u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d \ \ -
\ \ \underbrace{\phi\n^T [f(d)]: \n^T d}_{=:\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)}\bigg]\, dx}
\end{array}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
for $t\in (0,T)$ and each smooth, compactly supported in $\Omega$ and non-negative scalar field $\phi \geq 0$. (For Navier-Stokes, i.e. when $d\equiv 0$, one may omit all terms involving $d$, even though $0\neq F(0)\notin L^1(\R^3)$.)
\\\\
In \cite{linliu95}, for smooth and bounded $\Omega$, the global energy inequality (\ref{globenineq}) is used to construct global weak solutions to (\ref{maineq}) for initial velocity in $L^2(\Omega)$, along with a similarly appropriate condition on the initial value of $d$ which allows (\ref{globenineq}) to be integrated over $0<t<T$. This is consistent with the pioneering result of J. Leray \cite{leray} for Navier-Stokes (treated later by many other authors using various methods, but always relying on the natural energy as in \cite{leray}).
\\\\
In \cite{linliu}, the authors establish a partial regularity result for weak solutions to (\ref{maineq}) belonging to the natural energy spaces which moreover satisfy the local energy inequality (\ref{locenineq}). The result is of the same type as known partial regularity results for ``suitable weak solutions'' to the Navier-Stokes equations. The program for such partial regularity results for Navier-Stokes was initiated in a series of papers by V. Scheffer in the 1970s and 1980s (see, e.g., \cite{scheffer77,scheffer80} and other works mentioned in \cite{caf}), and subsequently improved by various authors (e.g. \cite{caf,lin,ladyser,vasseur}), perhaps most notably by L. Caffarelli, R. Kohn and L. Nirenberg in \cite{caf}. They show (as do \cite{linliu}) that the one-dimensional parabolic Hausdorff measure of the (potentially empty) singular set $S$ is zero ($\mathcal{P}^1(S)=0$, see Definition \ref{phausdorff} below), implying that singularities (if they exist) cannot for example form any smooth one-parameter curve in space-time. The method of proof in \cite{linliu} largely follows the method of \cite{caf}.
\\\\
Of course the general system (\ref{maineq}) is (when $d \neq 0$) substantially more complex than the Navier-Stokes system, and one therefore could not expect a stronger result than the type in \cite{caf}. In fact, it is surprising that one even obtains the same type of result ($\mathcal{P}^1(S)=0$) as in \cite{caf}. The explanation for this seems to be that although (\ref{maineq}) is more complex than Navier-Stokes in view of the additional $d$ components, one can derive an a priori maximum principle for $d$ because of the third equation in (\ref{maineq}) which substantially offsets this complexity from the viewpoint of regularity. Therefore, under suitable boundary and initial conditions on $d$, one may assume that $d$ is in fact bounded, a fact which is significantly exploited in \cite{linliu}. More recently, the authors of the preprint \cite{duhuwang} establish the same type of result for a related but more complex ``Q-tensor'' system; however there, as well, one may obtain a maximum principle which is of crucial importance for proving partial regularity. One is therefore led to the following natural question, which we will address below:
\\\\
{\bf Can one deduce any partial regularity for systems similar in structure to (\ref{maineq}) but which lack any maximum principle?}
\\\\
In the Navier-Stokes setting, it was asserted by Scheffer in \cite{scheffer3} that in fact the proof of the partial regularity result in \cite{caf} does not require the full set of equations in (\ref{maineq}). He mentions that the key ingredients are membership of the global energy spaces, the local energy inequality (\ref{locenineq}), the divergence-free condition $\n \cdot u =0$ and the {\em pressure} equation (\ref{preseqa}) (with $d\equiv 0$ throughout). Scheffer called vector fields satisfying these four requirements solutions to the ``Navier-Stokes inequality'', equivalent to solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations with a forcing $f$ which satisfies $f\cdot u \leq 0$ everywhere. In contrast, the results in \cite{linliu} do very strongly use the third equation in (\ref{maineq}) in that it implies a maximum principle for $d$.
\\\\
In this paper, we explore what happens if one considers the analog of Scheffer's ``Navier-Stokes inequality'' for the system (\ref{maineq}) when $d\neq 0$. That is, we consider triples $(u,d,p)$ with global regularities implied (at least when $\Omega$ is bounded and under suitable assumptions on the initial data) by (\ref{globenineq}) which satisfy (\ref{preseqa}) and $\n \cdot u=0$ weakly as well as (a formal consequence of) (\ref{locenineq}), but are {\em not} necessarily weak solutions of the first and third equations (i.e., the two vector equations) in (\ref{maineq}). In particular, we will {\em not} assume that $d\in L^\infty(\Omega \times (0,T))$, which would have been reasonable in view of the third equation in (\ref{maineq}). We see that without further assumptions, the result is substantially weaker than the $\mathcal{P}^1(S)=0$ result for Navier-Stokes: following the methods of \cite{linliu,caf} we obtain (see Theorem \ref{mainthm} below) $\mathcal{P}^{\frac 92 + \delta}(S)=0$ for any $\delta >0$. This reinforces our intuition that the situation here is substantially more complex than that of Navier-Stokes. On the other hand, we show that under a suitable uniform local decay condition on $|d|^\sigma (|u|^3 +|\n d|^3)^{(1-\frac \sigma 6)}$ with $\sigma \in (5,6)$
(see (\ref{dmorreysmall}) below, which in particular holds when $d\equiv 0$ as in \cite{caf}), one in fact obtains $\mathcal{P}^1(S)=0$ as in \cite{linliu} and \cite{caf}. In particular, we verify the above-mentioned assertion made by Scheffer in \cite{scheffer3} regarding partial regularity for Navier-Stokes inequalities.
\\\\
Our key observation which allows us to work without any maximum principle is that, in view of the global energy (\ref{globenineq}) and the particular forms of $F$ and $f$, it is reasonable (see Section \ref{motivation}) to assume (\ref{enspaces}); this implies\footnote{In fact, one can also show that $d\in L^s_{\mathrm{loc}}(0,T;L^\infty(\Omega))$ for any $s\in [2,4)$.} that ${d \in L^\infty(0,T;L^6(\Omega))}$ which is sufficient for our purposes.
\\\\
As alluded to above, for our purposes we actually do not require all of the information which appears in (\ref{locenineq}) above. In view of the fact that
\begin{equation}\label{expandrfdphipre}
\left| \mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi) \right| =|\phi\n^T [f(d)]: \n^T d| \leq 12|d|^2|\n d|^2\phi + 8\left(\frac{|\n d|^2}2 \phi \right)
\end{equation}
(see (\ref{expandrfdphi}) below), a consequence of (\ref{locenineq}) is that
\begin{equation}\label{locenineqrougher}
\mathcal{A}'(t) + \mathcal{B}(t) \leq 8\mathcal{A}(t) + \mathcal{C}(t)\ \quad \textrm{for} \ \ 0<t<T\, ,
\end{equation}
with $\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B}, \mathcal{C} \geq 0$ defined (denoting $\int_{\Omega \times \{t\}}g:=\int_{\Omega} g(\cdot, t)\, dx$) as
$$\mathcal{A}(t):=\int_{\Omega \times \{t\}}\left(\frac{|u|^2}{2} + \frac{|\n d|^2}2 \right)\phi \, , \quad
\mathcal{B}(t):=\int_{\Omega \times \{t\}}\left(|\n u|^2+ |\n^2 d|^2\right)\phi
$$
and
$$\mathcal{C}(t):=\int_{\Omega \times \{t\}} \bigg[\left(\frac{|u|^2}{2}+ \frac{|\n d|^2}{2}\right)|\phi_t + \D \phi| + 12 |d|^2 |\n d|^2\phi\bigg]
\qquad \qquad \qquad$$
$$\qquad \qquad \qquad +\ \ \left|\int_{\Omega \times \{t\}} \left[\left(\frac{|u|^2}2 +\frac{|\n d|^2}2 + p\right)u\cdot \n \phi + u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d\right]\right|\, .
$$
(\ref{locenineqrougher}) is nearly sufficient, with the appearance of $\mathcal{A}(t)$ on the right-hand side (in fact, even with $u$ omitted, which cannot be avoided as ``$\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)$'' appears on the right-hand side of (\ref{locenineq}) with a minus\footnote{See Footnote \ref{minussign}.} sign) actually being, for technical reasons, the only\footnote{In fact, the appearance of $|d|^2$ on the right-hand side of (\ref{expandrfdphipre}), and hence of (\ref{locenineqrougher}) as well, is handled precisely by the assumption that ${d \in L^\infty(0,T;L^6(\Omega))}$, and is the reason for the slightly weaker results compared to the Navier-Stokes setting (i.e., when $d\equiv 0$).} troublesome term.\footnote{Note that if $\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)$ had appeared with a plus sign in (\ref{locenineq}), one could have simply dropped this troublesome term as a non-positive quantity.} We therefore use a Gr\"onwall-type argument to hide this term to the left-hand side of (\ref{locenineqrougher}) so that (if $\phi|_{t=0} \equiv 0$)
\begin{equation}\label{locenineqsuf}
\mathcal{A}'(t) + \mathcal{B}(t) \leq \mathcal{C}(t) + 8e^{8T}\int_0^t\mathcal{C}(\tau)\, d\tau\ \quad \textrm{for} \ \ 0<t<T\, .
\end{equation}
The (formally derived) local energy inequality (\ref{locenineqsuf}) implies (\ref{locenta}) below (for an appropriate constant $C_T \sim 8Te^{8T} + 1$), which is sufficient for our purposes. (In fact, for all elements of the proof other than Proposition \ref{lc}, a weaker form as in (\ref{locent}) is sufficient.)
\ \\\\
In order to state our main result, we first recall the definition of the outer parabolic Hausdorff measure $\mathcal{P}^k$ (see \cite[pp.783-784]{caf}):
\begin{definition}[Parabolic Hausdorff measure]\label{phausdorff}
For any $\mathcal{S} \subset \R^3 \times \R$ and $k\geq 0$, define
$$\mathcal{P}^k(\mathcal{S}):=\lim_{\delta \searrow 0}\mathcal{P}^k_\delta(\mathcal{S})\, ,$$
where
$$\mathcal{P}^k_\delta(\mathcal{S}):=\inf\left\{\, \sum_{j=1}^\infty r_j^k\ \bigg| \ \mathcal{S}\subset \bigcup_{j=1}^\infty Q_{r_j}\, , r_j < \delta\ \forall j\in \N\, \right\}$$
and $Q_r$ is any parabolic cylinder of radius $r>0$, i.e. $$Q_r=Q_r(x,t):= B_r(x) \times (t-r^2,t) \subset \R^3 \times \R$$ for some $x\in \R^3$ and $t\in \R$. $\mathcal{P}^k$ is an outer measure, and all Borel sets are $\mathcal{P}^k$-measurable.
\end{definition}
\noindent
Our main result is the following:
\begin{thm}\label{mainthm}
Fix an open set $\Omega \subset \R^3$ and $T\in (0,\infty)$, set $\Omega_T:=\Omega \times (0,T)$ and suppose
$u,d:\Omega_T \to \R^3$ and $p: \Omega_T \to \R$ satisfy the following four assumptions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $u$, $d$ and $p$ belong to the following spaces:\footnote{For a vector field $f$ or matrix field $J$ and scalar function space $X$, by $f\in X$ or $J\in X$ we mean that all components or entries of $f$ or $J$ belong to $X$; by $\n^2 f \in X$ we mean all second partial derivatives of all components of $f$ belong to $X$; etc.}
\begin{equation}\label{enspaces}
u, d, \n d \in L^\infty(0,T;L^2(\Omega))\, , \quad
\nabla u, \n d, \n^2 d \in L^2(\Omega_T)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{pspace}
p\in L^{\frac 32}(\Omega_T)\, ;
\end{equation}
\item $u$ is weakly divergence-free:\footnote{Locally integrable functions will always be associated to the standard distribution whose action is integration against a suitable test function so that, e.g., $[\n \cdot u](\psi)= -[u](\n \psi):= -\int u\cdot \n \psi$ for $\psi \in \mathcal{D}(\Omega_T)$.}
\begin{equation}\label{divfree}
\nabla \cdot u = 0 \quad \textrm{in} \quad \mathcal{D}'(\Omega_T)\, ;
\end{equation}
\item the following pressure equation holds weakly:\footnote{Note that $u\otimes u + \n d \odot \n d \in L^{\frac 53}(\Omega_T) \subset L^1_{\mathrm{loc}}(\Omega_T)$, see (\ref{prespacetimeinterpaaa}) - (\ref{graddmixedleb}).}
\begin{equation}\label{preseq}
-\Delta p = \nabla \cdot [\nabla^T \cdot (u\otimes u+\n d \odot \n d)]\quad \textrm{in} \quad \mathcal{D}'(\Omega_T)\, ;
\end{equation}
\item for some $C_T>0$ (depending only on $T$), the following local energy inequality holds:\footnote{For brevity, for $\omega \subset \R^3$, we set $$\int_{\omega \times \{t\}} g\, dx:=\int_{\omega}g(x, t)\, dx\, .$$ \label{fnintdef}}
\begin{equation}\label{locenta}
\boxed{\begin{array}{l}
\int_{\Omega \times \{t\}} \left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right) \phi \, dx + \int_{0}^t \int_{\Omega} \left(|\n u|^2+ |\n^2 d|^2\right) \phi \, dx\, d\tau \\\\
\qquad \leq C_T\int_{0}^t \big\{ \int_{\Omega \times \{\tau\}} \left[\left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right)|\phi_t + \D \phi| + |d|^2 |\n d|^2\phi \right]\, dx\\\\
\qquad \qquad \quad +\ \ \big|\int_{\Omega \times \{\tau\}} \big[\big(\frac{|u|^2}2 +\frac{|\n d|^2}2 + p\big)u\cdot \n \phi + u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d\big]\, dx\big|\ \big\}\, d\tau\ \\\\
\qquad \textrm{for}\ \textrm{a.e.}\ t\in (0,T)\ \quad \textrm{and}\quad \forall \ \phi \in \mathcal{C}_0^\infty(\Omega \times (0,\infty))\ \textrm{s.t.}\ \phi \geq 0\, .
\end{array}}
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
Let $\mathcal{S} \subset \Omega_T$ be the (potentially empty) set of singular points where $|u|$ and $|\n d|$ are not essentially bounded in any neighborhood of each $z\in \mathcal{S}$, and let $\mathcal{P}^k$ be the $k$-dimensional parabolic Hausdorff outer measure (see Definition \ref{phausdorff}). The following are then true:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathcal{P}^{\frac 92 + \d}(\mathcal{S})=0$, for any $\d >0$ arbitrarily small.
\item If \footnote{In general we set $z=(x,t)\in \Omega_T$, $dz:=dx\, dt$, and recall from Definition \ref{phausdorff} that $Q_r(x_0,t_0):=B_r(x_0)\times (t_0-r^2,t_0)$.}
\begin{equation}\label{dmorreysmall}
g_\sigma:=\sup_{z_0\in \Omega_T}\left( \limsup_{r\searrow 0} \frac 1{r^{2+\frac \sigma2}}
\intt{Q_r(z_0)}|d|^\sigma(|u|^3 +|\n d|^3)^{(1-\frac \sigma 6)}\, dz\right)< \infty
\end{equation}
for some $\sigma \in (5,6)$, then $\mathcal{P}^1(\mathcal{S})=0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\ \\
Note that in the case $d\equiv 0$, we regain the classical result of $\mathcal{P}^1(\mathcal{S})=0$ for Navier-Stokes as obtained in, for example, \cite{caf}, and more specifically for the (weaker) Navier-Stokes inequalities mentioned in \cite{scheffer3}.
\begin{remark}\label{pspacesremark}
In the case $\Omega = \rt$, the condition (\ref{pspace}) on the pressure follows (locally, at least) from (\ref{enspaces}) and (\ref{preseq}) if $p$ is taken to be the potential-theoretic solution to (\ref{preseq}), since (\ref{enspaces}) implies that ${u,\n d\in L^{\frac{10}3}(\Omega_T)}$ by interpolation (see (\ref{prespacetimeinterpaaa})) and Sobolev embeddings, and then (\ref{preseq}) gives \linebreak $p\in L^{\frac{5}3}(\Omega_T)\subset L^{\frac{3}2}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\Omega_T)$ by Calderon-Zygmund estimates. For a more general $\Omega$, the existence of such a $p$ can be derived from the motivating equation (\ref{maineq}) (e.g. by estimates for the Stokes operator), see \cite{linliu} and the references therein. Here, however, we will not refer to (\ref{maineq}) at all and simply {\em assume} $p$ satisfies (\ref{pspace}) and address the partial regularity of such a hypothetical set of functions satisfying \linebreak (\ref{enspaces}) - (\ref{locenta}).
\end{remark}
\ \\
We note that Theorem \ref{mainthm} does not immediately recover the result of \cite{linliu} (which would correspond to $\sigma = 6$ in (\ref{dmorreysmall}), which holds when $d\in L^\infty$ as assumed in \cite{linliu}). Heuristically, however, one can argue\footnote{We assume this is roughly the argument in \cite{linliu}, although the details are not explicitly given; see, in particular, \cite[(2.45)]{linliu} which appears without the ``remainder'' term denoted in \cite{linliu} by $\mathbf{R}(f,\phi)$, and here by $\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)$. } as follows:
\\\\
If $d$ were bounded, then taking for example $D:=24 \|d\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_T)}^2 +8 <\infty$ one would deduce from (\ref{expandrfdphipre}) that
$$|\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)| \leq D\left( \frac{|\n d|^2}2 \right)\phi\, .$$
Adjusting the Gr\"onwall-type argument leading to (\ref{locenineqsuf}), one could then deduce from (\ref{locenineq}) that (if $\mathcal{A}(0)=0$)
$$\mathcal{A}'(t) + \mathcal{B}(t) \leq \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}(t) + De^{DT}\int_0^T\widetilde{\mathcal{C}}(\tau)\, d\tau\ \quad \textrm{for} \ \ 0<t<T\, ,
$$
where
$$\widetilde{\mathcal{C}}(t):=\int_{\Omega \times \{t\}} \left(\frac{|u|^2}{2}+ \frac{|\n d|^2}{2}\right)|\phi_t + \D \phi|
+\ \ \left|\int_{\Omega \times \{t\}} \left[\left(\frac{|u|^2}2 +\frac{|\n d|^2}2 + p\right)u\cdot \n \phi + u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d\right]\right|\, .
$$
Using such an energy inequality, one would not need to include the $|d|^6$ term in $E_{3,6}$ (see (\ref{etdefn})) as one would not need to consider the term coming from $\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)$ at all in Proposition \ref{lb}, and (noting that the $L^\infty$ norm is invariant under the re-scaling on $d$ in (\ref{recenteredscaling})) one could then adjust Lemmas \ref{thma} and \ref{thmb} appropriately to recover the result in \cite{linliu} using the proof of Theorem \ref{mainthm} below.
\\\\
Finally, we remark that the majority of the arguments in the proofs given below are not new, with many essentially appearing in \cite{linliu} or \cite{caf}. However we feel that our presentation is particularly transparent and may be a helpful addition to the literature, and we include all details so that our results are easily verifiable.
\\\\
{\bf Acknowledgment:} \quad The author would like to offer his sincere thanks to Prof. Arghir Zarnescu for many insightful discussions, for introducing him to the field of liquid crystals models, and for suggesting a problem which led to this publication. The author would also like to thank an anonymous referee for insightful comments about a previous draft of this article.
\section{Motivation}\label{motivation}
\noindent
We will show in this section that the assumptions in Theorem \ref{mainthm} are at least formally satisfied by smooth solutions to the system (\ref{maineq}).
\subsection{Energy identities}
As in \cite{linliu}, let us assume that we have smooth solutions to (\ref{maineq}) which vanish or decay sufficiently at $\partial \Omega$ (assumed smooth, if non-empty) and at spatial infinity as appropriate so that all boundary terms vanish in the following integrations by parts, and proceed to establish smooth versions of (\ref{globenineq}) and (\ref{locenineq}). First, noting the simple identities
\begin{equation}\label{llloca}
\n^T \cdot (\n d \odot \n d)=
\n \left(\frac{|\n d|^2}2\right)+
(\n^T d)^T\D d
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{symmetryetc}
[(\n^T d)^T\D d]\cdot u
=[(\n^T d)u]\cdot \D d
=[(u\cdot \n)d]\cdot \D d\, ,
\end{equation}
at a fixed $t$ one may perform various integrations by parts (keeping in mind that $\n \cdot u =0$) to see that
\begin{equation}\label{preglobllenueq}
\begin{array}{rcl}
0& =&\displaystyle{ \int_{\Omega}[u_t - \D u + \n^T \cdot (u\otimes u) + \n p + \n^T \cdot (\n d \odot \n d)]\cdot u \, dx}\\\\
& =& \displaystyle{ \int_{\Omega}\left[\frac{\p}{\p t} \left(\frac{|u|^2}2 \right) + |\n u|^2 + \underbrace{[(u\cdot \n)d]\cdot \D d}\right]\, dx }\\\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
and, recalling that $f = \nabla F$ so that $[d_t + (u\cdot \n)d]\cdot f(d) = \left(\tfrac{\partial}{\partial t} + u\cdot \n\right)[F(d)]$, that
\begin{equation}\label{preglobllendeq}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\begin{array}{rcl}
0& =& -\displaystyle{ \int_{\Omega}[d_t + (u\cdot \n)d - (\D d - f(d))]\cdot (\D d-f(d))\, dx}\\\\
&=& \displaystyle{-\int_{\Omega}\left[-\frac{\p}{\p t}\left(\frac{|\n d|^2}2 + F(d)\right) + \underbrace{[(u\cdot \n)d]\cdot \D d} - |\D d-f(d)|^2\right] \, dx\, . }
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Adding the two gives the
\\\\
\underline{Global energy identity for (\ref{maineq}):}
\begin{equation}\label{globllen}
\displaystyle{\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega} \left[ \frac{|u|^2}2 +\frac{|\n d|^2}2 + F(d) \right]\, dx + \int_{\Omega}\left[|\n u|^2 + |\D d-f(d)|^2 \right]}\, dx=0
\end{equation}
in view of the cancelation of the indicated terms in (\ref{preglobllenueq}) and (\ref{preglobllendeq}).
\\\\
It is not quite straightforward to localize the calculations in (\ref{preglobllenueq}) and (\ref{preglobllendeq}), for example replacing the (global) multiplicative factor $(\D d - f(d))$ by $(\D d - f(d))\phi$ for a smooth and compactly supported $\phi$. Arguing as in \cite{linliu}, one can deduce a local energy identity by instead replacing $(\D d - f(d))$ by only a part of its localized version in divergence-form, namely by $\n^T \cdot(\phi \n^T d)$, at the expense of the appearance of $|\D d-f(d)|^2$ anywhere in the local energy.
\\\\
Recalling (\ref{llloca}) and (\ref{symmetryetc}) and noting further that
$$
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\begin{array}{rcl}
[(u\cdot \n)d] \cdot [\n^T \cdot (\phi \n^T d)] & = &
\displaystyle{
[(u\cdot \n)d] \cdot [\phi \D d] + [(u\cdot \n)d] \cdot [(\n\phi \cdot \n)d]
}\\\\
& = &
\displaystyle{
[(u\cdot \n)d] \cdot [\phi \D d] + u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d
}
\end{array}
$$
and that
$$[\Delta(\n^Td)]:\n^Td = \Delta\left(\frac{|\n d|^2}2\right) - |\n^2 d|^2\, ,$$
one may perform various integrations by parts to deduce (as $\n \cdot u=0$) that
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
0& =& \displaystyle{ \int_{\Omega}[u_t - \D u + \n^T \cdot (u\otimes u) + \n p + \n^T \cdot (\n d \odot \n d)]\cdot u\phi\, dx }\\\\
& =& \displaystyle{ \int_{\Omega}\left[\frac{\p}{\p t}\left(\frac{|u|^2}{2}\phi\right) + |\n u|^2\phi - \frac{|u|^2}{2}(\phi_t + \D \phi) \right .}\\\\
& & \displaystyle{ \qquad \left . -\left(\frac{|u|^2}2 +\frac{ |\n d|^2}2+ p\right)u\cdot \n \phi + \underbrace{[(u\cdot \n)d]\cdot (\D d)\phi} \right]\, dx}
\end{array}
$$
and
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
0& =& -\displaystyle{ \int_{\Omega}[d_t + (u\cdot \n)d - (\D d - f(d))]\cdot [\n^T \cdot (\phi \n^T d)]\, dx}\\\\
& =& \displaystyle{ -\int_{\Omega}\left[ - \frac{\p}{\p t}\left(\frac{|\n d|^2}2 \phi\right) - |\n^2 d|^2\phi + \frac{|\n d|^2}2 (\phi_t + \D \phi) \right .}\\\\
& & \displaystyle{ \qquad \qquad -
\n^T [f(d)]: \phi \n^T d + \underbrace{[(u\cdot \n)d] \cdot (\D d)\phi} + u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d \bigg]\, dx}
\end{array}
$$
for smooth and compactly-supported $\phi$, upon adding which and noting again the cancelation of the indicated terms we obtain the
\\\\
\underline{Local energy identity for (\ref{maineq}):}
\begin{equation}\label{locllen}\frac{d}{d t}\int_{\Omega}\left[\left(\frac{|u|^2}{2} + \frac{|\n d|^2}2 \right)\phi \right] \, dx + \int_{\Omega}\left(|\n u|^2+ |\n^2 d|^2\right)\phi \, dx=\qquad \qquad
\end{equation}
$$ \qquad = \int_{\Omega} \bigg[\left(\frac{|u|^2}{2}+ \frac{|\n d|^2}{2}\right)(\phi_t + \D \phi) +\left(\frac{|u|^2}2 +\frac{|\n d|^2}2 + p\right)u\cdot \n \phi
$$
\ \medskip
$$\qquad \qquad +\ \ u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d \ \ -
\ \ \underbrace{\phi\n^T [f(d)]: \n^T d}_{=:\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)}\bigg]\, dx \, .$$
Note that we have corrected the omission in \cite{linliu} of the ``$-$'' preceding $\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)$, and the term ``${((u\cdot \n)d\odot \n d)\cdot \n \phi}$'' which appears in \cite{linliu} has been more accurately written here as \linebreak ${u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d}$, and that
$u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d = [(\n d \odot \n d)\n \phi]\cdot u = [(u\cdot \n)d]\cdot[(\n \phi \cdot \n)d]$.
\subsection{Global energy regularity heuristics}
Let us first see where the {\em global} energy identity (\ref{globllen}) leads us to expect weak solutions to (\ref{maineq}) to live (and hence why we assume (\ref{enspaces}) in Theorem \ref{mainthm}).
\\\\
To ease notation, in what follows let's fix $\Omega \subset \R^3$, and for $T\in (0,\infty]$ let us set $\Omega_T:=\Omega \times (0,T)$ and
$$L^r_tL^q_x(T):=L^r(0,T;L^q(\Omega)\, .$$
According to (\ref{globllen}), we expect, so long as
$$M_0:=\tfrac 12 \|u(\cdot, 0)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 + \tfrac 12 \|\n d(\cdot, 0)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 + \|F(d(\cdot, 0))\|_{L^1(\Omega)} <\infty\, ,$$
(which we would assume as a requirement on the initial data), to construct solutions with $u$ in the usual Navier-Stokes spaces:
\begin{equation}\label{spacesans}
u \in L^\infty_tL^2_x(\infty) \quad \textrm{and} \quad \n u\in L^2_tL^2_x(\infty)\, .
\end{equation}
As for $d$ we expect as well in view of (\ref{globllen}) that
\begin{equation}\label{spacesa}
\n d \in L^\infty_tL^2_x(\infty)\, ,\ \ F(d)\in L^\infty_tL^1_x(\infty) \quad \textrm{and} \quad [\D d -f(d)] \in L^2_tL^2_x(\infty)\, .
\end{equation}
The norms of all quantities in the spaces given in (\ref{spacesans}) and (\ref{spacesa}) are controlled by either $M_0$ (the $F(d)$ term) or $(M_0)^{\frac 12}$ (all other terms), by integrating (\ref{globllen}) over $t\in (0,\infty)$. Recalling that
\begin{equation}\label{ffdefn}
F(d) := (|d|^2-1)^2 \quad \textrm{and} \quad f(d):=4(|d|^2-1)d\, ,
\end{equation}
one sees that $|f(d)|^2 = 16F(d)|d|^2$, and
one can easily confirm the following simple estimates:
\begin{equation}\label{ffesta}
\|d\|^2_{L^\infty_tL^4_x(\infty)} \leq \|F(d)\|^{1/2}_{L^\infty_tL^1_x(\infty)} + \|1\|_{L^\infty_tL^2_x(\infty)}\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{ffestb}
\|F(d)\|^{1/2}_{L^\infty_tL^{3/2}_x(\infty)} \leq \|d\|^{2}_{L^\infty_tL^6_x(\infty)} + \|1\|_{L^\infty_tL^3_x(\infty)}\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{ffestc}
\|f(d)\|^2_{L^\infty_tL^2_x(\infty)} \leq 16\|F(d)\|_{L^\infty_tL^{3/2}_x(\infty)}\|d\|^2_{L^\infty_tL^6_x(\infty)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{ffestd}
\|\D d\|_{L^2(\Omega_T)} \leq \|\D d - f(d)\|_{L^2(\Omega_T)} + T^{1/2} \|f(d)\|_{L^\infty_tL^{2}_x(\infty)}\, .
\end{equation}
Therefore, if we assume that
\begin{equation}\label{bdddomain}
|\Omega|<\infty\, ,
\end{equation}
and hence
$$1\in L^\infty(0,\infty;L^2(\Omega)) \cap L^\infty(0,\infty;L^3(\Omega))\, ,$$
(\ref{spacesa}) along with (\ref{ffesta}) implies that
\begin{equation}\label{spacesaa}
d \in L^\infty(0,\infty;L^4(\Omega)) \stackrel{(\ref{bdddomain})}{\subset} L^\infty(0,\infty;L^2(\Omega))\, .
\end{equation}
so that (\ref{spacesa}) and (\ref{spacesaa}) imply
\begin{equation}\label{spacesf}
d\in L^\infty(0,\infty;H^1(\Omega)) \hookrightarrow L^\infty(0,\infty;L^6(\Omega))
\end{equation}
by the Sobolev embedding, from which (\ref{ffestb}) implies that
$$F(d)\in L^\infty_tL^{3/2}_x(\infty)$$
which, along with (\ref{ffestc}) and (\ref{spacesf}), implies that
$$f(d)\in L^\infty_tL^{2}_x(\infty)\, ,$$
from which, finally, (\ref{ffestd}) and the last inclusion in (\ref{spacesa}) implies that
\begin{equation}\label{spacesg}
\D d \in L^2(\Omega_T) \quad \textrm{for any} \quad T<\infty\, ,
\end{equation}
with the explicit estimate (\ref{ffestd})
which can then further be controlled by $M_0$ via (\ref{spacesa}), (\ref{ffesta}), (\ref{ffestb}) and (\ref{ffestc}).
\\\\
We therefore see that it is reasonable (in view of the usual elliptic regularity theory) to expect that weak solutions to (\ref{maineq}) should have the regularities in (\ref{enspaces}) of Theorem \ref{mainthm}.
\\\\
Note further that various interpolations of Lebesgue spaces imply, for example, that for any interval $I\subset \R$ one has
\begin{equation}\label{prespacetimeinterpaaa}
L^\infty(I;L^2(\Omega))\cap L^2(I;L^6(\Omega)) \subset L^{\frac 2\alpha}(I;L^{\frac 6{3-2\alpha}}(\Omega)) \quad \textrm{for any} \ \ \alpha \in [0,1]
\end{equation}
(for example, one may take $\alpha=\frac 35$ so that $\frac 2\alpha=\frac 6{3-2\alpha} =\frac {10}3$). Using this along with the Sobolev embedding we expect (as mentioned in Remark \ref{pspacesremark}) that
\begin{equation}\label{graddmixedleb}
(\, u \ \ \textrm{and}\, ) \ \ \n d \in L^{\frac 2\alpha}(0,T;L^{\frac 6{3-2\alpha}}(\Omega)) \quad \textrm{for any} \ \ \alpha \in [0,1]\, ,\ \ T<\infty
\end{equation}
with the explicit estimate\footnote{$A\lesssim B$ means that $A\leq CB$ for some suitably universal constant $C>0$. }
$$\|\n d\|_{L^{\frac 2\alpha}_tL^{\frac 6{3-2\alpha}}_x(T)}^{\frac 2 \alpha } \lesssim
T \|\n d\|_{L^\infty_tL^2_x(\infty)}^{\frac 2\alpha }
+ \|\n d\|_{L^\infty_tL^2_x(\infty)}^{\frac 2\alpha -2}
\|\n^2 d\|_{L^{2}(\Omega_T)}^2\, .
$$
\subsection{Local energy regularity heuristics}
Here, we will justify the well-posedness of the terms appearing in the {\em local} energy equality (\ref{locllen}), based on the expected {\em global} regularity discussed in the previous section. In fact, all but the final term in (\ref{locllen}) (where one can furthermore take the essential supremum over $t\in (0,T)$) can be seen to be well-defined by (\ref{graddmixedleb}) under the assumptions in (\ref{enspaces}) and (\ref{pspace}).
\\\\
The $\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi)$ term of (\ref{locllen}) requires some further consideration: in view of (\ref{ffdefn}) we see that
\begin{equation}\label{expandgradfd}
\tfrac 14 \n^T [f(d)] =
\n^T [(|d|^2-1)d] =
2d \otimes [d\cdot (\n^T d)] +(|d|^2-1)\n^T d\, ,
\end{equation}
Recalling that
$$\mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi) :=
\phi\n^T [f(d)]: \n^T d\, ,$$
we therefore have
\begin{equation}\label{expandrfdphi}
\tfrac 14 \mathcal{R}_f(d,\phi) =
\phi\bigg(2d \otimes [d\cdot (\n^T d)]: \n^T d +|d|^2 |\n d|^2\bigg)-\phi |\n d|^2
\end{equation}
where we have to be careful how we handle the appearance of, essentially, $|d|^2$ in the first term (the second term is integrable in view of (\ref{spacesa})). We have, for example, that
$$\|\phi |d|^2 |\n d|^2\|_{L^1(\Omega_T)} \leq \|\phi \|_{L^\infty(\Omega_T)}\|d \|_{L^6(\Omega_T)}^2\| \n d \|_{L^{3}(\Omega_T)}^2$$
and that
\begin{equation}\label{dlsix}
\|d \|_{L^6(\Omega_T)} <\infty \quad \textrm{for any} \ T\in (0,\infty)
\end{equation}
by (\ref{spacesf}), and either
$$\|\phi |\n d|^2\|_{L^1(\Omega_T)} \leq \|\phi \|_{L^\infty(\Omega_T)}\|\n d \|_{L^2(\Omega_T)}^2$$
or
$$\|\phi |\n d|^2\|_{L^1(\Omega_T)} \leq \|\phi \|_{L^3(\Omega_T)}\|\n d \|_{L^3(\Omega_T)}^2\, ,$$
(recall that $\phi$ is assumed to have compact support) and, for example, that
\begin{equation}\label{ndlsix}
\|\n d \|_{L^{10/3}(\Omega_T)} <\infty \quad \textrm{for any} \ T\in (0,\infty)
\end{equation}
by (\ref{graddmixedleb}).
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{mainthm}}
\noindent
The first part of Theorem \ref{mainthm} is a consequence of the following ``$L^3$ $\e$-regularity" Lemma \ref{thma}, while the second part is a consequence of the ``$\dot H^1$ $\e$-regularity" Lemma \ref{thmb} below which is itself a consequence of Lemma \ref{thma}. In the following, for a given $z_0 = (x_0, t_0) \in \rt \times \R$ and $r>0$, as in \cite{caf} we will adopt the following the notation for the standard parabolic cylinder $Q_r(z_0)$ as well as the following time intervals and their ``centered"
versions\footnote{These are defined in such a way that $Q^*_r(x_0,t_0)=Q_r(x_0,t_0+\tfrac{r^2}8)$, and subsequently
$$Q_{\frac r2}(x_0,t_0+\tfrac{r^2}8) = B_{\frac r2}(x_0)\times (t_0-\tfrac{r^2}8,t_0+\tfrac{r^2}8)$$
is a ``centered'' cylinder with center $(x_0,t_0)$.} (indicated with a star):
\begin{equation}\label{defnqr}
\begin{array}{c}
I_r(t_0):= (t_0 - r^2,t_0)\ , \quad I^*_r(t_0):= (t_0 - \frac 78 r^2,t_0 + \frac 18 r^2)\ , \\\\
Q_r(z_0):= B_r(x_0) \times I_r(t_0)\ \quad
\textrm{and} \quad Q^*_r(z_0):= B_r(x_0) \times I^*_r(t_0)\, .
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}[$L^3$ $\e$-regularity, cf. Theorem 2.6 of \cite{linliu} and Proposition 1 of \cite{caf}]\label{thma}
For each $q \in (5,6]$, there exists $\bar \e_q \in (0,1)$ sufficiently small\footnote{Roughly speaking, $\bar \e_q \lesssim (2^{\alpha_q}-1)^9$ with $\alpha_q:=\frac{2(q-5)}{q-2}$; in particular, $\bar \e_q \to 0$ as $q \searrow 5$.} such that for any ${\bar z = (\bar x,\bar t) \in \rt \times \R}$, the following holds:
\\\\
Suppose (see (\ref{defnqr}))
$u,d:Q_1(\bar z) \to \R^3$ and $p: Q_1(\bar z) \to \R$ with
\begin{equation}\label{f}
\begin{array}{c}
u, d, \n d \in L^\infty(I_1(\bar t);L^2(B_1(\bar x)))\, , \quad
\nabla u, \n d, \n^2 d \in L^2(Q_1(\bar z))\\\\
\textrm{and} \quad p\in L^{\frac 32}(Q_1(\bar z))
\end{array}
\end{equation}
satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{udivfree}
\nabla \cdot u =0 \quad \ \textrm{in}\ \ \mathcal{D}'(Q_1(\bar z))\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{preseqJ}
-\Delta p = \nabla \cdot (\nabla^T \cdot [u\otimes u+\n d \odot \n d ]) \quad \ \textrm{in}\ \ \mathcal{D}'(Q_1(\bar z))
\end{equation}
and, for some constants $\bar C>0$ and $\bar \rho \in (0,1]$, the following local energy inequality holds:\footnote{See Footnote \ref{fnintdef}, and note that (\ref{locenta}) implies (\ref{locent}) with $\bar C \sim C_T$ and $\bar \rho =1$ if $Q_1(\bar z)\subseteq \Omega_T$.}
\begin{equation}\label{locent}
\!\boxed{\begin{array}{l}
\int_{B_1(\bar x) \times \{t\}} \left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right) \phi\, dx + \int_{\bar t -1}^t \int_{B_1(\bar x)} \left(|\n u|^2+ |\n^2 d|^2\right) \phi \, dx\, d\tau \\\\
\qquad \leq \bar C\int_{\bar t -1}^t \big\{ \int_{B_1(\bar x)\times \{\tau\}} \left[ \left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right)|\phi_t + \D \phi| + (|u|^3 + |\n d|^3)|\nabla \phi| + \bar \rho |d|^2|\n d|^2 \phi \right] \, dx \\\\
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad +\ \big|\int_{B_1(\bar x) \times \{\tau\}} pu \cdot \nabla \phi \, dx\big|\ \big\}\, d\tau \\\\
\textrm{for}\ \textrm{a.e.}\ t\in I_1(\bar t)\ \quad \textrm{and}\quad \forall \ \phi \in \mathcal{C}^\infty_{0}(B_1(\bar x)\times (\bar t -1,\infty)) \ \ \textrm{s.t.}\ \ \phi \geq 0\, .
\end{array}}
\end{equation}
Set\footnote{Note that $E_{3,q}<\infty$ by (\ref{f}) and standard embeddings, see Section \ref{motivation} along with (\ref{gsiginterpest}) with $\sigma =6$.}
\begin{equation}\label{etdefn}
E_{3,q}:=\intt{Q_1(\bar z)} (|u|^3+ |\n d|^3+ |p|^{\frac 3 2} +|d|^q|\n d|^{3(1-\frac q6)})\ dz\, .
\end{equation}
If $E_{3,q} \leq \bar \e_q$, then $u, \n d \in L^\infty(Q_{\frac 12}(\bar z))$ with
$$\|u\|_{L^\infty(Q_{1/2}(\bar z))}, \|\n d\|_{L^\infty(Q_{1/2}(\bar z))} \leq {\bar \e_q}^{2/9}\, .$$
\end{lemma}
\noindent
In order to prove Lemma \ref{thma}, we will require the following two technical propositions. In order to state them, let us fix (recalling (\ref{defnqr})), for a given $z_0=(x_0,t_0)$ (to be clear by the context), the abbreviated notations
\begin{equation}\label{balls}
r_k:= 2^{-k}\ , \quad B^k:=B_{r_k}(x_0)\ , \quad I^k:=I_{r_k}(t_0)\quad \textrm{and} \quad Q^k:=B^k \times I^k
\end{equation}
(so that $Q^k= Q_{2^{-k}}(z_0)$) and, for each $k\in \N$, we define the quantities
$${L_k = L_k(z_0)} \quad \textrm{and}\quad R_k = R_k(z_0)$$
(again, the dependence on $z_0 = (x_0,t_0)$ will be clear by context) by\footnote{We use the standard notation for averages, e.g.
$$\int_{B} \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!- \ \ f(x)\ dx:=\frac 1{|B|}\int_B f(x)\, dx\, .$$}
\begin{equation}\label{Lk}
\!\!\!\!\!L_k:= \esssup_{t\in I^k} \avint{B^k}\left(|u(t)|^2+ |\n d(t)|^2 \right)\ dx + \int_{I^k} \! \avint{B^k} \left( |\nabla u|^2 + |\n^2 d|^2 \right)\ dx\, dt
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Rk}
R_k:=\avintt{Q^k} \left( |u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right) \ dz + r_{k}^{1/3} \avintt{Q^{k}} |u||p-\bar p_{k}|\ dz
\end{equation}
$$\textrm{where} \quad \bar p_k(t):= \avint{B^k}\ p(x,t)\ dx\ .$$
$L_k$ and $R_k$ correspond roughly to the left- and right-hand sides of the local energy inequality (\ref{locent}).
We now state the technical propositions, whose proofs we will give in Section \ref{technical}:
\begin{prop}[Cf. Lemma 2.7 of \cite{linliu}]\label{la}
There exists a large universal constant $C_A >0$ such that the following holds:
\\\\
Fix any $\bar z = (\bar x, \bar t) \in \R^3 \times \R$, suppose $u$, $d$ and $p$ satisfy (\ref{f}) and (\ref{preseqJ}).
\\\\
Then for any $z_0 \in Q_{\frac 12}(\bar z)$ we have (see (\ref{balls}), (\ref{Lk}), (\ref{Rk}))
\begin{equation}\label{c}
R_{n+1}(z_0) \leq C_A \bigg(\max_{1\leq k \leq n} L_k^{3/2}(z_0) + \underbrace{\|p\|^{3/2}_{L^{3/2}(Q_{1/2}(z_0))}}_{\leq E_{3,q} \ \forall q\geq 0,\ \mathrm{cf.}\ (\ref{etdefn})} \bigg) \qquad \forall \ \ n\geq 2\ .
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\noindent
The proof of Proposition \ref{la} uses only the H\"older and Poincar\'e inequalities, Sobolev embedding and Calderon-Zygmund estimates along with a local decomposition of the pressure (see (\ref{pinversion})) using the pressure equation (\ref{preseqJ}).
\begin{prop}[Cf. Lemma 2.8 of \cite{linliu}]\label{lb} There exists a large universal constant $C_B >0$ such that the following holds:
\\\\
Fix any $\bar z = (\bar x, \bar t) \in \R^3 \times \R$, suppose $u$, $d$ and $p$ satisfy (\ref{f}), (\ref{udivfree}) and (\ref{locent}), and set $E_{3,q}$ as in (\ref{etdefn}).
\\\\
Then for any $z_0 \in Q_{\frac 12}(\bar z)$ and any $q\in (5,6]$, we have (see (\ref{balls}), (\ref{Lk}), (\ref{Rk}))
\begin{equation}\label{d}
L_n(z_0) \leq C_B \bigg(\frac 1{2^{\alpha_q}-1}\cdot\max_{k_0\leq k \leq n}R_k(z_0)
+ E_{3,q}^{2/3} + (1+k_02^{5k_0})E_{3,q} \bigg) \quad \forall \, n \geq 2
\end{equation}
for any $k_0\in \{1, \dots, n-1\}$, where
$$\alpha_q:=\frac{2(q-5)}{q-2} >0\, .$$
\end{prop}
\noindent
The proof of Proposition \ref{lb} uses only the local energy inequality (\ref{locent}), the divergence-free condition (\ref{udivfree}) on $u$ and elementary estimates. The quantities on either side of (\ref{d}) do not scale (in the sense of (\ref{recenteredscaling})) the same way (as do those in (\ref{c})), which is why the energy inequality is necessary.
\\\\
Let us now prove Lemma \ref{thma} using Propositions \ref{la} and \ref{lb}.\\
\noindent
{\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{thma}:} \quad
Let us fix some $q\in (5,6]$. We first note that for any
$\phi \geq 0$ as in (\ref{locent}) we have\footnote{The inequality in fact holds for any $q\in (2,6]$.} (recalling that $\bar \rho \leq 1$)
$$
\bar \rho \intt{Q^1} |d|^2 |\n d|^2\phi
\leq \tfrac 2q \intt{Q^1} |d|^q|\n d|^{3(1-\frac q6)} + (1-\tfrac 2q)\intt{Q^1} |\n d|^3 \phi^{\frac 13(5-\alpha_q)}\, ,
$$
with $\alpha_q:=\frac{2(q-5)}{q-2} \in (0,\tfrac 12]$.
Taking $\phi$ in particular such that $\phi \equiv 1$ on $Q^1 = Q_{1/2}(z_0)$, we see easily from this that
\begin{equation}\label{lnolessE}
L_1 \stackrel{(\ref{locent})}{\lesssim} E_{3,q} + E_{3,q}^{2/3} \qquad \forall \ z_0\in Q_{1/2}(\bar z)\, .
\end{equation}
It is also easy to see that
\begin{equation}\label{lnolessln}
L_{n+1} \leq 8 L_{n} \quad \textrm{for any}\ \ n\in \N\, .
\end{equation}
Hence we may pick $C_0 = C_0(q) >>1$ such that for any $z_0 \in Q_{\frac 12}(\bar z)$ (and suppressing the dependence on $z_0$ in what follows) we have
\begin{equation}\label{lonetothree}
L_1, L_2, L_3 \stackrel{(\ref{lnolessE}),(\ref{lnolessln})}{\leq} \tfrac 12(C_0)^{2/3}\left(E_{3,q} + E_{3,q}^{2/3}\right)\, ,
\end{equation}
$$C_A \leq \frac {C_0}2 \quad \textrm{and} \quad ((2^{\alpha_q}-1)^{-1} + 2 + 3\cdot 2^{15})C_B \leq (C_0)^{2/3}$$
for $C_A$ and $C_B$ as in Propositions \ref{la} and \ref{lb}. Having fixed $C_0$ (uniformly over $z_0\in Q_{1/2}(\bar z)$), we then choose $\bar \e_q \in (0,1)$ so small that
$$\bar \e_q < \frac 1{(C_0)^6} \qquad \iff \qquad C_0^2 \bar \e_q < \bar \e_q^{2/3}\, .$$
Noting first that $\bar \e_q \leq (\bar \e_q)^{2/3}$, under the assumption $E_{3,q} \leq \bar \e_q$ we in particular see from (\ref{lonetothree}) that
$$L_1, L_2, L_3 \leq (C_0 \bar \e_q)^{2/3}\, .$$
Then, by Proposition \ref{la} with $n\in \{2,3\}$ we have
$$R_3,R_4 \stackrel{(\ref{c})}{\leq} \frac{C_0}{2} (\max \{L_1^{3/2},L_2^{3/2},L_3^{3/2} \} + \bar \e_q)
\leq \frac{C_0(C_0 +1)}{2} \bar \e_q
\leq C_0^2 \bar \e_q < \bar \e_q^{2/3}$$
which implies due to Proposition \ref{lb} with $n=4$ and $k_0 =3$ that
$$L_4 \stackrel{(\ref{d})}{\leq}
C_B((2^{\alpha_q}-1)^{-1}\max \{R_3,R_4\} + E_{3,q}^{2/3} + (1+3\cdot 2^{15})E_{3,q}) \leq (C_0 \bar \e_q)^{2/3}\ .$$
Then in turn, Proposition \ref{la} with $n=4$ gives
$$L_1,L_2,L_3,L_4 \leq (C_0 \bar \e_q)^{2/3} \quad \stackrel{(\ref{c})}{\Longrightarrow} \quad R_5 < \bar \e_q^{2/3}\, ,$$
from which Proposition \ref{lb} with $n=5$ and, again, $k_0 =3$ gives
$$R_3,R_4,R_5 < \bar \e_q^{2/3} \quad \stackrel{(\ref{d})}{\Longrightarrow} \quad L_5 \leq (C_0 \bar \e_q)^{2/3}\, ,$$
and continuing we see by induction that Proposition \ref{la} and Proposition \ref{lb} (with $k_0=3$ fixed throughout) imply that
$$R_n(z_0) < \bar \e_q^{2/3} \ , \quad L_n(z_0) \leq (C_0 \bar \e_q)^{2/3}\ \qquad \forall \ n \geq 3\, .$$
This, in turn, implies (for example) that (see, e.g., \cite[Theorem 7.16]{wheeden})
$$|u(x_0,t_0)|^3 + |\n d(x_0,t_0)|^3 \leq {\bar \e_q}^{2/3}$$
$$ \textrm{for all Lebesgue points}\ z_0 \in Q_{\frac 12}(\bar z)\ \textrm{of}\ |u|^3 + |\n d|^3$$
which implies the $L^\infty$ statement, and Lemma \ref{thma} is proved. \hfill $\Box$
\\\\
Lemma \ref{thma} will be used to prove the first assertion in Theorem \ref{mainthm} as well as the next lemma, which in turn will be used to prove the second assertion in Theorem \ref{mainthm}.
\begin{lemma}[$\dot H^1$ $\e$-regularity, cf. Theorem 3.1 of \cite{linliu} and Proposition 2 of \cite{caf}]\label{thmb}
For each \linebreak $\sigma \in (5,6)$ and $g_\sigma \in [1,\infty)$, there exists a small universal constant $\e_\sigma = \e (\sigma, g_\sigma)>0$ such that the following holds. Fix $\Omega_T:=\Omega \times (0,T)$ as in Theorem \ref{mainthm}, and suppose $u$, $d$ and $p$ satisfy assumptions (\ref{enspaces}) - (\ref{locenta}). If (recall (\ref{defnqr}))
\begin{equation}\label{dsmallatzo}
\limsup_{r\searrow 0} \frac 1{r^{2+ \frac \sigma 2}} \intt{Q^*_r(z_0)}|d|^\sigma \left(|u|^3+|\n d|^3\right)^{(1-\frac \sigma 6)} \, dz \leq g_\sigma
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{k}
\limsup_{r\searrow 0} \frac 1 r \intt{Q^*_r(z_0)} \left(|\nabla u|^2+|\nabla^2 d|^2\right) \, dz \leq \e_\sigma\ ,
\end{equation}
for some $z_0\in \Omega_T$, then $z_0$ is a regular point, i.e. $|u|$ and $|\n d|$ are essentially bounded in some neighborhood of $z_0$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent
For the proof of Lemma \ref{thmb}, for $z_0 =(x_0,t_0) \in \Omega_T$ and for $r>0$ sufficiently small, we define $A_{z_0}$, $B_{z_0}$, $C_{z_0}$, $D_{z_0}$, $E_{z_0}$, $F_{z_0}$ (cf. \cite[(3.3)]{linliu}) and $G_{z_0}$ using the cylinders $Q^*_r(z_0)$ (whose ``centers'' $z_0$ are in the interior, see (\ref{defnqr})) by
\begin{equation}\label{athroughgdef}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\begin{array}{c}
\displaystyle{A_{z_0}(r):= \frac 1r\esssup_{t\in I_r^*(t_0)} \int_{B_r(x_0)} \left(|u(t)|^2 + |\n d(t)|^2\right)\, dx \, , \quad }
\\\\
\displaystyle{B_{z_0}(r):= \frac 1r \intt{Q^*_r(z_0)}\left(|\nabla u|^2+|\n^2 d|^2\right)\, dz \, ,}
\\\\
\displaystyle{C_{z_0}(r):= \frac 1{r^2}\intt{Q^*_r(z_0)} \left(|u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right)\, dz \, ,\qquad D_{z_0}(r):= \frac 1{r^2}\intt{Q_r^*(z_0)}|p|^{3/2}\, dz \, ,}
\\\\
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\displaystyle{E_{z_0}(r):=\frac 1{r^2} \intt{Q^*_r(z_0)}|u| \left\{\left| |u|^2 - \overline{|u|^2}^r \right| + \left| |\n d|^2 - \overline{|\n d|^2}^r \right|\right\}\, dz}
\\\\
\left( \textrm{where} \qquad \displaystyle{\overline{g}^r(t):= \int_{B_r(x_0)}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!- \ \ \quad g(y,t) \, dy }\right)\, , \qquad\displaystyle{ F_{z_0}(r):= \frac 1{r^2} \intt{Q^*_r(z_0)} |u||p| \, dz }
\\\\
\displaystyle{ \qquad \textrm{and} \qquad G_{q,z_0}(r):= \frac 1{r^{2+ \frac q2}} \intt{Q^*_r(z_0)}|d|^q\left(|u|^3+|\n d|^3\right)^{(1-\frac q6)} \, dz}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
(note that $G_{0,z_0}\equiv C_{z_0}$) and, for $q\in [0,6)$, define
\begin{equation}\label{athroughgdefm}
M_{q,z_0}(r):= \tfrac 12 \left[C_{z_0}(r) + G^{\frac 6{6-q}}_{q,z_0}(r)\right] + D^2_{z_0}(r) + E_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2}(r) + F_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2}(r) \, .
\end{equation}
The statement in Lemma \ref{thmb} will follow from Lemma \ref{thma} along with the following technical ``decay estimate" which will be proved in Section \ref{technical}.
\begin{prop}[Decay estimate, cf. Lemma 3.1 of \cite{linliu} and Proposition 3 of \cite{caf}]\label{lc}
There exists some constant $\bar c >0$ such that the following holds: fix any $q,\sigma \in \R$ with $2 < q < \sigma < 6$, and define
\begin{equation}\label{esqasqdef}
\alpha_{\sigma,q}:=\frac 6\sigma \cdot \frac {\sigma-q}{6-q} \in (0,1) \, .
\end{equation}
If $u$, $d$ and $p$ satisfy (\ref{enspaces}) - (\ref{locenta}) for $\Omega_T$ as in Theorem \ref{mainthm}, and $z_0\in \Omega_T$ and $\rho_0 \in (0,1]$ are such that $Q_{\rho_0}^*(z_0) \subseteq \Omega_T$ and furthermore
\begin{equation}\label{grhofinite}
\sup_{\rho \in (0,\rho_0]} B_{z_0}(\rho) \leq 1 \qquad \textrm{and} \qquad \sup_{\rho \in (0,\rho_0]} G_{\sigma, z_0}(\rho) \leq g_\sigma
\end{equation}
for some finite $g_\sigma \geq 1$, then for any $\rho \in (0,\rho_0]$ and $\gamma \in (0, \frac 1 4]$ we
have
\begin{equation}\label{l}
M_{q,z_0}(\gamma \rho) \leq \bar{c}\cdot g_\sigma^{\frac {6}{6-\sigma}} \left[\gamma^{\frac18\cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}}
(M_{q,z_0} + M^{\alpha_{\sigma,q}}_{q,z_0}) + \gamma^{-15} B_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4 \cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}} \sum_{k=0}^2 (M_{q,z_0}^{\frac 1 {2^k}} +
M_{q,z_0}^{\frac 1 {2^k}\cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}})\right](\rho)\, .
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\noindent
(In fact, in the sum over $k$ in (\ref{l}), one can omit the term with $\alpha_{\sigma,q}$ when $k=0$.)
\\\\
The key new element in our statement and proof of Proposition \ref{lc} (and hence in achieving Lemma \ref{thmb}) is the fact that, for certain $q>0$ (so that $G_{q,z_0} \neq C_{z_0}$ and hence $M_{q,z_0}$ is notably different from the quantity found in the standard literature, namely $M_{0,z_0}$), we can still derive an estimate for $M_{q,z_0}$ of the form (\ref{l}), with a constant depending only on $\sigma$ and $g_\sigma$ (and not on $q$). This is made possible (see Claim \ref{clmalocen} and its applications in Section \ref{claimsproofs}) by the following interpolation-type estimate for the range of the quantities $G_{q,z_0}$ (including $G_{0,z_0}=C_{z_0}$), a simple consequence of H\"older's inequality:
\begin{equation}\label{gsiginterpest}
0\leq q \leq \sigma \leq 6 \quad \Longrightarrow \quad G_{q,z_0}(r) \leq G_{\sigma,z_0}^{\frac q\sigma}(r)C_{z_0}^{1-\frac q\sigma}(r) \quad \forall \ r>0\, .
\end{equation}
The estimate (\ref{gsiginterpest}) follows by writing
$$
|d|^q\left(|u|^3+|\n d|^3\right)^{(1-\frac q6)} =
\left[|d|^\sigma\left(|u|^3+|\n d|^3\right)^{(1-\frac \sigma 6)}\right]^{\frac q\sigma}\cdot \left(|u|^3+|\n d|^3\right)^{\frac {\sigma -q}\sigma}
$$
and applying H\"older's inequality with
$$1 = \frac q\sigma + \frac{\sigma -q}\sigma$$
to $G_{q,z_0}$, and noting that $r^{2+\frac q2}= [r^{2+\frac \sigma 2}]^{\frac q\sigma} \cdot [r^{2}]^{1-\frac q\sigma}$. In particular, if $0\leq q \leq \sigma < 6$, setting
$$\alpha_{\sigma,q}:=\left(1-\frac q\sigma\right)\cdot \frac{6}{6-q}
\quad \textrm{and} \quad \beta_{\sigma,q}:=\frac q\sigma \cdot \frac {6}{6-q}$$
and noting that
$$\beta_{\sigma,q}=\frac {6}{6-\sigma}\cdot \left(1- \alpha_{\sigma,q} \right) \leq \frac {6}{6-\sigma}\, ,$$
we see that
\begin{equation}\label{gsiginterpesta}
G^{\frac{6}{6-q}}_{q,z_0}(r) \stackrel{(\ref{gsiginterpest})}{\leq}
G_{\sigma,z_0}^{\beta_{\sigma,q}}(r)C_{z_0}^{\alpha_{\sigma,q}}(r)
\stackrel{(\ref{dsmallatzo})}{\leq}
g_{\sigma}^{\frac{6}{6-\sigma}}\cdot \left[2 M_{q,z_0}^{\alpha_{\sigma,q}}(r)\right] \quad \forall \ r>0
\end{equation}
as long as $g_{\sigma}\geq 1$; this leads to the constants appearing in (\ref{l}).
\ \\\\
Let's now use Proposition \ref{lc} and Lemma \ref{thma} to prove Lemma \ref{thmb}.
\\\\
{\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{thmb}:} \quad Fix any $\sigma \in (5,6)$ and $g_\sigma \in [1,\infty)$, and choose\footnote{In the requirement that $q \in (5,\min\{\sigma,\bar q\})$, the choice of $\bar q:=\frac {11}2$ is somewhat arbitrary and taken only for concreteness; one could similarly choose any $\bar q \in (5,6)$ and adjust the subsequent constants accordingly.} any ${q = q(\sigma) \in (5,\min\{\sigma,\tfrac {11}2\})}$ which we now also fix, noting that $\frac 6{6-q} < 12$ and $2(6-q) > 1$; for the chosen $q$, let $\bar \e_q \in (0,1)$ be the corresponding constant from Lemma \ref{thma}.
\\\\
Let us first note the following important consequence of Lemma \ref{thma}. Fix $z_0:=(x_0,t_0)\in \Omega_T$ as in Lemma \ref{thma}, and suppose that
\begin{equation}\label{mgsmall}
M_{q,z_0}(r) \leq \frac 12\left( \frac {\bar \e_q}{3}\right)^{12}
\end{equation}
for some $r\in (0,1]$ such that $Q^*_r(z_0) \subseteq \Omega_T$. Setting
\begin{equation}\label{recenteredscaling}
\begin{array}{c}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!u_{z_0,r}(x,t):=ru(x_0+rx, t_0+ r^2t)\, , \quad p_{z_0,r}(x,t):=r^2p(x_0+rx, t_0+ r^2t)\\\\
\textrm{and}\quad d_{z_0,r}(x,t):=d(x_0+rx, t_0+ r^2t)\, ,
\end{array}\end{equation}
a change of variables from $z=(x,t)$ to
\begin{equation}\label{varchange}
(y,s):=(x_0+rx,t_0+ r^2t)
\end{equation}
implies that
$$\int_{Q_1^*(0,0)}\left(|u_{z_0,r}|^3 +|\n d_{z_0,r}|^3+ |p_{z_0,r}|^{\frac 32} +|d_{z_0,r}|^q\left(|u_{z_0,r}|^3+|\n d_{z_0,r}|^3\right)^{(1-\frac q6)}\right)\, dz
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad $$
$$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad =
C_{z_0}(r) + D_{z_0}(r) + G_{q,z_0}(r) \ \leq \ \left(\frac {\bar \e_q}3\right)^{12} + \left(\frac {\bar \e_q}3\right)^{6} + \left(\frac {\bar \e_q}3\right)^{2(6-q)} < \ \bar \e_q\, .
$$
Since $Q^*_1(0,0) = Q_1(0,\tfrac 18)$, it follows from assumptions (\ref{enspaces}) - (\ref{locenta}) that $u_{z_0,r}$, $d_{z_0,r}$ and $p_{z_0,r}$ satisfy the assumptions\footnote{For example, if one fixes an arbitrary $\phi \in \mathcal{C}_0^\infty(Q_1^*(0,0))$ and sets $$\phi^{z_0,r}(x,\tau):= \phi\left(\frac{x-x_0}r, \frac{\tau-t_0}{r^2} \right)\, ,$$ then
$\phi^{z_0,r}\in \mathcal{C}_0^\infty(Q_r^*(z_0)) \subset \mathcal{C}_0^\infty(\Omega_T)$. One can therefore use the test function $\phi^{z_0,r}$ in (\ref{locenta}), make the change of variables $(\xi,s):=\left(\frac{x-x_0}r, \frac{\tau-t_0}{r^2} \right)$ (so $(x,\tau)=(x_0+r\xi, t_0+ r^2s)$) and divide both sides of the result by $r$ to obtain the local energy inequality (\ref{locent}) for the re-scaled functions with $\bar \rho = r^2$ (as all terms scale the same way except for $|d|^2|\n d|^2\phi^{z_0,r}$) and $\bar z =(0,\tfrac 18)$. The other assumptions are straightforward.} of Lemma \ref{thma} with $\bar z = (\bar x, \bar t):=(0,\tfrac 18)$ and $\bar \rho:=r^2 \in (0,1]$. Since we have just seen that $$E_{3,q}=E_{3,q}(u_{z_0,r},d_{z_0,r},p_{z_0,r},\bar z) < \bar \e_q\, ,$$ we therefore conclude by Lemma \ref{thma} that
$$|u_{z_0,r}(z)|,|\n d_{z_0,r}(z)| \leq {\bar \e_q}^{\frac 29} \qquad \textrm{for a.e.} \ z\in Q_{\frac 12}(0,\tfrac 18)
=B_{\frac 12}(0)\times(- \tfrac {1}8,\tfrac {1}8)$$
and hence
$$|u(y,s)|,|\n d(y,s)| \leq \frac {{\bar \e_q}^{\frac 29}}r \qquad \textrm{for a.e.}\ (y,s) \in
B_{\frac r2}(x_0)\times(t_0 - \tfrac {r^2}8,t_0 + \tfrac {r^2}8)\, .$$
In particular, by definition, $z_0 = (x_0,t_0)$ is a {\em regular} point, i.e. $|u|$ and $|\n d|$ are essentially bounded in a neighborhood of $z_0$, so long as (\ref{mgsmall}) holds for some sufficiently small $r>0$.
\ \\\\
In view of this fact, setting
$$\delta_\sigma:=\frac 12\left(\frac {\bar \e_{q(\sigma)}}3\right)^{12} \quad \textrm{and} \quad \bar c_\sigma := \bar{c}\cdot g_\sigma^{\frac {6}{6-\sigma}}\, ,$$
we choose $\gamma_\sigma \in (0,\tfrac 14]$ so small that furthermore
\begin{equation}\label{gsmall}
\bar{c}_\sigma \gamma_\sigma^{\frac18\cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}} \leq \frac 1{4} \left( \frac{\delta_\sigma^{[1-\alpha_{\sigma,q}]}}2 \right)\, ,
\end{equation}
where $\bar c$ is the constant from Proposition \ref{lc} and $\alpha_{\sigma,q}$ is defined as in (\ref{esqasqdef}); finally, we choose $\e_\sigma \in (0,1]$ so small that
\begin{equation}\label{eonesmall}
\bar c_\sigma \gamma_\sigma^{-15} \e_\sigma^{\frac 3 4 \cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}} \leq \frac 14 \left( \frac{ \delta_\sigma^{\left[1-\frac 14 \cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}\right]}}6\right)\, .
\end{equation}
If $z_0 \in \Omega_T$ is such that (\ref{dsmallatzo}) and (\ref{k}) hold, it implies in particular that there exists some $\rho_0\in (0,1]$ such that $Q_{\rho_0}^*(z_0) \subseteq \Omega_T$ and, furthermore,
\begin{equation}\label{rhonaughtgg}
\sup_{\rho \in (0,\rho_0]} G_{\sigma,z_0}(\rho) \leq g_\sigma
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{rhonaughtgb}
\sup_{\rho \in (0,\rho_0]} B_{z_0}(\rho) < \e_\sigma\, .
\end{equation}
It then follows from (\ref{gsmall}), (\ref{eonesmall}) and (\ref{rhonaughtgb}) (and the facts that $\alpha_{\sigma,q}, \delta_\sigma \leq 1$) that
$$
\bar{c}_\sigma \gamma_\sigma^{\frac18\cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}} \stackrel{(\ref{gsmall})}{\leq} \frac 1{4} \left( \frac{\delta_\sigma^{[1-\alpha_{\sigma,q}]}}2 \right)
= \frac 1{4} \left( \frac{\min \left\{1,\delta_\sigma^{[1-\alpha_{\sigma,q}]}\right\}}2 \right)\, ,
$$
and that
$$\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \bar c_\sigma\gamma_\sigma^{-15}B_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4 \cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}}(\rho)
\stackrel{(\ref{rhonaughtgb})}{\leq}\bar c_\sigma \gamma_\sigma^{-15} \e_\sigma^{\frac 3 4 \cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}}
\stackrel{(\ref{eonesmall})}{\leq}
\frac 14 \left( \frac{ \delta_\sigma^{\left[1-\frac 14 \cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}\right]}}6\right)
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad $$$$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad =
\frac 14 \left( \frac{ \min_{k\in \{0,2\}} \left\{\min \left\{ \delta_\sigma^{\left[1-\frac 1{2^k} \right]}, \delta_\sigma^{\left[1-\frac 1{2^k} \cdot \alpha_{\sigma,q}\right]} \right\}\right\}}6\right)
$$
for all $\rho \leq \rho_0$. Suppose now that $z_0$ is not a regular point. Then we must have
\begin{equation}\label{mbig}
\delta_\sigma < M_{q,z_0}(\rho) \qquad \textrm{for all}\ \ \rho \in (0,\rho_0]\, ,
\end{equation}
or else (\ref{mgsmall}) would hold for some $r\in (0,\rho_0]$ which would imply that $z_0$ is a regular point as we established above using Lemma \ref{thma}.
\\\\
In view of (\ref{rhonaughtgg}) and (\ref{rhonaughtgb}) (so that in particular (\ref{grhofinite}) holds, as we chose $\e_\sigma \leq 1$), we conclude by the estimate (\ref{l}) of Proposition \ref{lc} (along with (\ref{gsmall}), (\ref{eonesmall}), (\ref{rhonaughtgb}), (\ref{mbig}) and our calculations above) that
$$M_{q,z_0}(\gamma_\sigma \rho) \leq \frac 1 2 M_{q,z_0}(\rho) \qquad \textrm{for all} \quad
\rho \in (0, \rho_0]$$
for any $z_0$ which is not a regular point. However, since $\g_\sigma^{k}\rho_0 \in (0,\rho_0]$ for any $k\in \N$, by iterating the estimate above we would conclude for such $z_0$ that
$$M_{q,z_0}(\gamma_\sigma^n \rho_0) \leq \frac 1 2 M_{q,z_0}(\g_\sigma^{n-1}\rho_0) \leq \frac 1 {2^2} M_{q,z_0}(\g_\sigma^{n-2}\rho_0) \leq \cdots \leq \frac 1 {2^n} M_{q,z_0}(\rho_0) < \delta_\sigma$$
for a sufficiently large $n\in \N$ which contradicts (\ref{mbig}) (with $\rho = \gamma_\sigma^n \rho_0$), and hence contradicts our assumption that $z_0$ is not a regular point. Therefore $z_0$ must indeed be regular whenever (\ref{rhonaughtgg}) and (\ref{rhonaughtgb}) hold for our choice of $\e_\sigma$, which proves Lemma \ref{thmb}. \hfill $\Box$
\\\\
In order to prove Theorem \ref{mainthm}, we now prove the following general lemma, from which Lemma \ref{thma} and Lemma \ref{thmb} will have various consequences (including Theorem \ref{mainthm} as well as various other historical results, which we point out for the reader's interest). As a motivation, note first that, for $r>0$ and $z_1:= (x_1,t_1) \in \R^3 \times \R$, according to the notation in (\ref{recenteredscaling})
a change of variables gives
$$\int_{Q_1^*(0,0)}|u_{z_1,r}|^q + |p_{z_1,r}|^{\frac q2} = \frac 1{r^{5-q}} \int_{Q_r^*(x_1,t_1)}|u|^q + |p|^{\frac q2}\, ,
\quad
\int_{Q_1^*(0,0)}|\n u_{z_1,r}|^q = \frac 1{r^{5-2q}} \int_{Q_r^*(x_1,t_1)}|\n u|^q$$
and
\begin{equation}\label{scalinggq}
\int_{Q_1^*(0,0)}|d_{z_1,r}|^q|\n d_{z_1,r}|^{3(1-\frac q6)} = \frac 1{r^{2+\frac q2}} \int_{Q_r^*(x_1,t_1)}|d|^q|\n d|^{3(1-\frac q6)}
\end{equation}
for any $q\in [1,\infty)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{partialreggen}
Fix any open and bounded $\Omega \subset \subset \R^3$, $T\in (0,\infty)$, $k\geq 0$ and $C_k>0$, and suppose $\mathcal{S} \subseteq \Omega_T:=\Omega \times (0,T)$ and that $U:\Omega_T \to [0,\infty]$ is a non-negative Lebesgue-measurable function such that the following property holds in general:
\begin{equation}\label{partialreggene}
(x_0,t_0)\in \mathcal{S} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad \limsup_{r\searrow 0} \frac 1{r^{k}} \int_{Q_r^*(x_0,t_0)}\!\!\!U \, dz \ \geq\ C_k\, .
\end{equation}
If, furthermore,
\begin{equation}\label{partialreggenf}
U\in L^1(\Omega_T)\, ,
\end{equation}
then (recall Definition \ref{phausdorff}) $\mathcal{P}^{k}(\mathcal{S})<\infty$ (and hence the parabolic Hausdorff dimension of $\mathcal{S}$ is at most $k$) with the explicit estimate
\begin{equation}\label{partialreggeng}
\mathcal{P}^{k}(\mathcal{S}) \leq \frac {5^5}{C_{k}} \int_{\Omega_T} \!U\, dz \, ;
\end{equation}
moreover, if $k=5$, then
\begin{equation}\label{partialreggengkfive}
\mu(\mathcal{S}) \leq \frac{4 \pi}3\mathcal{P}^{5}(\mathcal{S}) \leq \frac {5^5\cdot 4 \pi}{3C_5}\int_{\Omega_T}U\, dz
\end{equation}
where $\mu$ is the Lebesgue outer measure, and if $k<5$, then in fact $\mathcal{P}^{k}(\mathcal{S})=\mu(\mathcal{S})=0$.
\end{lemma}
\ \\
Before proving Lemma \ref{partialreggen}, let's first use it along with Lemma \ref{thma} and Lemma \ref{thmb} to give the
\\
\\
{\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{mainthm}:} \quad
\\\\
First note that for any $r>0$ and $z_1:= (x_1,t_1) \in \R^3 \times \R$ such that $Q_r(z_1) \subseteq \Omega_T$, it follows (as in the proof of Lemma \ref{thmb}) that the re-scaled triple $(u_{z_1,r},d_{z_1,r},p_{z_1,r})$ (see (\ref{recenteredscaling})) satisfies the conditions of Lemma \ref{thma} with $\bar z:=(0,0)$ and $\bar \rho :=r^2$. Therefore if $q\in (5,6]$ and
$$\frac 1{r^{2}} \int_{Q_r(x_1,t_1)}|u|^3 +|\n d|^3 + |p|^{\frac 32}\ +\ \frac 1{r^{2+\frac q2}} \int_{Q_r(x_1,t_1)}|d|^q|\n d|^{3(1-\frac q6)}
=\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad $$
\begin{equation}\label{rescaledsmallthreefive}
\qquad \qquad = \int_{Q_1(0,0)}|u_{z_1,r}|^3 +|\n d_{z_1,r}|^3+ |p_{z_1,r}|^{\frac 32} +|d_{z_1,r}|^q|\n d_{z_1,r}|^{3(1-\frac q6)} < \bar \e_q
\end{equation}
(with $\bar \e_q$ as in Lemma \ref{thma}), it follows that $|u_{z_1,r}|,|\n d_{z_1,r}|\leq C$ on $Q_{\frac 12}(0,0)$ for some $C>0$, and hence $|u|,|\n d|\leq \frac Cr$ on $Q_{\frac r2}(x_1,t_1)$; in particular, every interior point of $Q_{\frac r2}(x_1,t_1)$ is a regular point, assuming (\ref{rescaledsmallthreefive}) holds. Therefore, taking $z_0:=(x_0,t_0)$ such that
$$Q_{\frac r2}(x_1,t_1) = Q^{*}_{\frac r2}(x_0,t_0)\, ,$$
(so $x_0 = x_1$ and $t_0$ is slightly lower than $t_1$ so that $(x_0,t_0)$ is in the interior of the cylinder $Q_{\frac r2}(x_1,t_1)$) and letting $\mathcal{S} \subset \Omega_T$ be the singular set of the solution $(u,d,p)$, we see (in particular) that, since $r^{2+\frac q2} < r^2$ for $r<1$,
\begin{equation}\label{upthreespacessingfive}
\left .\begin{array}{c} (x_0,t_0)\in \mathcal{S} \\ q\in (5,6] \end{array} \right\} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad \limsup_{r\searrow 0}\frac 1{r^{2+\frac q2}} \int_{Q_r^*(x_0,t_0)}|u|^3 +|\n d|^3 + |p|^{\frac 32} + |d|^q|\n d|^{3(1-\frac q6)} \geq \bar \e_q
\end{equation}
(in fact, (\ref{upthreespacessingfive}) must hold with $\liminf$ instead of $\limsup$). Therefore, since (\ref{enspaces}) - (\ref{pspace}) imply that
\begin{equation}\label{upthreespacesfive}
|u|^3 +|\n d|^3 + |p|^{\frac 32} + |d|^q|\n d|^{3(1-\frac q6)}\in L^1(\Omega_T)
\end{equation}
(for $T<\infty$), we may apply Lemma \ref{partialreggen} (it is not hard to see, by using a suitable covering argument, that without loss of generality we can assume $\Omega$ is bounded)
with $U:= |u|^3 +|\n d|^3 + |p|^{\frac 32} + |d|^q|\n d|^{3(1-\frac q6)} $, $k=2 + \frac q2$ and $C_k:=\bar \e_q$ to see that, setting $\delta := \frac{q-5}2 \in (0,\frac 12) \iff 5<q < 6$ with $2+\frac q2 = \frac 92 + \d$, that
$$
\boxed{\ \mathcal{P}^{\frac 92 + \delta}(\mathcal{S}) = 0 \quad \textrm{for any} \quad \delta \in (0,\tfrac 12)\ \, .}
$$
Before continuing with the proof of Theorem \ref{mainthm}, we describe some intermediate results (using only Lemma \ref{thma}), with historical relevance, for the interest of the reader:
\\\\
Suppose that (\ref{dmorreysmall}) holds for some $\sigma \in (5,6)$ which we now fix. We further fix any $q\in (5,\sigma)$, and choose
$\g_{\sigma,q}>0$ small enough that
$$
\g_{\sigma,q}^{1-\frac q\sigma}(\g_{\sigma,q}^{\frac q\sigma} +
(g_\sigma)^{\frac q\sigma} )< \bar \e_q\, .$$
As in the proof of (\ref{gsiginterpest}), H\"older's inequality (along with (\ref{scalinggq})) implies that
$$
\int_{Q_1(0,0)}|d_{z_1,r}|^q|\n d_{z_1,r}|^{3(1-\frac q6)} \leq (g_\sigma)^{\frac q\sigma} \left(\int_{Q_1(0,0)}|\n d_{z_1,r}|^3\right)^{1-\frac q\sigma}\, ,
$$
so that if
\begin{equation}\label{rescaledsmallthree}
\!\!\!\!\!\frac 1{r^{2}} \int_{Q_r(x_1,t_1)}|u|^3 +|\n d|^3 + |p|^{\frac 32} = \int_{Q_1(0,0)}|u_{z_1,r}|^3 +|\n d_{z_1,r}|^3+ |p_{z_1,r}|^{\frac 32} < \g_{\sigma,q}\, ,
\end{equation}
it follows that
$$\int_{Q_1(0,0)}|u_{z_1,r}|^3 +|\n d_{z_1,r}|^3+ |p_{z_1,r}|^{\frac 32} +|d_{z_1,r}|^q|\n d_{z_1,r}|^{3(1-\frac q6)} <
\bar \e_q$$
and hence $(x_0,t_0)\notin \mathcal{S}$ for $(x_0,t_0)$ as above.
\\\\
Therefore under the general assumption (\ref{dmorreysmall}) with $\sigma \in (5,6)$, there exists $\g_{\sigma}>0$ (e.g., $\g_\sigma:= \g_{\sigma,\frac{5+\sigma}2}$) such that
\begin{equation}\label{upthreespacessing}
(x_0,t_0)\in \mathcal{S} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad \limsup_{r\searrow 0}\frac 1{r^{2}} \int_{Q_r^*(x_0,t_0)}|u|^3 + |\n d|^3 + |p|^{\frac 32} \geq \g_\sigma\, .
\end{equation}
Therefore, as long as
\begin{equation}\label{upthreespaces}
(u,\n d,p)\in L^3(\Omega_T) \times L^3(\Omega_T) \times L^{\frac 32}(\Omega_T) \, ,
\end{equation}
we may apply Lemma \ref{partialreggen} with $U:= |u|^3 +|\n d|^3 + |p|^{\frac 32} $, $k=2$ and $C_k:=\g_\sigma$ to see (similar to Scheffer's result in \cite{scheffer77}) that
$$\boxed{\ \mathcal{P}^2(\mathcal{S})=0\, .\ }$$
On the other hand, we know slightly more than (\ref{upthreespaces}). The assumptions on $u$ and $d$ in (\ref{enspaces}) imply (for example, by (\ref{prespacetimeinterpaaa}) with $\alpha = \frac 35$, along with Sobolev embedding) that
$u, \n d\in L^{\frac {10}3}(\Omega_T)$.
{\em Suppose} we also knew (as in the case when $\Omega = \R^3$) that
$p\in L^{\frac 53}(\Omega_T)$
(which essentially follows from (\ref{enspaces}) and (\ref{preseq}), see \cite[Theorem 2.5]{linliu}). Then (\ref{partialreggenf}) holds with $U:=|u|^{\frac{10}3} + |\n d|^{\frac{10}3} + |p|^{\frac 53}$, and moreover H\"older's inequality implies that
$$\left\{\frac 1{r^{2}} \int_{Q_r^*(z_0)}|u|^3 + |\n d|^{3}+ |p|^{\frac 32}\right\}^{\frac {10}9} \leq 2^{\frac{10}9}|Q_1|^{\frac 19} \left[\frac 1{r^{\frac 53}} \int_{Q_r^*(z_0)}|u|^{\frac{10}3} + |\n d|^{\frac{10}3}+ |p|^{\frac 53} \right]$$
($|Q_1|$ is the Lebesgue measure of the unit parabolic cylinder). In view of (\ref{upthreespacessing}), one could therefore apply Lemma \ref{partialreggen} with
$$U:=|u|^{\frac{10}3} + |\n d|^{\frac{10}3}+ |p|^{\frac 53}\, , \quad k=\frac{5}3 \quad \textrm{and} \quad C_k = \frac{ {\g_\sigma}^{\frac {10}9}}{2^{\frac{10}9}|Q_1|^{\frac 19}}\, .$$
to deduce (similar to Scheffer's result in \cite{scheffer80}) that
$$\boxed{\ \mathcal{P}^{\frac 53}(\mathcal{S})=0\, .\ }$$
All of the above follows from Lemma \ref{thma} alone. We will now show that Lemma \ref{thmb} allows one (under assumption (\ref{dmorreysmall}) for some $\sigma\in (5,6)$, and even if $p\notin L^{\frac 53}(\Omega_T)$) to further decrease the dimension of the parabolic Hausdorff measure, with respect to which the singular set has measure zero, from $\frac 53$ to $1$. This was essentially the most significant contribution of \cite{caf} in the Navier-Stokes setting $d\equiv 0$.
\ \\\\
Let us now proceed with the proof of the second assertion in Theorem \ref{mainthm}.
Suppose $d$ satisfies (\ref{dmorreysmall}) for some $\sigma \in (5,6)$. Taking $\e_\sigma>0$ as in (\ref{k}) of Lemma \ref{thmb}, we see
that
$$(x_0,t_0)\in \mathcal{S} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad \limsup_{r\searrow 0} \frac 1{r} \int_{Q_r^*(x_0,t_0)}\left(|\n u|^2+ |\n^2 d|^2\right) \geq \e_\sigma\, ,$$
so that (\ref{partialreggene}) holds with $U:=|\n u|^2+ |\n^2 d|^2$ and $k=1$. The second assumption in (\ref{enspaces}) implies that (\ref{partialreggenf}) holds as well with $U:=|\n u|^2+ |\n^2 d|^2$. Therefore Lemma \ref{partialreggen} with $U:=|\n u|^2+ |\n^2 d|^2$, $k=1$ and $C_k=\e_\sigma$ implies that
$$\boxed{\ \mathcal{P}^{1}(\mathcal{S})=0\, .\ }$$
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{mainthm} (assuming Lemma \ref{partialreggen}). \hfill $\Box$
\\\\
Let us now give the
\\\\
{\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{partialreggen}.} \quad Fix any $\delta >0$, and any open set $V$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{sinv}
\mathcal{S}\subseteq V \subseteq \Omega \times (0,T)\ .
\end{equation}
For each $z:=(x,t)\in \mathcal{S}$, according to (\ref{partialreggene}) we can choose $r_{z} \in (0,\delta)$ sufficiently small so that $Q^*_{r_{z}}(z) \subset V$ and
\begin{equation}\label{partialreggenb}
\frac 1{r_{z}^{k}} \int_{Q_{r_{z}}^*(z)}U \geq C_k\, .
\end{equation}
By a Vitalli covering argument (see \cite[Lemma 6.1]{caf}), there exists a sequence $(z_j)_{j=1}^\infty \subseteq \mathcal{S}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{coverofs}
\mathcal{S} \subseteq \bigcup_{j=1}^\infty Q^*_{5r_{z_j}}(z_j)
\end{equation}
and such that the set of cylinders $\{Q^*_{r_{z_j}}(z_j)\}_j$ are pair-wise disjoint. We therefore see from (\ref{partialreggenb}) that
\begin{equation}\label{hausdorffest}
\sum_{j=1}^\infty r_{z_j}^{k}\ \leq\ \frac 1{C_k}\sum_{j=1}^\infty\int_{Q_{r_{z_j}}^*(z_j)}U
\ \leq \ \frac 1{C_k}\int_{V}U\ \leq \ \frac 1{C_k}\int_{\Omega_T}U
\end{equation}
which is finite (and uniformly bounded in $\delta$) by (\ref{partialreggenf}). Note that according to Definition \ref{phausdorff} of the parabolic Hausdorff measure $\mathcal{P}^k$, (\ref{hausdorffest}) implies
\begin{equation}\label{hausdorffestaaa}
\mathcal{P}^{k}(\mathcal{S}) \leq \frac {5^k}{C_k}\int_{V}U \leq \frac {5^k}{C_k}\int_{\Omega_T}U
\end{equation}
due to (\ref{hausdorffest}), which establishes (\ref{partialreggeng}).
\\\\
Let us now assume that $k\leq 5$. Letting $\mu$ be the Lebesgue (outer) measure, note that
$$\mu(Q^*_{5r_{z_j}}) \leq |B_1|(5r_{z_j})^5$$
so that
\begin{equation}\label{hausdorffesta}
\mu(\mathcal{S}) \stackrel{(\ref{coverofs})}{\leq} |B_1|\sum_{j=1}^\infty (5r_{z_j})^5 \leq 5^5|B_1|\delta^{5-k}\sum_{j=1}^\infty r_{z_j}^{k}
\stackrel{(\ref{hausdorffest})}{\leq} \delta^{5-k}\frac {5^5|B_1|}{C_k}\int_{\Omega_T}U\, ,
\end{equation}
since we have chosen $r_{z} < \delta$ for all $z\in \mathcal{S}$. If $k=5$, (\ref{hausdorffesta}) along with Definition \ref{phausdorff} gives the explicit estimate (\ref{partialreggengkfive}) on $\mu(S)$. If $k<5$, since $\delta >0$ was arbitrary, sending $\delta \to 0$ we conclude (by (\ref{partialreggenf})) that $\mu(\mathcal{S}) =0$
and hence $\mathcal{S}$ is Lebesgue measurable with Lebesgue measure zero. We may therefore take $V$ to be an open set such that $\mu(V)$ is arbitrarily small but so that (\ref{sinv}) still holds, and deduce that $\mathcal{P}^{k}(\mathcal{S})=0$ by (\ref{partialreggenf}) and (\ref{hausdorffestaaa}). \hfill $\Box$
\ \\
\section{Proofs of technical propositions}\label{technical}
\noindent
In order to prove Proposition \ref{la} as well as Proposition \ref{lc}, we will require certain local decompositions of the pressure (cf. \cite[(2.15)]{caf}) as follows:
\subsection{Localization of the pressure}
\noindent
\begin{clm}\label{smoothlocalpressure} Fix open sets $\Omega_1 \subset \subset \Omega_2 \subset \subset \Omega \subset \R^3$ and $\psi \in \mathcal{C}^\infty_0(\Omega_2;\R)$ with $\psi \equiv 1$ on $\Omega_1$. Let
\begin{equation}\label{fundsoln}
G^x(y):=\frac 1{4\pi}\frac{1}{|x-y|}
\end{equation}
be the fundamental solution of $-\D$ in $\R^3$ so that, in particular,
$$\n G^x \in L^q(\Omega_2) \quad \textrm{for any} \ \ q\in [1,\tfrac 32) $$
for any fixed $x\in \R^3$, and set
$$G^x_{\psi,1}:=-G^x \n \psi$$
$$G^x_{\psi,2}:=2 \n G^x \cdot \n \psi + G^x \D \psi
$$
$$G^x_{\psi,3}:=
\n G^x \otimes \n \psi+ \n \psi \otimes \n G^x +G^x \n^2 \psi\, ,
$$
so that
$$G^x_{\psi,1}, G^x_{\psi,2}, G^x_{\psi,3} \in \mathcal{C}^\infty_0(\Omega_2) \quad \textrm{for any fixed} \ x\in \Omega_1\, .$$
\ \\
Suppose $\Pi \in \mathcal{C}^2(\Omega;\R)$,
$v \in \mathcal{C}^1(\Omega;\R^{3})$ and
$K \in \mathcal{C}^2(\Omega;\R^{3\times 3})$.
\\\\
If
\begin{equation}\label{clasrepformav}
-\D \Pi = \n \cdot v \quad \textrm{in} \ \Omega\, ,
\end{equation}
then for any $x\in \Omega_1$,
\begin{equation}\label{clasrepformcv}
\Pi(x) = -\int \n G^x \cdot v\psi + \int G^x_{\psi,1} \cdot v + \int G^x_{\psi,2} \Pi \, .
\end{equation}
Similarly, if
\begin{equation}\label{clasrepforma}
-\D \Pi = \n \cdot (\n^T \cdot K) \quad \textrm{in} \ \Omega\, ,
\end{equation}
then for any $x\in \Omega_1$,
\begin{equation}\label{clasrepformc}
\Pi(x) = S[\psi K](x) + \int G^x_{\psi,3} : K + \int G^x_{\psi,2} \Pi
\end{equation}
where
$$S[\widetilde K ](x):= \n_x \cdot \left(\n_x^T \cdot \int G^{x} \widetilde K\right)= \int G^{x} \n \cdot \left(\n^T \cdot \widetilde K\right) \quad \forall \ \widetilde K \in \mathcal{C}_0^2(\Omega_2;\R^{3\times 3})\, ;$$
in particular (noting $\n^2G^x \notin L^1_{\mathrm{loc}}$), $S:\left[L^q(\Omega_2)\right]^{3\times 3} \to L^q(\Omega_2)$ for any $q\in (1,\infty)$ is a bounded, linear Calderon-Zygmund operator.
\end{clm}
\begin{remark}\label{smoothlocalpressurerk}
We note, therefore, that under the assumptions (\ref{enspaces}), (\ref{pspace}) and (\ref{preseq}), by suitable regularizations one can see that for almost every fixed $t\in (0,T)$, (\ref{clasrepformcv}) and (\ref{clasrepformc}) hold for a.e. $x\in \Omega_1$ with $\Pi:=p(\cdot, t)$, $K:=J(\cdot, t)$ and $v:=\n^T \cdot J(\cdot, t)$ where $$J:=u\otimes u+\n d \odot \n d\, .$$
Indeed, under the assumptions (\ref{enspaces}), we have $u,\n d \in L^{\frac{10}3}(\Omega_T)$ so that (omitting the $x$-dependence)
\begin{equation}\label{inclta}
J(t)\in L^{\frac 53}(\Omega) \quad \textrm{for a.e.} \ \ t\in (0,T)\, .
\end{equation}
Moreover, since $u,\n d \in L^\infty(0,T;L^2(\Omega))\cap L^{\frac{10}3}(\Omega_T)$ and $\n u, \n^2 d\in L^2(\Omega_T)$, we have
$$\n^T \cdot J \in L^2(0,T;L^1(\Omega)) \cap L^{\frac 54}(\Omega_T)$$
so that
\begin{equation}\label{incltb}
\n^T \cdot J(t) \in L^1(\Omega)\cap L^{\frac 54}(\Omega) \quad \textrm{for a.e.} \ \ t\in (0,T)\, .
\end{equation}
Finally, (\ref{pspace}) implies that
\begin{equation}\label{incltc}
p(t)\in L^{\frac 32}(\Omega) \quad \textrm{for a.e.} \ \ t\in (0,T)\, .
\end{equation}
Fix now any $t\in (0,T)$ such that the inclusions in (\ref{inclta}), (\ref{incltb}) and (\ref{incltc}) hold.
Since $G^x_{\psi,j} \in \mathcal{C}^\infty_0$ for $x\in \Omega_1$, the terms in (\ref{clasrepformcv}) and (\ref{clasrepformc}) containing $G^x_{\psi,j}$ are all well-defined for every $x\in \Omega_1$ since $J(t), \n^T \cdot J(t), p(t) \in L^1_{loc}(\Omega)$.
The term in (\ref{clasrepformcv}) containing $\n G^x$ is in $L^r_x(\Omega_2)$ for any $r\in [1,\frac {15}7)$ by Young's convolution inequality (since $\Omega_2$ is bounded), so that term is well-defined for a.e. $x\in \Omega_2$. Indeed, for $R>0$ such that $\Omega_2 \subseteq B_{\frac R2}(x_0)$ for some $x_0\in \R^3$, we have $x-y \in B_R:=B_R(0)$ for all $x,y\in \Omega_2$. Letting $G(y):=G^0(y)$ and $\chi_{B_R}$ the indicator function of $B_R$, since $\psi$ is supported in $\Omega_2$ we therefore have
$$-\int \n G^x \cdot v\psi = [([\n G] \chi_{B_R})*(v\psi)](x)$$
for all $x\in \Omega_2$. Therefore
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\displaystyle{\left\|\int \n G^x \cdot v\psi\right\|_{L^r_x(\Omega_2)}}
&\leq &\|([\n G] \chi_{B_R})*v\psi\|_{L^r(\R^3)}\\\\
&\leq &
\|[\n G] \chi_{B_R}\|_{L^q(\R^3)}\|v\psi\|_{L^s(\R^3)}
\\\\
&=&\|\n G \|_{L^q(B_R)}\|v\psi\|_{L^s(\Omega_2)} <\infty
\end{array}$$
by Young's inequality for any $q\in [1,\frac 32)$, $s\in [1,\frac 54)$ and $r$ such that $1 + \frac 1r = \frac 1q + \frac 1s$ (note that $\frac 23 + \frac 45 -1 = \frac 7{15}$).
Finally, $S[\psi J(t)]\in L^{\frac 53}(\Omega_2)$ by the Calderon-Zygmund estimates (as $1< \frac 53 < \infty$), so again that term is defined for a.e. $x\in \Omega_2$.
\\\\
Regularizing the linear equation (\ref{preseq}) using a standard spatial mollifier at any $t\in (0,T)$ where (\ref{preseq}) holds in $\mathcal{D}'(\Omega)$ and where the inclusions in (\ref{inclta}), (\ref{incltb}) and (\ref{incltc}) hold, applying Claim \ref{smoothlocalpressure} and passing to limits gives the almost-everywhere convergence (after passing to a suitable subsequence) due, in particular, to the boundedness of the linear operator $S$ on $L^{\frac 53}(\Omega_2)$.
\end{remark}
\ \\\\
\noindent
{\bf Proof of Claim \ref{smoothlocalpressure}.} \quad
Since (extending $\Pi$ by zero outside of $\Omega$) $\psi \Pi \in \mathcal{C}^\infty_0(\R^3)$, by the classical representation formula (see, e.g., \cite[(2.17)]{gilbarg}), for any $x\in \R^3$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{clasrepformb}
\psi(x)\Pi(x)
= -\int G^x \D (\psi \Pi)
= -\int G^x (\psi \D \Pi + 2\n \psi \cdot \n \Pi + \Pi \D \psi)\, .
\end{equation}
In particular, for a fixed $x\in \Omega_1$ where $\psi \equiv 1$, we have $G^x\n \psi \in \mathcal{C}_0^\infty(\R^3)$ so that
integrating by parts in (\ref{clasrepformb}) we see that
\begin{equation}\label{clasrepform}
\Pi(x)= \int G^x \psi (- \D \Pi) +\int G^x_{\psi,2}\Pi\, .
\end{equation}
If (\ref{clasrepformav}) holds, then by (\ref{clasrepform}) we have
\begin{equation}\label{clasrepformv}
\Pi(x)= \int G^x \psi \n \cdot v +\int G^x_{\psi,2}\Pi
\end{equation}
for any $x\in \Omega_1$. One can then carefully integrate by parts once in the first term of (\ref{clasrepformv}) as follows: for a small $\e>0$,
$$
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\int_{|y-x|>\e} G^x \psi \n \cdot v\, dy =
-\int_{|y-x|>\e} [\n (G^x \psi)]\cdot v\, dy
+\frac 1{4\pi\e}\underbrace{\int_{|y-x|=\e} \psi v\cdot \nu_y\, dS_y}_{=\mathcal{O}(\e^2)}
$$
and since the second term vanishes as $\e \to 0$ due to the fact that $|\partial B_\e(x)| \lesssim \e^2$, we conclude (since $\n G^x \in L^1_{loc}$) that
$$\int G^x \psi \n \cdot v = -\int [\n (G^x \psi)]\cdot v= -\int \n G^x \cdot v\psi + \int G^x_{\psi,1} \cdot v$$
which, along with (\ref{clasrepformv}), implies (\ref{clasrepformcv}) for any $x\in \Omega_1$.
\\\\
On the other hand, if (\ref{clasrepforma}) holds, then by (\ref{clasrepform}) we have
\begin{equation}\label{clasrepformk}
\Pi(x)= \int G^x \psi \n \cdot (\n^T \cdot K) +\int G^x_{\psi,2}\Pi
\end{equation}
and one can write
$$
\n \cdot (\n^T \cdot (\psi K))= [\n^2 \psi]^T:K + \n^T \psi \cdot [\n \cdot K]+ \n \psi \cdot [\n^T \cdot K]+ \psi \n \cdot (\n^T \cdot K)
$$
so that (as $\n^2 \psi = \n^T(\n \psi) = \n (\n^T \psi) = [\n^2 \psi]^T$ since $\psi \in \mathcal{C}^2$)
$$
\int G^x [\psi \n \cdot (\n^T \cdot K)] =
\int G^x [\n \cdot (\n^T \cdot (\psi K))] -
\int G^x [\n^2 \psi:K ]
\qquad \qquad
$$
$$
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
-\int \bigg([G^x\n^T \psi] \cdot [\n \cdot K] + [G^x\n \psi] \cdot [\n^T \cdot K]\bigg)\, .
$$
Since $G^x\n \psi \in \mathcal{C}^\infty_0$ for $x\in \Omega_1$, one can again integrate by parts in the final term to obtain
$$
\Pi(x)= \int G^x [\n \cdot (\n^T \cdot (\psi K))] +\int G^x_{\psi,3} : K + \int G^x_{\psi,2} \Pi
$$
for $x\in \Omega_1$ in view of (\ref{clasrepformk}). Moreover, since $\psi K \in \mathcal{C}^2_0$ and $G^x \in L^1_{loc}$, as usual for convolutions one can change variables to obtain
$$
\int G^x \n \cdot \left(\n^T \cdot (\psi K)\right)= \left[\n_x \cdot \left(\n_x^T \cdot \int G^x \psi K\right)\right](x) =:S[\psi K](x)$$
which gives us (\ref{clasrepformc}) for any $x\in \Omega_1$, where (see, e.g., \cite[Theorem 9.9]{gilbarg}) $S$ is a singular integral operator as claimed. (Note that $\n^2 G^x \notin L^1_{loc}$ so that one cannot simply integrate by parts twice in this term putting all derivatives on $G^x$, but $\int G^x \psi K$ is the Newtonian potential of $\psi K$ which can be twice differentiated in various senses depending on the regularity of $K$.) \hfill $\Box$
\\
\subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{la}}
In what follows, for $\mathcal{O}\subseteq \rt$ and $I\subseteq \R$, we will use the notation
$$\|\cdot \|_{q;\mathcal{O}}:=\|\cdot \|_{L^q(\mathcal{O})}\, , \quad \|\cdot \|_{s;I}:=\|\cdot \|_{L^s(I)}\, ,$$
$$\|\cdot \|_{q,s;\mathcal{O}\times I}:=\|\cdot \|_{L^s(I;L^q(\mathcal{O}))} =\left\|\|\cdot \|_{L^q(\mathcal{O})}\right\|_{L^s(I)}
$$
and we will abbreviate by writing
$$\|\cdot \|_{q;\mathcal{O} \times I}:=\|\cdot \|_{q,q;\mathcal{O}\times I}=\|\cdot \|_{L^q(\mathcal{O}\times I)}\, .$$
We first note some simple inequalities. Letting $B_r \subset \rt$ be a ball of radius $r>0$, from the embedding $W^{1,2}(B_1) \hookrightarrow L^6(B_1)$ applied to functions of the form $g_r(x) = g(rx)$ (or suitably shifted, if the ball is not centered as zero), we obtain
$$\|g_r\|_{6;B_1} \lesssim \|g_r\|_{2;B_1} + \|\n g_r\|_{2;B_1} = \|g_r\|_{2;B_1} + r\|(\n g)_r\|_{2;B_1} $$
whereupon, noting by a simple change of variables that
$$\|g_r\|_{q;B_1} = r^{-\frac 3q}\|g\|_{q;B_r}$$
for any $q\in [1,\infty)$, we obtain for any ball $B_r$ of radius $r>0$ and any $g$ that
\begin{equation}\label{scaledemb}
\|g\|_{6;B_r} \lesssim \tfrac 1r\|g\|_{2;B_r} + \|\n g\|_{2;B_r}
\end{equation}
where the constant is independent of $r$ as well as the center of $B_r$. Next, for any $v(x,t)$, using H\"older to interpolate between $L^2$ and $L^6$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{interpsobball}
\|v(t)\|_{3;B_r} \leq \|v(t)\|_{2;B_r}^{\frac 12}\|v(t)\|_{6;B_r}^{\frac 12}
\stackrel{(\ref{scaledemb})}{\lesssim} r^{-\frac 12} \|v(t)\|_{2;B_r} + \|v(t)\|_{2;B_r}^{\frac 12}\|\n v(t)\|_{2;B_r}^{\frac 12}\, .
\end{equation}
Then for $I_r \subset \R$ with $|I_r|=r^2$ and $Q_r:=B_r \times I_r$, H\"older in the $t$ variable gives
$$\|v\|_{3;Q_r} \lesssim
r^{-\frac 12}|I_r|^{\frac 13} \|v\|_{2,\infty;Q_r} + \|v\|_{2,\infty;Q_r}^{\frac 12}
\left[|I_r|^{\frac 16}\|\n v\|_{2;Q_r}\right]^{\frac 12}
$$
so that
$$r^{-\frac 16}\|v\|_{3;Q_r} \lesssim \|v\|_{2,\infty;Q_r} + \|v\|_{2,\infty;Q_r}^{\frac 12}
\|\n v\|_{2;Q_r}^{\frac 12} \lesssim \|v\|_{2,\infty;Q_r} +
\|\n v\|_{2;Q_r}
$$
(the first of which is sometimes called the ``multiplicative inequality")
with a constant independent of $r$. From these, noting that $|B_r|\sim r^3$, $|Q_r|\sim r^5$, it follows easily that, for example,
\begin{equation}\label{multineq}
\avintt{Q^n} |v|^3\ dz \lesssim \left(\esssup_{t\in I^n} \avint{B^n}|v(t)|^2\ dx\right)^{\frac 3 2}+\left( \int_{I^k} \! \avint{B^k} |\nabla v|^2\, dx\, dt \right)^{\frac 3 2}\, .
\end{equation}
Note also that a similar scaling argument applied to Poincar\'e's inequality gives the estimate
\begin{equation}\label{poincareball}
\|g-\overline{g_{B_r}}\|_{q;B_r} \lesssim r\|\nabla g\|_{q;B_r} \sim |B_r|^{\frac 13}\|\nabla g\|_{q;B_r}
\end{equation}
for any $r>0$ and $q\in [1,\infty]$, where $\overline{g_{\mathcal{O}}}$ is the average of $g$ in $\mathcal{O}$ for any $\mathcal{O} \subset \R^3$ with $|\mathcal{O}|<\infty$. Note finally that a simple application of H\"older's inequality gives
\begin{equation}\label{lqavg}
\|\overline{g_{\mathcal{O}}}\|_{q;\mathcal{O}} \leq \|g\|_{q;\mathcal{O}}\, .
\end{equation}
Proceeding now with the proof, fix some $\tilde \phi \in \mathcal{C}^\infty_0(\rt)$ such that
$$\tilde \phi \equiv 1 \quad \textrm{in} \quad B_{r_2}(0)=B_{\frac 14}(0)$$ and
$$\mathrm{supp}(\tilde \phi) \subseteq B_{r_1}(0)=B_{\frac 12}(0)\, .$$
Now fix
$\bar z = (\bar x,\bar t) \in \R^3 \times \R$ and $z_0 = (x_0,t_0) \in Q_{\frac 12}(\bar z)$,
define $B^k$, $I^k$ and $Q^k$ by (\ref{balls}) for this $z_0$ and define $\phi$ by $\phi(x):=\tilde \phi (x- x_0)$. So
$$\phi \equiv 1 \quad \textrm{in} \quad B^2 = B_{\frac 14}(x_0)$$
and
$$\mathrm{supp}(\phi) \subseteq B^1 =B_{\frac 12}(x_0) \subset B_{1}(\bar x) \, ,$$
since $x_0 \in B_{\frac 12}(\bar x)$. The following estimates will clearly depend only on $\tilde \phi$, i.e. constants will be uniform for all $z_0 \in Q_{\frac 12}(\bar z)$).
\\\\
First, applying (\ref{multineq}) to $v\in \{u,\n d\}$ and recalling (\ref{Lk}) we see that
\begin{equation}\label{a}
\frac 1{r_n^5}\left(\|u\|_{3;Q^n}^3+\|\n d\|_{3;Q^n}^3\right) \lesssim \avintt{Q^n} (|u|^3 + |\n d|^3) \ dz \stackrel{(\ref{multineq})}{\lesssim} L_n^{3/2}
\end{equation}
for any $n$, with a constant independent of $n$. In particular,
\begin{equation}\label{uthreelnest}
\|u\|_{3;Q^n} +\|\n d\|_{3;Q^n} \lesssim r_n^{\frac 53} L_n^{1/2}
\end{equation}
for any $n$.
\\\\
Next, by Claim \ref{smoothlocalpressure} and Remark \ref{smoothlocalpressurerk} with $\psi:=\phi$, $\Omega_2:= B^1$ and $\Omega_1:= B^2$, at almost every \linebreak $(x,t) \in Q^2 = Q_{\frac 14}(z_0) = B_{\frac 14}(x_0)\times (t_0 - (\tfrac 14)^2, t_0)$ (where $p = \phi p$), as in (\ref{clasrepformc}) we have
\begin{equation}\label{pinversion}
\begin{array}{rcl}
p(x,t)
& = & \displaystyle{S[\phi J(t)](x) +\int_{B^1 \backslash B^2} (2\nabla G^x \otimes_\sigma \nabla \phi + G^x \nabla^2 \phi): J(t)\ dy}\\\\
& & \qquad \qquad \qquad +
\displaystyle{\int_{B^1 \backslash B^2} (2\nabla G^x \cdot \nabla \phi + G^x \D \phi)p(t) \ dy}\, ,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{Juu}
J:=u\otimes u + \n d \odot \n d \, ,
\end{equation}
$2a\otimes_\sigma b:= a\otimes b + b\otimes a$ and the operator $S$ consisting of second derivatives of the Newtonian potential given by
$$S[\tilde K](x):= \n_x \cdot \left(\n_x^T \cdot \int_{B^1} G^x \tilde K\right)$$
for $\tilde K\in L^q(B^1)$ is a bounded linear Calderon-Zygmund operator on $L^q(B^1)$ for $1<q<\infty$.
Hence for any $n\in \N$, denoting by $\chi_n$ the indicator function for the set $B^n=B_{2^{-n}}(x_0)$ and splitting $\phi = \chi_n \phi +(1-\chi_n)\phi$ in the first term of (\ref{pinversion}), we can write
$$p=p^{1,n} +p^{2,n} +p^{3,n}\equiv p^{1,n} +p^{2,n} +p^{3}\ ,$$
where, for almost every $(x,t) \in Q^2$,
$$p(x,t)
=\underbrace{S[\chi_{n}\phi J(t)](x)}_{=:p^{1,n}(x,t)} +
\underbrace{S[(1-\chi_{n}) \phi J(t)](x)}_{=:p^{2,n}(x,t)} +
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad$$
$$\qquad \qquad
+\underbrace{\int_{B^1 \backslash B^2} (2\nabla G^x \otimes_\sigma \nabla \phi + G^x \nabla^2 \phi): J(t)\ dy +
\int_{B^1 \backslash B^2} (2\nabla G^x \cdot \nabla \phi + G^x \D \phi)p(t) \ dy}_{=:p^{3,n}(x,t) \equiv p^{3}(x,t)}
$$
(where the last term is clearly independent of $n$, but we keep the notation $p^{3,n}$ for convenience).
\\\\
Note first that, by the classical Calderon-Zygmund estimates, there is a universal constant $C_{cz}>0$ such that, for all $n\in \N$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{firstpest}
\|p^{1,n}(t)\|_{\frac 32;B^{n+1}} \leq C_{cz}
\|\chi_{n}\phi J(t)\|_{\frac 32;\R^3}
\leq C_{cz}\|\tilde \phi\|_{\infty;\rt} \|J(t)\|_{\frac 32;B^n}\, .
\end{equation}
Next, since the appearance of $\n \phi$ in $p^3$ exactly cuts off a neighborhood of the singularity of $G^x$ (see (\ref{fundsoln})) uniformly for all $x\in B_{\frac 18}(x_0)$ (as we integrate over $|x_0-y| \geq \frac 14$, hence $|x-y| \geq \frac 18$), we see that $p^{3,n}(\cdot , t) \in \mathcal{C}^\infty(B_{\frac 18}(x_0))$ for $t\in I_{\frac 18}(t_0)$ with, in particular,
\begin{equation}\label{secondpest}
\|\n_x p^{3,n}(t)\|_{\infty;B^{n+1}} \stackrel{(n\geq 2)}{\leq}\|\n_x p^{3,n}(t)\|_{\infty;B_{\frac 18}(x_0)} \leq c(\tilde \phi)\left( \|J(t)\|_{1;B^1}+\|p(t)\|_{1;B^1} \right)\, .
\end{equation}
In the term $p^{2,n}$, the singularity coming from $G^x$ is also isolated due to the appearance of $\chi_n$, but it is no longer uniform in $n$ so we must be more careful. As we are integrating over a region which avoids a neighborhood of the singularity at $y=x$ of $G^x$, we can pass the derivatives in $S$ under the integral sign to write
$$\nabla_x p^{2,n}(x,t) = \int_{B^1 \setminus B^n} \nabla_x[(\nabla^2_x G^x)^T:\phi J(t)]\, dy = \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} \int_{B^k \setminus B^{k+1}}\nabla_x[(\nabla^2_x G^x)^T:\phi J(t)]\, dy$$
and note, in view of (\ref{fundsoln}) that
$$\left|\nabla^3_xG^x(y)\right| \lesssim \frac 1{|x-y|^4} \leq (2^{k+2})^4 \lesssim \frac{2^k}{|B^k|} \quad \forall\ x\in B^{k+2},\ y\in \left(B^{k+1}\right)^c\, .$$
Therefore, since
$$B^{n+1} = B^{(n-1)+2} \subseteq B^{k+2} \quad \textrm{for}\quad 1\leq k \leq n-1\, ,$$
we see that
\begin{equation}\label{thirdpest}
\|\n_x p^{2,n}(\cdot, t)\|_{\infty, B^{n+1}} \lesssim c(\tilde \phi)\sum_{k=1}^{n-1} 2^k\avint{B^k}|J(y, t)|\, dy
\end{equation}
for all $t\in I_{\frac 18}(t_0)$.
\\\\
Now, recalling the notation
$$\bar f_k(t):= \avint{B^k} f(x,t)\ dx$$
for a function $f(x,t)$ and $k\in \N$,
for any $t\in I^2=(t_0 - (\tfrac 14)^2,t_0)$ and $n\geq 2$, we estimate
\begin{equation}\label{calcuppbara}
\int_{B^{n+1}}|u(x,t)||p(x,t)-\bar p_{n+1}(t)|\, dx \leq \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
\end{equation}
$$\qquad \begin{array}{cl}
\leq &\displaystyle{ \sum_{j=1}^3 \int_{B^{n+1}}|u(x,t)||p^{j,n}(x,t)-\bar p^{j,n}_{n+1}(t)|\, dx}\\\\
\leq & \displaystyle{ \|u(\cdot,t)\|_{3;B^{n+1}}\sum_{j=1}^3\|p^{j,n}(\cdot,t)-\bar p^{j,n}_{n+1}(t)\|_{\frac 32;B^{n+1}} } \\\\
\stackrel{
{\tiny
\begin{array}{c}(\ref{poincareball}),\\ (\ref{lqavg}),\\ \textrm{H\"older} \end{array}}}{\lesssim} & \displaystyle{
\|u(t)\|_{3;B^{n+1}}\left(\|p^{1,n}(t)\|_{\frac 32;B^{n+1}} + |B^{n+1}|\sum_{j=2}^3 \|\nabla p^{j,n}(t)\|_{\infty;B^{n+1}} \right) } \\\\
\stackrel{{\tiny
\begin{array}{c}(\ref{firstpest}),\\ (\ref{secondpest}), \\ (\ref{thirdpest}),\\ \textrm{H\"older}\end{array}}
}{\lesssim} & \displaystyle{
\|u(t)\|_{3;B^{n+1}}\left(\|J(t)\|_{\frac 32;B^n}
+r_{n+1}^3\left\{\left(\sum_{k=1}^{n-1} 2^k\avint{B^k}|J(t)|\, dy\right) +\|J(t)\|_{\frac 32;B^1}+\|p(t)\|_{\frac 32;B^1} \right\}\right)\, .}
\end{array}
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad $$
Note further that, setting
\begin{equation}\label{ljkdef}
\mathbb{L}_{J,k}:=\left\|\avint{B^k}|J(t)|\, dy\right\|_{L^\infty_t(I^{k})}\, ,
\end{equation}
we have
$$\left\|\sum_{k=1}^{n-1} 2^k\avint{B^k}|J(t)|\, dy\right\|_{L_t^{\frac 32}(I^{n+1})} \leq
|I^{n+1}|^{\frac 23}\left(\max_{1\leq k\leq n-1} \mathbb{L}_{J,k} \right) \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} 2^k
\leq
r_{n+1}^{\frac 13}\max_{1\leq k\leq n-1} \mathbb{L}_{J,k}\, ,
$$
since $|I^{n+1}| = r^2_{n+1}$ and
$$\sum_{k=1}^{n-1} 2^k =\frac{ 2^n-2}{2-1} < 2^n = r_n^{-1}\, .$$
Integrating over $t\in I^{n+1}$ in (\ref{calcuppbara}), applying H\"older in the variable $t$ and recalling by (\ref{uthreelnest}) that $\|u\|_{3;Q^{n+1}} \lesssim r_{n+1}^{\frac 53} L_{n+1}^{1/2}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{calcuppbaraJ}
\intt{Q^{n+1}}|u||p-\overline{p_{n+1}}|\, dz \lesssim \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
\end{equation}
$$ \lesssim r_{n+1}^{\frac 53} L_{n+1}^{1/2}\left\{\|J\|_{\frac 32;Q^n} +
r_{n+1}^{\frac{10}3} \max_{1\leq k\leq n-1} \mathbb{L}_{J,k} +r_{n+1}^3 \left(
\|J\|_{\frac 32;Q^1}+\|p\|_{\frac 32;Q^1}\right)\right\}\, .$$
It follows now from (\ref{Juu}) that
\begin{equation}\label{Juua}
\|J\|_{\frac 32;Q^k} \leq \|u\|^2_{3;Q^k}+\|\n d\|^2_{3;Q^k} \stackrel{(\ref{uthreelnest})}{\lesssim} \left(r_{k}^{\frac 53} L_{k}^{1/2} \right)^2 =
r_k^{\frac {10}3}L_k
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Juuc}
\mathbb{L}_{J,k} \stackrel{(\ref{ljkdef})}{\leq} \left\|\avint{B^k}\left(|u(\cdot)|^2 + |\n d(\cdot)|^2\right)\, dy\right\|_{\infty; I^{k}} \leq L_k\, .
\end{equation}
Now from (\ref{Juu}), (\ref{calcuppbaraJ}), (\ref{Juua}), (\ref{Juuc}) and the simple fact that $\tfrac 12 r_n = r_{n+1} \leq 1$
we obtain
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
\displaystyle{r_{n+1}^{\frac 13} \avinttt{Q^{n+1}} |u||p-\bar p_{n+1}|\, dz } & \lesssim & \displaystyle{ L_{n+1}^{1/2}\bigg\{r_{n+1}^{\frac 13}L_n +
r_{n+1}^{\frac 13}\max_{1\leq k\leq n-1} L_k +
\underbrace{r_1^{\frac {10}3}}_{\leq 1}L_1 +\|p\|_{\frac 32;Q^1}\bigg\}} \\\\
&\lesssim & \displaystyle{ L_{n+1}^{1/2}\left\{
\max_{1\leq k\leq n} L_k +\|p\|_{\frac 32;Q^1} \right\}\, .}
\end{array}
$$
Since
$$\avinttt{Q^{n+1}} \left(|u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right) \, dz \stackrel{(\ref{a})}{\lesssim} L_{n+1}^{\frac 32}\, ,
$$
adding the previous estimates and recalling (\ref{Lk}) and (\ref{Rk}) we have
$$R_{n+1} \lesssim L_{n+1}^{\frac 32} + L_{n+1}^{1/2}\left( \max_{1\leq k\leq n} L_k +\|p\|_{\frac 32;Q^1}\right)$$
(where the constant is universal). This along with (\ref{lnolessln})
easily implies (\ref{c}) and proves \linebreak Proposition \ref{la}. \hfill $\Box$
\ \\\\
\subsection{\bf Proof of Proposition \ref{lb}}
\noindent
For simplicity, take $\bar z = z_0 = (0,0)$, so that (recall (\ref{balls})) $Q^k = Q^k(0,0)$, etc., as the rest can be obtained by appropriate shifts.
\\\\
We want to take the test function $\phi$ in (\ref{locent}) such that $\phi = \phi^n:= \chi \psi^n$, where (recall that here $Q^1 = Q^1(0,0) = B_{\frac 12}(0)\times (-\tfrac 14,0)$ so $\chi$ will be zero in a neighborhood of the ``parabolic boundary'' of $Q^1$)
\begin{equation}\label{chizero}
\chi \in \mathcal{C}^\infty_{0} \left(B_{\frac 12}(0)\times \left(-\tfrac 14,\infty\right)\right)\ , \quad \chi \equiv 1\ \textrm{in}\ Q^2\ , \quad 0 \leq\chi \leq 1
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{defnpsin}
\psi^n(x,t):= \frac 1{(r_n^2 -t)^{3/2}} e^{-\frac{|x|^2}{4(r_n^2-t)}} \quad \textrm{for} \quad t \leq 0\, .
\end{equation}
Note that the singularity of $\psi^n$ would naturally be at $(x,t)=(0,r_n^2) \notin Q^1$, so $\psi^n\in \mathcal{C}^\infty(\overline{Q_1})$ and we may extend $\psi^n$ smoothly to $t>0$ (where it's values will actually be irrelevant) for each $n$ so that, in particular, $\phi^n \in \mathcal{C}^\infty_{0} \left(B_{1}(0)\times \left(-1,\infty\right)\right)$ as required\footnote{In (\ref{locent}) as well, the values of $\phi$ for $t>\bar t$ are actually irrelevant.} in (\ref{locent}) (with $(\bar x,\bar t)=(0,0)$). Furthermore, we have
\begin{equation}\label{bh}
\nabla \psi^n(x,t) = -\frac x{2(r_n^2-t)}\psi^n(x,t) \quad \textrm{and} \quad
\psi_t^n + \Delta \psi^n \equiv 0 \quad \textrm{in}\ \ Q^1\ .
\end{equation}
Note first that for $(x,t)\in Q^n$ ($n\geq 2$), we have
$$0\leq |x| \leq r_n \quad \textrm{and} \quad r_n^2 \leq [r_n^2 -t]\leq 2r_n^2$$
so that
$$r_n^3 = \left(r_n^2\right)^{\frac 32} e^{\frac 0{8r_n^2}}\leq (r_n^2 -t)^{3/2} e^{\frac{|x|^2}{4(r_n^2-t)}} \leq \left(2r_n^2\right)^{\frac 32}
e^{\frac{r_n^2}{4r_n^2}} = 2^{\frac 32} e^{\frac 14} r_n^3\, . $$
Hence
\begin{equation}\label{psia}
\frac{1}{2^{\frac 32} e^{\frac 14} } \cdot \frac 1{r_n^3}
\leq
\psi^n(x,t) \leq \frac 1{r_n^3} \quad \forall \ (x,t) \in Q^n
\end{equation}
and therefore (as $r_n^2 - t> 0$)
\begin{equation}\label{psic}
|\nabla_x \psi^n(x,t)| = \frac {|x|}{2(r_n^2 - t)} |\psi^n(x,t)|
\lesssim
\frac {r_n}{r_n^2}\cdot \frac {1}{r_n^3}
= \frac 1{r_n^4} \quad \forall \ (x,t) \in Q^n\, .
\end{equation}
Next, note similarly that for $2\leq k\leq n$ and $(x,t)\in Q^{k-1}\setminus Q^k$, we have
$$r_k \leq |x| \leq r_{k-1} = 2r_k$$
and
$$r_k^2 \leq r_n^2 +r_k^2 \leq [r_n^2 -t]\leq r_{n}^2 +r_{k-1}^2 \leq 2r_{k-1}^2 = 8r_k^2\, ,$$
so that
$$e^{\frac 1{32}}r_k^3 = \left(r_k^2\right)^{\frac 32} e^{\frac {r_k^2}{32r_k^2}}
\leq (r_n^2 -t)^{3/2} e^{\frac{|x|^2}{4(r_n^2-t)}}
\leq \left(8r_k^2\right)^{\frac 32}e^{\frac{(2r_k)^2}{4r_k^2}} = 2^{\frac 92} e r_k^3\, .$$
Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{psib}
\frac {1}{2^{\frac 92}e}\cdot \frac 1{r_k^3} \leq \psi^n(x,t) \leq \frac {1}{e^{\frac 1{32}}}\cdot \frac {1}{r_k^3} \quad \forall \ (x,t) \in Q^{k-1} \backslash Q^k \ \ (2\leq k\leq n)
\end{equation}
and hence, as in (\ref{psic}),
\begin{equation}\label{psid}
|\nabla_x \psi^n(x,t)|
\lesssim
\frac {r_k}{r_k^2}\cdot \frac {1}{r_k^3}
= \frac 1{r_k^4}
\quad \forall \ (x,t) \in Q^{k-1}\backslash Q^k \ \ (2\leq k\leq n)\ .
\end{equation}
We can therefore estimate (for $n\geq 2$ where $\phi^n = \psi^n$ in $Q^n$):
$$\boxed{
\begin{array}{l}
\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle{\frac{1}{2^{\frac 32} e^{\frac 14} } \cdot \frac 1{r_n^3} \left[
\esssup_{I^n} \int_{B^n}\left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right) + \intt{Q^n} \left(|\n u|^2 + |\n^2 d|^2\right)
\right]}
\end{array}\\\\
\qquad \qquad \begin{array}{l}\displaystyle{\stackrel{(\ref{psia})}{\leq}
\esssup_{I^n} \int_{B^n}\left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right) \phi^n + \intt{Q^n}\left(|\n u|^2 + |\n^2 d|^2\right) \phi^n}
\\\\
\displaystyle{\stackrel{(\ref{locent})}{\leq}
\bar C\, \bigg\{\intt{Q^1} \left[ \left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right)|\phi_t^n + \D \phi^n| + (|u|^3 + |\n d|^3)|\nabla \phi^n| + \bar \rho |d|^2|\n d|^2 \phi^n \right] }
\\\\
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \displaystyle{+ \ \int_{ I^1} \bigg|\int_{B^{1} } pu\cdot \nabla \phi^n\bigg|\ \ \bigg\} \, .}
\end{array}
\end{array}
}$$
\noindent
Note that
$$\phi^n_t + \D \phi^n \stackrel{(\ref{bh})}{=} \psi^n(\chi_t + \D \chi) + 2\nabla \chi \cdot \nabla \psi^n \stackrel{(\ref{chizero})}{\equiv} 0 \ \textrm{in}\ Q^2$$
and hence, taking $k=2$ in (\ref{psib}) and (\ref{psid}), we see that
\begin{equation}\label{phiheatest}
\left|\phi^n_t + \D \phi^n\right| \lesssim \frac 1{r_2^3} + \frac 1{r_2^4} \lesssim 1 \qquad \textrm{in }\ Q^1\ ,
\end{equation}
so that
$$\boxed{\intt{Q^1} \left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right)|\phi^n_t + \Delta \phi^n| \stackrel{(\ref{phiheatest})}{\lesssim} \intt{Q^1} \left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right)
\stackrel{(\ref{etdefn})}{\lesssim} E_{3,q}^{2/3}}$$
by H\"older's inequality. Note similarly that
$$|\nabla \phi^n |= |\chi \nabla \psi^n + \psi^n \nabla \chi| \stackrel{(\ref{chizero})}{\lesssim} | \nabla \psi^n| + |\psi^n| \ \textrm{in}\ Q^1$$
so that (since $r_n^4 < r_n^3$) (\ref{psia}), (\ref{psic}) and (\ref{psib}), (\ref{psid}), respectively, give
\begin{equation}\label{gradphiest}
|\nabla \phi^n| \lesssim \frac 1{r_n^4} \quad \textrm{in} \ \ Q^n\ , \quad |\nabla \phi^n| \lesssim \frac 1{r_k^4} \quad \textrm{in} \ \ Q^{k-1}\backslash Q^k
\end{equation}
for any $n \geq 2$ and $2\leq k\leq n$.
Therefore
$$
\sum_{k=2}^n \intt{Q^{k-1}\backslash Q^k} \left( |u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right) \underbrace{|\nabla \phi^n|}_{\lesssim r_k^{-4}} \stackrel{(\ref{gradphiest})}{\lesssim} \left[ \max_{1\leq k \leq n-1} (r_k)^{1-\alpha}\avintt{Q^k}\left(|u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right) \right]
\sum_{k=2}^n (r_k)^{\alpha}
$$
and similarly
$$ \intt{Q^{n}} \left( |u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right) \underbrace{|\nabla \phi^n|}_{\lesssim r_n^{-4}}\stackrel{(\ref{gradphiest})}{\lesssim} \left[(r_n)^{1-\alpha} \avintt{Q^n}\left(|u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right)\right](r_n)^{\alpha}
$$
for any $\alpha \in (0,1]$, and we note that
\begin{equation}\label{rkmsum}
\sum_{k=1}^\infty (r_k)^{\alpha}
=\sum_{k=1}^\infty \left(2^{-\alpha}\right)^{k} = \frac {1}{2^{\alpha}-1} <\infty \qquad \forall \ \ \alpha >0 \, .
\end{equation}
Hence in view of the disjoint union
\begin{equation}\label{disjun}
Q^1=\left(\bigcup_{k=2}^n Q^{k-1}\backslash Q^k\right)\cup Q^{n}
\end{equation}
we have (taking $\alpha=1$ in (\ref{rkmsum}))
$$\boxed{\intt{Q^1} \left( |u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right) |\nabla \phi^n | \lesssim \max_{1\leq k \leq n} \avintt{Q^k} \left(|u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right)\, .}$$
Similarly, setting
$$\alpha_q:=\frac{2(q-5)}{q-2}$$
(note $\alpha_q \in (0,\tfrac 12]$ for $q\in (5,6]$), we have
$$
\bar \rho \intt{Q^1} |d|^2 |\n d|^2\phi^n
\leq \tfrac 2q \underbrace{\intt{Q^1} |d|^q|\n d|^{3(1-\frac q6)}}_{\leq E_{3,q}} + (1-\tfrac 2q)\intt{Q^1} |\n d|^3 (\phi^n)^{\frac 13(5-\alpha_q)}
$$
uniformly, of course, over $\bar \rho \in (0,1]$. Since
$$ \intt{Q^{n}} |\n d|^3 (\underbrace{ \phi^n}_{\lesssim r_n^{-3}})^{\frac 13(5-\alpha_q)} \stackrel{(\ref{psia})}{\lesssim}
(r_n)^{\alpha_q -5}\intt{Q^{n}} |\n d|^3 \lesssim
(r_n)^{\alpha_q} \avintt{Q^n} |\n d|^3
$$
for $n\geq 2$ and similarly
$$
\intt{Q^{k}\backslash Q^{k+1}}
|\n d|^3 (\underbrace{ \phi^n}_{\lesssim r_k^{-3}})^{\frac 13(5-\alpha_q)} \stackrel{(\ref{psib})}{\lesssim}
( r_k)^{\alpha_q -5}\intt{Q^{k}} |\n d|^3 \lesssim
(r_k)^{\alpha_q }\avintt{Q^k} |\n d|^3
$$
for $1\leq k\leq n-1$, we see that (\ref{rkmsum}) with $\alpha = \alpha_q$ and (\ref{disjun}) again give
$$\intt{Q^1} |\n d|^3 (\phi^n)^{\frac 13(5-\alpha_q)}
\leq (2^{\alpha_q}-1)^{-1} \max_{1\leq k \leq n} \avintt{Q^k} |\n d|^3\, .$$
We therefore see that
$$
\boxed{ \bar \rho \intt{Q^1} |d|^2 |\n d|^2\phi^n
\lesssim \tfrac 25 E_{3,q} + \tfrac 23 (2^{\alpha_q}-1)^{-1}\max_{1\leq k \leq n} \avintt{Q^k} |\n d|^3 \quad \textrm{with} \ \alpha_q:=\frac{2(q-5)}{q-2}\, ,}$$
uniformly for any $\bar \rho \in (0,1]$ and $q\in (5,6]$.
\\\\
Putting all of the above together and recalling (\ref{Lk}), we see that for $n\geq 2$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{lnfirstestabc}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!L_n:=\esssup_{I^n} \avint{B^n} \left(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2\right) + \int_{I^n} \avint{B^n} \left(|\n u|^2 + |\n^2 d|^2\right) \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
\end{equation}
$$\qquad \qquad \qquad \lesssim E_{3,q} + E_{3,q}^{2/3} +
(2^{\alpha_q}-1)^{-1}\max_{1\leq k \leq n} \avintt{Q^k} \left(|u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right)+ \int_{ I^1} \bigg|\int_{B^{1} } pu\cdot \nabla \phi^n\bigg|\, .
$$
Furthermore we claim that for $1\leq k_0 \leq n-1$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{pressure}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\boxed{\ \int_{I^1} \bigg|\int_{B^{1} } pu\cdot \nabla \phi^n\bigg| \lesssim
\max_{k_0\leq k \leq n}\left(r_k^{1/3}\avintt{Q^k} |p-\bar p_k ||u|\right) + k_02^{4k_0}\intt{Q^1} |p||u|
\ .}
\end{equation}
Assuming this for the moment and continuing, for $n\geq 2$, (\ref{lnfirstestabc}), (\ref{pressure}) and Young's convexity inequality along with the fact that, for any $k_1\geq 1$, we can estimate
$$\max_{1\leq k \leq k_1} \avintt{Q^k} \left(|u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right) \lesssim k_1 2^{5k_1}\intt{Q^1}\left(|u|^3 + |\n d|^3\right)$$
imply (recalling (\ref{Rk})) that
$$\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! L_n
\lesssim E_{3,q} + E_{3,q}^{2/3} +
(2^{\alpha_q}-1)^{-1}\max_{k_0\leq k \leq n} R_k + k_02^{5k_0}\underbrace{\intt{Q^1} |u|^3 + |\n d|^3+ |p|^{3/2}}_{\leq E_{3,q}}
$$
for any $k_0\in \{1, \dots, n-1\}$, and hence Proposition \ref{lb} is proved.
\\\\
To prove (\ref{pressure}), we consider additional functions $\chi_k$ (so that $\chi_k \phi^n = \chi_k \chi \psi^n$) satisfying
(recall that here $Q^k = Q^k(0,0) = B_{r_k}(0)\times (-r_k^2,0)$, so $\chi_k$ will be zero in a neighborhood of the ``parabolic boundary'' of $Q^k$)
\begin{equation}\label{chiprop}
\begin{array}{c}
\chi_k \in \mathcal{C}_{0}^\infty(\widetilde Q_{r_k}) \quad \textrm{with} \quad \widetilde Q_r:=B_{r}(0)\times (-r^2,r^2) \ \ \textrm{for} \ r>0\, ,\\\\
\chi_k \equiv 1 \quad \textrm{in} \ \ \widetilde Q_{\frac 78 r_k}\, ,\quad 0\leq \chi_k \leq 1 \quad \textrm{and} \quad |\nabla \chi_k | \lesssim \frac 1{r_k}
\end{array}\end{equation}
($\left .\chi_k\right|_{\{t>0\}}$ will again actually be irrelevant) so that in particular (as $\widetilde Q_{r_{k+2}} \subset \widetilde Q_{\frac 78 r_{k+1}}$ where \linebreak $\chi_k \equiv \chi_{k+1} \equiv 1$)
\begin{equation}\label{suppchi}
\mathrm{supp}\left(\chi_k - \chi_{k+1}\right) \subset \widetilde Q_{r_k} \backslash \widetilde Q_{r_{k+2}}\, .
\end{equation}
Then since $Q^1 = Q_{1/2}(0,0) \subset Q_{\frac 78 }(0,0) = Q_{\frac 78 r_0}(0,0)$, we have $\chi_0 \equiv 1$ on $Q^1$ and hence for any $n\geq 2$, writing
$$\chi_0 = \chi_n + \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(\chi_{k} - \chi_{k+1})\, ,$$
for any fixed $k_0 \in \N\cap [1,n-1]$ and at each fixed $\tau \in I^1$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{bigcalc}
\!\begin{array}{rcl}
\displaystyle{\int_{B^{1} } pu\cdot \nabla \phi^n} & \stackrel{(\ref{chiprop})}{=} &\displaystyle{\int_{B^{1} } pu\cdot \nabla [\chi_0 \phi^n] }\\\\
& = &
\displaystyle{\int_{B^{1} } pu\cdot \nabla [\chi_n \phi^n]
+\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\int_{B^{1} } pu\cdot \nabla [(\chi_{k} - \chi_{k+1}) \phi^n]
}\\\\
& \stackrel{(\ref{chiprop}),(\ref{suppchi})}{=} &
\displaystyle{\int_{B^{n} } pu\cdot \nabla [\chi_n \phi^n]
+\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\int_{[B^k\setminus B^{k+2}] } pu\cdot \nabla [(\chi_{k} - \chi_{k+1}) \phi^n]
}\\\\
& \stackrel{(\ref{udivfree})}{=} &
\displaystyle{\int_{B^{n} } (p-\bar p_n)u\cdot \nabla [\chi_n \phi^n]+\sum_{k=0}^{k_0-1}\int_{[B^k\setminus B^{k+2}] } pu\cdot \nabla [(\chi_{k} - \chi_{k+1}) \phi^n]} \\\\
&&\qquad \displaystyle{+\sum_{k=k_0}^{n-1}\int_{[B^k\setminus B^{k+2}] } (p-\bar p_k)u\cdot \nabla [(\chi_{k} - \chi_{k+1}) \phi^n]\, ,}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where
$$\bar p_k = \bar p_k (\tau)=\avint{B^k}p(x,\tau)\ dx\ .$$
Note first that (\ref{psib}), (\ref{psid}) and (\ref{suppchi}) imply (since $r_{j+1} = 2r_{j}$ for any $j$)
that
$$|\nabla [(\chi_{k} - \chi_{k+1}) \phi^n]| \leq |\chi_{k} - \chi_{k+1}|| \nabla \phi^n| +|\phi^n||\nabla (\chi_{k} - \chi_{k+1}) | \lesssim r_k^{-4}
$$
$$
\textrm{on} \quad Q^k\setminus Q^{k+2} =
(Q^k\setminus Q^{k+1}) \cup (Q^{k+1}\setminus Q^{k+2})
$$
for any $k$, and similarly
$$|\nabla [\chi_n \phi^n]| \leq |\chi_n|| \nabla \phi^n| +|\phi^n||\nabla \chi_n | \lesssim r_n^{-4}
\quad \textrm{on} \ \ Q^n\, .$$
Therefore we can estimate (recalling again (\ref{chiprop}) and (\ref{suppchi}) when integrating $|(\ref{bigcalc})|$ over $\tau \in I^1$)
$$\int_{\tau\in I^1} \bigg|\int_{B^{1} \times \{\tau\}} pu\cdot \nabla \phi^n\bigg| \lesssim
k_02^{4k_0}\intt{Q^1} |p||u| +\sum_{k=k_0}^{n}r_k\avintt{ Q^k}
|p-\bar p_k||u|
$$
which, along with (\ref{rkmsum}) with $q=\frac 32$ implies (\ref{pressure}) for any $ k_0\in [1,n-1]$ as desired. \hfill $\Box$
\ \\\\
\subsection{\bf Proof of Proposition \ref{lc}}\label{claimsproofs}
\noindent
In this section we prove the technical decay estimate (Proposition \ref{lc}) used to prove Lemma \ref{thmb}. In all of what follows, recall the definitions in (\ref{athroughgdef}) and (\ref{athroughgdefm}) of $A_{z_0}$, $B_{z_0}$, $C_{z_0}$, $D_{z_0}$, $E_{z_0}$, $F_{z_0}$, $ G_{q,z_0}$ and $M_{q,z_0}$. We will require the following three claims which essentially appear in \cite{linliu} and which generalize certain lemmas in \cite{caf}; however we include full proofs in order to clarify certain details, and to highlight the role of $G_{q,z_0}$ (not utilized in \cite{linliu}) in Claim \ref{clmalocen} which is therefore\footnote{Note that $G_{z_0}(r) \lesssim \|d\|_\infty$ uniformly in $r$ (and $z_0$), though in our setting we may have $d\notin L^\infty$.} a slightly refined version of what appears in \cite{linliu}.
\begin{clm}[General estimates (cf. Lemmas 5.1 and 5.2 in \cite{caf})]\label{clmgenfunabce}
There exist constants $c_1,c_2>0$ such that for any $u$ and $d$ which have the regularities in (\ref{enspaces}) for $\Omega_T:=\Omega \times (0,T)$ as in Theorem \ref{mainthm}, the estimates
\begin{equation}\label{m}
C_{z_0}(\gamma \rho)\leq c_1 \left[\gamma^3 A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2} + \gamma^{-3} A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}B_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}\right](\rho)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{ag}
E_{z_0}(\gamma \rho) \leq c_2 \left[C_{z_0}^{\frac 13 } A^{\frac 1 2}_{z_0}B^{\frac 1 2}_{z_0}\right](\gamma \rho)
\end{equation}
hold for any $z_0\in \R^{3+1}$ and $\rho>0$ such that $Q_\rho^*(z_0)\subseteq \Omega_T$ and any $\gamma\in (0,1]$.
\end{clm}
\begin{clm}[Estimates requiring the pressure equation (cf. Lemmas 5.3 and 5.4 in \cite{caf})]\label{clma}
There exist constants $ c_3, c_4 >0$ such that for any $u$, $d$ and $p$ which have the regularities in (\ref{enspaces}) and (\ref{pspace}) for $\Omega_T:=\Omega \times (0,T)$ as in Theorem \ref{mainthm} and which satisfy the pressure equation (\ref{preseq}), the estimates
\begin{equation}\label{n}
D_{z_0}(\gamma \rho)\leq c_3 \left[\g (D_{z_0}+ A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}B_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4} + C_{z_0}^{\frac 12}) + \g^{-5}A_{z_0}^\frac{3}{4}B_{z_0}^{\frac 32}\right](\rho)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{p}
F_{z_0}(\gamma \rho)\leq c_4\left[\gamma^\frac1{12}(A_{z_0} +D_{z_0}^{\frac 43}+ C_{z_0}^{\frac 23} ) + \gamma^{-10} A_{z_0}(B_{z_0}^{\frac 12}+B_{z_0}^2)\right](\rho)\, .
\end{equation}
hold for any $z_0\in \R^{3+1}$ and $\rho>0$ such that $Q_\rho^*(z_0)\subseteq \Omega_T$ and any $\gamma\in (0,\tfrac 12]$.
\end{clm}
\ \\
The crucial aspect of the estimates (\ref{m}), (\ref{ag}), (\ref{n}) and (\ref{p}) (which control $M_{q,z_0}(\g \rho)$) in proving Lemma \ref{thmb} (through Proposition \ref{lc}) is that whenever a negative power of $\g$ appears, there is always a factor of $B_{z_0}$ as well, which will be small when proving Lemma \ref{thmb}. Positive powers of $\gamma$ will similarly be small; in each term evaluated at $\rho$ (see also (\ref{o}) below), we must have either $\gamma^\alpha$ or $B_{z_0}^\alpha$ for some $\alpha >0$.
\\\\
To complete the proof of Proposition \ref{lc}, we require the following:
\begin{clm}[Estimate requiring the local energy inequality (cf. Lemma 5.5 in \cite{caf})]\label{clmalocen}
There exists a constant $ c_5 >0$ such that for any $u$, $d$ and $p$ which have the regularities in (\ref{enspaces}) and (\ref{pspace}) for $\Omega_T:=\Omega \times (0,T)$ as in Theorem \ref{mainthm} and such that $u$ satisfies the weak divergence-free property (\ref{divfree}) and the local energy inequality (\ref{locenta}) holds, the estimate
\begin{equation}\label{q}
\!\!\!\!\!\!A_{z_0}(\tfrac \rho 2)\leq c_5 \left[C^\frac23 + E+F_{z_0} + (1+[\, \cdot \, ]^2)G_q^{\frac{4}{6-q}}+ (G_q^{\frac{2}{6-q}}+C^{\frac 13}) B^{\frac 12}\right](\rho)
\end{equation}
holds for any $q\in [2,6)$ and any $z_0\in \R^{3+1}$ and $\rho>0$ such that $Q_\rho^*(z_0)\subseteq \Omega_T$.
\end{clm}
\ \\
Postponing the proof of the claims, let us use them to prove the proposition.
\\\\
In all of what follows, we note the simple facts that, for any $\rho >0$ and $\alpha \in (0,1]$,
\begin{equation}\label{ca}
\begin{array}{c}
{\displaystyle \mathcal{K} \in \{A_{z_0},B_{z_0}\} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad \mathcal{K}(\alpha \rho) \leq \alpha^{-1}\mathcal{K}(\rho)}\ , \\\\
{\displaystyle \mathcal{K} \in \{C_{z_0},D_{z_0},E_{z_0},F_{z_0}\} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad \mathcal{K}(\alpha \rho)\leq \alpha^{-2}\mathcal{K}(\rho)}\\\\
\textrm{and} \qquad {\displaystyle G_{q,z_0}(\alpha \rho)\leq \alpha^{-2-\frac q2}G_{q,z_0}(\rho)}\ .
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\ \\
{\bf Proof of Proposition \ref{lc}.} \quad Fixing $z_0$ and $\rho_0$ as in Proposition \ref{lc}, under the assumptions in the proposition we see that estimates (\ref{m}), (\ref{ag}), (\ref{n}), (\ref{p}) and (\ref{q}) hold for all $\rho \in (0,\rho_0]$, $\gamma \in (0,\frac 12]$ and $q\in [2,6)$ by Claims \ref{clmgenfunabce}, \ref{clma} and \ref{clmalocen}.
\\\\
Note first that (\ref{m}), (\ref{ag}) and (\ref{ca}) imply that
$$E_{z_0}(\gamma \rho) \lesssim \left[A_{z_0}B_{z_0}^{\frac 12} + \gamma^{-2}A_{z_0}^{\frac 34}B_{z_0}^{\frac 34} \right](\rho)$$
and hence, for example, there exists some $c_6>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{o}
E_{z_0}(\gamma \rho)\leq c_6 \left[\gamma^2 A_{z_0} + \gamma^{-2} \left(A_{z_0}^{\frac 12}B_{z_0}^{\frac 12} + A_{z_0}B_{z_0}\right)\right](\rho)\, ,
\end{equation}
for $\rho \in (0,\rho_0]$ and $\gamma \in (0,\tfrac 12]$ (in fact, for $\gamma \in (0,1]$) and that it follows from (\ref{q}), the assumption (\ref{grhofinite}) and the assumption that $\rho_0 \leq 1$ that there exists $c_7>0$ such that
$$
\!\!\!\!\!\!A_{z_0}(\tfrac \rho 2)\leq c_7 \left[C_{z_0}^{\frac 23}+ E_{z_0} +F_{z_0} +G_{q,z_0}^{\frac{4}{6-q}}+ (G_{q,z_0}^{\frac{2}{6-q}}+C{z_0}^{\frac 13})B_{z_0}^{\frac 12}\right](\rho)\, ,
$$
and hence, recalling (\ref{athroughgdefm}), we have that, for some $c_8>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{r}
A^{\frac 3 2}_{z_0}\left(\rho/ 2\right)\leq c_8 \left[M_{q,z_0}(\rho) +M_{q,z_0}^{\frac 1 2}(\rho)B_{z_0}^{\frac 34}(\rho)\right]
\end{equation}
for $\rho \in (0,\rho_0]$. We note as well that, as in (\ref{gsiginterpesta}), if $\sigma \in [q, 6)$ and if (\ref{dsmallatzo}) holds for some $g_\sigma \geq 1$, then
\begin{equation}\label{ggsigab}
G^{\frac{6}{6-q}}_{q,z_0}(\g \rho) \stackrel{(\ref{gsiginterpest})}{\leq}
g_{\sigma}^{\frac{6}{6-\sigma}}\cdot C_{z_0}^{\alpha_{\sigma,q}}(\g \rho)
\stackrel{(\ref{m})}{\leq}
g_{\sigma}^{\frac{6}{6-\sigma}}\cdot \left[\gamma^3 A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2} + \gamma^{-3} A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}B_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}\right]^{\alpha_{\sigma,q}}(\rho)
\end{equation}
for $\rho \in (0,\rho_0]$.
Now, writing $\gamma \rho = 2\gamma \cdot \tfrac \rho 2$ for $2\gamma \leq \frac 12$ it follows from (\ref{m}), (\ref{n}), (\ref{p}), (\ref{o}), (\ref{ggsigab}) and (\ref{athroughgdefm}) followed by an application of (\ref{ca}) (with $\alpha = \frac 12$) to all terms except for $A_{z_0}$ along with the facts that $\gamma, B_{z_0}(\rho) \leq 1$ (so that you can always estimate positive powers by $1$) as well as the fact that $\alpha_{\sigma,q}\in (0,1)$ that
$$\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!M_{q,z_0}(\g \rho) \leq
[C_{z_0} + G^{\frac 6{6-q}}_{q,z_0} + D^2_{z_0} + E_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2} + F_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2}](\g \rho) \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
$$
$$\lesssim
\left[\gamma^3 A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2}(\tfrac \rho 2) + \gamma^{-3} A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}(\tfrac \rho 2)B_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}(\rho)\right]
+
g_{\sigma}^{\frac{6}{6-\sigma}}\cdot\left[\gamma^3 A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2}(\tfrac \rho 2) + \gamma^{-3} A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}(\tfrac \rho 2)B_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}(\rho)\right]^{\alpha_{\sigma,q}}
\qquad \qquad \qquad $$
$$
+ \left[\g M_{q,z_0}^{\frac 12}(\rho) + \g^{-5}A_{z_0}^\frac{3}{4}(\tfrac \rho 2)\left(B_{z_0}^{\frac 3 4}(\rho)+B_{z_0}^{\frac 32}(\rho)\right)\right]^2
$$
$$
\qquad + \left[\gamma^2 A_{z_0}(\tfrac \rho 2) + \gamma^{-2} \left(A_{z_0}^{\frac 12}(\tfrac \rho 2)B_{z_0}^{\frac 12}(\rho) + A_{z_0}(\tfrac \rho 2)B_{z_0}(\rho)\right)\right]^{\frac 3 2}
$$
$$
\qquad \qquad \qquad + \left[\gamma^\frac1{12}\left(A_{z_0}(\tfrac \rho 2) +M_{q,z_0}^{\frac 23}(\rho) \right) + \gamma^{-10} A_{z_0}(\tfrac \rho 2)\left(B_{z_0}^{\frac 12}(\rho)+B_{z_0}^2(\rho)\right)\right]^{\frac 3 2}
$$
$$\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\lesssim
(1+g_{\sigma}^{\frac{6}{6-\sigma}})\left[\gamma^{\frac {\alpha_{\sigma,q}}8} \left(M_{q,z_0}(\rho)+[A_{z_0}^{\frac {3} 2}(\tfrac \rho 2)]^{\alpha_{\sigma,q}}+[A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2}(\tfrac \rho 2)]\right) + \gamma^{-15} \left([A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2}(\tfrac \rho 2)]^{\frac {\alpha_{\sigma,q}}2}+[A_{z_0}^{\frac 3 2}(\tfrac \rho 2)]^{\frac 12}+[A_{z_0}^\frac{3}{2}(\tfrac \rho 2)]\right)B_{z_0}^{\frac {3\alpha_{\sigma,q}} 4}(\rho)\right]
$$
so long as $\gamma \in (0,\tfrac 14]$. Noting that $1\leq g_{\sigma}^{\frac{6}{6-\sigma}}$, the estimate (\ref{l}) for such $\gamma$ and for $\rho \in (0,\rho_0]$ now follows from the estimate above along with (\ref{r}) as, in particular, (\ref{r}) implies (as $\gamma, B_{z_0}(\rho) \leq 1$ and $\alpha_{\sigma,q}\in (0,1)$) that
$$
A^{\frac 3 2}_{z_0}\left(\tfrac \rho 2\right)\lesssim M_{q,z_0}(\rho) +\g^{-15-\frac{\alpha_{\sigma,q}}8}M_{q,z_0}^{\frac 1 2}(\rho)B_{z_0}^{\frac {3\alpha_{\sigma,q}}4}(\rho)
$$
which we apply to the terms above with the positive power of $\gamma$, and that
$$
A^{\frac 3 2}_{z_0}\left(\tfrac \rho 2\right)\lesssim M_{q,z_0}(\rho) +M_{q,z_0}^{\frac 1 2}(\rho)\, ,
$$
which we apply to the terms above with the negative power of $\gamma$. This completes the proof of \linebreak Proposition \ref{lc}. \hfill $\Box$
\\\\\\
Let us now prove the claims:
\\\\
{\bf Proof of Claim \ref{clmgenfunabce}:} \quad For simplicity, we will suppress the dependence on $z_0=(x_0,t_0)$ in what follows.
\\\\
Let us first prove (\ref{m}). Note that for any $r\leq \rho$, at any fixed $t\in I_r^*$, taking $v\in \{u,\n d\}$ we have
$$
\int_{B_r}|v|^2\, dx \leq
\int_{B_\rho}\left||v|^2 - \overline{|v|^2}^\rho \right|\, dx \ + \ |B_r|\, \overline{|v|^2}^\rho
\lesssim \rho \int_{B_\rho}\left|\n |v|^2\right| \, dx \ + \ \left(\frac r\rho \right)^3 \int_{B_\rho}|v|^2\, dx
$$
due to Poincar\'e's inequality (\ref{poincareball}). Since $\left|\n |v|^2\right|\leq |v||\n v|$ almost everywhere, H\"older's inequality then implies that
\begin{equation}\label{ubrtworrho}
\|v\|_{2;B_r}^2 \lesssim \rho \|v\|_{2;B_\rho}\|\n v\|_{2;B_\rho} + \left(\frac r\rho \right)^3\|v\|_{2;B_\rho}^2\, .
\end{equation}
Therefore
$$\|v\|_{3;B_r}^3 \stackrel{(\ref{interpsobball})}{\lesssim}
\frac 1{r^{\frac 32}}\left(\|v\|_{2;B_r}^2 \right)^{\frac 32} + \|v\|_{2;B_r}^{\frac 32}\|\n v\|_{2;B_r}^{\frac 32}\qquad \qquad \qquad
$$
$$
\qquad \qquad \quad \ \stackrel{(\ref{ubrtworrho})}{\lesssim}
\left(1+\left(\frac \rho r\right)^{\frac 32} \right)\|v\|_{2;B_\rho}^{\frac 32}\|\n v\|_{2;B_\rho}^{\frac 32}
+\frac 1{r^{\frac 32}}\left(\frac r \rho \right)^{\frac 92}\|v\|_{2;B_\rho}^{3}\, .
$$
\noindent
Summing over $v\in \{u,\n d\}$, we see that
$$\|u\|_{3;B_r}^3 + \|\n d\|_{3;B_r}^3 {\lesssim}
\left(1+\left(\frac \rho r\right)^{\frac 32} \right)\left(\|u\|_{2;B_\rho}^2 + \|\n d\|_{2;B_\rho}^2\right)^{\frac 34}\left(\|\n u\|_{2;B_\rho}^2 + \|\n^2 d\|_{2;B_\rho}^2\right)^{\frac 34}
$$
$$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad +\frac {r^3} {\rho^{\frac 92}}\left(\|u\|_{2;B_\rho}^2+\|\n d\|_{2;B_\rho}^2\right)^{\frac 32}\, .
$$
Now integrating over $t\in I_r^*$ (where $|I_r^*|=r^2$), H\"older's inequality implies that
$$r^2C(r)
\lesssim
|I^*_r|^{\frac 14}\left(1+\left(\frac \rho r\right)^{\frac 32} \right)\left\|\|u\|_{2;B_\rho}^2 + \|\n d\|_{2;B_\rho}^2\right\|_{\infty;I_r^*}^{\frac 34}\left(\|\n u\|_{2;Q_\rho^*}^2 + \|\n^2 d\|_{2;Q_\rho^*}^2\right)^{\frac 34}
$$
$$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad +|I^*_r| \frac {r^3} {\rho^{\frac 92}}\left\|\|u\|_{2;B_\rho}^2+\|\n d\|_{2;B_\rho}^2\right\|_{\infty;I_r^*}^{\frac 32}
$$
$$\lesssim
r^{\frac 12}\left(1+\left(\frac \rho r\right)^{\frac 32} \right) (\rho A(\rho))^{\frac 34}(\rho B(\rho))^{\frac 34}
+\frac {r^5} {\rho^{\frac 92}}(\rho A(\rho))^{\frac 32}\, ,\qquad \qquad \qquad
$$
which, upon dividing both sides by $r^2$, setting $\gamma:=\frac r\rho$ and noting that $1\leq \gamma^{-\frac 32}$, precisely gives (\ref{m}).
\\\\
Next, to prove (\ref{ag}), we use the Poincar\'e-Sobolev inequality
$$\|g-\overline{g}^r\|_{q^*;B_r} \leq c_q \|\n g\|_{q;B_r}$$
(the constant is independent of $r$ due to the relationship between $q$ and $q^*$) corresponding to the embedding ${W^{1,q}\hookrightarrow L^{q^*}}$ for $q<3$ (in $\R^3$) and $q^*=\frac{3q}{3-q}$. Taking $q=1$, at any $t\in I_r^*$ and for $v\in \{u,\n d\}$ the H\"older and Poincar\'e-Sobolev inequalities give us
$$\int_{B_r}|u|\left||v|^2 - \overline{|v|^2}^r \right|\, dx \leq \|u\|_{3;B_r} \|\ |v|^2 - \overline{|v|^2}^r\ \|_{\frac 3 2;B_r}
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad $$
$$
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \lesssim \|u\|_{3;B_r} \|\n (|v|^2)\|_{1;B_r}
\lesssim \|u\|_{3;B_r} \|v\|_{2;B_r} \|\n v\|_{2;B_r}\, . $$
Summing this first over $v\in \{u,\n d\}$ at a fixed $t$ and then integrating over $t\in I_r^*$, we see that
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
{\displaystyle r^2 E(r)}
& \lesssim & {\displaystyle \int_{I_r^*} \|u\|_{3;B_r}\left( \|u\|_{2;B_r}^2+\|\n d\|_{2;B_r}^2\right)^{\frac 12} \left(\|\n d\|_{2;B_r}^2+\|\n^2 d\|_{2;B_r}^2\right)^{\frac 12} \, dt}\\\\
&\lesssim & \|u\|_{3;Q_r^*} \left\|\left( \|u\|_{2;B_r}^2+\|\n d\|_{2;B_r}^2\right)^{\frac 12}\right\|_{6;I_r^*}
\left(\|\n u\|_{2;Q_r^*}^2 + \|\n^2 d\|_{2;Q_r^*}^2\right)^{\frac 12} \\\\
&\lesssim & |I^*_r|^{\frac 16}\left(\|u\|_{3;Q_r^*}^3\right)^{\frac 13} \left\|\|u\|_{2;B_r}^2+\|\n d\|_{2;B_r}^2\right\|_{\infty;I_r^*}^{\frac 12}
\left(\|\n u\|_{2;Q_r^*}^2 + \|\n^2 d\|_{2;Q_r^*}^2\right)^{\frac 12} \\\\
&\lesssim & r^{\frac 13} (r^2 C(r))^{\frac 13} (rA(r))^{\frac 12}
\left(rB(r)\right)^{\frac 12}\ \ =\ \ r^2 [C^{\frac 13} A^{\frac 12}
B^{\frac 12}](r)
\end{array}
$$
which proves (\ref{ag}) and completes the proof of Claim \ref{clmgenfunabce}. \hfill $\Box$
\\\\\\
{\bf Proof of Claim \ref{clma}:}
\\\\
As in (\ref{clasrepformcv}) of Claim \ref{smoothlocalpressure}, for any $t\in I_r^*(z_0)$ ($r\leq \rho$) we use Remark \ref{smoothlocalpressurerk} to decompose $\Pi:=p(\cdot, t)$ for almost every $x\in B_{\frac{3\rho}4}(x_0)$ using a smooth cut-off function $\psi$ equal to one in $\Omega_1:=B_{\frac{3\rho}4}(x_0)$ and supported in $\Omega_2:=B_\rho(x_0)$, so that
\begin{equation}\label{ac}
|\n \psi| \lesssim \rho^{-1} \quad \textrm{and} \quad |\D \psi| \lesssim \rho^{-2}\, ,
\end{equation}
as
$$
p(x,t) = \underbrace{-\int \n G^x \cdot v(t)\psi\, dy}_{=:p_1(x,t)} + \underbrace{\int G^x_{\psi,1} \cdot v(t)\, dy}_{=:p_2(x,t)} + \underbrace{\int G^x_{\psi,2} p(\cdot, t)\, dy}_{=:p_3(x,t)}
$$
with
$$G^x_{\psi,1}:=-G^x \n \psi\, , \qquad
G^x_{\psi,2}:=2 \n G^x \cdot \n \psi + G^x \D \psi
$$
and
$$v(t):=[\n^T \cdot (u \otimes u + \n d \odot \n d)](\cdot,t)\, .$$
Our goal is to estimate $p(x,t)$ for $x\in B_{\frac \rho 2}(x_0)$.
\\\\
Both $p_2$ and $p_3$ contain derivatives of $\psi$ in each term so that the integrand can only be non-zero when $|y-x_0|>\frac {3\rho}4$, and hence for $x\in B_{\frac \rho 2}(x_0)$ one has
\begin{equation}\label{acgx}
|x-y| \geq \frac \rho 4 \quad \Longrightarrow \quad |G^x(y)| \lesssim \rho^{-1} \quad \textrm{and} \quad |\n G^x(y)| \lesssim \rho^{-2}\, .
\end{equation}
In view of (\ref{ac}) and (\ref{acgx}) and the fact that $\psi$ is supported in $B_\rho(x_0)$, we have (omitting the dependence on $t$, and noting that the constants in the inequalities are independent of $t$ as they come only from $G^x$ and $\psi$)
\pagebreak
\begin{equation}\label{ba}
\!\!\!\!\!\sup_{x\in B_{\frac \rho 2}(x_0)}|p_2(x)| \lesssim \rho^{-2} \int_{B_\rho(x_0)} (|u||\n u| + |\n d||\n^2 d|)\, dy \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
\end{equation}
$$
\qquad \qquad \ \ \qquad \qquad \lesssim \rho^{-2} \left(\int_{B_\rho(x_0)} (|u|^2 + |\n d|^2)\, dy \right)^{\frac12} \left(\int_{B_\rho(x_0)} (|\n u|^2 + |\n^2 d|^2)\, dy \right)^{\frac12}$$
and similarly
\begin{equation}\label{ah}
\sup_{x\in B_{\frac \rho 2}(x_0)}|p_3(x)| \lesssim \rho^{-3}\int_{B_\rho(x_0)} |p|\, dy\, .
\end{equation}
For $p_1$, Young's inequality for convolutions (where we set $R:=2\rho$ as in Remark \ref{smoothlocalpressurerk}) with \linebreak $2/3 +1=3/4 + 11/12$ gives
$$
\|p_1\|_{\frac32;B_\rho(x_0)} \lesssim \left\|\frac{1}{|\cdot|^2} \right\|_{\frac{4}{3};B_{2\rho}(0)} \left\|(|u| + |\n d|)( |\n u|+|\n^2 d|) \right\|_{\frac{12}{11};B_\rho(x_0)}
$$
$$
\lesssim \rho^{\frac14} \left\|(|u| + |\n d|)( |\n u|+|\n^2 d|) \right\|_{\frac{12}{11};B_\rho(x_0)}
$$
and then H\"older's inequality with $11/12 = 1/4 + 1/6 + 1/2$ gives
$$
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\|p_1\|_{\frac32;B_\rho(x_0)}^{\frac32}
\lesssim
\left(
\rho^{\frac14}
\left\|(|u| + |\n d|)^{\frac12} \right\|_{4;B_\rho(x_0)}
\left\|(|u| + |\n d|)^{\frac12} \right\|_{6;B_\rho(x_0)}
\left\|\ |\n u|+|\n^2 d|\ \right\|_{2;B_\rho(x_0)}
\right)^{\frac32}
$$
\begin{equation}\label{be}
\lesssim
\rho^{\frac38}
\left(\rho A(\rho) \right)^{\frac38}
\left\|\ |u| + |\n d|\ \right\|^{\frac34}_{3;B_\rho(x_0)}
\left\|\ |\n u|+|\n^2 d|\ \right\|^{\frac32}_{2;B_\rho(x_0)}\, . \qquad \qquad \ \ \quad
\end{equation}
\ \\
For the following, we fix now any $r \in (0, \frac \rho 2]$, and omit the dependence on $x_0$, $t_0$ and $z_0$ in $B_r(x_0)$, $B_\rho(x_0)$, $I^*(t_0)$, $A_{z_0}$, $B_{z_0}$, $C_{z_0}$ and $D_{z_0}$ (we will retain $z_0$ in the notation for $F_{z_0}$ to distinguish it from $F=\n f$).
\ \\\\
To first prove (\ref{n}), we note that (\ref{ba}) implies (since $r\leq \frac \rho 2$) that
$$\int_{B_r}|p_2|^{\frac32}\, dx \lesssim r^3
\rho^{-3} \left(\int_{B_\rho} (|u|^2 + |\n d|^2)\, dy \right)^{\frac34} \left(\int_{B_\rho} (|\n u|^2 + |\n^2 d|^2)\, dy \right)^{\frac34}
$$
$$
\leq r^3
\rho^{-3} \left(\rho A(\rho) \right)^{\frac34} \left(\int_{B_\rho} (|\n u|^2 + |\n^2 d|^2)\, dy \right)^{\frac34} \ \ \quad
$$
so that, integrating over $t\in I_r^*$ and using H\"older's inequality, we have
\begin{equation}\label{ad}
r^{-2}\intt{Q_r^*}|p_2|^{\frac32}\, dz \lesssim r^{-2}r^3 \rho^{{-\frac94}} A^{\frac34}(\rho)\cdot |I^*_\rho|^{\frac 14}\left(\rho B(\rho)\right)^{\frac34}
= \frac r \rho \cdot [(AB)^{\frac34}](\rho)\ ,
\end{equation}
and that (\ref{ah}) similarly implies that
\begin{equation}\label{ab}
r^{-2} \intt{Q_r^*} |p_3|^{\frac 3 2}\, dz \lesssim r \rho^{-\frac 9 2} \int_{I^*_r} \left(\int_{B_\rho}|p|\, dy \right)^{\frac 3 2}
\lesssim \frac r \rho \cdot D(\rho)\, .
\end{equation}
Finally, integrating (\ref{be}) over $t\in I_r^*$, H\"older with $1=1/4+ 3/4$ gives
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
r^{-2} \|p_1\|_{\frac32;Q_r^*}^{\frac32}
&\lesssim &
r^{-2} \rho^{\frac34}
A^{\frac38}(\rho)
\left\|\ |u| + |\n d|\ \right\|^{\frac34}_{3;Q^*_\rho}
\left\|\ |\n u|+|\n^2 d|\ \right\|^{\frac32}_{2;Q^*_\rho}
\\\\
&\lesssim &
r^{-2} \rho^{\frac34}
A^{\frac38}(\rho)
\left(\rho^2 C(\rho) \right)^{\frac14}
\left( \rho B(\rho) \right)^{\frac34}
= \left( C^{\frac14}(\rho)\right) \cdot \left(\left(\frac r \rho \right)^{-2} A^{\frac38}(\rho)B^{\frac34}(\rho)\right)\ .
\end{array}
$$
Multiplying and dividing by $( r/ \rho )^{\frac \alpha 2}$ for any $\alpha \in \R$, Cauchy's inequality gives
\begin{equation}\label{ae}
r^{-2} \|p_1\|_{\frac32;Q_r^*}^{\frac32} \lesssim
\left(\frac r \rho \right)^{\alpha } C^{\frac12}(\rho) + \left(\frac r \rho \right)^{- \alpha -4} A^{\frac34}(\rho)B^{\frac 32}(\rho)\ .
\end{equation}
Since we want a positive power of $\gamma = r/\rho$ in the first term and a negative one on the second (because it contains $B$ which will be small), we want to take $\alpha>0$. Choosing $\alpha = 1$ purely to make the following expression simpler, since $p = p_3 + p_2 + p_1$, we see from (\ref{ad}), (\ref{ab}) and (\ref{ae}) that
$$D(r) \lesssim \frac r \rho \cdot [D + (AB)^{\frac34} + C^{\frac12}](\rho) + \left(\frac r \rho \right)^{-5} \left[A^{\frac34}B^{\frac 32}\right](\rho)
$$
which implies (\ref{n}) for $\gamma :=\frac r \rho \leq \frac 12$.
\\\\
To prove (\ref{p}), we note that $F_{z_0}(r) \leq F_1(r) + F_2(r) +F_3(r)$, where we set
$$F_j(r) := \frac1{r^2} \intt{Q_r} |p_j||u|\ dz\ .$$
To estimate $F_1$ we use H\"older and (\ref{be})
to see that (in fact, for $r\leq \rho$)
$$\int_{B_r}|p_1||u|\ dx \leq \|u\|_{3;B_\rho} \|p_1\|_{\frac32;B_\rho} \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
$$
$$
\qquad \qquad \qquad \lesssim
\|u\|_{3;B_\rho}\cdot \rho^{\frac14}
\left(\rho A(\rho) \right)^{\frac14}
\left\|\ |u| + |\n d|\ \right\|^{\frac12}_{3;B_\rho}
\left\|\ |\n u|+|\n^2 d|\ \right\|_{2;B_\rho}
$$
$$
\ \leq
\rho^{\frac12}
A^\frac14(\rho)
\left\|\ |u| + |\n d|\ \right\|^{\frac32}_{3;B_\rho}
\left\|\ |\n u|+|\n^2 d|\ \right\|_{2;B_\rho}
$$
and hence Cauchy-Schwarz in time gives
$$\qquad \qquad \qquad F_1(r) \lesssim r^{-2}\rho^{\frac12}
A^\frac14(\rho)
\left\|\ |u| + |\n d|\ \right\|^{\frac32}_{3;Q_\rho^*}
\left\|\ |\n u|+|\n^2 d|\ \right\|_{2;Q_\rho^*}
$$
$$
\lesssim
r^{-2}\rho^{\frac12}
A^\frac14(\rho)
(\rho^2C(\rho))^{\frac12} (\rho B(\rho))^\frac12
$$
$$
\quad \qquad \qquad =
\left(\left(\frac r\rho \right)^\alpha
C^{\frac12}(\rho)\right)\cdot \left(\left(\frac r\rho \right)^{-2-\alpha} [A^\frac14 B^\frac12](\rho)\right)
$$
$$ \quad \qquad \qquad \qquad \lesssim
\left(\left(\frac r\rho \right)^\alpha
C^{\frac12}(\rho)\right)^\frac43 +\left(\left(\frac r\rho \right)^{-2-\alpha} [A^\frac14 B^\frac12](\rho)\right)^4
$$
for any $\alpha \in \R$. Taking, say, $\alpha=\frac12$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{bg}
F_1(r) \lesssim \left(\frac r\rho \right)^\frac23
C^{\frac23}(\rho) +\left(\frac r\rho \right)^{-10} [A B^2](\rho)\, .
\end{equation}
Now for $F_2$ note that, using (\ref{ba}), we have (since $r\leq \frac \rho 2$)
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
\displaystyle{\int_{B_r}|p_2||u|\, dx}& \lesssim & \displaystyle{ \rho^{-2} \int_{B_\rho} (|u||\n u| + |\n d||\n^2 d|)\, dy \int_{B_r}|u|\, dx
}\\\\
& \lesssim & \rho^{-2} \|\ |u| + |\n d|\ \|_{2;B_\rho} \|\ |\n u|+|\n^2 d|\ \|_{2;B_\rho} (r^3)^\frac12\|u\|_{2;B_r}
\\\\
&\lesssim &
\rho^{-2}r^\frac32 (\rho A(\rho)) \|\ |\n u|+|\n^2 d|\ \|_{2;B_\rho}
\end{array}
$$
so that integrating over $t\in I^*_r$ and using H\"older in time we have
\begin{equation}\label{bc}
F_2(r) \lesssim \frac1{r^2} \frac{r^\frac32}{\rho^2}(\rho A(\rho))(\rho B(\rho))^\frac12 (r^2)^\frac12 = \left(\frac r\rho \right)^\frac12[AB^\frac12](\rho)\ .
\end{equation}
For $F_3$, using (\ref{ah}) and H\"older, we see that
$$\frac1{r^2}\int_{B_r} |p_3||u|\ dx \leq \frac{1}{r^2\rho^3}\left(\int_{B_\rho}|p|\, dy \right)\left(\int_{B_r}|u|\, dx \right) \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
$$
$$
\qquad \qquad \leq \frac{1}{r^2\rho^3}\left(\int_{B_\rho}|p|^{\frac32}\, dx \right)^{\frac23}(\rho^3)^{\frac13}\left(\int_{B_r}(|u|^{\frac12})^4\, dx \right)^{\frac14}
\left(\int_{B_r}(|u|^{\frac12})^6\, dx \right)^{\frac16}(r^3)^{\frac7{12}}
$$
which gives us (setting $\gamma:=\frac r\rho$)
$$F_3(r) \lesssim \frac{1}{r^\frac14\rho^2}(rA(r))^\frac14 \left(\intt{Q_\rho^*}|p|^{\frac32}\ dx \right)^{\frac23}\left(\intt{Q_r^*}|u|^3\ dx \right)^{\frac16}(r^2)^\frac16 \qquad \qquad \qquad
$$
$$
\leq
\frac{1}{r^\frac14\rho^2}(rA(r))^\frac14 \left(\rho^2D(\rho) \right)^{\frac23}\left(r^2C(r) \right)^{\frac16}(r^2)^\frac16 \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
$$
$$
\ \leq \left(\frac{r}{\rho}\right)^\frac23 (\g^{-1}A)^\frac14(\rho) D^\frac23(\rho) (\g^{-2}C)^\frac16(\rho)
= \left(\frac{r}{\rho}\right)^\frac1{12} A^\frac14(\rho) D^\frac23(\rho) C^\frac16(\rho)
$$
by (\ref{ca}). Hence Young's inequality implies
\begin{equation}\label{am}
F_3(r) \lesssim
\left(\frac{r}{\rho}\right)^\frac1{12} \left(A(\rho)+ D^\frac43(\rho) +C^\frac23(\rho)\right)\, .
\end{equation}
Adding (\ref{bg}), (\ref{bc}) and (\ref{am}) and passing to the smallest powers of $\g=\frac r\rho \, (< 1)$ we see that
$$
F_{z_0}(r) \lesssim
\left(\frac{r}{\rho}\right)^\frac1{12} \left(A+ D^\frac43 +C^\frac23\right)(\rho)
+\left(\frac r\rho \right)^{-10} [A(B^\frac12+ B^2)](\rho)
$$
which implies (\ref{p}), and completes the proof of Claim \ref{clma}. \hfill $\Box$
\ \\\\\\
{\bf Proof of Claim \ref{clmalocen}:} \quad We will again omit the dependence on $z_0$ (except in $F_{z_0}$).
\\\\
To estimate $A(\tfrac \rho 2)$, we use the local energy inequality (\ref{locenta}) with a non-negative cut-off function $\phi \in C^\infty_0(Q^*_\rho)$ which is equal to $1$ in $Q^*_{\frac \rho 2}$, with
$$|\nabla \phi| \lesssim \rho^{-1} \qquad \textrm{and} \qquad |\phi_t|, |\n^2 \phi| \lesssim \rho^{-2}\ .$$
We'll need to estimate terms which control those that appear on the right-hand side of the local energy inequality (\ref{locenta}), which we'll call $I$ - $V$ (all of which depend on $\rho$) as follows:
$$I:= \intt{Q^*_\rho} (|u|^2 + |\nabla d|^2)|\phi_t + \D \phi|\ dz
\lesssim
\rho^{-2}\|\ |u|^2 + |\n d|^2 \ \|_{\frac32;Q^*_\rho}(\rho^5)^\frac13
\qquad \qquad \qquad $$
\begin{equation}\label{cd}
\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad \lesssim
\rho^{-2}(\rho^2C(\rho))^\frac23(\rho^5)^\frac13 = \rho C^\frac23(\rho)\ .
\end{equation}
Using the assumption (\ref{divfree}) that $\n \cdot u = 0$ weakly and indicating by $\overline{g}^\rho$ the average of a function $g$ in $B_\rho$, we have
$$
\begin{array}{rrl}
II &:= &\displaystyle{\int_{I^*_\rho} \left|\int_{B_{\rho}}(|u|^2 + |\n d|^2)u\cdot \nabla \phi\, dx \right| \, dt
}\\\\
&= &\displaystyle{ \int_{I^*_\rho} \left|\int_{B_{\rho}}\left[(|u|^2 - \overline{|u|^2}^\rho) + (|\n d|^2 - \overline{|\n d|^2}^\rho)\right]u\cdot \nabla \phi\, dx \right| \, dt}
\end{array}$$
hence
\begin{equation}\label{ce}
II\lesssim \rho^{-1} (\rho^2 E(\rho)) = \rho E(\rho)\ .
\end{equation}
Clearly we have
\begin{equation}\label{cf}
III:= \intt{Q^*_\rho}|pu\cdot \n \phi|\ dz \lesssim \rho^{-1}(\rho^2F_{z_0}(\rho)) = \rho F_{z_0}(\rho)\ .
\end{equation}
Using the weak divergence-free condition $\n \cdot u=0$ in (\ref{divfree}) to write (see (\ref{vecprodrule}))
$$(u\cdot \n)d = \n^T \cdot (d\otimes u)$$
(at almost every $x$) and integrating by parts we have
$$IV:
= \int_{I^*_\rho} \left|\int_{B_{\rho}} u\otimes \n \phi : \n d \odot \n d \, dx \right| \, dt
= \int_{I^*_\rho} \left|\int_{B_{\rho}} [(u\cdot \n)d]\cdot[(\n \phi \cdot \n)d] \, dx \right| \, dt \qquad \qquad \qquad
$$
$$
= \int_{I^*_\rho} \left|\int_{B_{\rho}} [\n^T \cdot (d\otimes u)]\cdot[(\n \phi \cdot \n)d] \, dx \right| \, dt
= \int_{I^*_\rho} \left|-\int_{B_{\rho}} d\otimes u : \n^T [(\n \phi \cdot \n)d] \, dx \right| \, dt\, ,
$$
and clearly
$$|\n^T [(\n \phi \cdot \n)d]| \lesssim |\n^2 \phi||\n d| + |\n \phi | |\n^2 d|\, .$$
\noindent
Therefore, for $q\in [2,6]$ we have\footnote{Note that it is only the appearance of $\n^2 d$ in the estimate of term $IV$ which forces us to include $u$ in the definition of $G_{q,z_0}$. Indeed, switching the roles of $u$ (which appears in $C_{z_0}$ along with $\n d$) and $\n d$ (which appears in $G_{q,z_0}$ even with $u$ omitted), one could otherwise control term $IV$ in precisely the same way. If $u$ is omitted in $G_{q,z_0}$, one could still obtain the same estimate of $IV$ if one takes $q=6$, but this would dramatically weaken the statement of Theorem \ref{mainthm}. The remainder of the proof of Theorem \ref{mainthm} does not require (but is not harmed by) the inclusion of $u$ in $G_{q,z_0}$.}
$$IV \lesssim
\intt{Q^*_\rho} |d||u|\left(\rho^{-2}|\n d| + \rho^{-1}|\n^2 d|\right)\ dz
\qquad \qquad \qquad
\qquad
$$
$$
\qquad \qquad \quad \
\begin{array}{cl}
\leq &
\|\, |d||u|\, \|_{2;Q^*_\rho}\left( \rho^{-2}\|\n d\|_{2;Q^*_\rho}
+
\rho^{-1} \|\n^2 d\|_{2;Q^*_\rho}\right)
\\\\
\lesssim &
\|\, |d||u|\, \|_{2;Q^*_\rho}\left( \rho^{-2}\cdot \rho^{\frac 56}\|\n d\|_{3;Q^*_\rho}
+
\rho^{-1} \|\n^2 d\|_{2;Q^*_\rho}\right)
\\\\
\leq &
\left(\rho^3G_2(\rho)\right)^{\frac 12}\left( \rho^{-2}\cdot \rho^{\frac 56}(\rho^2 C(\rho))^{\frac 13}
+
\rho^{-1} (\rho B(\rho))^{\frac 12}\right)
\\\\
= &
\rho\, \left(G_2(\rho) \right)^{\frac 12}\left( C^{\frac 13}(\rho)
+
B^{\frac 12}(\rho)\right)
\\\\
\stackrel{(\ref{gsiginterpest})}{\leq}&
\rho\, \left(G_q^{\frac 2q}(\rho)C^{1-\frac 2q}(\rho) \right)^{\frac 12}\left( C^{\frac 13}(\rho)
+
B^{\frac 12}(\rho)\right)
\, ,
\end{array}
$$
so that
\begin{equation}\label{cg}
IV \lesssim
\rho\left[G_q^{\frac 1q}\left(C^{\frac 56-\frac 1q}+ C^{\frac 12-\frac 1q} B^{\frac 12}\right)\right](\rho)
\, .
\end{equation}
Similarly, for $q\in [2,6]$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{ch}
V:= \intt{Q^*_\rho} |d|^2|\n d|^2\phi \ dz
\lesssim \rho^3 G_2(\rho)
\stackrel{(\ref{gsiginterpest})}{\leq} \rho^3 G_q^{\frac 2q}(\rho)C^{1-\frac 2q}(\rho)\, .
\end{equation}
Finally, using (\ref{cd}) - (\ref{ch}), the local energy inequality gives
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
\tfrac \rho 2A(\tfrac \rho 2) &\lesssim & I + II + III+ IV + V
\\\\
& \lesssim &\rho \left[ C^\frac23 + E+F_{z_0} + G_q^{\frac 1q}\left(C^{\frac 56-\frac 1q}+ C^{\frac 12-\frac 1q} B^{\frac 12}\right) + [\, \cdot\, ]^2 G_q^{\frac 2q}C^{1-\frac 2q} \right](\rho)
\\\\
& \lesssim &\rho \left[ C^\frac23 + E+F_{z_0} + (1+[\, \cdot\, ]^2)G_q^{\frac{4}{6-q}}+ (G_q^{\frac{2}{6-q}}+C^{\frac 13}) B^{\frac 12} \right](\rho)
\end{array}
$$
as long as $2\leq q<6$, as in that case we have
$$
G_q^{\frac 1q}C^{\frac 56-\frac 1q}=(G_q^{\frac{4}{6-q}})^{\frac{6-q}{4q}}(C^{\frac 23})^{\frac{5q-6}{4q}}
\leq \left(\frac{6-q}{4q}\right) G_q^{\frac{4}{6-q}}+\left(\frac{5q-6}{4q}\right) C^{\frac 23}
\leq \tfrac{3}{4} G_q^{\frac{4}{6-q}}+\tfrac{5}{4} C^{\frac 23}
\, ,
$$
$$
G_q^{\frac 1q}C^{\frac 12-\frac 1q}=(G_q^{\frac{2}{6-q}})^{\frac{6-q}{2q}}(C^{\frac 13})^{\frac{3q-6}{2q}}
\leq \left(\frac{6-q}{2q}\right)G_q^{\frac{2}{6-q}}+\left(\frac{3q-6}{2q}\right)C^{\frac 13}
\leq \tfrac{3}{2}G_q^{\frac{2}{6-q}}+\tfrac{3}{2}C^{\frac 13}
$$
and
$$
G_q^{\frac 2q}C^{1-\frac 2q}= (G_q^{\frac{4}{6-q}})^{\frac{6-q}{2q}}(C^{\frac 23})^{\frac{3q-6}{2q}}
\leq \left(\frac{6-q}{2q}\right)G_q^{\frac{4}{6-q}} + \left(\frac{3q-6}{2q}\right)C^{\frac 23}
\leq \tfrac{3}{2}G_q^{\frac{4}{6-q}} + \tfrac{3}{2}C^{\frac 23}\, .
$$
This implies (\ref{q}) and proves Claim \ref{clmalocen}. \hfill $\Box$
|
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Patrick McCorry for reviewing and commenting on the final draft, and
our AIT colleagues Hannes Koller and Melitta Dragaschnig for insightful
discussions regarding the Apache Spark implementation.
Work on this topic is supported inter alia by the European Union's Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No.\ 740558 (TITANIUM)
and the Austrian FFG's KIRAS programme under project VIRTCRIME (No.\ 860672).
\bibliographystyle{splncs}
\section{Additional Figures}
\label{sec:appendix}
In this section, we provide additional plots for visual inspection
of our findings reported in Section~\ref{sec:results}.
Figure~\ref{fig:stake_shift_lags} depicts the evolution of stake
shifts for Bitcoin (BTC), Bitcoin (BCH), Litecoin (LTC), and Zcash (ZEC).
Afterwards, in Figures~\ref{fig:spikes_attributed_btc}--\ref{fig:spikes_attributed_ltc}
we present more details on the contributions of real-world
actors to the top-five spikes in each currency within the past two years.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/stake_shift_lags}
\caption{Stake shift for all analyzed cryptocurrencies
(stake distribution lag $\Lambda$: 1, 7, and 14 days).}
\label{fig:stake_shift_lags}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/spikes_btc}}%
\caption{Attributed spikes for BTC}
\label{fig:spikes_attributed_btc}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/spikes_bch}}%
\caption{Attributed spikes for BCH}
\label{fig:spikes_attributed_bch}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/spikes_ltc}}%
\caption{Attributed spikes for LTC}
\label{fig:spikes_attributed_ltc}
\end{figure*}
\section{Background}\label{sec:background}
In this section we provide a more detailed discussion of the relevance of
stake shift for PoS protocols, and survey stake distribution lags of
several known PoS proposals.
\subsection{Importance of Stake Shift for Security of PoS-Based Blockchains}
\label{sec:pos}
As mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:intro},
the selection of a party for any security-relevant role in a PoS protocol
should ideally be based on a stake distribution $\dist{SD}$ that is as up-to-date as possible.
However, this is often difficult, as we detail next.
First, in the eventual-consensus PoS protocols such
as~\cite{C:KRDO17,EPRINT:BenPasShi16b,EC:DGKR18,CCS:BGKRZ18,EPRINT:BGKRZ19}, there is no
consensus about the inclusion of the most recently created blocks into the stable
ledger, such a consensus is only achieved gradually by adding more and more
blocks on top of them.
Consequently, during the protocol execution, the view of the current stake distribution
$\dist{SD}_t$ at time $t$ by different honest parties might actually differ and hence
$\dist{SD}_t$ cannot be used for electing protocol actors.
On the other hand, in PoS protocols based on Byzantine Agreement
such
as~\cite{algorand},
where the consensus about a block is achieved before proceeding to further blocks,
the most recent stake distribution still cannot be used for sampling protocol
participants. The reason is that the security of the protocol requires the stake
distribution to be old enough so that it was fully determined \emph{before} the
adversary could have any information about the bits of randomness used to sample
from this distribution (which are also produced by the protocol).
Therefore, in all these protocols, participants that are allowed to act at some
time $t$ are sampled according to a distribution $\dist{SD}_{t-\Lambda}$
recorded in the ledger up to the point in time $t-\Lambda$ for some
stake distribution lag $\Lambda$.
This is done with the intention that $\dist{SD}_{t-\Lambda}$ is both
\begin{itemize
\item stable (in the case of eventual-consensus protocols), and
\item recent enough so that it can be assumed that it does not
differ too much from the current distribution $\dist{SD}_t$.
\end{itemize}
However, the incentives of the participants are, of course, shaped by the current
distribution of the stake: For example, a party $\mathsf{P}$ that used to own a
significant portion of the stake, but has just transferred (e.g., sold) all of
it in time $t_1$, has no longer any stake in the system and hence no direct motivation to
contribute to its maintenance. Nonetheless, at any time $t$ during the time interval
$(t_1,t_1+\Lambda)$, the stake distribution $\dist{SD}_{t-\Lambda}$ will still attribute some stake to
$\mathsf{P}$ and hence $\mathsf{P}$ will be allowed (and expected) to act accordingly in the protocol.
This discrepancy is present in all PoS protocols listed above, and in fact in
all provably-secure PoS protocols in the literature.
The security of these PoS protocols is typically argued based on the assumption
that at any point during the execution, less than a fraction $T$ of the total
stake in the system is controlled by adversarial parties (for
$T=1/2$
in~\cite{C:KRDO17,EPRINT:BenPasShi16b,EC:DGKR18,CCS:BGKRZ18,EPRINT:BGKRZ19}
and $T=1/3$ in~\cite{algorand}).
To formally account for the above mismatch, one has to choose between the following
two approaches:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item
\label{assum1}
Directly assume that, at every point $t$ during the execution,
less than a $T$-fraction of stake in the \emph{old} distribution $\dist{SD}_{t-\Lambda}$ is controlled by
parties that are adversarial \emph{at time $t$}.
\item
\label{assum2}
Make an additional assumption that, at any point $t$ during the execution,
some (normalized) ``difference'' between $\dist{SD}_{t-\Lambda}$ and the
current factual distribution of stake $\dist{SD}_{t}$ in the system is bounded by a
constant $\sigma\in(0,1)$; i.e., that not too much money has changed hands
between $t-\Lambda$ and $t$.
This assumption allows to conclude
security as long as the
\emph{current} adversarial stake ratio $\alpha\in[0,1]$ in $\dist{SD}_t$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:alpha}
\alpha
\leq
(1-\varepsilon)
\cdot T
- \sigma
\end{equation}
for some $\varepsilon\geq 0$ (see e.g.~\cite[Theorem~6]{C:KRDO17}, respectively
Theorem~5.3 in the full version of~\cite{C:KRDO17}).
\end{enumerate}
All of the provably secure PoS protocols adopt one of these two approaches.
While the assumption in approach~\ref{assum1} is
formally sufficient, it is arguably cumbersome and counter-intuitive, making
the reasoning~\ref{assum2} preferable.
As evidenced by equation~(\ref{eq:alpha}), in the approach~\ref{assum2} the
quantity $\sigma$, called stake shift,
plays a significant role for the protocols' security.
Let us clarify that our primary motivation for investigating stake shift
pertains to the distributions $\dist{SD}_t$ and $SD_{t-\Lambda}$ as described above and
defined by individual PoS protocols, and does not aim at addressing the dangers
of long-range attacks (see e.g.~\cite{EPRINT:GazKiaRus18} for an overview of
those).
In a typical long-range attack setting, the
considered time interval would be much longer and one could hardly
expect a limited stake shift over it.
Finally, following the above motivation, below we focus on provably secure
PoS proposals. All these protocols use all existing coins for staking, not
distinguishing between ``staked'' and ``unstaked'' coins, and so we don't
consider this distinction below. It is worth mentioning
that practical implementations of these protocols, as well as other PoS
blockchains such as
EOS\footnote{\url{https://eos.io}}
and Tezos\footnote{\url{https://tezos.com}}, often deviate from this
approach and allow for coins that do not participate in staking.
\subsection{Stake Distribution Lag in Existing PoS Protocols}
\label{sec:stake_shift_proto}
Here we survey the value of stake distribution lag in several provably secure PoS protocol
proposals.
\heading{Ouroboros.}
The Ouroboros PoS protocol~\cite{C:KRDO17} divides its execution into so-called
\emph{epochs}, where each epoch is a sequence of $10k$ slots for a parameter
$k$ (this structure is dictated by the inner workings of the protocol). The stake
distribution used for sampling slot leaders in epoch $ep_j$ is the one reflected in
the current chain up to slot $4k$ of the preceding epoch $ep_{j-1}$.
Therefore, the stake distribution lag amounts to at most $14k$ slots.
In the deployment of the Ouroboros protocol in the Cardano
project~\footnote{\url{https://www.cardano.org}}, each
slot takes $20$ seconds and $k$ is chosen to be $2160$. Therefore, the above
upper bound on the stake distribution lag corresponds to exactly $7$~days.
\heading{Ouroboros Praos and Ouroboros Genesis.}
These protocols, which are defined in~\cite{EC:DGKR18,CCS:BGKRZ18}, also divide
their execution into epochs. However, the stake distribution used for sampling
slot leaders in epoch $ep_j$ is the one reflected in the current chain up
to the last slot of the epoch $ep_{j-2}$. Hence the stake distribution lag
amounts to at most $2$~epochs.
Assuming the same epoch length as above, this would result in a stake
distribution lag of exactly $10$~days.
\heading{Algorand and Vault.}
For the protocols Algorand~\cite{algorand,EPRINT:GHMVZ17,EPRINT:CGMV18} and
Vault~\cite{EPRINT:LSGZ18}
we consider the parametrization given
in~\cite{EPRINT:LSGZ18}, where the authors suggest to consider a stake distribution
lag of $1$~day for Algorand and hence $2$~days for Vault.
\heading{Snow White.}
The Snow White protocol employs a ``look-back'' of $2\omega$~blocks for a
parameter $\omega$ that is sufficient to invoke the common-prefix and
chain-quality properties (see~\cite{EPRINT:BenPasShi16b}).
The authors do not propose a concrete value of $\omega$, however, given that the
requirements put on $\omega$ are similar to other protocols (common prefix,
chain quality), it is safe to assume that an implementation of Snow White would
also lead to a stake distribution lag between 1 and 10~days.
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:discussion}
\heading{Key Findings.}
Our analysis of stabilized stake shift presented in
Sections~\ref{sec:results_shifts} and~\ref{sec:shifts_model}
leads us to the following conclusions:
\begin{itemize}
\item
The two main observable reasons for extreme stake-shift spikes are hacks and
migration of funds to different wallets.
Large stake shifts resulting from hacks are clearly problematic for a
proof-of-stake based cryptocurrency, as the entity getting control of
these funds can be reasonably considered adversarial, with
unpredictable future actions.
\item
When considering the levels of adversarial stake ratio that a proof-of-stake
protocol can provably tolerate, one needs to be aware that this threshold is
affected by the assumed maximal stake shift $\sigma$ as per Equation~%
(\ref{eq:alpha}). Our measurements, summarized in Table~%
\ref{tab:stake_shift_stat}, show that depending on the protocol's stake
distribution lag, this effect may decrease the guaranteed resilience bound
by several percent even for lag intervals where the stake shift achieves average
values (as the most extreme example, consider the average stabilized stake
shift for a (hypothetical) two-week lag interval in ZEC, which amounts to
$9.4\%$). Note that, as captured in Figure~\ref{fig:stake_shift_lags_btc} and the standard deviation
values in Figure~\ref{tab:stake_shift_stat}, the stake shift value can deviate
considerably from this average.
This is particularly noteworthy for protocols that only aim
for the threshold $T=1/3$ in Equation~(\ref{eq:alpha}) such as~\cite{algorand}.
\item
Unsurprisingly, our data confirms that with increasing stake distribution
lag also the corresponding stake shift increases, the precise (empirical)
sublinear dependence is captured in Figure~\ref{fig:stake_shift_trend}.
This advocates for the need to make the stake distribution lag as small as
possible in any future PoS protocol design. More importantly, knowing the
exact slope of this function (and hence the price being paid for longer
stake distribution lag in terms of increased expected stake shift) allows
the designers of existing and future proof-of-stake protocols to weigh
these costs against the benefits of longer lag intervals, leading to more
informed design decisions.
\item
Our results empirically support the natural assumption that high stake shift
mostly appears at the beginning of the lifetime of a cryptocurrency, and
hence older, more established cryptocurrencies experience lower average and
median stake shift for a given lag interval, as well as less occurrences of
extreme stake shift spikes. This observation allows for some optimism on the
side of PoS-protocol designers, as the role of stake-shift-related weakening of the
proven security guarantees should diminish during the lifetime of the
system. On the other hand, the initial vulnerability of a new, bootstrapping
PoS cryptocurrency could be prevented for example by the ``merged staking''
mechanism discussed in~\cite{sidechains}.
\end{itemize}
Additionally, our investigation of the extremal stake-shift spikes conducted in
Section~\ref{sec:results_spikes} results in the following observations:
\begin{itemize}
\item The spikes motivated by migration of funds can be assumed to be often
triggered by a single entity, we conjecture that the main reason of
these transfers was moving the considerable funds to a more secure,
multisig-protected wallet. In such cases, it is natural to assume that
the funds are controlled by the same party after the transfer, making
these spikes benign from the perspective of our considered PoS scenario.
\end{itemize}
\heading{Limitations.}
The main limitation of our results with respect to the question motivating our
investigation lies in the imperfections of clustering techniques and incompleteness of
attribution tags linking entities to real-world identities (despite
using the best currently known). Having a
better understanding of which keys are controlled by the same real-world entity
would give us a more precise picture of the experienced stake shift. However, it
appears likely that more realistic clustering would lead to more keys being
clustered, and hence lower stake-shift estimates. One can thus see our
results as reasonable upper bounds of these quantities.
\heading{Future Work.}
One clear area of future work is to devise new and better address-clustering
and attribution data sharing techniques.
On top of that, it might be interesting to expand our investigation in time and
considered cryptoassets. After more data is available, future studies should
also include assets or currencies built on top of PoS protocols. Such studies
should also investigate the role of exchanges, which typically hold major
stakes and might become important players in a PoS-based consensus. This is
particularly interesting for PoS protocols where coins must be explicitly
``staked'' to participate in the consensus, and hence the total participating
stake is typically much smaller than the overall stake.
Finally, it would be interesting to perform a more careful and
detailed investigation of the activity behind the five considered major stake shift
spikes, as well as other unusually large spikes uncovered by our work.
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
The introduction of Bitcoin~\cite{bitcoin} represented the first practically
viable design of a cryptocurrency capable of operating in the so-called
permissionless setting, without succumbing to the inherently threatening Sybil
attacks. In the decade following Bitcoin's appearance, cryptocurrencies
have arguably become the main use case of the underlying blockchain technology.
Most deployed cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin are relying on \emph{proofs of work
(PoW)} to prevent Sybil attacks and provide a robust transaction
ledger. However, the PoW approach, also has its downsides, most
importantly the associated energy waste (see e.g.~\cite{digiconomist}).
A promising alternative approach to maintaining a ledger in a permissionless
environment is based on so-called \emph{proof of stake (PoS)}, where Sybil
attacks are prevented by, roughly speaking, attributing to each participant in
the consensus protocol a weight that is proportional to his stake as recorded in
the ledger itself. Several PoS protocols embracing this idea have been shown to
achieve provable security guarantees in various
models~\cite{algorand,C:KRDO17,EPRINT:BenPasShi16b,EC:DGKR18,CCS:BGKRZ18,EPRINT:BGKRZ19}.
More concretely, in all these PoS schemes, whenever a protocol
participant needs to be selected for a certain role in the protocol, he is
chosen with a probability that is proportional to his stake share in some
\emph{stake distribution} $\dist{SD}$, by which we mean a record of ownership of all
the assets maintained on the ledger at a given time, allowing to determine what
proportion of this stake is in control by any given party. In other words, the
stake distribution is a snapshot of the ownership of the ledger-based
asset at a given time (for simplicity of exposition, we assume only
a single-asset ledger in this discussion).
Ideally, the selection of a party for any security-relevant role in the protocol
at time $t$
should be based on a stake distribution $\dist{SD}$ that is as up-to-date as possible.
However, for various security-related reasons that we detail in
Section~\ref{sec:pos},
the protocols cannot use the ``current'' distribution of assets $\dist{SD}_{t}$ and
are forced to use $\dist{SD}_{t-\Lambda}$
that
is recorded in the ledger up
to the point in time $t-\Lambda$ for some time interval $\Lambda$ that we
call the \emph{stake distribution lag} of the protocol.
However, roughly speaking, the security of the protocol is
determined by---and relies on a honest-majority assumption about---the
present stake distribution $\dist{SD}_{t}$. To account for this
difference,
existing protocols assume that not too much money has changed hands
during the past time interval of length $\Lambda$, and hence
the distributions $\dist{SD}_{t-\Lambda}$ and
$\dist{SD}_{t}$ are close.
Their distance, called \emph{stake shift}
in~\cite{C:KRDO17},
is the focus of our present investigation.
\heading{Our Contributions.}
Up until now, the notion of stake shift has only been discussed on a theoretical
level and not yet quantified based on real-world data;
we set up to fill this gap.
We conjecture that the
stake shift statistics of a cryptocurrency are mostly influenced by its
proliferation, market cap and daily trading volumes, rather than its underlying
consensus algorithm. Therefore, in an effort to understand the stake shift
characteristics of a mature cryptocurrency, we focus our analysis
on PoW ledgers with a strong market dominance such as Bitcoin.\footnote{%
As of September 13, 2019, about $68\%$ of the total market capitalization of
cryptocurrencies is stored in Bitcoin (cf.\ \url{https://coinmarketcap.com}).}
We perform a systematic, empirical study of the stake shift phenomenon.
More concretely, our contributions can be summarized as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
We adjust the formal definition of stake shift given in~\cite{C:KRDO17}
to be applicable to studying the execution of the protocol in
retrospect, based only on the stabilized ledger produced, without access to the
states held by the parties during its execution.
\item
We provide a scalable algorithmic method for computing stabilized stake shift
over the entire history of PoW ledgers following the UTXO model. We computed
it in ledgers of four major cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Litecoin,
and Zcash) from their inception until July 31\textsuperscript{st}, 2019.
\item
We study the evolution of stabilized stake shift in all ledgers and found
that hard forks may trigger major stake shifts. We also fitted a simple
quadratic polynomial model that mimics the real-world sublinear growth of
stake shift with respect to the considered stake distribution lag.
\item
We pick top spikes occurring within the last two years, and determine the
likely real-world identities behind them. We can observe that exchanges
are behind those spikes, at least in established cryptocurrencies such as
Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash.
\end{enumerate}
Our results show that the stake-shift phenomenon has a noticeable impact on the
provable-security guarantees provided by PoS protocols from the literature.
We argue in Section~\ref{sec:pos} that the stake shift over the stake distribution
lag period of a PoS protocol counts directly against the threshold of
adversarial
stake it can tolerate (typically 1/2 or 1/3), and the values of stake shift that
we observe are clearly significant on this scale, as we detail in
Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.
While our initial intention was to inform the design of PoS protocols, we believe
that our results can be interesting to a wider community and shed some light on
the real-life use of the studied cryptocurrencies as tools for value transfer.
Therefore, we make our research reproducible by releasing the implementation of our
stake shift computation method. It can be
used for computing stabilized stake shifts with configurable lag for any other
cryptocurrency that follows Bitcoin's UTXO model.
Finally, note that all measurements were performed on UTXO-based currencies
and some of the mentioned PoS protocols envision an account-based ledger. This
aspect, however, is completely irrelevant to our investigation.
Also, while our motivation comes from PoS protocols, we believe
that most robust and useful data can be obtained from
mature blockchains and hence we focus our measurements on PoW ledgers. To
reemphasize, it seems reasonable to believe that the maturity (age, market cap,
trading volume, etc.) of a blockchain are more determining for its stake shift
behavior than the underlying consensus mechanism, hence justifying our choice.
We start by providing more details on the relevance of stake shift for PoS
security, and
survey the stake distribution lags in existing proof-of-stake protocols
in Section~\ref{sec:background}. Then we provide a formal definition of stabilized
stake shift in Section~\ref{sec:stake_shift} and describe our datasets
and computation methods in Section~\ref{sec:methodology}. We present our findings
in Section~\ref{sec:results} and discuss them in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.
\section{Data and Methods}\label{sec:methodology}
Before we can empirically investigate stake shifts in deployed
cryptocurrencies, we first need to translate the definition of
\emph{stake shift} into a scalable algorithmic procedure
that can compute stake shift with configurable lags over a currency's
entire history, which in the case of Bitcoin spans more than 440M
transactions and 0.5B addresses.
In this section, we describe how we prepare the required datasets
from the underlying blockchains and the technical details
of our stabilized stake shift computation method.
\subsection{Dataset Preparation and Structure}\label{subsec:methodology_dataset}
We consider datasets from four different cryptocurrency ledgers: first, we take
\emph{Bitcoin (BTC)}, which is still the cryptocurrency with the strongest
market dominance. Additionally, we take three alternatives derived from the
Bitcoin Core code base: \emph{Bitcoin Cash (BCH)}, which is a hard fork from
the Bitcoin blockchain to increase the block size limit, which took effect in
August 2017; \emph{Litecoin (LTC)}, which was an early altcoin, starting in
October 2011, and is very similar to Bitcoin. The key differences to Bitcoin
are its choice of the proof-of-work algorithm (\emph{scrypt}) and the network's
average block creation time, which is roughly 2.5 minutes. Finally, we also
consider \emph{Zcash (ZEC)}, which is a cryptocurrency with enhanced privacy
features, initially released in October 2016. Zcash coins are either in a
transparent or a shielded pool.
The transparent (unshielded) pool contains ZEC in transparent addresses
(so-called \emph{t-addresses}). Due to the anonymity features in
Zcash, our analysis is limited to the transparent transactions in the
unshielded pool. However, as observed in~\cite{kappos}, a large proportion of
the activity on Zcash does not use the shielded pools. A summary of the used
datasets is provided in Table~\ref{tab:data-summary}.
\begin{table*}[h]
\centering%
\caption{Summary of considered cryptocurrency datasets.}%
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{\input{tables/data_summary}}%
\label{tab:data-summary}%
\end{table*}
For each cryptocurrency ledger, we partition these addresses into
maximal subsets (clusters) that are likely to be controlled by the
same entity using the well-known and efficient mul\-ti\-ple-input
clustering heuristics~\cite{meiklejohn2013fistful}.
The underlying intuition is that if two addresses (e.g., $A_{1}$ and
$A_{2}$) are used as inputs in the same transaction while one of these
addresses along with another address (e.g., $A_{2}$ and $A_{3}$) are
used as inputs in another transaction, then the three addresses
($A_{1}$, $A_{2}$ and $A_{3}$) must somehow be controlled by the same
entity, who conducted both transactions and therefore possesses the
private keys corresponding to all three addresses. Being aware that this
heuristic fails when CoinJoin transactions~\cite{MoeserB2016JoinMeOnAMarket}
are involved, we filtered those transactions before applying the
multiple-input heuristics.
Before describing our stake shift computation method in more detail,
we introduce the following notation for key entities in our dataset:
we consider a blockchain
$\mathsf{B}_{t_{\text{end}}} = (\mathsf{A}, \mathsf{T})$ with its
associated set of addresses~$\mathsf{A}$ and set of transactions $\mathsf{T}$
at time $t_{\text{end}}$.
The multiple-input heuristics algorithm is applied to the complete transaction
dataset at time~$t_{\text{end}}$ to obtain a set of clusters
$\mathsf{C} = \{C_{1}, \ldots, C_{n_{c}}\}$.
Each cluster $C_{i}$ is represented by a set of addresses, where
$\lvert C_{i} \rvert \geq 2, \forall i \in \{1, \ldots, n_{c}\}$.
The set of entities $\mathsf{E}$ is represented by the union of $\mathsf{C}$
with the remaining single address clusters, i.e.,
$ \mathsf{E} = \mathsf{C} \cup
\{\{a\} \,\vert\,
a \in \mathsf{A} \wedge \forall C \in \mathsf{C}: a \notin C \}
$.
The (cumulative) balance for entity $e \in \mathsf{E}$ at time $t$ is denoted
by $b_{e}^{t}$, and the total balance over all entities at time $t$ is given
by $b_{\text{total}}^{t} = \sum_{e \in \mathsf{E}} b_{e}^{t}$.
The last three columns in Table~\ref{tab:data-summary} show the number of
addresses in each ledger, the number of computed clusters, as well as the
number of entities holding the corresponding private keys of one or more
addresses.
For further inspecting the real-world identities behind entities causing major
stake shifts, we rely on Chainalysis\footnote{\url{https://www.chainalysis.com/}},
which is a proprietary online tool that facilitates the tracking of Bitcoin
transactions by annotating Bitcoin addresses with potential owners.
\subsection{Stake Shift Computation}
Given the dimensionality of our dataset, the challenge lies in finding a method
that follows Definition~\ref{def:SSS} and can compute the distances~$\delta$ in
a scalable, distributed and memory-efficient manner.
In a na\"ive approach one would calculate the cumulative balance for each
entity at every time period (e.g., days). The stake distribution is represented
by the relative frequencies, which are the result of dividing the cumulative
balances at time $t_{p}$ by the total balance~$b_{\text{total}}^{t_{p}}$. This
approach would result in huge temporary datasets that must be persisted in
memory for subsequent computation steps. For instance, for the computation of
the stabilized stake shift in Bitcoin, a grid of 3,862 $\times$ 260,182,367
(number of days $\times$ number of entities) data points needs to be cached,
which is computationally inefficient and hardly feasible in practice given
today's hardware limitations.
Therefore, we propose an iterator-based approach coupled with a custom
aggregation method, which can be executed on a distributed, horizontally
scalable data processing architecture: First, we join the transaction data with
the relevant entity information, and use the entity IDs for partitioning.
Then, for calculating the cumulative balances, we sort every partition by time
period. The iterator represents basically a loop over the grid of predefined
time periods for a given entity. Internally, we build up a data structure that
holds the following information in each iteration step:
\begin{enumerate*}[label=(\roman*)]
\item entity ID $e$,
\item time period $t_{p}$,
\item the cumulative balance $b_{e}^{t_{p}}$,
\item the contribution of the current entity to the stake distribution
$ R_{e}^{t_{p}} = {b_{e}^{t_{p}}}/{b_{\text{total}}^{t_{p}}}$
at time $t_{p}$; and
\item the absolute difference of the stake distribution
contributions at time $t_{p}$ and $t_{p-\ell}$:
$\delta_{e}^{t_{p}} =
\lvert R_{e}^{t_{p}} - R_{e}^{t_{p-\ell}} \rvert.$
\end{enumerate*}
To compute the stake shift for arbitrary lag values~$\ell$, a FIFO
(first in, first out) structure is needed to hold at most $\ell$ instances
of the above data structure for the last $\ell$ periods.
That data structure can efficiently be partitioned
across computation nodes and requires zero communication costs.
An aggregation method then collects all partial results to obtain the
stake shift value~$\hat{\mathsf{SS}}_{\ell}^{t_{p}}$ at time period~$t_{p}$.
We implemented our stake shift computation method as single Apache
Spark\footnote{\url{https://spark.apache.org/}} job operating directly on
a pre-computed dataset provisioned by the GraphSense Cryptocurrency Analytics
Platform\footnote{\url{https://graphsense.info}}. For further technical details,
we refer to the source code, which will be released with this paper.
\section{Analysis and Results}\label{sec:results}
In the following, we first report results on the longitudinal evolution of
stake shifts in all considered cryptocurrencies (BTC, BCH, LTC, ZEC).
Then we handpick past stake shift spikes and analyze them in more detail,
in order to gain a better understanding on the factors causing those shifts.
We also elaborate on cross-ledger similarities and differences.
\subsection{Evolution of Stabilized Stake Shifts}\label{sec:results_shifts}
Figure~\ref{fig:stake_shift_lags_btc} depicts the evolution of \textbf{Bitcoin}
stake shifts over the observation period for three different lag settings
$\Lambda$: 1 day, 7 days, and 14 days. We can observe huge spikes
(0.933 for $\Lambda = 1$) right after the generation of the genesis block and
another major spike occurring on June 19\textsuperscript{th}, 2011. That spike
is most likely related to a security breach on Mt.\ Gox, at this time one of
the dominating Bitcoin exchanges. After an attacker illegally transferred a
large amount of Bitcoins, 424,242~BTC were moved from a \emph{cold storage} to a
Mt.\ Gox address on June 23\textsuperscript{rd} 2011%
\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mt._Gox}}.
We can also observe that hard forks trigger major stake shifts: Bitcoin Cash,
for instance, hard forked on August 1, 2017.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/stake_shift_lags_btc}
\caption{Stake shift for BTC (stake distribution lag $\Lambda$: 1, 7, and 14 days).}
\label{fig:stake_shift_lags_btc}
\end{figure}
Due to the lack of space, we will in the following refrain from depicting
stake evolutions for the other investigated currencies and focus on reporting
key observations and findings instead. For further visual inspection, we refer
the interested reader to the Appendix of this paper. We also restrict subsequent
discussions to $\Lambda = 1$ because we can observe that stake shifts evolve
synchronously and differ only in lag amplitudes.
\textbf{Bitcoin Cash} shows similar behavior to Bitcoin: since it is a hard
fork of Bitcoin, stake shifts run synchronous to Bitcoin until the hard fork
date. Stake shift values in Bitcoin Cash also show a higher
variability after November 15, 2018. On this date a hard fork
was activated by \emph{Bitcoin~ABC}\footnote{\url{https://www.bitcoinabc.org/}}
(at the time the largest software client for Bitcoin Cash) and
\emph{Bitcoin~SV}\footnote{\url{https://bitcoinsv.io/}} (Satoshi's Vision).
In general, the variability of stake shifts in \textbf{Litecoin} (\$4.7B market
capitalization) appears to be higher than the one in Bitcoin. The biggest
spikes appear on the following dates: 2014-02-05, 2015-03-08, and 2018-11-30.
The first two spikes are represented by a couple of dominating entities.
We observed either a direct currency flow between them, or a indirect flow
via some intermediary cluster or address.
One exception is the spike on November 30\textsuperscript{th}, 2018: on that
day, approximately 35.4M~LTC were transferred within a 24 hour period, with a
total value of \$1.1B at that time. This is extraordinary, because the Litecoin
network has recorded approximately \$100M of trading volume per day, on
average.
After investigating involved transactions, we noted that a significant portion
of the transaction volume appears to originate from a single entity, which was
not captured by the multiple-input clustering heuristic. At least 40~new
wallets have entered the list of the richest Litecoin addresses, each with a
balance of 300,000~LTC ($\sim$\$10M).
In total, the addresses account for 12.9M~LTC (approximately \$372M). The
reason for the movement is still unclear, but, as we will discuss later in
Section~\ref{sec:results_spikes}, we can observe that the entities involved in
those stake shifts were controlled by Coinbase, which is a major cryptocurrency
exchange.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/stakeshift_contribution_ltc17865}
\caption{Ranked contributions (top 60) to stabilized stake shift for $\Lambda=1$
(LTC on November 30\textsuperscript{th}, 2018).}
\label{fig:stakeshift_contribution_ltc17865}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:stakeshift_contribution_ltc17865} provides a more detailed
view on that single Litecoin spike. It shows the top 60 contributions to the
stake shift for Litecoin on November 30\textsuperscript{th}, 2018. A block of
consecutive addresses sharing a certain transaction behavior becomes visible
between rank 16 to 46. They share the following common characteristics:
\begin{enumerate*}[label=(\roman*)]
\item the number of incoming transaction is either 40 or 41;
\item transactions are executed in chunks of 7,500 LTC; and
\item the total balance is 300,000 LTC.
\end{enumerate*}
The remaining 11~addresses of this entity appear in the tail of the distribution.
The reason is that the transactions already started on the day before
(2018-11-29 21:18:59Z). Therefore, these 11~addresses do not (fully) account
to the stabilized stake shift of November 30\textsuperscript{th}, 2018.
When regarding the stake shift evolution of \textbf{Zcash} (\$366M market
capitalization), we can, as in Litecoin, observe higher variability than in
Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash. This could be explained by the differences in market
capitalization (\$5.5B BCH vs. \$177B BTC) in these two
currencies\footnote{\url{https://coinmarketcap.com/all/views/all/}, retrieved
on 2019-09-19.}.
\begin{table*}[h]
\centering%
\caption{Summary statistics of stabilized stake shift for different lag values.}%
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{\input{tables/stake_shift_statistics_wide}}%
\label{tab:stake_shift_stat}%
\end{table*}
More detailed statistics for stake distribution lag $\Lambda$ ranging from 1 to
14~days are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:stake_shift_stat}, which shows the
mean, median, and standard deviation of resulting stake shift values.
Since the estimators for the arithmetic mean and standard deviation are not
robust against outliers, we did not consider the initial parts of the time
line and disregarded the first 6\% of the total number of days in our
estimation (marked with red dash-dotted vertical line in
Figure~\ref{fig:stake_shift_lags_btc} and Figure~\ref{fig:stake_shift_lags},
respectively). The gradually increasing mean and median stake shift values
confirm our previous observation of growing amplitudes.
\subsection{Modeling Stake Shift}\label{sec:shifts_model}
Having observed that stake shifts for different lags evolve synchronously
and vary in amplitudes, we next fitted regression models to the computed mean,
median, and standard deviations (Figure~\ref{fig:stake_shift_trend}).
We can observe that estimated values show a clear, strictly monotonic
increasing trend with growing lag. More specifically, we found that quadratic
polynomials capture well the relation between the location/scale estimators and
lag~$\Lambda$ (coefficient of determination $R^2 \geq 0.99$).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/stake_shift_trend}
\caption{Fitted trends for mean, median, and standard deviation of stake shift.}
\label{fig:stake_shift_trend}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Attributing Selected Stake Shift Spikes}\label{sec:results_spikes}
In order to shed some more light on the real-world actors behind observable
stake shift spikes, we selected the top five $\Lambda = 1$ spikes in each currency
and attributed them to real-world identities using the Chainalysis API.
Due to the limited availability of attribution tags, we focus only on the
period between August 1, 2017 and July 31, 2019. Before continuing, we note
that a fully fledged systematic analysis of real-world entities and their
motivation for transferring large amounts is out of scope in this paper.
Figure~\ref{fig:spike_btc_20170801} shows the distribution of stake shift
contributions at the spike that occurred during the Bitcoin Cash hard fork
(cf.\ Section~\ref{sec:results_shifts}). We can clearly see that
known exchanges such as Bitfinex, Kraken, Coinbase, and Korbit were the major
entities behind those stake shifts. The largest stake shift was caused by
a transfer from a Bitfinex operated address to some multisig wallet, which is not
a public deposit address but known to be operated by Bitfinex as well. This suggest
that this spike represents a major hot-to-cold wallet transfer. However, it remains
unclear why this co-occurs with the Bitcoin Cash hard-fork date.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/spikes_btc_17379}
\caption{Attributed BTC stake shift spike triggered by Bitcoin Cash fork (2017-08-01)}
\label{fig:spike_btc_20170801}
\end{figure}
We also attributed the top five Bitcoin Cash and Litecoin spikes and see that
exchanges play a major role in stake shifts, however to a lesser extent than
in Bitcoin. In the selected Litecoin spike the identity of involved entities is
unknown. However, we note that only limited attribution tags are available for
that currency. For further details on intra-spike stake shift distributions,
we refer to the plots in the Appendix of this paper
(Figures~\ref{fig:spikes_attributed_btc}--\ref{fig:spikes_attributed_ltc}).
The underlying cause and motivation for being involved in a major stake shift
is not always apparent. Possible reasons are migration of funds between hot
and/or cold wallets, or institutional investors taking a serious long position.
Summarizing the results, we can conclude that, at least in established
cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, a small number of real-world entities --
usually exchanges -- may account for major stake shifts in cryptocurrency
ecosystems.
\section{Stabilized Stake Shift Definition}\label{sec:stake_shift}
We are interested in executions of blockchain ledger protocols, and will be assuming a
model in the spirit of~\cite{EC:GarKiaLeo15} to formalize such executions.
In particular, we assume there is an \emph{environment} orchestrating the
execution, a set of \emph{parties} $\mathcal{P}$ executing the protocol, and an
\emph{adversary}
$\mathcal{A}$ allowed to corrupt the parties upon approval from the environment;
parties yet uncorrupted are called \emph{honest}.
We assume that the protocol execution is divided into a sequence of disjoint,
consecutive time intervals called \emph{slots}, indexed by natural numbers
(starting with $1$).
The set of honest parties at each slot $sl$ is denoted by $\mathcal{H}[sl]$.
Finally, we denote by $\mathsf{C}^\mathsf{P}[sl]$ the chain held by an honest party
$\mathsf{P}$ at the beginning of slot $sl$.
Finally, let $\dist{SD}^\mathsf{P}[sl]$ denote the stake distribution
recorded in the chain $\mathsf{C}^\mathsf{P}[sl]$
up to slot $sl$, seen as a probability distribution (i.e., normalized to sum
to $1$).
As a notational convenience, let $\dist{SD}^\mathsf{P}[0]$ denote
the initial stake distribution recorded in the genesis block.
To define stake shift, we use the standard notion of statistical distance of two
discrete probability distributions.
\begin{definition}[Statistical distance]\label{def:stat-dist}
For two discrete probability distributions $\dist{X}$ and $\dist{Y}$ with
support $\set{S}_{\dist{X}}$ and $\set{S}_{\dist{Y}}$ respectively, the
\emph{statistical distance} (sometimes also called the \emph{total variation
distance})
of $\dist{X}$ and $\dist{Y}$
is defined as
$$
\delta(\dist{X},\dist{Y})
\eqdef
\tfrac{1}{2}\sum_{s\in\set{S}_{\dist{X}}\cup\set{S}_{\dist{Y}}}
\left|
\Pr_{\dist{X}}[s]
-
\Pr_{\dist{Y}}[s]
\right|.
$$
\end{definition}
Seeing stake distributions as probability distributions allows for the
following definition inspired by~\cite[Definition 5.1]{C:KRDO17}.
\begin{definition}[Stake shift]
Consider an execution $\mathcal{E}$ of a block\-chain protocol $\Pi$
for $L$ slots, and let $sl\in\{\Lambda,\ldots,L\}$.
The \emph{$\Lambda$-stake shift} in slot $sl$ is the maximum, over
all parties $\mathsf{P}_1$ honest in slot $sl-\Lambda$ and
all parties $\mathsf{P}_2$ honest in slot $sl$,
of the statistical distance between the stake
distributions in slots $sl-\Lambda$ and $sl$ as perceived by $\mathsf{P}_1$ and
$\mathsf{P}_2$, respectively.
Formally,
$$
\SS_\Lambda(\mathcal{E},sl)
\eqdef
\max_{
\substack{
\mathsf{P}_1\in\mathcal{H}[sl-\Lambda]\\
\mathsf{P}_2\in\mathcal{H}[sl]
}
}
\delta\left(
\dist{SD}^{\mathsf{P}_1}[sl-\Lambda],
\dist{SD}^{\mathsf{P}_2}[sl]
\right).
$$
Naturally, we extend this notion over the whole execution and define
the \emph{$\Lambda$-stake shift} of $\mathcal{E}$ to be
$$
\SS_\Lambda(\mathcal{E})
\eqdef
\max_{\Lambda\leqsl\leq L}
\SS_\Lambda(\mathcal{E},sl).
$$
\end{definition}
Finally, note that the quantity $\SS_{\Lambda}(\mathcal{E},sl)$, and consequently also
$\SS_{\Lambda}(\mathcal{E})$, cannot be determined based solely on the final stabilized
ledger $\mathbf{L}$ that was created by the protocol, as it does not contain the views of the
participants during the protocol execution. For this reason, any long-term
empirical study that is only based on the preserved stabilized ledger
$\mathbf{L}$ (e.g. the Bitcoin blockchain)
has to aim for an analogous quantity capturing stake shift in $\mathbf{L}$, as defined next.
For a stable ledger $\mathbf{L}$, we denote by $\dist{SD}^{\mathbf{L}}[sl]$ the stake
distribution as recorded in $\mathbf{L}$ up to slot $sl$.
\begin{definition}[Stabilized stake shift]
\label{def:SSS}
Consider an execution $\mathcal{E}$ of a block\-chain protocol $\Pi$
for $L$ slots, let $\mathbf{L}$ denote the resulting stable ledger produced by
$\Pi$ during $\mathcal{E}$, and let $sl\in\{\Lambda,\ldots,L\}$.
The \emph{stabilized $\Lambda$-stake shift} in slot $sl$ is defined as
$$
\hat{\mathsf{SS}}_\Lambda(\mathcal{E},sl)
\eqdef
\delta\left(
\dist{SD}^{\mathbf{L}}[sl-\Lambda],
\dist{SD}^{\mathbf{L}}[sl]
\right),
$$
and similarly, the \emph{stabilized $\Lambda$-stake shift} of $\mathcal{E}$ is
$$
\hat{\mathsf{SS}}_\Lambda(\mathcal{E})
\eqdef
\max_{\Lambda\leqsl\leq L}
\hat{\mathsf{SS}}_\Lambda(\mathcal{E},sl).
$$
\end{definition}
For the reasons noted above, we will focus on \emph{stabilized} stake shift in our
empirical analysis; whenever we use the term \emph{stake shift} below, we refer to
its stabilized variant as per Definition~\ref{def:SSS}.
|
\section{Introduction}
Supermassive black holes (SMBHs) reside ubiquitously at the center of
galaxies, based on observations of stellar proper motion, stellar velocity
dispersion or accretion luminosity \citep{2013ARAA..51..511K}.
Tidal disruption events (TDEs) are thought to be a key signature of dormant SMBHs
at the centers of the inactive galaxies or intermediate-mass black holes (IMBHs) in star clusters.
As a star approaches to a SMBH, it is torn apart by the tidal force of the black hole,
which dominates the self-gravity of the star at the tidal disruption radius:
\begin{equation}
r_{\rm t}=\left(\frac{M_{\rm bh}}{m_*}\right)^{1/3}r_{*}\approx
24\left(\frac{M_{\rm bh}}{10^6\,{M}_\odot}\right)^{-2/3}
\left(\frac{m_*}{{M}_\odot}\right)^{-1/3}
\left(\frac{r_*}{{R}_\odot}\right)
r_{\rm S}.
\label{eq:rt}
\end{equation}
Here we denote the black hole mass with $M_{\rm bh}$, stellar mass
with $m_*$ and radius with $r_*$, and the Schwarzschild radius
with $r_{\rm{S}}=2{\rm G}M_{\rm bh}/{\rm c}^2$, where $G$ and
$c$ are Newton's gravitational constant and the speed of light,
respectively.
Most TDEs take place when a star at large separation ($\sim1\,\rm{pc}$) is perturbed onto
a parabolic orbit approaching close enough to the SMBH to be ripped apart by its tidal force.
The subsequent accretion of stellar debris falling back to the SMBH produces a characteristic
flare with a luminosity that could exceed the Eddington luminosity for a time scale of weeks
to months \citep{rees88,p89,ek89}.
TDE flares have been discovered at optical, ultraviolet, and soft X-ray
(see \citealt{2015JHEAp...7..148K} for a review; \citealt{2016MNRAS.455.2918H};
\citealt{2017ApJ...838..149A}) wavelengths with infrared event rates of $10^{-5}-10^{-4}$
per year per Milky-way mass galaxy \citep{dbeb02,sm16}, while jetted TDEs have been
detected through non-thermal emissions in radio \citep{baz+11,2016ApJ...819L..25A,2016Sci...351...62V}
or hard X-ray \citep{dnb+11,2015MNRAS.452.4297B}, with a lower event rate
\citep{2014arXiv1411.0704F,2017MNRAS.469.1354D}. Some spectroscopic
researches confirmed ${\rm H \,I}$ and ${\rm He\, II}$ (\citealt{ar14}) as well as
metal lines (\citealt{2019arXiv190303120L}) in TDEs. Weakly relativistic blue-shifted
broad absorption lines were attributed to a high-velocity outflow produced in TDE
AT2018zr (\citealt{2019arXiv190305637H}).
It is still debated how the expected fallback rate as a function of time,
$\propto{t}^{-5/3}$, translates into the observed light curves. While most of
the soft X-ray TDEs appear to follow the $t^{-5/3}$ scaling, the optical to
ultraviolet TDEs exhibit the different decay (e.g., \citealt{2012Natur.485..217G}).
\cite{lkp09} numerically showed that the fallback rate depends on the internal structure
of the tidally disrupted star, leading to early-time deviations from the standard behavior.
The centrally condensed core survived by the partial disruption of the star can make
the light curve steeper \citep{2013ApJ...767...25G}.
The accretion of clumps formed by self-gravitational fragmentation of the debris stream
causes the significant variations of the light curve around the $t^{-5/3}$ average at very
late time \citep{2015ApJ...808L..11C}, although they did not explain the underlying
trigger for the self-gravitating instability.
These clumps could be the origin of G2 cloud observed around Sgr A$^*$
\citet{2014ApJ...786L..12G},
which made the clumpy structure on the debris by a fluid instabilities caused by the interaction between the debris stream and an ambient medium.
In this paper, we explore the possibility of rapid fragmentation of a tidally disrupted star
around a SMBH through radiation hydrodynamic (RHD) simulations.
In section~\ref{sec:2}, we describe our numerical approach, focusing on the radiation transfer we make use of. In section~\ref{sec:3}, we study what causes rapid fragmentation of stellar debris, and predict
the resulting fallback rate.
Finally, section~\ref{sec:con} concludes with a discussion of our results and their implication.
\section{Computational Method}
\label{sec:2}
We start by describing our numerical methods, with a focus on how
we handle the radiation transfer in the numerical code, and summarize the setup of our physical
and numerical models. The simulations presented below were performed using a
three-dimensional (3D), Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) code with radiative transfer.
The code is based on the original version of \cite{benz90a,benz90b}, but substantially
modified as described in \cite{bate95} and parallelized using both OpenMP and MPI.
Subsequently, the radiation hydrodynamics was incorporated into the code by \cite{wb04}
and \cite{wbm05}, and it has been used extensively to study star formation (e.g \citealt{wb06,2012MNRAS.419.3115B}).
\subsection{Equations of radiation hydrodynamics in SPH}
\label{sec:radSPH}
In a frame comoving with a radiating fluid, assuming the local thermodynamics equilibrium (LTE),
the equations of self-gravitating, non-viscous RHD to order unity in $v/c$ are given by
\citep{ts01,wb04,wbm05},
\begin{eqnarray}
&&
\frac{D\rho}{Dt}=-\rho\vec\nabla\cdot\vec{v},
\label{eq:masscons}
\\
&&
\rho\frac{D\vec{v}}{dt}=-\vec\nabla{p}+\frac{\chi_{\rm F}\rho}{c}\vec{F}-\rho\vec\nabla\phi,
\label{eq:momcons}
\\
&&
\rho\frac{D}{Dt}\left(\frac{e}{\rho}\right)=-p\vec\nabla\cdot\vec{v}-4\pi\kappa_{\rm p}\rho{B}+c\kappa_{\rm E}\rho{E},
\label{eq:gasene}
\\
&&
\rho\frac{D}{Dt}\left(\frac{E}{\rho}\right)=-\vec{\nabla}\cdot{\vec{F}}-\vec\nabla\vec{v}:\vec{P}+4\pi\kappa_{\rm p}\rho{B}-c\kappa_{\rm E}\rho{E},
\label{eq:radene}
\\
&&
\frac{\rho}{c^{2}}\frac{D}{Dt}\left(\frac{\vec{F}}{\rho}\right)=-\nabla\cdot\vec{P}-\frac{\chi_{\rm F}\rho}{c}\vec{F},
\label{eq:radflux}
\\
&&
\nabla^{2}\phi=4\pi{G}\rho,
\label{eq:selfgrav}
\end{eqnarray}
where $D/Dt\equiv\partial/\partial{t}+\vec{v}\cdot\vec\nabla$ is the convective derivative,
$\rho$ is the density, $\vec{v}$ is the velocity, $u$ is the specific energy of the gas,
$p$ is the scalar isotropic pressure of the gas, $\phi$ is the gravitational potential,
$B$ is the frequency-integrated Planck function, $E$ is the frequency-integrated radiation energy,
$\vec{F}$ is the momentum flux density, $\vec{P}$ is the radiation pressure tensor.
The colon product: \vec\nabla\vec{v}:\vec{P} indicates contraction over two indices as follows:
$(\partial{v}_{j}/\partial{x}_i)P_{ij}$.
Note that equations (3)-(5) have been integrated over frequency. This leads to the
flux mean opacity $\chi_{\rm F}$, the Planck mean opacity $\kappa_{\rm P}$,
and the energy mean opacity $\kappa_{\rm E}$. The opacities are assumed to be
independent of frequency so that $\kappa_{\rm P}=\kappa_{\rm E}$, and they are newly
defined as $\kappa$ without the subscripts. The total opacity, $\chi_{\rm F}$, should be the
sum of the components of $\kappa$ and scattering. In our simulations, we ignore the
scattering so that $\chi_{\rm F}=\kappa$.
\subsubsection{Flux-limited diffusion}
The flux-limited diffusion method provides the following relation \citep{lp81},
\begin{equation}
\vec{F}=-\mathcal{D}\nabla{E},
\label{eq:fluxdiffusion}
\end{equation}
with a diffusion constant $\mathcal{D}=c\lambda(E)/(\chi\rho)$, where $\lambda(E)$
is the flux limiter, as an alternative of equation~(\ref{eq:radflux}).
It assumes a radiation pressure stress tensor,
\begin{equation}
\vec{P}=\vec{f}E,
\end{equation}
where $\vec{f}$ is the Eddington tensor:
\begin{equation}
\vec{f}=\frac{1}{2}(1-f(E))\vec{I}+\frac{1}{2}(3f(E)-1)\vec{\hat{n}}\vec{\hat{n}},
\end{equation}
with isotropic unit tensor $\vec{I}$ and unit vector $\vec{\hat{n}}=\vec\nabla{E}/|\nabla\vec{E}|$
in the direction of radiation energy gradient. Here, $f(E)$ is the Eddington factor:
\begin{equation}
f(E)=\lambda(E)+\lambda^2(E)\mathcal{R}(E)^2,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{R}(E)=|\nabla{E}|/(\chi\rho{E})$ is the dimensionless quantity and
we choose the flux limiter of \cite{lp81}:
\begin{equation}
\lambda(E)=\frac{2+\mathcal{R}(E)}{6+3\mathcal{R}(E)+\mathcal{R}^2(E)}.
\label{eq:fluxlimiter}
\end{equation}
We solve the RHD equations by using equations (\ref{eq:fluxdiffusion})-(\ref{eq:fluxlimiter})
without solving equation (\ref{eq:radflux}) directly.
\subsubsection{Equation of state and opacities}
In order to close the equations (\ref{eq:masscons})-(\ref{eq:fluxlimiter}),
we need to add the equation of state for the gas:
\begin{equation}
p=\mathcal{E}(T)\rho
\label{eq:eqs}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{E}(T)$ is a specific internal energy.
Note that $\mathcal{E}(T)$ equals to $(R_{\rm g}/\mu)T$ for an ideal gas,
where $R_{\rm g}$ is the gas constant and $\mu$ is the molecular weight.
For pure hydrodynamic simulations an adiabatic equation of state
\begin{equation}
p=K\rho^{\gamma}
\end{equation}
is used in addition to the ideal equation of state,
where $\gamma$ is the specific heat ratio ($\gamma=5/3$ is applied for a monoatomic gas)
and $K$ is a proportionality constant. On the other hand, when the ionization and dissociation of the molecular hydrogen and hydrogen is included, \cite{bb75} derived:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{E}(T)
&=&
X(1-y)E(H_2)T_{\rm}+[1.5X(1+x)y+0.375Y(1+z_1+z_1z_2)]R_{\rm g}T_{\rm}
\nonumber \\
&+&
X(1.304\times10^{13}x+2.143\times10^{12})y
+Y(5.888\times10^{12}(1-z_2)+1.892\times10^{13}z_2)z_1,
\label{eq:cv2}
\end{eqnarray}
where X and Y are the mass fractions of hydrogen and helium, respectively,
$y$ is the dissociation fraction of hydrogen, x the ionization fraction of hydrogen,
and $z_1$ and $z_2$ are the degrees of single and double ionization of helium, respectively.
$E(H2)$ gives the contribution to the specific heat capacity from molecular hydrogen and the
ionization fractions are calculated using the standard Saha equation \citep{bb75,2007ApJ...656L..89B}.
The mean molecular weight also changes with the degree of the
ionization and dissociation, and was derived by \cite{bb75},
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu=\frac{4}{2X(1+y+2xy)+Y(1+z_1+z_2)}.
\label{eq:mu}
\end{eqnarray}
In our simulations, the solar elemental composition (X = 0.70 and Y = 0.28) are applied and the mean molecular weight of the gas is initially $\mu=2.38$ for this composition \citep{2012MNRAS.419.3115B}.
We adopt the gas opacity tables from \cite{alex75} and the dust opacity from \cite{pmc85}, and
from \cite{fer05} at the higher temperatures when the dust is sublimated. Above $10^4$ K,
the opacity is dominated by the Kramers law and electron scattering:
\begin{equation}
\kappa=\kappa_{\rm K}+\kappa_{\rm es}=1.2512\times10^{22}\rho{T}^{-7/2}+0.4\,{\rm cm^2\,g^{-1}}.
\end{equation}
For temperatures above a few million K, the opacity, specific heat capacity, and mean molecular mass approach constant values.
\subsection{Modeling stellar tidal disruption
by SPH with radiative transfer}
\label{sec:models}
We follow two-stages in studying the process
of tidal disruption of a vilialized star by a SMBH.
In the first stage, we model a star by the polytrope, which is a solution to the
Lane-Emden equation with a polytropic index $n=1.5$ and $n=3$ as an initial condition.
We then run five types of simulations of a solar-type star with mass and radius
$(m_*,r_*)=(1\,M_\odot,1\,R_\odot)$, and a solar metallicity ($1\,Z_\odot$)
for the RHD cases.
We finish the simulations at $t=50$ when they are well-virialized, where the unit of time
is given by $\Omega_{*}^{-1}=\sqrt{r_*^3/Gm_*}\simeq1.6\times10^3\,\rm{s}$.
Models S1 and S3 show the purely hydrodynamic simulations with $n=1.5$ and $n=3$,
respectively, whereas Model S2 represents the RHD simulation of the polytrope of $n=1.5$.
Models S4 and S5 do the RHD simulations of an $n=3$ polytrope with and without radiative transfer.
The details of each model are shown in Table~\ref{tbl:tdes}.
For all models, the magnitude ratio of thermal to gravitational
energies ranges between $0.497 \le |E_{\rm th}/E_{\rm grav}|\le0.499$
at $t=0$ and takes a value of $|E_{\rm th}/E_{\rm grav}|=0.497$ at $t=50$.
It means that stars that we make use of in the second-stage are well-virialized.
In the second stage, the SMBH is added at the origin and the star is initially
located at the distance of three times its tidal disruption radius from the black hole.
The total number of SPH particles used in each simulation is $\sim10^6$.
In all second-stage simulations, we used $M_{\rm bh}=10^6 M_{\odot}$, $m_*=1\,M_\odot$,
$r_*=1\,R_\odot$, and termination time of each simulation is $t=100$. Figure~\ref{fig:raddis} depicts the radial density distribution of the stellar debris for the five models and the radial temperature distribution of Models 3 and 4. Panel (a) represents that of Models S1 and S2 at $t=0$, whereas panel (b) does that of Models S1 and S2 at $t=100$. Panel (c) represents that of Models S3 and S4 at $t=0$, whereas panel (d) does that of Models S3 and S4 at $t=100$. Panel (e) represents the corresponding temperature distribution to panel (d). For comparison, panel (d) represnets the overlapped density distribution between those of Models S4 and S5. Panel (a) shows that Model S1 initially have the same density profile as Model S2, while panel (c) shows that Models S3 initially have the same density profile as Model S4. Note that Model S5 has also the same density profile at $t=0$ as those of Models S3 and S4.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{
Simulated models of TDEs.
The first column shows the model label.
The second column is the polytrope index, $n$, of gas sphere
at the initial setting. The third column indicates whether radiative
transfer was used. The fourth and fifth columns provide the number
of clumps and the clump's mass, respectively. The last column
describes the type of corresponding simulation.
}
\begin{tabular}{@{}ccccccccccl@{}}
\hline
Model
& Polytropic index
& Radiative transfer
& Fragmentation
& Clumpy number
& Remark \\
& $n$ & & at $t=100$
& $N_{\rm cl}$
\\
\hline
S1 & $1.5$ & $-$ & no & $0$ & Pure Hydro.\\
S2 & $1.5$ & on & no & $0$ & RHD \\
S3 & $3$ & $-$ & no & $0$ & Pure Hydro.\\
S4 & $3$ & on & yes & $16$ & RHD \\
S5 & $3$ & off & yes & $19$ & RHD \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tbl:tdes}
\end{table}
\section{Fragmentation of the stellar debris}
\label{sec:3}
Panel (b) of Figure~\ref{fig:raddis} indicates that no fragmentation is apparent
at $t=100$ for the $n=1.5$ cases, although some structure is seen around the
highest density region of Model S2. It is apparent from panel (d) that the stellar
debris remarkably fragments in Model S4, whereas it shows no clear fragmentation
in Model S3. This demonstrates that a remarkable fragmentation occurs at
$t=10^5\,{\rm s}\sim1\,{\rm day}$, soon after tidal disruption of the star modeled
by a $n=3$ polytrope. In panel (d), the dashed line denotes $\rho_{\rm crit}=3\times10^{-3}\,{\rm g\,cm^{-3}}$, which we set as a fiducial minimum value for defining a clump.
The fourth to sixth columns of Table~\ref{tbl:tdes} shows the flag of whether the
debris fragments at $t=100$, the number of clumps ($N_{\rm cl}$), and the type of
corresponding simulation, respectively. Figure~\ref{fig:dens} shows the density
map of the stellar debris of Models S3 and S4 at $t=100$ in the x-y plane over a dynamic
range of twelve orders of magnitude. Each axis is normalized by the tidal disruption radius.
The black hole is located at the origin. The figure demonstrates that there are $\sim20$
clumps on the debris in Model S4, whereas it is obvious that there is no fragmentation
in Model 3. These results are consistent with panel (d).
We find from panel (e) that in Model S3 the gas temperature in the bulk of the debris
filament (i.e. not in the clumps) is substantially higher than in the Model S4 case, and
that is why the debris filament does not fragment (because the temperature is typically
higher at a given density) in Model S3.
It suggests that some mechanism should efficiently work to make the stellar debris cools down.
One of promising mechanisms is radiative cooling. If the debris is fully ionized,
its optical depth for Thomson scattering is estimated to be,
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_{p}=n_p\sigma_{\rm T}r\approx2\times10^9
\left(\frac{\rho}{10^{-3}\,{\rm g\,cm^{-3}}}\right)
\left(\frac{r}{r_{\rm t}}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $n_p\approx\rho/m_p$ is the number density of the free electrons,
$m_p$ is the proton's mass, and $\sigma_{\rm T}$ is the Thomson scattering cross section.
This implies that radiative cooling is not efficient because the opacity of the gas is so high that
the photon diffusion time is very long.
Panel (f) demonstrates that radiative cooling does not work as a debris cooling mechanism almost at all
because the stellar debris clearly fragments in Model S5 as well as Model S4.
Figure~\ref{fig:jeans} includes six panels in Model 4:
panel (a) provides the gas temperature distribution over the density.
The temperature ranges from $\sim3\times10^3$\,K to $4\times10^4$\,K over $1.0\times10^{-4}\,{\rm gcm^{-3}}\le\rho\lesssim1.0$. The gas temperature tends to increase with the density
Panel (b) depicts the temperature dependence of the ratio of the pressure computed by equation~\ref{eq:eqs} to the pressure of the corresponding ideal gas. The panel indicates that the gas pressure can be significantly weaker than the ideal gas case at some temperature range, where the gravitational collapse can occur. We find from panel (c) that the mean molecular weight changes in two stages: first, it changes due to the dissociation of $H_2$ from $2.38$ to $1.3\sim1.5$ in the range of $3\sim5\times10^3$ K. Next, due to the hydrogen ionization, the mean molecular weight starts at $\sim3\times10^4$ K decreasing to $0.61$, where the gas is fully ionized. In panel (d), the smoothing length is $0.25$ times smaller than $R_{\rm J}$ for more than $10^{-4}\,{\rm g\,cm^{-3}}$. We denote from the panel that the clumps on the debris seen in Figure~\ref{fig:dens} are numerically sufficiently resolved.
In panel (e), the Jeans radius is defined by
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{\rm J}=\sqrt{\frac{3}{8\pi}}
\left(\frac{R_{\rm g}}{G\mu}\right)^{1/2}
\left(\frac{T}{\rho}\right)^{1/2},
\label{eq:rj}
\end{eqnarray}
where we assume that the mean density of a clump
corresponds to the density of each SPH particle.
With $R_{\rm J}$ estimated from equation~(\ref{eq:rj}),
the Jeans mass is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{\rm J}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{R_{\rm J}c_{\rm s}^2}{G}=
\frac{1}{2}
\left(\frac{R_{\rm g}}{\mu{G}}\right)TR_{\rm J}.
\end{eqnarray}
From the panel,
the Jeans mass is distributed over $0.1 < M_{\rm J} / M_{\rm Jup} < 12$
and the Jeans radius is distributed over $2 < R_{\rm J}/R_{\rm Jup} < 20$.
According to \cite{2007ApJ...661..502B}, the observed
mass-radius relation of giant planets occupies the narrow
range of $0.76\lesssim{r_{\rm cl}}/R_{\rm Jup}\lesssim1.4$
for $0.35\lesssim{m}_{\rm cl}/M_{\rm Jup}\lesssim1.35$,
where $r_{\rm cl}$ and $m_{\rm cl}$ are
the radius and mass of the formed clump, respectively.
For brown dwarfs at age of $\sim{\rm Gyr}$, the observed mass-radius relation
shows $0.9<r_{\rm cl}/R_{\rm Jup}<1.1$ for $2\le{m}_{\rm cl}/M_{\rm Jup}\le20$ \citep{2011ApJ...736...47B}.
In our simulations, the returning clumps having the orbital period less than $\sim100\,{\rm yr}$
are too hot to cool down to be the observed giant planes, while the unbound clumps
can be potentially freely-floating planets and brown dwarfs if they would keep surviving.
The ratio of stellar to clump's tidal disruption radii is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{r_{\rm t,cl}}{r_{\rm t}}=\left(\frac{m_*}{m_{\rm cl}}\right)^{1/3}\frac{r_{\rm cl}}{r_*}
\sim1.02\,\left(\frac{m_*}{M_\odot}\right)^{1/3}
\left(\frac{r_*}{R_\odot}\right)^{-1}
\left(\frac{m_{\rm cl}}{M_{\rm Jup}}\right)^{-1/3}
\left(
\frac{r_{\rm cl}}{R_{\rm Jup}}
\right),
\label{eq:rtclrt}
\end{eqnarray}
where $r_{\rm cl}$ and $m_{\rm cl}$ are the clumpy radius and mass,
and the tidal disruption radius of a clump is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{\rm t,cl}
=\left(\frac{M_{\rm bh}}{m_{\rm cl}}\right)^{1/3}r_{\rm cl}.
\end{eqnarray}
Panel (f) shows that the tidal radius of the returning clumps
is larger than the tidal radius of the original star. This suggests
that all the retuning clumps would be tidally disrupted.
If the returning clump is disrupted, then the subsequent flare
would be triggered after the orbital period of the returning debris on the most tightly bound orbit:
\begin{equation}
t_{\rm mtb,cl}=\frac{\pi}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\frac{M_{\rm bh}}{m_{\rm cl}}\right)^{1/2}
\frac{1}{\Omega_{\rm cl}}
\approx1.2\times10^{8}\,{\rm s}\,
\left(\frac{M_{\rm bh}}{10^6\,M_{\odot}}\right)^{1/2}
\left(\frac{m_{\rm cl}}{M_{\rm Jup}}\right)^{-1}\left(\frac{r_{\rm cl}}{R_{\rm Jup}}\right)^{3/2},
\label{eq:mtb}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_{\rm cl}=\sqrt{Gm_{\rm cl}/r_{\rm cl}^{3}}$ is the dynamical angular frequency of the clump.
The peak fallback rate is then estimated to be
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{M}_{\rm cl,max}=\frac{1}{3}\frac{m_{\rm cl}}{t_{\rm mtb,cl}}
\sim8.5\times10^{-5}\,{\rm M_\odot\,yr^{-1}}
\left(\frac{M_{\rm bh}}{10^6\,M_{\odot}}\right)^{-1/2}
\left(\frac{m_{\rm cl}}{M_{\rm Jup}}\right)^{2}\left(\frac{r_{\rm cl}}{R_{\rm Jup}}\right)^{-3/2}.
\label{eq:fbr}
\end{eqnarray}
By taking account of the range of simulated mass and radius of the formed clump,
which is obtained from panel (b), equation~(\ref{eq:fbr}) implies that the tidal
disruption of the fallback clumps would be smaller than the Eddington accretion rate $\dot{M}_{\rm Edd}=L_{\rm Edd}/c^2\sim2.2\times10^{-3}\,{M_\odot\,{\rm yr^{-1}}}(M_{\rm bh}/10^6\,M_\odot)$, where $L_{\rm Edd}=4\pi{GM_{\rm bh}}m_{p}c/\sigma_{\rm T}$ is the Eddington luminosity.
Figure~\ref{fig:fbrate} is the simulated mass fallback rate of the stellar debris
for each model. The mass fallback rate is defined by $\dot{M}_{\rm fb}=(dM/d\epsilon)(d\epsilon/dt)$, where $\epsilon$
is the specific energy of the stellar debris, $d\epsilon/dt\propto{t^{-5/3}}$ because of
Kepler's third law, and $dM/d\epsilon$ is the simulated differential mass distribution.
The solid black and red lines show the mass fallback rates of Models S4 and S5,
while the dotted green and dashed blue line represents that of
Model S3 and the standard $t^{-5/3}$ decay rate.
The horizontal dashed orange line shows the Eddington accretion rate.
The mass fallback rates of Models S4 and S5 decays with several pronounced spikes
from the early to late time. The spikes in the light curve
can be used as evidence for the clump formation in TDEs.
\section{Discussions and Conclusions}
\label{sec:con}
We have performed the RHD simulations of tidal disruption of a star
on a parabolic orbit by a SMBH by using a 3D SPH code with radiative transfer.
Our conclusions are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Tidally disrupted stars fragment and
form $\sim20$ clumps soon after tidal disruption ($\sim1\,{\rm day}$ for an SMBH of $10^6\,M_\odot$).
This formation is triggered by the endothermic processes through ionization and dissociation of helium and hydrogen, decreasing the gas pressure compared with the adiabatic gas case, leading to local gravitational collapse. Radiative cooling is ineffective almost at all in causing fragmentation because
the stellar debris is highly optically thick.
\item
The fragmentation does not occur in tidal disruption of a star modeled as a $n=1.5$ polytrope.
This is because the highest density is an order of magnitude lower than that of $n=3$ case.
\item The mass fallback rate decays with time but shows several pronounced spikes
due to the formation of clumps. The detection of such spikes can serve as a smoking-gun
for clump formation in stellar debris.
\item The clumps on unbound debris can be potentially freely-floating planets and brown dwarfs.
\end{enumerate}
We have also tested the dependence of
the debris fragmentation for the $n=3$ case on the penetration factor $\beta$,
and found that it occurs only for $\beta\gtrsim2.2$. This condition resembles the condition
for avoiding the partial tidal disruption, where the core of the star survives
\citep{2017A&A...600A.124M}.
We find that if the fraction of SPH particles making of the central, biggest clump
is less than one-third of the total particle number, the debris can fragment.
The degree of central concentration determines whether the stellar
debris fragments or not. This is possibly due to the suppression of the self-gravitating instability
by the central clump. The suppression condition is given by the balance
between the self-gravity of the smaller clump and the gravity acting on it
from the central clump as $Gm_{\rm cl}^2/r_{\rm cl}^2\,\lesssim\,{G}m_{\rm c}m_{\rm cl}/r^2(H/r)$,
where $m_{\rm c}$, $H$, and $r$ is the mass of the central clump, the debris scale hight, and
the distance between the the central and the other clumps.
Because this results in $r/r_{\rm cl}\lesssim(m_{\rm c}/m_{\rm cl})^{1/2}(H/r)^{1/2}\sim\mathcal{O}(1)$,
we find the suppression by the central clump cannot work.
If the originally approaching star is more massive than 10$R_\odot$, then each
clump's mass should correspond to a star.
This is a promising mechanism for making low-mass stars around a SMBH or an IMBH.
\newpage
\begin{figure}
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{
\includegraphics*[width=5cm]{fig1a.jpg}
\includegraphics*[width=5cm]{fig1b.jpg}
}\\
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{
\includegraphics*[width=5cm]{fig1c.jpg}
\includegraphics*[width=5cm]{fig1d.jpg}
}\\
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{
\includegraphics*[width=5cm]{fig1e.jpg}
\includegraphics*[width=5cm]{fig1f.jpg}
}
\caption{
Radial density distributions of the star at $t=0$ and of the stellar debris at $t=100$.
Panel (a) shows the overlapped density distribution between Models S1 and S2 at t=0,
while panel (b) shows the same distribution as panel (a) but for at t=100.
Panel (c) shows the overlapped density distribution between Models S3 and S4 at t=0,
while panel (d) shows the same distribution as panel (c) but for at t=100.
In panel (d), the dashed line represents $\rho_{\rm crit}=3\times10^{-3}\,{\rm g\,cm^{-3}}$,
which is set as a fiducial value of the gas density. We then recognize what has the density beyond
it as a clump. Panel (e) depicts the corresponding temperature distribution to panel (d).
Panel (f) represents the overlapped density distribution between Models S4 and S5 at $t=100$.
}
\label{fig:raddis}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics*[width=9cm]{fig2a.pdf}}\\
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics*[width=9cm]{fig2b.pdf}}
\caption{Density map of the stellar debris of Models S3 and S4
at $t=100$ in the x-y plane over the twelve orders of magnitude
logarithmic scale in computational unit. Each axis is normalized by the
tidal disruption radius. The black hole is located at the origin.}
\label{fig:dens}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{
\includegraphics{fig3a.jpg}
\includegraphics{fig3b.jpg}
}\\
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{
\includegraphics{fig3c.jpg}
\includegraphics{fig3d.jpg}
}\\
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{
\includegraphics{fig3e.jpg}
\includegraphics{fig3f.jpg}
}
\caption{SPH particle distributions in some phase-spaces of Model 4 at t=100.
In all the panels, each axis is shown on a logarithmic scale.
(a) Gas temperature-density distribution
(b) Density dependence of the ratio of
the pressure computed by equations~\ref{eq:eqs} and \ref{eq:cv2}
to the pressure of the corresponding ideal gas.
(c) Mean molecular weight-temperature distribution.
The dashed line denotes $\mu_0=0.62$, which corresponds to
the mean molecular weight for the fully ionized gas.
(d) Dependence of the smoothing length normalized by $R_{\rm J}$ on the gas density.
(e) Jeans mass-radius distribution for $\rho\ge\rho_{\rm crit}$, where $\rho_{\rm crit}=3\times10^{-3}\,{\rm gcm^{-3}}$. The Jeans radius and mass are normalized by Jupiter's radius $R_{\rm Jup}$ and
mass $M_{\rm Jup}$, respectively.
(f) Dependence of the ratio of stellar to clump's tidal disruption radii (see equation \ref{eq:rtclrt}) on Jeans mass.
}
\label{fig:jeans}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\resizebox{\hsize}{!}{\includegraphics*[width=10cm]{fig4.pdf}}
\caption{Simulated mass fallback rates of the stellar debris.
The solid black and red lines show that of Models S4 and S5,
while the dotted green and dashed blue line represents that of
Model S3 and the standard $t^{-5/3}$ decay rate.
The horizontal dashed orange line shows the corresponding
Eddington accretion rate.
}
\label{fig:fbrate}
\end{figure}
\acknowledgments
This research has been supported by Basic Science Research
Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2016R1A5A1013277
and 2017R1D1A1B03028580 to KH), by the European Research
Council under the European Community’s Seventh Framework
Programme (FP7/2007- 2013 grant agreement no. 339248 MRB),
and by the Black Hole Initiative at Harvard university which is
funded by JTF and GBMF (AL). The numerical simulations were
performed and also supported by the National Supercomputing
Center with supercomputing resources including technical support
(KSC-2019-CRE-0082 to KH).
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sect:intro}
Solar eruptions, including solar flares, coronal mass ejections (CMEs), and various scales of plasma jets release a great amount of energy (up to $10^{25}$ J in tens of minutes in a typical X-class flare), eject fast hot plasma flows (up to 1000 km s$^{-1}$), and emit a great number of energetic particles into the interplanetary space, and produce great impacts on the terrestrial environment. Although studies of solar eruptions have been done for more than one century, there are still many big questions, including what powers the eruptions? What is the primary trigger? etc. Answers of these questions may help us to better predict when, where, and how solar eruptions occur, and avoid their damages as soon as possible.
Observations show that most solar eruptions take place in active regions which composed of many plasma loops (Somov 1989, Shibata 1999, Wang et al. 2002, Tan et al. 2006) with scales from several hundred km to beyond one million km, and stretching from the photosphere, via chromosphere to the high corona (Bray 1991, Hudson 2011). Many models proposed that magnetic reconnection could release magnetic energy, accelerate particles and heat plasmas (Lin 2003, Schrijver 2009, Chen 2011). Before the onset of magnetic reconnection, the active region has stored enough free energy by twisting or shearing motions near the photosphere (Ishii 2000, Fang 2012), or braiding of plasma loops by continuous footpoint motions (Cirtain 2013, Tiwari 2014), or magnetic flux emergence (Liu 2006) and other motions. However, what trigger these eruptions is still debated (Hu et al. 1995, Forbes 2000, Schrijver 2009, Shibata et al. 2011, Kusano et al. 2012, Aulanier 2014, Sun et al. 2015, Jiang et al. 2016, Wyper et al. 2017).
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=9 cm]{ms-RAA-2019-0281-Fig1.eps}
\caption{Eruptive process of an X2.3 flare observed at SXR of 1 - 8 \AA~ by GOES satellites on 2013 October 29. The orange curve shows the temperature in the flaring source region derived from the observed SXR emission fluxes at two wavelengths: 1 - 8 \AA~ and 0.5 - 4 \AA.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Fig.1 presents a typical solar flare observed by GOES soft X-ray (SXR) telescope. The black curve presents the SXR emission at 1 - 8 \AA, and the orange curve shows the temperature in flaring region derived from SXR emission at two wavelength band (1 - 8 \AA~ \& 0.5 - 4 \AA) (Thomas et al. 1985, White et al. 2005). The whole process can be plotted into 4 phases: slow increase (A), fast increase (B), maximum (C), and gradual decrease (D). The slow increase lasts for more than 10 min before the flare start with slowly temperature increasing in source region. Then, the emission increases rapidly at 4 orders of magnitude in about 3 min and the temperature increases from about $4\times10^{6}$ K up to $2.4\times10^{7}$ K in about 2 min (B). After the maximum (C), both the emission flux and temperature decrease gradually in more than 20 min. Here, we noted that the temperature reaches its maximum 1 - 2 min prior to the SXR maximum. If the flare eruption is generated from magnetic reconnection, then when did the reconnection start? Does it start in phase A or phase B? If it occurred in phase A, why the temperature increases slowly? If it occurred in phase B, why the temperature increases before this phase? Obviously there must have some heating processes in source region in phase A. Then, what heat the source region during phase A? and what is the physical connection between the heating process and magnetic reconnection? Many models have been proposed to explain the triggering mechanism of solar eruptions (Forbes et al. 2006, Kusano et al. 2012, Schmieder et al. 2013, Aulanier, 2014). However, two basic questions still remain open: how does the energy accumulate in the source region before the onset of eruptions? which drive and trigger the plasma loops to erupt?
It is well-known that there is a gradient, there will drive a flow inevitably. For example, an electric potential-gradient ($\nabla U$) will drive an electric current in plasmas: $j=-\sigma\cdot\nabla U$ ($\sigma$ is the conductivity), a density-gradient ($\nabla n$) may drive a diffusion flow: $\Gamma=-D\cdot\nabla n$ ($D$ is the diffusion coefficient), and a temperature gradient ($\nabla T$) may drive a heat flow: $q=-K\cdot\nabla T$ ($K$ is the coefficient of heat conduction), etc. Then, what flow will be driven by a magnetic-gradient ($\nabla B$) in solar plasma loops?
Considering the ubiquitous magnetic gradient in solar atmosphere, this work proposed that magnetic-gradient in solar plasma loops may drive an energetic particle flow which carry and convey kinetic energy from the solar lower atmosphere to move upwards, accumulate around the looptop and increase the temperature, and finally trigger a violent eruption. Section 2 introduces the magnetic-gradients in solar atmosphere. Section 3 discuss the primary processes driven by magnetic-gradient force. Section 4 is the applications to other astrophysical processes, such as the formation of the cold of sunspot near photosphere and the hot above sunspot, plasma jets, type-II spicule, and the fast solar wind above coronal holes, etc. Finally, conclusions are summarized in Section 5.
\section{Magnetic-gradient in solar atmosphere}
The solar atmosphere is always filled with many magnetized plasma loops in lengths from several thousand km to beyond one million km. Some of them connect two opposite magnetic polarities in an active region, while some of them may even connect different active regions, and the solar global magnetic field may connect both solar poles. Because generally the plasma is frozen in magnetic field, these loops are shaped the main structure of solar atmosphere with different scales of lengths and heights.
In each solar plasma loop, the magnetic field around the footpoint near the photosphere is strongest and decreases generally with the increasing height above the solar surface. Therefore, there is magnetic-gradient ($\nabla B$) from the photosphere to the corona, and the direction of magnetic-gradient is downward. So far, we have no reliable direct measurement of the magnetic field and the gradient in the chromosphere and corona. We may indirectly estimate them above active regions from a fitted expression obtained by Dulk \& MeClean (1978):
\begin{equation}
B=0.5(\frac{r}{R_{s}}-1)^{-\frac{3}{2}}=0.5(\frac{R_{s}}{h})^{\frac{3}{2}}.
\end{equation}
The unit of magnetic field strength $B$ is Gs. $R_{s}$ is the solar photospheric radius. $h$ is the height above the photosphere. From Equation (1), the vertical magnetic-gradient can be derived,
\begin{equation}
\frac{dB}{dh}\approx-1.08\times10^{-9}(\frac{R_{s}}{h})^{\frac{5}{2}}.
\end{equation}
From Equation (1) and (2), we may estimate that the magnetic field strength and magnetic-gradient are about 102 Gs and -7.7$\times10^{-6}$ Gs m$^{-1}$ at height of 2$\times10^{4}$ km, 26 Gs and -7.8$\times10^{-7}$ Gs m$^{-1}$ at height of 5$\times10^{4}$ km, 9 Gs and - 1.4$\times10^{-7}$ Gs m$^{-1}$ at height of 1$\times10^{5}$ km, 3 Gs and - 2.4$\times10^{-8}$ Gs m$^{-1}$ at height of 2$\times10^{5}$ km, respectively. Some roughly observations show that the magnetic field is about 1000 G around the footpoint, 10-250 G at height about 5$\times10^{4}$ km, and 5-10 G at height about 2$\times10^{5}$ km, respectively. Accordingly, the magnetic-gradient is about -4$\times10^{-7}$ G m$^{-1}$ at height of 5$\times10^{4}$ km, and -2$\times10^{-9}$ G m$^{-1}$ at the height of 2$\times10^{5}$ km, respectively (Gelfreikh et al. 1997, Mathew \& Ambastha 2000, Cui et al. 2007, Joshi et al. 2017).
Many practices show that Equations (1) and (2) is valid only in the range of $h=0.02 - 10 R_{s}$ above solar surface with uncertainty $\leq 30\%$. In the lower solar atmosphere, especially in the photosphere, chromosphere and lower corona with height $h<10$ Mm, we have to obtain the magnetic field and its gradient from modeling extrapolations. All of the above approaches show that the magnetic-gradient near the footpoint gets its maximum, then decreases rapidly with height and diminishes in the high corona.
\section{Magnetic-gradient Driving Processes of Solar Eruptions}
\subsection{Principle of Magnetic-gradient Pumping Mechanism}
Tan (2014) proposed that a charged particle may have the following balance in solar atmospheric plasma with slowly-varying inhomogeneous magnetic field,
\begin{equation}
F_{t}=F_{m}+mg(h).
\end{equation}
Here, $mg(h)$ is the solar gravitational force at height $h$ above the solar surface. $m$ is the mass of the charged particle, $g(h)=\frac{GM_{s}}{(R_{s}+h)^{2}}$ is the solar gravitational acceleration at $h$. $M_{s}$ and $R_{s}$ are the mass and photospheric radius of the Sun, respectively. $F_{m}$ is the magnetic-gradient force which can be expressed as,
\begin{equation}
F_{m}=-\mu\cdot\nabla B=-G_{B}\cdot\epsilon_{t}.
\end{equation}
Here, $\mu=\frac{\frac{1}{2}mv_{t}^{2}}{B}=\frac{\epsilon_{t}}{B}$ is the magnetic-moment which is approximately an invariance in the slowly-varying inhomogeneous magnetized plasmas. $\nabla B$ is the magnetic-gradient along the magnetic field lines, $v_{t}$ is the transverse velocity, and $\epsilon_{t}$ is the transverse kinetic energy. $G_{B}=\nabla B/B$ is the relative magnetic-gradient. $L_{B}=\frac{1}{G_{B}}$ is the magnetic field scale length.
Because $F_{m}\propto-G_{B}$, the magnetic-gradient ($G_{B}$) plays an effective force on the charged particles and drive it to get away from the strong magnetic field region to the weak field region. In solar conditions, the relative magnetic-gradient $G_{B}$ is nearly constant at certain place in plasma loop, $F_{m}$ only changes with respect to the particle's transverse kinetic energy: $F_{m}\propto\epsilon_{t}$. The higher the kinetic energy of a particle, it will get a stronger $F_{m}$, and get away from strong field region faster than the low energy particles. The energetic particles are picked up by the magnetic-gradient force from the underlying thermal plasma with strong magnetic field, transported to move upwards, accumulate in the high plasma with weak magnetic field in solar plasma loops. The plasma loops act as a pumper driving energetic particles (similar as water) to move upwards and form an energetic particle flow. Therefore, this process is called magnetic-gradient-pumping (MGP) mechanism (Tan 2014).
However, Equations (3) and (4) are derived under conditions of collision-free plasmas and slow variation of magnetic field in time and space, which may ensure that a charged particle can finish at least one more cycles gyrating to the magnetic field before it collides with other particles. In this case, the magnetic-moment is approximately conserved. These conditions are satisfied in the solar corona and upper chromosphere. But the photosphere and lower chromosphere are partial ionized and frequent collisions for their low temperature and high density. It seems that Equations (3) and (4) are possibly not valid here. Just because of this doubt, there is little response since Tan (2014) proposed the MGP mechanism to explain the mystery of coronal heating.
It is possibly inspirational to compare the collision timescales ($t_{c}$) and the magnetic cyclotron period ($t_{mc}$) in the solar photosphere and chromosphere.
(1) Collision timescale ($t_{c}$). In solar photosphere and chromosphere, because of the weakly partial ionization, the dominated collision mainly occur between the charged particles and the neutral hydrogen atoms. the collision timescale can be estimated by $t_{c}(ia)\approx\frac{1}{\pi r^{2}vn_{n}}$. Here, $r\approx5.3\times10^{-11}$ m is the radius of hydrogen atom, $n_{n}$ is the density of hydrogen atoms, $v\approx(\frac{k_{B}T}{m})^{\frac{1}{2}}$ is the averaged speed of the charged particles (mainly protons). Approximately, $t_{c}(ia)\approx1.25\times10^{18}\frac{1}{n_{n}T^{1/2}}$. The other collision timescale is occurred among ions, $t_{c}(ii)\approx4.64\times10^{5}\frac{T^{3/2}}{n_{i}}$. $n_{i}$ is the density of ions.
(2) Magnetic cyclotron period ($t_{mc}$). The proton's magnetic cyclotron period can be simply expressed as $t_{mc}\approx6.7\times10^{-8}B^{-1}$. Here, the unit of magnetic field B is Gauss.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption[]{The comparison between the collision timescales and the magnetic cyclotron periods in solar atmosphere.}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Parameter & Photosphere & Chromosphere & Corona \\\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
T (K) & 5450 & 10800 & 447000 \\
$n_{n}$ (m$^{-3}$) & 6.880$\times10^{22}$ & 9.136$\times10^{16}$ & 2.137$\times10^{15}$ \\
$n_{i}$ (m$^{-3}$) & 1.065$\times10^{19}$ & 7.259$\times10^{16}$ & 2.567$\times10^{15}$ \\
B (Gs) & 500 & 100 & 20 \\
$t_{c}(ia)$ (s) & 2.46$\times10^{-7}$ & 0.13 & 0.87 \\
$t_{c}(ii)$ (s) & 1.75$\times10^{-8}$ & 7.2$\times10^{-6}$ & 5.4$\times10^{-2}$ \\
$t_{mc}$ (s) & 1.34$\times10^{-10}$ & 6.7$\times10^{-10}$ & 3.4$\times10^{-9}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\tablecomments{0.96\textwidth}{The data of temperature, hydrogen density and ion density are cited from Vernazza et al. (1981).}
\end{table}
Table 1 lists the comparison between the typical collision timescale and the magnetic cyclotron periods in solar atmosphere. Here the data of temperature, magnetic field strength, hydrogen density and ion density in the photosphere, chromosphere, and corona are cited from Vernazza et al. (1981). The comparison shows that the magnetic cyclotron periods are much shorter than the collision timescale: $t_{mc}\ll t_{c}$. Even in the photosphere, the proton's magnetic cyclotron period is shorter at least 100 times than the collision timescale. This means that a proton can gyrate at least more than 100 cycles before it collides with an atom or more than 1000 cycles before it collides with a proton. This fact indicates that Equation (3) and (4) are valid even in the photosphere. There is enough time for MGP mechanism works in solar plasma loops.
Although the collision timescale is much longer than the proton's magnetic cyclotron period, it is still much shorter than the lifetime of solar plasma loops ($t_{d}$) which is generally from many hours to several days ($t_{d}>10^{5}$ s). $t_{d}\gg t_{c}$ means that there are enough time for pumping particles to transform their kinetic energy into the thermal energy by collisions in the solar plasma loops. Therefore, the MGP process might play a significant role for heating the upper atmosphere even in the solar photosphere, chromosphere as well as in the corona.
Actually, because of the curvature of magnetic field lines in a closed plasma loop (Fig. 2), Equation (3) should be modified into,
\begin{equation}
F_{t}=-G_{B}\cdot\epsilon_{t}\cos\theta+mg(h).
\end{equation}
When $F_{t}>0$, then $\epsilon_{t}>\frac{mg(h)}{G_{B}\cdot\cos\theta}$, the particle will get rid of the confinement of the solar gravitation force and fly upward along the plasma loop, called escaping particle, or pumping particles. When $F_{t}<0$, then $\epsilon_{t}<\frac{mg(h)}{G_{B}\cdot\cos\theta}$, the particle will be confined in the lower region and not move upward, called confined particle. The threshold of the particle's transverse kinetic energy is called starting energy, expressed as,
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{t0}=\frac{mg(h)}{G_{B}\cdot\cos\theta}=\frac{mg(h)}{\cos\theta}L_{B}
\end{equation}
Obviously, the solar gravitational force plays a key role in the MGP model.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7.5 cm, height=5.5 cm]{ms-RAA-2019-0281-Fig2-1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=7.2 cm, height=5.5 cm]{ms-RAA-2019-0281-Fig2-2.eps}
\caption{The schematic diagram of the MGP mechanism and temperature distribution in solar magnetic plasma loop. The big red arrows show the motion of escaping energetic particles. The small red arrows show the motion of energetic particles compensating from the inner part of the Sun driven by the convection motion. The right panel shows the temperature around the looptop with radius of R.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The starting energy is a function of the height ($h$) above the solar surface. For a symmetric semicircle plasma loop (Fig. 2), using Equation (1) and (2) approximately, the starting energy can be expressed as,
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{t0}(h)\approx1.9\times10^{-6}\frac{h}{(1+\frac{h}{R_{s}})^{2}\cos\theta} (eV).
\end{equation}
At each height $h$ below looptop of the plasma loop, the kinetic energy of proton should be $\epsilon_{t0}(h)$ (as discussed in Tan 2014, protons play dominated role in the solar process). Any protons with kinetic energy of $\epsilon_{t}>\epsilon_{t0}(h)$ should be triggered to fly away to higher place, while the protons with kinetic energy of $\epsilon_{t}<\epsilon_{t0}(h)$ will be confined in the lower place. Therefore, the starting energy $\epsilon_{t0}(h)$ is a monotonic function of height $h$, and the corresponding temperature at height $h$ can be expressed as,
\begin{equation}
T(h)\approx2.2\times10^{-2}\frac{h}{(1+\frac{h}{R_{s}})^{2}\cos\theta}~(K).
\end{equation}
Solar plasma loops always have specific widths $d$ and the looptop occupies a large area (Fig.2). In a symmetric loop, the looptop region can be defined as $\theta\geq\theta_{0}$. Here, $\cos\theta_{0}=\sqrt{1-(1-\frac{d}{2R})^{2}}\approx(\frac{d}{R})^{1/2}$. The looptop traps the particles with kinetic energy $\epsilon_{t0}>1.9\times10^{-6}\frac{h}{(1+\frac{h}{R_{s}})^{2}}(\frac{R}{d})^{1/2}$ (eV), and the temperature should be $T_{top}>2.2\times10^{-2}\frac{R}{(1+\frac{R}{R_{s}})^{2}}(\frac{R}{d})^{1/2}$~(K). Usually, the ratio of $\frac{R}{d}$ is about 20 (Bray et al. 1991), then, the temperature would exceed 2.2$\times10^{6}$ K around the looptop with radius of 25 Mm, and exceed 4.0$\times10^{6}$ K with loop radius of 50 Mm. It may reach to a maximum (exceeds $10^{7}$ K) when the loop radius is at 1.0 $R_{s}$ (right panel of Fig.2).
The pumping particles are picked up by the magnetic-gradient force from the underlying thermal plasma, transported to move upwards, accumulate in the high corona, and finally increase the averaged particle kinetic energy of the coronal plasma. The plasma loops act as a pumper driving energetic escaping particles (similar as water) to move upwards and form an energetic particle flow. Because temperature is a measurement of particles' averaged kinetic energy in a plasma volume with thermal equilibrium, the above process consequently increases the temperature of the corona, equivalently heat the corona. Therefore, this process is called magnetic-gradient-pumping (MGP) mechanism (Tan 2014). Fig. 3 shows the MGP process and the formation of energetic particle upflow. The red circles represent the pumping particles while the black circles indicate the confined particles.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=10 cm]{ms-RAA-2019-0281-Fig3.eps}
\caption{The schematic diagram of the magnetic-gradient-pumping process and the formation of energetic particle flow in a plasma loop. Red circles represent the escaping particles driven by magnetic-gradient force, and the black circles represent the confined particles, red arrows indicate the energetic particle flow.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The above estimations are roughly approximation based on the simple assumptions of magnetic field in Equation (1) and (2) and the symmetric semicircle plasma loop (Fig. 2). The real solar conditions will be much more complex than the above regime. However, the underlying physical process and the results should be very similar.
Additionally, we need to answer another question: are there enough charged particles for magnetic-gradient pumping to move upward in the weakly ionized photosphere?
At first, the degree of ionization ($a_{i}$) may indicate that how much charged particles in the weakly ionized plasma, it can be calculated from the Saha's Equation:
\begin{equation}
a_{i}\approx4.9\times10^{10}\frac{T^{3/4}}{\sqrt{n_{n}}}exp(-\frac{U_{i}}{2k_{B}T}).
\end{equation}
$U_{i}$ is the ionized potential energy of hydrogen atom, $U_{i}=13.6$ eV.
Then, we may calculate the fraction of the magnetic-gradient pumping particles (pumping rate, $a_{pu}$) by the following integral,
\begin{equation}
a_{pu}=\int_{\epsilon_{t0}}^{\infty}
f(\epsilon_{k})d\epsilon_{k}.
\end{equation}
$f(\epsilon_{k})$ is the distribution function of particles in the photosphere. Generally we may suppose that it is a Maxwell distributing function: $f(\epsilon_{k})=\frac{\epsilon_{k}}{(k_{B}T)^{2}}exp(-\frac{\epsilon_{k}}{k_{B}T})$. Then, the pumping rate can be expressed as,
\begin{equation}
a_{pu}=\int_{\epsilon_{t0}}^{\infty}
\frac{\epsilon_{k}}{(k_{B}T)^{2}}exp(-\frac{\epsilon_{k}}{k_{B}T})d\epsilon_{k}.
\end{equation}
The starting energy $\epsilon_{t0}$ is very crucial in above calculation. Here, we can not obtain $\epsilon_{t0}$ directly from Equation (7) in the solar photosphere. Because Equations (1) and (2) and (7) are valid only when the height is at the range of 0.02 - 10 $R_{s}$, they are not valid near the photosphere for their magnetic field is mainly vertical to the solar surface. The magnetic modeling and extrapolations show that the magnetic field scale length near solar surface is about $L_{B}\sim2\times10^{6}$m, and then $\epsilon_{t0}\approx5.7$ eV. The calculating results of $a_{i}$ and $a_{up}$ are listed in Table 2. It is showed that $a_{i}>a_{up}$ even at the minimum temperature region of the solar photosphere. This fact implies that there are enough charged particles for the MGP process even in the weakly ionized photosphere. Actually, we may think about this process from another way: the density of the photosphere is generally at about $10^{22}-10^{23}$ m$^{-3}$, the temperature is about 5780-6400 K, and the degree of ionization is at the order of $10^{-4}$. That means the density of the charged gas is still at least at the order of $10^{18}-10^{19}$ m$^{-3}$ in the photosphere, and this is much higher than the density of the hot corona ($10^{14}-10^{16}$ m$^{-3}$). This means that the photosphere can provide enough charged gas for the upper hot atmosphere, needn't extra heating processes.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption[]{The comparison between the degree of ionization and the fraction of the magnetic-gradient pumping particles in the photosphere.}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
h (km) & T (k) & $n_{n}$ (m$^{-3}$) & $a_{i}$ & $a_{up}$ \\\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
0 & 6420 & 1.168$\times10^{23}$ & 4.8$\times10^{-4}$ & 3.6$\times10^{-4}$ \\
500 & 4440 & 2.483$\times10^{21}$ & 1.1$\times10^{-5}$ & 5.0$\times10^{-6}$ \\
855 & 5890 & 9.996$\times10^{19}$ & 5.1$\times10^{-3}$ & 1.5$\times10^{-4}$ \\
1280 & 6510 & 5.723$\times10^{18}$ & 8.2$\times10^{-2}$ & 4.1$\times10^{-4}$ \\
1515 & 6740 & 1.494$\times10^{18}$ & 0.25 & 5.6$\times10^{-4}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\tablecomments{0.96\textwidth}{The data of temperature and hydrogen density at different height $h$ above the solar surface are cited from Vernazza et al. (1981).}
\end{table}
The motion of the escaping particles forms a natural upflow of energetic particles in open magnetic field configurations. This energetic upflow may explain the formation of some solar ejection phenomena, which will be presented in Section 4.
\subsection{MGP Triggering Mechanism in Solar Eruptions}
In solar plasma loops, the pumping particles move upward driven by the magnetic-gradient force from both footpoints. The flying timescale ($t_{f}$) of pumping particles to fly upward from the footpoint via the plasma loop and reach to the looptop can be estimated by,
\begin{equation}
t_{f}\approx\frac{R}{v_{\|}}\approx\frac{3m_{i}}{2\epsilon_{t0}}\approx1.93\times10^{-7}R(1+\frac{h}{R_{s}})\sqrt{\frac{R_{s}}{h}}.
\end{equation}
For a loop with radius of R=25 Mm, $t_{f}\sim 26$ s, and $t_{f}\sim 38$ s in a loop with radius of R=50 Mm. Typically, $t_{f}\sim10-100$ s in most cases, it is much shorter than the lifetime of solar plasma loop: $t_{f}\ll t_{d}$. This fact implies that the plasma loop has enough time to be heated by the pumping energetic particles from the MGP process.
The pumped energetic particles pile up and accumulate around the looptop, and this will result in increasing of the particle density ($n_{e}$) and temperature ($T_{e}$). It is equivalent to a heating process. Consequently, the plasma thermal pressure ($p_{t}=k_{B}n_{e}T_{e}$) increases, and the plasma parameter $\beta=\frac{p_{t}}{p_{m}}$ will also increase. Here, $p_{m}=\frac{B^{2}}{2\mu_{0}}$ is the magnetic pressure. Finally, when $\beta$ exceeds a critical value $\beta_{c}$ the magnetic pressure cannot balance the expansion of the plasma thermal pressure, and the plasma loop will loss its equilibrium, produce a ballooning instability around the looptop, break away from the confinement of magnetic field, let out energetic particles and kinetic energy, and finally lead to violent magnetic eruptions.
In practice, the critical plasma beta $\beta_{c}$ is very small ($\beta_{c}\ll1$, means $p_{t}\ll p_{m}$). The $\beta_{c}$ value depends on the boundary conditions (Haas \& Thomas 1973, Greenwald et al 1988, Greenwald, 2002), including the radii of the magnetic loop and its cross-section, the distributions of plasma density, magnetic field, and current density, etc. The Tokmak experimental results show $\beta_{c}<0.1$ (Inverarity \& Priest 1996, Tsap et al. 2008, Katsuro-Hopkins et al. 2010). From the critical plasma beta, the threshold parameter becomes:
\begin{equation}
M=n_{m}T_{e}=\frac{B^{2}}{2\mu_{0}k_{B}}\beta_{c}.
\end{equation}
$M$ describes a critical status of magnetized plasma loops. $n_{m}$ is the density limit of the ballooning instability. The increases of either plasma density or temperature will make the plasma approaching the critical status, and excite ballooning instability in the plasma loop. Tsap et al. (2008) investigated the excitation of the ballooning instability in a coronal flaring loop under the framework of ideal MHD and found that ballooning instability would be excited when $\beta_{c}\approx\frac{d}{R}$. $R$ is the radius of loop's curvature. Generally, $\frac{d}{R}\approx0.05$ for most coronal loops (Bray et al. 1991). Therefore, the critical plasma density around the looptop of typical coronal loops should be about $3.6\times10^{10}$ cm$^{-3}$ when the temperature is about $2\times10^{6}$ K and magnetic field strength is about 50 Gs. This value is consistent with the typical temperature in flaring loops.
Actually, it is difficult to give an exact description of the development of ballooning instability in a coronal plasma loop. Here, it is useful to estimate the characteristic time of the ballooning instability development. From the work of Shibasaki (2001), this characteristic time can be expressed,
\begin{equation}
t_{b}\approx\frac{2R}{C_{s}\sqrt{\beta_{c}}}\approx1.7\times10^{-2}\frac{R}{\sqrt{T\beta_{c}}}.
\end{equation}
Here, $C_{s}=\sqrt{\frac{\gamma p}{\rho}}=\sqrt{\frac{\gamma k_{B}T}{m_{i}}}\approx117.3\sqrt{T}$ is the sound speed. $\gamma$ is the ratio of specific heat capacity, usually $\gamma=\frac{5}{3}$ in the ideal gas. $m_{i}$ is the mass of ion. Considering a coronal loop with R = 25 Mm, the characteristic time of the ballooning instability development is about 17 minutes. Typically, $t_{b}\sim 100 - 1000$ s. This implies that the ballooning instability has a 10 - 20 minutes preflare developing process before the flaring loop eventually erupts.
The comparisons among the five timescales show the following relations:
\begin{equation}
t_{mc}\ll t_{c}\ll t_{f}<t_{b}\ll t_{d}.
\end{equation}
Equation (15) indicates: (1) MGP model is valid even in the photosphere, chromosphere as well as in corona, (2) the solar plasma loop have enough time to be heated by MGP process, and (3) the ballooning instability has a relatively short developing process before the loop eventually erupts.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=12 cm]{ms-RAA-2019-0281-Fig4.eps}
\caption{The evolution of a solar plasma loop driving by MGP mechanism. 1. Heating of the plasma loop by MGP process. 2. Starting of ballooning instability and appearing of the finger structure. 3. Formation of the upward bubble and a X-point (C) of the magnetic field. 4. Magnetic reconnection and the formation of cusp-like configuration. The last panel is an example of bright hot cusp-configuration on the image of 94 \AA~ observed by AIA/SDO in the early phase of a M7.7 flare on 19-Jul-2012.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The whole process from the preflare heating of the plasma loop via ballooning instability around the looptop to erupting in cusp-like flare can be showed in Fig.4. Here, MGP process heats the looptop (marked 1), and ballooning instability will be triggered to start around the looptop when $\beta\geq\beta_{c}$, forms finger structures (marked 2). In a longitudinally homogeneous plasma loop or a long straight cylindrical plasma tube, the finger structures due to the ballooning instability may appear in the random direction around the loop. It is difficult to know where and which direction the finger structure will appear. However, as the solar plasma loops are not longitudinally homogeneous, the looptop is the weakest point of magnetic confinement for its weakest magnetic field strength and the highest plasma temperature, therefore, the finger structure due to the ballooning instability will happen first around the looptop and at the direction of upward. The threshold can be obtained from Equation (13). After the formation of finger structure, due to the continues injection of the pumping particles by the MGP process, the finger structure will expand and develop into an upward moving bubble and make the opposite magnetic field lines close to each other around C point beneath the bubble (marked 3). When the bubble rises to a certain height, a current sheet and an X-point will generate and trigger the magnetic reconnection above the looptop (marked 4). Finally the magnetic field lines will be broken, reconnect and release magnetic energy and energetic particles rapidly, and form cusp-like flares. The magnetic reconnection can also accelerate the charged particles and generate nonthermal particles violently. Therefore, the ballooning instability should be a result of MGP process, and it might be a precursor of the magnetic reconnection. The looptop becomes hot during the process of ballooning instability which may last for about 10-20 minutes in loops with radius of 25 Mm. Finally, a hot cusp-configuration can be observed.
The right bottom panel of Fig. 4 presents an observing EUV images of a solar flare the early phase, which is an example of hot cusp-like structure obtained at 94 \AA~ by AIA/SDO (Lemen et al. 2012) at 05:09:03 UT on 19-Jul-2012, just at the start of an M7.7 flare (Sun et al. 2014, Huang et al. 2016). Here, the looptop is much brighter than other parts. The breakup of the flaring loop primarily takes place around the looptop, and then it finally develops into cusp-like flare (Masuda et al. 1994, Masuda et al. 1995, Shibata et al. 1995, Karlicky et al. 2006).
In the previous literatures, Shibasaki (2001) and Hollweg (2006) also mentioned the role of magnetic-gradients in plasma loops and the possibly high-beta disruption triggered by the ballooning instability. They proposed that magnetic-gradient force would push the whole plasma as a fluid toward weak magnetic field region, and the magnetic field played as a converter of thermal random motion into coherent flow motion and instability. However, there are two distinct differences between our MGP model and the regime of Shibasaki (2001) and Hollweg (2006) (hereafter, simply say S-H regime): (1) S-H regime has not considered the dependence between magnetic-gradient force and the kinetic energy of particles, and therefore their plasma flow has no temperature change. Our MGP model emphasized that the magnetic-gradient force is proportional to the particles' kinetic energy. The higher the kinetic energy, the stronger the magnetic-gradient force acting on the charged particle, and therefore it will escape more easily from the lower atmosphere. (2) S-H regime does not include the solar gravitational force which is a key factor in MGP model. It was just because of the solar gravitational force to divide all particles into two groups: pumping particles and confined particles, they have different behaviors in the solar plasma loops.
\section{Application to the other solar phenomena}
The MGP model can be also applied to demonstrate other astrophysical processes, such as coronal heating (Tan 2014), the formation of the cold in sunspot near photosphere and the hot above it, the coronal plasma jets, and the fast solar wind above the coronal holes, etc. In this section, we try to apply the MGP model to provide a new explanation of some of the above phenomena.
\subsection{Sunspot}
It is well-known that sunspots are colder than the surrounding photosphere. The previous models explain this phenomenon as the strong magnetic fields of sunspots suppress the convective flows beneath the photosphere. However, a large number of observations indicate that the plasmas high up in the atmosphere above sunspots are always hotter than the surrounding chromosphere and corona at the same height, and this is the reason why the most solar flares always take place somewhere above sunspot active regions. Now that the strong magnetic suppression holds back the hot materials flowing into the region of sunspots from the solar interior, why the upper part is hot above the sunspot? The magnetic suppression hypothesis is hard to make a perfect demonstration on this phenomenon. Here, we try to apply MGP model to present a new explanation of the cold in sunspot and the hot above it.
As we know, the magnetic field is approximately vertical to the solar surface in and above the sunspots. Therefore, the Equation (5) should be changed into the following form,
\begin{equation}
F_{t}=-G_{B}\cdot\epsilon_{t}+mg(h).
\end{equation}
The starting energy should be a function of the height ($h$) above the solar surface,
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{t0}(h)=mg(h)L_{B}(h).
\end{equation}
At each height, the charged particles with kinetic energy of $\epsilon_{t}>\epsilon_{t0}(h)$ will fly away and move upward, while the charged particles with kinetic energy of $\epsilon_{t}<\epsilon_{t0}(h)$ will stay beneath this height. Only the charged particles with energy around $\epsilon_{t0}(h)$ will stay around the height of $h$. Therefore, the starting energy ($\epsilon_{t0}$) should be an indicator of the temperature ($T$) at the height of $h$ above the sunspot.
In the region at the height of 0.02 - 10 $R_{s}$ above the sunspot, we may still adopt Equation (1) and (2) to express the distribution of magnetic field strength and its gradient approximately, then we may obtain a roughly estimation of the temperature distribution,
\begin{equation}
T(h)\approx2.2\times10^{-2}\frac{h}{(1+\frac{h}{R_{s}})^{2}}.
\end{equation}
However, in the region below the height of 0.02 $R_{s}$, Equations (1) and (2) are not suitable to describe the magnetic field and its gradient, we can not estimate the temperature distribution by using Equation (18). We have to adopt some modeling results of the magnetic field and its gradient to estimate the temperatures very close to the sunspots.
We assume that the solar photosphere has the averaged temperature ($T_{0}$) at about 5780 K and density of $10^{^{22}}m^{-3}$. When a sunspot appears, the magnetic field and its gradient will occur simultaneously. Under the joint-action of magnetic-gradient force and the solar gravitational force, the confined particles will stay near the sunspot for their low energy, while the energetic pumping particles will flow upward and carry a fraction of kinetic energy to the upper atmosphere. The temperature of the sunspot ($T_{s}$) will decrease for losing part of kinetic energy, which can be estimated by,
\begin{equation}
T_{s}=\frac{k_{B}T_{0}-E(\epsilon_{t}>\varepsilon_{t0})}{k_{B}N(\epsilon_{t}\leq\varepsilon_{t0})}\approx T_{0}-\frac{E(\epsilon_{t}>\varepsilon_{t0})}{k_{B}N(\epsilon_{t}\leq\varepsilon_{t0})}.
\end{equation}
Here, $f(\epsilon_{k})$ is supposed to be a Maxwellian distribution function which is dominated by temperature. $E(\epsilon_{t}>\epsilon_{t0})=\int_{\epsilon_{t0}}^{\infty}
f(\epsilon_{k})\epsilon_{k}d\epsilon_{k}$ is the kinetic energy carried by pumping particles. $N(\epsilon_{t}\leq\varepsilon_{t0})=\int_{0}^{\epsilon_{t0}}
f(\epsilon_{k})d\epsilon_{k}$ is the density of the confined particles in sunspot. When we suppose that $L_{B}\sim900$ km, then $T_{s}\approx4474$ K, 1306 K of temperature decrease from the initial state (Fig.5). This result is very close to the result of observations and simulations (Vernazza et al. 1981, etc.).
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=10 cm]{ms-RAA-2019-0281-Fig5.eps}
\caption{The evolution of distribution functions of the plasmas around sunspot acting on MGP mechanism. $\epsilon_{t0}$ is the pumping starting energy. The black solid curve is the distribution function of the initial state of the photosphere ($T_{0}=5780$ K, $n_{n}=10^{22}m^{-3}$, $L_{B}\sim900$ km). It will develop into the dotted curve after losing the energetic escaping particles (the right red shadow region) and the temperature decreases to $T_{s}=4474$ K.}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=10 cm]{ms-RAA-2019-0281-Fig6.eps}
\caption{The comparison between the pumping rate ($a_{up}$, solid line) and the degree of ionization ($a_{i}$, dashed line) at different temperature. The initial density is $n_{n}=10^{22}m^{-3}$.}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
As we mentioned in Section 3.1, the magnetic field scale length should be about 2000 km around the sunspots, then Equation (18) leads to $T_{s}\approx5770$ K, only 10 degrees of temperature decrease from the initial state ($T_{0}=5780$ K, $n_{n}=10^{22}m^{-3}$). Here, we should realize that the MGP is a continuous process. The initial temperature of the photosphere is at 5780 K. It will decrease to 5770 K under the action of MGP process. Because the atmosphere still contains considerable charged energetic particles ($a_{i}=1.2\times10^{-4}$) which can be pumped to move upward by the magnetic-gradient force. Therefore, the temperature will be continuous to decrease. However, the degree of ionization will sharply decrease when the temperature decreases. Fig. 6 presents the comparison between the pumping rate and the degree of ionization at different temperature. It shows that the degree of ionization is larger than the pumping rate ($a_{i}>a_{up}$) when the temperature $T>4460$ K which implies that there are enough charged particles to be pumped by the MGP process. However, the degree of ionization is smaller than the pumping rate ($a_{i}<a_{up}$) when the temperature $T<4460$ K, which implies that there are no enough charged particles to be pumped to move upward in this temperature range. The minimum temperature of sunspot is about 4460 K.
\subsection{Solar plasma jets}
In solar atmosphere, plasma jets are ubiquitous in columnar collimated, beam-like eruptions that are magnetically rooted in the photosphere and shoot up along large-scale unipolar guide field reaching high into the corona. Solar plasma jets include spicules, H$\alpha$ surges, photospheric jets, chromospheric jets, coronal EUV and X-ray jets, and white-light polar jets (Moore et al. 2010). They represent important manifestations of ubiquitous solar transients especially onside coronal holes and their long periphery, which may be the source of mass and energy input to the solar upper atmosphere and the solar wind. The observed velocities of solar plasma jets range from several decades to more than 500 km s$^{-1}$ with height from a few thousand km up to several solar radii. The lifetimes of coronal EUV jets ranged from about 5 to 70 min. There are typically two models to explain the formation of solar plasma jets: the the magnetic reconnection model and the nonstandard blowout model. Despite the major advances made on both observations and theories of solar plasma jet, so far, many questions are still not completely understood, including its nature, their triggers, evolution, and contribution to the coronal heating and acceleration of solar wind (Raouafi et al. 2016). For example, the magnetic reconnection model can explain the formation of plasma jets related to solar eruptions in active regions, but it is difficult to explain why the velocity increases after the jet leave from its formation site, such as the type II spicules (De Pontieu et al. 2009, 2011, Samanta et al. 2019), the hot plasma ejections along the ultrafine magnetic channels from the solar surface upward to the corona (Ji et al. 2012), and polar jets, etc.
Here, we attempt to apply MGP mechanism to demonstrate the formation of the type II spicules, polar jets, and other solar plasma jets without relationships to solar activities. We assume that the escaping energetic particles in solar open magnetic configurations may form the upflow of plasma jets, the averaged velocity of the escaping particles can be an estimation of the velocity of upflow jet, which can be calculated,
\begin{equation}
v_{up}=\frac{\int_{\epsilon_{t0}}^{\infty}
f(\epsilon_{k})v_{\|}d\epsilon_{k}}{\int_{\epsilon_{t0}}^{\infty}
f(\epsilon_{k})d\epsilon_{k}}.
\end{equation}
Here, $v_{\|}\approx\sqrt{\frac{2\epsilon_{k}}{m}}$ is the vertical velocity component of the escaping particles. Because the starting energy $\epsilon_{t0}$ of the pumping particles is a function of the height above the solar surface (Equation 6), the velocity $v_{up}$ of upflow jet is also a function of the height.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=10 cm]{ms-RAA-2019-0281-Fig7.eps}
\caption{The velocity of upflow at different height above the solar surface driving by MGP mechanism in an open magnetic configuration. Here, the unit of the height is solar radius $R_{s}$.}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
If we assume the expressions of magnetic field and gradient are still valid in the form of Equation (1) and (2). Then we may obtain an approximated profile of the velocity above solar surface. Fig. 7 presents the velocity of upflows at different height above the solar surface driving by MGP mechanism in an open magnetic configuration: $v_{up}\sim$ 20 - 30 km s$^{-1}$ near the photosphere, $v_{up}\sim$ 40 - 60 km s$^{-1}$ in the chromosphere, $v_{up}\sim$ 150 - 200 km s$^{-1}$ at the bottom of corona, and $v_{up}\sim$ 800 km s$^{-1}$ in the corona at height of 1.0 $R_{s}$. The velocity is slightly decreasing beyond the height of 1.0 $R_{s}$. These results are nearly in line with the observations (Savcheva et al. 2007).
It is possible that Equation (1) and (2) are not valid exactly for describing the magnetic field and gradient beyond active regions. However, the above estimation still implies that MGP mechanism may provide a reasonable explanation for the formation of solar plasma jets. One of the advantages is that the MGP mechanism can explain the velocity increasing of the solar plasma jets from the solar photosphere to high corona after they leave from their source region.
Similarly, because the compact bodies, such as the white dwarfs, neutron stars, and black holes also have strong magnetic field and the related magnetic-gradient in their surrounding atmosphere, the magnetic-gradient force can also drive and form fast plasma jets. Equation (17) indicates that the starting energy is proportional to the gravitational force: $\epsilon_{t0}\propto g(h)$. Because the compact bodies have much more strong gravitation force, and therefore the starting energy is much higher than that in solar conditions. Additionally, the atmosphere around the compact bodies is much hotter than the solar atmosphere. All these facts imply that the plasma jets may much more high speeds.
\subsection{Fast solar wind above coronal holes}
The solar wind is a stream of charged particles (including electrons, protons, and $\alpha$ particles, etc.) released from the solar upper corona. Among them, the fast solar wind has a flow speed exceeding 200 - 300 km s$^{-1}$ at 2 - 3 $R_{s}$, near 700 - 800 km s$^{-1}$ well below 10 $R_{s}$. The fast solar winds are believed to originate from the coronal holes, which are funnel-like regions of open magnetic fields (Bravo \& Stewart 1997, Wilhelm et al. 2000).
Obviously, there exists magnetic-gradient in the coronal hole and the funnel-like regions of open magnetic field. Reasonably, we may apply the energetic particle flows driven by magnetic-gradient force to explain the formation of fast solar wind similar to the solar plasma jets. It was just the escaping energetic particles pumped by the magnetic gradient force from coronal hole and the funnel-like regions of open magnetic field to form the fast solar wind. We may approximately adopt Equation (20) to estimate the flow speed of fast solar wind at different heights. Here, the magnetic field and its gradient are unknown. We may try to assume its magnetic field scale height ($L_{B}$) reasonably. For example, at height of 2 - 3 $R_{s}$ above solar surface, $T_{0}\sim10^{6}$ K, $L_{B}\sim 10^{6}$ km, then $v_{up}\sim$ 350 km s$^{-1}$. At height of 10 $R_{s}$ above the photosphere, $T_{0}\sim10^{6}$ K, $L_{B}\sim10^{7}$ km, then $v_{up}\sim$ 730 km s$^{-1}$. These values are well in accordance with observations (Feldman \& Landi 2005). This estimation also indicates that the fast solar winds are possibly the energetic particle flow driven by magnetic-gradient force above coronal holes.
Obviously, here we need a more exact estimation of the magnetic fields in the high corona from 2-3 $R_{s}$ to beyond 10 $R_{s}$. And this requires multiple diagnostic tools of coronal magnetic fields.
\section{Conclusions}
In summary, we obtain the following conclusions from this work:
(1) The calculations and comparisons between the collision timescales ($t_{c}(ia)$ and $t_{c}(ii)$), the magnetic cyclotron period ($t_{mc}$), and the lifetime of solar plasma loops indicate that the MGP model is valid even in the solar photosphere, chromosphere, as well as in the corona.
(2) The MGP process can heat the top region of solar plasma loops up to several million Kelvin, make the looptop exceeds the critical $\beta_{c}$, trigger the ballooning instability to produce finger structures, result in the looptop expanding, plumping, out of shape, and produce an upward bubble and reversed magnetic field, and finally trigger the eruption around a cusp-like structure. Therefore, the MGP process can provide a natural driver of the solar eruptions.
(3) The MGP model can be applied to demonstrate the low temperature of sunspot, the formation of solar plasma jets, type-II spicule, and fast solar wind above the coronal holes.
The magnetic-gradient force drives energetic particle upflows in solar plasma loops, extract the kinetic energy from the underlying plasma, convey and transport them to the upper corona. This mechanism provides an natural approach to explain the processes occurring in the early phase of solar eruptions, including transporting the energetic particles and kinetic energy to the top region of plasma loops, increasing the temperature, pressure and plasma beta, stimulating and triggering the ballooning instability, and finally driving eruptions. Here, the magnetic-gradient plays a key role in the converting of not only the energetic particles but also the kinetic energy for solar eruptions. The pumping particle flows play a crucial role of energy storage in corona by carrying the energetic particles to pile up around the looptops. When the looptop becomes overpressure, it departs from the equilibrium and trigger the ballooning instability near the looptop and generate the cusp-like flare eruptions. This is a natural triggering mechanism of solar eruptions, which does build a direct connections among the erupting energy, the underlying plasma's motions, and the magnetic configurations. This mechanism implies that the released energy during the eruption primarily comes from the solar interior, and their transporting channels are magnetized plasma loops.
The above deductions suggest that the magnetic-gradient possibly dominate the occurrence of solar eruptions. It is very meaningful for solar activity prediction to diagnose the magnetic field and its structures in solar atmosphere. In open magnetic flux loop, the energetic particle flows driven by magnetic-gradient force may provide a possible demonstration of the the plasma jets and fast solar wind. Furthermore, it will also help us the understand the fast jets related to black holes or other compact celestial bodies, such as neutron stars and black holes.
The energetic particle flows driven by magnetic-gradient force are fundamental and ubiquitous phenomena in the inhomogeneous magnetized plasmas. The energetic particles will be driven to move to the weak magnetic field region and make the plasma temperature to become more and more uneven. Consequently, this will excite plasma instabilities, such as the ballooning instability. This furthermore results in the release of energetic particles and energy. It is possibly that it was just the magnetic-gradient force trigger and drive the generation of the major disruption in Tokamak plasmas. The MGP mechanism might give us a bit of enlightenments for controlling the nuclear fusion plasmas and help us to understand the formation of various astrophysical plasma jets.
\begin{acknowledgements}
The authors would thank the referee for his helpful and valuable comments to improve the manuscript of this paper. This work adopted EUV observation obtained by AIA/SDO, soft X-ray observation by GOES satellite. It is supported by NSFC Grants 11433006, 11573039, 11661161015, 11790301 and 11973057.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:Introduction}
Consider the discrete memoryless additive white Gaussian noise channel (AWGNC) with noiseless feedback, shown in Figure \ref{fig:feedback_cha}. The transmitter attempts to transmit a message, $I \in \{0,1,\ldots,M-1\}$, using $N$ channel uses, where at each time step it transmits over the AWGNC, and then it receives noiseless feedback from the receiver. More precisely, at each time step, $n=0,1,\ldots,N-1$, the transmitter sends $X_n = G_n(I, Y_0^{n-1})$ over the AWGNC. We assume an average power constraint $P$ at the input to the channel. The receiver attempts to decode the transmitted message, $I$, using $\widehat{I} = D(Y_0^{N-1})$. The communication rate in bits per channel use is $R = \log_2 M / N$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{feedback_ch_fig.pdf}
\caption{Noiseless AWGNC with feedback. The element $Z^{-1}$ represents a unit delay.}
\label{fig:feedback_cha}
\end{figure}
While it is well known that feedback cannot improve the capacity of point to point communications \cite{cover_book}, there exist schemes where it can significantly reduce complexity and / or improve reliability (reduce error probability). For the case of AWGNC with feedback, the Schalkwijk-Kailath (SK) scheme \cite{SK_1,SK_2,SK_3} can achieve any rate below the channel capacity with error probability that decreases double exponentially in the number of interaction rounds (iterations), $N$.
In \cite{shayevitz2011optimal} a generalized approach for feedback communication, using posterior matching, was presented. Special cases of posterior matching are the Horstein scheme for the binary symmetric channel \cite{horstein1963sequential} and the SK scheme for the AWGNC.
The SK scheme conveys its message $I$ to the receiver using an $M$-PAM constellation. In the beginning, the transmitter transmits an $M$-PAM symbol representing the message $I$ over the AWGNC. Then, in the following iterations, it transmits an error correction signal to the receiver, based on its knowledge of both $I$ and the current estimate of $I$ at the receiver. If one wishes to transmit at rates close to capacity, the scheme must be used with a sufficiently large number of interaction rounds, $N$, over the AWGNC. Now, since the constellation size, $M$, is exponentially increasing in $N$ ($M=2^{NR}$), this might lead to an excessive constellation size and extremely small error correction terms computed at the encoder, as will be described later in more detail. As a result, the SK scheme completely breaks down when either the transmitter or receiver are limited to use low precision arithmetic, such as 16 bit floating point numbers (Float16). The numerical issues of the SK scheme were noted by various authors, e.g., \cite{kim2018deepcode}. The case of noisy feedback was also discussed by various authors \cite{kim2007gaussian,noisy_peak_en_const,chance2011concatenated,noisy_fb_rel,ben2017interactive,kim2018deepcode} and will not be considered in this paper.
In this work, we propose a new modified SK communication scheme, that breaks the standard SK transmission protocol into stages, where each stage comprises several SK interaction rounds. In the first stage, based on the available information from the associated SK interaction rounds, the transmitter and receiver agree on a sub-interval that with high probability contains the transmitted PAM symbol representing the message. Then, they both zoom into this decoded sub-interval, and apply additional SK interaction rounds, that eventually enable both parties to further zoom into a finer resolution sub-interval, that (with high probability) contains the transmitted PAM symbol. This process repeats until the message has been completely decoded (the final sub-interval is the decoded symbol). We call our new method a zoom-in SK (ZSK) scheme.
We show that our scheme can practically achieve the same performance (error probability) as standard SK, using low precision arithmetic.
The paper is organized as follows. In section \ref{sec:Defs} we define the setup and introduce notations. We then briefly review the SK scheme, and explain its numerical issues. In section \ref{sec:single_zoom} we describe the proposed scheme for the case of a single zoom-in and analyze its error probability. In Section \ref{sec:multiple_zooms} we extend the method to multiple zoom-in stages and describe an algorithm for determining the zoom-in parameters (number of SK interaction rounds associated with each stage and its constellation size as described below).
In Section \ref{sec:sim} we compare our ZSK scheme with standard SK using computer simulations.
\section{Overview of SK scheme and numerical issues}\label{sec:Defs}
\subsection{Preliminaries} \label{sec:preliminary}
We define the following $M$-PAM constellation, also shown in Figure \ref{fig:pam_const}, that will be used throughout the work,
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{PAM_const_16.pdf}
\caption{$M$-PAM constellation with $M=16$.}
\label{fig:pam_const}
\end{figure}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:M_PAM}
\theta(i) = {\rm PAM}(i, M) = \frac{i}{M}-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2M}, \quad i\in [0, M-1].
\end{equation}
Assuming that the input message\footnote{We follow the notation that an upper case letter denotes a random variable (RV), and a lower case letter denotes a particular value that this RV attains.}, $I$, is uniformly distributed, it is straightforward to obtain the average power, $A$, of this constellation as
\begin{equation}
A^2 = \mbox{E}[\Theta(I)^2] = \frac{M^2-1}{12M^2}.
\label{eq:A}
\end{equation}
Suppose that we transmit $\Theta(I)$ over an additive noise channel,
$$
Y = \Theta(I) + Z
$$
where $\mbox{E}[Z]=0$ and $Z$ is distributed symmetrically around zero.
The ML decoding error probability can be easily derived and is given by,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:PAM_error}
P_e^{{\rm PAM}} &=
\frac{M-2}{M}\cdot 2\cdot\Pr\left(Z>\frac{1}{2M}\right) + \frac{2}{M}\cdot \Pr\left(Z>\frac{1}{2M}\right)
\\&=
2\left(1-\frac{1}{M}\right)\Pr\left(Z>\frac{1}{2M}\right)
\le 2\Pr\left(Z>\frac{1}{2M}\right)
.
\end{align}
For example, if the noise is Gaussian, i.e., $Z\sim{\mathcal{N}}(0,\sigma^2)$, the decoding error probability is given by,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:PAM_error_gaussian}
P_{e, {\rm Gaussian}}^{{\rm PAM}}
=
2\left(1-\frac{1}{M}\right)Q\left(\frac{1}{2M\sigma}\right)
\le
2Q\left(\frac{1}{2M\sigma}\right)
\end{equation}
where $Q(x)$, the tail distribution function of the standard normal distribution, is given by
$$
Q(x) \: {\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Delta}{=}} \: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int_{x}^{\infty} e^{-u^2/2} du
$$
Note that the inequalities in \eqref{eq:PAM_error} and \eqref{eq:PAM_error_gaussian} are actually very tight for non-trivial cases (where $M$ is very small). Hence the upper bounds in these equations are also excellent approximations to the respective error probabilities.
In the sequel we use some properties of the linear minimum mean square error (LMMSE) estimator. We highlight some of it's main properties as a reminder. Assume that we are given an input sample, $Y = \frac{\sqrt{P}}{\sigma_x}X+Z$, where $X$ and $Z$ are statistically independent RVs with $\mbox{E}[X]=\mbox{E}[Z]=0$, $\mathrm{Var}[X]=\sigma_x^2$ and $\mathrm{Var}[Z]=\sigma_z^2$. Denote the signal to noise ratio by ${\rm SNR}=P / \sigma_z^2$. Given $Y$, we wish to estimate $X$ using a linear estimator, $\widehat{X}^L(Y)$, that minimizes $\mbox{E}[(\widehat{X}^L(Y) - X)^2]$. The estimator is given by \cite{RVs},
\begin{equation} \label{eq:LMMSE_estimator}
\widehat{X}^L(Y)= \frac{{\mathrm{Cov}}(X,Y)}{\mathrm{Var}(Y)}Y = \frac{\frac{\sqrt{P}}{\sigma_x}\sigma_x^2}{P + \sigma_z^2}Y=\frac{\sigma_x}{\sigma_z}\frac{\sqrt{{\rm SNR}}}{1+{\rm SNR}}Y.
\end{equation}
Denote the estimation error by $E=\widehat{X}^L(Y)-X$. Its variance is given by,
\begin{equation}\label{error_var_eq}
\mathrm{Var}(E) = \mathrm{Var}(X)-\frac{{\mathrm{Cov}}(X,Y)^2}{\mathrm{Var}(Y)} = \frac{\sigma_x^2}{1+{\rm SNR}}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, the estimation error is orthogonal to any linear function of the measurements $Y$, i.e., ${\mathrm E}[E\cdot Y] = 0$. We note that if $X$ and $Z$ are both Gaussians, the LMMSE estimator coincides with the general minimum mean square error estimator (MMSE).
\subsection{SK scheme} \label{sec:SK_scheme}
We briefly describe the SK scheme. A detailed explanation can be found in \cite{SK_1,SK_2,SK_3}.
The goal is to reliably transmit a message, $i$, over an AWGNC with feedback, as described in Section \ref{sec:Introduction}, using $N$ interaction rounds (iterations). There are $M=2^{NR}$ possible messages, $i\in[0,M-1]$, where $R$ is the communication rate. We assume an average power constraint $P$ at the channel input.
The modulated PAM symbol, prior to power scaling, is $\theta = \theta(i)$, defined in \eqref{eq:M_PAM}. In the first iteration, the transmitter simply transmits the symbol, normalized to satisfy the input power constraint, i.e., $x_0=\frac{\sqrt{P}}{A}\theta$ and the receiver estimates the transmitted symbol using $\widehat{\theta}_0=\frac{y_0}{\sqrt{P}/A}$, where $y_0$ is the channel output corresponding to $x_0$. In each of the following iterations, the transmitter calculates the receiver's estimation error,
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_n=\widehat{\theta}_n-\theta
\label{eq:epsilon_n}
\end{equation}
and transmits it back to the receiver (normalized to satisfy the input power constraint) $x_{n+1}=\frac{\sqrt{P}}{\sigma_n}\epsilon_n$, where $\sigma_n^2 = \mathrm{Var}({\cal E}_n)$. The receiver obtains
\begin{equation}
y_{n+1} = x_{n+1} + z_{n+1} = \frac{\sqrt{P}}{\sigma_n} \epsilon_n + z_{n+1}
\label{eq:chan_np1}
\end{equation}
where $z_{n+1}$ is the channel noise at the $n+1$'th iteration, and calculates the MMSE estimator of $\epsilon_n$, denoted by $\widehat{\epsilon}_n$ (which, in the Gaussian case, coincides with the LMMSE) using,
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\epsilon}_n = \beta_n\cdot y_{n+1}
\label{eq:hat_epsilon_n}
\end{equation}
where $\beta_n$ is the LMMSE estimator coefficient given by \eqref{eq:LMMSE_estimator},
\begin{equation}
\beta_n = \frac{\sigma_n}{\sigma_z} \cdot \frac{\sqrt{{\rm SNR}}}{1+{\rm SNR}}
\label{eq:beta_n}
\end{equation}
It then updates its current estimate using,
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\theta}_{n+1}=\widehat{\theta}_{n}-\widehat{\epsilon}_n.
\end{equation}
Hence, at each round we have,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:EpsUpdate}
\epsilon_{n+1} = \widehat{\theta}_{n+1}-\theta = \widehat{\theta}_{n}-\widehat{\epsilon}_n-\theta = \epsilon_n-\widehat{\epsilon}_n.
\end{equation}
Thus, the error variance can be recursively calculated using \eqref{error_var_eq},
\begin{equation} \label{error_var}
\sigma_{n+1}^2=\frac{\sigma_{n}^2}{1+{\rm SNR}}=\frac{\sigma_0^2}{(1+{\rm SNR})^{n+1}}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_0^2 = A^2 / {\rm SNR}$ is the error variance at the first iteration. After $N$ iterations, the symbol is decoded at the receiver using an ML PAM decoder. The decoding is successful if $\left|{\cal E}_{N-1}\right| < \frac{1}{2M}$, and in fact by \eqref{eq:PAM_error_gaussian}, the error is upper bounded (and also well approximated) by,
\begin{align}
P_e^{{\rm SK}}
\le
2\Pr\left( {\cal E}_{N-1} \ge \frac{1}{2M} \right)
=
2Q\left(\frac{1}{2M\sigma_{N-1}}\right)
\label{eq:SK}
\end{align}
where the noise variance at the last iteration is given by,
\begin{align}\label{eq:sk_final_snr}
\sigma_{N-1}^{2}=\frac{\sigma_0^2}{(1+{\rm SNR})^{N-1}} = \frac{A^2}{{\rm SNR}(1+{\rm SNR})^{N-1}} = \frac{M^2-1}{12M^2\cdot {\rm SNR}(1+{\rm SNR})^{N-1}}.
\end{align}
(the last equality is due to \eqref{eq:A}). Thus we have,
\begin{equation}
P_e^{{\rm SK}} \le 2Q\left(\frac{1}{2M}\sqrt{\frac{12M^2\cdot {\rm SNR}(1+{\rm SNR})^{N-1}}{M^2-1}}\right) \le 2Q\left(\sqrt{\frac{3{\rm SNR}}{1+{\rm SNR}}\frac{(1+{\rm SNR})^N}{M^2}}\right).
\end{equation}
Plugging in $C=\frac{1}{2}\log_2(1+{\rm SNR})$, and $M=2^{NR}$, we have,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:SK_error}
P_e^{{\rm SK}} \le 2Q\left(\sqrt{\frac{3{\rm SNR}}{1+{\rm SNR}}\cdot2^{2N(C-R)}}\right).
\end{equation}
which is the well known SK error probability.
The SK scheme is summarized in Algorithm \ref{alg:SK}.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{SK}
\label{alg:SK}
\begin{algorithmic}
\Procedure {SK}{$i$: message}
\State \textbf{Initialize:}
\State \hspace*{\algorithmicindent} Transmitter: $\theta={\rm PAM}(i,M)$, $x_{0}=\frac{\sqrt{P}}{A}\theta$
\State \hspace*{\algorithmicindent} Receiver: $\widehat{\theta}_0=\frac{y_0}{\sqrt{P}/A}$
\For{$n=0,\ldots,N-2$}
\State Transmitter: $\epsilon_{n}=\widehat{\theta}_n-\theta$
\State $x_{n+1}=\frac{\sqrt{P}}{\sigma_n}\epsilon_n$
\State Receiver: $\widehat{\epsilon}_n=\beta_n\cdot y_{n+1} = \beta_n\cdot \left( x_{n+1} + z_{n+1} \right)$
\State $\widehat{\theta}_{n+1}=\widehat{\theta}_n-\widehat{\epsilon}_n$
\EndFor
\Return$\widehat{i}=\mathop{\rm argmin}_l\{||\widehat{\theta}_{N-1}-{\rm PAM}(l, M)||^2 \}$
\EndProcedure
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Numerical issues} \label{sec:numeric}
Many of toady's practical receivers use Float16 \cite{float16_standard} as their main variable for digital signal processing (DSP) calculations. Unfortunately, the use of this low precision variable with the SK iterative feedback decoding scheme is impossible even for a moderate number of iterations or rate. There are mainly two issues:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The error variance $\sigma_n$ decreases exponentially fast to zero as can be seen in \eqref{error_var}. Thus, $\sigma_n$ vanishes quickly when using low precision representation such as Float16. This phenomenon affects almost all calculations in SK, as $\beta_n$ and the transmission normalization factor $\frac{\sigma_n}{\sqrt{P}}$ are proportional to $\sigma_n$.
\item Increasing the number of iterations, $N$, will decrease the capacity gap and / or decrease the error rate, as can be seen in \eqref{eq:SK_error}. However, increasing $N$ will also increase the constellation size exponentially fast, as $M=2^{NR}$. As a result, low precision arithmetic such as Float16 may be insufficient to represent the distance of $1/M$ between two adjacent symbols. That is, using Float16 causes aliasing and an error floor.
\end{enumerate}
As a result, the iterative SK scheme fails under low precision arithmetic (Float16) even for moderate values of $N$ and $R$, as can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:float16_SK_no_zoom}. Even when using Float32 the scheme fails when we try to use a large number of iterations or a high rate, as can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:float32_SK_no_zoom}. Note that simple solutions, such as storing the logarithms of the variables in the SK scheme and operating on them are not sufficient for solving the issues indicated above. The numerical issues with the SK scheme have been noted before, e.g. \cite{kim2018deepcode}.
\section{Single zoom-in scheme}\label{sec:single_zoom}
\subsection{The new algorithm} \label{sec:single_zoomin_alg}
To overcome the numerical issues described above, we propose a new modified SK communication scheme, termed zoom-in SK (ZSK). We start with a single zoom-in scheme, that breaks the standard SK transmission protocol into two stages. In the next section we generalize the method to an arbitrary number of zoom-in stages.
Let $M$ be written as $M = M_0 \cdot M_1$.
The idea of the proposed scheme is to break the decoding into two stages. In the first stage, the transmitter and receiver start by applying $k+1$ standard SK interaction rounds (the first round is the initialization one, see Algorithm \ref{alg:SK}). Denote by $\widehat{\theta}_k$ the estimate of the transmitted PAM message $\theta$ after the $k+1$ interaction rounds. Instead of decoding $\theta$ based on $\widehat{\theta}_k$, the receiver just determines an interval $[a,b] \in [-1/2,1/2]$ of size $1/M_0$ (i.e., $b-a=1/M_0$) that contains $\theta$ with high probability. The transmitter, that knows everything about the receiver due to the feedback, makes the same decision.
In the second stage, the transmitter and receiver zoom into the interval $[a,b]$ synchronously (as described below), and apply $N-k-1$ additional interaction rounds, so that in the end of this stage the receiver can decode $\theta$ with high probability.
The interval $[a,b]$ is determined as follows.
First, the receiver constructs the interval
$S'_1 = \left[\widehat{\theta}_k-\frac{1}{2M_0}, \widehat{\theta}_k+\frac{1}{2M_0}\right]$
of size $\frac{1}{M_0}$ around the current estimate, $\widehat{\theta}_k$. For example, we plotted this initial interval for the case where $M=16$, $M_0=4$ and $M_1=4$ in Figure \ref{fig:zoom_in_segment}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{zoom_before_align.pdf}
\caption{The ZSK scheme with a single zoom-in for $M=16$, $M_0=4$ and $M_1=4$. The original $M$ constellation points are marked by red dots. The estimate $\widehat{\theta}_k$ at the receiver after $k+1$ initial SK interaction rounds is denoted by blue `$\times$', and the initial interval $S'_1$ is denoted by a pair of blue square brackets.}
\label{fig:zoom_in_segment}
\end{figure}
Then, the receiver aligns the interval $S'_1$ with the original PAM constellation of size $M$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:pam_const}) by first computing the number of symbols that are on the left of $S'_1$, denoted by $i'_0$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
i'_0={\rm round}\left(\left(\widehat{\theta}_k-\frac{1}{2M_0}+\frac{1}{2}\right)\cdot M \right).
\label{eq:ip0_round}
\end{equation}
In the example shown in Figure \ref{fig:zoom_in_segment}, we have, $i'_0=3$.
Then the receiver applies $[0,M-M_1]$-clipping on $i'_0$:
\begin{equation}
i_0=\min\left(M-M_1,\max(i'_0,0)\right).
\label{eq:i0_clip}
\end{equation}
The receiver stores $i_0$ in its memory.
We note here that the only variables that need to be kept with a high enough resolution at the transmitter and receiver are the transmitted symbol $i$ and the decoded symbol (naturally if we want to transmit and decode a $K=N\cdot R$-bit word we need a $K$-bit variable in memory). These are stored as integers. Instead of storing the constellation size $M$ we store its logarithm $NR$ as an integer.
We then align the interval $S'_1$ by constructing the interval $S_1=[a, b]$, as can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:aligned_zoom_a_b}, where
\begin{align}
a&=i_0\cdot\frac{1}{M}-\frac{1}{2}, \label{eq:a_from_i1}\\
b&=a+\frac{1}{M_0}.
\end{align}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{aligned_zoom.pdf}
\caption{Aligned zoom segment, $S_1=[a,b]$. Here $i'_0=3$.}
\label{fig:aligned_zoom_a_b}
\end{figure}
Finally, both the transmitter and receiver zoom into the interval $S_1$ by updating the current estimate $\widehat{\theta}_k$ to $\widehat{\theta}_k^{(1)}$ using a simple linear transformation,
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\theta}_k^{(1)} = \frac{\widehat{\theta}_k-a}{b-a}-\frac{1}{2} = M_0\cdot(\widehat{\theta}_k-a) -\frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation}
Hence, after zooming in, $\widehat{\theta}_k=a$ ($\widehat{\theta}_k=b$, respectively) is transformed to $\widehat{\theta}_k^{(1)}=-1/2$ ($\widehat{\theta}_k^{(1)}=1/2$), so that the interval $S_1=[a,b]$ has been transformed to the interval $[-1/2,1/2]$.
Define
$$
\theta^{(1)} \: {\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Delta}{=}} \: M_0 (\theta-a) - \frac{1}{2}
$$
In the second stage of our ZSK scheme, we replace the decoding of $\theta \in S_1 = [a,b]$ by the decoding of $\theta^{(1)} \in [-1/2,1/2]$. This is done by applying $N-k-1$ additional SK interaction rounds, starting with the current zoom-in estimate $\widehat{\theta}_k^{(1)}$ to $\theta^{(1)}$.
Recalling that at the $k$'th iteration, $\widehat{\theta}_k=\theta+\epsilon_k$ (see \eqref{eq:epsilon_n}), we have,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:t_k_zoom}
\widehat{\theta}_k^{(1)} = M_0\cdot\left(\theta+\epsilon_k-a\right)-\frac{1}{2} =
M_0 (\theta - a)-\frac{1}{2}+M_0\epsilon_k = \theta^{(1)} + M_0\epsilon_k.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}
Defining $i_1 \: {\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Delta}{=}} \: i-i_0$, we have
\begin{equation}
\theta^{(1)} = {\rm PAM}(i_1, M_1)=\frac{i_1}{M_1}+\frac{1}{2M_1}-\frac{1}{2}.
\label{eq:PAM_i1_M1}
\end{equation}
\label{lem:theta1_i2}
\end{lemma}
\noindent \textbf{Proof: }
\begin{align}
\theta^{(1)}=&M_0(\theta-a)-\frac{1}{2}=M_0(\theta -\frac{i_0}{M}+\frac{1}{2})-\frac{1}{2}\\
=&
M_0(\frac{i}{M}-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1 }{2M}-\frac{i_0}{M}+\frac{1}{2})-\frac{1}{2}=\\
=&
M_0(\frac{i-i_0}{M}+\frac{1}{2M})-\frac{1}{2} = \frac{i-i_0}{M_1}+\frac{1}{2M_1}-\frac{1}{2} \\
=&
\frac{i_1}{M_1}+\frac{1}{2M_1}-\frac{1}{2}.
\end{align}
\noindent $[]$\\
Now, after the zoom-in operation, when $i_0$ has already been decoded, it remains to decode $i_1$ in order to conclude the decoding of $i=i_0+i_1$. By Lemma \ref{lem:theta1_i2}, the decoding of $i_1$ is equivalent to the decoding of the PAM symbol $\theta^{(1)}$ corresponding to $i_1$, for a constellation size of $M_1$. We implement the decoding of $i_1$ by using $N-k-1$ SK interaction rounds in the second stage of the ZSK scheme. Our initial estimate to $\theta^{(1)}$ in the second stage of ZSK is $\widehat{\theta}^{(1)}_k$. Our estimate to $\theta^{(1)}$ at the $n$'th interaction round of ZSK, for $n=k,k+1,\ldots,N-1$, is $\widehat{\theta}^{(1)}_n$. We also denote the respective estimation error by $\epsilon_{n}^{(1)}=\widehat{\theta}_n^{(1)}-\theta^{(1)}$. Motivated by the increased error variance in the second stage (as seen in \eqref{eq:t_k_zoom}), we suggest the following updated parameters for the second stage of ZSK,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SecondStageParams}
(\sigma_{k}^{(1)})^2 &= M_0^2 \sigma_{k}^2\\
(\sigma_{n}^{(1)})^2 &= \frac{(\sigma_{n-1}^{(1)})^2}{1+{\rm SNR}}
\quad
n=k+1,\ldots,N-2\\
\beta_{n}^{(1)} &= \frac{\sqrt{{\rm SNR}}}{1+{\rm SNR}}\frac{\sigma_{n}^{(1)}}{\sigma_z}
\quad
n=k,\ldots,N-2
\: .
\end{align}
A summary of the ZSK scheme is provided in Algorithm \ref{alg:ZSK}.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{ZSK}
\label{alg:ZSK}
\begin{algorithmic}
\Procedure {ZSK}{$i$: message}
\State \textbf{Initialize:}
\State \hspace*{\algorithmicindent} Transmitter: $\theta={\rm PAM}(i,M)$, $x_{0}=\frac{\sqrt{P}}{A}\theta$
\State \hspace*{\algorithmicindent} Receiver: $\widehat{\theta}_0=\frac{y_0}{\sqrt{P}/A}$
\For{$n=0,\ldots,k-1$}
\State Transmitter: $\epsilon_{n}=\widehat{\theta}_n-\theta$
\State $x_{n+1}=\frac{\sqrt{P}}{\sigma_n}\epsilon_n$
\State Receiver: $\widehat{\epsilon}_n=\beta_n\cdot y_{n+1} = \beta_n\cdot \left( x_{n+1} + z_{n+1} \right)$
\State $\widehat{\theta}_{n+1}=\widehat{\theta}_n-\widehat{\epsilon}_n$
\EndFor
\State \textbf{Zoom} transmitter and receiver:
\State $i'_0={\rm round}\left(\left(\widehat{\theta}_k-\frac{1}{2M_0}+\frac{1}{2}\right)\cdot M \right)$
\State $i_0=\min\left(M-M_1,\max(i'_0,0)\right)$
\State $a=i_0\cdot\frac{1}{M}-\frac{1}{2}$
\State $\widehat{\theta}_k^{(1)} = M_0\cdot(\widehat{\theta}_k-a) -\frac{1}{2}$
\State Transmitter: $i_1=i-i_0$, $\theta^{(1)}={\rm PAM}(i_1,M_1)$
\For{$n=k,\ldots,N-2$}
\State Transmitter: $\epsilon_{n}^{(1)}=\widehat{\theta}_n^{(1)}-\theta^{(1)}$
\State $x_{n+1}=\frac{\sqrt{P}}{\sigma_n^{(1)}}\epsilon_n^{(1)}$
\State Receiver: $\widehat{\epsilon}_n^{(1)}=\beta_n^{(1)}\cdot y_{n+1} = \beta_n^{(1)}\cdot \left( x_{n+1} + z_{n+1} \right)$
\State $\widehat{\theta}_{n+1}^{(1)}=\widehat{\theta}_n^{(1)}-\widehat{\epsilon}_n^{(1)}$
\EndFor
\State$i_1=\mathop{\rm argmin}_l\{||\widehat{\theta}_{N-1}^{(1)}-{\rm PAM}(l, M_1)||^2 \}$
\Return$\widehat{i}=i_0+i_1$
\EndProcedure
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
As a result of the zoom-in operation, the error variance increases, but at the same time the constellation size decreases such that the numerical robustness is improved while having negligible effect on the error probability (as will be seen in the next section). The numerical robustness improves, mainly because the ZSK scheme allows us to keep the error variance (and thus all the other variables which are linearly related to it) relatively high, such that they can be represented using low precision. Assuming that $M=M_{0}\cdot M_{1}$, while in SK we need $\sigma_{N-1}\ll 1/M$ at the final iteration, for ZSK we require $\sigma_{k}\ll1/M_0$, thus saving approximately $\log_{2}(M/M_0)=\log_{2}(M_1)$ bits in representation. If we assume for simplicity that $M_0=M_1=\sqrt{M}$, then in ZSK we reduced by half the number of bits needed in order to represent the error variance. Even though we might have a small numerical error in decoding $i_0$, the decoded value will be the same in the receiver and transmitter, so that they both stay synchronized, and thus this small error will not pose a problem.
\subsection{Error probability analysis} \label{sec:error_analysis}
As was discussed in Section \ref{sec:SK_scheme}, the SK scheme decodes successfully if $\left|{\cal E}_{N-1}\right| < \frac{1}{2M}$.
By the discussion in Section \ref{sec:single_zoomin_alg}, the first stage decoding of the ZSK scheme is successful if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:noErrorFirst}
\Theta \in \left[\widehat{\Theta}_k-\frac{1}{2M_0}, \widehat{\Theta}_k+\frac{1}{2M_0}\right]
\end{equation}
This event is equivalent to $\left| {\cal E}_k \right| < 1/[2M_0]$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:theta1_i2}, the second stage decoding of the ZSK scheme is successful if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:noErrorSecond}
\Theta^{(1)} \in
\left[\widehat{\Theta}_{N-1}^{(1)} - \frac{1}{2M_1}, \widehat{\Theta}_{N-1}^{(1)}+\frac{1}{2M_1}\right]
\end{equation}
This event is equivalent to $\left| {\cal E}_{N-1}^{(1)} \right| < 1/[2M_1]$.
The error probability of the ZSK scheme can be analyzed using truncated RVs. However, a simpler analysis is provided below using a coupling argument similar to the one used in \cite{ben2017interactive} in the context of noisy feedback.
\begin{theorem} \label{th:err_prb}
The ZSK error probability is upper bounded by the sum of the zoom error probability and the regular SK error probability,
\begin{equation}
P_{e}^{{\rm ZSK}} \le
2Q\left(\frac{1}{2M_0\sigma_{k}}\right) + 2Q\left(\frac{1}{2M\sigma_{N-1}}\right)
\label{eq:th_err_prb}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
As an immediate corollary we have:
\begin{corollary} \label{corr:err_prb}
Suppose that $M_0$ and $k$ are chosen such that
$Q\left(\frac{1}{2M_0\sigma_{k}}\right) < \epsilon Q\left(\frac{1}{2M\sigma_{N-1}}\right)$
for some (small) $\epsilon>0$. Then,
\begin{equation}
P_{e}^{{\rm ZSK}} \le 2(1+\epsilon) Q\left(\frac{1}{2M\sigma_{N-1}}\right)
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
As will be seen in Section \ref{sec:choosing_params}, we set the parameters of the ZSK scheme, which in the single zoom case are $M_0$ and $k$, such that the required condition in Corollary \ref{corr:err_prb} is satisfied for small $\epsilon>0$.
It can be seen that the bound on $P_{e}^{{\rm ZSK}}$ in Corollary \ref{corr:err_prb} is essentially (up to $1+\epsilon$) the same as the bound in \eqref{eq:SK} on the SK error probability, $P_e^{{\rm SK}}$, with the same total number of iterations, $N$. Furthermore, as was noted above, the bound \eqref{eq:SK} is an excellent approximation to $P_e^{{\rm SK}}$. Hence, under a proper design of the ZSK scheme, its error probability is essentially the same as that of plain SK.
{\noindent \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{th:err_prb}: } }
Consider two systems that are fed with the exact same message and experience the exact same channel noises. The first one applies the proposed ZSK algorithm, while the second one applies plain SK. The parameters and signals of the SK system are denoted by $\sigma_n$, $\beta_n$, $\epsilon_n$, $\widehat{\epsilon}_n$ and $y_{n+1}$. The same parameters and signals are used by the ZSK system for $n=0,\ldots,k-1$ (before the zoom in). The parameters and signals of the ZSK scheme after the zoom in are denoted by $\sigma_n^{(1)}$, $\beta_n^{(1)}$, $\epsilon_n^{(1)}$, $\widehat{\epsilon}_n^{(1)}$ and $y^{(1)}_{n+1}$ for $n=k,\ldots, N-2$.
We claim that if $|\epsilon_k| < 1 / [2 M_0]$ and $|\epsilon_{N-1}| < 1 / [2 M]$ then both systems will decode the transmitted message successfully.
If this claim indeed holds then
\begin{equation}
P_e^{{\rm ZSK}} \le
\Pr \left\{ \left|{\cal E}_k\right| \ge \frac{1}{2M_0} \bigcup \left|{\cal E}_{N-1}\right| \ge \frac{1}{2M} \right\}
\end{equation}
which immediately proves \eqref{eq:th_err_prb} by the union bound and the analysis of the SK scheme in Section \ref{sec:SK_scheme} (see \eqref{eq:SK} for the second term on the right hand side of \eqref{eq:th_err_prb}, and the same argument can also be used to obtain the first term on the right hand side of \eqref{eq:th_err_prb}).
Now, the above claim obviously holds for the SK system since $|\epsilon_{N-1}| < 1 / [2 M]$.
It remains to prove the claim for the ZSK system.
The first stage of ZSK decoding is successful since by assumption, $|\epsilon_k| < 1 / [2 M_0]$. We show that the second stage of ZSK decoding is also successful by showing that the second assumption of the claim, $|\epsilon_{N-1}| < 1 / [2 M]$, is equivalent to $\left| \epsilon_{N-1}^{(1)} \right| < 1/[2M_1]$.
For that, it is sufficient to show that given $\left| \epsilon_k \right| < 1/[2M_0]$, so that the first stage decoding of the ZSK scheme was successful, we have
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_n^{(1)} = M_{0}\epsilon_{n}
\label{eq:epsilon_M0}
\end{equation}
for $n=k,\ldots,N-1$ (i.e., in the second stage of the ZSK scheme the estimation errors are $M_0$ times larger than the corresponding error in the SK scheme). For $n=k$ \eqref{eq:epsilon_M0} holds by \eqref{eq:t_k_zoom}. We proceed by induction: Suppose that \eqref{eq:epsilon_M0} holds for $n=r$. Then, by \eqref{eq:EpsUpdate}, \eqref{eq:SecondStageParams}, Algorithm \ref{alg:SK}, Algorithm \ref{alg:ZSK} and the induction assumption,
\begin{align}
\epsilon_{r+1}
&= \epsilon_{r} - \beta_{r}y_{r+1}\\
&= \epsilon_{r} - \frac{\sigma_r}{\sigma_z} \cdot \frac{\sqrt{{\rm SNR}}}{1+{\rm SNR}}\left(\frac{\sqrt{P}}{\sigma_r}\epsilon_{r}+z_{r+1}\right)\\
\epsilon_{r+1}^{(1)} &= \epsilon_{r}^{(1)} - \beta_{r}^{(1)}y_{r+1}^{(1)}\\
&= M_{0}\epsilon_{r} - \frac{M_{0}\sigma_r}{\sigma_z} \cdot \frac{\sqrt{{\rm SNR}}}{1+{\rm SNR}}\left(\frac{\sqrt{P}}{M_{0}\sigma_r}M_{0}\epsilon_{r}+z_{r+1}\right)\\
&= M_{0}\epsilon_{r+1}
\end{align}
This concludes the induction, the proof of the claim, and the proof of the theorem.
\noindent $[]$\\
\section{Multiple zooms} \label{sec:multiple_zooms}
In the previous section we have described how the zoom scheme works for the case of a single zoom. It is straight forward to generalize it into a scheme with multiple zooms where the transmitter and receiver zoom synchronously every few iterations. This way we can implement an SK scheme with an arbitrarily large number of iterations and still use low precision arithmetic. Consider a multiple zoom SK scheme with $r$ zoom-ins and $r+1$ stages (such that for $r=1$ it reduces to the single zoom-in case with 2 stages discussed earlier). Suppose that $M$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
M = \prod_{j=0}^{r} M_j
\end{equation}
and that the $j$'th zoom-in operation, $j=0,\ldots,r-1$, is performed after $k_{j} + 1$ interaction rounds. The last zoom-in is performed after $k_{r-1}+1$ interaction rounds. Immediately after the last zoom-in we carry out the last $N-k_{r-1}-1$ interaction rounds for a total of $N$ interaction rounds. We also define $k_r \: {\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Delta}{=}} \: N-1$.
The estimation error random variables at the $j$'th stage ($j=0,1,\ldots,r$) of ZSK are denoted by ${\cal E}_n^{(j)}$, where $n$ is the interaction round index, $n=k_{j-1},k_{j-1}+1,\ldots,k_{j}$ and $k_{-1}\equiv 0$. Before the $j$'th zoom-in the estimation error is ${\cal E}_{k_j}^{(j)}$, and after the zoom-in it is ${\cal E}_{k_j}^{(j+1)}$. Similarly to \eqref{eq:SecondStageParams}, we suggest the following updated parameters for the $j$'th stage,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:SecondStageParams1}
(\sigma_{k_{j-1}}^{(j)})^2 &= \left[\prod_{l=0}^{j-1}M_l^2\right] \sigma_{k_{j-1}}^2\\
(\sigma_{n}^{(j)})^2 &= \frac{(\sigma_{n-1}^{(j)})^2}{1+{\rm SNR}}
\quad
n=k_{j-1}+1,\ldots,k_j-1\\
\beta_{n}^{(j)} &= \frac{\sqrt{{\rm SNR}}}{1+{\rm SNR}}\frac{\sigma_{n}^{(j)}}{\sigma_z}
\quad
n=k_{j-1},\ldots,k_j-1
\: .
\end{align}
where $\sigma_k^2$ is the SK error variance at the $k$'th iteration given by \eqref{error_var}. Similarly to \eqref{eq:noErrorFirst}-\eqref{eq:noErrorSecond} a zoom error event at the $j$'th stage is equivalent to the event $\left|{\cal E}_{k_j}^{(j)}\right|>1/\left[2M_j\right]$. As an example consider the single zoom-in case where $r=1$. In this case there is a single zoom-in after $k_0+1$ interaction rounds (in the previous section, where we considered the single zoom-in case, $k_0$ was denoted by $k$). During the $0$'th stage of ZSK, the estimation errors are ${\cal E}_{n}^{(0)}$, for $n=0,1,\ldots,k_0$ and an error at the end of that stage is equivalent to the event $\left|{\cal E}_{k_0}^{(0)}\right| > 1/\left[2M_0\right]$ (in the previous section the superscript $(0)$ was omitted for the $0$'th stage of ZSK). After the zoom-in the estimation errors are ${\cal E}_{n}^{(1)}$, for $n=k_0,k_0+1,\ldots,k_1$, and an error at the end of that stage is equivalent to the event $\left|{\cal E}_{k_1}^{(1)}\right| > 1/\left[2M_1\right]$ where $k_1=N-1$.
As an extension of Theorem \ref{th:err_prb} to the multiple zooms case we have the following.
\begin{theorem} \label{th:err_prb_MZSK}
The multiple ZSK error probability is upper bounded by,
\begin{equation}
P_{e}^{{\rm ZSK}} \le \sum_{j=0}^{r}
2Q\left(\frac{1}{2 M_{0}\ldots M_{j} \sigma_{k_{j}}}\right)
\label{eq:th_err_prb_MZSK}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_n^2$ is the standard SK error variance at the $n$'th interaction round (as given in \eqref{error_var}).
\end{theorem}
As an immediate corollary we have:
\begin{corollary} \label{corr:err_prb_MZSK}
Suppose that $\{M_j\}_{j=0}^r$ and $\{k_j\}_{j=0}^r$ are chosen such that
$$
Q\left(\frac{1}{2\cdot M_{0}\ldots M_{j} \sigma_{k_{j}}}\right) < \epsilon Q\left(\frac{1}{2M\sigma_{N-1}}\right)
$$
for $j=0,\ldots,r-1$. Then
\begin{equation}
P_{e}^{{\rm ZSK}} \le 2(1+r\epsilon) Q\left(\frac{1}{2M\sigma_{N-1}}\right)
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
As will be seen in Section \ref{sec:choosing_params}, we set the parameters of the ZSK scheme, $M_j$ and $k_j$, such that the required condition in Corollary \ref{corr:err_prb_MZSK} is satisfied for small $\epsilon>0$.
It can be seen that the bound on $P_{e}^{{\rm ZSK}}$ in Corollary \ref{corr:err_prb_MZSK} is essentially (up to $1+r\epsilon$) the same as the bound in \eqref{eq:SK} on the SK error probability, $P_e^{{\rm SK}}$, with the same total number of iterations, $N$. Furthermore, as was noted above, the bound \eqref{eq:SK} is an excellent approximation to $P_e^{{\rm SK}}$. Hence, under a proper design of the multiple ZSK scheme, its error probability is essentially the same as that of plain SK.
{\noindent \textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{th:err_prb_MZSK}: } }
Similarly to the proof of Theorem \ref{th:err_prb}, we compare two systems which are fed with the same message and experience the same noises. The first applies the proposed multiple stage ZSK algorithm while the second applies plain SK. Using the same notation (where the estimation errors in the SK system are denoted by $\epsilon_n$, and in the ZSK system they are marked with an additional superscript indicating the stage), we claim that if for $j=0,1,\ldots,r$ we have,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:noZoomError}
\left|\epsilon_{k_j}\right|<\left[2\prod_{l=0}^{j} M_l\right]^{-1}
\end{equation}
then both systems will decode the transmitted message successfully. If this claim indeed holds then the ZSK error probability is upper bounded by,
\begin{equation}
P_e^{{\rm ZSK}} \le
\Pr \left( \bigcup_{j=0}^{r}\left\{\left|{\cal E}_{k_j}\right| \ge \left[2\prod_{l=0}^{j} M_l\right]^{-1}\right\}\right)
\end{equation}
which immediately proves the theorem by the union bound and the analysis of the SK scheme in Section \ref{sec:SK_scheme}.
Now, the claim obviously holds for the SK system since $|\epsilon_{k_r}| < 1 / [2 M]$. Next, we show that the event \eqref{eq:noZoomError} implies a successful zoom at all the zoom steps and a successful decoding at the last iteration. It can be seen that by the exact same arguments as in Theorem \ref{th:err_prb}, given that \eqref{eq:noZoomError} holds for $j=0, \ldots, j_0-1$ then at the $j_0$'th stage we have,
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_n^{(j_0)} = \epsilon_n\prod_{i=0}^{j_0-1} M_{i} \quad n=k_{j_0-1}, \ldots,k_{j_0}
\end{equation}
which implies that the event $\left|\epsilon_{k_{j_0}}\right| \ge \left[2\prod_{l=0}^{j_0} M_l\right]^{-1}$ is equivalent to $\epsilon_{k_{j_0}}^{(j_0)}>\left[2M_{j_0}\right]^{-1}$. But this is exactly the error event at the $j_0$'th stage of the ZSK scheme. Thus, we see that the event \eqref{eq:noZoomError} indeed implies a successful decoding in the ZSK scheme as well. As a result, the claim holds and the theorem follows.
\noindent $[]$\\
\subsection{Choosing zoom parameters} \label{sec:choosing_params}
It remains to show how we determine the zoom constellation sizes,
${\bf M} \: {\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Delta}{=}} \: (M_0,M_1,\ldots,M_{r})$ and the iteration indices to zoom at, ${\bf K} \: {\stackrel{\scriptscriptstyle \Delta}{=}} \: (k_0,k_1,\ldots,k_{r-1})$, so that the total error probability of ZSK will be essentially the same as the error probability of standard SK, without the numerical issues of standard SK. First, we set a target error probability $P_e^{{\rm target}}$ that we want to achieve with SK (e.g., $P_e^{{\rm target}}=10^{-6}$). Then, we calculate at what SNR the standard SK scheme will reach that error probability by solving,
\begin{align}
P_e^{{\rm target}} &= 2Q\left(\frac{1}{2M\sigma_{N-1}}\right),\\
\sigma^2_{N-1} &= \frac{\sigma^2_0}{(1+{\rm SNR})^{N-1}}.
\end{align}
We denote that SNR by ${\rm SNR}_{{\rm target}}$. Next, we set the desired error probability at each zoom step, $P_e^{{\rm zoom}}=\epsilon P_e^{{\rm target}}$ (e.g., with $\epsilon=10^{-3}$), such that the sum of all zoom errors will have a negligible effect on the final error probability. We calculate the error variance at each iteration when the SNR is ${\rm SNR}_{{\rm target}}$, for the standard SK scheme and store it in the array $\boldsymbol\sigma_{{\rm ZSK}}^2[{\rm iter}]=\frac{\sigma_0^2}{(1+{\rm SNR}_{{\rm target}})^{{\rm iter}}}$ for ${\rm iter}=0,\ldots,N-1$ (this is done off-line so we can store these values (or their logarithms) at any desired accuracy).
Next, we can use the following algorithm to set the iterations at which we need to zoom-in and the corresponding zoom constellation.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Finding zoom parameters}
\begin{algorithmic}
\Procedure {Find zoom parameters}{$P_e^{{\rm zoom}}$: upper bound on the zoom error probability, $\boldsymbol\sigma_{{\rm ZSK}}^2$: error variances of plain SK at ${\rm SNR}_{{\rm target}}$}
\For{$i = 1,2,\ldots,N-1$}
\State $\sigma^2=\boldsymbol\sigma_{{\rm ZSK}}^2[i]$
\For {NumBits $=\log_2 M,\dots,1$}
\State $M_{z} = 2^{{\rm NumBits}}$
\State$P_{e} = 2Q(\frac{1}{2M_{z}\sigma})$
\If{$P_e<P_e^{{\rm zoom}}$}
\State ${\bf K}$.append($i$)
\State ${\bf M}$.append($M_{z}$)
\State $\boldsymbol\sigma_{{\rm ZSK}}^2=\boldsymbol\sigma_{{\rm ZSK}}^2\cdot M_{z}^2$
\State$M=M/M_{z}$
\State Break
\State
\EndIf
\EndFor
\EndFor
\Return ${\bf K},{\bf M}$
\EndProcedure
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
At each iteration ($i$), the algorithm tests whether there exists a constellation size, such that zooming in to that constellation at iteration $i$ will result in a zoom error that is smaller than $P_e^{{\rm zoom}}$. If such constellation exists, it chooses the maximal $M_{z}$ possible and updates $M$ and the error variances $\boldsymbol\sigma_{{\rm ZSK}}^2$.
\section{Simulation results}\label{sec:sim}
In the following we present some of the results achieved by running the proposed zoom scheme in a simulation, compared to the regular SK scheme. In Figure \ref{fig:float16_SK_no_zoom} we can see how the regular SK scheme fails even at a relatively small number of iterations, $N=10$, when using Float16. In Figure \ref{fig:float32_SK_no_zoom} we can see that even when using Float32, the SK scheme fails at a moderate number of iterations, $N=30$. In Figures \ref{fig:zoom_10_25} and \ref{fig:zoom_30_50}, we see that while regular SK fails after approximately 10 iterations, when using Float16, we can continue running our zoom scheme even up to $50$ iterations (or any other desired number of iterations). The capacity gap for $N=50$ is approximately $0.2{\rm dB}$ at $P_e=10^{-6}$.
Instead of storing the constellation size, $M$, we stored its logarithm $\log_2 M = NR$ in a short integer. The transmitted message, $i$, was stored as a long integer. The decoded message, $\widehat{i}$, was stored in the array of short integers, $i_0, i_1, \ldots, i_r$ such that $\widehat{i}=i_0+i_1+\ldots+i_r$.
All the other variables were stored as Float16.
In the implementation of \eqref{eq:M_PAM} we create $\theta(i)$ in Float16 representation as a rounded value of the right hand side from the integers $i$ and $NR$. We implement \eqref{eq:a_from_i1} and \eqref{eq:PAM_i1_M1} similarly.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{SK_float16_10_15.pdf}
\caption{The symbol error rate of the standard SK scheme with Float16.}
\label{fig:float16_SK_no_zoom}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{SK_float32_20_30_no_zoom.pdf}
\caption{The symbol error rate of the standard SK scheme with Float32.}
\label{fig:float32_SK_no_zoom}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{ZSK_float16_10_25.pdf}
\caption{Zoom scheme symbol error rate for $N=10$ with ${\bf M}=[4, 8 ,4]$, ${\bf K}=[4,6,8]$, and $N=25$ with ${\bf M}=[4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4]$, ${\bf K}=[4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23]$.}
\label{fig:zoom_10_25}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{ZSK_float16_30_50.pdf}
\caption{Zoom scheme symbol error rate for $N=30$ with ${\bf M}=[4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4]$, ${\bf K}=[4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27]$ and $N=50$ with ${\bf M}=[4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4]$, ${\bf K}=[5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 29, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39, 41, 43, 45, 47]$.}
\label{fig:zoom_30_50}
\end{figure}
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank Ofer Shayevitz and Assaf Ben-Yishai for suggesting the use of a coupling argument in order to simplify the proofs used in the first version of this paper.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{introduction}}
Research on `Problematic Facebook Use' (PFU) has investigated correlations between Facebook use and negative effects on outcomes such as level of academic achievement \citep{guptaInclassDistractionsRole2016} and subjective wellbeing \citep{marinoComprehensiveMetaanalysisProblematic2018, marinoAssociationsProblematicFacebook2018}.
Here, a cross-cutting finding is that negative outcomes are associated with subjective difficulty at exerting self-control over use, as well as specific use patterns including viewing friends' wide-audience broadcasts rather than receiving targeted communication from strong ties \citep{burkeRelationshipFacebookUse2016, marinoComprehensiveMetaanalysisProblematic2018}.
Much of this work has focused on self-control over Facebook use in student populations \citep{al-dubaiAdverseHealthEffects2013, khumsriPrevalenceFacebookAddiction2015, kocFacebookAddictionTurkish2013}, with media multitasking research finding that students often give in to use which provides short-term `guilty pleasures' over important, but aversive academic tasks \citep{rosenFacebookTextingMade2013, xuMediaMultitaskingWellbeing2016, meierFacebocrastinationPredictorsUsing2016}.
In the present paper, we present a mixed-methods study exploring how two interventions to Facebook --- goal reminders and removing the newsfeed --- affect university students' patterns of use and perceived control over Facebook use.
To triangulate self-report with objective measurement, our study combined usage logging with fortnightly surveys and post-study interviews.
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
We found that both interventions helped participants stay on task and use Facebook more in line with their intentions.
In terms of usage patterns, goal reminders led to less scrolling, fewer and shorter visits, and less time on site, whereas removing the newsfeed led to less scrolling, shorter visits, and less content 'liked'.
However, goal reminders were often experienced as annoying, and removing the newsfeed made some participants fear missing out on information.
After the study, participants suggested a range of design solutions to mitigate self-control struggles on Facebook, including controls for filtering or removing the newsfeed, reminders of time spent and use goals, and removing features that drive engagement.
As an exploratory study, this work should be followed by confirmatory studies to assess whether our findings replicate, and how they may generalise beyond a student population.
\hypertarget{related-work}{%
\section{Related work}\label{related-work}}
\hypertarget{struggles-with-facebook-use}{%
\subsection{Struggles with Facebook use}\label{struggles-with-facebook-use}}
Whereas many uses of Facebook offer important benefits, such as social support, rapid spread of information, or facilitation of real-world interactions \citep{ryanUsesAbusesFacebook2014}, a substantial amount of research has focused on negative aspects \citep{marinoComprehensiveMetaanalysisProblematic2018}.
For example, studies have reported correlations between patterns of Facebook use and lower academic achievement \citep{rouisImpactFacebookUsage2011, wangContextCollegeStudents2018}, low self-esteem, depression and anxiety \citep{labragueFacebookUseAdolescents2014}, feelings of isolation and loneliness \citep{al-dubaiAdverseHealthEffects2013}, and general psychological distress \citep{chenSharingLikingCommenting2013}.
Such `Problematic Facebook Use' (PFU) has been studied under various names (including `Facebook dependence' \citep{wolniczakAssociationFacebookDependence2013} and `Facebook addiction'\citep{andreassenDevelopmentFacebookAddiction2012}), but a recent review summarised a common definition across papers as `problematic behaviour characterised by addictive-like symptoms and/or self-regulation difficulties related to Facebook use leading to negative consequences in personal and social life' \citep{marinoComprehensiveMetaanalysisProblematic2018}.
A large number of studies have in turn correlated measures of PFU with patterns of use and personality traits. Here, researchers often distinguish between use that is more `active' (creating content and communicating with friends) and use that is more `passive' (consuming content created by others without actively engaging), with the former being linked to more positive correlates of subjective wellbeing \citep{burkeSocialNetworkActivity2010, ellisonBenefitsFacebookFriends2007, gersonPassiveActiveFacebook2017, grieveFacetofaceFacebookCan2013} and the latter to more negative \citep{krasnovaEnvyFacebookHidden2013, verduynPassiveFacebookUsage2015}.
Moreover, most studies have found that `problematic users' tend to spend more time on Facebook \citep{marinoComprehensiveMetaanalysisProblematic2018}, including a recent study by researchers at Facebook with direct access to server logs: users who experienced their use as problematic (i.e., reported negative impact on sleep, relationships, or work/school performance, plus lack of control over use) spent more time on the platform, especially at night, as well as more time looking at profiles and less time browsing the newsfeed, and were more likely to deactivate their accounts \citep{chengUnderstandingPerceptionsProblematic2019}.
Depending on the specific tools and thresholds used for assessing use as `problematic', prevalence estimates vary widely, from 3.1\% in a representative sample of US users \citep{chengUnderstandingPerceptionsProblematic2019} to 47\% in a study of Malaysian university students (\citep{jafarkarimiFacebookAddictionMalaysian2016} see also \citep{banyaiProblematicSocialMedia2017, khumsriPrevalenceFacebookAddiction2015, wolniczakAssociationFacebookDependence2013}).
The upper bounds of such estimates suggest that, at least at a mild levels, it is very common for people to struggle with using Facebook in accordance with their goals \citep{guedesInternetAddictionExcessive2016}.
This is supported by studies of multitasking and media use finding that people very often perceive their use of digital media to be in conflict with other important goals (61.2\% of use occurrences in an experience sampling study by Reinecke and Hofmann \citep{reineckeSlackingWindingExperience2016}), and that Facebook in particular is one of the most common sources of media-induced procrastination \citep{rosenFacebookTextingMade2013, xuMediaMultitaskingWellbeing2016}.
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{interventions-and-digital-self-control-tools}{%
\subsection{Interventions and digital self-control tools}\label{interventions-and-digital-self-control-tools}}
Catering to users struggling with self-control over digital device use, a growing niche exists for `digital self-control' tools on online stores for apps and browser extensions.
Such tools promise to support user self-control through interventions such as removing distracting element from websites, tracking and visualising use, or rewarding intended behaviour \citep{lyngsSelfControlCyberspaceApplying2019}.
In particular, many browser extensions focus on adjusting \emph{Facebook} in ways intended to help self-control, for example by removing the newsfeed \citep{jdevNewsFeedEradicator2019} or hiding numerical metrics such as like count \citep{grosserFacebookDemetricator2019}.
No studies have assessed how interventions found in these tools may alleviate self-control struggles on Facebook.
However, some recent studies have investigated how temporarily deactivating or not logging in to Facebook affect subjective wellbeing \citep{allcottWelfareEffectsSocial2019, mosqueraEconomicEffectsFacebook2019, tromholtFacebookExperimentQuitting2016, vanmanBurdenOnlineFriends2018}.
The findings from these studies have largely been in agreement, with Allcott et al. \citep{allcottWelfareEffectsSocial2019} the largest to date:
in a study where 580 participants were randomly assigned to deactivate their accounts for four weeks, and compared to 1,081 controls, Facebook deactivation increased offline activities (including socialising with family and friends and watching TV) and subjective wellbeing, and decreased online activity (including other social media than Facebook).
Moreover, Facebook deactivation caused a large and persistent reduction in Facebook use after the experiment.
For many users, however, deactivating or deleting their Facebook account presents too tall a barrier to action for tackling problematic use.
Most users have more targeted non-use goals than ``abstinence'', such as reducing time scrolling the newsfeed (but not time posting in a university social group), or reducing time spent on Facebook during final exams (but not during vacations, cf. \citep{chengUnderstandingPerceptionsProblematic2019, wangContextCollegeStudents2018}).
Some existing research similarly supports positive effects on wellbeing of targeted non-use, including research on active versus passive social media use \citep{burkeRelationshipFacebookUse2016, hinikerMyTimeDesigningEvaluating2016, verduynPassiveFacebookUsage2015}.
Therefore, investigating interventions found in digital self-control tools for Facebook presents an exciting research opportunity, as they represent less extreme measures than deactivation that may have positive effects.
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{overview-of-study}{%
\section{Overview of study}\label{overview-of-study}}
On this background, we set out to study how two interventions found in popular browser extensions for scaffolding self-control on Facebook --- specifically, \emph{adding goal prompts and reminders} and \emph{removing the newsfeed} --- affect patterns of use and perceived control on Facebook among university students.
We designed a mixed-methods study that attempted to address common limitations in related studies:
\begin{itemize}
\item
Most studies rely on self-reported Facebook use, which complicates interpretation because self-report often correlates poorly with actual use of digital devices \citep{ellisDigitalTracesBehaviour2018, ellisSmartphoneUsageScales2019, orbenScreensTeensPsychological2019, scharkowAccuracySelfReportedInternet2016}.
Therefore, we combined surveys and interviews with logging of use, to triangulate subjective self-report and objective measurement.
\item
Nearly all studies, apart from deactivation studies, have used cross-sectional designs, making it very difficult to interpret causality \citep{marinoComprehensiveMetaanalysisProblematic2018}.
Therefore, we randomly assigned participants to intervention groups and compared an initial baseline to a subsequent intervention as well as post-intervention block.
\end{itemize}
Our choice of interventions is described in the `Pre-study' section below.
Based on existing research on self-control struggles in relation to Facebook use, our research questions were as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\tightlist
\item
RQ1 (Amount of use): How do goal reminders (C\textsubscript{goal}) or removing the newsfeed (C\textsubscript{no-feed}) impact time spent and visits made?
\item
RQ2 (Patterns of use): How do goal reminders (C\textsubscript{goal}) or removing the newsfeed (C\textsubscript{no-feed}) impact patterns of use (e.g., passive / active)?
\item
RQ3 (Control): How do goal reminders (C\textsubscript{goal}) or removing the newsfeed (C\textsubscript{no-feed}) impact perceived control?
\item
RQ4 (Post-intervention effects): Do the effects (RQ1-3) of goal reminders (C\textsubscript{goal}) or removing the newsfeed (C\textsubscript{no-feed}) persist after interventions are removed?
\item
RQ5 (Self-reflection): Do the interventions enable participants to reflect on their struggles with Facebook use in ways that might inform the design of more effective interventions?
\end{itemize}
Whereas RQ1-4 follow from the background literature reviewed, RQ5 was a generative research question pointing towards new design solutions.
We did not envision participants being `vessels of truth' in relation to which design interventions would solve their struggles, but were interested in what suggestions the interventions might inspire as design probes.
\section{Methods}
Study materials, anonymised data, and analysis scripts are available via the \href{https://osf.io}{Open Science Framework} at \href{https://osf.io/qtg7h/}{osf.io/qtg7h}.
\hypertarget{pre-study}{%
\subsection{Pre-study}\label{pre-study}}
\subsubsection{Reviewing Facebook self-control tools}
In February 2018, we searched for browser extensions for supporting self-control on Facebook on the Chrome Web store and identified 50 such extensions implementing a range of interventions (see study materials for the list).
Most (36 out of 50) let the user remove or alter distracting elements, with more than half (27/50) specifically hiding the newsfeed (e.g., `Newsfeed Eradicator' \citep{jdevNewsFeedEradicator2019} removes the newsfeed and optionally replaces it with a motivational quote).
Others implemented interventions such as time limits (e.g., setting a daily limit and prompting the user to stop using Facebook or, like \emph{Auto Logout} \citep{avtechlabsAutoLogout2019}, force closing it when the time has passed), goal reminders (e.g., asking the user what she needs to do on Facebook and subsequently providing reminders, \emph{Focusbook} \citep{forstyonahFocusbook2016}) or providing rewards or punishments (e.g., transferring money out of one's bank account if use is above a set limit, \emph{Timewaste Timer} \citep{prettymind.coTimewasteTimer2018}).
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\subsubsection{Selecting interventions to investigate guided by a dual systems model of self-control}
To categorise these interventions, we relied on a recent review of functionality in digital self-control tools, which grouped their main design features into the types \emph{block/removal}, \emph{self-tracking}, \emph{goal advancement}, and \emph{reward/punishment}, which in turn were mapped to psychological mechanisms in a dual systems model of self-regulation \citep{lyngsSelfControlCyberspaceApplying2019}.
This model distinguishes between behaviour under non-conscious `System 1' control, i.e., when the external environment or internal states trigger habits or instinctive responses; and behaviour that is under conscious `System 2' control, i.e., when goals, intentions, and rules held in working memory trigger behaviour.
For example, a student might check Facebook as the first thing when opening his laptop, because this context triggers a habitual check-in via System 1 control.
Alternatively, the student might open Facebook because he has a conscious goal of messaging a friend.
According to this model---which we return to in the Discussion---`self-control' is the capacity of conscious System 2 control to override System 1 responses when the two are in conflict.
For example, one might have a conscious goal to not check one's phone at the dinner table and a need to use self-control to suppress one's checking habit, in order to align behaviour with this goal (see \citep{lyngsSelfControlCyberspaceApplying2019} for details, cf. \citep{kotabeIntegratingComponentsSelfControl2015}).
\emph{C\textsubscript{no-feed}} {} For our first experimental condition, C\textsubscript{no-feed}, we chose removing the newsfeed, because this was by far the most common approach among the extensions reviewed.
Viewed through the dual systems model lens, removing the newsfeed represents a \emph{block/removal} strategy which scaffolds self-control on Facebook by preventing unwanted System 1 control from being triggered by the newsfeed, and supporting System 2 control by preventing distracting information from crowding out working memory and make the user forget her goal \citep{lyngsSelfControlCyberspaceApplying2019}.
\emph{C\textsubscript{goal}} {} To compare this to a different strategy, we selected a \emph{goal advancement} intervention as a second experimental condition (C\textsubscript{goal}), specifically the one implemented by \emph{Focusbook} \citep{forstyonahFocusbook2016}, which prompts the user to type in their goal when visiting Facebook and then periodically reminds them of this goal.
According to the dual systems model, this scaffolds self-control in a way that is distinct from removing the newsfeed, namely, by keeping the goals the user wishes to achieve present in working memory, thereby enabling System 2 control.
We chose \emph{Focusbook}'s implementation, because it had the largest number of users among the extensions reviewed that implemented alternatives to \emph{block/removal} strategies.
\emph{C\textsubscript{control}} {} In order to control for `demand characteristics' and placebo effects \citep{bootPervasiveProblemPlacebos2013, nicholsGoodSubjectEffectInvestigating2008}, we also included a control condition (C\textsubscript{control}).
In this condition, we changed the background colour of Facebook from light grey to white, which we did not hypothesise to have any significant effect on behaviour or perceived control.
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{materials}{%
\subsection{Materials}\label{materials}}
\hypertarget{study-conditions}{%
\subsubsection{Study conditions}\label{study-conditions}}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/study-conditions-1} \caption{Mockup of study conditions: C\textsubscript{goal} (adding a goal prompt when visiting the site that every few minutes pops up a reminder), C\textsubscript{no-feed} (removing the newsfeed), and C\textsubscript{control} (white background). See study materials for screenshots.}\label{fig:study-conditions}
\end{figure}
The study conditions are shown in Figure \ref{fig:study-conditions}.\\
We implemented the interventions as Chrome extensions written in JavaScript and CSS:
during the intervention block, the extension script for C\textsubscript{control} turned the background colour of Facebook white.
For C\textsubscript{no-feed}, the extension script hid the webpage elements containing the newsfeed.
For C\textsubscript{goal}, the extension script was a modified version of \emph{Focusbook} (the source code for which is available on GitHub \citep{forstyonahFocusbook2016}), where we forced safe-for-work-mode (i.e., avoiding foul language in reminders) and altered prompts that expressed disapproval to neutral reminders (e.g., changing ``Fine, just tell me why you needed to open Facebook'' to ``Tell me why you needed to open Facebook'').
The extension prompted the user to type in why they opened Facebook when they went to the site, and after 1-3 minutes popped up a reminder of what they typed, along with a snooze button.
Until the snooze button was pressed, the banner containing the prompt slowly expanded to take up more and more screenspace.
\hypertarget{logging-of-use}{%
\subsubsection{Logging of use}\label{logging-of-use}}
Following recent work \citep{wangContextCollegeStudents2018}, we used the open-source browser extension `Research tool for Online Social Environments' (ROSE) \citep{pollerWelcomeROSEResearch2017, pollerInvestigatingOSNUsers2014} to log Facebook use in the Google Chrome browser.
We used this extension to record usage metrics (e.g., timestamps when a browser tab with Facebook was brought in and out of focus, number of clicks) and specific interactions (e.g., viewing a profile, liking content).
To preserve privacy, the extension gave interactions (e.g., content liked) an anonymous identifier in stored data without storing any identifying information about the actual content engaged with.
The ROSE extension was installed on participants' laptop in addition to the extension for their intervention condition.
\hypertarget{surveysinterviews}{%
\subsubsection{Surveys/interviews}\label{surveysinterviews}}
\textbf{Opening survey}:
The opening survey included
(i) demographic information,
(ii) basic information about participants' use of Facebook (when they got an account, devices they use to access the site, prior use of self-control tools for Facebook), and
(iii) two individual difference measures (susceptibility to types of distraction \citep{markEffectsIndividualDifferences2018} and a Big Five personality measure \citep{goslingVeryBriefMeasure2003}).
\textbf{Repeated surveys}:
The survey administered after each study block included three measures:\\
(i) The Passive and Active Facebook Use Measure (PAUM; \citep{gersonPassiveActiveFacebook2017}), which assesses frequency of activities on Facebook.
The measure is factored into the usage dimensions `active social' (items including ``Posting status updates'', ``Chatting on FB chat''), `active non-social' (e.g., ``Creating or RSVPing to events'', ``Tagging photos''), and `passive' (e.g., ``Checking to see what someone is up to'', ``Browsing the newsfeed passively (without liking or commenting on anything)'').\\
(ii) The Multidimensional Facebook Intensity Scale \citep{oroszFourFacetsFacebook2016}, which assesses agreement with statements about Facebook use (e.g., ``I feel bad if I don't check my Facebook daily'') and is factored into the dimensions `persistence', `boredom', `overuse' and `self-expression'.\\
(iii) The Single-Item Self-Esteem Scale \citep{robinsMeasuringGlobalSelfesteem2001}, a commonly used measure of self-esteem in psychological research.
In addition, the survey after the intervention block included items on whether the changes affected perceived control, or how participants accessed Facebook on laptop vs smartphone.
\textbf{Interviews}:
After the study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with all participants.
Main topics probed were
(i) whether the interventions worked as expected,
(ii) how participants experienced the interventions (example question: ``When {[}changes in the participant's condition{]}, what was that like?''),
(iii) what changes participants might wish to make to Facebook to support their intended use (example question: ``If you could build any extension you wanted to change the way Facebook appears and works to make it work better for you, what might you want to do?'').
\textbf{5-month follow-up survey}:
Five months after the study, we sent participants an optional brief survey, assessing whether (and if so, how) the study had led to enduring changes in how they use Facebook.
\enlargethispage{2\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{recruitment}{%
\subsection{Recruitment}\label{recruitment}}
Participants were recruited from colleges at the University of Oxford, using a combination of mailouts, posters, and Facebook posts.
Recruitment materials described the study as a study on `Facebook distraction', investigating `which parts of Facebook distract users, and what might be done about it'.
Recruitment targeted non-first year students aged 18-30, who felt they were `often distracted by Facebook'.
Participation was compensated with a \pounds20 Amazon gift card.
\hypertarget{procedure}{%
\subsection{Procedure}\label{procedure}}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/flowchart.png} \caption{Flowchart of the study procedure}\label{fig:flowchart}
\end{figure}
\enlargethispage{2\baselineskip}
A flowchart of the study procedure is shown in Figure \ref{fig:flowchart}.\\
Participants were randomly assigned to conditions.
At an initial meeting, participants filled in the opening survey and installed two extensions on their laptop for the Chrome browser:
the ROSE extension for logging use and our extension for modifying Facebook according to their assigned condition.
Participants were instructed to use Chrome whenever they accessed Facebook on their laptop throughout the study period, and informed that the extensions would `anonymously measure how you spend time on the site' and `may change how Facebook appears at some point during the study period'.
The logging period lasted six weeks, grouped into three two-week blocks.
By the end of each block, participants were sent a survey link on Friday at 3pm and a reminder two days later.
The first block served as a baseline, with no changes made to Facebook.
In the second block, interventions were applied from Monday 9am (announced with a pop-up the first time participants visited Facebook) to Monday 9am two weeks later.
The third block served as a new baseline measurement (post-intervention) with Facebook returned to normal.
By the end of this block, a pop-up thanked participants for taking part and directed them to sign up for an interview and debriefing.
A subset of participants (n = 11) began the tracking period one week later than the others.
\hypertarget{data-pre-analysis}{%
\subsection{Data pre-analysis}\label{data-pre-analysis}}
\textbf{Quantitative data}:
On rare occasions, the ROSE extension did not correctly record entries to or exits from Facebook, which resulted in some instances where the calculated duration of active focus on a tab with Facebook was unrealistically long (more than 24 hours in one case).
To handle such instances, we excluded visits longer than one hour when analysing visit durations (144 tab visits out of a total of 120,002).\footnote{See study materials for the precise data processing workflow from raw data to reported results.}
\textbf{Interview transcription and thematic analysis}:
Two of the authors transcribed and conducted thematic analysis of all the interviews and free-text survey responses.
The recordings were iteratively transcribed and analysed using an open-coding approach.
The authors reviewed transcripts and identified emerging codes individually, and regularly discussed emerging codes.
Thematic analysis was conducted in the \href{https://www.dedoose.com}{Dedoose} software; quantitative analyses were conducted in \href{https://www.r-project.org}{R}.
\enlargethispage{4\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{results}{%
\section{Results}\label{results}}
58 students (21 male) took part.
For 8 participants, the intervention failed (on some Windows laptops, security settings prompted participants to turn the extensions off), and 1 participant deactivated his Facebook account during the study.
Survey and logging data from these participants, as well as their interview statements about the interventions, were excluded from analysis.
In addition, 2 participants deleted the ROSE extension before the debriefing - and with it their logged use - and for 1 participant the interview recording device failed.
This left us with survey data from 49 participants, logging data from 47 participants, and interview data from 57 participants for analysis.
Median interview length was 23m 51s (sd = 5m 5s).
In the following, we first report general characteristics of participants and their Facebook use, as well as introductory notes on how interventions were used and perceived. Afterwards, we report results grouped by research question.
\hypertarget{participant-characteristics}{%
\subsection{Participant characteristics}\label{participant-characteristics}}
Participants' median age was 22.5 (min = 19, max = 38) years.
90\% had had a Facebook account for six years or longer, and the median number of Facebook friends was 900 (min = 200, max = 2200).
All participants used Facebook on their laptop, and
96\% also used it on their smartphone.
On smartphone, most (78\%) used the Facebook and Messenger apps, 8\% used the web browser (instead of the Facebook app) plus the Messenger app, 6\% used only the Messenger app, and 2\% (1 participant) used only the smartphone's web browser to access Facebook.
Most participants (71\%) had never used digital self-control tools for Facebook.
Among those who had, the most commonly used tools blocked access (7 participants) or removed the newsfeed (3 participants).
3 participants currently used such tools; one used \emph{Newsfeed Eradicator} (which removes the newsfeed), another used \emph{Self-control} (which blocks social media), and the third used an ad blocker (which we did not consider a self-control tool).
\hypertarget{overall-facebook-use}{%
\subsection{Overall Facebook use}\label{overall-facebook-use}}
Across all participants and the entire study period, the median number of daily tab visits to Facebook was 23 (min = 5, max = 138).
The median break length between visits to Facebook was 69.5 seconds (min = 11, max = 445).
The median of participants' average amount of daily time spent was approximately 21 minutes (min = 4m, max = 2h 56m).
Often, a number of successive tab visits was logged within a short span of time (e.g., if participants switched back and forth between active application windows).
Following Cheng et al. \citep{chengUnderstandingPerceptionsProblematic2019}, we calculated the number of `sessions' as the number of times where the break between two visits to Facebook was longer than 60 seconds.
The median number of daily sessions on Facebook was 11 (min = 1, max = 101).
\hypertarget{intervention-use-and-perceptions}{%
\subsection{Intervention use and perceptions}\label{intervention-use-and-perceptions}}
The C\textsubscript{goal} extension did not record what participants typed when prompted for their goal, as we wanted to study effects of goal reminders without participants adapting or self-censoring from knowing responses might be read by the researchers.
However, we asked in the interviews how they had used it.
Most said they wrote short, descriptive, but generic notes for what they did (``I would type shorthand in for what I was about to do, so most of the time I would say something like `reply to messages' or just `messages' or `post something on a group' or something like that'', P4).
Some also said they occasionally wrote meaningless or `unsavoury' things when they found the goal prompt annoying or disruptive (``I think sometimes I tried to type in, like, not really proper words and it said, `give me a proper answer' and I was like `dammit'!'', P27).
In C\textsubscript{no-feed}, one participant said the newsfeed occasionally flashed on screen very briefly before being hidden by our script (``sometimes i saw like a millisecond of something and I was like `oh that's interesting, I would like to see that' but then it wasn't there'', P56).
\enlargethispage{4\baselineskip}
In C\textsubscript{control}, a couple of participants said the white background made content stand out less on their screen (``white background definitely makes it harder to\ldots{} I don't think it's easier to read\ldots{}'', P1).
Others, however, found it aesthetically pleasing (``I just liked Facebook more\ldots{} it felt more\ldots{} I mean it felt more Nordic, it wasn't grey and boring, it was white and nice\ldots{}'', P30) and wanted it to persist (``is there a way that I can keep the background white?'', P15).
\hypertarget{rq1-amount-of-use-how-do-goal-reminders-or-removing-the-newsfeed-impact-time-spent-and-visits-made}{%
\subsection{RQ1 (Amount of use): How do goal reminders or removing the newsfeed impact time spent and visits made?}\label{rq1-amount-of-use-how-do-goal-reminders-or-removing-the-newsfeed-impact-time-spent-and-visits-made}}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/mean-time-boxplot-1} \caption{Time spent and number of visits made to Facebook. Comparing baseline and intervention, goal reminders were associated with less daily time (A), fewer tab visits (B), and a trend towards shorter visits (C). Removing the newsfeed was associated with shorter visits (C). Comparing the post-intervention block to baseline, goal reminders were associated with fewer visits, suggesting an enduring effect of the intervention.}\label{fig:mean-time-boxplot}
\end{figure}
The logging data and qualitative data suggested that C\textsubscript{goal} led to less time spent and fewer and shorter visits, whereas C\textsubscript{no-feed} led to shorter visits (Figure \ref{fig:mean-time-boxplot}):
Usage logging showed that in C\textsubscript{goal}, average daily time on Facebook was significantly lower during the intervention block than in the baseline (median daily time in baseline: 27m 14s,
median in intervention: 15m 5s,
\emph{p} = 0.01, \emph{r} = 0.63, Wilcoxon signed rank test); number of daily visits declined (median number of visits in baseline = 29.4,
median in intervention = 10.6,
\emph{p} = 0.01, \emph{r} = 0.63, Wilcoxon signed rank test);
and there was a trend towards shorter visits (mean tab visit duration in baseline = 1m 25s,
mean in intervention = 1m 15s,
\emph{t}(14) = 1.96, \emph{p} = 0.07, \emph{d} = 0.51).
In C\textsubscript{no-feed}, only visit length declined significantly (mean visit length in baseline = 1m 12s, mean in intervention = 56s, \emph{t}(13) = 2.81, \emph{p} = 0.01, \emph{d} = 0.75).\footnote{Reported effect sizes are Cohen's \emph{d} for t-tests \protect\cite{cohenPowerPrimer1992} and \emph{r} for Wilcoxon signed rank tests \protect\cite{fritzEffectSizeEstimates2012}, computed with the \texttt{rstatix} package for R \protect\cite{kassambaraRstatixPipeFriendlyFramework2019}.}
\enlargethispage{4\baselineskip}
Participants' reports in the surveys and interviews agreed with the logging data:\\
In C\textsubscript{goal}, two common themes were that \textbf{the intervention reduced amount of time on Facebook on laptop} (``yeah i think I used it less and when I was using it I wasn't using it for very long, like a minute maybe'', P45\textsubscript{interview}\footnote{Subscripts indicate whether quotes are from survey free text responses or from post-study interviews, and in some cases also show participants' study condition.}; ``definitely used it a bit less'', P21\textsubscript{interview}) and that \textbf{reduced use was partly caused by the intervention being annoying/stressful} (``This programme made me annoyed thus I would spent {[}sic{]} less time on Facebook'', P32\textsubscript{survey}; ``The changes stressed me to get done with my task and then close facebook'', P40\textsubscript{survey}).
In C\textsubscript{no-feed}, participants had \textbf{mixed opinions on whether or not it reduced amount of use}.
Some felt it reduced their use (``limited overall usage'', P28\textsubscript{survey}, ``I think I used it less erm for shorter periods of time'' P55\textsubscript{interview}) but others felt it only changed their newsfeed use without affecting amount per se (``The lack of newsfeed is welcome \ldots{} Facebook usage on my laptop has not changed/barely changed'', P27\textsubscript{survey}; ``I spent a lot of time actually on facebook but messaging other people and not just looking through my wall'', P54\textsubscript{interview}).
\hypertarget{rq2-patterns-of-use-how-do-goal-reminders-or-removing-the-newsfeed-impact-patterns-of-use}{%
\subsection{RQ2 (Patterns of use): How do goal reminders or removing the newsfeed impact patterns of use?}\label{rq2-patterns-of-use-how-do-goal-reminders-or-removing-the-newsfeed-impact-patterns-of-use}}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/passive-active-plots-1} \caption{Scores on the Passive and Active Facebook Use Measure by condition. Comparing the intervention to the baseline block, removing the newsfeed reduced scores on the 'passive' dimension (A), as well as (as expected) individual items 'Browsing the newsfeed passively (without liking or commenting on anything)'s (B) and 'Browsing the newsfeed actively (liking and commenting on posts, pictures and updates)' (C). Goal reminders reduced only passive newsfeed browsing (B). Comparing post-intervention and baseline, removing the newsfeed was associated with reduced passive newsfeed browsing post-intervention (B).}\label{fig:passive-active-plots}
\end{figure}
The logging, survey, and interview data suggested that both C\textsubscript{goal} and C\textsubscript{no-feed} affected patterns of use:
C\textsubscript{goal} selectively reduced passive scrolling of the newsfeed, whereas C\textsubscript{no-feed} (as expected) reduced all behaviour related to the newsfeed (Figure \ref{fig:passive-active-plots}).
Thus, \emph{usage logging} showed that average daily scrolling declined by 42\% in C\textsubscript{goal} (comparing intervention to baseline, \emph{t}(14) = 2.39, \emph{p} = 0.03, \emph{d} = 0.62), and by 73\% in C\textsubscript{no-feed} (\emph{t}(13) = 4.15, \emph{p} = 0.001, \emph{d} = 1.11).
Moreover, in C\textsubscript{no-feed}, the number of times content was liked declined (median number of likes during baseline = 16, median during intervention = 7, \emph{p} = 0.002, \emph{r} = 0.88, Wilcoxon signed rank test).
In the \emph{surveys}, scores on the Passive and Active Facebook Use Measure dimensions showed that participants in C\textsubscript{no-feed} had substantially lower scores on `passive' use in the intervention than in the baseline block (\emph{t}(13) = 4.8, \emph{p} = 0.0003, \emph{d} = 1.28).
We explored effects on more granular elements of Facebook use by comparing baseline and intervention scores separately for each item of the PAUM.\footnote{The reported p-values are not corrected for multiple comparisons --- these should be considered exploratory results to be followed-up with confirmatory studies.}
Two items showed significant variation with condition:
``Browsing the newsfeed passively (without liking or commenting on anything)'' and ``Browsing the newsfeed actively (liking and commenting on posts, pictures and updates)'':
in C\textsubscript{goal}, participants reported less passive, but not active, browsing of the newsfeed during the intervention block compared to baseline (Passive browsing: \emph{p} = 0.03, \emph{r} = 0.57, Active browsing: \emph{p} = 1, \emph{r} = 0.05, Wilcoxon signed rank test).
In C\textsubscript{no-feed}, participants reported less passive as well as less active newsfeed browsing (Passive browsing: \emph{p} = 0.001, \emph{r} = 0.89, Active browsing: \emph{p} = 0.01, \emph{r} = 0.69, Wilcoxon signed rank test).
Moreover, participants in C\textsubscript{no-feed} showed a trend towards lower scores on ``Commenting (on statuses, wall posts, pictures, etc)'' (\emph{p} = 0.09, \emph{r} = 0.46, Wilcoxon signed rank test).
\enlargethispage{1\baselineskip}
The quantitative results were supported by the qualitative data:\\
for participants in both experimental conditions, a recurrent theme was that the interventions caused \textbf{decreased browsing of the newsfeed} (``I did feel very aware when scrolling down my newsfeed, and cut it down'', P19\textsubscript{goal\_survey}; ``definitely meant I spent less time scrolling on newsfeed on my laptop'', P55\textsubscript{no-feed\_survey}), and \textbf{increased use of Facebook for other, more deliberate purposes} (``a big facebook post or whatever not just passively\ldots{}scrolling'', P41\textsubscript{goal\_interview}; ``messaging other people and not just looking through my wall'', P54\textsubscript{no-feed\_interview}).\\
In \textbf{C\textsubscript{goal}}, participants said the effects were driven by the intervention making them \textbf{search for reasons to justify being on the site} (``Being asked why I was opening Facebook was really helpful as it made me question why'', P41\textsubscript{goal\_survey}; ``less likely to aimlessly browse, as I couldn't justify it'', P45\textsubscript{goal\_survey}). In \textbf{C\textsubscript{no-feed}}, participants said the lack of a newsfeed made them \textbf{seek out alternative options that were often more productive and deliberate} (``procrastination was more productive in that I was uhm seeking things out to read or to do that were more intentional, I suppose, and less kind of mindless which I guess the newsfeed is'', P12\textsubscript{no-feed\_interview}). (Changed patterns of use related to perceived control are reported below.)
\hypertarget{rq3-control-how-do-goal-reminders-or-removing-the-newsfeed-impact-perceived-control}{%
\subsection{RQ3 (Control): How do goal reminders or removing the newsfeed impact perceived control?}\label{rq3-control-how-do-goal-reminders-or-removing-the-newsfeed-impact-perceived-control}}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/control-on-laptop-wide.pdf} \caption{Responses from survey question on control included in the survey administered by the end of the intervention block: 'During the last two weeks, did the changes made to Facebook on your laptop affect how in control you felt over your use of the site on your laptop?'}\label{fig:control-on-laptop}
\end{figure}
The qualitative data suggested that C\textsubscript{goal} and C\textsubscript{no-feed} supported control in the sense of helping participants avoid unintended use and staying on task, but at the cost of being annoying/frustrating (C\textsubscript{goal}) or leading to fear of missing out (C\textsubscript{no-feed}).
When exploring survey responses in the Multidimensional Facebook Intensity Scale, the only of its four dimensions that showed significant differences between the baseline and intervention blocks was \emph{overuse}:
scores on this measure trended towards decrease during the intervention in all conditions
(C\textsubscript{control}: \emph{t}(18) = 2.37, \emph{p} = 0.03, \emph{d} = 0.54,
C\textsubscript{no-feed}: \emph{t}(13) = 1.99, \emph{p} = 0.07, \emph{d} = 0.53,
C\textsubscript{goal}: t(14) = 1.75, \emph{p} = 0.1, \emph{d} = 0.45),
perhaps suggesting that the study procedure across conditions made participants reflect on use.
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
When asked directly in a survey item following the intervention block whether the changes made to Facebook made them feel less or more in control of their use, C\textsubscript{control} had no impact, while participants seemed divided about the impact of the experimental conditions (Figure \ref{fig:control-on-laptop}).
The qualitative data seemed to provide the explanation:\\
In both C\textsubscript{goal} and C\textsubscript{no-feed}, it was a strong theme in the surveys and interviews that the interventions \textbf{helped participants stay on their intended task during use} (``used it less for stuff that I wasn't intending when I opened it'', P4\textsubscript{goal\_interview}; ``I'll kind of forget that I'm doing work and start scrolling so it was useful to not be able to do that'', P47\textsubscript{no-feed\_interview}).
A subtheme was that this included making it \textbf{easier to disengage from use} (``it's good to get this reminder of `hey you can get off this thing'\,'', P31\textsubscript{goal\_interview}; ``it was easier just to log out, just check what I had to and then leave facebook'' P54\textsubscript{no-feed\_interview}).
In \textbf{C\textsubscript{goal}}, participants said the reason the intervention helped them stay on task was that it \textbf{helped them snap out of automatic use}, that is, stop themselves when they engaged in unintended behaviour (``{[}the reminder{]} sort of snaps you out of that trance, you know what I mean?'', P21\textsubscript{interview}).
In \textbf{C\textsubscript{no-feed}}, participants said the intervention \textbf{stopped unintended behaviours from being triggered} in the first place (``there is nothing here {[}referring to the newsfeed{]}, like `what did I want?', you know, so then I went and contacted the person or looked at the specific thing that I wanted, not what I saw and kinda wanted at the moment'', P56\textsubscript{interview}).
At the same time, there were downsides to the interventions in that \textbf{C\textsubscript{goal} was frequently annoying or frustrating}, especially because it was \textbf{not sensitive to context} (``I use facebook just to message people and I found this extremely annoying because I need to tell someone something and then this thing comes up and I'd just get annoyed\ldots{}'' P32\textsubscript{interview}), and that \textbf{C\textsubscript{no-feed} led to fear of missing out} (``missing out on a lot because actually a lot of the ways I interact with people on facebook is things I see on the newsfeed'', P12\textsubscript{interview}).
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{cross-device-use}{%
\subsubsection{Cross-device use}\label{cross-device-use}}
When asked if the interventions changed how they used Facebook on smartphone vs laptop, 86\% of participants in C\textsubscript{goal} and 57\% in C\textsubscript{no-feed} answered `Yes' (compared to 6\% in C\textsubscript{control}, \(\chi^2\) = 65.19, \emph{p} \textless{} 0.001).
Unpacking this in the qualitative data, participants in both experimental conditions expressed that \textbf{cross-device access helped them manage the interventions' downsides, while still enjoying the positive effects} (``if I was scrolling through the newsfeed or checking events, then it wouldn't be annoying because I shouldn't be doing that on my laptop while I'm working, and if it was something like sending messages about work, contacting friends and asking for help then I could use my phone'', P40\textsubscript{goal\_interview}; ``I could reap the benefits of the newsfeed but without being sucked into it on two platforms'', P28\textsubscript{no-feed\_survey}), and so they \textbf{sometimes used their smartphone for activities on Facebook the interventions interfered with, but as a more deliberate choice} (``you're working on your laptop, uhm, and then it's very easy to just click new tab, but having to get your phone out\ldots{}'', P19\textsubscript{goal\_interview}; ``the time I did spend on my phone was more, like, focused because I was actually looking for things I missed out on on my laptop'', P55\textsubscript{no-feed\_interview}).
\hypertarget{rq4-post-intervention-effects-do-the-effects-rq1-3-of-goal-reminders-or-removing-the-newsfeed-persist-after-interventions-are-removed}{%
\subsection{RQ4 (Post-intervention effects): Do the effects (RQ1-3) of goal reminders or removing the newsfeed persist after interventions are removed?}\label{rq4-post-intervention-effects-do-the-effects-rq1-3-of-goal-reminders-or-removing-the-newsfeed-persist-after-interventions-are-removed}}
Comparing post-intervention to baseline, C\textsubscript{goal} and C\textsubscript{no-feed} were associated with some persisting effects, with participants in C\textsubscript{goal} engaging in fewer daily visits and some feeling that the intervention helped build a habit of more intentional use, and participants in C\textsubscript{no-feed} engaging in less passive newsfeed browsing.
Thus, in terms of \emph{amount of use}, participants in C\textsubscript{goal} made fewer daily visits post-intervention compared to baseline (median number of daily visits in first baseline = 29.4, median in post-intervention block = 9.8, \emph{p} = 0.003, \emph{r} = 0.72, Wilcoxon signed rank test).\\
In terms of \emph{patterns of use}, participants in C\textsubscript{no-feed} reported less passive browsing of the newsfeed post-intervention compared to baseline (\emph{p} = 0.007, \emph{r} = 0.78, Wilcoxon signed rank test).
In the interviews, some C\textsubscript{no-feed} participants expressed \textbf{feeling less attracted by the newsfeed when it returned} (``I found myself less interested in the newsfeed'', P10\textsubscript{interview}).\\
In terms of \emph{perceived control}, some participants in C\textsubscript{goal} said the intervention helped them build a persisting \textbf{habit of asking themselves what their intention of use was} when visiting the site (``from this week there is a habit being built\ldots{} asking myself why I'm opening Facebook and that habit's perpetuated more or less to this week'', P34\textsubscript{interview}, ``I'm still aware every time I open Facebook, I'm just a bit more aware every time\ldots{} it's not the reflex anymore now that I've had that experience where I have to write everything down'', P1\textsubscript{interview}).
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{rq5-self-reflection-do-the-interventions-enable-participants-to-reflect-on-their-struggles-in-ways-that-might-inform-the-design-of-more-effective-interventions}{%
\subsection{RQ5 (Self-reflection): Do the interventions enable participants to reflect on their struggles in ways that might inform the design of more effective interventions?}\label{rq5-self-reflection-do-the-interventions-enable-participants-to-reflect-on-their-struggles-in-ways-that-might-inform-the-design-of-more-effective-interventions}}
In the interviews, nearly all participants expressed feeling conflicted about Facebook, in that they found it too useful or engrained in their lives to do without, but also an ongoing source of distraction and self-control struggles.
They readily suggested a range of design solutions to mitigate self-control struggles.
The extent to which interventions were perceived as freely chosen was important to how it was received, and participants did not trust Facebook to provide solutions.
\hypertarget{struggles-with-facebook-use-1}{%
\subsubsection{Struggles with Facebook use}\label{struggles-with-facebook-use-1}}
\textbf{Too useful to do without, but source of distraction and self-control struggles}:
On the one hand, Facebook provided functionality participants could not --- or would not --- do without, especially messaging, events, groups, and pages.
On the other, Facebook was frequently distracting and caused them to waste time and feel frustrated (``I just want\ldots{}to hack myself to have the self-control to, like, not get distracted\ldots{} I literally just use it as distraction'', P42\textsubscript{no-feed}).
In particular, participants struggled to use Facebook in line with their intentions.
Main aspects included
(i) going to the site to do one thing, but then forgetting this goal (``there is one specific trigger that I need to open facebook, but because when I open the page immediately there is tons of information there, like erm notifications, and you scroll down endless streaming\ldots{} so very easily I could be distracted'', P34\textsubscript{goal}),
(ii) internal conflict between short-term gratification and longer-term goals (``might find them {[}videos{]} funny in the short term but when I think about it in the bigger picture it is a complete waste of time'', P48\textsubscript{control}), and
(iii) using Facebook purely out of habit.
In relation to the latter, emotional states, especially boredom, were mentioned as triggers of habitual use (``if I'm in that erm not very motivated state\ldots{} I'll literally just find myself opening it, without even thinking that I'm doing it'', P17\textsubscript{control}).
\hypertarget{specific-suggestions-for-design-solutions}{%
\subsubsection{Specific suggestions for design solutions}\label{specific-suggestions-for-design-solutions}}
Four themes emerged in relation to specific design suggestions for mitigating these struggles:
\textbf{Control over the newsfeed}:
More than half of participants explicitly said the newsfeed did not give them what they wanted, and they desired easy ways to filter it, limit it, or turn it off. Some had tried customising their newsfeeds, but found Facebook's means of doing so tedious and ineffective (``I browse through shit that I don't want to see and I keep on clicking on `I don't like this', `this is not interesting' and of course it keeps on adding new stuff so that doesn't solve the problem basically'', P51\textsubscript{control}).
Solution suggestions included simple ways to filter the newsfeed (``a slider to modify the amount you see people who are on your newsfeed at different percentiles'', P49\textsubscript{goal}, ``two different ones, like you could have a `friends' or like `photos' or something'', P17\textsubscript{control}), reducing the amount of information (``maybe it should be limited to like ten posts and you wouldn't get another ten until the next hour'', P45\textsubscript{goal}, ``if it was instead like blank and then you opt-in to who you actually wanna see on your newsfeed as opposed to opt-out'', P44\textsubscript{no-feed}), or being able to remove it altogether.
\textbf{Raise awareness of time spent or usage goals}:
Participants often lost track of time spent, or of their usage goals, and wanted reminders that raised awareness.
These should be easily accessible (``you wouldn't want it to be buried in settings, something that was actively shown to you I think that would be useful'', P52\textsubscript{control}), and let users judge whether their use was appropriate (``if I saw like `you've spent 2 minutes today', like `great, I've got loads of time that I can waste tomorrow because I've been good today'\,'', P6\textsubscript{goal}).
Participants in C\textsubscript{goal} said the timing and intrusiveness should be calibrated differently to the reminders they experienced in the study (``less in-your-face\ldots{} so maybe more, longer intervals and not the expanding thing\ldots{} if I could change it to longer intervals and maybe a bit less invasive then I think it would actually help'', P4\textsubscript{goal}).
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\textbf{Remove `addictive' features}:
Participants wished to remove or modify features driving them to use the site.
Specific features mentioned included notifications (``get rid of notifications\ldots{} if I didn't have things popping up every 30 minutes like `this has happened' I don't think I would think about Facebook', P6\textsubscript{goal}), viral videos, and games (``things like game suggestions and like all that sort of stuff I would definitely get rid of cause\ldots{} I don't want to play games \ldots{} `stop bugging me'\,'', P55\textsubscript{no-feed}).
One interesting suggestion was to be able to display content as text-only (``limit it to like text-only posts when you're working so that you're not bothered by videos and algorithms and photos'', P45\textsubscript{goal}).
\textbf{Flexible blocking to meet individual definitions of distraction}:
Participants suggested blocking solutions that could adapt to the type --- or timing --- of use they found distracting.
Thus, some said blocking access altogether was too inflexible to be useful (``there are useful uses of Facebook that aren't just waste of time\ldots{}a blanket, like, `don't do anything on Facebook'\ldots{} it's not practical for those people who have to use Facebook'', P41\textsubscript{goal}).
Suggestions for useful solutions included being able to block or allow specific functionality within Facebook, block access only during specific times (``sync it with a timetable, like lectures or something'', P45\textsubscript{goal}), or even automatically detect if activity is engaged with as a distraction.
\hypertarget{generic-solution-needs}{%
\subsubsection{Generic solution needs}\label{generic-solution-needs}}
\textbf{People differ in what they seek on Facebook and the design solutions they prefer:}
Some participants wanted to block or remove distractions, whereas others preferred less intrusive solutions, such as goal reminders.
Similarly, even though most participants were dissatisfied with the newsfeed, some wanted it to prioritise close ties, whereas others wanted it to prioritise pages they follow (``I wouldn't want to see anyone's posts, I would only want to see posts by things I wanted to follow, whether that's petitions or science papers'', P20\textsubscript{no-feed}).
\textbf{Interventions can `backfire' if overly intrusive and/or not freely chosen:}
Participants felt interventions could make people to rebel against them if too intrusive and/or if they did not feel in charge.
In terms of \emph{intrusiveness}, some felt blocking tools could backfire for this reason (``I feel like most people in their nature, if you have something restrictive\ldots{} then you kinda want to rebel against it'', P56\textsubscript{no-feed}).
In terms of \emph{feeling in control}, some participants suggested this could change their reaction to the very same intervention.
For example, a participant in C\textsubscript{goal} felt the goal reminders were too intrusive and led to resistance (``I got very used to clicking out of it and like, I'm just gonna stay on just out of spite'', P19\textsubscript{goal}), but thought she would react differently if she controlled the reminders herself (``it would be a bit different if it was me, if I could actually write the messages\ldots{} I think that'd help me, and knowing it was me, so it wasn't anyone else'').
\textbf{Scepticism about design solutions coming from Facebook:}
Participants did not trust Facebook to provide effective solutions for mitigating self-control struggles, because this was seen as going against their business interests (''you wonder how much they'd try to just give people the information that doesn't really reflect badly on them'', P36\textsubscript{control}; ``Facebook's interest is for people to spend more time on it 'cause then they'll get more ad revenue, so\ldots{}'', P45\textsubscript{goal}).
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{discussion}{%
\section{Discussion}\label{discussion}}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/results-table.png} \caption{Summary of main findings for RQ1-4. 'L' = logged usage data, 'S' = quantitative survey data, 'Q' = qualitative data from surveys and interviews. For quantitative data, arrows indicate direction of the effect when \emph{p} \textless{} .10, and effect sizes are marked with an asterisk when \emph{p} \textless{} .05.}\label{fig:results-table}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:results-table} summarises findings from RQ1-4:
both C\textsubscript{goal} and C\textsubscript{no-feed} reduced unintended Facebook use (RQ3), with the downside that C\textsubscript{goal} was often experienced as annoying and C\textsubscript{no-feed} made some fear missing out on information (cf. ``FOMO'', \citet{przybylskiMotivationalEmotionalBehavioral2013}).
On amount of use (RQ1), C\textsubscript{goal} reduced daily time, number of visits, and visit length, whereas C\textsubscript{no-feed} reduced visit length.
On patterns of use (RQ2), C\textsubscript{goal} and C\textsubscript{no-feed} reduced scrolling and passive newsfeed browsing, and C\textsubscript{no-feed} in addition reduced active newsfeed browsing and amount of content 'liked'.
On post-intervention effects (RQ4), C\textsubscript{goal} was associated with fewer visits and C\textsubscript{no-feed} with less passive newsfeed browsing.\\
In terms of reflections on struggles and solutions (RQ5), participants felt conflicted because Facebook was a source of distraction and self-control struggles but also vital to staying connected, i.e., too useful to avoid.
They suggested specific design solutions related to control over the newsfeed, reminders of time spent and usage goals, removing `addictive' features, and flexible blocking.
Their preferred solutions (as well as the information sought on Facebook) differed, however, and they felt that solutions might `backfire' if overly intrusive and/or not freely chosen.
We now discuss design implications as well as some of the limitations and future work.
\hypertarget{evaluating-the-experimental-interventions}{%
\subsection{Evaluating the experimental interventions}\label{evaluating-the-experimental-interventions}}
Focusing specifically on the ability to use Facebook in line with one's conscious intentions ----- which is at the very core of self-control \citep{duckworthUnpackingSelfControl2015} ----- which of our two experimental interventions is more effective?
Goal reminders and removing the newsfeed represent contrasting, and potentially complementary, strategies.
In our study, both strategies had a positive effect on perceived control and a significant effect on behaviour, with C\textsubscript{goal} helping people 'snap out' of unintended behaviour and C\textsubscript{no-feed} preventing unintended behaviours from being triggered.
While these results suggest that both interventions have potential, as an exploratory study with a restricted sample, further research is needed to draw definitive conclusions about robustness, effect sizes, and individual differences.
However, contextualising our study within related research in psychology and HCI can provide some predictions:
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
One possible approach is to apply a dual systems model of self-regulation (as called for in recent HCI research \citep{coxDesignFrictionsMindful2016, pinderDigitalBehaviourChange2018, adamsMindlessComputingDesigning2015, lyngsSelfControlCyberspaceApplying2019}).
From this perspective, \textbf{goal reminders are a `System 2' intervention} which supports conscious self-control by bringing the goals into working memory that the user wishes to control her behaviour in relation to.
\textbf{Removing the newsfeed is both a `System 1' and `System 2' intervention} which prevents unwanted automatic responses from being triggered by the newsfeed, and supports conscious self-control by preventing attention-grabbing information from crowding out working memory and making the user forget her goal.\\
A recent comprehensive review of digital behaviour change interventions found that providing information about the consequences of behaviour (a System 2 intervention) tends to be unsuccessful, despite being the most common technique.
The authors argued that targeting unconscious habit formation (System 1) should be the focus for interventions that aim at long-term efficacy \citep{pinderDigitalBehaviourChange2018}.
Similarly, psychological research has found that people who are better at self-control tend to develop habits that make their intended behaviour more reliant on automatic processes (System 1) and less on conscious in-the-moment self-control (System 2), and/or reduce their exposure to `temptations' in the first place \citep{gallaMoreResistingTemptation2015, duckworthUnpackingSelfControl2015, duckworthStitchTimeStrategic2016}.
This may be because effective System 2 control depends not only on remembering longer-term goals, but also on one's motivation to exert control relative to those goals, which can fluctuate with emotional state (cf.~participants who said they were more likely to go on Facebook when bored or unmotivated \citep{berkmanSelfControlValueBasedChoice2017, inzlichtWhySelfcontrolSeems2014, Lee2011Mining}).
We therefore expect removing the newsfeed to be more generally effective than goal reminders, because it reduces the amount of potentially distracting information and thus the need for in-the-moment conscious control.
In our study, the qualitative data did suggest that C\textsubscript{goal} fostered a habit of asking oneself about one's purpose when visiting Facebook.
However, given the above, the likelihood of effective control through a habit of goal awareness should depend on what content is available and how that content is perceived:
the more `engaging' the content, the greater the risk that goal awareness will not by itself provide sufficient control motivation \citep{berkmanSelfControlValueBasedChoice2017, ticeEmotionalDistressRegulation2001, Lee2011Mining}.
Goal reminders should therefore exhibit larger variation in effectiveness, and may be less useful for individuals whose newsfeeds contain more attention-grabbing content and/or who struggle more with inhibiting distractions in general.
This would align with recent findings that those who find Facebook more valuable are also (somewhat paradoxically) more likely to find their use problematic \citep{chengUnderstandingPerceptionsProblematic2019}.
Similarly, prior work suggest that blocking off online distractions is more effective for individual who are more susceptible to social media distractions \citep{markEffectsIndividualDifferences2018} (cf. \citep{Lee2011Mining, miriEmotionRegulation2018}).
These strategies are, however, not mutually exclusive and can be combined in effective interventions, as is already the case in many digital self-control tools (e.g., \emph{Todobook} \citep{yummyappsTodobook2019}, which removes Facebook's newsfeed and replaces it with a to-do list reminding the user of her goals).
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{designing-future-interventions}{%
\subsection{Designing future interventions}\label{designing-future-interventions}}
Broadly, participants' suggested design solutions related to either \emph{altering the information landscape} (by filtering the newsfeed, removing features driving engagement, or blocking distracting elements) or \emph{raising awareness to help navigation within this landscape} (by adding reminders of time spent or usage goals).
These suggestions could be compared to the many existing interventions on online stores, analysed using a dual systems or other model, and strategies more likely to be effective implemented and evaluated.
Here, we discuss implications of the cross-cutting theme that interventions should be experienced as freely chosen and not overly intrusive to avoid `backfiring' and motivate people to rebel against an intervention instead of being helped by it (cf. \citep{Lee2011Mining}).
Given that participants preferred different interventions --- with some wanting restrictive blocking tools --- it is not a solution to only consider, e.g., non-intrusive addition of user controls \citep{harambamRecommenderSystems2019}.
Rather, designers should keep in mind that the effectiveness of the exact same restriction or intrusion may depend on whether it is perceived by the user as self-imposed or externally imposed \citep{brookEcologicalFootprintFeedback2011, Swim2013, Bryan2010}.
An implication is that interventions should be carefully framed as being supportive of the user's personal goals (cf. \citep{Swim2013, Bandura1982}).
For example, blocking tools may wish to remind the user why their past self decided to impose restrictions on their present self \citep{duckworthWillpowerStrategiesReducing2018}.
Current examples `in the wild' include browser extensions for website blocking that display motivational quotes or task reminders when users navigate to distracting sites \citep{lyngsSelfControlCyberspaceApplying2019}.
One exciting avenue for future tools is systems that can learn the user's personal definition of distraction and in what contexts to, e.g., automatically impose or not impose limits.
This was suggested by one of our participants, and is being explored in some HCI research, e.g. \href{https://habitlab.github.io}{\emph{HabitLab}}, which rotates between interventions to discover what best helps a user limit time on specific websites \citep{Kovacs2018}.
A useful such system in the context of Facebook would not simply limit time, but rather assist the user in carrying out their goals, for example by dynamically blocking elements such as the newsfeed if the user's current goal is to create an event.
Such a hypothetical system could be highly useful, but it would be crucial to its success that its interventions were perceived by the user as being in her own interest.
In addition, it would need to \emph{really} understand the user to be functional \citep{lyngsTellMeWhat2018}, creating a possible trade-off between privacy and the `fit' of the intervention.
Facebook itself, with its deep knowledge of user behaviour, might be in the best position to explore this approach, but we note that participants in our study were deeply sceptical about Facebook's motivations and did not expect design solutions coming from Facebook to be `on their side' (cf. \citep{Creswick2019, PerezVallejos2017}).
\hypertarget{limitations-and-future-work}{%
\subsection{Limitations and future work}\label{limitations-and-future-work}}
\textbf{Confounding variables:}
A possible criticism is that less scrolling and shorter visits when removing the newsfeed occur simply because there is nothing to scroll.
We note that removing the newsfeed did not make scrolling impossible --- it remained relevant on all other pages than the home screen --- and thus scrolling remains a useful measure.
Moreover, reduced time is often an explicit goal for users, and so time spent in the face of reduced content is a relevant outcome.\\
\textbf{Lack of cross-device tracking:}
We logged Facebook use on laptop only and did not quantify effects of the interventions on cross-device use.
It is important in future work to assess potential `spillover' effects between devices when applying interventions meant to scaffold self-control \citep{kovacsConservationProcrastinationProductivity2019, lascauWhyAreCrossDevice2019, kimTechnologySupportedBehavior2017}, and so we encourage follow-up studies to explore how our methods could be supplemented by, e.g., smartphone logging.\\
\textbf{Retrospective self-report:}
In the surveys and interviews, participants retrospectively reported their experience, which is subject to recall biases \citep{Kahneman2005, redelmeierPatientsMemoriesPainful1996}.
As self-control often involves one's past self setting goals for one's future self (e.g., in blocking tools), retrospective reflection is very informative \citep{lyngsTellMeWhat2018}, but it would be interesting in future research to include experience sampling methods to assess in-the-moment experience \citep{reineckeSlackingWindingExperience2016}.\\
\textbf{Granular interventions and usage measures:}
Standard measures of Facebook use were not optimal for assessing granular interventions on laptop only:
most measures consider global use, and factor into broad dimensions.
For example, we found the Passive and Active Facebook Use Measure's overall dimensions too broad to capture the behavioural changes our interventions introduced.
We flag this as a consideration for future study designs.\\
\textbf{Sampling:}
Our sample size was restricted, to allow us to conduct interviews with all participants, and further research is required to assess whether our exploratory results will replicate (ideally in pre-registered studies with minimum sample size guided by our effect size estimates, cf. \citep{cockburnHARKNoMore2018}).
Moreover, our recruitment was restricted to university students.
Whereas previous research suggests that struggles with Facebook use are particularly pronounced in this population, and that finding effective interventions in this population therefore is important, further research is needed to assess how our findings might generalise.
Finally, our recruitment process may have selected for participants who were highly motivated to change their use of Facebook and/or who used it extensively.
Motivation is central to self-control \cite{inzlichtEmotionalFoundationsCognitive2015}, but we did not assess this explicitly.
Our participants' baseline levels of logged use, and scores on the Multidimensional Facebook Intensity Scale, were fairly average compared to previous studies (\citep{phuFacebookUseIts2019, wangContextCollegeStudents2018}, see supplementary analysis on \href{https://osf.io/qtg7h/}{osf.io/qtg7h}), future work will benefit from explicitly measuring participants' level of motivation.
\enlargethispage{3\baselineskip}
\hypertarget{conclusion}{%
\section{Conclusion}\label{conclusion}}
Imagining what success for digital self-control on Facebook and beyond looks like is not an academic exercise, but a practical and urgent concern as evidenced by the recent hearing on `Persuasive Technology' in the US senate \citep{OptimizingEngagementUnderstanding2019}, and a UK All Party Parliamentary Group's call for a `duty of care' to be established on social media companies \citep{allpartyparliamentarygrouponsocialmediaandyoungpeoplesmentalhealthandwellbeingNewFiltersManageImpact2019}.
We encourage future HCI work in this space to assess possible design interventions with open and transparent research methods, to provide the evidence base needed to assist regulators in moving towards a benevolent future \citep{GrimpeRRIHCI2014}.
\hypertarget{acknowledgements}{%
\section{Acknowledgements}\label{acknowledgements}}
We thank Felix Epp for assistance with the ROSE extension;
Michael Inzlicht and Nick Yeung for feedback on the study design;
and Nadia Flensted H\o gholt for feedback on the study design, participant communication, and design of Facebook usage visualisations.
\balance{}
\bibliographystyle{SIGCHI-Reference-Format}
|
\section{\label{sec: Introduction}Introduction}
Automatic differentiation (AD) is a technique of numerically evaluating the exact derivatives of a computation process expressed as a program \cite{BARTHOLOMEWBIGGS2000171}. Basically, the derivatives are obtained by traversing through the computation graph from end to end and iteratively applying the chain rule. Compared to numerical differentiation, it can compute the value of derivatives to machine precision. Automatic differentiation is the computation engine underlying modern deep learning applications \cite{maclaurin2015gradient, rumelhart1986learning, baydin2018automatic} and has been realized in different ways in a large variety of modern deep learning libraries, such as TensorFlow \cite{tensorflow}, autograd \cite{autograd}, PyTorch \cite{pytorch}, Jax \cite{jax} and Zygote \cite{zygote}. This fact has triggered applications of AD in much broader research areas, such as quantum optimal control \cite{jirari2009optimal, PhysRevA.95.042318}, various electron structure methods in quantum chemistry \cite{doi:10.1021/acscentsci.7b00586, doi:10.1021/ct100117s, steiger2005using} and tensor network approach of studying statistical physics and quantum many-body problems \cite{PhysRevX.9.031041}.
One of the most important characteristics of automatic differentiation is its modular nature. More specifically, this means that the programmer can control the granularity of a computation process as he wants by grouping many ``elementary'' computation steps in a single unit. Such a unit often has higher-level mathematical meanings and is called a \textit{primitive}. For example, it turns out that many subroutines in scientific computing can be differentiated as a whole unit. Typical examples include solving ordinary differential equations \cite{chen2018neural}, various linear algebra manipulations, including both simple operations such as matrix multiplication, inverse and more sophisticated ones such as full eigen-decomposition, singular value decomposition (SVD), QR decomposition, etc \cite{giles2008extended, Seeger2017AutoDifferentiatingLA}. In view of this perspective, a new programming paradigm called \emph{differentiable programming} has emerged, which lays emphasize on assembling relative simple differentiable components (i.e., primitives) together and differentiating through them by applying the chain rule iteratively. By formulating a computational task in this way, one is able to combine domain-specific knowledge and the flexibility of modern machine learning techniques.
There can be two kinds of schemes of performing AD of a computation process, namely the forward mode and the reverse mode. The difference lies on the order of evaluating and passing gradients through the computation graph using the chain rule. The forward mode AD computes the gradients along with the objective output in a single forward pass, whereas in the reverse mode version, one needs an extra backward pass in which the gradient message are passed from the output back to the input via a series of vector-Jacobian products. This approach is usually referred to as the back-propagation algorithm \cite{rumelhart1986learning} in the context of deep learning. It is also favored and more commonly adopted in applications of physics and deep learning than the forward mode, due to the fact that the dimension of the output is often much smaller than input. For the same reason, we will almost exclusively focus on reverse mode AD in this paper.
Since primitives are the building blocks of a differentiable program, the central task of differentiable programming lies on AD of the primitives. To be more specific, in a typical computation process, one starts from some input parameters, say, $\theta$, and computes a series of intermediate results following the topological order characterized by the computation graph, until reaching the final outcome $\mathcal{L}$, which is usually assumed to be a scalar valued loss function. Consider a certain primitive generally described by a function $O = O(I)$, where $O$ and $I$ denote the outputs and inputs, respectively. It is convenient to introduce the \emph{adjoint} of a certain variable $T$ as $\overline{T} \equiv \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial T}$. Then in reverse mode AD, one is typically concerned with the adjoint $\overline{I}$ of inputs as a function of the adjoint $\overline{O}$ of outputs. This is sometimes referred to as the \emph{adjoint relation} of the primitive and can be written in an abstract mathematical form as follows:
\begin{equation}
\overline{I} \equiv \overline{I}(\overline{O}; I, O) = \overline{O} \frac{\partial O}{\partial I}.
\end{equation}
Notice that this function depends linearly on $\overline{O}$, as indicated by the linear approximation nature of derivatives. Once this function is determined for all the primitives involved in a computation process, one can then use the chain rule to ``glue'' them together and compute the desired gradient $\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \theta}$ by traversing through the computation graph in the reverse direction.
In this paper, we will concentrate on the automatic differentiation of dominant eigensolver, which is essentially the process of eigen-decomposition except that only a small number of eigenvalues and eigenvectors are desired. Eigen-decomposition plays a fundamental role in quantum physics and chemistry, and is related to many practical methods such as exact diagonalization, full configuration interaction and Hartree-Fock method \cite{doi:10.1021/acscentsci.7b00586}; it has also been used in conjunction with neural network architectures in various deep learning algorithms \cite{huang2018decorrelated, Ionescu2015, Dang2020, Zanfir_2018_CVPR, DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1906-09023}; furthermore, it has close and intrinsic relation with SVD, and they have been widely used in various tensor network algorithms \cite{ORUS2014117, SCHOLLWOCK201196, hasik2019towards, PhysRevX.9.031041}. In many of these applications, usually only a small number of eigenvalues and eigenvectors are of practical interest, despite the fact that the matrix dimension is possibly quite large. In the context of quantum physics and chemistry, for example, this typically means that one is concerned only about the ground state or several low-lying excited states. The situation is also similar in many other settings, including deep learning applications \cite{Zanfir_2018_CVPR, DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1906-09023} and tensor network algorithms \cite{ORUS2014117, SCHOLLWOCK201196}. In this respect, since the computational cost of full eigen-decomposition becomes fairly high when the matrix dimension is large, one would usually resort to more efficient numerical algorithms of dominant eigen-decomposition, such as power iteration or Lanczos method. These algorithms are particularly useful when the matrix to be diagonalized has certain inner structures (e.g., sparse), which is often the case in practical applications.
However, there emerges an additional difficulty when trying to implement the dominant eigen-decomposition process in a differentiable way. To get an intuitive understanding, consider a quantum system described by a Hamiltonian $H$, which depends on a certain parameter $\theta$. To obtain the derivative of the ground state $\Ket{\psi_0}$ with respect to $\theta$, the first order perturbation theory gives
\begin{equation}
\Ket{\frac{\partial \psi_0}{\partial \theta}} = \sum_{n \neq 0} \frac{\Braket{\psi_n | \frac{\partial H}{\partial \theta} | \psi_0}}{E_0 - E_n} \Ket{\psi_n}.
\label{eq: 1st order correction of ground state}
\end{equation}
where $E_n$, $\Ket{\psi_n}$ are the energy eigenvalues and eigenstates, respectively. Due to explicit presence of the full eigen-spectrum in \Eq{eq: 1st order correction of ground state}, the computation of full eigen-decomposition is inevitable in this direct approach, which is inefficient and even intractable when the dimension of the Hilbert space is large. One way around this problem is proposed in Ref.~\cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1906-09023}, which is based on the power iteration algorithm of dominant eigensolver. Since the operations involved in the power iteration procedure are very simple (mainly matrix multiplications), it can be easily differentiated without any reference to the full spectrum. However, this approach also has some drawbacks. The convergence rate of power iteration can be a problem in practice and has to be analyzed case by case. In addition, although possible in principle, it is often tedious and impractical to obtain good estimate of other eigenvalues and eigenvectors than the dominant one through power iteration, which makes the approach inflexible to various user needs.
Basically, we need a way to effectively separate the information about the desired eigenvalues and eigenvectors out of the full spectrum. In this paper, this problem is tackled by two different methods, which allow us to construct a high-level primitive that correctly handles the AD of dominant eigensolver without direct access to the full spectrum. The first one, called the adjoint method, can yield the relevant formulas straightforwardly in a full-spectrum-free form. On the other hand, the second method reflects the modular nature of differentiable programming paradigm by wrapping the process of full eigen-decomposition within the dominant one and utilizing the results of the former in the latter. Typically, the results obtained by this method still have explicit dependence on the full spectrum. Nevertheless, these two methods are totally equivalent, and by making a careful contrast between them, one can get a clear understanding of how the goal of separating the desired information out of the full spectrum is achieved behind the scene. Even more ideally, it turns out that the obtained dominant eigensolver primitive could be differentiated again in a convenient way, which in turn makes it support in principle arbitrarily higher order derivatives of the dominant eigen-decomposition process. These results are very useful in practice, since they enable one to share the efficiency of dominant eigen-decomposition algorithms and various advantages of the differentiable programming paradigm discussed above at the same time.
The organization of this paper is as follows. In Sec. \ref{sec: Formulations}, the automatic differentiation of dominant eigensolver is studied in a typical setting. The mechanisms that effectively separate the desired information out of the full spectrum as well as support taking arbitrarily order of derivatives are carefully explained. In Sec. \ref{sec: Applications}, we demonstrate applications of the techniques by studying the ground state properties of 1D transverse field Ising model via two different approaches, namely exact diagonalization and gradient-based optimization of uniform matrix product states. The concluding remarks are given in Sec. \ref{sec: Discussions}. Our code implementation is publicly available~\cite{github}.
\section{\label{sec: Formulations}Formulations}
For the sake of simplicity and clarity, let $A$ be an $N$-dimensional real square matrix, and we are concerned with only one certain eigenvalue $\lambda$ and corresponding left and right eigenvector $\vec{l}$, $\vec{r}$ of $A$, respectively. In other words, we have
\begin{equation}
\vec{l}^T A = \lambda \vec{l}^T, \quad A \vec{r} = \lambda \vec{r}, \quad \vec{l}^T \vec{r} = 1.
\label{eq: relation between A, l, r}
\end{equation}
where we have imposed the conventional normalization condition. Note here that $A$ is generally non-symmetric, and we only assume that $A$ is diagonalizable and the desired eigenvalue $\lambda$ is non-degenerate. Since the set of non-diagonalizable matrices has measure zero, these are not strong restrictions in practice. In reverse mode AD, what we need is the adjoint relation $\overline{A} = \overline{A}(\overline{\lambda}, \overline{\vec{l}}, \overline{\vec{r}})$ as discussed in Sec. \ref{sec: Introduction}. Below we will adopt two different approaches to this task, namely the adjoint method and the more ``traditional'' approach based on the full eigen-decomposition process, and explain the intimate relation between them.
\subsection{\label{sec: the adjoint method}The adjoint method}
The adjoint method \cite{johnson2012notes} is a general way of deriving backward pass of various computation processes. To demonstrate the basic ideas, consider a simple yet generic setting as follows. Let $\vec{\theta} = (\theta_1, \cdots, \theta_P)$ be a $P$-dimensional input vector of parameters to be differentiated, and the output $\vec{x} = (x_1, \cdots, x_M)^T$ is an $M$-dimensional column vector. $\vec{x}$ is implicitly dependent on $\vec{\theta}$ through $M$ (generally nonlinear) equations of the form $f_i(\vec{x}, \vec{\theta}) = 0$, where $i$ ranges from $1$ to $M$.
To derive the adjoint relation in the framework of reverse mode AD, one needs to compute the following vector-Jacobian product:
\begin{equation}
\overline{\theta_\mu} = \overline{\vec{x}}^T \frac{\partial \vec{x}}{\partial \theta_\mu}, \quad \forall \mu = 1, \cdots, P.
\label{eq: adjointp}
\end{equation}
where the $M$-dimensional column vector $\frac{\partial \vec{x}}{\partial \theta_\mu}$ is determined by the set of equations
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial f}{\partial \theta_\mu} +
\frac{\partial f}{\partial \vec{x}} \frac{\partial \vec{x}}{\partial \theta_\mu} = 0.
\label{eq: partialxpartialp}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial f}{\partial \theta_\mu} =
\begin{pmatrix}
\frac{\partial f_1}{\partial \theta_\mu} \\ \vdots \\
\frac{\partial f_M}{\partial \theta_\mu}
\end{pmatrix}, \quad
\frac{\partial f}{\partial \vec{x}} =
\begin{pmatrix}
\text{---} & \frac{\partial f_1}{\partial \vec{x}} & \text{---} \\
& \vdots \\
\text{---} & \frac{\partial f_M}{\partial \vec{x}} & \text{---}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Assuming the matrix $\frac{\partial f}{\partial \vec{x}}$ is invertible, one can solve for $\frac{\partial \vec{x}}{\partial \theta_\mu}$ directly from \Eq{eq: partialxpartialp} , then substitute it back to \Eq{eq: adjointp} to obtain the adjoint relation:
\begin{align}
\overline{\theta_\mu} &= -\overline{\vec{x}}^T \left( \frac{\partial f}{\partial \vec{x}} \right)^{-1} \frac{\partial f}{\partial \theta_\mu} \nonumber \\
&= -\vec{\eta}^T \frac{\partial f}{\partial \theta_\mu}.
\quad \forall \mu = 1, \cdots, P.
\label{eq: adjointp in general case}
\end{align}
where in the second line we have defined a column vector $\vec{\eta}$ determined by the so-called \emph{adjoint equation}:
\begin{equation}
\left( \frac{\partial f}{\partial \vec{x}} \right)^T \vec{\eta} = \overline{\vec{x}}.
\label{eq: general adjoint equation}
\end{equation}
In this way, we have also rearranged the order of matrix multiplication to avoid explicitly solving $\frac{\partial \vec{x}}{\partial \theta_\mu}$ appearing in \Eq{eq: adjointp}. This rearrangement is the core idea of the adjoint method.
Specifically, in the settings of dominant eigen-decomposition described above, the $N$-dimensional matrix $A = A(\vec{\theta})$ depends on some parameters $\vec{\theta}$, and the output vector is effectively $(2N + 1)$-dimensional, including both the left/right eigenvectors $\vec{l}, \vec{r}$ and the scalar eigenvalue $\lambda$. The $2N + 1$ equations $f_i(\vec{l}, \vec{r}, \lambda, \vec{\theta}) = 0$ connecting the inputs and outputs are given by
\begin{equation}
f_i(\vec{l}, \vec{r}, \lambda, \vec{\theta}) =
\begin{cases}
(A - \lambda I)_i^T \vec{l}. & i = 1, \cdots, N. \\
(A^T - \lambda I)_i^T \vec{r}. & i = N+1, \cdots, 2N. \\
\vec{l}^T \vec{r} - 1. & i = 0.
\end{cases}
\label{eq: fs}
\end{equation}
where the subscript $i$ in an expression $M_i$ denotes the $i$th column of the matrix $M$, and the equation $f_0(\vec{l}, \vec{r}, \lambda, \vec{\theta}) = 0$ imposes the normalization constraint.
Making use of \Eq{eq: fs}, one can solve for $\vec{\eta}$ in \Eq{eq: general adjoint equation}, then substitute it back to \Eq{eq: adjointp in general case} to obtain the desired expression of $\overline{\theta_\mu}$ for the dominant eigensolver. The derivation is fairly straightforward, and we refer the reader to Appendix \ref{appendix: adjoint method} for details. The final results are:
\begin{equation}
\overline{\theta_\mu} = \overline{\lambda} \vec{l}^T \frac{\partial A}{\partial \theta_\mu} \vec{r}
-\vec{l}^T \frac{\partial A}{\partial \theta_\mu} \vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}}
-\vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}}^T \frac{\partial A}{\partial \theta_\mu} \vec{r}.
\label{eq: adjointp for dominant eigen-decomposition}
\end{equation}
where the vectors $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}}$ and $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}}$ satisfy the linear systems
\begin{subequations}
\begin{gather}
(A - \lambda I) \vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}} = (1 - \vec{r}\vec{l}^T) \overline{\vec{l}}, \quad \vec{l}^T \vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}} = 0.
\label{eq: lambda_0_l} \\
(A^T - \lambda I) \vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}} = (1 - \vec{l}\vec{r}^T) \overline{\vec{r}}, \quad \vec{r}^T \vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}} = 0.
\label{eq: lambda_0_r}
\end{gather}
\label{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}
\end{subequations}
respectively. These linear systems are \emph{low-rank} in the sense that the coefficient matrices $A - \lambda I$ and $A^T - \lambda I$ are singular. Specifically, under our assumption that the eigenvalue $\lambda$ is non-degenerate, they have rank $N - 1$. Nevertheless, the solution for $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}}$($\vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}}$) is unique, because the singular matrix $A - \lambda I$($A^T - \lambda I$), when represented in the $(N - 1)$-dimensional subspace spanned by the $N - 1$ right(left) eigenvectors other than $\vec{r}$($\vec{l}$), is effectively non-singular. See also the discussions in Appendix \ref{appendix: adjoint method}.
\Eq{eq: adjointp for dominant eigen-decomposition} can be further simplified. In fact, we can ``strip'' the parameter $\vec{\theta}$ out of the primitive and obtain the neater expression for $\overline{A}$ by taking account of the fact that $\overline{\theta_\mu} = \textrm{Tr}\left(\overline{A}^T \frac{\partial A}{\partial \theta_\mu}\right)$. This way, we finally write the adjoint relation of dominant eigensolver as follows:
\begin{equation}
\overline{A} = \overline{\lambda} \vec{l} \vec{r}^T - \vec{l} \vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}}^T - \vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}} \vec{r}^T.
\label{eq: adjoint of general dominant eigen-decomposition}
\end{equation}
Fairly simple.
From Eqs. (\ref{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}) and (\ref{eq: adjoint of general dominant eigen-decomposition}), one can see that the adjoint of $A$ needs only the desired eigenvalue $\lambda$ and corresponding eigenvectors $\vec{l}$, $\vec{r}$ without explicit reference to the full spectrum. In other words, we have successfully stripped out the information we want in the backward pass of dominant eigensolver, at the price of solving two somewhat nontrivial low-rank linear systems shown in \Eq{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}. In a typical implementation, the forward pass can be accomplished by using Lanczos or other dominant eigen-decomposition algorithms, while the low-rank linear systems (\ref{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}) involved in the backward pass can be solved efficiently using Krylov-based iterative algorithms such as biconjugate gradient and generalized minimal residual methods, among others. It's worth noting that both the dominant eigensolvers in the forward pass and the iterative linear system solvers in the backward pass do not need to know each individual entries of the matrix $A$; they only require the computation of matrix-vector products $A\vec{v}$ with an arbitrary vector $\vec{v}$. In many applications, this computation can be fairly efficient with the help of certain inner structures of $A$, even though the size of $A$ can be quite large.
\subsection{\label{sec: the special case where A is symmetric} Special case: $A$ is symmetric}
In this section, we will briefly discuss the special and important case where the real matrix $A$ to be diagonalized is symmetric. This case is particularly relevant to applications in quantum physics. There, all physical observables, including the Hamiltonian, are represented by Hermitian operators, thus also symmetric when all the matrix elements involved are real.
When $A$ is real symmetric, the desired left eigenvector is equal to the corresponding right eigenvector, that is, $\vec{l} = \vec{r} \equiv \vec{v}$. To obtain the adjoint of $A$ as a function of $\overline{\lambda}$ and $\overline{\vec{v}}$ in this special case, one can imitate the derivation in Sec. \ref{sec: the adjoint method} based on the adjoint method and obtain
\begin{gather}
\overline{A} = (\overline{\lambda} \vec{v} - \vec{\xi}) \vec{v}^T, \quad \textrm{where $\vec{\xi}$ satisfies} \nonumber \\
(A - \lambda I) \vec{\xi} = (1 - \vec{v} \vec{v}^T) \overline{\vec{v}}, \quad \vec{v}^T \vec{\xi} = 0.
\label{eq: adjoint of symmetric dominant eigen-decomposition}
\end{gather}
This result can also be easily obtained from the general formulas (\ref{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}) and (\ref{eq: adjoint of general dominant eigen-decomposition}). To do this, simply let the adjoint $\overline{\vec{l}}$ be zero, and $\overline{\vec{r}}$ be equal to $\overline{\vec{v}}$. The reason is that only the right eigenvector $\vec{r}$ is needed for downstream calculations, while the left eigenvector $\vec{l}$, which is equal to $\vec{r}$ in this case, acts as a piece of redundant information that doesn't affect the downstream results at all. It is then easy to see that the vector $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}}$ in \Eq{eq: lambda_0_l} vanishes, and the general formula (\ref{eq: adjoint of general dominant eigen-decomposition}) immediately reduces to the special form (\ref{eq: adjoint of symmetric dominant eigen-decomposition}).
It's instructive to furthermore inspect the physical implications of the adjoint relation (\ref{eq: adjoint of symmetric dominant eigen-decomposition}). Let again the matrix $A$ depend on one certain parameter, say, $\theta$. Then the adjoint of $\theta$ reads
\begin{align}
\overline{\theta} &\equiv \textrm{Tr} \left( \overline{A}^T \frac{\partial A}{\partial \theta} \right) \nonumber \\
&= \overline{\lambda} \vec{v}^T \frac{\partial A}{\partial \theta} \vec{v} - \vec{\xi}^T \frac{\partial A}{\partial \theta} \vec{v}.
\label{eq: adjointp in symmetric case}
\end{align}
Note the two terms correspond to dependence of the eigenvalue $\lambda$ and eigenvector $\vec{v}$ on $\theta$, respectively. In particular, if only the eigenvalue $\lambda$ is used for downstream computations, then the second term vanishes. For clarity, one could just consider the case where the loss $\mathcal{L} \equiv \lambda$. Thus we have $\overline{\lambda} = 1$, and \Eq{eq: adjointp in symmetric case} reduces to
\begin{equation}
\overline{\theta} \equiv \frac{\partial \lambda}{\partial \theta} = \vec{v}^T \frac{\partial A}{\partial \theta} \vec{v}.
\end{equation}
This is the celebrated Hellmann-Feynman theorem \cite{PhysRev.56.340}, which is equivalent to the result of first order energy correction in perturbation theory.
However, in the general case where the eigenvector also has nontrivial effect on the computation process, the second term in \Eq{eq: adjointp in symmetric case} is nonzero, and the formulation presented above turns out to be very useful.
\subsection{\label{sec: relation with the full eigen-decomposition approach}Relation with the full eigen-decomposition approach}
In Sec. \ref{sec: the adjoint method}, the automatic differentiation of dominant eigensolver has been presented straightforwardly in a full-spectrum-free form through the adjoint method. To figure out how this is achieved, it is instructive to change to another perspective by studying the relation between the adjoint method described above and the traditional approach based on full eigen-decomposition. The point is that we can wrap the process of full eigen-decomposition within the dominant one and utilize the results of the former formulation in the latter, as illustrated in \Fig{fig: wrap dominant eigen-decomposition}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[page=1, width=0.85\columnwidth]{figs/computation_graph.pdf}
\caption{Studying the automatic differentiation of dominant eigensolver for a general real matrix $A$ by wrapping within it the corresponding full eigen-decomposition process. The internal data nodes $D$, $U$ and $V$, which are the outputs of the full eigen-decompostion process, act as a link for deriving desired results from already known ones. See text for more details, especially \Eq{eq: adjointD adjointU adjointalpha adjointx} for how this is achieved in reverse mode AD. It's worth noting that these inner structures are invisible if one treats the dominant eigensolver as a whole unit, which reflects the flexibility of the modular nature of differentiable programming paradigm.}
\label{fig: wrap dominant eigen-decomposition}
\end{figure}
For clarity and without loss of generality, let $\lambda$ and $\vec{l}$, $\vec{r}$ be the ``first'' eigenvalue and eigenvectors of the $N$-dimensional matrix $A$, respectively. Recalling the assumption that $A$ is diagonalizable, we can write $V^T A U = D$, where
\begin{gather}
D = \begin{pmatrix}
\lambda \\
& \lambda_2 \\
& & \ddots \\
& & & \lambda_N
\end{pmatrix},
U = \begin{pmatrix}
\vert & \vert & & \vert \\
\vec{r} & \vec{r}_2 & \cdots & \vec{r}_N \\
\vert & \vert & & \vert
\end{pmatrix}, \nonumber \\
V^T \equiv U^{-1} = \begin{pmatrix}
\text{---} & \vec{l}^T & \text{---} \\
\text{---} & \vec{l}_2^T & \text{---} \\
& \vdots \\
\text{---} & \vec{l}_N^T & \text{---}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{gather}
That is, the columns of $U$ and rows of $U^{-1}$ correspond to the basis consisting of the $N$ right eigenvectors $(\vec{r}, \vec{r}_2, \cdots, \vec{r}_N)$ and left eigenvectors $(\vec{l}, \vec{l}_2, \cdots, \vec{l}_N)$, respectively.
In the framework of reverse mode AD, the adjoint relation of the full eigen-decomposition process is pretty standard \cite{giles2008extended} and reads
\begin{equation}
\overline{A} = V \left[\overline{D} \circ I + (U^T \overline{U} - \overline{V}^T V) \circ F \right] U^T.
\label{eq: full diagonalization AD}
\end{equation}
where $F$ is an anti-symmetric matrix with off-diagonal elements $F_{ij} = (\lambda_j - \lambda_i)^{-1}$ and $\circ$ denotes the Hadamard element-wise product. Here comes the key point. Since only $\lambda$, $\vec{l}$ and $\vec{r}$ will be used for downstream computations, the procedure of wrapping the process of full eigen-decomposition within the dominant one means that the adjoints of $D$, $U$ and $V$ should take the following form:
\begin{gather}
\overline{D} \circ I =
\begin{pmatrix}
\overline{\lambda} \\
& 0 \\
& & \ddots \\
& & & 0
\end{pmatrix},
\overline{U} =
\begin{pmatrix}
\begin{array}{c|}
\vert \\
\overline{\vec{r}} \\
\vert
\end{array} &
\begin{array}{ccc}
\\ & \Huge{0} & \\ &
\end{array}
\end{pmatrix},
\overline{V} =
\begin{pmatrix}
\begin{array}{c|}
\vert \\
\overline{\vec{l}} \\
\vert
\end{array} &
\begin{array}{ccc}
\\ & \Huge{0} & \\ &
\end{array}
\end{pmatrix}.
\label{eq: adjointD adjointU adjointalpha adjointx}
\end{gather}
Substituting \Eq{eq: adjointD adjointU adjointalpha adjointx} into \Eq{eq: full diagonalization AD} yields
\begin{equation}
\overline{A} = \overline{\lambda} \vec{l} \vec{r}^T - \sum_{i=2}^N c_i^{(\vec{r})} \vec{l}_i \vec{r}^T
- \sum_{i=2}^N c_i^{(\vec{l})} \vec{l} \vec{r}_i^T.
\label{eq: adjoint of dominant eigen-decomposition another form}
\end{equation}
where we have introduced the quantities $c_i^{(\vec{r})} \equiv \frac{1}{\lambda_i - \lambda} \vec{r}_i^T \overline{\vec{r}}$ and $c_i^{(\vec{l})} \equiv \frac{1}{\lambda_i - \lambda} \vec{l}_i^T \overline{\vec{l}}, \forall i = 2, \cdots, N$. This formula looks quite similar to the earlier result (\ref{eq: adjoint of general dominant eigen-decomposition}) obtained by the adjoint method. Actually they are \emph{identically the same}. This can be seen by expanding the vectors $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}}$ and $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}}$ in \Eq{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r} in the complete basis $(\vec{r}, \vec{r}_2, \cdots, \vec{r}_N)$ and $(\vec{l}, \vec{l}_2, \cdots, \vec{l}_N)$, respectively. One can easily see that the quantities $c_i^{(\vec{l})}$ and $c_i^{(\vec{r})}$ defined above are exactly the linear combination coefficients of $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}}$ and $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}}$ in these two basis. In other words, we have
\begin{equation}
\vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}} = \sum_{i=2}^N c_i^{(\vec{l})} \vec{r}_i, \quad
\vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}} = \sum_{i=2}^N c_i^{(\vec{r})} \vec{l}_i.
\end{equation}
Plugging these relations back into \Eq{eq: adjoint of dominant eigen-decomposition another form} clearly reproduces the earlier result (\ref{eq: adjoint of general dominant eigen-decomposition}).
The observation above truely reveals the way in which the full spectrum information appearing explicitly in the original full eigen-decomposition approach can be effectively eliminated and replaced by the vectors $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{l}}$, $\vec{\xi}_{\vec{r}}$ characterized in \Eq{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}. The fact that the final results of the two approaches are identically the same is not surprising, but the ``native'' representations are indeed different from a practical point of view. Specifically, the formulation based on the adjoint method clearly reveals the feasibility of constructing a valid dominant eigensolver primitive without any access to the full spectrum, while the approach based on full eigen-decomposition helps to furthermore clarify how this is achieved behind the scene.
\subsection{\label{sec: towards higher order derivatives}Towards higher order derivatives}
In this section, we study the possibility of performing higher order derivatives of the dominant eigensolver primitive. To do this, we have to investigate the backward pass of the low-rank linear system solvers described in \Eq{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}, since this is the only non-trivial part in the backward pass of the primitive. It's instructive to study the simpler full-rank case first, where the coefficient matrix is non-singular. Specifically, Let $\vec{x}$ be the unique solution to the full-rank linear system $A \vec{x} = \vec{b}$, where $A$ is a non-singular matrix and $\vec{b}$ is an arbitrarily chosen vector. Since $A^{-1}$ exists, the derivation of the backward pass (i.e., the adjoint relation) is fairly straightforward. The final results are~\cite{giles2008extended}:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{gather}
\textrm{$\overline{\vec{b}}$ satisfies } A \overline{\vec{b}} = \overline{\vec{x}}, \\
\overline{A} = - \overline{\vec{b}} \vec{x}^T.
\end{gather}
\label{eq: backward pass of full-rank linear system solver}
\end{subequations}
One can see that the backward pass of full-rank linear system solver involves solving another full-rank linear system. This observation is insightful, and as we will see, the similar conclusion can be drawn for the low-rank case.
The derivation for the backward pass of low-rank linear system solver is more subtle. For current purposes, it suffices to consider the following settings. Let $A$ be an $N$-dimensional real (diagonalizable) matrix of rank $N - 1$. This indicates that $A$ has $N - 1$ (right) eigenvectors $\vec{v}_2, \cdots, \vec{v}_N$ of nonzero eigenvalues $\lambda_2, \cdots, \lambda_N$, respectively, other than a single (right) eigenvector $\vec{v}$ with eigenvalue zero. For simplicity, we will restrict ourselves to the case where $A$ is symmetric, hence the left and right eigenvectors coincide. The derivation for the general case is pretty similar. Letting $\vec{b}$ be an arbitrary vector lying in the $(N - 1)$-dimensional subspace spanned by $\vec{v}_2, \cdots, \vec{v}_N$, the goal of the computation process is the unique solution for $\vec{x}$ of the following equations:
\begin{equation}
A \vec{x} = \vec{b}, \quad \vec{v}^T \vec{x} = 0.
\label{eq: low-rank linear system problem}
\end{equation}
These settings can fit properly into the backward pass of the low-rank linear system appearing in, say, \Eq{eq: adjoint of symmetric dominant eigen-decomposition}, under the correspondence $A \rightarrow A - \lambda I, \vec{x} \rightarrow \vec{\xi}, \vec{b} \rightarrow (1 - \vec{v} \vec{v}^T) \overline{\vec{v}}, \vec{v} \rightarrow \vec{v}$.
Rigorously speaking, the information about the eigenvector $\vec{v}$ of eigenvalue zero is contained in the matrix $A$. However this information is somewhat hard to extract directly, and in practice one finds it more convenient to treat $\vec{v}$ as an independent input to the process. To derive the adjoint relations for the low-rank linear system solver under these settings, one way is to manually perform decomposition of relevant quantities into the two orthogonal subspaces spanned by $\vec{v}$ alone and other $N-1$ eigenvectors of nonzero eigenvalues, respectively. This makes it more convenient to take advantage of the fact that $A$ is effectively invertible in the latter subspace. For more details, see Appendix \ref{appendix: low-rank linear system solver}. The final results are:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{gather}
\textrm{$\overline{\vec{b}}$ satisfies }A \overline{\vec{b}} = (1 - \vec{v} \vec{v}^T) \overline{\vec{x}}, \quad
\vec{v}^T \overline{\vec{b}} = 0.
\label{eq: another low-rank linear system} \\
\overline{A} = - \overline{\vec{b}} \vec{x}^T. \\
\overline{\vec{v}} = - \vec{x} \vec{v}^T \overline{\vec{x}}.
\end{gather}
\label{eq: backward pass of low-rank linear system solver}
\end{subequations}
Notice the high similarity between \Eq{eq: backward pass of low-rank linear system solver} and the corresponding results (\ref{eq: backward pass of full-rank linear system solver}) for the full-rank case. Just as in the full-rank case, the backward pass of the low-rank linear system solver involves solving another low-rank linear system (\ref{eq: another low-rank linear system}) of the same kind. This observation is crucial and satisfying for the purposes of this paper. It implies that the backward pass of dominant eigensolver, which involves solving a low-rank linear system, can be conveniently differentiated itself by solving another low-rank linear system of the same kind, which in turn can be differentiated again, and so on. In other words, the formulation presented above allows us to compute in principle arbitrarily higher order derivatives of the dominant eigen-decomposition process in the framework of (reverse mode) automatic differentiation.
\section{\label{sec: Applications}Applications}
In this section, we demonstrate the use of dominant eigensolver primitive in action by two examples. Our code implementation \cite{github} is based on PyTorch \cite{pytorch}, a deep learning library that supports reverse mode AD through dynamic construction of computation graphs \cite{NIPS2019_9015}. In addition, note that PyTorch supports computing high order derivatives and, thanks to the modular nature of differentiable programming, has good flexibility and extensibility by allowing users to customize their own primitives. These features turns out to be very convenient for the purposes of this work.
Both of the examples are concentrated on the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ transverse field Ising model (TFIM) on a $1$-dimensional lattice. The Hamiltonian reads:
\begin{equation}
H = - \sum_{i=0}^{N-1} \left( g \sigma_i^x + \sigma_i^z \sigma_{i+1}^z \right).
\label{eq: TFIM}
\end{equation}
where $g$ is a non-negative parameter characterizing the strength of the transverse magnetic field. When $g = 0$, the model reduces to the ``Ising limit'', and the spins in the ground state are perfectly aligned along the $z$ direction. When $g > 0$, on the other hand, the transverse field term will disrupt the magnetic order by introducing flipping of the spins. This model is a well-known prototype of the study of quantum phase transitions \cite{sachdev_2011}. Specifically, there is a transition point at $g = 1$ in thermodynamic limit, where the energy gap between ground state and the lowest excited state, which characterizes the energy scale of fluctuations at zero temperature for a gapped Hamiltonian like \Eq{eq: TFIM}, vanishes through a power law. Furthermore, this behavior can be characterized by a critical exponent, which usually turns out to be universal, that is, independent of most of the microscopic details of the system.
Below we give a brief study of the model through the approach of exact diagonalization and variational optimization of matrix product states, respectively, using the formulations developed in Sec. \ref{sec: Formulations}.
\subsection{\label{sec: exact diagonalization} Identify the transition point by differentiating through exact diagonalization}
We first study the ground state properties of the model through exact diagonalization, specifically the behavior near the transition point. As indicated above, one of the main characterization of quantum phase transition (of gapped systems) is the vanishing of the gap between ground state and the lowest excited state in thermodynamic limit. There has been various kind of quantities proposed in practice to indicate the emergence of such behavior, and we have chosen two of them for the purpose of demonstration.
\subsubsection{\label{subsec: 2nd order derivative of the ground state energy}$2$nd order derivative of the ground state energy}
Computing the second order derivative of ground state energy (per site) $\frac{\partial^2 E_0}{\partial g^2}$ with respect to the parameter $g$ is a convenient way to characterize the quantum phase transition. In fact, the vanishing gap at the transition point implies the divergence of this quantity, which can be easily seen from the expression of $2$nd order perturbation theory as follows:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial^2 E_0}{\partial g^2} = \sum_{n \neq 0} \frac{\left| \Braket{\psi_n | h^\prime | \psi_0}\right|^2}{E_0 - E_n}.
\label{eq: d2E0}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
h^\prime \equiv \frac{1}{N} \frac{\partial H(g)}{\partial g} = - \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=0}^{N-1} \sigma_i^x.
\end{equation}
is the ``perturbation Hamiltonian (per site)'', and $H(g) \ket{\psi_n(g)} = N E_n(g) \ket{\psi_n(g)}$, with $n=0$ corresponding to the ground state.
Note that as discussed in Sec. \ref{sec: the special case where A is symmetric}, the computation of the $1$st order derivative of $E_0$ is more or less trivial and essentially equivalent to the Hellmann-Feynman theorem. Specifically, we have in current case
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial E_0}{\partial g} = \Braket{\psi_0 | h^\prime | \psi_0}.
\label{eq: 1st derivative of E0}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, it is the computation of the $2$nd (and even higher) order derivative of $E_0$ that truly reveals the value of the machinery of automatic differentiation developed above. In fact, the $1$st order derivative of $E_0$ has explicit dependence on the eigenvector $\Ket{\psi_0}$ as shown in \Eq{eq: 1st derivative of E0}, and this implies that the $2$nd order derivative of $E_0$ has to be computed through direct differentiation onto $\Ket{\psi_0}$. This is exactly when the formulation based on AD could help to avoid the costly full eigen-decomposition as explicitly desired in \Eq{eq: d2E0}. See also the discussion in the last paragraph of Sec. \ref{sec: the special case where A is symmetric}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./figs/d2E0s.pdf}
\caption{The $2$nd order derivative respect to parameter $g$ of the ground state energy per site $E_0$ of 1D TFIM for three values of the lattice size $N$, calculated through AD of the exact (dominant) digonalization.}
\label{fig: d2E0}
\end{figure}
\Fig{fig: d2E0} shows $\frac{\partial^2 E_0}{\partial g^2}$ for three distinct lattice sizes $N$. Note that when $N = 20$, the dimension of the Hilbert space involved is $2^{20} \sim 1000000$, and full eigen-decomposition of the Hamiltonian has become extremely challenging in practice \cite{PhysRevB.91.081103}. One can see that the $2$nd derivative of ground state energy is negative, which is a well-known fact in perturbation theory (See, e.g., \Eq{eq: d2E0}). In addition, the peak near the transition point $g = 1$ becomes more and more evident as $N$ increases, which agrees with the physical characterization of phase transition described above.
\subsubsection{\label{subsec: fidelity susceptibility}Fidelity susceptibility}
Another indicator of the quantum phase transition is the fidelity susceptibility \cite{PhysRevX.5.031007}, whose origin can be traced back to the field of quantum information science \cite{nielsen_chuang_2010}. To motivate this concept, note that there has emerged various kinds of classical and quantum phase transitions that go beyond the traditional Ginzburg-Landau-Wilson formulations based on the existence of some local order parameters. To name an example, topological phase transitions \cite{PhysRevLett.70.1501, PhysRevB.61.10267, KITAEV20062} do not have any local order parameter on either side of the phase transition. In view of this, new ideas and theoretical tools are needed to characterize these exotic phases and transitions among them, and various concepts in other fields, such as quantum fidelity \cite{doi:10.1142/S0217979210056335} and entanglement entropy \cite{RevModPhys.82.277} in quantum information science, have been borrowed and proved useful.
For current purposes, the concept of quantum fidelity is defined as the overlap of ground states of the Hamiltonian for two different parameters. More specifically, we have
\begin{equation}
F(g, \varepsilon) = \left| \Braket{\psi_0(g) | \psi_0(g + \varepsilon)}\right|.
\end{equation}
Suppose the value of the parameter $g$ is fixed. When $\varepsilon = 0$, the two ground states coincide, and the quantum fidelity as a function of the ``distance'' $\varepsilon$ clearly reaches the maximum value $1$. Previous work \cite{PhysRevE.74.031123} has suggested that two ground states lying at different sides of a phase transition point is qualitatively different, thus have significantly smaller overlap. This means that when $g$ is near the transition point, the quantum fidelity as the function of $\varepsilon$ has more drastic changes at the maximum $\varepsilon=0$.
The concept of fidelity susceptibility $\chi_F$ is then proposed as a quantitative measure of this rate of change at $\varepsilon=0$ for various values of the parameter $g$. Specifically, it is defined as
\begin{equation}
\chi_F = - \frac{\partial^2 \ln F(g, \varepsilon)}{\partial \varepsilon^2} \bigg{|}_{\varepsilon=0}.
\label{eq: chiF original definition}
\end{equation}
It can be seen from the argument above that $\chi_F$ may exhibit a maximum or even diverge in thermodynamic limit at the transition point, which has been demonstrated by various works \cite{PhysRevLett.99.095701, Gu_2009, PhysRevLett.103.170501, PhysRevB.81.064418} and furthermore used for the detection and characterization of topological \cite{PhysRevA.78.010301, PhysRevA.79.032302, PhysRevB.80.014403} and other kinds of phase transitions.
Despite its high theoretical values, the practical calculation of fidelity susceptibility has become a difficult task in many situations, and many previous studies have thus been restricted to the case where the accurate ground state overlap can be computed via analytic results, exact diagonalization or density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) method. Even within the framework of exact diagonalization, the accurate computation of fidelity susceptibility is still annoying, which is largely due to the appearance of the $2$nd derivative in \Eq{eq: chiF original definition}. To make this statement clearer, one can do some simple manipulation on the original definition (\ref{eq: chiF original definition}) of $\chi_F$ and obtain an equivalent expression as follows:
\begin{equation}
\chi_F = \Braket{\frac{\partial \psi_0}{\partial g} | \frac{\partial \psi_0}{\partial g}} -
\Braket{\psi_0 | \frac{\partial \psi_0}{\partial g}} \Braket{\frac{\partial \psi_0}{\partial g} | \psi_0}.
\label{eq: chiF geometric form}
\end{equation}
where the ground state $\Ket{\psi_0(g)}$ has assumed to be normalized. The differential $\Ket{\frac{\partial \psi_0}{\partial g}}$ is difficult to handle properly, as already indicated by \Eq{eq: 1st order correction of ground state} and the discussions therein. The most natural approach is certainly through the perturbation theory, which yields
\begin{equation}
\chi_F = \sum_{n \neq 0} \frac{\left| \Braket{\psi_n | h^\prime | \psi_0} \right|^2}{(E_0 - E_n)^2}.
\label{eq: chiF perturbation form}
\end{equation}
Note that the second term in \Eq{eq: chiF geometric form} vanishes identically due to the orthogonality of $\Ket{\psi_0}$ and $\Ket{\frac{\partial \psi_0}{\partial g}}$ from the result of perturbation theory. \Eq{eq: chiF perturbation form} can be used as a benchmark against other methods based on certain approximations. However, it becomes intractable fairly quickly as the lattice size $N$ increases, due to the need of the full spectrum through highly expensive computation of full eigen-decomposition.
Comparing \Eq{eq: chiF perturbation form} with (\ref{eq: d2E0}) as well as the discussions therein, it is evident that the difficulties encountered here are pretty similar to those when attempting to compute the $2$nd derivative of the ground state energy in Sec. \ref{subsec: 2nd order derivative of the ground state energy}. Again, the formulation based on automatic differentiation provides a unifying and satisfactory solution. Specifically, one can directly implement the $2$nd order derivative in the original definition (\ref{eq: chiF original definition}) in the framework of reverse mode AD using PyTorch, by transforming it into a slightly different form:
\begin{equation}
\chi_F = - \frac{\partial^2}{\partial g^{\prime 2}} \ln \left| \Braket{\psi_0(g) | \psi_0(g^\prime)} \right| \bigg{|}_{g^\prime = g}.
\label{eq: chiF computation graph}
\end{equation}
\Fig{fig: chiF computation graph} shows the computation graph of this process. This graph has to be differentiated twice to obtain the fidelity susceptibility as indicated in \Eq{eq: chiF computation graph}. Note the partial derivative in (\ref{eq: chiF computation graph}) operates on only one of the two ground state vectors involved in the overlap. This implies that a \textit{detached} duplicate of $\Ket{\psi_0}$ has to be created, in the sense that the detached data node in a computation process is no longer treated as dependent on the inputs, as demonstrated by the dashed arrow in \Fig{fig: chiF computation graph}. This mechanism of detaching is well supported by PyTorch, which makes the implementation fairly straightforward and easy.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[page=2]{figs/computation_graph.pdf}
\caption{The graph of computing the fidelity susceptibility $\chi_F$ in the framework of reverse mode AD using \Eq{eq: chiF computation graph}. The color indicates the part of various data nodes that should be regarded as dependent on the input $g$ and differentiated upon when backwarding through the computation process. Note the presence of a detached duplicate of the ground state $\Ket{\psi_0}$, which is necessary to obtain the desired result.}
\label{fig: chiF computation graph}
\end{figure}
Since the output node appearing in \Fig{fig: chiF computation graph} has explicit dependence on the eigenvector $\Ket{\psi_0}$, the $1$st differentiation of the process involves solving low-rank linear systems of the kind in, say, \Eq{eq: adjoint of symmetric dominant eigen-decomposition}. This in turn makes the $2$nd differentiation involve the backward pass of this linear system solver, which typically involves the same kind of linear system solver again, as shown in Sec. \ref{sec: towards higher order derivatives}. To sum up, this example makes full use of the machinery developed in Sec. \ref{sec: Formulations}, including the mechanism of computing higher order derivatives.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./figs/chiFs.pdf}
\caption{The fidelity susceptibility of 1D TFIM for three values of the lattice size $N$, calculated through AD of the exact (dominant) digonalization.}
\label{fig: chiF}
\end{figure}
\Fig{fig: chiF} shows the computation results of $\chi_F$ for the same three distinct lattice sizes $N$ as in \Fig{fig: d2E0}. Observe that the fidelity susceptibility is always positive, which can be conveniently seen from \Eq{eq: chiF perturbation form}. In addition, there is indeed a peak near the transition point $g=1$ that grows higher quite rapidly as the lattice size increases. This agrees with the anticipation in previous studies regarding the good capability of fidelity susceptibility in detecting and characterizing various quantum phase transitions.
\subsection{\label{gradient optimization of uniform MPS}Gradient-based optimization of uniform MPS}
Matrix product states (MPS) originates from the celebrated DMRG method \cite{PhysRevLett.69.2863, PhysRevB.48.10345} and acts as the underlying variational ansatz of the formalism. MPS is a typical and well-known category of the rich family of tensor network (TN) states, which encode the correlation and entanglement of many-body states by virtual bonds connecting the microscopic degrees of freedom living on different sites. Based on such structures, TN states can provide a suitable parameterization of the low-energy states of various quantum many-body systems, with the theoretical guarantee relevant to the area law scaling of the entanglement entropy \cite{RevModPhys.82.277}. In particular, the class of MPS has proved to be very useful for studying the ground state of 1D strongly correlated systems with local interactions \cite{PhysRevB.73.094423, PhysRevB.76.035114}.
There have existed several schemes for the variational optimization of MPS states both for the finite and infinite, uniform lattice sites. Typical examples include various variations of the original DMRG algorithm \cite{SCHOLLWOCK201196}, infinite time evolving block decimation (iTEBD) based on Trotter decomposition of the evolution operator \cite{PhysRevLett.98.070201} and the recent variational uniform MPS (VUMPS) algorithm based on the concept of MPS tangent space \cite{PhysRevB.97.045145, 10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes.7}. Despite the maturity and successful applications of these methods in 1D systems, they usually lack generality and extensibility in some sense. For example, the formulation of VUMPS algorithm relies heavily on specific properties characteristic of the MPS state, and the analytic derivation of the gradients is rather cumbersome and error prone due to complicated and highly nonlinear dependence of the variational energy on input parameters. Maybe the most obvious consequence regarding this perspective is the well-known difficulty of generalization of these methods to two or higher dimensional systems.
The differentiable programming paradigm provides a natural solution in this respect. Owning to the inherent advantages mentioned in Sec. \ref{sec: Introduction}, differentiable programming serves as a suitable framework for various tensor network applications, and the practical implementation is usually more generic and free of specialized details relevant to certain settings. Recently \cite{PhysRevX.9.031041}, the technique of differentiable programming has been successfully used for studying ground state of the 2D square lattice antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model by gradient-base optimization of infinite projected entangled pair state (iPEPS). This clearly reveals its capability beyond other traditional tensor network methods.
Motivated by these arguments, we will calculate the ground state energy of 1D TFIM in thermodynamic limit by gradient-based variational optimization of uniform MPS, using the formulations developed in Sec. \ref{sec: Formulations}. The variational ansatz of the ground state reads
\begin{equation}
\Ket{\psi_0} = \raisebox{-2.95ex}{\includegraphics[page=1]{figs/MPS.pdf}}.
\label{eq: MPS ansatz}
\end{equation}
The parameter $A$ of the MPS is a rank-3 tensor of shape $d \times D \times D$, where $d = 2$ is the dimension of the local Hilbert space at each site, and $D$ is the virtual bond dimension. Note the model involves only nearest-neighbor interactions, which implies that the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq: TFIM}) can be written in the form
\begin{equation}
H = \sum_{i=0}^{N-1} h_{i, i+1}.
\end{equation}
where $h_{i, j}$ is a ``local Hamiltonian'' that acts only on the two spin degrees of freedom at site $i$ and $j$. In the present case, for example, $h$ can be chosen to have the following symmetric form:
\begin{equation}
h_{i, j} = -\frac{g}{2} \left( \sigma_i^x + \sigma_j^x \right) - \sigma_i^z \sigma_j^z.
\end{equation}
By simple algebraic manipulations, one can express the energy expectation value per site as follows:
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{N} \frac{\Braket{\psi_0 | H | \psi_0}}{\Braket{\psi_0 | \psi_0}} = \frac{1}{\lambda^2}
\frac{\raisebox{0ex}{\includegraphics[page=2]{figs/MPS.pdf}}}
{\raisebox{0ex}{\includegraphics[page=3]{figs/MPS.pdf}}}.
\label{eq: MPS expectation energy per site}
\end{equation}
where $\raisebox{-5.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=4, scale=0.75]{figs/MPS.pdf}}
\equiv \Braket{s_i^\prime s_j^\prime | h_{i, j} | s_i s_j}$ is the tensor representation of $h_{i, j}$. $\lambda$ is the eigenvalue of largest amplitude of the transfer matrix $\raisebox{-3.2ex}{\includegraphics[page=5, scale=0.75]{figs/MPS.pdf}}$, and
$\raisebox{-2.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=6, scale=0.75]{figs/MPS.pdf}}$ and
$\raisebox{-2.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=7, scale=0.75]{figs/MPS.pdf}}$
are the corresponding left and right eigenvectors, respectively. More concretely, we have
\begin{equation}
\raisebox{-7.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=8]{figs/MPS.pdf}} = \lambda
\raisebox{-5.8ex}{\includegraphics[page=9]{figs/MPS.pdf}}, \quad
\raisebox{-7.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=10]{figs/MPS.pdf}} = \lambda
\raisebox{-5.8ex}{\includegraphics[page=11]{figs/MPS.pdf}}.
\label{eq: dominant eigen-decomposition of transfer matrix}
\end{equation}
Notice that the expectation energy \Eq{eq: MPS expectation energy per site} has nonlinear dependence on the parameter tensor $A$, both explicitly and implicitly via the eigenvalue $\lambda$ and eigenvectors $l$, $r$. We will compute the gradient of \Eq{eq: MPS expectation energy per site} with respect to $A$ using automatic differentiation, which can automatically take care of all the complicated ways of dependence without any laborious human efforts of deriving gradients analytically.
Since the computation process involves the dominant eigen-decomposition (\ref{eq: dominant eigen-decomposition of transfer matrix}) of the transfer matrix and, notably, the output clearly has nontrivial dependence on the eigenvectors, the formulation developed in Sec. \ref{sec: Formulations} can thus be efficiently exploited. To put our contribution into the context of previous efforts~\cite{10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes.7}, it is instructive to manually back-propagate through the computation graph and derive the expression for the gradient with respect to $A$. For simplicity, one can safely set the normalization factor $\raisebox{-4ex}{\includegraphics[page=3, scale=0.75]{figs/MPS.pdf}}$ in \Eq{eq: MPS expectation energy per site} to $1$, which can always be achieved in practice. By making use of \Eq{eq: adjoint of general dominant eigen-decomposition}, one can then easily obtain
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}
\raisebox{-3ex}{\includegraphics[page=12]{figs/MPS.pdf}} \sim
\raisebox{-10.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=13]{figs/MPS.pdf}} +
\raisebox{-10.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=14]{figs/MPS.pdf}} + \overline{\lambda} \lambda^2
\raisebox{-10.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=15]{figs/MPS.pdf}} -
\raisebox{-10.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=16]{figs/MPS.pdf}} -
\raisebox{-10.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=17]{figs/MPS.pdf}}.
\label{eq: MPS gradA expression}
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
where the first two and remaining terms correspond to the explict and implicit dependence on $A$, respectively. The vectors $\xi_l$, $\xi_r$ satisfy the kind of low-rank linear systems shown in \Eq{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}, which in the present context have the forms
\begin{widetext}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{gather}
\left( \raisebox{-7.15ex}{\includegraphics[page=18]{figs/MPS.pdf}} - \lambda \mathbbm{1}\right)
\raisebox{-5.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=19]{figs/MPS.pdf}} =
\left(\mathbbm{1} - \raisebox{-5.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=9]{figs/MPS.pdf}} \raisebox{-5.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=11]{figs/MPS.pdf}}\right)
\raisebox{-7.15ex}{\includegraphics[page=20]{figs/MPS.pdf}}, \quad
\raisebox{-5.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=21]{figs/MPS.pdf}} = 0. \\
\raisebox{-5.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=22]{figs/MPS.pdf}}
\left( \raisebox{-7.15ex}{\includegraphics[page=18]{figs/MPS.pdf}} - \lambda \mathbbm{1}\right) =
\raisebox{-7.15ex}{\includegraphics[page=23]{figs/MPS.pdf}}
\left(\mathbbm{1} - \raisebox{-5.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=9]{figs/MPS.pdf}} \raisebox{-5.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=11]{figs/MPS.pdf}}\right), \quad
\raisebox{-5.5ex}{\includegraphics[page=24]{figs/MPS.pdf}} = 0.
\end{gather}
\label{eq: MPS low-rank linear systems}
\end{subequations}
\end{widetext}
\Eq{eq: MPS gradA expression} is, apart from the gauge chosen, essentially equivalent to the gradient expression (116) in Ref.~\cite{10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes.7}. In particular, $\xi_l$, $\xi_r$ correspond to the quantities $R_h$ and $L_h$ in the reference, respectively. There, these two vectors are obtained by differentiating with respect to each tensor $A$ of the ansatz (\ref{eq: MPS ansatz}) and summing the resulting infinite series. The final expressions are given in Eq. (115) of the reference, which are essentially equivalent to the linear systems (\ref{eq: MPS low-rank linear systems}) above. Note that the similar pattern also appears when computing the single-site effective Hamiltonian in the VUMPS algorithm, which involves a step of formally performing some geometric sums. See \cite{PhysRevB.97.045145} for details. In the present work, on the other hand, the machinery of automatic differentiation through a dominant eigensolver allows us to bypass manually inspecting Eqs.~(\ref{eq: MPS gradA expression}, \ref{eq: MPS low-rank linear systems}) by encapsulating these derivations and calculations into a single computational primitive.
For current purposes, we don't impose any additional constraints on $A$ except assuming that it is real. Thus, the $D^2 \times D^2$ transfer matrix is generally not symmetric. Nevertheless, it is well-known that its largest-amplitude eigenvalue $\lambda$ is always real, positive and non-degenerate \cite{perez2006matrix}~\footnote{Strictly speaking, the largest-amplitude eigenvalue of the transfer matrix of an MPS is unique only if the MPS is injective. Nevertheless, since non-injective MPS tensors appear with measure zero, this is not a problem in practical computations. }, which meets the presupposition of the formulations in Sec. \ref{sec: Formulations}. In practice, the optimization is accomplished by using a quasi-Newton L-BFGS algorithm \cite{nocedal2006numerical} with automatically computed gradients. \Fig{fig: E0 relative error} shows the error of the ground state energy (per site) $E_0$ for several values of the parameter $g$ near the transition point $g=1$ and various bond dimensions $D$, relative to the analytic result obtained through Jordan-Wigner transformation \cite{sachdev_2011}:
\begin{equation}
E_0(g) = - \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_0^{2\pi} \mathrm{d} k \sqrt{g^2 - 2g\cos{k} + 1}.
\label{eq: E0 analytic result}
\end{equation}
For each point in the figure, the convergence can be quickly reached after several hundreds of forward and backward pass, and the results are fairly accurate with relative errors of at most $10^{-5}$. Note the optimization is performed for bond dimension $D$ up to $100$, in which case the transfer matrix is of size $10000 \times 10000$ and the approach of full eigen-decomposition has become very slow. Another observation is that as one approaches the transition point $g=1$, it becomes more difficult to reach a certain level of accuracy. This phenomenon is typical and also arises in many other kinds of computational approaches, such as evaluating the integral \Eq{eq: E0 analytic result} and various quantum Monte Carlo methods.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./figs/error.pdf}
\caption{The relative error of the ground state energy per site $E_0$ of 1D TFIM for different values of the parameter $g$ and bond dimension $D$, compared to the analytic result \Eq{eq: E0 analytic result}.}
\label{fig: E0 relative error}
\end{figure}
However, \Fig{fig: E0 relative error} also has some drawbacks compared with the state-of-the-art VUMPS algorithm. In the present approach, the gradient (\ref{eq: MPS gradA expression}) is computed explicitly using automatic differentiation and then fed directly into a general-purpose optimizizer such as L-BFGS. Due to high complexity of the optimization landscape, it is generally very hard for such a optimizer to reach machine precision (i.e., $\sim 10^{-16}$) in a limited number of iteration steps. It's also easy to be trapped in local minima and, as a result, the converged energy is more or less sensitive to random initialization of $A$. In \Fig{fig: E0 relative error}, the strategy of initializing large $D$ simulation with the result of small one has been adopted to alleviate this issue. Nevertheless, the dependence of $E_0$ on $D$ is still slightly non-monotonous, which is not the case in VUMPS. In fact, the VUMPS algorithm is a more sophisticated variational approach by exploiting specific properties of the MPS manifold~\cite{PhysRevB.97.045145, 10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes.7} rather than simply employing a general-purpose optimization algorithm as we did here. Nevertheless, the approach based on automatic differentiation is clearly more straightforward and generic, and the results shown here are still satisfactory for the purpose of demonstration.
\section{\label{sec: Discussions}Discussions}
In this paper, the (reverse mode) automatic differentiation of dominant eigensolver is illustrated through two different yet equivalent approaches, namely the adjoint method and one based on the full eigen-decomposition process. In particular, the mechanism that effectively strips the desired information out of the full spectrum is carefully explained. In this respect, the former approach yields full-spectrum-free formulas more directly, while the results of the latter approach still have explicit dependence on the full spectrum. On the other hand, the latter approach reveals the modular nature of differentiable programming paradigm and is more routinely, while the former approach typically requires some specialized mathematical understanding of the primitive. In view of these arguments, the two approaches are complementary to each other and can be used for double checking in studying AD of certain computation processes.
In Sec. \ref{sec: Formulations}, we have taken into account only one eigenvalue and corresponding eigenvectors. The results presented there can be very easily generalized to the case of multiple eigenvalues and eigenvectors~\footnote{Actually, this is only true under the assumption that the desired eigenvalues are all non-degenerate. In the general case possibly with degeneracies, the formulas for AD of eigen-decomposition become considerably more complicated, and it's not straightforward to obtain a natural generalization of the present approach, particularly the low-rank linear systems shown in \Eq{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}. However, it's worth noting that one may work around this issue for certain applications where the degenerate eigenvectors are used in downstream computations in such a way that the general AD formulas can be greatly simplified. In this case, a natural generalization of the formalism presented in this work is indeed possible. See also Ref.~\cite{PhysRevX.9.031041} for some discussions of this problem. }. In fact, different eigenvalues and eigenvectors are determined by the matrix $A$ in a totally independent way, implying that the adjoint of $A$ can be obtained simply by adding the contributions from them together, each of which has the form shown in Eqs. (\ref{eq: lambda_0_l and lambda_0_r}) and (\ref{eq: adjoint of general dominant eigen-decomposition}). The case of multiple eigenvalues and eigenvectors can be useful in many problems, such as Hamiltonian engineering to reproduce given low-energy spectrum \cite{PhysRevB.97.075114} and tensor network applications \cite{PhysRevX.9.031041}.
Furthermore, the formulations presented in this work can be readily extended to other similar computation processes. One typical and important example is the \emph{truncated} SVD, in which, as opposed to \emph{full} SVD, only a small proportion of singular values and corresponding singular vectors are desired. In practice, truncated SVD is widely adopted in various tensor network calculations \cite{ORUS2014117, SCHOLLWOCK201196}, such as the tensor renormalization group~\cite{PhysRevLett.99.120601} and corner transfer matrix renormalization group methods~\cite{doi:10.1143/JPSJ.65.891}. From the mathematical point of view, on the other hand, the truncated SVD of a real matrix $A$ has intimate relation with the dominant eigen-decomposition of the symmetric and positive semi-definite matrices $A A^T$ and $A^T A$. With this in mind, it turns out that one can exploit both of the approaches presented in Sec. \ref{sec: Formulations} in a similar way and derive the automatic differentiation of truncated SVD in a full-spectrum-free form. This will bring significant performance improvement over traditional approaches involving full SVD, such as the one implemented in Ref.~\cite{PhysRevX.9.031041}. Note that similar to the discussions in last paragraph, one can derive the relevant backpropagation formulas assuming only one singular value and corresponding singular vectors are desired. The generalization to the multiple case is then pretty straightforward.
\begin{acknowledgments}
The authors thank Shuo-Hui Li, Yue-Shui Zhang and Hai-Jun Liao for useful discussions. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under the Grant No.~11774398 and the Ministry of Science and Technology of China under the Grant No.~2016YFA0300603 and 2016YFA0302400.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{SecIntro}
The steep slope of the dark matter halo mass function at the low-mass
end is a defining characteristic of the $\Lambda$CDM
cosmological paradigm. It is much steeper than the faint-end slope of
the galaxy stellar mass function, implying that low-mass CDM haloes are
significantly more abundant than faint dwarf galaxies
\citep{Moore1999b,Klypin1999}. This discrepancy is usually reconciled
by assuming that dwarfs form preferentially in relatively massive
haloes, because cosmic reionization and the energetic
feedback from stellar evolution are effective at removing baryons from
the shallow gravitational potential of low-mass systems and at
curtailing their star forming activity
\citep{Bullock2000,Benson2002,Somerville2002}.
Such scenario makes clear predictions for the stellar mass -- halo
mass relation at the faint end. A simple -- but powerful and widely
used -- parameterization of this prediction is obtained from
abundance matching (AM) modeling, where galaxies and CDM haloes are
ranked by mass and matched to each other respecting their relative
ranked order \citep[see,
e.g.,][]{Frenk1988,Vale2004,Guo2011,Moster2013,Behroozi2013}. Halo masses may thus be
derived from stellar masses, yielding clear predictions amenable to
observational testing.
Most such tests rely on using kinematic tracers such as rotation
speeds or velocity dispersions to estimate the total gravitational
mass enclosed within the luminous radius of a galaxy. Its dark matter
content, computed after subtracting the contribution of the baryons,
may then be used to estimate the total virial\footnote {We define
virial quantities as those corresponding to the radius where the
spherical mean density equals 200 times the critical density for
closure, $3H^2/8\pi G$. Virial quantities are identified by a
``200'' subscript.} mass of the system. Such estimates rely heavily
on the similarity of the mass profiles of CDM haloes \citep[][referred
to hereafter as NFW]{Navarro1996,Navarro1997}, and involve a fairly
large extrapolation, since virial radii are typically much larger than
galaxy radii.
These tests have revealed some tension between the predictions of AM
models and observations. \citet{Boylan-Kolchin2011}, for example,
estimated masses for the most luminous Galactic satellites that were
lower than those of the most massive substructure haloes in N-body
simulations of Milky Way-sized haloes from the Aquarius Project
\citep{Springel2008b}. \citet{Ferrero2012} reported a related finding
when analyzing the dark matter content of faint dwarf irregular
galaxies in the field: many of them implied total virial masses well
below those predicted by AM models. Subsequent work has highlighted
similar results both in the analysis of M31 satellites
\citep{Tollerud2014,Collins2014}, as well as in other samples of field
galaxies \citep{Garrison-Kimmel2014,Papastergis2015}.
These discrepancies may in principle be reconciled with $\Lambda$CDM
in a number of ways. One possibility is to reconsider virial mass
estimates based on the dark mass enclosed by the galaxy, a procedure
that is highly sensitive to assumptions about the halo mass profile. A
popular revision assumes that the assembly of the galaxy may lead to a
reshuffling of the mass profile, pushing dark matter out of the inner
regions and creating a constant-density `core' in an otherwise cuspy
NFW halo
\citep[e.g.,][]{Navarro1996b,Mashchenko2006,Governato2012}.
These cores allow dwarf galaxies to inhabit massive haloes despite
their relatively low inner dark matter content. This option has received
some support from hydrodynamical simulations \citep[see, e.g.,][for a
review]{Pontzen2014} although the results are sensitive to how star
formation and feedback are implemented. Indeed, no consensus has yet
been reached over the magnitude of the effect, its dependence on mass,
or even whether such cores exist at all \citep[see, e.g.,][and
references
therein]{Parry2012,Garrison-Kimmel2013,DiCintio2014,Schaller2015a,Oman2015, Onorbe2015}.
A second possibility is that Galactic satellites have been affected by
tidal stripping, which would preferentially remove dark matter
\citep[e.g.,][]{Penarrubia2008b} and, therefore, act to reduce their
dark mass content, much as the baryon-induced `cores' discussed in
the preceding paragraph. This proposal would not help to solve the
issue raised by field dwarf irregulars \citep{Ferrero2012} nor the low
dark matter content of Galactic satellites (tides are, of course,
already included in N-body halo simulations), unless baryon-induced
cores help to enhance the effects of tides, as proposed by
\citet{Zolotov2012} and \citet{Brooks2014}.
A third option is to revise the abundance matching prescription so as
to allow dwarf galaxies to inhabit haloes of lower mass. This would be
the case if some galaxies simply fail to form (or are too faint to
feature in current surveys) in haloes below some mass: once these
``dark'' systems are taken into account, the AM stellar mass -- halo
mass relation would shift to systematically lower virial masses for
given stellar mass, as pointed out by \citet{Sawala2013}.
The existence of `dark' subhaloes does not, on its own, solve the
problem pointed out by \citet{Boylan-Kolchin2011}, which is usually
referred to as the `too-big-to-fail' problem \citep[hereafter TBTF,
see also][]{Boylan-Kolchin2012}. Indeed, associating dwarfs with lower
halo masses would not explain why many of the most massive
substructures in the Aquarius haloes seem inconsistent with the
kinematic constraints of the known Galactic satellites.
One explanation might be that fewer massive subhaloes are present in
the Milky Way (MW) than in Aquarius haloes. Since the number of
substructures scales with the virial mass of the main halo, a lower
Milky Way mass would reduce the number of massive substructures, thus
alleviating the problem
\citep{Wang2012a,Vera-Ciro2013,Cautun2014}. Another possibility is
that dark-matter-only (DMO) simulations like Aquarius overestimate the
subhalo mass function. Low mass haloes are expected to lose most of
their baryons to cosmic reionization and feedback, a loss that stunts
their growth and reduces their final mass. The effect is limited in
terms of mass (baryons, after all, make up only $17$ per cent of the total
mass of a halo) but it can have disproportionate consequences on the number
of massive substructures given the steepness of the subhalo mass
function \citep{Guo2015,Sawala2016}.
\begin{figure}
\hspace{-0.2cm}
\resizebox{8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{figures/Fig1.ps}}\\%
\caption{{\it Top}: Stellar velocity dispersion and effective radius
($R_{\rm eff}$) of the Fornax dSph. The $R_{\rm eff}$ distribution
is obtained by convolving uncertainties in distance and in the
observed angular half-light radius, using uncertainties from the
literature and assuming Gaussian error distributions. {\it
Middle}: Dynamical mass within the deprojected 3D half-light
radius ($r_{1/2}$) of Fornax, calculated using eq.~\ref{eqW10}
\citep{Wolf2010}. The red histogram shows the result of
propagating the observational uncertainties, whereas the grey
histogram adds a $23$ per cent base modeling uncertainty, as
suggested by \citet{Campbell2016}. {\it Bottom}: Circular velocity
at $r_{1/2}$ ($V_{1/2}$), including both observational and
systematic uncertainties, calculated from the final $M_{1/2}$
distribution (middle panel). Unlike $M_{1/2}$, $V_{1/2}$ is
independent of $r_{1/2}$. Contours in all panels enclose $50$ per
cent and $80$ per cent of the distributions. }
\label{FigError}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\hspace{-0.2cm}
\resizebox{8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{figures/Fig2.ps}}\\%
\caption{{\it Top:} Circular velocity at the half-light radius of
Milky Way classical dSphs. Open circles show the results of
\citet{Wolf2010} with $1\sigma$ error. The bar-and-whisker symbols
show the results of this work, including observational and
systematic uncertainties (see, e.g., the bottom panel of
Fig.~\ref{FigError} for the case of the Fornax dSph). The thick
and thin portions illustrate interquartile and $10$--$90^{\rm th}$
percentile intervals, respectively. Our results suggest that $V_{1/2}$
uncertainties have been underestimated in previous work. Slanted
lines show objects with constant crossing time, as labelled. {\it
Bottom:} Stellar mass derived for the $9$ Galactic dSphs, shown
as a function of their half-light radius. The blue dashed line
indicates the characteristic halo mass -- radius dependence of
APOSTLE centrals, computed from the fit shown in
Fig.~\ref{FigMstarM200}. The line divides the sample in two groups
of compact objects resilient to tides and more extended systems
where tidal effects may be more apparent.}
\label{FigVR}
\end{figure}
We explore these issues here using $\Lambda$CDM cosmological
hydrodynamical simulations of the Local Group from the
APOSTLE\footnote{A Project Of Simulating The Local Environment}
project \citep{Fattahi2016,Sawala2016}. These simulations use the same code as
the EAGLE project, whose numerical parameters have been calibrated to
reproduce the galaxy stellar mass function and the distribution of
galaxy sizes \citep{Schaye2015,Crain2015}. Our analysis complements
that of \citet{Sawala2016}, who showed that APOSTLE reproduces the
Galactic satellite luminosity/stellar mass function, as well as the
total number of galaxies brighter than $10^5 \Msun$ within the Local
Group.
We extend here the TBTF discussion of that paper by reviewing the
accuracy of observational constraints (Sec.~\ref{SecObs}), which are
based primarily on measurements of line-of-sight velocity dispersions
and the stellar half-mass radii ($r_{1/2}$) of `classical' (i.e.,
$M_V<-8$) Galactic dwarf spheroidals (dSphs), and by focusing our
analysis on the actual mass enclosed within $r_{1/2}$ rather than on
extrapolated quantitites such as the maximum circular velocity of
their surrounding haloes. We also highlight the effect of Galactic
tides, and identify the satellites where such effects might be more
easily detectable observationally.
This paper is organized as follows. We begin by reviewing in
Sec.~\ref{SecObs} the observational constraints on the mass of
Galactic dSphs. We then describe briefly our simulations and discuss
our main results in Sec.~\ref{SecResults}, and conclude with a summary
of our main conclusions in Sec.~\ref{SecConc}.
\section{The mass of Milky-Way dwarf spheroidals}
\label{SecObs}
Dwarf spheroidals (dSph) are dispersion-supported stellar systems,
with little or no gaseous content. Their stellar velocity dispersion
may be combined with the half-mass radius, $r_{1/2}$, to estimate the
total mass enclosed within $r_{1/2}$. This estimate depends only
weakly on the velocity anisotropy, provided that the system is in
equilibrium, close to spherically symmetric, and that its velocity
dispersion is relatively flat \citep{Walker2009d,Wolf2010}. In that
case, the latter authors show that the total mass enclosed within the
(deprojected) half-mass radius is well approximated by
\begin{equation}
M_{1/2}=3\,G^{-1}\,\sigma_{\rm los}^2\,r_{1/2},
\label{eqW10}\end{equation}
where $\sigma_{\rm los}$ is the luminosity-weighted line-of-sight velocity
dispersion of the stars and $r_{1/2}$ has been estimated from the
(projected) effective radius, $R_{\rm eff}$, using $r_{1/2}=(4/3)R_{\rm
eff}$.
The velocity dispersion profiles of the Milky Way classical dSph satellites are
indeed nearly flat \citep{Walker2007,Walker2009d}, and eq.~\ref{eqW10}
has been used to estimate $M_{1/2}$ or, equivalently, the circular
velocity at $r_{1/2}$, $V_{1/2}=\sqrt{GM_{1/2}/r_{1/2}}$, for many of them. The two
parameters needed for eq.~\ref{eqW10} are inferred from (i) individual
stellar velocities; (ii) the angular projected half-light radius; and
(iii) the distance modulus, each of which is subject to observational
uncertainty. A lower limit on the uncertainty in $M_{1/2}$ may thus be
derived by propagating the uncertainties in each of those three
quantities. We shall adopt the most up-to-date values from the
\citet{McConnachie2012} Local Group compilation\footnote{http://www.astro.uvic.ca/$\sim$alan/Nearby\_Dwarf\_Database.html}
as the main source of observational data. Table \ref{TabSat} lists our
adopted values for the $9$ dSphs within $300$ kpc from the Milky
Way. (We have excluded the Sagittarius dwarf from our analysis because
it is in the process of being tidally disrupted.)
We show in Fig.~\ref{FigError} the error budget (assumed Gaussian
unless otherwise specified) for the case of the Fornax dSph, one of
the best studied Galactic dSphs. The top panel illustrates the errors
in $\sigma_{\rm los}$ and $R_{\rm eff}$, including errors in the distance
and the angular half size. The red histogram in the middle panel of
Fig.~\ref{FigError} shows the result of applying eq.~\ref{eqW10}, after
transforming $R_{\rm eff}$ into 3D $r_{1/2}$, assuming no
additional error.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center} \hspace{-0.2cm}
\resizebox{17cm}{!}{\includegraphics{figures/Fig3.ps}}\\%
\caption{{\it Left}: Stellar mass -- halo mass relation for
`central' galaxies in the highest resolution APOSTLE runs
(L1). The abundance matching relations of \citet{Guo2010},
\citet{Moster2013} and \citet{Behroozi2013} are shown for
reference, labelled as G10, M13, and B13, respectively. The dotted
portion of these curves indicates extrapolation of their formulae
to low masses. The fraction of `dark' systems in APOSTLE (i.e.,
no star particles) as a function of virial mass is indicated by
the curve labelled `$f_{\rm dark}$', with the scale shown on the
right axis. {\it Right:} Stellar mass versus maximum circular
velocity ($V_{\rm max}$) of centrals and satellite galaxies (at
$z=0$ for both) in APOSTLE, shown as blue crosses and red circles,
respectively. The offset between field and satellite galaxies is
due to loss of mass, mostly dark matter, caused by tidal
stripping. The fraction of `dark' subhaloes is shown by the solid
red curve. There are no dark subhaloes with $V_{\rm max}>25\hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$.
Blue and red dashed lines are fits to the central and satellite
stellar mass -- $V_{\rm max}$ relations, respectively, of the form
$M_{\rm str}/\Msun=M_0\,\nu^{\alpha}\exp(-\nu^{\gamma})$, where
$\nu$ is the velocity in units of $50 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$. Best fits have
$(M_0,\alpha,\gamma)$ equal to $(3.0\times10^8, 3.36, -2.4)$ and
$(8.0\times10^8,2.70,-1.3)$ for centrals and satellites,
respectively. For illustration, we indicate the stellar mass of
Fornax and Draco with box-and-whisker symbols, at an arbitrary
value of $V_{\rm max}$.}
\label{FigMstarM200} \end{center}
\end{figure*}
The error propagation results in a $30$ per cent uncertainty in $M_{1/2}$,
with some covariance with that in $r_{1/2}$. Note that this
uncertainty is substantially larger than the $\sim 7$ per cent uncertainty
quoted for Fornax by \citet{Wolf2010}. Furthermore, the uncertainty
shown by the red histogram in Fig.~\ref{FigError} assumes that
applying eq.~\ref{eqW10} introduces no additional error. This
assumption has been recently examined by \citet{Campbell2016}, who
conclude that such modeling has a base systematic uncertainty of
$\sim 23$ per cent, even when half-mass radii and velocity dispersions are known
with exquisite accuracy. We therefore add this in quadrature to obtain
the grey histogram in the middle panel of
Fig.~\ref{FigError}. Finally, using the circular velocity, $V_{1/2}$,
instead of $M_{1/2}$ removes the covariance between mass and radius
(see bottom panel of the same figure), so we shall hereafter adopt
$V_{1/2}$ for our analysis.
We have followed this procedure to compute $r_{1/2}$ and $V_{1/2}$ for
all $9$ classical MW dSphs, and quote their values and uncertainties
in Table~\ref{TabSat}. Note that in a number of cases these
uncertainties are well in excess of those assumed in recent work. This
may also be seen in the top panel of Fig. \ref{FigVR}, where the grey
crosses indicate our results and compare them with the values quoted
by \citet{Wolf2010}, shown by the open circles. Some of the
differences may be ascribed to revisions to the observational data
from more recent studies and some to the increase in the error due to
the base systematic uncertainty discussed above.
We have also estimated stellar masses for all Galactic dSphs in order
to facilitate comparison with simulated data. We do this by using the
$V$-band magnitude and distance modulus from the compilation of
\citet{McConnachie2012}, and stellar mass-to-light ratios from
\citet{Woo2008}. Errors in $V$-band magnitude and distance modulus are
taken from \citet{McConnachie2012}. \citet{Woo2008} do not provide
uncertainties in the mass-to-light ratios, so we assume a constant
$10$ per cent uncertainty for all systems. We list all observable quantities
and derived stellar masses in Table \ref{TabSat} and show, for future
reference, the relation between stellar mass and half-mass radius in
the bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{FigVR}.
\section{Results}
\label{SecResults}
\subsection{The Local Group APOSTLE simulations}
\label{SecSim}
We shall use results from the APOSTLE project, a suite of
cosmological hydrodynamical simulations of $12$ independent volumes chosen to resemble
the Local Group of Galaxies (LG), with a relatively isolated dominant
pair of luminous galaxies analogous to M31 and the Milky Way. A full description
of the volume selection procedure and of the simulations is presented in
\citet{Fattahi2016} and \citet{Sawala2016}. We briefly summarize here
the main parameters of the simulations relevant to our analysis.
LG candidate volumes for resimulation were selected from a
dark-matter-only (DMO) simulation of a $(100\Mpc)^3$ cosmological box with
$1620^3$ particles \citep[known as DOVE,][]{Jenkins2013}. DOVE adopts cosmological
parameters consistent with 7-year {\it Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy
Probe} \citep[WMAP-7,][]{Komatsu2011} measurements, as follows:
$\Omega_m=0.272$, $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.728$, $h=0.704$,
$\sigma_8=0.81$, $n_s=0.967$.
Each APOSTLE volume includes a relatively-isolated pair of haloes with
kinematics consistent with the MW--M31 pair; in particular: (i) the
pair members are separated by $600$ to $1000 \kpc$; (ii) they are
approaching each other with velocities in the range $(-250,0)\hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$;
and (iii) their relative tangential velocities do not exceed $100
\hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$. The virial mass of the pair members are in the range $(5\times
10^{11},2.5\times 10^{12}) \Msun$, and the combined virial masses are
in the range $(1.6\times 10^{12},4\times 10^{12}) \Msun$. An isolation
criterion is also adopted to ensure that no halo more massive than the
smaller of the pair is found within $2.5 \Mpc$ from the pair
barycentre.
APOSTLE volumes were resimulated using the code developed for the
EAGLE simulation project \citep{Schaye2015, Crain2015}. The code is a
highly modified version of the Tree-PM/SPH code, P-Gadget3
\citep{Springel2005b,Schaller2015c}, with subgrid implementations for
star formation, radiative cooling, metal enrichment, uniform UV and
X-ray background (cosmic reionization), feedback from evolving stars,
as well as the formation and growth of supermassive black holes and
related feedback. APOSTLE runs use the parameters of the `Ref' model
described in \citet{Schaye2015}. The EAGLE galaxy formation model has been
calibrated to reproduce the galaxy stellar mass function and sizes in
the mass range $10^8$--$10^{11}\Msun$ at $z=0.1$. This leads to
relatively `flat' rotation curves for luminous galaxies that agree
well with observations \citep{Schaller2015a}.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center} \hspace{-0.2cm}
\resizebox{17cm}{!}{\includegraphics{figures/ForDra.ps}}\\%
\caption{Circular velocity profiles of Fornax- and Draco-like
satellites (red) and centrals (blue), as labelled. The solid lines
indicate the average profiles, which turn to dotted inside the
\citet{Power2003} convergence radius. Shaded regions indicate
$\pm1\sigma$ deviations. The grey vertical bars bracket the $10^{\rm th}$ and
$90^{\rm th}$ percentiles of the half-light radii of Fornax and Draco,
respectively. Note that, although both sets of satellites have been
heavily stripped, the dark matter content within $r_{1/2}$ has been
more significantly affected in the case of Fornax, given its
relatively large size.}
\label{FigTS} \end{center}
\end{figure*}
The APOSTLE project aims to simulate each volume at three different
resolution levels (L1 to L3). At the time of writing, all $12$ APOSTLE
volumes (AP-$1$ to AP-$12$) have been resimulated at L3 and L2
resolution levels with gas particle mass of $\sim 10^6\Msun$ and
$\sim10^{5}\Msun$, respectively. Three volumes \citep[AP-1, AP-4,
AP-11, see][]{Fattahi2016} have also been completed at the highest
resolution level, L1, with gas particle mass of $\sim 10^4$, DM
particle mass of $\sim5\times 10^4 \Msun$, and maximum gravitational
softening of $134\pc$. In this paper, we shall use mainly results from
the APOSTLE L1 runs, unless otherwise specified.
Dark matter haloes in APOSTLE are identified using a
friends-of-friends \citep[FoF,][]{Davis1985} algorithm with linking
length equal to $0.2$ times the mean interparticle separation. The FOF
algorithm is run on the dark matter particles; gas and star particles
acquire the FoF membership of their nearest DM particle. Self-bound
substructures inside each FoF halo are then found recursively using
the SUBFIND algorithm \citep{Springel2001a,Dolag2009}. We will
hereafter refer to the main structure of each FoF halo as its
`central', and to the self-bound substructures as its `satellites'. MW
and M31 analogues in the simulations are referred to as primary
galaxies.
\subsection{Stellar mass -- halo mass relation in APOSTLE }
\label{SecMstarM200}
Abundance matching models provide the relation between the stellar
mass and virial mass of galaxies by assuming that every dark matter
halo hosts a galaxy and that there is a monotonic correspondence
between stellar mass and halo mass. The relation is best specified in
the regime where the galaxy stellar mass function is well determined
($M_{\rm str} > 10^7 \Msun$), but is routinely extrapolated to lower
masses, usually assuming a power-law behaviour \citep[][hereafter G10,
B13, and M13, respectively]{Guo2010,Behroozi2013,Moster2013}.
We compare the APOSTLE stellar mass -- halo mass relation with the
predictions of three different AM models in the left panel of
Fig. \ref{FigMstarM200}. Stellar masses, $M_{\rm str}$, are measured
for simulated galaxies within the `galactic radius', $r_{\rm gal}$,
defined as $0.15$ times the virial radius the halo. This radius
contains most of the stars and cold, star-forming gas of the main
(`central') galaxy of each FoF halo. When considering galaxies
inhabiting subhaloes (`satellites'), whose virial radii are not well
defined, we shall compute $r_{\rm gal}$ using their maximum circular
velocity, $V_{\rm max}$, after calibrating the $V_{\rm max}$--$r_{\rm
gal}$ relation\footnote{Specifically, we used $r_{\rm
gal}/$kpc$=0.169\,(V_{\rm max}/\hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$})^{1.01}$} of the centrals.
\begin{figure*}
\hspace{-0.2cm}
\resizebox{17cm}{!}{\includegraphics{figures/Fig4.ps}}\\%
\caption{{\it Left}: Circular velocity curves of Sculptor-like
satellites in APOSTLE, i.e., systems within $300$ kpc from either
of the main primaries with stellar mass matching that of Sculptor
within $3\sigma$ of the central value given in
Table~\ref{TabSat}. Curves turn from solid to dotted inside the
\citet{Power2003} convergence radius (for $\kappa=0.6$, see
Appendix~\ref{SecAppendix}). The grey vertical band indicates the
half-light radius of Sculptor and the corresponding $10$--$90^{\rm
th}$ precentile interval. Small crosses indicate the half-mass
radii of Sculptor-like simulated satellites. {\it Right}:
Distribution of circular velocities of Sculptor-like satellites,
measured at the half-light radius of the Sculptor dSph (grey band
on left). The red histogram shows the distribution after applying
the resolution correction described in
Appendix~\ref{SecAppendix}. The grey vertical band corresponds to
$V_{1/2}$ of Scultpr ($10$--$90^{\rm th}$ precentile interval).}
\label{FigSim}
\end{figure*}
The left panel of Fig.~\ref{FigMstarM200} shows that APOSTLE centrals
do not form `stochastically' in low mass haloes as envisioned in some
models \citep[e.g.,][]{Guo2015}, but, rather, follow a tight
stellar mass -- halo mass relation that deviates systematically from the AM
predictions/extrapolations of G10 and M13. APOSTLE galaxies of given
stellar mass live in haloes systematically less massive than
extrapolated by those models but more massive than the B13
extrapolation. This reflects the fact that the galaxy stellar mass
function of faint galaxies is rather poorly known, and that AM
`predictions' must be considered with care in this mass regime.
The systematic offset between the G10 and M13 AM extrapolations and
our numerical results has been discussed by
\citet{Sawala2013,Sawala2015}, who trace the disagreement at least in
part to the increasing prevalence of `dark'\footnote{These are
systems with no stars in APOSTLE L1, or, more precisely,
$M_{\rm str}<10^4\Msun$, the mass of a single baryonic particle.}
haloes with decreasing virial mass. The effect of these dark systems
is not subtle, as shown by the thick solid blue line in
Fig. \ref{FigMstarM200}. This indicates the fraction of APOSTLE haloes
that are dark (scale on right axis); only {\it half} of
$10^{9.5}\Msun$ haloes harbor luminous galaxies in APOSTLE. The
`dark' fraction increases steeply with decreasing mass: $9$ out of
$10$ haloes with $M_{200}=10^9\Msun$ are dark, and fewer than $1$ in
$50$ haloes with virial mass $\sim 10^{8.8}\Msun$ are luminous.
One might fear that the deviation from the AM prediction shown in
Fig.~\ref{FigMstarM200} might lead to a surplus of faint galaxies in
the Local Group. This is not the case; as discussed by
\citet{Sawala2016}, APOSTLE volumes contain $\sim 100$ galaxies with
$M_{\rm str}>10^5\Msun$ within $2$ Mpc from the LG barycentre, only
slightly above the $\sim 60$ known such galaxies in the compilation of
\citet{McConnachie2012}, which might still be incomplete due to the
difficulty of finding dwarf galaxies in the Galactic `zone of
avoidance'. We shall hereafter adopt $10^5\Msun$ (which corresponds
roughly to a magnitude limit of $M_V\sim -8$) as the minimum galaxy
stellar mass we shall consider in our discussion. In APOSTLE L1 runs
these systems inhabit haloes of $M_{200}\sim 2\times 10^9\Msun$ (three
quarters of which are `dark'), and are resolved with a few tens of
thousands of particles.
\subsection{Tidal stripping effects}
\label{SecTS}
The right-hand panel of Fig.~\ref{FigMstarM200} is analogous to the
left but using $V_{\rm max}$ (at $z=0$) as a measure of mass
\citep[see also][]{Sales2016a}. This allows the satellites in APOSTLE
(open circles) to be included and compared with centrals (blue
crosses). Satellites clearly deviate from centrals and push the offset
from the G10 abundance matching prediction even further. This is
mainly the result of tidal stripping, which affects disproportionately
the dark matter content of a galaxy, reducing its $V_{\rm max}$ and
increasing its scatter at a given stellar mass \citep[see, e.g.,][and
references therein]{Penarrubia2008b}.
Despite the large scatter, a few results seem robust. One is that
{\it every} subhalo with $V_{\rm max}>25 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$ is host to a satellite
more massive than $10^5 \Msun$. This implies that the number of
massive subhaloes provides a firm lower limit to the total number of
satellites at least as bright as the `classical' dSphs, an issue to
which we shall return below.
A second point to note is that the effects of tidal stripping increase
with decreasing stellar mass. Indeed, the $V_{\rm max}$ of
Fornax-like\footnote{We match Galactic satellites with APOSTLE dwarfs
by stellar mass. For example, we refer to systems as Fornax-like if
their $M_{\rm str}$ match Fornax's within $3\sigma$. Fornax-like
{\it satellites} are those within $300\kpc$ of any of the APOSTLE
primaries; Fornax-like {\it centrals} refer to field galaxies beyond
that radius.} centrals is, on average, only $37$ per cent higher
than that of corresponding satellites; the difference, on the other
hand, increases to $67$ per cent in the case of Draco. This trend
arises because dynamical friction erodes the orbits of massive
satellites much faster than those of less luminous systems, leading to
rapid merging or full disruption. As a result, surviving luminous
satellites have, on average, been accreted more recently and have been
less stripped than fainter systems \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Barber2014}.
This does not necessarily imply that the {\it stellar} components of
fainter satellites have been more affected by stripping. Tides are more
effective at removing (mostly dark) mass from the outskirts of a
subhalo than from the inner regions, so their effects on the stellar
component (for a given orbit) will be sensitive to the size of the
satellite. This may be appreciated from Fig.~\ref{FigTS}, where we
show the average circular velocity profiles of both Fornax- and
Draco-like satellites and centrals. The outer regions are clearly more
heavily stripped, implying that satellites that are physically large
for their luminosity should show clearer signs of stripping than their
more compact counterparts.
In other words, dSphs like Can Ven~I or Sextans, for example, are much
more likely to have been affected by tides than Draco or
Leo~II. Fig.~\ref{FigVR} illustrates this in two different ways. In
the top panel, the latter are seen to have much shorter crossing times
than the former, making them more resilient to tides. Similarly, in
the bottom panel, the former are shown to be physically larger than
the latter both at fixed stellar mass and in terms of the
characteristic radius of their host haloes (according to the stellar
mass -- halo mass relation for APOSTLE centrals shown in
Fig.~\ref{FigMstarM200}; see blue dashed line).
Thus, although our results suggest that satellites and field galaxies
of similar $M_{\rm str}$ are expected to inhabit haloes of different
$V_{\rm max}$, the difference might not translate directly into an
observable deficit in their dark matter content\footnote{Indeed,
\citet{Kirby2014} argue that no large differences seem to exist
between field and satellite galaxies in the LG.}. This is because
$V_{\rm max}$ is usually reached at radii much larger than the stellar
half-mass radii where kinematic data provide meaningful
constraints. Given the large scatter in $V_{\rm max}$ at a given
stellar mass shown by APOSTLE satellites, it is important to compare
simulations and observations {\it at the same radii}. We explore this
next.
\begin{figure*}
\hspace{-0.2cm}
\resizebox{17cm}{!}{\includegraphics{figures/Fig5.ps}}\\%
\caption{Circular velocity, $V_{1/2}$, of APOSTLE satellites
matching the stellar mass of each of the $9$ Galactic dSphs, and
measured at the observed half-light radius of each
system. Observational estimates and uncertainties are given by the
grey cloud, whereas red bar-and-whisker symbols indicate the
values for matching APOSTLE satellites. Contours indicate the
regions containing $50$ per cent and $80$ per cent of the
distributions. Bars and whiskers represent the interquartile and
$10$--$90^{\rm th}$ percentile intervals of predicted $V_{1/2}$,
plotted at the median value of $r_{1/2}$. Note the significant
overlap between the satellite simulation results and the
observational estimates; this may be quantified by the velocity
difference between the mean observed and simulated values, divided
by the combined rms of each distribution ($\mu$), which is less
than unity in all cases. The values of $V_{1/2}$ for APOSTLE
centrals are larger, since centrals have not experienced tidal
stripping.}
\label{FigV}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{The dark matter content of APOSTLE satellites}
\label{SecDM}
Our main conclusion from Fig.~\ref{FigMstarM200} is that APOSTLE
satellites of given stellar mass are significantly less massive than expected
from abundance matching and, because of stripping, span a relatively
wide range of maximum circular velocities. Are these results
consistent with the observational constraints discussed in
Sec.~\ref{SecObs}? In other words, are the predicted values of
$r_{1/2}$ and $V_{1/2}$ consistent with those of Galactic
satellites of matching stellar mass?
The main issue to consider when addressing this question is that the
half-light radii, $r_{1/2}$, of the faintest dSphs are smaller than
the smallest well-resolved radius in APOSTLE. This impacts the
analysis in two ways: one is that the faintest simulated dwarfs have
radii larger than observed\footnote{The subgrid equation of state
imposed on star-forming gas particles by the EAGLE model results in
a minimum effective radius of $\sim 400$ pc for galaxies in AP-L1
runs \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Crain2015,Campbell2016}.}; another is that
the total mass enclosed by simulated dwarfs within radii as small as
the observed half-light radii might be systematically affected by the
limited resolution.
We illustrate this in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{FigSim} for the case
of the Sculptor dSph. The vertical shaded band shows the half-light
radius of that galaxy, $r_{1/2}=377^{+77}_{-73} \pc$ ($10$--$90^{\rm
th}$ percentile interval), whereas the small crosses indicate the
stellar half-mass radii of Sculptor-like APOSTLE satellites on their
circular velocity profiles, $V_{\rm circ}(r)$. Clearly, for the
comparison with Sculptor to be meaningful, we should estimate masses
within the {\it observed} radius (grey band), rather than at the
half-mass radius of each of the simulated systems.
\begin{figure*}
\hspace{-0.2cm}
\resizebox{17cm}{!}{\includegraphics{figures/Fig6.ps}}\\%
\caption{ {\it Left}: Luminosity function of satellites of the six
APOSTLE L1 primaries (dotted lines), compared with that of
Galactic satellites (filled circles). We consider as satellites
all systems within $300\kpc$ of the centre of each primary
galaxy. We also show the luminosity function of the Aq-E halo
(dot-dashed line) derived by \citet{Boylan-Kolchin2012} using an
abundance matching model. The best fitting APOSTLE galaxy is
highlighted with a solid line type. {\it Right}: $V_{\rm
max}$--$M_V$ relation for APOSTLE satellites (circles) compared
with the abundance matching estimates for Aq-E subhaloes from
\citet{Boylan-Kolchin2012}. Box-and-whisker symbols indicate the
$V_{\rm max}$ range of APOSTLE satellites that match the stellar
mass and $V_{1/2}$ of each of the 9 Galactic dSphs (see
Sec. \ref{SecTBTF} for details). APOSTLE satellites inhabit
markedly lower mass haloes than expected from abundance matching,
at a given luminosity. APOSTLE also differs from Aq-E in the
number of massive substructures. On average, each APOSTLE primary
has $\sim 7.2$ satellite more massive than $V_{\rm max}>25\hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$;
this number is actually only $5$ for the halo that best matches
the MW satellite luminosity function (solid circles; two of them
are brighter than $M_V=-15$). Aq-E has $21$ satellites with
$V_{\rm max}$ exceeding $25\hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$, some of them fainter than
$M_V=-8$. }
\label{FigLF}
\end{figure*}
However, the observed $r_{1/2}$ (although significantly larger than
the gravitational softening, which is fixed at $134$ pc at z=0 in AP-L1 runs)
is smaller the minimum resolved radius according to the convergence
criterion proposed by \citet{Power2003}. This is shown by the circular
velocity profiles in Fig.~\ref{FigSim}, where the line types change
from solid to dotted at the convergence radius, $r_{\rm conv}$
(defined by setting $\kappa=0.6$ in eq.~\ref{EqKappa}). The total
mass within $r_{1/2}$ and, consequently, $V_{1/2}$, are therefore
probably underestimated in the simulations. Fortunately, the analysis
of \citet{Power2003} also shows that mass profiles inside
$r_{\rm conv}$ deviate from convergence in a predictable fashion, so
that a correction procedure is straightforward to devise and
implement, at least for radii not too far inside $r_{\rm conv}$.
In Appendix~\ref{SecAppendix}, we describe the correction used to
estimate the total mass enclosed within the Sculptor half-light radius
for all Sculptor-like satellites in APOSTLE. The right-hand panel of
Fig.~\ref{FigSim} shows the APOSTLE $V_{1/2}$ estimates with and
without correction. These estimates are obtained by randomly sampling
the allowed range in $r_{1/2}$ as well as the $V_{\rm circ}(r_{1/2})$
distribution of Sculptor-like APOSTLE satellites. In brief, this
procedure involves: (i) choosing a random value for $r_{1/2}$
consistent with propagating the Gaussian errors in distance modulus
and angular size (see Sec.~\ref{SecObs} and col. 7 of
Table~\ref{TabSat}); (ii) measuring $V_{1/2}=V_{\rm circ}(r_{1/2})$
for a random satellite in AP-L1; and (iii) weighting\footnote{The
weighting function is $\exp(-x^2/2\sigma^2)$, where
$x=M_{\rm str}^{\rm AP}-M_{\rm str}^{\rm Scl}$, and $\sigma$ is the
uncertainty in Sculptor's stellar mass discussed in
Sec.~\ref{SecObs}.} each APOSTLE satellite by how closely it matches
Sculptor's stellar mass. (Although the procedure considers all
satellites, in practice only Sculptor-like satellites contribute
meaningfully, given the weighting procedure.)
The procedure is repeated $10,000$ times to derive the $V_{1/2}$
distribution shown in Fig.~\ref{FigSim}, which is then corrected for
resolution as described in Appendix~\ref{SecAppendix}. In the case of
Sculptor the correction to the measured $V_{1/2}$ values is relatively
mild; the median $V_{1/2}$ shifts only slightly, from $13.9 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$
before correction to $15.7 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$. This is actually the case for the
majority of systems; the largest correction is obtained for the Leo II
dSph, where the median $V_{1/2}$ increases by $24$ per cent, from
$10.3 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$ to $12.8 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$. Satellites like Fornax, which have larger
half-light radii well-resolved by APOSTLE, are corrected by less than
$5$ per cent.
We apply the same procedure outlined above to all $9$ Galactic
`classical' dSph satellites (excluding Sagittarius) and compare our
results with observational constraints in Fig.~\ref{FigV}. The grey
shaded regions and contours denote the observational estimates
including uncertainties, while the red box-and-whisker symbols
indicate the results for APOSTLE satellites. There is clearly
substantial overlap between observational estimates of $V_{1/2}$ and
the APOSTLE results for all $9$ dSphs, with no exception.
The values of $\mu_{\rm sat}$ quoted in the legends of Fig.~\ref{FigV}
indicate the absolute value of the difference between the mean
observed and simulated values, in units of the combined rms: the
difference is clearly not significant (less than unity) in any of the
$9$ cases. We conclude that the dark matter content of APOSTLE
satellites is in good agreement with the observed values. We
emphasize that this agreement is {\it not} the result of cored DM
density profiles, as dwarf galaxies in APOSTLE show no evidence for cores
\citep{Oman2015,Sawala2016}.
We may assess the effect of tidal stripping on our conclusion by
repeating the above procedure using APOSTLE centrals, rather than
satellites, for the comparison. The results are shown by the blue
box-and-whisker symbols in Fig.~\ref{FigV} (red and blue boxes are
plotted with different widths, for clarity). The values of $V_{1/2}$
are systematically larger for centrals, since they have not
experienced tidal stripping. The agreement is clearly poorer, in
particular for satellites `unusually large for their luminosities'
(Sec.~\ref{SecTS}) like Can~Ven~I, Sextans, Carina, and Fornax.
Consistency between APOSTLE and Galactic satellites therefore requires
that the dark matter content of at least some dSphs has been affected
by tides from the Milky Way halo. We emphasize that {\it all} subhaloes
have been affected by tides; their effects, however, are noticeable
mainly in systems whose sizes are large enough for their kinematics to
probe regions where the mass loss is significant. The strong
dependence of the effect of tides on galaxy size must be taken
carefully into account when comparing the dynamics of satellite and
isolated field galaxies to search for signs of environmental effects
\citep[see, e.g.,][]{Kirby2014}.
\subsection{The too-big-to-fail problem revisited}
\label{SecTBTF}
The previous section demonstrates that there is no conflict between
the dark matter content of APOSTLE satellites and that of Galactic
dSphs. This does not {\it per se} solve the `too-big-to-fail'
problem laid out by \citet{Boylan-Kolchin2011,Boylan-Kolchin2012},
which asserts that there is an excess of massive subhaloes without a
luminous counterpart in Milky Way-sized haloes. Does this problem
persist in APOSTLE?
We have examined this question earlier in \citet{Sawala2016}, but we
review those arguments here in light of the revised uncertainties in
the mass of the Galactic classical dwarf spheroidals discussed in
Sec~\ref{SecObs}. Fig.~\ref{FigLF} reproduces the argument given by
\citet[][]{Boylan-Kolchin2012}. The solid squares in the right-hand
panel of our Fig.~\ref{FigLF} are taken directly from their Fig.~6 and
show the maximum circular velocities of the $13$ most luminous
subhaloes in the Aq-E halo, selected because, according to an
abundance matching model patterned after \citet{Guo2010}, its number
of satellites brighter than $M_V=-8$ matches that of the Milky
Way. This is shown by the magenta dot-dashed line in the left-hand
panel of Fig. ~\ref{FigLF}. The offset between the Aq-E solid squares
and the \citet{Guo2010} prediction (dotted line on right-hand panel)
is mainly due to tidal stripping.
Our APOSTLE L1 simulations also reproduce well the MW satellite
luminosity function (see dotted lines in left-hand panel), but they
differ from the \citet{Boylan-Kolchin2012} analysis of Aq-E in two
respects. One is that our subhaloes are, on average, significantly
less massive, at a given $M_V$, than assumed for Aq-E. This is because
the APOSTLE stellar mass -- halo mass relation is offset from
abundance matching predictions (see Fig.~\ref{FigMstarM200}).
The box-and-whisker symbols in the right-hand panel of
Fig. ~\ref{FigLF} show the $V_{\rm max}$ values (Table~\ref{TabSim})
of APOSTLE satellites that best match the stellar mass {\it and}
$V_{1/2}$ of each Galactic dSph. The procedure for estimating
$V_{\rm max}$ is the same as that outlined in Sec.~\ref{SecDM} for
computing $V_{1/2}$ but, in addition, weights each simulated satellite
by how closely it matches the observed $V_{1/2}$. These new
$V_{\rm max}$ estimates complement and extend those reported by
\citet{Sawala2016}.
The second difference concerns the number of massive substructures:
Aq-E has $21$ subhaloes with $V_{\rm max}>25 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$ within $300$ kpc
from the centre, $10$ of which are more luminous than $M_V=-8$,
according to the model of \citet{Boylan-Kolchin2012}. On the other
hand, APOSTLE L1 primaries have, on average, just $7.2\pm 2.5$
subhaloes with $V_{\rm max}>25 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$ within the same volume. Indeed,
the APOSTLE primary whose satellite population best matches the MW
satellite luminosity function (solid red curve in the left-panel of
Fig.~\ref{FigLF}) has only $5$ subhaloes this massive, as indicated by
the solid circles in the right-hand panel of the same figure. (Two of
those host satellites brighter than $M_V=-15$.)
As discussed by \citet{Sawala2016}, the reason for the discrepancy is
twofold. (i) Subhalo masses are systematically lower in cosmological
hydrodynamical simulations because of the reduced growth brought about
by the early loss of baryons caused by cosmic reionization and
feedback. This reduces the $V_{\rm max}$ of all subhaloes by
$\sim 12$ per cent. (ii) Chance plays a role too, as Aq-E
seems particularly rich in massive substructures. The average number
of subhaloes with $V_{\rm max}>25\hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$ expected {\it within the virial
radius} of a halo of virial mass $M_{200}=1.2\times10^{12}\Msun$ is
just $8.1$ \citep{Wang2012a}, compared with $18$ for Aq-E, a
$>3\sigma$ upward fluctuation. Note that
the expected number would drop to just $5.4$ after correcting for the
$\sim 12$ per cent reduction in $V_{\rm max}$. Indeed, the subhalo
velocity function is so steep that even a slight variation in
$V_{\rm max}$ leads to a disproportionately large change in the number
of massive substructures.
The discrepancy between APOSTLE and Aq-E noted above can therefore be
ascribed to a chance upward fluctuation in the number of massive
substructures in Aq-E coupled with the reduction of subhalo masses due
to the loss of baryons in a hydrodynamical simulation.
\begin{figure}
\hspace{-0.2cm}
\resizebox{8cm}{!}{\includegraphics{figures/Fig7_v2.ps}}\\%
\caption{{\it Top}: Number of massive subhaloes
($V_{\rm max}>25\hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$) within $r_{200}$, shown as a function of
virial mass, $M_{200}$, for APOSTLE-L1 (solid red
circles) haloes and their DMO counterparts (open red circles), and
Aquarius haloes (open stars). The results from EAGLE L0250752-Ref
and its DMO counterpart are shown using small solid green circles
and grey open circles, respectively. The prediction of
\citet[][W12]{Wang2012a} with $1\sigma$ scatter is shown by the
grey band. Including the $12$ per cent reduction in $V_{\rm max}$
brings the W12 relation down to the green dotted line. The
horizontal dashed line indicates the number of MW satellites
brighter than $M_V=-8$. {\it Bottom}: The fraction of haloes with
$12$ or fewer massive subhaloes (i.e., $V_{\rm max}>25\hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$), as a
function of the virial mass of the primary. The grey curve
corresponds to the \citet{Wang2012a} estimate from
dark-matter-only simulations. The green curve includes the $12$ per cent
reduction in $V_{\rm max}$ obtained in hydrodynamical simulations. }
\label{FigNsat}
\end{figure}
\subsection{TBTF and the mass of the Milky Way}
\label{SecMWMass}
The number of massive substructures is, of course, quite sensitive to
the virial mass of the host halo. Following \citet{Wang2012a} and
\citet{Cautun2014}, we may use this to derive an upper
limit to the mass of the Milky Way. In APOSTLE every subhalo with
$V_{\rm max}>25 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$ hosts a satellite brighter than $M_V=-8$ (or,
equivalently, more massive than $M_{\rm str}\sim 10^5\Msun$; see
the right-hand panel of Fig.~\ref{FigMstarM200}). This means that any
potential Milky Way host halo with more than $\sim 12$ subhaloes this
massive will either suffer from a `too-big-to-fail' problem or have
an excess of luminous satellites.
We examine this in Fig.~\ref{FigNsat}, which shows the number of
massive subhaloes within $r_{\rm 200}$ as a function of virial
mass. The criterion above implies that, in the top panel, only systems
below the dashed line labelled `MW' are likely to reproduce well the
MW satellite population. The grey band in the same panel shows the
expected number ($\pm 1\sigma$) of massive substructures according to
\citet{Wang2012a}. Small (grey) open circles indicate the results from
a $752^3$-particle dark-matter-only simulation of a cube $25$ Mpc on a
side. Small (green) filled circles correspond to the same volume, but
for a run including baryons and the full galaxy formation physics
modules from the EAGLE project\footnote{This simulation is labelled
L0250752 in \citet{Schaye2015} and was run using the
parameters of the `Ref' model.}. The offset between green and grey
circles demonstrates the effect of the reduction of $V_{\rm max}$
caused by the inclusion of baryons in the simulation.
The six Aquarius haloes \citep{Springel2008b} are shown by starred
symbols: these systems are slightly overabundant in massive
substructures relative to both the EAGLE runs and the predictions of
\citet{Wang2012a}, which are based on large samples of haloes from the
Millennium Simulations. Three Aquarius haloes have more
than 12 massive substructures, and therefore would not be
consistent with the MW satellite population according to our APOSTLE
results.
Including baryons changes this, as shown by the six primaries in
APOSTLE L1: these are shown in Fig.~\ref{FigNsat} with red circles;
filled symbols for the hydrodynamical runs, and open symbols for the DMO
versions. The DMO runs give results similar to Aquarius: half of
APOSTLE DMO are above the `MW' line. The number of massive
substructures drops substantially once baryons are included (filled
circles), so that all six primaries in the APOSTLE L1
hydrodynamical runs are actually consistent with the MW.
We may use these results to derive firm upper limits on the mass of
the Milky Way. This is shown in the bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{FigNsat}
where each curve traces the fraction of haloes of a given virial mass
that have $12$ (or fewer) massive substructures (i.e., the observed
number of Galactic satellites brighter than $M_V=-8$). We show results
for two cases; one where the numbers are derived from the formula of
\citet{Wang2012a}, assuming Poisson statistics (solid grey lines) and
another where the zero-point of that relation has been shifted to
account for the $12$ per cent reduction in $V_{\rm max}$ discussed above (see
green dotted line in the top panel of Fig.~\ref{FigNsat}).
Clearly, the reduction in $V_{\rm max}$ induced by the loss of baryons
in hydrodynamical simulations significantly relaxes the constraints
based on dark-matter-only simulations. Indeed, according to this
argument, fewer than $5$ per cent of haloes more massive than
$2.8\times 10^{12}\Msun$ can host the Milky Way, assuming the DMO
relation. The same criterion results in an increased mass limit of
$4.2\times 10^{12}\Msun$ adopting the $V_{\rm max}$ correction. This
may also be compared with the earlier analysis of \citet{Wang2012a},
which found an upper limit of $2\times 10^{12}\Msun$, and of
\citet{Cautun2014}, which derived an even stricter limit, albeit using
slightly different criteria.
\section{Summary and Conclusions}
\label{SecConc}
We use the APOSTLE suite of $\Lambda$CDM cosmological hydrodynamical
simulations of the Local Group to examine the masses of satellite
galaxies brighter than $M_V=-8$ (i.e., $M_{\rm str}>10^5 \Msun$). Our
analysis extends that of \citet{Sawala2016}, were we showed that our
simulations reproduce the Galactic satellite luminosity function
and show no sign of either the `missing satellites' problem nor of the
`too-big-to-fail' problem highlighted in earlier work. Our main
conclusions may be summarised as follows.
Previous studies have underestimated the uncertainty in the mass
enclosed within the half-light radii of Galactic dSphs, derived from
their line-of-sight velocity dispersion and half-light radii. Our
analysis takes into account the error propagation due to uncertainties
in the distance, effective radius, and velocity dispersion, and also
include an estimate of the intrinsic dispersion of the modeling
procedure, following the recent work of \citet{Campbell2016}. The
latter is important as it introduces a base systematic uncertainty
that exceeds $\sim 20$ per cent.
Simulated galaxies in APOSTLE/EAGLE follow a stellar mass -- halo mass
relation that differs, for dwarf galaxies, from common extrapolations
of abundance matching models, a difference that is even more
pronounced for satellites due to tidal stripping, At fixed stellar
mass, APOSTLE dwarfs inhabit halos significantly less massive than AM
predicts. This difference, however, might not be readily apparent
because tides strip halos from the outside in and some dSphs are too
compact for tidal effects to be readily apparent.
We find that the dynamical mass of {\it all} Galactic dSphs is in
excellent agreement with that of APOSTLE satellites that match their
stellar mass. APOSTLE centrals (i.e., not satellites), on the
other hand, overestimate the observed mass of four Galactic dSphs (Can
Ven~I, Sextans, Carina, and Fornax), suggesting that they have had
their dark matter content significantly reduced by stripping. The
other, more compact, dSphs are well fit by either APOSTLE satellites
or centrals, so tides are not needed to explain their dark matter
content.
After accounting for tidal mass losses, we find that all APOSTLE halos
(satellites or centrals) with $V_{\rm max}>25 \hbox{${\rm km\, s^{-1}}$}$ host dwarfs
brighter than $M_V=-8$. Only systems with fewer than $\sim 12$
subhaloes with $V_{\rm max}>25$ km/s are thus compatible with the
population of luminous MW satellites. This suggests an upper
limit to the mass of the Milky Way halo: we find that most halos with
virial mass not exceeding $2\times 10^{12}\, M_\odot$ should pass this
test, unless they are unusually overabundant in massive substructures.
Our APOSTLE primaries satisfy these constraints, and show a dwarf
galaxy population in agreement with observations of the
Local Group, including their abundance as a function of mass, their
dark matter content, and their global kinematics. Furthermore, APOSTLE
uses the same galaxy formation model that was found by EAGLE to
reproduce the galaxy stellar mass function in cosmologically
significant volumes. We consider this a significant success for direct
simulations of galaxy formation based on the $\Lambda$CDM paradigm.
We note that this success does not require any substantial
modification to well-established properties of $\Lambda$CDM. In
particular, none of our simulated dwarf galaxies have `cores' in
their dark mass profiles, but yet have no trouble reproducing the
detailed properties of Galactic satellites. Baryon-induced cores are
not mandatory to solve the `too-big-to-fail' problem.
We end by noting that a number of recent studies have argued that
TBTF-like problems also arise when considering the properties of M31
satellites \citep{Tollerud2014,Collins2014}, as well as those of field
galaxies in the local Universe
\citep{Garrison-Kimmel2014,Papastergis2015}. It remains to be seen
whether the resolution we advocate here for Galactic satellites will
solve those problems as well. We plan to report on those issues in
future work.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We acknowledge useful discussions with Mike Boylan-Kolchin, Manolis
Papastergis, and Alan McConnachie. The research was supported in part
by the Science and Technology Facilities Council Consolidated Grant
(ST/F001166/1), and the European Research Council under the European
Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013)/ERC Grant
agreement 278594-GasAroundGalaxies. CSF acknowledges ERC Advanced
Grant 267291 ’COSMIWAY’; and JW the 973 program grant 2015CB857005 and
NSFC grant No. 11373029, 11390372. This work used the DiRAC Data
Centric system at Durham University, operated by the Institute for
Computational Cosmology on behalf of the STFC DiRAC HPC Facility
(www.dirac.ac.uk), and also resources provided by WestGrid
(www.westgrid.ca) and Compute Canada (www.computecanada.ca). The DiRAC
system was funded by BIS National E-infrastructure capital grant
ST/K00042X/1, STFC capital grants ST/H008519/1 and ST/K00087X/1, STFC
DiRAC Operations grant ST/K003267/1 and Durham University. DiRAC is
part of the National E-Infrastructure. This research has made use of
NASA's Astrophysics Data System.
\bibliographystyle{apj}
|
\section{Connecting an LHC discovery of a mediator particle with DM signals}
\label{750}
In this Section we discuss the possibility of connecting a new physics signal in a channel visible at the LHC with DM using a simplified model with effective couplings. For definiteness we focus on a particular example consistent with the 750 GeV diphoton excess observed by the ATLAS and CMS experiments with the 2015 data sample. Although the 750 GeV excess did not survive in the 2016 data of ATLAS and CMS (see, e.g.,~\cite{Khachatryan:2016yec} ) this example still provides interesting insights on a potential strategy that could be followed in case of a signal. Our pragmatic Ansatz links such a potential collider signal to other experimental signatures, which can be used to verify/falsify a specific signal hypothesis and to study its underlying nature. With this approach it is possible to define discovery scenarios combining different signatures, which can be vital for guiding the experimental search programme in case of a discovery.
\subsection{Simplified DM model}
\label{750model}
In order to see how a direct-channel resonance such as the diphoton excess seen in 2015 by ATLAS and CMS~\cite{Aaboud:2016tru,Khachatryan:2016hje} could be linked to a stable DM candidate, one can augment the SM by a scalar $S$ or pseudoscalar $P$ particle with the mass of $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ and a Dirac fermion $\chi$.\footnote{The formalism we present is also directly applicable to a Majorana DM particle.} The relavant interactions can be written in the scalar case as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:LS}
{\cal L}_S = g_{\chi} \hspace{0.25mm} S \hspace{0.25mm} \bar \chi \chi + \frac{\alpha_s}{4 \pi} \hspace{0.25mm} \frac{c_G}{\Lambda} \hspace{0.25mm} S \hspace{0.25mm} G_{\mu \nu}^a G^{a\, \mu \nu} + \frac{\alpha}{4 \pi s_w^2}\hspace{0.25mm} \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} \hspace{0.25mm} S \hspace{0.25mm} W_{\mu \nu}^i W^{i \, \mu \nu} + \frac{\alpha}{4 \pi c_w^2}\hspace{0.25mm} \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \hspace{0.25mm} S \hspace{0.25mm} B_{\mu \nu} B^{ \mu \nu} \,.
\end{equation}
Here $G^a_{\mu \nu}$, $W_{\mu \nu}^i$, and~$B_{\mu \nu}$ are the $SU(3)_C$, $SU(2)_L$, and $U(1)_Y$ field strength tensors, $\alpha_s$ and~$\alpha$ denote the strong and electromagnetic coupling constants, and $s_w$ and $c_w$ are the sine and the cosine of the weak mixing angle. The scale that suppresses the higher-dimensional interactions that couple the mediator $S$ to gauge fields is denoted by $\Lambda$, while the Wilson coefficients $c_V$ with $V=G,\;W,\;B$ describe how strongly $S$ couples to $V_{\mu \nu} V^{\mu \nu}$. The corresponding Lagrangian~${\cal L}_P$ for the pseudoscalar case is obtained from (\ref{eq:LS}) by replacing $\bar \chi \chi$ by $\bar \chi \hspace{0.25mm} i \gamma_5 \hspace{0.25mm} \chi$, $V_{\mu \nu} V^{\mu \nu}$ by $V_{\mu \nu} \tilde V^{\mu \nu}$ with $\tilde V_{\mu \nu} = \frac{1}{2} \, \epsilon_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta} \hspace{0.25mm} V^{\alpha \beta}$ and, finally, $g_\chi$ by $\tilde g_\chi$ and $c_V$ by $\tilde c_V$. The DM phenomenology of such simplified models ${\cal L}_{S,P}$ has recently been studied in~\cite{Backovic:2015fnp,Barducci:2015gtd,Mambrini:2015wyu,D'Eramo:2016mgv,Backovic:2016gsf}.
The production cross section and the rates for the decays of the resonance $S$ ($P$) into SM and DM particles can all be expressed in terms of the Wilson coefficients $c_V$ ($\tilde c_V$), the scale $\Lambda$, the DM coupling $g_\chi$ ($\tilde g_\chi$) and the DM mass $m_\chi$. Assuming that the production of a new spin-0 state is dominated by gluon-gluon fusion and considering
for definiteness the excess reported in~\cite{Aaboud:2016tru,Khachatryan:2016hje} and one obtains \cite{Bauer:2016lbe}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:xsecS}
\sigma_{8 \, {\rm TeV}} \left ( p p \to S \right ) \simeq 46.7 \, {\rm fb} \left ( \frac{c_G \, {\rm TeV}}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \quad \sigma_{13 \, {\rm TeV}} \left ( p p \to S \right ) \simeq 208 \, {\rm fb} \left ( \frac{c_G \, {\rm TeV}}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,,
\end{equation}
for the total cross section at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ and 13~TeV, respectively. These results hold to first approximation also for a pseudoscalar~$P$ after obvious replacements.
The partial decay rates of such a scalar resonance into pairs of vector bosons and DM particles
can be written as~\footnote{The expressions for the partial widths to $\gamma Z$, $ZZ$ and $WW$ are only approximations that hold in the limit of vanishing $W$ and $Z$ boson masses, as is appropriate for any heavy spin-0 state. They reproduce the full results (see~e.g.~\cite{Bauer:2016lbe}), which will be used in the numerical analysis, to better than 10\%.}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Gammas}
\begin{split}
\Gamma \left (S \to gg \right ) & = \frac{\alpha_s^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{8 \pi^3} \hspace{0.5mm} K_G \left ( \frac{c_G}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 1.93 \cdot 10^{4} \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( \frac{c_G}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to \gamma \gamma \right ) & = \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{64 \pi^3} \left ( \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} + \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 11.3 \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} + \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to \gamma Z \right ) & \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{32 \pi^3} \left ( \frac{c_w}{s_w} \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} - \frac{s_w}{c_w} \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 26 \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( 1.82 \, \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} - 0.55 \, \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to Z Z \right ) & \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{64 \pi^3} \left ( \frac{c_w^2}{s_w^2} \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} + \frac{s_w^2}{c_w^2} \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 13 \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( 3.32 \, \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} + 0.30 \, \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to W W \right ) & \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{32 \pi^3 \hspace{0.25mm} s_w^4} \left ( \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 485 \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to \chi \bar \chi \right ) & = \frac{g_\chi^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S}{8 \pi} \left ( 1 - \frac{4 m_\chi^2}{M_S^2} \right )^{3/2} \simeq 29.8 \, {\rm GeV} \, g_\chi^2 \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
These numbers are simple to rescale for any other possible new spin-0 state, assumin that couplings of the new resonance to SM quarks are negligible. For definiteness in our numerical results we use $K_G = 1.348$~\cite{Bauer:2016lbe}, $\alpha_s= 0.092$, $\alpha = 1/137.04$ for the diphoton decay and $\alpha = 1/127.94$ otherwise, and $s_w^2 = 0.2313$. In the case of the invisible decay width, we set the DM particle mass to zero, as would be a good approximation for any heavy spin-0 state decaying into light DM particles. After replacing $c_V$ by $\tilde c_V$, the above results for the partial decay widths of $S$ to gauge bosons also apply to the case of a pseudoscalar, while to obtain the invisible decay rate of $P$ one has to change the exponent $3/2$ appearing in $\Gamma \left (S \to \chi \bar \chi \right )$ with $1/2$.
Looking at the expressions in (\ref{eq:Gammas}), one observes that new physics scenarios that lead to~$c_W \ll c_B$ are generically less constrained than models that predict $c_W \gg c_B$, because in the former case the decays to $\gamma Z$ and $ZZ$ are suppressed by a factor $\left (s_w/c_w \right ) ^4 \simeq 0.1$ and $\left ( s_w/c_w \right ) ^8 \simeq 0.01$, respectively, and decays to $WW$ are absent in the limit of~$c_W$ going to zero. In the following we will focus on the model realisations with~$c_W = 0$ and $c_B \neq 0$ (or $\tilde c_W = 0$ and $\tilde c_B \neq 0$, thereby
avoiding constraints on the simplified model~(\ref{eq:LS}) arising from resonance searches in the $\gamma Z$, $ZZ$, and $WW$ channels~\footnote{We do not examine scenarios with $c_W \simeq (s_w/c_w)^2 \hspace{0.25mm} c_B$ or $c_W \simeq -(s_w/c_w)^4 \hspace{0.25mm} c_B$, which would evade constraints from $\gamma Z$ or $Z Z$ resonance searches by tuning $c_W$ and $c_B$.}.
In the narrow-width approximation, the signal strength for the process $pp \to XY$ with $XY = \{ gg, \,\gamma\gamma, \,\gamma Z, \,ZZ,$ $WW\}$ factorises into the product of the total production cross section and the relevant branching fraction
\begin{equation} \label{eq:muSM}
\mu_{\sqrt{s}} \left (pp \to XY \right ) = \sigma_{\sqrt{s}} \left (pp \to S \right ) \, {\rm Br} \left ( S \to X Y \right ) \,,
\end{equation}
and a similar factorisation also applies in the pseudoscalar case.
\subsection{Monojet signatures}
\label{sec:monojet}
Since the couplings of the mediators to gluon pairs are implemented by means of effective operators $\big($see (\ref{eq:LS})$\big)$, the factorisation of the signal strength (\ref{eq:muSM}) is expected also to apply to the case of a monojet signature for any spin-0 state in the general class considered here. This means, in particular, that varying the coupling~$c_G$~($\tilde c_G$) should only result in an overall rescaling of the total $pp \to \slashed{E}_T + j$ cross section, but should leave the shape of all kinematic distributions unchanged. To validate the extent to which the kinematic distributions can be affected by the detector effects relevant for modern searches for DM at the LHC \cite{Aad:2015zva,Aaboud:2016tnv,Khachatryan:2014rra,CMS-PAS-EXO-12-055,CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013}, we simulate the~$\slashed{E}_T + 0,1,2$ jet spectra resulting from the model (\ref{eq:LS}) using {\tt MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO}~\cite{Alwall:2014hca} with the MLM merging scheme~\cite{MLM}, {\tt FastJet}~\cite{Cacciari:2011ma}, and {\tt PYTHIA~8}~\cite{Sjostrand:2007gs}. The modelling of the experimental resolution for $\slashed{E}_T$ and the recoiling system is done by using resolutions typical of the ATLAS and CMS detectors.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{MET750.pdf}
\caption{\it Normalised detector-level $\slashed{E}_T$ distributions for different values of $c_G$. For comparison, we show also the normalised $\slashed{E}_T$ distribution predicted in the scalar-mediated DM model recommended by the LHC DMF~\protect\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}. The latter predictions have been obtained by the ${\tt POWHEG}$ implementation~\protect\cite{Haisch:2013ata}.}
\label{fig:kine}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:kine} shows the normalised $\slashed{E}_T$ distributions predicted in the model (\ref{eq:LS}) for different values of the coupling $c_G$. Within the detector resolution no significant variations in the~$\slashed{E}_T$ shapes are observed, which implies that the signal strength $\mu_{\sqrt{s}} \left ( pp \to \slashed{E}_T + j \right )$ for a given monojet signal region is proportional to the total production cross section of the mediator times its invisible branching fraction. For instance, for the recent CMS monojet search~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013}, one finds
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mumono}
\mu_{13 \, {\rm TeV}} \left (pp \to \slashed{E}_T + j \right ) \simeq 3.2 \cdot 10^{-2} \; \sigma_{13 \, {\rm TeV}} (pp \to S) \, {\rm Br} \left ( S \to \chi \bar \chi \right ) \,.
\end{equation}
The same expression also holds in the pseudoscalar case, since the $\slashed{E}_T$ spectrum is insensitive to the mediator type.
It is also illustrative to compare the normalised $\slashed{E}_T$ shapes resulting from ${\cal L}_S$ with the spectra predicted in the LHC DMF model. Such a comparison is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:kine} as well. One observes that the effective interactions present in (\ref{eq:LS}) lead to a significantly harder spectrum than the top quark loop diagrams (see the third panel in Fig.~\ref{fig:scalardiagrams}) that produce the $\slashed{E}_T + j$ events in the LHC DMF model. Numerically, the observed suppression amounts to a factor of around 7 for $\slashed{E}_T \simeq 1 \, {\rm TeV}$. This is an expected feature, because high-energy jet radiation is able to resolve the structure of the top quark loops~\cite{Haisch:2012kf,Haisch:2013fla,Buckley:2014fba,Harris:2014hga,Haisch:2015ioa}, while the production mechanism cannot be resolved in the model~(\ref{eq:LS}) where the coupling of $S$ (or $P$) to gluons is implemented through a dimension-five operator.
\subsection{LHC constraints}
\label{sec:LHCconstraints}
\begin{table}[!t]
\begin{center}
\caption{\label{tab:mu} \it The 95\% confidence level (CL) upper bounds on the relevant signal strengths arising from different LHC Run 1 and 2 searches.}
\vspace{5mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline $gg$ (8 TeV) & $\gamma Z$ (8 TeV) & $Z Z$ (8 TeV) & $W W$ (8 TeV) & $\slashed{E}_T + j$ (13 TeV) \\ \hline
$<2.5 \, {\rm pb}$ \cite{Khachatryan:2016ecr} & $<4 \, {\rm fb}$ \cite{Aad:2014fha} & $<12 \, {\rm fb}$ \cite{Aad:2015kna} & $<40 \, {\rm fb}$ \cite{Aad:2015agg} & $<14 \, {\rm fb}$ \cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{0mm}
\end{center}
\end{table}
For the purposes of our subsequent illustration of the interplay between collider and astrophysical constraints,
we first explore for which parameters the simplified model (\ref{eq:LS}) could have explained the putative diphoton excess
reported in the 2015 data~\cite{Buttazzo:2015txu}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mugammagamma}
\mu_{13 \, {\rm TeV}} \left (pp \to \gamma \gamma \right ) = (4.6 \pm 1.2) \, {\rm fb} \,,
\end{equation}
while at the same time respecting existing bounds from dijet, diboson, and monojet searches. The bounds are collected in Tab.~\ref{tab:mu}. Notice that dijet production arises in the context of (\ref{eq:LS}) to first order only from the process $pp \to S/P \to gg$. In order to suppress contributions to the diboson channels, we study the scalar scenario with $c_W = 0$ and~$c_B \neq 0$. After setting~$M_S = 750 \, {\rm GeV}$ and $\Lambda = 1 \, {\rm TeV}$, the full phenomenology in the simplified model can thus be characterised by the four parameters $c_G$, $c_B$, $g_\chi$, and $m_\chi$. In fact, one can trade the two parameters $g_\chi$ and $m_\chi$ for the total decay width $\Gamma_S$ by correctly adjusting the DM coupling~$g_\chi$ for any choice of $c_G$, $c_B$, and $m_\chi$. If this is done, one can derive the constraints in the $c_G \hspace{0.25mm}$--$\hspace{0.25mm} c_B$ plane for different values of $\Gamma_S$. The outcome of this exercise is depicted in the six panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:pseudoB}. We note that very similar plots would be obtained for a pseudoscalar scenario with $\tilde c_W = 0$ and~$\tilde c_B \neq 0$.
For the width $\Gamma_S = 45 \, {\rm GeV}$ preferred by the ATLAS 2015 data (upper left panel), one observes that monojet searches severely constrain the region in the $c_G \hspace{0.25mm}$--$\hspace{0.25mm} c_B$ plane in which the diphoton excess can be explained.\footnote{From the discussion in Section~\ref{sec:monojet} it should be clear that the strength of the monojet constraints is partly due to that fact that the production of $S,P$ proceeds via higher-dimensional operators. Milder bounds are expected to apply to any weakly coupled model with an ultraviolet completion of (\ref{eq:LS}) at a low scale~$\Lambda$.} This observation has also been made in~\cite{Backovic:2015fnp,Barducci:2015gtd,Mambrini:2015wyu,D'Eramo:2016mgv,Backovic:2016gsf}. In fact, the allowed values of $c_G \simeq 1$ and $c_B \simeq 200$ translate into the following effective digluon and diphoton couplings,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Cga}
C_g = \frac{\alpha_s}{4\pi} \, \frac{c_G}{\Lambda} \simeq \frac{0.007}{{\rm TeV}} \,, \qquad C_\gamma = \frac{\alpha}{4\pi} \, \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \simeq \frac{0.12}{{\rm TeV}} \,.
\end{equation}
The effective spin-0 mediator coupling to gluons is hence of similar size to the effective SM Higgs digluon coupling, while the $S$ field interacts with photons 20 times more strongly than the Higgs. For smaller total widths of $\Gamma_S = 5 \, {\rm GeV}$ and $2 \, {\rm GeV}$ (upper middle and right panel) the constraints on the Wilson coefficient $c_B$ become weaker by a factor of 3 and 5, while the minimal allowed value of $c_G$ remains basically the same. Reducing the total width to $\Gamma_S = 1 \, {\rm GeV}$ (lower left panel), one sees that the regions disfavoured by the monojet and dijet searches do not overlap anymore, allowing for an explanation of the diphoton excess with $c_G \simeq c_B \simeq 7$. For $\Gamma_S = 0.1 \, {\rm GeV}$~(lower middle panel) monojet searches do not provide a direct constraint on $c_G$ and $c_B$ any more, but invisible decays $S \to \chi \bar \chi$ indirectly still play a role compared to the case of $g_\chi =0$~(lower right panel), since significantly larger values of $c_B$ are needed for $g_\chi \neq 0$ to fit the diphoton excess if~$c_G \lesssim 2$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.975\textwidth]{scalarB.pdf}
\caption{\it \label{fig:pseudoB} Fit to the LHC diphoton excess in the $c_G \hspace{0.25mm}$--$\hspace{0.25mm} c_B$ plane for $\Gamma_S = 45 \, {\rm GeV}$, $5 \, {\rm GeV}$, $2 \, {\rm GeV}$, $1 \, {\rm GeV}$, $0.1 \, {\rm GeV}$ and $g_\chi = 0$ from upper left to lower right. The 95\% CL regions favoured by the reported diphoton excess are shaded green, while bounds from Run 1 and 2 data are shown as contour lines coloured blue for dijets, yellow for $\gamma Z$, magenta for $ZZ$, and red for monojets. There are no bounds from the $WW$ final states. The grey shaded areas are excluded at the 95\% CL. }
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Direct detection}
\label{sec:DD}
Direct detection experiments can also be used to constrain the generic scalar model ${\cal L}_S$, since it leads to a spin-independent~(SI) DM-nucleon scattering cross section, but not the pseudoscalar scenario~${\cal L}_P$, because it predicts spin-dependent and momentum-suppressed rates. After the mediator $S$ has been integrated out, the interactions~(\ref{eq:LS}) induce couplings between DM and gluons, photons, as well as EW gauge bosons. If the gluon coupling is non-vanishing at the scale~$M_S$, the couplings to photons and EW gauge bosons can be shown to provide a subleading contribution to direct detection rates~\cite{Frandsen:2012db,Crivellin:2014gpa,D'Eramo:2016mgv}. To keep the discussion simple, we ignore such effects and include only QCD corrections. The SI DM-nucleon scattering cross section takes the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:SI}
(\sigma_{\rm SI}^N)_S \simeq \frac{g_\chi^2 \hspace{0.5mm} \mu_{N\chi}^2 \hspace{0.25mm} m_N^2 \hspace{0.25mm} f^2(c_G)}{\pi} \,,
\end{equation}
where $\mu_{N\chi} = m_N \hspace{0.25mm} m_\chi/(m_N + m_\chi)$ is the DM-nucleon reduced mass with $m_N \simeq 0.939 \, {\rm GeV}$ the nucleon mass. The mediator-nucleon coupling $f (c_G)$ reads (see, e.g.~\cite{D'Eramo:2016mgv,Frandsen:2012db,Vecchi:2013iza,Hill:2014yxa})
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fcg}
f (c_G) \simeq \frac{c_G}{4 \pi \hspace{0.1mm} \Lambda \hspace{0.1mm} M_S^2} \left ( 6 \alpha_s f_q^N + \frac{8 \pi}{9} f_{\rm TG}^N \right ) \simeq \frac{2 \hspace{0.25mm} c_G \hspace{0.1mm} f_{\rm TG}^N }{9 \Lambda \hspace{0.1mm} M_S^2} \,.
\end{equation}
Notice that to first approximation the coupling $f(c_G)$ only depends on the gluonic component of the nucleon,~i.e.~$f^{N}_{\rm TG}=1-\sum_{q=u,d,s }f_{q}^{N} \simeq 0.894$ \cite{Junnarkar:2013ac,Hoferichter:2015dsa}, while contributions from the light-quark form factors~$f_{q}^{N}$ are suppressed by an additional power of $\alpha_s$.
Combining~(\ref{eq:SI}) and (\ref{eq:fcg}), one finds that for $M_S = 750 \, {\rm GeV}$ prototype axample the size of the SI cross section is
\begin{equation}
(\sigma_{\rm SI}^N)_S \simeq 1.4 \cdot 10^{-47} \, {\rm cm}^2 \, g_\chi^2 \, c_G^2 \, \left ( \frac{1 \, {\rm TeV}}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \left ( \frac{\mu_{N\chi}}{1 \, {\rm GeV}} \right )^2 \,.
\end{equation}
Using this expression one can derive the region in the~$m_\chi$--$\hspace{0.5mm} c_G$ plane that is disfavoured by direct detection experiments. The left panel in Fig.~\ref{fig:DDID} shows the resulting constraints for three different values of $g_\chi$, employing the recent LUX bound~\cite{Akerib:2015rjg}\footnote{In this study we use the LUX result as an example to illustrate the impact from direct detection experiments. As outlined in detail in the the LHC DM WG recommendation~\cite{Boveia:2016mrp}, also other experiments constrain this parameter space. The PandaX-II experiment~\cite{Tan:2016zwf} possess similar sensitivity than LUX and together they provide the strongest limits for DM-neutron scattering cross sections. For DM-proton scattering cross sections the strongest limits are from the PICO collaboration~\cite{Amole:2016pye,Amole:2015pla}, while for DM particles lighter than $\mathcal{O}(10 \, \mathrm{GeV})$, solid-state cryogenic detectors as used by the SuperCDMS~\cite{Agnese:2015nto} and CRESST-II~\cite{Angloher:2015ewa} collaborations are more constraining than xenon experiments as their energy threshold is lower. The IceCube~\cite{Aartsen:2016exj} and Super-Kamiokande~\cite{Choi:2015ara} neutrino observatories are also able to provide constrains.}
One sees that depending on whether $g_\chi $ is $0.5, 1$, or $2$, current direct detection experiments can exclude $c_G$ values larger than around~16, 8, or 4 for DM masses around $40 \, {\rm GeV}$. For smaller and larger DM masses the LUX constraints soften and exclude only values of $c_G$ that are typically in conflict with dijet bounds (see Fig.~\ref{fig:pseudoB}). Below we will combine the above direct detection constraint with the LHC bounds for a scalar benchmark model.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=0.3\textwidth]{scalarDD.pdf} \quad
\includegraphics[height=0.3\textwidth]{IDgg.pdf} \quad
\includegraphics[height=0.3\textwidth]{IDaa.pdf}
\caption{\it Left: Constraints in the $m_\chi$--$\hspace{0.5mm} c_G$ plane arising from the LUX bound~\cite{Akerib:2015rjg} on $\sigma_{\rm SI}^N$ for $g_\chi = 0.5$ (dotted orange), $g_\chi = 1$ (dashed orange), and $g_\chi = 2$~(solid orange). The grey shaded regions are excluded at a 90\% CL. Middle: DM annihilation rate into $gg$ (black line) for $\tilde g_\chi = 1$, $\tilde c_G = 5$, $\tilde c_W = \tilde c_B = 0$ and $\Lambda = 1 \, {\rm TeV}$. The orange curve indicates the corresponding 95\% CL bound from~\cite{Ackermann:2015zua} and the region shaded grey is excluded. Right: DM annihilation rate into $\gamma \gamma$ (black line) for $\tilde g_\chi = 1$, $\tilde c_B = 50$, $\tilde c_G = \tilde c_W = 0$ and $\Lambda = 1 \, {\rm TeV}$. For comparison the 95\% CL bound from \cite{Ackermann:2015lka} is indicated employing the same colour scheme as in the middle panel. }
\label{fig:DDID}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Indirect detection}
In contrast to direct detection, indirect detection is only relevant for the case of a pseudoscalar mediator, since DM annihilations mediated by scalar exchange are $p$-wave suppressed. Constraints on the couplings of the pseudoscalar mediator arise from $\gamma$ ray line searches~\cite{Abramowski:2013ax,Ackermann:2013uma,Ackermann:2015lka} as well as continuum limits from observations of dwarf spheroidal galaxies~\cite{Abramowski:2014tra,Ackermann:2015zua}.
The velocity-averaged DM annihilation rates relevant for the following discussion are given in terms of the couplings $\tilde c_G$, $\tilde c_W$, and $\tilde c_B$ by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
& \hspace{5mm} \langle \sigma ( \chi \bar \chi \to gg ) \hspace{0.25mm} v_{\rm rel} \rangle \simeq \frac{\alpha_s^2 \hspace{0.25mm} g_\chi^2 \hspace{0.5mm} \tilde c_G^2}{\pi^3 \hspace{0.25mm} \Lambda^2} \, \frac{m_\chi^4}{\left (4 m_\chi^2 - M_P^2 \right )^2 + \Gamma_P^2 M_P^2} \,, \\[2mm]
& \langle \sigma ( \chi \bar \chi \to \gamma \gamma ) \hspace{0.25mm} v_{\rm rel} \rangle \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} g_\chi^2 \left (\tilde c_W + \tilde c_B \right)^2}{8 \pi^3 \hspace{0.25mm} \Lambda^2} \, \frac{m_\chi^4}{\left (4 m_\chi^2 - M_P^2 \right )^2 + \Gamma_P^2 M_P^2} \,, \\[2mm]
& \hspace{-5mm} \langle \sigma ( \chi \bar \chi \to \gamma Z ) \hspace{0.25mm} v_{\rm rel} \rangle \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} g_\chi^2 \left ( \displaystyle \frac{c_w}{s_w} \, \tilde c_W - \displaystyle \frac{s_w}{c_w} \, \tilde c_B \right)^2}{4 \pi^3 \hspace{0.25mm} \Lambda^2} \, \frac{m_\chi^4 \left ( 1 - \displaystyle \frac{M_Z^2}{4 m_\chi^2} \right )^3}{\left (4 m_\chi^2 - M_P^2 \right )^2 + \Gamma_P^2 M_P^2} \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Notice that the given expressions are all independent of $v_{\rm rel} \simeq 1.3 \cdot 10^{-3} \, c$, since the annihilation rates all proceed via $s$-wave. To constrain the parameter space of the pseudoscalar model, we compare the limits on $\chi \bar \chi \to u \bar u$ from~\cite{Ackermann:2015zua} with the predicted annihilation cross section into gluons, while we use \cite{Ackermann:2015lka} with an Einasto R16 DM profile when comparing with annihilation into the combination $\gamma \gamma + \gamma Z/2$. We rescale all indirect limits by a factor of 2 to take into account that they are obtained for Majorana DM while we are considering Dirac DM.
Our results for the DM annihilation rates into digluons and diphotons are shown in the middle and on the right of Fig.~\ref{fig:DDID}. The parameters that we have employed to obtain the plots are specified in the figure caption. From both panels it is evident that the existing indirect detection limits exclude only realisations of the pseudoscalar model if $m_\chi = {\cal O}( M_P/2) \simeq 375 \, {\rm GeV}$,~i.e.,~DM can annihilate resonantly into SM final states via~$P$ exchange. Notice that in this mass region also the DM relic density constraints are most easily fulfilled~\cite{Backovic:2015fnp,Barducci:2015gtd,Mambrini:2015wyu,D'Eramo:2016mgv,Backovic:2016gsf}, since due to the resonance enhancement DM can annihilate efficiently into SM states in the early universe. In order to give an example, in the case of the scalar model the parameter choices $m_\chi = 323 \, {\rm GeV}$, $g_\chi = 2.7$, $c_G = 1.9$, and $c_B = 132$~\cite{Backovic:2015fnp} allow for instance to reproduce the observed relic abundance $\Omega h^2 \simeq 0.12$, if standard thermal freezeout is assumed. For this parameters the predicted diphoton cross section is consistent with~(\ref{eq:mugammagamma}) and the total decay width of the scalar amounts to $\Gamma_S = 29 \, {\rm GeV}$.\footnote{Note that the quoted parameters are viable if $8 \, {\rm TeV}$ LHC data is considered, as done in \cite{Backovic:2015fnp}, but they are incompatible with the latest $13 \, {\rm TeV}$ CMS $\slashed{E}_T + j$ results~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013}, as they lead to a signal strength of~$20 \, {\rm fb}$.}
\subsection{Benchmark scenarios}
To compare the constraints from collider DM searches with other experiments, the best-fit diphoton bounds, the indirect search bounds, and the direct detection searches for the prototype 750~GeV case can be plotted in the $g_{\chi}\hspace{0.25mm}$--$\hspace{0.5mm}c_{G}$ plane with a fixed DM mass. The choice of this plane constitutes all allowed free couplings since the diphoton cross section measurement constrains the photon coupling in terms of the other DM and gluon couplings.
The final collider bounds on this prototype scenario are determined from the observed $\slashed{E}_T$~ distribution~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013} through a CL$_s$ fit~\cite{Junk,Read,Cowan:2010js,CMS-NOTE-2011-005,cls} exploiting the full shape. The quoted change in likelihood corresponding to the 95\% CL is presented as the exclusion bound.
The combined bounds are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:all750Bounds}. The collider searches are essentially independent of the coupling structure, so the bound for the mediator holds if the mediator is either a scalar or a pseudoscalar. For direct detection, the shown bounds only apply in the case that the mediator is a scalar, while the continuum and $\gamma$ ray line searches limits constrain only the pseudoscalar mediator. For large DM couplings where the total width is dominated by the DM contribution $\Gamma(S \rightarrow\bar{\chi}\chi)$ additional modifications of the production cross section occur when the DM particle mass encroaches the region of resonant annihilation $m_\chi = {\cal O}( M_{S}/2) \simeq 375 \, {\rm GeV}$. These modifications can be taken into account by considering three benchmark DM masses on-shell production $m_{\chi}=1 \, {\rm GeV}$, resonant production $m_{\chi}=374 \, {\rm GeV}$, and near resonant production $m_{\chi}=360 \, {\rm GeV}$. All three scenarios are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:all750Bounds}.
For DM searches both on-shell and near-resonant production, the collider searches drive the constraining power. Constraints from the collider are strongest for large values of $c_{G}$ or $g_{\chi}$. For pseudoscalar mediators, bounds from the $\gamma$ ray line searches exclude the region of large diphoton coupling. The continuum indirect detection bounds exceed the collider bounds and provide the strongest constraints in the region of resonant production where $m_{\chi}=374\, {\rm GeV}$. For scalar mediators, direct detection provides the strongest current bound when $m_{\chi}=374\, {\rm GeV}$. For the other scenarios, collider constraints dominate.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MDM1Bound.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MDM360Bound.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MDM374Bound.pdf}
\caption{\it Comparison of the bounds from direct detection~\cite{Akerib:2015rjg}, $\gamma$ ray line searches~\cite{Ackermann:2013uma,Abramowski:2013ax}, continuum indirect detection~\cite{Ackermann:2015zua,Abramowski:2014tra}, and constraints from collider monojet searches with the best fit measurements of the putative diphoton excess assuming a fixed diphoton coupling. Three plots are shown for three different DM masses, to show the modification in the sensitivity of the searches in the resonant and non-resonant scenario. Finally, bounds for direct detection can only be applied when the $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ mediator is assumed to be scalar, whereas bounds from the photon line and indirect searches are only valid when the mediator is a pseudoscalar. Bounds from collider searches are valid in both cases.}
\label{fig:all750Bounds}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Although the detailed numbers in the above analysis apply to the specific 750~GeV diphoton excess reported by ATLAS and CMS,
the manner in which the LHC, direct and indirect constraints interplay is more general, as is the approach described above
for modelling the potential discovery of a mediator particle and linking it to DM physics.
\section{Connecting an LHC discovery of a mediator particle with DM signals}
\label{750}
In this Section we discuss the possibility of connecting a new physics signal in a channel visible at the LHC with DM using a simplified model with effective couplings. For definiteness we focus on a particular example consistent with the 750 GeV diphoton excess observed by the ATLAS and CMS experiments with the 2015 data sample. Although the 750 GeV excess did not survive in the 2016 data of ATLAS and CMS (see, e.g.,~\cite{Khachatryan:2016yec} ) this example still provides interesting insights on a potential strategy that could be followed in case of a signal. Our pragmatic Ansatz links such a potential collider signal to other experimental signatures, which can be used to verify/falsify a specific signal hypothesis and to study its underlying nature. With this approach it is possible to define discovery scenarios combining different signatures, which can be vital for guiding the experimental search programme in case of a discovery.
\subsection{Simplified DM model}
\label{750model}
In order to see how a direct-channel resonance such as the diphoton excess seen in 2015 by ATLAS and CMS~\cite{Aaboud:2016tru,Khachatryan:2016hje} could be linked to a stable DM candidate, one can augment the SM by a scalar $S$ or pseudoscalar $P$ particle with the mass of $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ and a Dirac fermion $\chi$.\footnote{The formalism we present is also directly applicable to a Majorana DM particle.} The relavant interactions can be written in the scalar case as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:LS}
{\cal L}_S = g_{\chi} \hspace{0.25mm} S \hspace{0.25mm} \bar \chi \chi + \frac{\alpha_s}{4 \pi} \hspace{0.25mm} \frac{c_G}{\Lambda} \hspace{0.25mm} S \hspace{0.25mm} G_{\mu \nu}^a G^{a\, \mu \nu} + \frac{\alpha}{4 \pi s_w^2}\hspace{0.25mm} \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} \hspace{0.25mm} S \hspace{0.25mm} W_{\mu \nu}^i W^{i \, \mu \nu} + \frac{\alpha}{4 \pi c_w^2}\hspace{0.25mm} \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \hspace{0.25mm} S \hspace{0.25mm} B_{\mu \nu} B^{ \mu \nu} \,.
\end{equation}
Here $G^a_{\mu \nu}$, $W_{\mu \nu}^i$, and~$B_{\mu \nu}$ are the $SU(3)_C$, $SU(2)_L$, and $U(1)_Y$ field strength tensors, $\alpha_s$ and~$\alpha$ denote the strong and electromagnetic coupling constants, and $s_w$ and $c_w$ are the sine and the cosine of the weak mixing angle. The scale that suppresses the higher-dimensional interactions that couple the mediator $S$ to gauge fields is denoted by $\Lambda$, while the Wilson coefficients $c_V$ with $V=G,\;W,\;B$ describe how strongly $S$ couples to $V_{\mu \nu} V^{\mu \nu}$. The corresponding Lagrangian~${\cal L}_P$ for the pseudoscalar case is obtained from (\ref{eq:LS}) by replacing $\bar \chi \chi$ by $\bar \chi \hspace{0.25mm} i \gamma_5 \hspace{0.25mm} \chi$, $V_{\mu \nu} V^{\mu \nu}$ by $V_{\mu \nu} \tilde V^{\mu \nu}$ with $\tilde V_{\mu \nu} = \frac{1}{2} \, \epsilon_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta} \hspace{0.25mm} V^{\alpha \beta}$ and, finally, $g_\chi$ by $\tilde g_\chi$ and $c_V$ by $\tilde c_V$. The DM phenomenology of such simplified models ${\cal L}_{S,P}$ has recently been studied in~\cite{Backovic:2015fnp,Barducci:2015gtd,Mambrini:2015wyu,D'Eramo:2016mgv,Backovic:2016gsf}.
The production cross section and the rates for the decays of the resonance $S$ ($P$) into SM and DM particles can all be expressed in terms of the Wilson coefficients $c_V$ ($\tilde c_V$), the scale $\Lambda$, the DM coupling $g_\chi$ ($\tilde g_\chi$) and the DM mass $m_\chi$. Assuming that the production of a new spin-0 state is dominated by gluon-gluon fusion and considering
for definiteness the excess reported in~\cite{Aaboud:2016tru,Khachatryan:2016hje} and one obtains \cite{Bauer:2016lbe}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:xsecS}
\sigma_{8 \, {\rm TeV}} \left ( p p \to S \right ) \simeq 46.7 \, {\rm fb} \left ( \frac{c_G \, {\rm TeV}}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \quad \sigma_{13 \, {\rm TeV}} \left ( p p \to S \right ) \simeq 208 \, {\rm fb} \left ( \frac{c_G \, {\rm TeV}}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,,
\end{equation}
for the total cross section at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ and 13~TeV, respectively. These results hold to first approximation also for a pseudoscalar~$P$ after obvious replacements.
The partial decay rates of such a scalar resonance into pairs of vector bosons and DM particles
can be written as~\footnote{The expressions for the partial widths to $\gamma Z$, $ZZ$ and $WW$ are only approximations that hold in the limit of vanishing $W$ and $Z$ boson masses, as is appropriate for any heavy spin-0 state. They reproduce the full results (see~e.g.~\cite{Bauer:2016lbe}), which will be used in the numerical analysis, to better than 10\%.}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Gammas}
\begin{split}
\Gamma \left (S \to gg \right ) & = \frac{\alpha_s^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{8 \pi^3} \hspace{0.5mm} K_G \left ( \frac{c_G}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 1.93 \cdot 10^{4} \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( \frac{c_G}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to \gamma \gamma \right ) & = \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{64 \pi^3} \left ( \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} + \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 11.3 \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} + \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to \gamma Z \right ) & \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{32 \pi^3} \left ( \frac{c_w}{s_w} \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} - \frac{s_w}{c_w} \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 26 \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( 1.82 \, \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} - 0.55 \, \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to Z Z \right ) & \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{64 \pi^3} \left ( \frac{c_w^2}{s_w^2} \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} + \frac{s_w^2}{c_w^2} \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 13 \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( 3.32 \, \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} + 0.30 \, \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to W W \right ) & \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S^3}{32 \pi^3 \hspace{0.25mm} s_w^4} \left ( \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \simeq 485 \, {\rm GeV}^3 \left ( \frac{c_W}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \,, \\[2mm]
\Gamma \left (S \to \chi \bar \chi \right ) & = \frac{g_\chi^2 \hspace{0.25mm} M_S}{8 \pi} \left ( 1 - \frac{4 m_\chi^2}{M_S^2} \right )^{3/2} \simeq 29.8 \, {\rm GeV} \, g_\chi^2 \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
These numbers are simple to rescale for any other possible new spin-0 state, assumin that couplings of the new resonance to SM quarks are negligible. For definiteness in our numerical results we use $K_G = 1.348$~\cite{Bauer:2016lbe}, $\alpha_s= 0.092$, $\alpha = 1/137.04$ for the diphoton decay and $\alpha = 1/127.94$ otherwise, and $s_w^2 = 0.2313$. In the case of the invisible decay width, we set the DM particle mass to zero, as would be a good approximation for any heavy spin-0 state decaying into light DM particles. After replacing $c_V$ by $\tilde c_V$, the above results for the partial decay widths of $S$ to gauge bosons also apply to the case of a pseudoscalar, while to obtain the invisible decay rate of $P$ one has to change the exponent $3/2$ appearing in $\Gamma \left (S \to \chi \bar \chi \right )$ with $1/2$.
Looking at the expressions in (\ref{eq:Gammas}), one observes that new physics scenarios that lead to~$c_W \ll c_B$ are generically less constrained than models that predict $c_W \gg c_B$, because in the former case the decays to $\gamma Z$ and $ZZ$ are suppressed by a factor $\left (s_w/c_w \right ) ^4 \simeq 0.1$ and $\left ( s_w/c_w \right ) ^8 \simeq 0.01$, respectively, and decays to $WW$ are absent in the limit of~$c_W$ going to zero. In the following we will focus on the model realisations with~$c_W = 0$ and $c_B \neq 0$ (or $\tilde c_W = 0$ and $\tilde c_B \neq 0$, thereby
avoiding constraints on the simplified model~(\ref{eq:LS}) arising from resonance searches in the $\gamma Z$, $ZZ$, and $WW$ channels~\footnote{We do not examine scenarios with $c_W \simeq (s_w/c_w)^2 \hspace{0.25mm} c_B$ or $c_W \simeq -(s_w/c_w)^4 \hspace{0.25mm} c_B$, which would evade constraints from $\gamma Z$ or $Z Z$ resonance searches by tuning $c_W$ and $c_B$.}.
In the narrow-width approximation, the signal strength for the process $pp \to XY$ with $XY = \{ gg, \,\gamma\gamma, \,\gamma Z, \,ZZ,$ $WW\}$ factorises into the product of the total production cross section and the relevant branching fraction
\begin{equation} \label{eq:muSM}
\mu_{\sqrt{s}} \left (pp \to XY \right ) = \sigma_{\sqrt{s}} \left (pp \to S \right ) \, {\rm Br} \left ( S \to X Y \right ) \,,
\end{equation}
and a similar factorisation also applies in the pseudoscalar case.
\subsection{Monojet signatures}
\label{sec:monojet}
Since the couplings of the mediators to gluon pairs are implemented by means of effective operators $\big($see (\ref{eq:LS})$\big)$, the factorisation of the signal strength (\ref{eq:muSM}) is expected also to apply to the case of a monojet signature for any spin-0 state in the general class considered here. This means, in particular, that varying the coupling~$c_G$~($\tilde c_G$) should only result in an overall rescaling of the total $pp \to \slashed{E}_T + j$ cross section, but should leave the shape of all kinematic distributions unchanged. To validate the extent to which the kinematic distributions can be affected by the detector effects relevant for modern searches for DM at the LHC \cite{Aad:2015zva,Aaboud:2016tnv,Khachatryan:2014rra,CMS-PAS-EXO-12-055,CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013}, we simulate the~$\slashed{E}_T + 0,1,2$ jet spectra resulting from the model (\ref{eq:LS}) using {\tt MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO}~\cite{Alwall:2014hca} with the MLM merging scheme~\cite{MLM}, {\tt FastJet}~\cite{Cacciari:2011ma}, and {\tt PYTHIA~8}~\cite{Sjostrand:2007gs}. The modelling of the experimental resolution for $\slashed{E}_T$ and the recoiling system is done by using resolutions typical of the ATLAS and CMS detectors.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{MET750.pdf}
\caption{\it Normalised detector-level $\slashed{E}_T$ distributions for different values of $c_G$. For comparison, we show also the normalised $\slashed{E}_T$ distribution predicted in the scalar-mediated DM model recommended by the LHC DMF~\protect\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}. The latter predictions have been obtained by the ${\tt POWHEG}$ implementation~\protect\cite{Haisch:2013ata}.}
\label{fig:kine}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:kine} shows the normalised $\slashed{E}_T$ distributions predicted in the model (\ref{eq:LS}) for different values of the coupling $c_G$. Within the detector resolution no significant variations in the~$\slashed{E}_T$ shapes are observed, which implies that the signal strength $\mu_{\sqrt{s}} \left ( pp \to \slashed{E}_T + j \right )$ for a given monojet signal region is proportional to the total production cross section of the mediator times its invisible branching fraction. For instance, for the recent CMS monojet search~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013}, one finds
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mumono}
\mu_{13 \, {\rm TeV}} \left (pp \to \slashed{E}_T + j \right ) \simeq 3.2 \cdot 10^{-2} \; \sigma_{13 \, {\rm TeV}} (pp \to S) \, {\rm Br} \left ( S \to \chi \bar \chi \right ) \,.
\end{equation}
The same expression also holds in the pseudoscalar case, since the $\slashed{E}_T$ spectrum is insensitive to the mediator type.
It is also illustrative to compare the normalised $\slashed{E}_T$ shapes resulting from ${\cal L}_S$ with the spectra predicted in the LHC DMF model. Such a comparison is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:kine} as well. One observes that the effective interactions present in (\ref{eq:LS}) lead to a significantly harder spectrum than the top quark loop diagrams (see the third panel in Fig.~\ref{fig:scalardiagrams}) that produce the $\slashed{E}_T + j$ events in the LHC DMF model. Numerically, the observed suppression amounts to a factor of around 7 for $\slashed{E}_T \simeq 1 \, {\rm TeV}$. This is an expected feature, because high-energy jet radiation is able to resolve the structure of the top quark loops~\cite{Haisch:2012kf,Haisch:2013fla,Buckley:2014fba,Harris:2014hga,Haisch:2015ioa}, while the production mechanism cannot be resolved in the model~(\ref{eq:LS}) where the coupling of $S$ (or $P$) to gluons is implemented through a dimension-five operator.
\subsection{LHC constraints}
\label{sec:LHCconstraints}
\begin{table}[!t]
\begin{center}
\caption{\label{tab:mu} \it The 95\% confidence level (CL) upper bounds on the relevant signal strengths arising from different LHC Run 1 and 2 searches.}
\vspace{5mm}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline $gg$ (8 TeV) & $\gamma Z$ (8 TeV) & $Z Z$ (8 TeV) & $W W$ (8 TeV) & $\slashed{E}_T + j$ (13 TeV) \\ \hline
$<2.5 \, {\rm pb}$ \cite{Khachatryan:2016ecr} & $<4 \, {\rm fb}$ \cite{Aad:2014fha} & $<12 \, {\rm fb}$ \cite{Aad:2015kna} & $<40 \, {\rm fb}$ \cite{Aad:2015agg} & $<14 \, {\rm fb}$ \cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{0mm}
\end{center}
\end{table}
For the purposes of our subsequent illustration of the interplay between collider and astrophysical constraints,
we first explore for which parameters the simplified model (\ref{eq:LS}) could have explained the putative diphoton excess
reported in the 2015 data~\cite{Buttazzo:2015txu}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mugammagamma}
\mu_{13 \, {\rm TeV}} \left (pp \to \gamma \gamma \right ) = (4.6 \pm 1.2) \, {\rm fb} \,,
\end{equation}
while at the same time respecting existing bounds from dijet, diboson, and monojet searches. The bounds are collected in Tab.~\ref{tab:mu}. Notice that dijet production arises in the context of (\ref{eq:LS}) to first order only from the process $pp \to S/P \to gg$. In order to suppress contributions to the diboson channels, we study the scalar scenario with $c_W = 0$ and~$c_B \neq 0$. After setting~$M_S = 750 \, {\rm GeV}$ and $\Lambda = 1 \, {\rm TeV}$, the full phenomenology in the simplified model can thus be characterised by the four parameters $c_G$, $c_B$, $g_\chi$, and $m_\chi$. In fact, one can trade the two parameters $g_\chi$ and $m_\chi$ for the total decay width $\Gamma_S$ by correctly adjusting the DM coupling~$g_\chi$ for any choice of $c_G$, $c_B$, and $m_\chi$. If this is done, one can derive the constraints in the $c_G \hspace{0.25mm}$--$\hspace{0.25mm} c_B$ plane for different values of $\Gamma_S$. The outcome of this exercise is depicted in the six panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:pseudoB}. We note that very similar plots would be obtained for a pseudoscalar scenario with $\tilde c_W = 0$ and~$\tilde c_B \neq 0$.
For the width $\Gamma_S = 45 \, {\rm GeV}$ preferred by the ATLAS 2015 data (upper left panel), one observes that monojet searches severely constrain the region in the $c_G \hspace{0.25mm}$--$\hspace{0.25mm} c_B$ plane in which the diphoton excess can be explained.\footnote{From the discussion in Section~\ref{sec:monojet} it should be clear that the strength of the monojet constraints is partly due to that fact that the production of $S,P$ proceeds via higher-dimensional operators. Milder bounds are expected to apply to any weakly coupled model with an ultraviolet completion of (\ref{eq:LS}) at a low scale~$\Lambda$.} This observation has also been made in~\cite{Backovic:2015fnp,Barducci:2015gtd,Mambrini:2015wyu,D'Eramo:2016mgv,Backovic:2016gsf}. In fact, the allowed values of $c_G \simeq 1$ and $c_B \simeq 200$ translate into the following effective digluon and diphoton couplings,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Cga}
C_g = \frac{\alpha_s}{4\pi} \, \frac{c_G}{\Lambda} \simeq \frac{0.007}{{\rm TeV}} \,, \qquad C_\gamma = \frac{\alpha}{4\pi} \, \frac{c_B}{\Lambda} \simeq \frac{0.12}{{\rm TeV}} \,.
\end{equation}
The effective spin-0 mediator coupling to gluons is hence of similar size to the effective SM Higgs digluon coupling, while the $S$ field interacts with photons 20 times more strongly than the Higgs. For smaller total widths of $\Gamma_S = 5 \, {\rm GeV}$ and $2 \, {\rm GeV}$ (upper middle and right panel) the constraints on the Wilson coefficient $c_B$ become weaker by a factor of 3 and 5, while the minimal allowed value of $c_G$ remains basically the same. Reducing the total width to $\Gamma_S = 1 \, {\rm GeV}$ (lower left panel), one sees that the regions disfavoured by the monojet and dijet searches do not overlap anymore, allowing for an explanation of the diphoton excess with $c_G \simeq c_B \simeq 7$. For $\Gamma_S = 0.1 \, {\rm GeV}$~(lower middle panel) monojet searches do not provide a direct constraint on $c_G$ and $c_B$ any more, but invisible decays $S \to \chi \bar \chi$ indirectly still play a role compared to the case of $g_\chi =0$~(lower right panel), since significantly larger values of $c_B$ are needed for $g_\chi \neq 0$ to fit the diphoton excess if~$c_G \lesssim 2$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.975\textwidth]{scalarB.pdf}
\caption{\it \label{fig:pseudoB} Fit to the LHC diphoton excess in the $c_G \hspace{0.25mm}$--$\hspace{0.25mm} c_B$ plane for $\Gamma_S = 45 \, {\rm GeV}$, $5 \, {\rm GeV}$, $2 \, {\rm GeV}$, $1 \, {\rm GeV}$, $0.1 \, {\rm GeV}$ and $g_\chi = 0$ from upper left to lower right. The 95\% CL regions favoured by the reported diphoton excess are shaded green, while bounds from Run 1 and 2 data are shown as contour lines coloured blue for dijets, yellow for $\gamma Z$, magenta for $ZZ$, and red for monojets. There are no bounds from the $WW$ final states. The grey shaded areas are excluded at the 95\% CL. }
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Direct detection}
\label{sec:DD}
Direct detection experiments can also be used to constrain the generic scalar model ${\cal L}_S$, since it leads to a spin-independent~(SI) DM-nucleon scattering cross section, but not the pseudoscalar scenario~${\cal L}_P$, because it predicts spin-dependent and momentum-suppressed rates. After the mediator $S$ has been integrated out, the interactions~(\ref{eq:LS}) induce couplings between DM and gluons, photons, as well as EW gauge bosons. If the gluon coupling is non-vanishing at the scale~$M_S$, the couplings to photons and EW gauge bosons can be shown to provide a subleading contribution to direct detection rates~\cite{Frandsen:2012db,Crivellin:2014gpa,D'Eramo:2016mgv}. To keep the discussion simple, we ignore such effects and include only QCD corrections. The SI DM-nucleon scattering cross section takes the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:SI}
(\sigma_{\rm SI}^N)_S \simeq \frac{g_\chi^2 \hspace{0.5mm} \mu_{N\chi}^2 \hspace{0.25mm} m_N^2 \hspace{0.25mm} f^2(c_G)}{\pi} \,,
\end{equation}
where $\mu_{N\chi} = m_N \hspace{0.25mm} m_\chi/(m_N + m_\chi)$ is the DM-nucleon reduced mass with $m_N \simeq 0.939 \, {\rm GeV}$ the nucleon mass. The mediator-nucleon coupling $f (c_G)$ reads (see, e.g.~\cite{D'Eramo:2016mgv,Frandsen:2012db,Vecchi:2013iza,Hill:2014yxa})
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fcg}
f (c_G) \simeq \frac{c_G}{4 \pi \hspace{0.1mm} \Lambda \hspace{0.1mm} M_S^2} \left ( 6 \alpha_s f_q^N + \frac{8 \pi}{9} f_{\rm TG}^N \right ) \simeq \frac{2 \hspace{0.25mm} c_G \hspace{0.1mm} f_{\rm TG}^N }{9 \Lambda \hspace{0.1mm} M_S^2} \,.
\end{equation}
Notice that to first approximation the coupling $f(c_G)$ only depends on the gluonic component of the nucleon,~i.e.~$f^{N}_{\rm TG}=1-\sum_{q=u,d,s }f_{q}^{N} \simeq 0.894$ \cite{Junnarkar:2013ac,Hoferichter:2015dsa}, while contributions from the light-quark form factors~$f_{q}^{N}$ are suppressed by an additional power of $\alpha_s$.
Combining~(\ref{eq:SI}) and (\ref{eq:fcg}), one finds that for $M_S = 750 \, {\rm GeV}$ prototype axample the size of the SI cross section is
\begin{equation}
(\sigma_{\rm SI}^N)_S \simeq 1.4 \cdot 10^{-47} \, {\rm cm}^2 \, g_\chi^2 \, c_G^2 \, \left ( \frac{1 \, {\rm TeV}}{\Lambda} \right )^2 \left ( \frac{\mu_{N\chi}}{1 \, {\rm GeV}} \right )^2 \,.
\end{equation}
Using this expression one can derive the region in the~$m_\chi$--$\hspace{0.5mm} c_G$ plane that is disfavoured by direct detection experiments. The left panel in Fig.~\ref{fig:DDID} shows the resulting constraints for three different values of $g_\chi$, employing the recent LUX bound~\cite{Akerib:2015rjg}\footnote{In this study we use the LUX result as an example to illustrate the impact from direct detection experiments. As outlined in detail in the the LHC DM WG recommendation~\cite{Boveia:2016mrp}, also other experiments constrain this parameter space. The PandaX-II experiment~\cite{Tan:2016zwf} possess similar sensitivity than LUX and together they provide the strongest limits for DM-neutron scattering cross sections. For DM-proton scattering cross sections the strongest limits are from the PICO collaboration~\cite{Amole:2016pye,Amole:2015pla}, while for DM particles lighter than $\mathcal{O}(10 \, \mathrm{GeV})$, solid-state cryogenic detectors as used by the SuperCDMS~\cite{Agnese:2015nto} and CRESST-II~\cite{Angloher:2015ewa} collaborations are more constraining than xenon experiments as their energy threshold is lower. The IceCube~\cite{Aartsen:2016exj} and Super-Kamiokande~\cite{Choi:2015ara} neutrino observatories are also able to provide constrains.}
One sees that depending on whether $g_\chi $ is $0.5, 1$, or $2$, current direct detection experiments can exclude $c_G$ values larger than around~16, 8, or 4 for DM masses around $40 \, {\rm GeV}$. For smaller and larger DM masses the LUX constraints soften and exclude only values of $c_G$ that are typically in conflict with dijet bounds (see Fig.~\ref{fig:pseudoB}). Below we will combine the above direct detection constraint with the LHC bounds for a scalar benchmark model.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=0.3\textwidth]{scalarDD.pdf} \quad
\includegraphics[height=0.3\textwidth]{IDgg.pdf} \quad
\includegraphics[height=0.3\textwidth]{IDaa.pdf}
\caption{\it Left: Constraints in the $m_\chi$--$\hspace{0.5mm} c_G$ plane arising from the LUX bound~\cite{Akerib:2015rjg} on $\sigma_{\rm SI}^N$ for $g_\chi = 0.5$ (dotted orange), $g_\chi = 1$ (dashed orange), and $g_\chi = 2$~(solid orange). The grey shaded regions are excluded at a 90\% CL. Middle: DM annihilation rate into $gg$ (black line) for $\tilde g_\chi = 1$, $\tilde c_G = 5$, $\tilde c_W = \tilde c_B = 0$ and $\Lambda = 1 \, {\rm TeV}$. The orange curve indicates the corresponding 95\% CL bound from~\cite{Ackermann:2015zua} and the region shaded grey is excluded. Right: DM annihilation rate into $\gamma \gamma$ (black line) for $\tilde g_\chi = 1$, $\tilde c_B = 50$, $\tilde c_G = \tilde c_W = 0$ and $\Lambda = 1 \, {\rm TeV}$. For comparison the 95\% CL bound from \cite{Ackermann:2015lka} is indicated employing the same colour scheme as in the middle panel. }
\label{fig:DDID}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Indirect detection}
In contrast to direct detection, indirect detection is only relevant for the case of a pseudoscalar mediator, since DM annihilations mediated by scalar exchange are $p$-wave suppressed. Constraints on the couplings of the pseudoscalar mediator arise from $\gamma$ ray line searches~\cite{Abramowski:2013ax,Ackermann:2013uma,Ackermann:2015lka} as well as continuum limits from observations of dwarf spheroidal galaxies~\cite{Abramowski:2014tra,Ackermann:2015zua}.
The velocity-averaged DM annihilation rates relevant for the following discussion are given in terms of the couplings $\tilde c_G$, $\tilde c_W$, and $\tilde c_B$ by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
& \hspace{5mm} \langle \sigma ( \chi \bar \chi \to gg ) \hspace{0.25mm} v_{\rm rel} \rangle \simeq \frac{\alpha_s^2 \hspace{0.25mm} g_\chi^2 \hspace{0.5mm} \tilde c_G^2}{\pi^3 \hspace{0.25mm} \Lambda^2} \, \frac{m_\chi^4}{\left (4 m_\chi^2 - M_P^2 \right )^2 + \Gamma_P^2 M_P^2} \,, \\[2mm]
& \langle \sigma ( \chi \bar \chi \to \gamma \gamma ) \hspace{0.25mm} v_{\rm rel} \rangle \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} g_\chi^2 \left (\tilde c_W + \tilde c_B \right)^2}{8 \pi^3 \hspace{0.25mm} \Lambda^2} \, \frac{m_\chi^4}{\left (4 m_\chi^2 - M_P^2 \right )^2 + \Gamma_P^2 M_P^2} \,, \\[2mm]
& \hspace{-5mm} \langle \sigma ( \chi \bar \chi \to \gamma Z ) \hspace{0.25mm} v_{\rm rel} \rangle \simeq \frac{\alpha^2 \hspace{0.25mm} g_\chi^2 \left ( \displaystyle \frac{c_w}{s_w} \, \tilde c_W - \displaystyle \frac{s_w}{c_w} \, \tilde c_B \right)^2}{4 \pi^3 \hspace{0.25mm} \Lambda^2} \, \frac{m_\chi^4 \left ( 1 - \displaystyle \frac{M_Z^2}{4 m_\chi^2} \right )^3}{\left (4 m_\chi^2 - M_P^2 \right )^2 + \Gamma_P^2 M_P^2} \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Notice that the given expressions are all independent of $v_{\rm rel} \simeq 1.3 \cdot 10^{-3} \, c$, since the annihilation rates all proceed via $s$-wave. To constrain the parameter space of the pseudoscalar model, we compare the limits on $\chi \bar \chi \to u \bar u$ from~\cite{Ackermann:2015zua} with the predicted annihilation cross section into gluons, while we use \cite{Ackermann:2015lka} with an Einasto R16 DM profile when comparing with annihilation into the combination $\gamma \gamma + \gamma Z/2$. We rescale all indirect limits by a factor of 2 to take into account that they are obtained for Majorana DM while we are considering Dirac DM.
Our results for the DM annihilation rates into digluons and diphotons are shown in the middle and on the right of Fig.~\ref{fig:DDID}. The parameters that we have employed to obtain the plots are specified in the figure caption. From both panels it is evident that the existing indirect detection limits exclude only realisations of the pseudoscalar model if $m_\chi = {\cal O}( M_P/2) \simeq 375 \, {\rm GeV}$,~i.e.,~DM can annihilate resonantly into SM final states via~$P$ exchange. Notice that in this mass region also the DM relic density constraints are most easily fulfilled~\cite{Backovic:2015fnp,Barducci:2015gtd,Mambrini:2015wyu,D'Eramo:2016mgv,Backovic:2016gsf}, since due to the resonance enhancement DM can annihilate efficiently into SM states in the early universe. In order to give an example, in the case of the scalar model the parameter choices $m_\chi = 323 \, {\rm GeV}$, $g_\chi = 2.7$, $c_G = 1.9$, and $c_B = 132$~\cite{Backovic:2015fnp} allow for instance to reproduce the observed relic abundance $\Omega h^2 \simeq 0.12$, if standard thermal freezeout is assumed. For this parameters the predicted diphoton cross section is consistent with~(\ref{eq:mugammagamma}) and the total decay width of the scalar amounts to $\Gamma_S = 29 \, {\rm GeV}$.\footnote{Note that the quoted parameters are viable if $8 \, {\rm TeV}$ LHC data is considered, as done in \cite{Backovic:2015fnp}, but they are incompatible with the latest $13 \, {\rm TeV}$ CMS $\slashed{E}_T + j$ results~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013}, as they lead to a signal strength of~$20 \, {\rm fb}$.}
\subsection{Benchmark scenarios}
To compare the constraints from collider DM searches with other experiments, the best-fit diphoton bounds, the indirect search bounds, and the direct detection searches for the prototype 750~GeV case can be plotted in the $g_{\chi}\hspace{0.25mm}$--$\hspace{0.5mm}c_{G}$ plane with a fixed DM mass. The choice of this plane constitutes all allowed free couplings since the diphoton cross section measurement constrains the photon coupling in terms of the other DM and gluon couplings.
The final collider bounds on this prototype scenario are determined from the observed $\slashed{E}_T$~ distribution~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-16-013} through a CL$_s$ fit~\cite{Junk,Read,Cowan:2010js,CMS-NOTE-2011-005,cls} exploiting the full shape. The quoted change in likelihood corresponding to the 95\% CL is presented as the exclusion bound.
The combined bounds are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:all750Bounds}. The collider searches are essentially independent of the coupling structure, so the bound for the mediator holds if the mediator is either a scalar or a pseudoscalar. For direct detection, the shown bounds only apply in the case that the mediator is a scalar, while the continuum and $\gamma$ ray line searches limits constrain only the pseudoscalar mediator. For large DM couplings where the total width is dominated by the DM contribution $\Gamma(S \rightarrow\bar{\chi}\chi)$ additional modifications of the production cross section occur when the DM particle mass encroaches the region of resonant annihilation $m_\chi = {\cal O}( M_{S}/2) \simeq 375 \, {\rm GeV}$. These modifications can be taken into account by considering three benchmark DM masses on-shell production $m_{\chi}=1 \, {\rm GeV}$, resonant production $m_{\chi}=374 \, {\rm GeV}$, and near resonant production $m_{\chi}=360 \, {\rm GeV}$. All three scenarios are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:all750Bounds}.
For DM searches both on-shell and near-resonant production, the collider searches drive the constraining power. Constraints from the collider are strongest for large values of $c_{G}$ or $g_{\chi}$. For pseudoscalar mediators, bounds from the $\gamma$ ray line searches exclude the region of large diphoton coupling. The continuum indirect detection bounds exceed the collider bounds and provide the strongest constraints in the region of resonant production where $m_{\chi}=374\, {\rm GeV}$. For scalar mediators, direct detection provides the strongest current bound when $m_{\chi}=374\, {\rm GeV}$. For the other scenarios, collider constraints dominate.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MDM1Bound.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MDM360Bound.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{MDM374Bound.pdf}
\caption{\it Comparison of the bounds from direct detection~\cite{Akerib:2015rjg}, $\gamma$ ray line searches~\cite{Ackermann:2013uma,Abramowski:2013ax}, continuum indirect detection~\cite{Ackermann:2015zua,Abramowski:2014tra}, and constraints from collider monojet searches with the best fit measurements of the putative diphoton excess assuming a fixed diphoton coupling. Three plots are shown for three different DM masses, to show the modification in the sensitivity of the searches in the resonant and non-resonant scenario. Finally, bounds for direct detection can only be applied when the $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ mediator is assumed to be scalar, whereas bounds from the photon line and indirect searches are only valid when the mediator is a pseudoscalar. Bounds from collider searches are valid in both cases.}
\label{fig:all750Bounds}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Although the detailed numbers in the above analysis apply to the specific 750~GeV diphoton excess reported by ATLAS and CMS,
the manner in which the LHC, direct and indirect constraints interplay is more general, as is the approach described above
for modelling the potential discovery of a mediator particle and linking it to DM physics.
\section{Other simplified models of interest}
\label{otherSMS}
In this Section we highlight other interesting options for simplified models that could be studied in more detail in the future. In Subsection~\ref{t-channel} we outline interesting features of $t$-channel simplified models, while in Subsection~\ref{Spin-2} we discuss some interesting models with spin-2 mediators. We conclude this part with a discussion about simplified models with pseudo-Dirac DM in Subsection~\ref{pseudo-Dirac}.
\subsection{A few representative $t$-channel simplified models}
\label{t-channel}
So far, we have focused on simplified models with the $s$-channel exchange of the mediatior. However, it is now relevant to build and explore simplified models with the mediator exchanged in the $t$ channel. While for the $s$-channel mediator exchange the EFT description breaks down spectacularly in the case of a light mediator that can be produced on-shell, also in the $t$-channel case there are sizable regions of the parameter space probed by the LHC where the EFT approach breaks down~\cite{Busoni:2014haa}, and therefore a simplified model description is important in this case as well.
Since we wish to produce the DM via colored particles at the LHC, but the DM particle itself cannot be colored, the mediator exchanged in the $t$ channel needs to carry non-trivial color. Thus, it is possible to search for the mediator via its direct QCD pair production. This is the \textit{leitmotiv} of all $t$-channel models.
By restricting ourselves to scalar or fermion DM and to tree-level mediation only, there are four possible $t$-channel simplified models, see, e.g., the recent review~\cite{DeSimone:2016fbz} for more details.
Perhaps the most relevant one is the case of a ``squark-like'' mediator (the model $0t\frac12$, following the nomenclature of~\cite{DeSimone:2016fbz}).
The reason why we believe this simplified model is particularly interesting is twofold:
on the one hand, in this model the mediator has the quantum numbers of squarks in SUSY, and therefore the analyses for squark searches can be efficiently readapted, and,
on the other hand, the other $t$-channel models either share with it very similar collider phenomenology, or involve suppressed higher-dimensional interactions.
For these reasons we recommend the experimental collaborations to start from this model and to consider it as a benchmark for $t$-channel simplified models.
Let us now discuss the $0t\frac12$ model in more detail. The DM is a Dirac or Majorana fermion $\chi$ and the interactions with the quarks are mediated by a set of colored scalar particles $\eta^{(i)}$. For simplicity, we will only consider the case where the DM is a total singlet under the SM symmetries, in particular DM carries no flavor or EW quantum numbers (see, e.g.,~\cite{1109.3516, 1308.0584, 1404.1373} for scenarios with ``flavored'' DM). This implies that the scalar mediator carries not only color charge, but also EW and flavor charges, and hence it resembles the squarks of the minimal supersymmetric extension of the SM.
The most general Lagrangian describing the renormalizable interactions between the SM quark doublets ($Q_L^{(i)}=(u_L, d_L)^{(i)}$) and singlets ($u_R^{(i)}$ and $d_R^{(i)}$) of flavour $i=1,2,3$, a fermion singlet DM $\chi$, and the colored mediators $\eta^{(i)}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=\sum_{i=1,2,3} g_i \,\chi
\left(\bar Q_L^{(i)} \eta^{(i)}_L+\bar u_R^{(i)}\eta^{(i)}_{u,R}
+\bar d_R^{(i)}\eta^{(i)}_{d,R}
\right)+\textrm{ h.c.},
\label{tchannelLagr}
\end{equation}
where the mediators $\eta_L^{(i)}, \eta_{u,R}^{(i)}, \eta_{d,R}^{(i)}$ transform
under the SM gauge group $SU(3)_c\otimes SU(2)_L\otimes U(1)_Y$ according to the representations $(3,2,-1/6), (3,1,2/3)$, and $(3,1,-1/3)$, respectively.
The minimal width of the generic mediator $\eta^{(i)}$ of mass $M_i$ decaying to a generic quark $q_i$ and the DM particle is simply
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(\eta_i\to \bar q_i \chi)=\frac{g_i^2}{16\pi}\frac{M_i^2-m_{q_i}^2-m_\chi^2}{M_i^3}\sqrt{(M_i^2-m_\chi^2-m_{q_i}^2)^2-4m_\chi^2m_{q_i}^2}
\simeq \frac{g_i^2 M_i}{16\pi}\left[1-\frac{m_\chi^2}{M_i^2}\right]^2,
\end{equation}
where the last expression holds for $M_i,m_\chi \gg m_{q_i}$.
A simplification of the Lagrangian (\ref{tchannelLagr}) arises by assuming Minimal Flavour Violation (MFV), which implies that the $\eta_i$'s have equal masses $M_1=M_2=M_3\equiv M$ and couplings $g_1=g_2=g_3\equiv g$, and therefore the model has only three parameters: $\{m_\chi, M,g\}$, with the restriction $m_\chi<M$ to ensure the stability of the DM.
The MFV hypothesis implies that couplings to third-generation quarks should be nonzero. However, from the point of view of flavor constraints, in some particular situations it may also be safe to violate MFV and restrict the Lagrangian (\ref{tchannelLagr}) to the first two generations $i=1,2$. In any case, we recommend to stick to MFV and to include the couplings to heavy flavors, as they also induce interesting collider phenomenology, allowing the possibility of exploiting also the searches with b jets in the final state.
For the parameter scan, we recommend to fix the value of the flavor-universal coupling $g$ (e.g., $g=1$) while performing a scan over $m_\chi, M$,
with $m_\chi<M$. The parameter space points need to satisfy the narrow-width condition for the mediator $\Gamma/M<1$ and allow for a sufficient number of events to pass the experimental selections
(see, e.g., Table 2.8 of the LHC DMF report \cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}).
Considering a subset of the general model described by (\ref{tchannelLagr}) may represent a convenient starting point to perform the experimental analyses.
Several choices for the mediators in the general Lagrangian of Eq.~(\ref{tchannelLagr}) have been studied in the literature:
all mediator species $\eta_L^{(i)}, \eta_{u,R}^{(i)}, \eta_{d,R}^{(i)}$ (for $i=1,2$) \cite{Papucci:2014iwa,Abdallah:2014hon, Ko:2016zxg},
only $\eta_{L}^{(i)}$ \cite{Bell:2012rg, Chang:2013oia,DiFranzo:2013vra,Busoni:2014haa, Garny:2014waa},
only $\eta_{u,R}^{(i)}$ \cite{DiFranzo:2013vra},
only $\eta_{d,R}^{(i)}$ \cite{DiFranzo:2013vra,Papucci:2014iwa,Abdallah:2014hon},
or combinations \cite{Bai:2013iqa, An:2013xka}.
For instance, one can choose
to couple the mediators only to left-handed quarks
$Q_L^{(i)}$ $(i=1,2,3)$. Of couse, other choices can (and should) be explored in a similar fashion.
In this simpler setup, there are three scalar colored mediators $\eta_L^{(i)}$, with the quantum numbers of the left-handed squarks.
The Lagrangian, with the MFV assumption, is then simply given by
a subset of the interactions of the general Lagrangian (\ref{tchannelLagr})
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}= \sum_{i=1,2,3}
g \,\eta_L^{(i)}\,\bar Q_L^{(i)}\, \chi+\textrm{ h.c.}\,,
\end{equation}
with $\chi$ being either a Dirac or a Majorana fermion singlet.
The collider phenomenology of this model is mainly driven by the 1 jet + $\slashed{E}_T$ and 2 jets + $\slashed{E}_T$ signals. The former is mostly due to the usual initial-state radiation of a parton from the processes of DM pair production with $t$-channel exchange of the $\eta_L^{(i)}$ (radiation of a gluon from the $\eta_L^{(i)}$ is also possible but suppressed, although this process and the analogue ones with EW radiation play a relevant role in indirect detection, see, e.g.~\cite{Bell:2010ei, Bell:2011eu, Bell:2011if, Ciafaloni:2011gv,
DeSimone:2013gj}).
The latter process (2 jets+$\slashed{E}_T$) is instead a rather distinctive feature of $t$-channel models, because it is mostly arises from pair production of the mediator, followed by the decay $\eta_i\to u_i\chi$, see diagrams in Fig.~\ref{fig:0t12}.
Mediator pair production is typically dominated by QCD interactions, being initiated by two gluons or $\bar u_i u_i$. However, since the mediator has EW charges, also Drell--Yan pair production is possible and, more importantly, it is possible to produce a pair of $\eta^{(i)}$ from $\bar u_i u_i$ (or even via the leading channel $u_i u_i$, for Majorana DM) through the $t$-channel exchange of a DM particle (right diagram of Fig.~\ref{fig:0t12}).
This process is controlled by the Yukawa coupling $g$ of the simplified model.
An interesting feature to keep in mind is that $g$ is a free parameter, whereas in SUSY the coupling of squarks and neutralinos is set to be a combination of gauge couplings. Therefore, depending on the value of $g$ compared to the strong gauge coupling, the relative importance of the diagrams for the $\eta$ pair production (QCD with respect to DM exchange) can be varied. Another difference with respect to the SUSY case is that the DM can be a Dirac fermion, unlike the neutralino.
Powerful analyses can be carried out by exploiting the combination of the searches for the monojet signal with mediator pair production
(see, e.g.~\cite{An:2013xka, Bai:2013iqa, DiFranzo:2013vra, Papucci:2014iwa} for early work), and by a proper reformulation of the squark searches with the Yukawa coupling $g$ as free parameter.
As far as the comparison with other experiments is concerned, the limits from direct detection are rather strong for Dirac DM, as it leads to spin-independent DM-nucleus scattering, while in the Majorana DM case only spin-dependent scattering is allowed, for which current constraints are much weaker.
Combining LHC and direct detection results with the requirement of a correct relic abundance excludes the $0t\frac12$ model with Dirac DM with masses below TeV, while a Majorana DM candidate is still viable for a DM particle mass above $\sim$100 GeV \cite{An:2013xka}. However, it should be noted that the relic density constraint may be evaded by either alternative (non-thermal) production mechanisms in the early universe,
or by assuming that only a fraction of the present energy density of DM has originated from freeze-out, or by additional DM candidates
with respect to the one produced at LHC.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{2jets0t12a.pdf}\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{2jets0t12b.pdf}\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{2jets0t12c.pdf}
\caption{\it
Some representative diagrams for mediator pair production in the $t$-channel $0t\frac{1}{2}$ model, which contribute to 2 jets+$\slashed{E}_T$ events.}
\label{fig:0t12}
\end{figure}
\vspace{1em}
Another representative $t$-channel model is the model with a ``vector-like quark'' mediator (the model $\frac12 t 0$, following the nomenclature of~\cite{DeSimone:2016fbz}), where the DM particle is a scalar singlet $\phi$ and the mediator $\psi$ is a vector-like colored fermion.
By choosing to couple the mediator and the DM particle to right-handed quarks, and assuming MFV, the Lagrangian is
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=\frac12\left[(\partial_\mu\phi)^2-m_\phi^2\phi^2\right]
+\bar\psi(i\slashed{D}-M)\psi+ (y\,\phi\,\bar\psi\, q_R+\textrm{h.c.}).
\end{equation}
The case of the mediator coupling to left-handed quarks can be worked out similarly.
The mediator is a color triplet and electrically charged, so
it is pair produced mainly via QCD interactions (the processes are depicted in~\cite{Giacchino:2015hvk}, Fig.~6).
For phenomenological studies of this simplified model, including an analysis of the LHC constraints, see~\cite{Vasquez:2009kq, Ibarra:2014qma,
Giacchino:2014moa, Giacchino:2015hvk}.
The reach for this model is improved by
combining the DM searches with the collider searches for vector-like quarks, to be interpreted as searches for the mediator.
We expect the collider phenomenology of this model to be similar, although not identical, to the one of the $0t\frac12$ (squark-like mediator) model discussed at the beginning of this Subsection, as some processes for mediator pair production are different. As for the combinations with other searches, it should be noted that the direct and indirect detection phenomenology of this model is very different from the case with a squark-like mediator (see, e.g.,~\cite{DeSimone:2016fbz}).
Combining all the available limits from LHC, direct, and indirect detection, as well as relic density constraints, one ends up with a rather constrained scenario, but still some parameter space is available for $m_\phi\gtrsim 200$ GeV and
$m_\psi/m_\phi\lesssim 2$ \cite{Giacchino:2015hvk}, which is worth exploring
with analyses of the upcoming data.
\subsection{Spin-2 models}
\label{Spin-2}
The behaviour of DM depends on the way it interacts with the SM and, in particular, on the quantum numbers of both DM and the mediator. An interesting possibility for a new kind of spin-two mediator has been proposed in Ref.~\cite{Lee:2013bua} in the so-called Gravity-Mediated Dark Matter (GMDM) model. In this scenario, the origin of DM is linked to a new sector of strong interactions (gravity or its gauge dual) and mediation to the SM is via spin-two and spin-zero states. In the gravitational interpretation of the scenario, these mediator states can be identified as the lightest Kaluza--Klein graviton and radion of the compact extra dimension. In the gauge dual scenario, these states are glueballs linked to the spontaneous breaking of symmetries. Fortunately, the behaviour of the GMDM spin-2 mediator $h_{\mu\nu}$ is determined by the low-energy symmetries of the theory~\cite{Fok:2012zk}, and is largely independent of the interpretation of the spin-two state. In particular, DM and SM fields would interact with the mediator via dimension-five operators involving the same type of couplings as from the stress-tensor $T^{\mu\nu}$, namely
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{int} = \frac{-c_i}{\Lambda} \, h_{\mu\nu} \, T^{(i) \mu\nu} \ ,
\end{equation}
where the index $i$ denotes any kind of field, DM or SM, and $\Lambda$ is the scale suppressing the interactions. In~\cite{Lee:2013bua,Lee:2014caa}, it was found that an unsuppressed s-wave annihilation is possible for scalar, vector and fermionic DM.
This distinctive scenario for DM is largely unexplored and may deserve a closer look. The DM phenomenology via a spin-2 mediator necessarily involves higher-dimensional operators, which emulates the suppression of contact interactions, yet in a resonant regime where the mediator is on-shell. In particular, one would need to explore further the implications in direct detection and collider phenomenology of these models. For example, current searches for spin-2 Kaluza--Klein gravitons could be made in the context of GMDM and linked to the DM searches at the LHC, as illustrated recently in the interpretation of GMDM in the context of the 750 GeV diphoton excess~\cite{Han:2015cty}.
\subsection{Pseudo-Dirac DM}
\label{pseudo-Dirac}
The starting point is to consider a generic new four-component Dirac fermion $\Psi$ that is a singlet under the SM gauge group. We consider the most general Lagrangian for $\Psi$ with both Dirac ($M_D$) and Majorana ($m_{L,R}$) masses
\cite{DeSimone:2010tf}:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_0=\bar\Psi(i\slashed{\partial}-M_D)\Psi
-\frac{m_L}{2}(\bar\Psi^cP_L\Psi+\textrm{h.c.})
-\frac{m_R}{2}(\bar\Psi^cP_R\Psi+\textrm{h.c.}),
\end{equation}
where $P_{R,L}=(1\pm \gamma^5)/2$.
We focus on the ``pseudo-Dirac'' limit of the mass matrix,
where $M_D\gg m_L, m_R$.
The two mass eigenstates, denoted by $\chi_{1,2}$, with masses $m_{1,2}=
M_D\mp (m_L+m_R)/2$, will be linear combinations of $\Psi,\Psi^c$.
It is then possible to construct the Majorana fields $\Psi_1^{\rm{M}}, \Psi_2^{\rm{M}}$ out of the mass eigenstates: $\Psi_1^{\rm{M}}\equiv \chi_1+\chi_1^c$ and $\Psi_2^{\rm{M}}\equiv \chi_2+\chi_2^c$.
The spectrum of this model consists of the lightest state $\Psi_1^{\rm{M}}$ with mass $M_1=M_D-(m_L+m_R)/2$, identified with a Majorana DM particle, and a slightly heavier companion state $\Psi_2^{\rm{M}}$, with mass $M_2=M_1+\Delta M=M_1+(m_L+m_R)$. The model described by the free Lagrangian $\mathcal{L}_0$ is simply defined by the two mass parameters $M_1, \Delta M$.
The situation with pseudo-Dirac fermions may also be realized in a SUSY framework, see e.g.~Refs.~\cite{Hall:1990hq, Nelson:2002ca, Belanger:2009wf, Chun:2009zx, Hsieh:2007wq}.
At this point one needs to consider the interactions of $\Psi$ with the SM fields $f$.
The choice made in~\cite{DeSimone:2010tf} was to consider effective (non-renormalizable) interactions. At dimension six, one can write:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\rm{int}}=\frac{1}{\Lambda^2}
\left[\bar\Psi\gamma^\mu(c_L P_L+c_R P_R)\Psi\right]
\times
\left[\bar f\gamma_\mu(c_L^{(f)} P_L+c_R^{(f)} P_R)f\right],
\label{pDDMLint}
\end{equation}
where $c_{R,L}, c_{R,L}^{(f)}$ are generic operator coefficients.
Other dimension-6 operators are possible, e.g. those leading to anapole moments of Majorana Dark Matter fermions with SM gauge bosons \cite{Fitzpatrick:2010br, Ho:2012bg, Gao:2013vfa}. The analysis of such operators in the context of pseudo-Dirac Dark Matter deserves further investigation.
The Lagrangian (\ref{pDDMLint}) can be rewritten in terms of the Majorana
mass eigenstates $\Psi_{1,2}^{\rm M}$, leading to terms for the interactions
of two $\Psi_1^{\rm M}$ particles
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\rm{int},{11}}=\frac{1}{\Lambda^2}
\frac{c_R-c_L}{4}
\left[\bar\Psi_1^{\rm M}\gamma^\mu\gamma^5\Psi_1^{\rm M}\right]
\times
\frac12\left[(c_L^{(f)}+c_R^{(f)})\bar f\gamma_\mu f
+(c_R^{(f)}-c_L^{(f)})\bar f\gamma_\mu \gamma^5 f\right] \, ,
\label{pDDMLint11}
\end{equation}
and to terms for the interaction of $\Psi_1^{\rm M}$ with $\Psi_2^{\rm M}$
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\rm{int},{12}}=\frac{i}{\Lambda^2}
\frac{c_R+c_L}{2}
\left[\bar\Psi_1^{\rm M}\gamma^\mu\Psi_2^{\rm M}\right]
\frac12\left[(c_L^{(f)}+c_R^{(f)})\bar f\gamma_\mu f
+(c_R^{(f)}-c_L^{(f)})\bar f\gamma_\mu \gamma^5 f\right].
\label{pDDMLint12}
\end{equation}
The pseudo-Dirac DM scenario, despite its minimality, has several interesting features, as we now describe briefly (see~\cite{DeSimone:2010tf} for more details).
\begin{itemize}
\item With a large enough splitting $\Delta M\gtrsim \mathcal{O}(10 - 100 \textrm{ keV})$, DM-nucleon scattering involves only the elastic scattering of a Majorana DM particle $\Psi_1^{\rm M}$, and it is driven by the
interactions in (\ref{pDDMLint11}), which are spin-dependent.
In this way the stringent constraints on spin-independent scattering are evaded.
\item
The relic density is driven by the coannihilation channel of the two nearly-degenerate states $\Psi_1^{\rm M}\Psi_2^{\rm M}\to \bar f f$ described by the terms in Eq.~(\ref{pDDMLint12}), since the Majorana annihilations of $\Psi_1^{\rm M}\Psi_1^{\rm M}$ and $\Psi_2^{\rm M}\Psi_2^{\rm M}$ are either suppressed by $m_f$ or by the relative velocity ($p$-wave).
\item The same interaction terms in Eq.~(\ref{pDDMLint12}) responsible for the relic abundance calculation are also driving the decay of $\Psi_2^{\rm M}\to \Psi_1^{\rm M}f\bar f$.
For mass splittings of the order of GeV, the decay lengths can naturally be of the order of a measurable displaced vertex.
By considering $f$ as a lepton, the edge of the dilepton invariant mass distribution is directly related to the mass splitting $\Delta M$.
So by just measuring the decay length and the dilepton edge one can determine the overall DM mass scale and the mass splitting.
\item As a consequence of the last two points, it is possible to relate the decay length
to the DM relic abundance and the mass parameters of the model, in such a way that
one can make a prediction for the DM mass, to be tested against other independent measurements.
\end{itemize}
Pseudo-Dirac DM is particularly interesting in the context of collider physics, since it leads to a rather rich phenomenology for DM searches beyond the usual missing transverse energy signature, such as the displaced vertex signatures which have not been fully explored yet in this context.
(See also the discussion of SUSY DM signatures in the next Section.)
It was remarked during the workshop that it would be interesting to adapt the analysis of~\cite{DeSimone:2010tf} in the framework of simplified models
(Note: simplified models for coannihilation scenarios have been worked out in~\cite{Baker:2015qna}).
This effort will require replacing the effective interactions in Eq.~(\ref{pDDMLint}) with the inclusion of a mediator, which is currently under way.
\section{Scalar singlet model with mixing}
\label{scalar}
In this Section we discuss the simplest extension of the scalar-mediated DM model recommended by the LHC DMF~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb} that includes mixing with the SM Higgs boson. Extensions with a more complicated scalar sector have been discussed, for example, in \cite{Izaguirre:2014vva,Ipek:2014gua,Berlin:2015wwa,Baek:2015lna,Choudhury:2015lha,Duerr:2016tmh}, some of them are aiming to address the Fermi-LAT galactic center $\gamma$ ray excess~\cite{TheFermi-LAT:2015kwa}.
Besides the SM particles and interactions, the model considered here contains a scalar mediator $s$ and a~DM particle~$\chi$, which for concreteness is taken to be a Dirac fermion. The additional scalar interactions relevant for the further discussion are~\cite{Kim:2008pp,Kim:2009ke,Baek:2011aa,LopezHonorez:2012kv,Baek:2012uj,Fairbairn:2013uta,Carpenter:2013xra,Khoze:2015sra,Abdallah:2015ter}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Linteractions}
{\cal L} \supset -y_{\rm DM} \hspace{0.25mm} s \hspace{0.25mm} \bar \chi \chi - \mu \hspace{0.25mm} s \hspace{0.25mm} |H|^2 \,,
\end{equation}
where $y_{\rm DM}$ is a dark-sector Yukawa coupling and $H$ denotes the usual SM Higgs doublet.
As a result of the portal coupling $\mu$, the Higgs field $h$ and the real scalar field $s$ mix, giving rise to mass eigenstates $h_1$ and $h_2$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mixing}
\begin{pmatrix} h_1 \\[2mm] h_2 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} \cos \theta & \hspace{1mm} \sin \theta \\[2mm] -\sin \theta & \hspace{1mm} \cos \theta \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} h \\[2mm] s \end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
where $\theta$ is the mixing angle. In terms of these mass eigenstates the trilinear couplings of the scalars to DM and to the massive SM gauge bosons and fermions take the following form
\begin{equation}
\begin{split} \label{eq:smh1h2}
{\cal L} \supset &- y_{\rm DM} \hspace{0.5mm} \big ( \sin \theta \hspace{1mm} h_1 + \cos \theta \hspace{1mm} h_2 \big ) \hspace{0.5mm} \bar{\chi}\chi \\[2mm] & + \big( \cos \theta \hspace{1mm} h_1 - \sin \theta \hspace{1mm} h_2 \big) \left(\frac{2M_W^2}{v} \, W^{+}_\mu W^{-\,\mu} + \frac{M_Z^2}{v} \, Z_\mu Z^{\mu} - \sum_f \frac{m_f}{v}\, \bar{f}f\right) \,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $v \simeq 246 \, {\rm GeV}$ is the Higgs field vacuum expectation value, $M_W$ and $M_Z$ are the $W$ and $Z$ boson masses, respectively, and $m_f$ denotes the masses of the SM fermions. Since the mixing angle~$\theta$ is defined such that for $\theta \to 0$ the DM sector is decoupled from the~SM, the state~$h_1$ plays the role of the observed Higgs boson with $m_{h_1} \simeq 125 \, {\rm GeV}$, while the mass of the state $h_2$, along with $y_{\rm DM}$ and $\theta$, are free parameters of the model.\footnote{In (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) the trilinear scalar couplings and all quartic couplings have not been included. These couplings are all simple functions of $\sin \theta$ and $\cos \theta$ and uniquely fixed in the model (\ref{eq:Linteractions}). Apart from the $h_1 h_2^2$ and~$h_1^2 h_2$ vertices, we ignore them here because they do not play a role in the phenomenological applications discussed in this Section.} Note that, as far as the couplings between $h_2$ and fermions are concerned, the interactions~(\ref{eq:smh1h2}) resemble those of the scalar-mediated DM model recommended by the LHC DMF~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb} after identifying $g_{\rm DM} = y_{\rm DM} \hspace{0.25mm} \cos \theta$ and $g_{\rm SM} = -\sin \theta$. Couplings between the SM Higgs~$h_1$ and~DM as well as $h_2$ and electroweak (EW) gauge bosons are, on the other hand, not present in the latter model, while in the context of (\ref{eq:Linteractions}) such interactions and their precise form are an unavoidable consequence of EW symmetry breaking.
In this paper we focus specifically on the possible collider signatures of this model, and how they differ from the LHC DMF scalar singlet case without mixing. Constraints on the model from non-collider DM experiments can be found in~\cite{Kim:2008pp,Baek:2011aa,LopezHonorez:2012kv,Baek:2012uj,Fairbairn:2013uta}.
For $m_{h_1} > 2 m_\chi$, the most obvious manifestation of the interactions (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) is through their contributions to the invisible decay of the Higgs boson. The corresponding decay width is
\begin{equation} \label{eq:h1DM2}
\Gamma (h_1 \to \chi \bar \chi) = \frac{y_{\rm DM}^2 \sin^2 \theta \, m_{h_1}}{8 \pi} \left ( 1 - \frac{4m_\chi^2}{m_{h_1}^2} \right )^{3/2} \,.
\end{equation}
After the transformation $\sin \theta \to \cos \theta$ and $m_{h_1} \to m_{h_2}$ the same expression holds in the case of $h_2$, if it is sufficiently heavy. To determine the invisible Higgs boson branching fraction from (\ref{eq:h1DM2}), one has to keep in mind that all partial widths of $h_1$ to SM particles are suppressed by~$\cos^2 \theta$ and that depending on the mass spectrum also $h_1 \to h_2 h_2$ may be allowed.
Another important feature of (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) is that the couplings between $h_1$ and the EW gauge bosons, as well as the SM fermions, receive a universal suppression factor of $\cos \theta$ relative to the SM values. The mixing angle and hence (\ref{eq:Linteractions}) is therefore subject to the constraints that arise from the ATLAS and CMS measurements of the signal strengths in Higgs boson production and decay~\cite{HIG-15-002}. Global fits \cite{Farzinnia:2013pga,Belanger:2013kya} to the LHC Run 1 data find $\sin \theta \lesssim 0.4$, which implies that the state $h_1$ ($h_2$) is mostly Higgs-like (singlet-like). Constraints on $\theta$ also arise from the oblique parameters $T$ and $S$~\cite{Baek:2011aa,Lopez-Val:2014jva,Robens:2015gla,Robens:2016xkb}, but are weaker than those that follow from the Higgs boson measurements.
Turning our attention to the $\slashed{E}_T$ signals, an important observation is that the phenomenology of the scalar singlet model with mixing (SMM) is generically richer than that of the scalar-mediated DM model recommended by the LHC DMF. For instance, the couplings in (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) that involve EW gauge bosons will give rise to mono-$W$ and mono-$Z$ signals at tree level. The relevant diagrams are shown in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:scalardiagrams}. The resulting amplitudes take the following schematic form:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:amplitude}
{\cal A} (pp \to \slashed{E}_T + W/Z) \propto y_{\rm DM} \sin (2 \theta) \left ( \frac{1}{s - m_{h_1}^2 + i m_{h_1} \Gamma_{h_1}} - \frac{1}{s - m_{h_2}^2 + i m_{h_2} \Gamma_{h_2}} \right ) ,
\end{equation}
where $s$ denotes the invariant mass squared of the DM pair, and $\Gamma_{h_1}$ and $ \Gamma_{h_2}$ are the total decay widths of the two mass eigenstates in the scalar sector. Similar results hold in the case of $\slashed{E}_T + 2j$ production through vector boson fusion (VBF), top quark loop induced $\slashed{E}_T + j$ signals, and $\slashed{E}_T + t \bar t$ production. Examples of diagrams that lead to these signals are also displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:scalardiagrams}. We note that the contributions from virtual $h_1/h_2$ exchange have opposite signs in (\ref{eq:amplitude}), which is a simple consequence of the mixing matrix (\ref{eq:mixing}) being orthogonal.
The destructive interference of the two scalar contributions is a feature that is also well-known from the DM-nucleon scattering cross section relevant for direct detection~\cite{Kim:2008pp,Baek:2011aa,LopezHonorez:2012kv}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.975\textwidth]{scalardiagrams.pdf}
\vspace{2mm}
\caption{\it Examples of diagrams with an exchange of a $h_1/h_2$ mediator that lead, respectively, to a mono-$W/Z$ signal, a $\slashed{E}_T + 2 j$ signature in vector boson fusion, $\slashed{E}_T + j$ events from a top quark loop, and a $\slashed{E}_T + t \bar t$ signature.}
\label{fig:scalardiagrams}
\end{figure}
It is easy to understand from (\ref{eq:amplitude}) that the parameter space of the model (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) can be divided into several cases with distinct phenomenologically:
\begin{itemize}
\item Scenario A: For $m_{h_2} > 2 m_\chi > m_{h_1}$, only the second propagator in (\ref{eq:amplitude}) can go on-shell and, as a result, only diagrams involving $h_2$ exchange will contribute to the various~$\slashed{E}_T$ signals arising in the model (\ref{eq:Linteractions}). This feature implies, for instance, that the normalised kinematic distributions of the monojet signal in the scalar models with and without mixing are the same. In consequence, the $\slashed{E}_T + j$ cross sections in the two models can be obtained by a simple rescaling procedure. Working in the narrow-width approximation~(NWA) and taking into account only top quark loop induced diagrams, one obtains
\begin{equation} \label{eq:rescale}
\frac{\sigma ( pp \to h_2 \hspace{0.5mm} (\to \chi \bar \chi) + j )}{\sigma ( pp \to \phi \hspace{0.5mm} (\to \chi \bar \chi) + j )} \simeq \left ( \frac{\sin (2 \theta)}{2 g_{\rm SM}} \right )^2 \frac{\Gamma_\phi}{\Gamma_{h_2}} \,,
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma_\phi$ denotes the total width of the scalar mediator in the LHC~DMF spin-0 simplified model. We note that additional contributions to $\slashed{E}_T + {\rm jets}$ production arise in the context of (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) also from mono-$V$ or VBF topologies. Such contributions are not present in the LHC DMF model, but are consistently described in the~SMM.
\item Scenario B: If $m_{h_1} > 2 m_\chi > m_{h_2}$, the roles of $h_1$ and $h_2$ are interchanged, which means that the interactions (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) can be mapped onto the simplified models that are employed in the context of direct and indirect searches for invisible decays of the SM Higgs boson \cite{Aad:2015uga,Aad:2015txa,Chatrchyan:2014tja,CMS-PAS-HIG-16-009}. Again, simple rescaling relations like the one given in (\ref{eq:rescale}) can be worked out to translate the signal strengths in a given $\slashed{E}_T$ channel between the different SDMMs. Unlike the LHC DMF model, the SMM again allows for a consistent description of searches for invisible Higgs boson decays across all channels.
\item Scenario C: For $m_{h_2} > m_{h_1} > 2 m_\chi$, both scalars can be produced on-shell and, in principle, diagrams with $h_1$ and $h_2$ exchange can be relevant for describing correctly $\slashed{E}_T$ signals arising from (\ref{eq:Linteractions}). However, in large parts of the parameter space the state~$h_1$ will give the dominant contribution, due to a resonance enhancement associated to the first propagator in (\ref{eq:amplitude}). This is an immediate consequence of the fact that $\Gamma_{h_1}$, being the width of the Higgs-like scalar, is experimentally observed to be small, while $\Gamma_{h_2}$ can receive sizable contributions from decays into~DM and, if kinematically allowed, into top quark pairs. The phenomenology of scenarios~B and~C can therefore be expected to be similar for searches with $\slashed{E}_T$ signatures.
\item Scenario D: If $m_{h_1} > m_{h_2} > 2 m_\chi$, both scalars can be produced on-shell like in scenario C, and both contributions can again be important if $\Gamma_{h_1} \simeq \Gamma_{h_2}$. As we will argue in the following, such cases can only be realised if $y_{\rm DM}$ is sufficiently small, and thus are not relevant for searches in $\slashed{E}_T$ signatures.
\item Scenario E: If $m_{h_1}, m_{h_2} < 2 m_\chi$, the scalars cannot decay to DM, and the prospects for observing $h_2$ production in $\slashed{E}_T$ channels will be very challenging. To probe this scenario one thus has to exploit resonance searches in the SM final states. Depending on the mass and width of $h_2$, possible channels are $\gamma \gamma$, $\gamma Z$, $t \bar t$, $h_1 h_1$, and $t {\bar t }t {\bar t }$.
\end{itemize}
We now quantify these general observations by studying $\slashed{E}_T$ signals for different mass hierarchies, values of the mixing angle $\theta$, and values of the dark-sector Yukawa coupling~$y_{\rm DM}$. We compare predictions from the SMM \eqref{eq:smh1h2} with those of the scalar models~\cite{Haisch:2013ata,DMFmodel_Buckley,DMFmodel_Hahn} used in earlier LHC DMF studies~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}. The SMM and DMF models are used to produce leading order kinematic distributions and cross sections for the monojet and $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ processes. Monojet, $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ and SM Higgs boson events are generated with {\tt MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO}~\cite{Alwall:2014hca} using the {\tt SMM} UFO model~\cite{Haisch:2016} for the SMM case and the {\tt DMSIMP} UFO model~\cite{Backovic:2015soa} for the LHC DMF and SM Higgs boson cases. The widths of the $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ mass eigenstates in the SMM and DMF models are determined automatically with {\tt MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO} as a function of the relevant masses and $y_{\rm DM}$ values.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_H1_width}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_H2_width}.pdf}
\caption{\it
The $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ (left) and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ (right) total decay width in scenarios C and D for several values of $y_{\rm DM}$ and $\theta$. In both panels the DM mass is fixed to $1 \, {\rm GeV}$. An increase in the total decay width of the $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ state at low masses and low values of DM coupling $y_{\rm DM}$ is due to the contribution of the $h_1 \to h_2 h_2$ decay channel. Note that the $\theta = 0.01$ lines for $y_{\rm DM} = 0.1$ and 0.01 nearly overlap and hence are seen as a single line in the left plot.}
\label{fig:widths}
\end{figure}
In general, the total width $\Gamma_{h_1}$ in the SMM differs from the SM Higgs boson width due to the additional $h_1 \to \ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ and $h_1 \to h_2 h_2$ decay channels, and the $\cos^{2}\theta$ suppression of $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ decays into SM particles. Similarly, $\Gamma_{h_2}$ includes decays both to DM and SM particles, and depends on~$\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}$, $y_{\rm DM}$, and~$\theta$. Figure~\ref{fig:widths} shows $\Gamma_{h_1}$ and $\Gamma_{h_2}$ as a function of these SMM parameters for scenarios C and D, for which both $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ can potentially contribute to the different~$\slashed{E}_T$ signatures. The kinematics in the SMM is expected to be driven by $h_1$ ($h_2$) exchange when $\Gamma_{h_1} \ll \Gamma_{h_2}$~($\Gamma_{h_2} \ll \Gamma_{h_1}$) --- we will demonstrate below that this expectation is indeed correct. From the comparison of the two panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:widths} it also is evident that in order to have~$\Gamma_{h_1} \simeq \Gamma_{h_2}$, the DM coupling $y_{\rm DM}$ has to be small. In the limit $y_{\rm DM} \to 0$, the decay rates of $h_1$ and~$h_2$ to SM particles will however become dominant and, as a result, mediator searches in SM final states will typically provide the leading constraints on the parameter space. One can thus conclude that in the parameter space where $\slashed{E}_T$ searches are strongest, depending on the mass hierarchy, either $h_1$ or $h_2$ exchange dominates the signals.
Next, we study the exclusive $\ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ production cross section and its kinematics for the mass hierarchies corresponding to scenarios A, B, C, and D. As mentioned, scenarios C and D correspond to the on-shell decays of both the $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ mediators to DM particles. Earlier studies have shown that kinematics and cross sections are independent of $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}$ in such scenarios~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}. Therefore, without loss of generality, we consider DM particles with a mass of $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}} = 1\rm~GeV$ in scenarios C and D, and scan values for $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}$, $y_{\rm DM}$, and $\theta$. In scenario A (B), the DM particles are heavier than $\ensuremath{m_{h_{1}}}/2$ ($\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}/2$), and $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ ($\ensuremath{h_{2}}$) decays to~$\ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ are prohibited. Provided that $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}$ is smaller than $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ ($\ensuremath{h_{1}}$) in scenario A (B), SMM kinematics should also be independent of $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}$. Consequently, we focus on $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}} = 100 \, {\rm GeV}$~($\ensuremath{m_{\chi}} = 10 \, {\rm GeV}$) for these scenarios.
We compare SMM and LHC DMF kinematics by means of the predicted transverse momentum of the $\ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ system, $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$, which is a useful generator-level proxy for the $\slashed{E}_T$ observable typically used in collider-based DM searches. Our treatment ignores experimental effects (e.g.,~selection efficiencies, energy resolutions, and detector effects) that would be relevant in an analysis at the reconstruction level.
\subsection{Scenario A}
Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioA_kin} compares SMM and LHC DMF model kinematics in scenario A. In accordance with the expectation, we observe a close correspondence between the kinematics in these models. The discrepancy observed in the monojet spectra near $150 \, {\rm GeV}$ results from vector-boson-mediated processes, which are included in the SMM but not in the LHC DMF model. Section~\ref{sec:VBF} discusses the vector boson mediated (VBM) contributions in more detail.
Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioA_xsecBR} shows the $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ production cross section for the nominal case of $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. As expected, the SMM cross section times branching fraction approaches zero as the mixing angle $\theta$ tends to $0$ or $\pi/2$. Previous studies have shown that $\chi \bar \chi$ kinematics are independent of the $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}$ value for the low to moderate mediator masses explored here~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}. The prediction for $\sigma ( pp \to t \bar t + h_1/h_2) \hspace{0.25mm} {\rm Br} ( h_1/h_2 \to \chi \bar \chi)$ is smaller than both the SM Higgs boson and corresponding LHC DMF model cross sections due to mixing between $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$, and because on-shell $\ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ production via $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ exchange is forbidden in scenario A. These results also generalize to the monojet process.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_750_mDM_100_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_750_mDM_100_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario A kinematics: $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ in the SMM and LHC DMF models for the monojet (left) and $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ (right) channels. Both plots correspond to $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}} = 100 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}} = 750 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. The monojet plot includes a comparison with the SM Higgs boson production in association with one or two jets, while the $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ plot includes a comparison with SM Higgs boson production in association with $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}}$ (the Higgs boson $p_{\rm T}$ is displayed in these cases). The SMM kinematics for both monojet and $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ generally agree with the LHC DMF model predictions in this scenario.
}
\label{fig:scenarioA_kin}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_xsec_vs_theta_mDM_100_mMed_750_g_1.0}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario A cross sections: the SMM $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ production cross section for $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=750\rm~GeV$, $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=100\rm~GeV$, $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$ as a function of mixing angle compared with the LHC DMF model and SM $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + h$ cross sections. Because the $h_{1} \rightarrow \ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ channel is inaccessible in this scenario, the SMM cross section remains below the LHC DMF model equivalent.
}
\label{fig:scenarioA_xsecBR}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scenario B}
Figures~\ref{fig:scenarioB_kin} and~\ref{fig:scenarioB_xsecBR}, respectively, compare $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions and cross sections for scenario B. In this scenario, SMM kinematics clearly correspond to SM Higgs boson production rather than to the LHC DMF model predictions. Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioB_xsecBR} displays $\sigma ( pp \to t \bar t + h_1/h_2) \hspace{0.25mm} {\rm Br} ( h_1/h_2 \to \chi \bar \chi)$ for representative $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}},\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}$ values in the nominal case of $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. For intermediate values of the mixing angle, $\sigma ( pp \to t \bar t + h_1/h_2) \hspace{0.25mm} {\rm Br} ( h_1/h_2 \to \chi \bar \chi)$ lies between the corresponding LHC DMF model and SM Higgs boson cross sections. The finding that $h_1$ drives the prediction in scenario~B also applies to the monojet case.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_10_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_10_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario B kinematics: $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions for the monojet (left) and $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ (right) process with~$\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, and $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. The rest of the notations are as in Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:scenarioA_kin}.
}
\label{fig:scenarioB_kin}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_xsec_vs_theta_mDM_10_mMed_10_g_1.0}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario B cross sections: the SMM $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ production cross section for $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, and $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$.
}
\label{fig:scenarioB_xsecBR}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scenarios C and D}
Scenarios C and D in the SMM are similar in that on-shell decays of both the $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ mediators are possible. In principle, both mediators can therefore contribute to the~$\slashed{E}_T$ production cross sections in the different channels. Figures~\ref{fig:scenarioC_kin} and~\ref{fig:scenarioD_kin} show representative $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions for scenarios C and D, respectively. Representative cross sections for these scenarios are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scenarioCD_xsecBR}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_500_mDM_1_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_500_mDM_1_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario C kinematics: $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions for the monojet~(left) and $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ (right) channels. The results shown correspond to $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}= 500 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}= 1 \, {\rm GeV}$, and $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. The rest of the notations are as in Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:scenarioA_kin}.
}
\label{fig:scenarioC_kin}
\end{figure}
From Fig.~\ref{fig:scenarioC_kin} it is evident that the SMM $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions are generally softer than those of the LHC DMF model. Within statistical uncertainties the kinematics of the SMM signals are essentially identical to Higgs production in the SM. Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioCD_xsecBR} demonstrates that the $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ cross section in scenario~C is generally larger than that of the LHC DMF model, and approaches the SM~$\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + h$ cross section for intermediate values of the mixing angle.
Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioD_kin}, which corresponds to scenario D, clearly shows the impact of $\ensuremath{h_{1}}/\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ mixing. Significant differences between the LHC DMF model and SMM kinematics are found for large $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}$. As $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}$ decreases from $1.0$, kinematics approach those of the LHC DMF model. The SMM production cross section is shown as a function of mixing angle in Fig.~\ref{fig:scenarioCD_xsecBR}. The situation here is essentially the reverse of scenario C, with the production cross section remaining below that of the LHC DMF model.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_1_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_1_gDM_0.01_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\vspace{2mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_1_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_1_gDM_0.01_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario D kinematics: $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions for $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ (top row) and monojet (bottom row) channels. The displayed results are obtained for $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, and $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=1 \, {\rm GeV}$. The left and right columns correspond to $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$ and $0.01$, respectively. The rest of the notations are as in Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:scenarioA_kin}.
}
\label{fig:scenarioD_kin}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_xsec_vs_theta_mDM_1_mMed_500_g_1.0}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_xsec_vs_theta_mDM_1_mMed_10_g_1.0}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario C and D cross sections: $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ production cross sections compared with those for the SM $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}}+h$ and the corresponding LHC DMF model cross sections for $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=500 \, {\rm GeV}$~(left) and $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}} = 10 \, {\rm GeV}$~(right). All results use $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=1 \, {\rm GeV}$ and $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$.
}
\label{fig:scenarioCD_xsecBR}
\end{figure}
\subsection{VBM production}\label{sec:VBF}
The effects of Higgs boson mixing were not considered in the LHC DMF monojet model, which includes mediator production via top quark loop diagrams only. The SMM, on the other hand, also accounts for possible mediator production via $s$-channel or $t$-channel massive gauge boson exchange. The corresponding $W/Z$-associated and VBF-like topologies are shown in the first two panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:scalardiagrams}. Figure~\ref{fig:VBF} compares the VBM $\slashed{E}_T + \rm{jets}$ cross section against the full result for scenarios~A and~B. We observe that the VBM processes constitute an appreciable fraction of the total cross section already at \ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}} \ values of the order of two times the massive gauge boson masses.
\begin{figure}[!htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_vs_vbfWithHiggs_kinematics_MMed_750_mDM_100_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_vs_vbfWithHiggs_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_10_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Comparison of total and VBM $\slashed{E}_T + {\rm jets}$ cross sections for scenarios~A and B: the full differential cross sections for the SMM are shown as solid lines, while the weak contributions due to $W/Z$-associated and VBF production are indicated with open circles. The results correspond to $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=750 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=100 \, {\rm GeV}$~(left) and $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}} = 10 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$~(right). All results use $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$.
}
\label{fig:VBF}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Relic density}\label{sec:relic}
The DMF and SMM scalar models can be used to obtain the DM relic density in the universe with an assumption that there is only a single species of DM particle and that no mechanisms can generate/annihilate DM beyond those contained in the models. We compute the relic density using {\sc MadDM} version 2.0.6~\cite{Backovic:2013dpa,Backovic:2015tpt}, which considers all $2 \rightarrow 2$ interactions between DM and SM particles. The contours shown in the left panel of~Fig.~\ref{fig:relic}, which are estimated following the procedure described in~\cite{Pree:2016hwc}, correspond to the DMF and SMM model parameter spaces for which the computed relic density matches the $\Omega_{c}h^{2} = 0.12$ observation from the Planck collaboration~\cite{Ade:2015xua}. Regions interior (exterior) to the contours are those in which the obtained relic density is over-abundant (under-abundant) with respect to observation. Note that the color scale is truncated at 1.0; larger values of the relic density are indicated in the same shade of dark blue. As before, the Yukawa coupling strength in the SMM and DMF models is set to 1.0. The SMM results shown correspond to a mixing angle of $\theta = 0.2$. The mass hierarchies of scenarios A to E are indicated in the left panel. The right panel shows the relic abundance for the SMM model together with several relevant mass relations.
The plots show that the observed relic density can be obtained from both the DMF and SMM models over a wide range of parameter space. Dashed lines are added to illustrate which processes contribute to enhanced annihilation along the corresponding relic density contours. For example, the vertical line labeled $m_{\chi}=m_{h_1}/2$ corresponds to an enhancement of the $\chi \bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{1}$ process. Likewise, the line labeled $m_{\chi}=m_{h_2}$ ($m_{\chi}=(m_{h_2}+m_{h_1})/2$) corresponds to the enhancement of the $\chi \bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{2} h_{2}$ ($\chi \bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{2} h_{1}$).
Perhaps the most obvious difference in the results obtained from the two models lies in the region near $m_{\chi} = m_{h_1}/2$. This region is depleted in the SMM due to the resonant enhancement of DM annihilation to SM particles through the light $h_{1}$ mediator. In region~E, the lower SMM contour departs from the line of $m_{\chi} = m_{h_2}$, which corresponds to $t$-channel $\chi\bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{2}h_{2}$ annihilation, at a value of $m_{h_2} = m_{h_1}$. For $m_{h_2} > m_{h_1}$, the SMM contour instead follows the line of $m_{\chi} = (m_{h_1} + m_{h_2})/2$, corresponding to $\chi\bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{1}h_{2}$. The upper contour in region E also stems from $t$-channel $\chi\bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{2}h_{2}$ annihilation. This region is enlarged for the SMM because the coupling between the $h_{2}$ mediator and SM particles is relatively weaker (by a factor of $\sin^{2} \theta$) than the analogous coupling in the DMF model. The relic density shown in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:relic} indicates a series of steps in the DM abundance of region A at low $m_{\chi}$ that are not apparent for the DMF model. These steps coincide with $m_{\chi} = m_{h_1},m_{W}$, and are due to the additional Higgs and VBM interactions present in the SMM.
\begin{figure}[!htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{smm_dmf_comparison}.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{smm_color}.png}
\caption{\it
Left: comparison of the DM relic abundance obtained from the SMM and DMF models. The solid lines indicate regions for which the calculated relic density matches the observation of $\Omega_{c}h^{2} = 0.12$. The $m_{\chi}$--$\hspace{0.5mm} m_{h_2}$ mass hierarchies introduced in Section~\ref{scalar} are delineated with dashed red lines. Right: the relic abundance for the SMM overlaid with phenomenologically relevant mass relations. In both plots $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$ and $\theta=0.2$ are used.}
\label{fig:relic}
\end{figure}
~\\
\noindent In summary, we have studied a simple extension of the LHC DMF scalar mediator model that incorporates mixing between the new scalar DM mediator field and the SM Higgs boson. We have shown that in several cases mixing leads to kinematics and cross sections that significantly differ from those of the LHC DMF model. We have also shown that the addition of $W/Z$-associated and VBF production processes leads to changed kinematics and cross sections relative to the those obtained with loop-only topologies. The scalar mixing model also gives rise to several distinct features in the DM relic density distribution that do not appear in the LHC DMF analog. Overall, our results reveal that simplified scalar models with Higgs boson mixing typically display a much richer phenomenology than the simple LHC DMF model. The SMM introduced in~(\ref{eq:smh1h2}) represents the simplest extension of the LHC DMF model that includes Higgs boson mixing, and thus allows for a consistent comparison and combination of individual~$\slashed{E}_T$ channels such as monojet, mono-$V$, and~$\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$.
\section{What can we learn about simplified DM models from SUSY?}
\label{SUSY}
{\it In this Section we review general features of DM in complete SUSY models, and propose how these could inspire and guide the development of improved SDMMs.}
In the absence of clear theoretical guidance, much experimental and phenomenological
effort has gone into probing models with universal soft SUSY breaking at the GUT scale,
such as the CMSSM in which universality is postulated for the gauginos
and all scalars, and models with non-universal Higgs masses (NUHM1,2). These models
are already significantly constrained by the LHC Run 1 data (with $p$-values $\sim 0.1$), if one
attempts to explain the $g_\mu - 2$ anomaly~\cite{NUHM2}. On the other hand, if one treats $n$ soft
supersymmetry-breaking masses as independent phenomenological inputs at the EW
scale, as in pMSSMn models, retaining only the degree of universality motivated by the upper limits
on flavour-changing neutral currents, the LHC constraints are less restrictive ($p \sim 0.3$)
and the $g_\mu - 2$ anomaly can still be accommodated~\cite{pMSSM10}.
\subsection{The DM mechanisms in SUSY}
Generically, assuming standard Big Bang cosmology and requiring that the relic density of lightest supersymmetric particles (LSPs)
respect the upper limit imposed by the Planck satellite and other measurements imposes
an upper limit on the range of possible soft SUSY breaking masses in universal models.
Within this range, many different mechanisms for bringing the DM density into the
allowed cosmological range may come into play, not only the conventional annihilation and
freeze-out mechanism. For example, there may be enhanced, rapid annihilation through
direct channel resonances such as $Z$, $h$, $H/A$, $X(750)$. Also, coannihilation with some other,
almost-degenerate SUSY particle species such as the lighter stau ($\tilde\tau_1$), top squark ($\tilde t_1$), wino, or sneutrino, may be
important.
Figure~\ref{fig:SUSY1} illustrates the most important DM mechanisms in the CMSSM
(upper left panel), NUHM1 (upper right panel), NUHM2 (lower left panel), and pMSSM10
(lower right panel), colour-coded as indicated in the legend~\cite{MCDM}. We see immediately
the importance of including coannihilation with staus (pink), stops (grey), and charginos
(green), as well as the need to take into account enhanced annihilations through direct channel
resonances such as the $h$ (pink), heavy SUSY Higgs bosons (dark blue), and the $Z$ boson
(yellow), often in combination as indicated by the hybrid regions (purple).
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{CMSSM_m0_m12_DMmeas}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{NUHM1_m0_m12_DMmeas}}\\[1em]
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{NUHM2_m0_m12_DMmeas}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pMSSM_m0_m12_DMmeas}} \\
\resizebox{15cm}{!}{\includegraphics{n12c_dm_legend}}
\end{center}
\caption{\it The $(m_0, m_{1/2})$ planes in the CMSSM (upper left), the NUHM1 (upper right), and the NUHM2 (lower left),
and the $(\ensuremath{m_{\tilde q}}, \mneu1)$ plane in the pMSSM10~\protect\cite{MCDM}. Regions in which different mechanisms bring the DM
density into the allowed range are shaded as described in the legend and discussed in the text. The red and blue
contours are the $\Delta \chi^2 = 2.30$ and 5.99 contours found in global fits
to these models, corresponding approximately to the 68 and 95\% CL
contours, with the green stars indicating the best fit points, and the solid purple contours
show the current LHC 95\% exclusions from ~$\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$ searches.
In the CMSSM, NUHM1, and NUHM2 cases, the dashed purple contours show the prospective 5$\sigma$
discovery reaches for ~$\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$ searches at the LHC with 3000 fb$^{-1}$ of data at $\sqrt{s} = 14$~TeV.
In the pMSSM10 case, the dashed purple contour shows the 95\% CL exclusion sensitivity
of the LHC with 3000 fb$^{-1}$, assuming $\ensuremath{m_{\tilde g}} \gg \ensuremath{m_{\tilde q}}$, and the dash-dotted lines
bound the corresponding sensitivity region assuming $\ensuremath{m_{\tilde g}} = 4.5 \ensuremath{\,\, \mathrm{TeV}}$.
}
\label{fig:SUSY1}
\end{figure*}
{\it It is, therefore, desirable to extend the simplified model approach to include at least some of these possibilities in order to achieve a more realistic description of relevant DM mechanisms in SDMMs.}
(See Ref.~\cite{Baker:2015qna} for a discussion of simplified models for coannihilation.)
\subsection{Collider signatures}
A corollary of the importance of coannihilation is that in many scenarios the next-to-lightest
supersymmetric particle (NLSP) may have a mass only slightly greater than that of the LSP,
in which case it may have a long lifetime, opening up the possibility of signatures from
displaced vertices and/or massive metastable charged particles passing through the detector~\cite{MCDM}.
For example, in the CMSSM, NUHM1, and NUHM2 one can find that
$m_{\tilde \tau_1} - m_{LSP} < m_\tau$, in which case the ${\tilde \tau_1}$ lifetime can be
very long~\cite{Citron:2012fg}, as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:SUSY2}~\cite{MCDM}, which displays in colour code the lifetime of
the ${\tilde \tau_1}$ at the best fit point for each pair of $(m_0, m_{1/2})$ values in the CMSSM
(left panel) and the NUHM1 (right panel). We see that a long-lived stau may be a distinctive signature
in the regions of these models that can be explored in future runs of the LHC.
Long-lived NLSP signatures also appear in other models of SUSY breaking, e.g., minimal
anomaly-mediated SUSY breaking, in which the appropriate DM density is obtained by
coannihilation of the LSP with a nearly degenerate long-lived wino.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{cmssm_staulifetime_m0_4K_m12_4K_chi2}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{nuhm1_staulifetime_m0_4K_m12_4K_chi2}}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{\it
The $(m_0, m_{1/2})$ planes in the CMSSM (left panel) and the NUHM1 (right panel), showing (colour coded)
the lifetime of the lighter stau~\protect\cite{Citron:2012fg} for the best fit at each point in the plane~\protect\cite{MCDM}.
The red, blue, and purple contours have the same significances as in Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:SUSY1}.
}
\label{fig:SUSY2}
\end{figure*}
{\it It is, therefore, desirable to consider other possible signatures of DM models, such as the appearance of long-lived particles.}
(See also the discussion of pseudo-Dirac DM in the previous Section.)
Furthermore, simplified DM models typically do not take into account the complexity
of many mechanisms of producing DM particles. In SUSY, as well as other frameworks
such as extra dimensions, most DM particles are not produced directly at the LHC, but
appear at the final stage of cascade decays of heavier SUSY particles. Typically, strongly interacting
particles (e.g. squarks and gluinos in SUSY models) are produced and then decay via many
possible intermediate particles into the DM particle (e.g., the LSP in SUSY models).
Figure~\ref{fig:SUSY3} illustrates the important possible decays of gluinos and squarks in the
pMSSM10, colour-coded according to the dominant decay for the best fit parameter set at each
point in the displayed plane~\cite{pMSSM10}. A comprehensive study of SUSY models should take these decays
and their branching fractions into account; assuming that one particular decay mode is dominant
is likely to lead to an over-estimated exclusion of realistic models.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\resizebox{8.0cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pmssm10_abs_mg_4K_abs_mneu1_750_br_gluino_to_3g}}
\resizebox{8.0cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pmssm10_msqr_4K_abs_mneu1_750_br_squark_via_cha1neu2}} \\[1em]
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{\it Illustration of the dominant ${\tilde g}$ decays (left panel)
and ${\tilde q}$ decays (right panel) in the pMSSM10~\protect\cite{pMSSM10}.
The pale blue solid (dashed) lines show the estimated LHC sensitivities
with 300~\ensuremath{{\rm fb}^{-1}} (3000~\ensuremath{{\rm fb}^{-1}}).
}
\vspace{1em}
\label{fig:SUSY3}
\end{figure*}
The importance of these considerations is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:SUSY4}, that displays
the $\chi^2$ likelihood functions for the gluino mass (left panel) and the lighter stop mass
(right panel) in the pMSSM10 (solid black lines), the NUHM2 (solid blue lines), the NUHM1
(dashed blue lines), and the CMSSM (dashed blue lines)~\cite{pMSSM10}. In each model, careful attention has
been paid to the implementation of the LHC Run 1 constraints on a variety of different SUSY
production and decay channels and their respective branching fractions. Two important
points are worth noting. In the case of the gluino, the lower limit on its mass from LHC Run 1
is significantly weaker than for the other models, reflecting the importance of
taking into account the complexity of possible SUSY
cascade decay channels seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:SUSY3}. In the stop case, the pMSSM10
features a compressed stop region with $\Delta \chi^2 \lesssim 2$ that is not visible in the
NUHM2, NUHM1, and CMSSM cases. Understanding the interplay between several different
production and decay mechanisms is essential to estimate correctly the LHC reach in this
region.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\resizebox{8.0cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pmssm10_n12c_abs_mg_4K_chi2}}
\resizebox{8.0cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pmssm10_n12c_mstop1_4K_chi2}}
\caption{\it One-dimensional profile likelihood functions
for \ensuremath{m_{\tilde g}}\ and \mstop{1}:
the solid black lines are for the pMSSM10, the solid blue lines for the NUHM2,
the dashed blue lines for the NUHM1, and the dotted blue lines for the
CMSSM~\protect\cite{pMSSM10}.}
\label{fig:SUSY4}
\end{figure*}
Therefore, we conclude that care must be taken in interpreting simplified models: {\it many competing decay modes are possible in
realistic models, which are not likely to feature simple decay chains.}
\subsection{Interplay of Collider and Direct Detection Searches in SUSY}
Figure~\ref{fig:SUSY5} emphasizes that the interplay between LHC and direct DM
searches is quite different in different SUSY models~\cite{MCDM}. The detectability of a specific model
depends on the dominant mechanism for fixing the DM density via its spin-independent DM scattering
cross section \ensuremath{\sigma^{\rm SI}_p}, as can be seen in each of the panels.
For example, in the CMSSM, the stop coannihilation regions lie very close to the current
LUX exclusion, whereas the $H/A$ annihilation region likely lies within the future reach
of the LZ experiment~\cite{LZ} and the stau coannihilation region may require a more sensitive experiment.
On the other hand, in the pMSSM10 the chargino coannihilation region apparently lies
mainly within reach of LZ, whereas portions of the chargino coannihilation region,
the stau coannihilation region, and the $h$ and $Z$ funnels may lie below the neutrino `floor'
where there is an irreducible neutrino background. Overall assessments of the LHC and
direct search sensitivities for these models, the NUHM1 and the NUHM2, are given in
Table~\ref{tab:SUSY1}.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{CMSSM_mN1_SI_DMmeas}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{NUHM1_mN1_SI_DMmeas}}\\[1em]
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{NUHM2_mN1_SI_DMmeas}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pMSSM_mN1_SI_DMmeas}}\\
\resizebox{15cm}{!}{\includegraphics{n12c_dm_legend}}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{\it The $(\mneu1, \ensuremath{\sigma^{\rm SI}_p})$ planes in the CMSSM (upper left),
the NUHM1 (upper right), the NUHM2 (lower left), and the pMSSM10 (lower right)~\protect\cite{MCDM}.
The red and blue solid lines are the $\Delta \chi^2 = 2.30$ and 5.99 contours,
and the solid purple lines show the projected 95\% exclusion sensitivity of the LZ experiment~\protect\cite{LZ}. The green and black lines show the current sensitivities of the XENON100~\protect\cite{Xe100}
and LUX~\protect\cite{LUX} experiments,
respectively, and the dashed orange line shows the
astrophysical neutrino `floor'~\protect\cite{Billard:2013qya, Snowmass}, below which astrophysical neutrino backgrounds dominate (yellow region).
}
\label{fig:SUSY5}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table*}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\caption{\it
\label{tab:SUSY1}
Summary of SUSY detectability in the CMSSM, NUHM1, NUHM2, and pMSSM10
models at the LHC in searches for $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$ events, long-lived charged particles (LL), and heavy $A/H$
Higgs bosons, and in direct DM search experiments, depending on the dominant mechanism for
bringing the DM density into the cosmological range~\protect\cite{MCDM}. The symbols $\checkmark$, ($\checkmark$) and
$\times$ indicate good prospects, interesting possibilities and poorer prospects, respectively.
The symbol -- indicates that a DM mechanism is not important for the corresponding model.
}
\vspace{5mm}
\begin{tabular}{ | c || c || c | c | c | c|}
\hline
DM & Exp't & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{Models} \\
mechanism & & CMSSM & NUHM1 & NUHM2 & pMSSM10 \\ \hline
${\tilde \tau_1}$ & LHC & {$\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$, $\checkmark$ LL} & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$, $\checkmark$ LL) & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$, $\checkmark$ LL) & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$), $\times$ LL \\
coann. & DM & ($\checkmark$) & ($\checkmark$) & $\times$ & $\times$ \\ \hline
$\cha{1}$ & LHC & -- & $\times$ & $\times$ & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$) \\
coann. & DM & -- & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & ($\checkmark$) \\ \hline
${\tilde t_1}$ & LHC & -- & -- & $\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$ & -- \\
coann. & DM & -- & -- & $\times$ & -- \\ \hline
$A/H$ & LHC & $\checkmark$ $A/H$ & ($\checkmark$ $A/H$) & ($\checkmark$ $A/H$) & -- \\
funnel & DM & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & ($\checkmark$) & -- \\ \hline
Focus & LHC & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$) & -- & -- & -- \\
point & DM & $\checkmark$ & -- & -- & -- \\ \hline
$h,Z$ & LHC & -- & -- & -- & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$) \\
funnels & DM & -- & -- & -- & ($\checkmark$) \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
Based on these findings, we see that {\it a detailed consideration of the relevant DM mechanisms is as important for direct searches as it is for LHC searches}, and needs to be taken into account in assessing the interplay between these search strategies.
\subsection{Lessons from SUSY for simplified DM models}
In this Section we have discussed the lessons we can learn for the development for simplified models from a complete theory like SUSY. This is important to identify potential oversimplification of simplified models and how this can be overcome. For example, one should check that a simplified model can reasonably be extended to yield an acceptable DM density, remembering that there are many different mechanisms for bringing the DM density into the cosmological range. In addition to the conventional
annihilation and freezeout, one should consider extending the
simplified model approach to include other possibilities such as coannihilation with some other,
almost degenerate particle (e.g., the stau, stop, wino in SUSY), as well as the possibility of
rapid annihilation via direct channel resonances. One should keep in mind possible
non-\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}\ final-state signatures such as displaced vertices
and/or massive long-lived particles in coannihilation scenarios. One should also remember that DM
particles appear typically at the ends of cascade decays of heavier particles, and it may be misleading
to assume that any particular production or decay channel dominates. The sensitivities of both the LHC and direct
DM detection experiments are quite dependent on these features, and it is desirable for
simplified models to be extended to take at least some of these possibilities into account.
\section{Introduction}
This White Paper summarises discussions during the brainstorming meeting ``Next generation of simplified Dark Matter models"
held at the Imperial College, London on May 6, 2016 \cite{Agenda} and expands on a few selected topics that were considered to be the most important for the near future.
This informal brainstorming meeting followed thematically the one hosted at Imperial in May 2014, which focused on the interplay and characterization of Dark Matter (DM) searches at colliders and in direct detection experiments, summarised in a White Paper~\cite{Malik:2014ggr}, which in part builds upon work documented in~\cite{Buchmueller:2014yoa}.
Since then several important developments in the characterisation of DM searches at colliders have taken place, most notably the activities of the LHC DM forum (LHC~DMF)~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb} and the newly-founded LHC DM working group~\cite{Boveia:2016mrp}.
Central to this effort are simplified DM models (SDMM), which have replaced interpretations using a universal set of operators in an effective field theory (EFT)
\cite{Beltran:2010ww,Goodman:2010yf,Bai:2010hh,Goodman:2010ku,Rajaraman:2011wf,Fox:2011pm} as the main vehicle to characterise DM searches at colliders. However, as discussed in~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}, EFT interpretations can still provide useful information and complement the SDMM approach for collider searches. Today, SDMM are also used for comparisons with other searches, such as those conducted by direct detection and indirect detection experiments (see~\cite{Boveia:2016mrp}).
The majority of these SDMMs are derived from simple Lagrangians that are governed by four basic parameters: a mediator mass ($m_{\rm med}$), the DM candidate mass~($m_\chi$), the coupling of the mediator to Standard Model (SM) particles (usually quarks or gluons,~$g_{\rm SM}$),
and the coupling of the mediator to DM particles ($g_{\rm DM}$).
While these simplistic models have been very useful to map out the general characteristics of DM searches at colliders, they are often too simple to capture fully the detailed physics of all relevant searches.
Therefore, a well-defined extension of these SDMMs is required in order to allow for a more refined characterisation and comparison of all relevant DM searches. This should also include resonance searches in the dijet, dilepton, diphoton and other channels with only~SM particles in the final state, which are not directly looking for the DM particles but can nevertheless be very powerful in constraining the mediator mass and couplings.
Furthermore, this next generation of SDMMs should ideally also address some of the theoretical shortcomings inherent to the simplistic first-generation SDMMs.
The scope of the brainstorming meeting was to discuss options for defining the next generation of SDMMs and, if deemed relevant/possible, to contribute to the development of consistent, state-of-the-art SDMM extensions.
In Section~\ref{scalar} of this White Paper we discuss in detail a simplified scalar singlet mediator model, which includes mixing between the
SM Higgs boson and another scalar. In contrast to the simplified scalar model recommended in~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb} this class of mixing models allows for a more consistent interpretation of missing transverse energy searches, such as monojet, mono-$V$, and VBF-tagged analyses that are sensitive to different production modes --- gluon fusion, associated, and vector boson fusion (VBF) production, respectively.
In Section~\ref{750} we use the example of the observed $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ excess in high-mass diphoton searches at ATLAS and CMS
with the 2015 data to outline how a hypothetical signal for the production of a new mediator can be connected to DM using simplified models.
While this excess was not confirmed by the new data collected by both experiments up to mid 2016,
this exercise is an example of a case study on how to correlate searches with different experimental signatures to characterise the properties of a new particle discovery in the context of DM studies.
Following these two detailed examples comparing and combining different experimental searches using SDMMs, in Section~\ref{otherSMS} we outline qualitatively other interesting options for simplified models that could be studied in more detail in the future, while in Section~\ref{SUSY}
we review some aspects of supersymmetric (SUSY) models that are important for DM physics.
We summarise the White Paper and make recommendations for future work on the extension and refinement of SDMMs in Section~\ref{summary}.
\include{scalar-singlet}
\include{750model}
\include{OtherSMS}
\include{SUSYlessons}
\section{Summary and Recommendations}
\label{summary}
In this White Paper we have summarised the discussions and corresponding follow-up studies of the brainstorming meeting ``Next generation of simplified Dark Matter models" held at the Imperial College, London on May 6, 2016 \cite{Agenda}. Based on this work we have defined a short list of recommendations, which we think will be important for defining both short-term and long-term strategies for the evolution of simplified Dark Matter models. This White Paper is an input to the
ongoing discussion within the experimental and theoretical community about the extension and refinement of simplified Dark Matter models.
In Section 2 we studied in detail the extension of SDMMs with a scalar mediator, as currently used by ATLAS and CMS, to include mixing with the SM
Higgs boson. We conclude that including mixing provides a more realistic description of the underlying kinematic properties that a complete physics model would possess. The addition of the mixing with the
Higgs also provides the opportunity to interpret this class of models in the context of LHC Higgs
measurements, as these results constrain the required mixing angle in these models. Furthermore,
the scalar mixing model also provides the option to compare and combine consistently searches targeting different experimental signatures. For example, in this model a consistent interpretation of missing transverse energy searches, such as monojet, mono-$V$, and VBF-tagged analyses, which are sensitive to different production modes --- gluon fusion, associated, and VBF production, respectively --- is possible.
Therefore, connecting the missing energy DM searches with
other LHC measurements of properties of SM final states will result in a more complete and rigorous interpretation.
{We recommend that the class of SDMMs with scalar mediator and mixing with the
Higgs boson should become part of the portfolio of simplified models studied by the LHC experiments.}
Using the example of the recently observed excess in the high-mass diphoton searches in ATLAS and CMS for definiteness, we have discussed in Section~3 how a hypothetical signal for
production of a new mediator can be connected to DM using simplified models. This exercise was intended as an example of a case
study of how to correlate
searches with different experimental signatures in order to characterise the properties of a newly discovered particle in the context of DM. This study highlights that within the framework of simplified models, possibly combined with effective couplings, it is rather straightforward to connect a new physics signal observed in a visible channel with DM searches or vice versa.
Using the simplified DM model with scalar (pseudoscalar) mediator and extending it using effective couplings, we have shown that it is possible to not only connect the diphoton excess with different important visible signatures such as $\gamma Z$, $ZZ$, $WW$, and dijets, but also with generic DM signatures such as the monojet search. Therefore, this pragmatic ansatz enables one to link a potential signal in one channel with searches for other experimental signatures, which then can be used to verify/falsify potential signal models and to study their underlying nature. We believe that exploring these links
is vital for guiding the experimental search programme in case of a discovery of a new particle. {\ We recommend that the development of discovery-oriented simplified models that manifest themselves in a variety of experimental signatures, such as the one used in the example to characterise the $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ diphoton excess, should be an important part of future activities of the LHC DM working group.}
We highlighted in Section 4 the importance of $t$-channel and spin-2 mediator SDMMs, as well as models in which the properties of the DM candidate are different from the currently canonically assumed Dirac fermion, such as pseudo-Dirac DM. {\ We recommend that SDMMs with $t$-channel exchange and other properties like a spin-2 mediator or different DM candidates should be studied with higher priority in the future}.
Last but not least, we have discussed in Section 5 important properties of SUSY DM and how these could aid the development of new simplified DM models that possess more realistic mechanisms for bringing the DM density into the cosmological range. In addition to the conventional annihilation and freezeout, SDMMs could be extended to include other possibilities such as coannihilation with an almost degenerate particle, as well as the possibility of rapid annihilation via direct-channel resonances. {We recommend that properties of complete models, such as SUSY and its DM sector, should become a stronger guide
for the development of more realistic SDMMs in the future}.
\subsection{Recommendations of the White Paper in a nutshell}
\begin{itemize}
\item {\it We recommend that the class of SDMMs with scalar mediator and mixing with the
Higgs boson should become part of the official portfolio of simplified models studied by the LHC experiments. }
\item {\it We recommend the development of discovery-oriented SDMMs that manifest themselves in a variety of experimental signatures, such as the one used to characterise the $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ diphoton excess, should be an important part of future activities of the LHC DM working group.}
\item {\it We recommend that SDMMs with $t$-channel exchange and other properties such as a spin-2 mediator or different DM candidates should be studied with higher priority in the future}.
\item {\it We recommend that properties of complete models, such as SUSY and its DM sector, should become a stronger guide for the development of more realistic SDMMs}.
\end{itemize}
\section{Acknowledgements}
The work of JE was partially supported by STFC Grant ST/L000326/1, that of GL by DOE Award DE-SC0010010, and that of KH by DOE Award DE-SC0015973. UH is grateful to the CERN Theoretical Physics Department and the MITP in Mainz for their hospitality and their partial support during the completion of this work.
\section{Other simplified models of interest}
\label{otherSMS}
In this Section we highlight other interesting options for simplified models that could be studied in more detail in the future. In Subsection~\ref{t-channel} we outline interesting features of $t$-channel simplified models, while in Subsection~\ref{Spin-2} we discuss some interesting models with spin-2 mediators. We conclude this part with a discussion about simplified models with pseudo-Dirac DM in Subsection~\ref{pseudo-Dirac}.
\subsection{A few representative $t$-channel simplified models}
\label{t-channel}
So far, we have focused on simplified models with the $s$-channel exchange of the mediatior. However, it is now relevant to build and explore simplified models with the mediator exchanged in the $t$ channel. While for the $s$-channel mediator exchange the EFT description breaks down spectacularly in the case of a light mediator that can be produced on-shell, also in the $t$-channel case there are sizable regions of the parameter space probed by the LHC where the EFT approach breaks down~\cite{Busoni:2014haa}, and therefore a simplified model description is important in this case as well.
Since we wish to produce the DM via colored particles at the LHC, but the DM particle itself cannot be colored, the mediator exchanged in the $t$ channel needs to carry non-trivial color. Thus, it is possible to search for the mediator via its direct QCD pair production. This is the \textit{leitmotiv} of all $t$-channel models.
By restricting ourselves to scalar or fermion DM and to tree-level mediation only, there are four possible $t$-channel simplified models, see, e.g., the recent review~\cite{DeSimone:2016fbz} for more details.
Perhaps the most relevant one is the case of a ``squark-like'' mediator (the model $0t\frac12$, following the nomenclature of~\cite{DeSimone:2016fbz}).
The reason why we believe this simplified model is particularly interesting is twofold:
on the one hand, in this model the mediator has the quantum numbers of squarks in SUSY, and therefore the analyses for squark searches can be efficiently readapted, and,
on the other hand, the other $t$-channel models either share with it very similar collider phenomenology, or involve suppressed higher-dimensional interactions.
For these reasons we recommend the experimental collaborations to start from this model and to consider it as a benchmark for $t$-channel simplified models.
Let us now discuss the $0t\frac12$ model in more detail. The DM is a Dirac or Majorana fermion $\chi$ and the interactions with the quarks are mediated by a set of colored scalar particles $\eta^{(i)}$. For simplicity, we will only consider the case where the DM is a total singlet under the SM symmetries, in particular DM carries no flavor or EW quantum numbers (see, e.g.,~\cite{1109.3516, 1308.0584, 1404.1373} for scenarios with ``flavored'' DM). This implies that the scalar mediator carries not only color charge, but also EW and flavor charges, and hence it resembles the squarks of the minimal supersymmetric extension of the SM.
The most general Lagrangian describing the renormalizable interactions between the SM quark doublets ($Q_L^{(i)}=(u_L, d_L)^{(i)}$) and singlets ($u_R^{(i)}$ and $d_R^{(i)}$) of flavour $i=1,2,3$, a fermion singlet DM $\chi$, and the colored mediators $\eta^{(i)}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=\sum_{i=1,2,3} g_i \,\chi
\left(\bar Q_L^{(i)} \eta^{(i)}_L+\bar u_R^{(i)}\eta^{(i)}_{u,R}
+\bar d_R^{(i)}\eta^{(i)}_{d,R}
\right)+\textrm{ h.c.},
\label{tchannelLagr}
\end{equation}
where the mediators $\eta_L^{(i)}, \eta_{u,R}^{(i)}, \eta_{d,R}^{(i)}$ transform
under the SM gauge group $SU(3)_c\otimes SU(2)_L\otimes U(1)_Y$ according to the representations $(3,2,-1/6), (3,1,2/3)$, and $(3,1,-1/3)$, respectively.
The minimal width of the generic mediator $\eta^{(i)}$ of mass $M_i$ decaying to a generic quark $q_i$ and the DM particle is simply
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(\eta_i\to \bar q_i \chi)=\frac{g_i^2}{16\pi}\frac{M_i^2-m_{q_i}^2-m_\chi^2}{M_i^3}\sqrt{(M_i^2-m_\chi^2-m_{q_i}^2)^2-4m_\chi^2m_{q_i}^2}
\simeq \frac{g_i^2 M_i}{16\pi}\left[1-\frac{m_\chi^2}{M_i^2}\right]^2,
\end{equation}
where the last expression holds for $M_i,m_\chi \gg m_{q_i}$.
A simplification of the Lagrangian (\ref{tchannelLagr}) arises by assuming Minimal Flavour Violation (MFV), which implies that the $\eta_i$'s have equal masses $M_1=M_2=M_3\equiv M$ and couplings $g_1=g_2=g_3\equiv g$, and therefore the model has only three parameters: $\{m_\chi, M,g\}$, with the restriction $m_\chi<M$ to ensure the stability of the DM.
The MFV hypothesis implies that couplings to third-generation quarks should be nonzero. However, from the point of view of flavor constraints, in some particular situations it may also be safe to violate MFV and restrict the Lagrangian (\ref{tchannelLagr}) to the first two generations $i=1,2$. In any case, we recommend to stick to MFV and to include the couplings to heavy flavors, as they also induce interesting collider phenomenology, allowing the possibility of exploiting also the searches with b jets in the final state.
For the parameter scan, we recommend to fix the value of the flavor-universal coupling $g$ (e.g., $g=1$) while performing a scan over $m_\chi, M$,
with $m_\chi<M$. The parameter space points need to satisfy the narrow-width condition for the mediator $\Gamma/M<1$ and allow for a sufficient number of events to pass the experimental selections
(see, e.g., Table 2.8 of the LHC DMF report \cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}).
Considering a subset of the general model described by (\ref{tchannelLagr}) may represent a convenient starting point to perform the experimental analyses.
Several choices for the mediators in the general Lagrangian of Eq.~(\ref{tchannelLagr}) have been studied in the literature:
all mediator species $\eta_L^{(i)}, \eta_{u,R}^{(i)}, \eta_{d,R}^{(i)}$ (for $i=1,2$) \cite{Papucci:2014iwa,Abdallah:2014hon, Ko:2016zxg},
only $\eta_{L}^{(i)}$ \cite{Bell:2012rg, Chang:2013oia,DiFranzo:2013vra,Busoni:2014haa, Garny:2014waa},
only $\eta_{u,R}^{(i)}$ \cite{DiFranzo:2013vra},
only $\eta_{d,R}^{(i)}$ \cite{DiFranzo:2013vra,Papucci:2014iwa,Abdallah:2014hon},
or combinations \cite{Bai:2013iqa, An:2013xka}.
For instance, one can choose
to couple the mediators only to left-handed quarks
$Q_L^{(i)}$ $(i=1,2,3)$. Of couse, other choices can (and should) be explored in a similar fashion.
In this simpler setup, there are three scalar colored mediators $\eta_L^{(i)}$, with the quantum numbers of the left-handed squarks.
The Lagrangian, with the MFV assumption, is then simply given by
a subset of the interactions of the general Lagrangian (\ref{tchannelLagr})
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}= \sum_{i=1,2,3}
g \,\eta_L^{(i)}\,\bar Q_L^{(i)}\, \chi+\textrm{ h.c.}\,,
\end{equation}
with $\chi$ being either a Dirac or a Majorana fermion singlet.
The collider phenomenology of this model is mainly driven by the 1 jet + $\slashed{E}_T$ and 2 jets + $\slashed{E}_T$ signals. The former is mostly due to the usual initial-state radiation of a parton from the processes of DM pair production with $t$-channel exchange of the $\eta_L^{(i)}$ (radiation of a gluon from the $\eta_L^{(i)}$ is also possible but suppressed, although this process and the analogue ones with EW radiation play a relevant role in indirect detection, see, e.g.~\cite{Bell:2010ei, Bell:2011eu, Bell:2011if, Ciafaloni:2011gv,
DeSimone:2013gj}).
The latter process (2 jets+$\slashed{E}_T$) is instead a rather distinctive feature of $t$-channel models, because it is mostly arises from pair production of the mediator, followed by the decay $\eta_i\to u_i\chi$, see diagrams in Fig.~\ref{fig:0t12}.
Mediator pair production is typically dominated by QCD interactions, being initiated by two gluons or $\bar u_i u_i$. However, since the mediator has EW charges, also Drell--Yan pair production is possible and, more importantly, it is possible to produce a pair of $\eta^{(i)}$ from $\bar u_i u_i$ (or even via the leading channel $u_i u_i$, for Majorana DM) through the $t$-channel exchange of a DM particle (right diagram of Fig.~\ref{fig:0t12}).
This process is controlled by the Yukawa coupling $g$ of the simplified model.
An interesting feature to keep in mind is that $g$ is a free parameter, whereas in SUSY the coupling of squarks and neutralinos is set to be a combination of gauge couplings. Therefore, depending on the value of $g$ compared to the strong gauge coupling, the relative importance of the diagrams for the $\eta$ pair production (QCD with respect to DM exchange) can be varied. Another difference with respect to the SUSY case is that the DM can be a Dirac fermion, unlike the neutralino.
Powerful analyses can be carried out by exploiting the combination of the searches for the monojet signal with mediator pair production
(see, e.g.~\cite{An:2013xka, Bai:2013iqa, DiFranzo:2013vra, Papucci:2014iwa} for early work), and by a proper reformulation of the squark searches with the Yukawa coupling $g$ as free parameter.
As far as the comparison with other experiments is concerned, the limits from direct detection are rather strong for Dirac DM, as it leads to spin-independent DM-nucleus scattering, while in the Majorana DM case only spin-dependent scattering is allowed, for which current constraints are much weaker.
Combining LHC and direct detection results with the requirement of a correct relic abundance excludes the $0t\frac12$ model with Dirac DM with masses below TeV, while a Majorana DM candidate is still viable for a DM particle mass above $\sim$100 GeV \cite{An:2013xka}. However, it should be noted that the relic density constraint may be evaded by either alternative (non-thermal) production mechanisms in the early universe,
or by assuming that only a fraction of the present energy density of DM has originated from freeze-out, or by additional DM candidates
with respect to the one produced at LHC.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{2jets0t12a.pdf}\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{2jets0t12b.pdf}\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{2jets0t12c.pdf}
\caption{\it
Some representative diagrams for mediator pair production in the $t$-channel $0t\frac{1}{2}$ model, which contribute to 2 jets+$\slashed{E}_T$ events.}
\label{fig:0t12}
\end{figure}
\vspace{1em}
Another representative $t$-channel model is the model with a ``vector-like quark'' mediator (the model $\frac12 t 0$, following the nomenclature of~\cite{DeSimone:2016fbz}), where the DM particle is a scalar singlet $\phi$ and the mediator $\psi$ is a vector-like colored fermion.
By choosing to couple the mediator and the DM particle to right-handed quarks, and assuming MFV, the Lagrangian is
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=\frac12\left[(\partial_\mu\phi)^2-m_\phi^2\phi^2\right]
+\bar\psi(i\slashed{D}-M)\psi+ (y\,\phi\,\bar\psi\, q_R+\textrm{h.c.}).
\end{equation}
The case of the mediator coupling to left-handed quarks can be worked out similarly.
The mediator is a color triplet and electrically charged, so
it is pair produced mainly via QCD interactions (the processes are depicted in~\cite{Giacchino:2015hvk}, Fig.~6).
For phenomenological studies of this simplified model, including an analysis of the LHC constraints, see~\cite{Vasquez:2009kq, Ibarra:2014qma,
Giacchino:2014moa, Giacchino:2015hvk}.
The reach for this model is improved by
combining the DM searches with the collider searches for vector-like quarks, to be interpreted as searches for the mediator.
We expect the collider phenomenology of this model to be similar, although not identical, to the one of the $0t\frac12$ (squark-like mediator) model discussed at the beginning of this Subsection, as some processes for mediator pair production are different. As for the combinations with other searches, it should be noted that the direct and indirect detection phenomenology of this model is very different from the case with a squark-like mediator (see, e.g.,~\cite{DeSimone:2016fbz}).
Combining all the available limits from LHC, direct, and indirect detection, as well as relic density constraints, one ends up with a rather constrained scenario, but still some parameter space is available for $m_\phi\gtrsim 200$ GeV and
$m_\psi/m_\phi\lesssim 2$ \cite{Giacchino:2015hvk}, which is worth exploring
with analyses of the upcoming data.
\subsection{Spin-2 models}
\label{Spin-2}
The behaviour of DM depends on the way it interacts with the SM and, in particular, on the quantum numbers of both DM and the mediator. An interesting possibility for a new kind of spin-two mediator has been proposed in Ref.~\cite{Lee:2013bua} in the so-called Gravity-Mediated Dark Matter (GMDM) model. In this scenario, the origin of DM is linked to a new sector of strong interactions (gravity or its gauge dual) and mediation to the SM is via spin-two and spin-zero states. In the gravitational interpretation of the scenario, these mediator states can be identified as the lightest Kaluza--Klein graviton and radion of the compact extra dimension. In the gauge dual scenario, these states are glueballs linked to the spontaneous breaking of symmetries. Fortunately, the behaviour of the GMDM spin-2 mediator $h_{\mu\nu}$ is determined by the low-energy symmetries of the theory~\cite{Fok:2012zk}, and is largely independent of the interpretation of the spin-two state. In particular, DM and SM fields would interact with the mediator via dimension-five operators involving the same type of couplings as from the stress-tensor $T^{\mu\nu}$, namely
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{int} = \frac{-c_i}{\Lambda} \, h_{\mu\nu} \, T^{(i) \mu\nu} \ ,
\end{equation}
where the index $i$ denotes any kind of field, DM or SM, and $\Lambda$ is the scale suppressing the interactions. In~\cite{Lee:2013bua,Lee:2014caa}, it was found that an unsuppressed s-wave annihilation is possible for scalar, vector and fermionic DM.
This distinctive scenario for DM is largely unexplored and may deserve a closer look. The DM phenomenology via a spin-2 mediator necessarily involves higher-dimensional operators, which emulates the suppression of contact interactions, yet in a resonant regime where the mediator is on-shell. In particular, one would need to explore further the implications in direct detection and collider phenomenology of these models. For example, current searches for spin-2 Kaluza--Klein gravitons could be made in the context of GMDM and linked to the DM searches at the LHC, as illustrated recently in the interpretation of GMDM in the context of the 750 GeV diphoton excess~\cite{Han:2015cty}.
\subsection{Pseudo-Dirac DM}
\label{pseudo-Dirac}
The starting point is to consider a generic new four-component Dirac fermion $\Psi$ that is a singlet under the SM gauge group. We consider the most general Lagrangian for $\Psi$ with both Dirac ($M_D$) and Majorana ($m_{L,R}$) masses
\cite{DeSimone:2010tf}:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_0=\bar\Psi(i\slashed{\partial}-M_D)\Psi
-\frac{m_L}{2}(\bar\Psi^cP_L\Psi+\textrm{h.c.})
-\frac{m_R}{2}(\bar\Psi^cP_R\Psi+\textrm{h.c.}),
\end{equation}
where $P_{R,L}=(1\pm \gamma^5)/2$.
We focus on the ``pseudo-Dirac'' limit of the mass matrix,
where $M_D\gg m_L, m_R$.
The two mass eigenstates, denoted by $\chi_{1,2}$, with masses $m_{1,2}=
M_D\mp (m_L+m_R)/2$, will be linear combinations of $\Psi,\Psi^c$.
It is then possible to construct the Majorana fields $\Psi_1^{\rm{M}}, \Psi_2^{\rm{M}}$ out of the mass eigenstates: $\Psi_1^{\rm{M}}\equiv \chi_1+\chi_1^c$ and $\Psi_2^{\rm{M}}\equiv \chi_2+\chi_2^c$.
The spectrum of this model consists of the lightest state $\Psi_1^{\rm{M}}$ with mass $M_1=M_D-(m_L+m_R)/2$, identified with a Majorana DM particle, and a slightly heavier companion state $\Psi_2^{\rm{M}}$, with mass $M_2=M_1+\Delta M=M_1+(m_L+m_R)$. The model described by the free Lagrangian $\mathcal{L}_0$ is simply defined by the two mass parameters $M_1, \Delta M$.
The situation with pseudo-Dirac fermions may also be realized in a SUSY framework, see e.g.~Refs.~\cite{Hall:1990hq, Nelson:2002ca, Belanger:2009wf, Chun:2009zx, Hsieh:2007wq}.
At this point one needs to consider the interactions of $\Psi$ with the SM fields $f$.
The choice made in~\cite{DeSimone:2010tf} was to consider effective (non-renormalizable) interactions. At dimension six, one can write:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\rm{int}}=\frac{1}{\Lambda^2}
\left[\bar\Psi\gamma^\mu(c_L P_L+c_R P_R)\Psi\right]
\times
\left[\bar f\gamma_\mu(c_L^{(f)} P_L+c_R^{(f)} P_R)f\right],
\label{pDDMLint}
\end{equation}
where $c_{R,L}, c_{R,L}^{(f)}$ are generic operator coefficients.
Other dimension-6 operators are possible, e.g. those leading to anapole moments of Majorana Dark Matter fermions with SM gauge bosons \cite{Fitzpatrick:2010br, Ho:2012bg, Gao:2013vfa}. The analysis of such operators in the context of pseudo-Dirac Dark Matter deserves further investigation.
The Lagrangian (\ref{pDDMLint}) can be rewritten in terms of the Majorana
mass eigenstates $\Psi_{1,2}^{\rm M}$, leading to terms for the interactions
of two $\Psi_1^{\rm M}$ particles
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\rm{int},{11}}=\frac{1}{\Lambda^2}
\frac{c_R-c_L}{4}
\left[\bar\Psi_1^{\rm M}\gamma^\mu\gamma^5\Psi_1^{\rm M}\right]
\times
\frac12\left[(c_L^{(f)}+c_R^{(f)})\bar f\gamma_\mu f
+(c_R^{(f)}-c_L^{(f)})\bar f\gamma_\mu \gamma^5 f\right] \, ,
\label{pDDMLint11}
\end{equation}
and to terms for the interaction of $\Psi_1^{\rm M}$ with $\Psi_2^{\rm M}$
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\rm{int},{12}}=\frac{i}{\Lambda^2}
\frac{c_R+c_L}{2}
\left[\bar\Psi_1^{\rm M}\gamma^\mu\Psi_2^{\rm M}\right]
\frac12\left[(c_L^{(f)}+c_R^{(f)})\bar f\gamma_\mu f
+(c_R^{(f)}-c_L^{(f)})\bar f\gamma_\mu \gamma^5 f\right].
\label{pDDMLint12}
\end{equation}
The pseudo-Dirac DM scenario, despite its minimality, has several interesting features, as we now describe briefly (see~\cite{DeSimone:2010tf} for more details).
\begin{itemize}
\item With a large enough splitting $\Delta M\gtrsim \mathcal{O}(10 - 100 \textrm{ keV})$, DM-nucleon scattering involves only the elastic scattering of a Majorana DM particle $\Psi_1^{\rm M}$, and it is driven by the
interactions in (\ref{pDDMLint11}), which are spin-dependent.
In this way the stringent constraints on spin-independent scattering are evaded.
\item
The relic density is driven by the coannihilation channel of the two nearly-degenerate states $\Psi_1^{\rm M}\Psi_2^{\rm M}\to \bar f f$ described by the terms in Eq.~(\ref{pDDMLint12}), since the Majorana annihilations of $\Psi_1^{\rm M}\Psi_1^{\rm M}$ and $\Psi_2^{\rm M}\Psi_2^{\rm M}$ are either suppressed by $m_f$ or by the relative velocity ($p$-wave).
\item The same interaction terms in Eq.~(\ref{pDDMLint12}) responsible for the relic abundance calculation are also driving the decay of $\Psi_2^{\rm M}\to \Psi_1^{\rm M}f\bar f$.
For mass splittings of the order of GeV, the decay lengths can naturally be of the order of a measurable displaced vertex.
By considering $f$ as a lepton, the edge of the dilepton invariant mass distribution is directly related to the mass splitting $\Delta M$.
So by just measuring the decay length and the dilepton edge one can determine the overall DM mass scale and the mass splitting.
\item As a consequence of the last two points, it is possible to relate the decay length
to the DM relic abundance and the mass parameters of the model, in such a way that
one can make a prediction for the DM mass, to be tested against other independent measurements.
\end{itemize}
Pseudo-Dirac DM is particularly interesting in the context of collider physics, since it leads to a rather rich phenomenology for DM searches beyond the usual missing transverse energy signature, such as the displaced vertex signatures which have not been fully explored yet in this context.
(See also the discussion of SUSY DM signatures in the next Section.)
It was remarked during the workshop that it would be interesting to adapt the analysis of~\cite{DeSimone:2010tf} in the framework of simplified models
(Note: simplified models for coannihilation scenarios have been worked out in~\cite{Baker:2015qna}).
This effort will require replacing the effective interactions in Eq.~(\ref{pDDMLint}) with the inclusion of a mediator, which is currently under way.
\section{Scalar singlet model with mixing}
\label{scalar}
In this Section we discuss the simplest extension of the scalar-mediated DM model recommended by the LHC DMF~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb} that includes mixing with the SM Higgs boson. Extensions with a more complicated scalar sector have been discussed, for example, in \cite{Izaguirre:2014vva,Ipek:2014gua,Berlin:2015wwa,Baek:2015lna,Choudhury:2015lha,Duerr:2016tmh}, some of them are aiming to address the Fermi-LAT galactic center $\gamma$ ray excess~\cite{TheFermi-LAT:2015kwa}.
Besides the SM particles and interactions, the model considered here contains a scalar mediator $s$ and a~DM particle~$\chi$, which for concreteness is taken to be a Dirac fermion. The additional scalar interactions relevant for the further discussion are~\cite{Kim:2008pp,Kim:2009ke,Baek:2011aa,LopezHonorez:2012kv,Baek:2012uj,Fairbairn:2013uta,Carpenter:2013xra,Khoze:2015sra,Abdallah:2015ter}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Linteractions}
{\cal L} \supset -y_{\rm DM} \hspace{0.25mm} s \hspace{0.25mm} \bar \chi \chi - \mu \hspace{0.25mm} s \hspace{0.25mm} |H|^2 \,,
\end{equation}
where $y_{\rm DM}$ is a dark-sector Yukawa coupling and $H$ denotes the usual SM Higgs doublet.
As a result of the portal coupling $\mu$, the Higgs field $h$ and the real scalar field $s$ mix, giving rise to mass eigenstates $h_1$ and $h_2$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mixing}
\begin{pmatrix} h_1 \\[2mm] h_2 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} \cos \theta & \hspace{1mm} \sin \theta \\[2mm] -\sin \theta & \hspace{1mm} \cos \theta \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} h \\[2mm] s \end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
where $\theta$ is the mixing angle. In terms of these mass eigenstates the trilinear couplings of the scalars to DM and to the massive SM gauge bosons and fermions take the following form
\begin{equation}
\begin{split} \label{eq:smh1h2}
{\cal L} \supset &- y_{\rm DM} \hspace{0.5mm} \big ( \sin \theta \hspace{1mm} h_1 + \cos \theta \hspace{1mm} h_2 \big ) \hspace{0.5mm} \bar{\chi}\chi \\[2mm] & + \big( \cos \theta \hspace{1mm} h_1 - \sin \theta \hspace{1mm} h_2 \big) \left(\frac{2M_W^2}{v} \, W^{+}_\mu W^{-\,\mu} + \frac{M_Z^2}{v} \, Z_\mu Z^{\mu} - \sum_f \frac{m_f}{v}\, \bar{f}f\right) \,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $v \simeq 246 \, {\rm GeV}$ is the Higgs field vacuum expectation value, $M_W$ and $M_Z$ are the $W$ and $Z$ boson masses, respectively, and $m_f$ denotes the masses of the SM fermions. Since the mixing angle~$\theta$ is defined such that for $\theta \to 0$ the DM sector is decoupled from the~SM, the state~$h_1$ plays the role of the observed Higgs boson with $m_{h_1} \simeq 125 \, {\rm GeV}$, while the mass of the state $h_2$, along with $y_{\rm DM}$ and $\theta$, are free parameters of the model.\footnote{In (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) the trilinear scalar couplings and all quartic couplings have not been included. These couplings are all simple functions of $\sin \theta$ and $\cos \theta$ and uniquely fixed in the model (\ref{eq:Linteractions}). Apart from the $h_1 h_2^2$ and~$h_1^2 h_2$ vertices, we ignore them here because they do not play a role in the phenomenological applications discussed in this Section.} Note that, as far as the couplings between $h_2$ and fermions are concerned, the interactions~(\ref{eq:smh1h2}) resemble those of the scalar-mediated DM model recommended by the LHC DMF~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb} after identifying $g_{\rm DM} = y_{\rm DM} \hspace{0.25mm} \cos \theta$ and $g_{\rm SM} = -\sin \theta$. Couplings between the SM Higgs~$h_1$ and~DM as well as $h_2$ and electroweak (EW) gauge bosons are, on the other hand, not present in the latter model, while in the context of (\ref{eq:Linteractions}) such interactions and their precise form are an unavoidable consequence of EW symmetry breaking.
In this paper we focus specifically on the possible collider signatures of this model, and how they differ from the LHC DMF scalar singlet case without mixing. Constraints on the model from non-collider DM experiments can be found in~\cite{Kim:2008pp,Baek:2011aa,LopezHonorez:2012kv,Baek:2012uj,Fairbairn:2013uta}.
For $m_{h_1} > 2 m_\chi$, the most obvious manifestation of the interactions (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) is through their contributions to the invisible decay of the Higgs boson. The corresponding decay width is
\begin{equation} \label{eq:h1DM2}
\Gamma (h_1 \to \chi \bar \chi) = \frac{y_{\rm DM}^2 \sin^2 \theta \, m_{h_1}}{8 \pi} \left ( 1 - \frac{4m_\chi^2}{m_{h_1}^2} \right )^{3/2} \,.
\end{equation}
After the transformation $\sin \theta \to \cos \theta$ and $m_{h_1} \to m_{h_2}$ the same expression holds in the case of $h_2$, if it is sufficiently heavy. To determine the invisible Higgs boson branching fraction from (\ref{eq:h1DM2}), one has to keep in mind that all partial widths of $h_1$ to SM particles are suppressed by~$\cos^2 \theta$ and that depending on the mass spectrum also $h_1 \to h_2 h_2$ may be allowed.
Another important feature of (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) is that the couplings between $h_1$ and the EW gauge bosons, as well as the SM fermions, receive a universal suppression factor of $\cos \theta$ relative to the SM values. The mixing angle and hence (\ref{eq:Linteractions}) is therefore subject to the constraints that arise from the ATLAS and CMS measurements of the signal strengths in Higgs boson production and decay~\cite{HIG-15-002}. Global fits \cite{Farzinnia:2013pga,Belanger:2013kya} to the LHC Run 1 data find $\sin \theta \lesssim 0.4$, which implies that the state $h_1$ ($h_2$) is mostly Higgs-like (singlet-like). Constraints on $\theta$ also arise from the oblique parameters $T$ and $S$~\cite{Baek:2011aa,Lopez-Val:2014jva,Robens:2015gla,Robens:2016xkb}, but are weaker than those that follow from the Higgs boson measurements.
Turning our attention to the $\slashed{E}_T$ signals, an important observation is that the phenomenology of the scalar singlet model with mixing (SMM) is generically richer than that of the scalar-mediated DM model recommended by the LHC DMF. For instance, the couplings in (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) that involve EW gauge bosons will give rise to mono-$W$ and mono-$Z$ signals at tree level. The relevant diagrams are shown in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:scalardiagrams}. The resulting amplitudes take the following schematic form:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:amplitude}
{\cal A} (pp \to \slashed{E}_T + W/Z) \propto y_{\rm DM} \sin (2 \theta) \left ( \frac{1}{s - m_{h_1}^2 + i m_{h_1} \Gamma_{h_1}} - \frac{1}{s - m_{h_2}^2 + i m_{h_2} \Gamma_{h_2}} \right ) ,
\end{equation}
where $s$ denotes the invariant mass squared of the DM pair, and $\Gamma_{h_1}$ and $ \Gamma_{h_2}$ are the total decay widths of the two mass eigenstates in the scalar sector. Similar results hold in the case of $\slashed{E}_T + 2j$ production through vector boson fusion (VBF), top quark loop induced $\slashed{E}_T + j$ signals, and $\slashed{E}_T + t \bar t$ production. Examples of diagrams that lead to these signals are also displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:scalardiagrams}. We note that the contributions from virtual $h_1/h_2$ exchange have opposite signs in (\ref{eq:amplitude}), which is a simple consequence of the mixing matrix (\ref{eq:mixing}) being orthogonal.
The destructive interference of the two scalar contributions is a feature that is also well-known from the DM-nucleon scattering cross section relevant for direct detection~\cite{Kim:2008pp,Baek:2011aa,LopezHonorez:2012kv}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.975\textwidth]{scalardiagrams.pdf}
\vspace{2mm}
\caption{\it Examples of diagrams with an exchange of a $h_1/h_2$ mediator that lead, respectively, to a mono-$W/Z$ signal, a $\slashed{E}_T + 2 j$ signature in vector boson fusion, $\slashed{E}_T + j$ events from a top quark loop, and a $\slashed{E}_T + t \bar t$ signature.}
\label{fig:scalardiagrams}
\end{figure}
It is easy to understand from (\ref{eq:amplitude}) that the parameter space of the model (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) can be divided into several cases with distinct phenomenologically:
\begin{itemize}
\item Scenario A: For $m_{h_2} > 2 m_\chi > m_{h_1}$, only the second propagator in (\ref{eq:amplitude}) can go on-shell and, as a result, only diagrams involving $h_2$ exchange will contribute to the various~$\slashed{E}_T$ signals arising in the model (\ref{eq:Linteractions}). This feature implies, for instance, that the normalised kinematic distributions of the monojet signal in the scalar models with and without mixing are the same. In consequence, the $\slashed{E}_T + j$ cross sections in the two models can be obtained by a simple rescaling procedure. Working in the narrow-width approximation~(NWA) and taking into account only top quark loop induced diagrams, one obtains
\begin{equation} \label{eq:rescale}
\frac{\sigma ( pp \to h_2 \hspace{0.5mm} (\to \chi \bar \chi) + j )}{\sigma ( pp \to \phi \hspace{0.5mm} (\to \chi \bar \chi) + j )} \simeq \left ( \frac{\sin (2 \theta)}{2 g_{\rm SM}} \right )^2 \frac{\Gamma_\phi}{\Gamma_{h_2}} \,,
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma_\phi$ denotes the total width of the scalar mediator in the LHC~DMF spin-0 simplified model. We note that additional contributions to $\slashed{E}_T + {\rm jets}$ production arise in the context of (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) also from mono-$V$ or VBF topologies. Such contributions are not present in the LHC DMF model, but are consistently described in the~SMM.
\item Scenario B: If $m_{h_1} > 2 m_\chi > m_{h_2}$, the roles of $h_1$ and $h_2$ are interchanged, which means that the interactions (\ref{eq:smh1h2}) can be mapped onto the simplified models that are employed in the context of direct and indirect searches for invisible decays of the SM Higgs boson \cite{Aad:2015uga,Aad:2015txa,Chatrchyan:2014tja,CMS-PAS-HIG-16-009}. Again, simple rescaling relations like the one given in (\ref{eq:rescale}) can be worked out to translate the signal strengths in a given $\slashed{E}_T$ channel between the different SDMMs. Unlike the LHC DMF model, the SMM again allows for a consistent description of searches for invisible Higgs boson decays across all channels.
\item Scenario C: For $m_{h_2} > m_{h_1} > 2 m_\chi$, both scalars can be produced on-shell and, in principle, diagrams with $h_1$ and $h_2$ exchange can be relevant for describing correctly $\slashed{E}_T$ signals arising from (\ref{eq:Linteractions}). However, in large parts of the parameter space the state~$h_1$ will give the dominant contribution, due to a resonance enhancement associated to the first propagator in (\ref{eq:amplitude}). This is an immediate consequence of the fact that $\Gamma_{h_1}$, being the width of the Higgs-like scalar, is experimentally observed to be small, while $\Gamma_{h_2}$ can receive sizable contributions from decays into~DM and, if kinematically allowed, into top quark pairs. The phenomenology of scenarios~B and~C can therefore be expected to be similar for searches with $\slashed{E}_T$ signatures.
\item Scenario D: If $m_{h_1} > m_{h_2} > 2 m_\chi$, both scalars can be produced on-shell like in scenario C, and both contributions can again be important if $\Gamma_{h_1} \simeq \Gamma_{h_2}$. As we will argue in the following, such cases can only be realised if $y_{\rm DM}$ is sufficiently small, and thus are not relevant for searches in $\slashed{E}_T$ signatures.
\item Scenario E: If $m_{h_1}, m_{h_2} < 2 m_\chi$, the scalars cannot decay to DM, and the prospects for observing $h_2$ production in $\slashed{E}_T$ channels will be very challenging. To probe this scenario one thus has to exploit resonance searches in the SM final states. Depending on the mass and width of $h_2$, possible channels are $\gamma \gamma$, $\gamma Z$, $t \bar t$, $h_1 h_1$, and $t {\bar t }t {\bar t }$.
\end{itemize}
We now quantify these general observations by studying $\slashed{E}_T$ signals for different mass hierarchies, values of the mixing angle $\theta$, and values of the dark-sector Yukawa coupling~$y_{\rm DM}$. We compare predictions from the SMM \eqref{eq:smh1h2} with those of the scalar models~\cite{Haisch:2013ata,DMFmodel_Buckley,DMFmodel_Hahn} used in earlier LHC DMF studies~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}. The SMM and DMF models are used to produce leading order kinematic distributions and cross sections for the monojet and $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ processes. Monojet, $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ and SM Higgs boson events are generated with {\tt MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO}~\cite{Alwall:2014hca} using the {\tt SMM} UFO model~\cite{Haisch:2016} for the SMM case and the {\tt DMSIMP} UFO model~\cite{Backovic:2015soa} for the LHC DMF and SM Higgs boson cases. The widths of the $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ mass eigenstates in the SMM and DMF models are determined automatically with {\tt MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO} as a function of the relevant masses and $y_{\rm DM}$ values.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_H1_width}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_H2_width}.pdf}
\caption{\it
The $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ (left) and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ (right) total decay width in scenarios C and D for several values of $y_{\rm DM}$ and $\theta$. In both panels the DM mass is fixed to $1 \, {\rm GeV}$. An increase in the total decay width of the $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ state at low masses and low values of DM coupling $y_{\rm DM}$ is due to the contribution of the $h_1 \to h_2 h_2$ decay channel. Note that the $\theta = 0.01$ lines for $y_{\rm DM} = 0.1$ and 0.01 nearly overlap and hence are seen as a single line in the left plot.}
\label{fig:widths}
\end{figure}
In general, the total width $\Gamma_{h_1}$ in the SMM differs from the SM Higgs boson width due to the additional $h_1 \to \ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ and $h_1 \to h_2 h_2$ decay channels, and the $\cos^{2}\theta$ suppression of $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ decays into SM particles. Similarly, $\Gamma_{h_2}$ includes decays both to DM and SM particles, and depends on~$\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}$, $y_{\rm DM}$, and~$\theta$. Figure~\ref{fig:widths} shows $\Gamma_{h_1}$ and $\Gamma_{h_2}$ as a function of these SMM parameters for scenarios C and D, for which both $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ can potentially contribute to the different~$\slashed{E}_T$ signatures. The kinematics in the SMM is expected to be driven by $h_1$ ($h_2$) exchange when $\Gamma_{h_1} \ll \Gamma_{h_2}$~($\Gamma_{h_2} \ll \Gamma_{h_1}$) --- we will demonstrate below that this expectation is indeed correct. From the comparison of the two panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:widths} it also is evident that in order to have~$\Gamma_{h_1} \simeq \Gamma_{h_2}$, the DM coupling $y_{\rm DM}$ has to be small. In the limit $y_{\rm DM} \to 0$, the decay rates of $h_1$ and~$h_2$ to SM particles will however become dominant and, as a result, mediator searches in SM final states will typically provide the leading constraints on the parameter space. One can thus conclude that in the parameter space where $\slashed{E}_T$ searches are strongest, depending on the mass hierarchy, either $h_1$ or $h_2$ exchange dominates the signals.
Next, we study the exclusive $\ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ production cross section and its kinematics for the mass hierarchies corresponding to scenarios A, B, C, and D. As mentioned, scenarios C and D correspond to the on-shell decays of both the $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ mediators to DM particles. Earlier studies have shown that kinematics and cross sections are independent of $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}$ in such scenarios~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}. Therefore, without loss of generality, we consider DM particles with a mass of $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}} = 1\rm~GeV$ in scenarios C and D, and scan values for $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}$, $y_{\rm DM}$, and $\theta$. In scenario A (B), the DM particles are heavier than $\ensuremath{m_{h_{1}}}/2$ ($\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}/2$), and $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ ($\ensuremath{h_{2}}$) decays to~$\ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ are prohibited. Provided that $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}$ is smaller than $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ ($\ensuremath{h_{1}}$) in scenario A (B), SMM kinematics should also be independent of $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}$. Consequently, we focus on $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}} = 100 \, {\rm GeV}$~($\ensuremath{m_{\chi}} = 10 \, {\rm GeV}$) for these scenarios.
We compare SMM and LHC DMF kinematics by means of the predicted transverse momentum of the $\ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ system, $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$, which is a useful generator-level proxy for the $\slashed{E}_T$ observable typically used in collider-based DM searches. Our treatment ignores experimental effects (e.g.,~selection efficiencies, energy resolutions, and detector effects) that would be relevant in an analysis at the reconstruction level.
\subsection{Scenario A}
Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioA_kin} compares SMM and LHC DMF model kinematics in scenario A. In accordance with the expectation, we observe a close correspondence between the kinematics in these models. The discrepancy observed in the monojet spectra near $150 \, {\rm GeV}$ results from vector-boson-mediated processes, which are included in the SMM but not in the LHC DMF model. Section~\ref{sec:VBF} discusses the vector boson mediated (VBM) contributions in more detail.
Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioA_xsecBR} shows the $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ production cross section for the nominal case of $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. As expected, the SMM cross section times branching fraction approaches zero as the mixing angle $\theta$ tends to $0$ or $\pi/2$. Previous studies have shown that $\chi \bar \chi$ kinematics are independent of the $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}$ value for the low to moderate mediator masses explored here~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}. The prediction for $\sigma ( pp \to t \bar t + h_1/h_2) \hspace{0.25mm} {\rm Br} ( h_1/h_2 \to \chi \bar \chi)$ is smaller than both the SM Higgs boson and corresponding LHC DMF model cross sections due to mixing between $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$, and because on-shell $\ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ production via $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ exchange is forbidden in scenario A. These results also generalize to the monojet process.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_750_mDM_100_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_750_mDM_100_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario A kinematics: $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ in the SMM and LHC DMF models for the monojet (left) and $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ (right) channels. Both plots correspond to $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}} = 100 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}} = 750 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. The monojet plot includes a comparison with the SM Higgs boson production in association with one or two jets, while the $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ plot includes a comparison with SM Higgs boson production in association with $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}}$ (the Higgs boson $p_{\rm T}$ is displayed in these cases). The SMM kinematics for both monojet and $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ generally agree with the LHC DMF model predictions in this scenario.
}
\label{fig:scenarioA_kin}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_xsec_vs_theta_mDM_100_mMed_750_g_1.0}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario A cross sections: the SMM $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ production cross section for $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=750\rm~GeV$, $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=100\rm~GeV$, $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$ as a function of mixing angle compared with the LHC DMF model and SM $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + h$ cross sections. Because the $h_{1} \rightarrow \ensuremath{\chi\bar{\chi}}$ channel is inaccessible in this scenario, the SMM cross section remains below the LHC DMF model equivalent.
}
\label{fig:scenarioA_xsecBR}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scenario B}
Figures~\ref{fig:scenarioB_kin} and~\ref{fig:scenarioB_xsecBR}, respectively, compare $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions and cross sections for scenario B. In this scenario, SMM kinematics clearly correspond to SM Higgs boson production rather than to the LHC DMF model predictions. Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioB_xsecBR} displays $\sigma ( pp \to t \bar t + h_1/h_2) \hspace{0.25mm} {\rm Br} ( h_1/h_2 \to \chi \bar \chi)$ for representative $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}},\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}$ values in the nominal case of $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. For intermediate values of the mixing angle, $\sigma ( pp \to t \bar t + h_1/h_2) \hspace{0.25mm} {\rm Br} ( h_1/h_2 \to \chi \bar \chi)$ lies between the corresponding LHC DMF model and SM Higgs boson cross sections. The finding that $h_1$ drives the prediction in scenario~B also applies to the monojet case.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_10_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_10_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario B kinematics: $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions for the monojet (left) and $t \bar t + \slashed{E}_T$ (right) process with~$\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, and $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. The rest of the notations are as in Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:scenarioA_kin}.
}
\label{fig:scenarioB_kin}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_xsec_vs_theta_mDM_10_mMed_10_g_1.0}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario B cross sections: the SMM $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ production cross section for $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, and $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$.
}
\label{fig:scenarioB_xsecBR}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scenarios C and D}
Scenarios C and D in the SMM are similar in that on-shell decays of both the $\ensuremath{h_{1}}$ and $\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ mediators are possible. In principle, both mediators can therefore contribute to the~$\slashed{E}_T$ production cross sections in the different channels. Figures~\ref{fig:scenarioC_kin} and~\ref{fig:scenarioD_kin} show representative $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions for scenarios C and D, respectively. Representative cross sections for these scenarios are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scenarioCD_xsecBR}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_500_mDM_1_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_500_mDM_1_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario C kinematics: $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions for the monojet~(left) and $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ (right) channels. The results shown correspond to $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}= 500 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}= 1 \, {\rm GeV}$, and $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$. The rest of the notations are as in Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:scenarioA_kin}.
}
\label{fig:scenarioC_kin}
\end{figure}
From Fig.~\ref{fig:scenarioC_kin} it is evident that the SMM $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions are generally softer than those of the LHC DMF model. Within statistical uncertainties the kinematics of the SMM signals are essentially identical to Higgs production in the SM. Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioCD_xsecBR} demonstrates that the $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ cross section in scenario~C is generally larger than that of the LHC DMF model, and approaches the SM~$\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + h$ cross section for intermediate values of the mixing angle.
Figure~\ref{fig:scenarioD_kin}, which corresponds to scenario D, clearly shows the impact of $\ensuremath{h_{1}}/\ensuremath{h_{2}}$ mixing. Significant differences between the LHC DMF model and SMM kinematics are found for large $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}$. As $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}$ decreases from $1.0$, kinematics approach those of the LHC DMF model. The SMM production cross section is shown as a function of mixing angle in Fig.~\ref{fig:scenarioCD_xsecBR}. The situation here is essentially the reverse of scenario C, with the production cross section remaining below that of the LHC DMF model.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_1_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_1_gDM_0.01_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\vspace{2mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_1_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_1_gDM_0.01_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario D kinematics: $\ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}}$ distributions for $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ (top row) and monojet (bottom row) channels. The displayed results are obtained for $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$, and $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=1 \, {\rm GeV}$. The left and right columns correspond to $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$ and $0.01$, respectively. The rest of the notations are as in Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:scenarioA_kin}.
}
\label{fig:scenarioD_kin}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_xsec_vs_theta_mDM_1_mMed_500_g_1.0}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{ttDM_xsec_vs_theta_mDM_1_mMed_10_g_1.0}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Scenario C and D cross sections: $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$ production cross sections compared with those for the SM $\ensuremath{t\bar{t}}+h$ and the corresponding LHC DMF model cross sections for $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=500 \, {\rm GeV}$~(left) and $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}} = 10 \, {\rm GeV}$~(right). All results use $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=1 \, {\rm GeV}$ and $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$.
}
\label{fig:scenarioCD_xsecBR}
\end{figure}
\subsection{VBM production}\label{sec:VBF}
The effects of Higgs boson mixing were not considered in the LHC DMF monojet model, which includes mediator production via top quark loop diagrams only. The SMM, on the other hand, also accounts for possible mediator production via $s$-channel or $t$-channel massive gauge boson exchange. The corresponding $W/Z$-associated and VBF-like topologies are shown in the first two panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:scalardiagrams}. Figure~\ref{fig:VBF} compares the VBM $\slashed{E}_T + \rm{jets}$ cross section against the full result for scenarios~A and~B. We observe that the VBM processes constitute an appreciable fraction of the total cross section already at \ensuremath{p_{T}^{\chi\bar{\chi}}} \ values of the order of two times the massive gauge boson masses.
\begin{figure}[!htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_vs_vbfWithHiggs_kinematics_MMed_750_mDM_100_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{monojet_vs_vbfWithHiggs_kinematics_MMed_10_mDM_10_gDM_1.0_vs_DMF}.pdf}
\caption{\it
Comparison of total and VBM $\slashed{E}_T + {\rm jets}$ cross sections for scenarios~A and B: the full differential cross sections for the SMM are shown as solid lines, while the weak contributions due to $W/Z$-associated and VBF production are indicated with open circles. The results correspond to $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}}=750 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=100 \, {\rm GeV}$~(left) and $\ensuremath{m_{h_{2}}} = 10 \, {\rm GeV}$, $\ensuremath{m_{\chi}}=10 \, {\rm GeV}$~(right). All results use $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$.
}
\label{fig:VBF}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Relic density}\label{sec:relic}
The DMF and SMM scalar models can be used to obtain the DM relic density in the universe with an assumption that there is only a single species of DM particle and that no mechanisms can generate/annihilate DM beyond those contained in the models. We compute the relic density using {\sc MadDM} version 2.0.6~\cite{Backovic:2013dpa,Backovic:2015tpt}, which considers all $2 \rightarrow 2$ interactions between DM and SM particles. The contours shown in the left panel of~Fig.~\ref{fig:relic}, which are estimated following the procedure described in~\cite{Pree:2016hwc}, correspond to the DMF and SMM model parameter spaces for which the computed relic density matches the $\Omega_{c}h^{2} = 0.12$ observation from the Planck collaboration~\cite{Ade:2015xua}. Regions interior (exterior) to the contours are those in which the obtained relic density is over-abundant (under-abundant) with respect to observation. Note that the color scale is truncated at 1.0; larger values of the relic density are indicated in the same shade of dark blue. As before, the Yukawa coupling strength in the SMM and DMF models is set to 1.0. The SMM results shown correspond to a mixing angle of $\theta = 0.2$. The mass hierarchies of scenarios A to E are indicated in the left panel. The right panel shows the relic abundance for the SMM model together with several relevant mass relations.
The plots show that the observed relic density can be obtained from both the DMF and SMM models over a wide range of parameter space. Dashed lines are added to illustrate which processes contribute to enhanced annihilation along the corresponding relic density contours. For example, the vertical line labeled $m_{\chi}=m_{h_1}/2$ corresponds to an enhancement of the $\chi \bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{1}$ process. Likewise, the line labeled $m_{\chi}=m_{h_2}$ ($m_{\chi}=(m_{h_2}+m_{h_1})/2$) corresponds to the enhancement of the $\chi \bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{2} h_{2}$ ($\chi \bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{2} h_{1}$).
Perhaps the most obvious difference in the results obtained from the two models lies in the region near $m_{\chi} = m_{h_1}/2$. This region is depleted in the SMM due to the resonant enhancement of DM annihilation to SM particles through the light $h_{1}$ mediator. In region~E, the lower SMM contour departs from the line of $m_{\chi} = m_{h_2}$, which corresponds to $t$-channel $\chi\bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{2}h_{2}$ annihilation, at a value of $m_{h_2} = m_{h_1}$. For $m_{h_2} > m_{h_1}$, the SMM contour instead follows the line of $m_{\chi} = (m_{h_1} + m_{h_2})/2$, corresponding to $\chi\bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{1}h_{2}$. The upper contour in region E also stems from $t$-channel $\chi\bar{\chi} \rightarrow h_{2}h_{2}$ annihilation. This region is enlarged for the SMM because the coupling between the $h_{2}$ mediator and SM particles is relatively weaker (by a factor of $\sin^{2} \theta$) than the analogous coupling in the DMF model. The relic density shown in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:relic} indicates a series of steps in the DM abundance of region A at low $m_{\chi}$ that are not apparent for the DMF model. These steps coincide with $m_{\chi} = m_{h_1},m_{W}$, and are due to the additional Higgs and VBM interactions present in the SMM.
\begin{figure}[!htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{smm_dmf_comparison}.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{{smm_color}.png}
\caption{\it
Left: comparison of the DM relic abundance obtained from the SMM and DMF models. The solid lines indicate regions for which the calculated relic density matches the observation of $\Omega_{c}h^{2} = 0.12$. The $m_{\chi}$--$\hspace{0.5mm} m_{h_2}$ mass hierarchies introduced in Section~\ref{scalar} are delineated with dashed red lines. Right: the relic abundance for the SMM overlaid with phenomenologically relevant mass relations. In both plots $\ensuremath{y_{\rm DM}}=1.0$ and $\theta=0.2$ are used.}
\label{fig:relic}
\end{figure}
~\\
\noindent In summary, we have studied a simple extension of the LHC DMF scalar mediator model that incorporates mixing between the new scalar DM mediator field and the SM Higgs boson. We have shown that in several cases mixing leads to kinematics and cross sections that significantly differ from those of the LHC DMF model. We have also shown that the addition of $W/Z$-associated and VBF production processes leads to changed kinematics and cross sections relative to the those obtained with loop-only topologies. The scalar mixing model also gives rise to several distinct features in the DM relic density distribution that do not appear in the LHC DMF analog. Overall, our results reveal that simplified scalar models with Higgs boson mixing typically display a much richer phenomenology than the simple LHC DMF model. The SMM introduced in~(\ref{eq:smh1h2}) represents the simplest extension of the LHC DMF model that includes Higgs boson mixing, and thus allows for a consistent comparison and combination of individual~$\slashed{E}_T$ channels such as monojet, mono-$V$, and~$\ensuremath{t\bar{t}} + \slashed{E}_T$.
\section{What can we learn about simplified DM models from SUSY?}
\label{SUSY}
{\it In this Section we review general features of DM in complete SUSY models, and propose how these could inspire and guide the development of improved SDMMs.}
In the absence of clear theoretical guidance, much experimental and phenomenological
effort has gone into probing models with universal soft SUSY breaking at the GUT scale,
such as the CMSSM in which universality is postulated for the gauginos
and all scalars, and models with non-universal Higgs masses (NUHM1,2). These models
are already significantly constrained by the LHC Run 1 data (with $p$-values $\sim 0.1$), if one
attempts to explain the $g_\mu - 2$ anomaly~\cite{NUHM2}. On the other hand, if one treats $n$ soft
supersymmetry-breaking masses as independent phenomenological inputs at the EW
scale, as in pMSSMn models, retaining only the degree of universality motivated by the upper limits
on flavour-changing neutral currents, the LHC constraints are less restrictive ($p \sim 0.3$)
and the $g_\mu - 2$ anomaly can still be accommodated~\cite{pMSSM10}.
\subsection{The DM mechanisms in SUSY}
Generically, assuming standard Big Bang cosmology and requiring that the relic density of lightest supersymmetric particles (LSPs)
respect the upper limit imposed by the Planck satellite and other measurements imposes
an upper limit on the range of possible soft SUSY breaking masses in universal models.
Within this range, many different mechanisms for bringing the DM density into the
allowed cosmological range may come into play, not only the conventional annihilation and
freeze-out mechanism. For example, there may be enhanced, rapid annihilation through
direct channel resonances such as $Z$, $h$, $H/A$, $X(750)$. Also, coannihilation with some other,
almost-degenerate SUSY particle species such as the lighter stau ($\tilde\tau_1$), top squark ($\tilde t_1$), wino, or sneutrino, may be
important.
Figure~\ref{fig:SUSY1} illustrates the most important DM mechanisms in the CMSSM
(upper left panel), NUHM1 (upper right panel), NUHM2 (lower left panel), and pMSSM10
(lower right panel), colour-coded as indicated in the legend~\cite{MCDM}. We see immediately
the importance of including coannihilation with staus (pink), stops (grey), and charginos
(green), as well as the need to take into account enhanced annihilations through direct channel
resonances such as the $h$ (pink), heavy SUSY Higgs bosons (dark blue), and the $Z$ boson
(yellow), often in combination as indicated by the hybrid regions (purple).
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{CMSSM_m0_m12_DMmeas}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{NUHM1_m0_m12_DMmeas}}\\[1em]
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{NUHM2_m0_m12_DMmeas}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pMSSM_m0_m12_DMmeas}} \\
\resizebox{15cm}{!}{\includegraphics{n12c_dm_legend}}
\end{center}
\caption{\it The $(m_0, m_{1/2})$ planes in the CMSSM (upper left), the NUHM1 (upper right), and the NUHM2 (lower left),
and the $(\ensuremath{m_{\tilde q}}, \mneu1)$ plane in the pMSSM10~\protect\cite{MCDM}. Regions in which different mechanisms bring the DM
density into the allowed range are shaded as described in the legend and discussed in the text. The red and blue
contours are the $\Delta \chi^2 = 2.30$ and 5.99 contours found in global fits
to these models, corresponding approximately to the 68 and 95\% CL
contours, with the green stars indicating the best fit points, and the solid purple contours
show the current LHC 95\% exclusions from ~$\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$ searches.
In the CMSSM, NUHM1, and NUHM2 cases, the dashed purple contours show the prospective 5$\sigma$
discovery reaches for ~$\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$ searches at the LHC with 3000 fb$^{-1}$ of data at $\sqrt{s} = 14$~TeV.
In the pMSSM10 case, the dashed purple contour shows the 95\% CL exclusion sensitivity
of the LHC with 3000 fb$^{-1}$, assuming $\ensuremath{m_{\tilde g}} \gg \ensuremath{m_{\tilde q}}$, and the dash-dotted lines
bound the corresponding sensitivity region assuming $\ensuremath{m_{\tilde g}} = 4.5 \ensuremath{\,\, \mathrm{TeV}}$.
}
\label{fig:SUSY1}
\end{figure*}
{\it It is, therefore, desirable to extend the simplified model approach to include at least some of these possibilities in order to achieve a more realistic description of relevant DM mechanisms in SDMMs.}
(See Ref.~\cite{Baker:2015qna} for a discussion of simplified models for coannihilation.)
\subsection{Collider signatures}
A corollary of the importance of coannihilation is that in many scenarios the next-to-lightest
supersymmetric particle (NLSP) may have a mass only slightly greater than that of the LSP,
in which case it may have a long lifetime, opening up the possibility of signatures from
displaced vertices and/or massive metastable charged particles passing through the detector~\cite{MCDM}.
For example, in the CMSSM, NUHM1, and NUHM2 one can find that
$m_{\tilde \tau_1} - m_{LSP} < m_\tau$, in which case the ${\tilde \tau_1}$ lifetime can be
very long~\cite{Citron:2012fg}, as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:SUSY2}~\cite{MCDM}, which displays in colour code the lifetime of
the ${\tilde \tau_1}$ at the best fit point for each pair of $(m_0, m_{1/2})$ values in the CMSSM
(left panel) and the NUHM1 (right panel). We see that a long-lived stau may be a distinctive signature
in the regions of these models that can be explored in future runs of the LHC.
Long-lived NLSP signatures also appear in other models of SUSY breaking, e.g., minimal
anomaly-mediated SUSY breaking, in which the appropriate DM density is obtained by
coannihilation of the LSP with a nearly degenerate long-lived wino.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{cmssm_staulifetime_m0_4K_m12_4K_chi2}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{nuhm1_staulifetime_m0_4K_m12_4K_chi2}}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{\it
The $(m_0, m_{1/2})$ planes in the CMSSM (left panel) and the NUHM1 (right panel), showing (colour coded)
the lifetime of the lighter stau~\protect\cite{Citron:2012fg} for the best fit at each point in the plane~\protect\cite{MCDM}.
The red, blue, and purple contours have the same significances as in Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:SUSY1}.
}
\label{fig:SUSY2}
\end{figure*}
{\it It is, therefore, desirable to consider other possible signatures of DM models, such as the appearance of long-lived particles.}
(See also the discussion of pseudo-Dirac DM in the previous Section.)
Furthermore, simplified DM models typically do not take into account the complexity
of many mechanisms of producing DM particles. In SUSY, as well as other frameworks
such as extra dimensions, most DM particles are not produced directly at the LHC, but
appear at the final stage of cascade decays of heavier SUSY particles. Typically, strongly interacting
particles (e.g. squarks and gluinos in SUSY models) are produced and then decay via many
possible intermediate particles into the DM particle (e.g., the LSP in SUSY models).
Figure~\ref{fig:SUSY3} illustrates the important possible decays of gluinos and squarks in the
pMSSM10, colour-coded according to the dominant decay for the best fit parameter set at each
point in the displayed plane~\cite{pMSSM10}. A comprehensive study of SUSY models should take these decays
and their branching fractions into account; assuming that one particular decay mode is dominant
is likely to lead to an over-estimated exclusion of realistic models.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\resizebox{8.0cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pmssm10_abs_mg_4K_abs_mneu1_750_br_gluino_to_3g}}
\resizebox{8.0cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pmssm10_msqr_4K_abs_mneu1_750_br_squark_via_cha1neu2}} \\[1em]
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{\it Illustration of the dominant ${\tilde g}$ decays (left panel)
and ${\tilde q}$ decays (right panel) in the pMSSM10~\protect\cite{pMSSM10}.
The pale blue solid (dashed) lines show the estimated LHC sensitivities
with 300~\ensuremath{{\rm fb}^{-1}} (3000~\ensuremath{{\rm fb}^{-1}}).
}
\vspace{1em}
\label{fig:SUSY3}
\end{figure*}
The importance of these considerations is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:SUSY4}, that displays
the $\chi^2$ likelihood functions for the gluino mass (left panel) and the lighter stop mass
(right panel) in the pMSSM10 (solid black lines), the NUHM2 (solid blue lines), the NUHM1
(dashed blue lines), and the CMSSM (dashed blue lines)~\cite{pMSSM10}. In each model, careful attention has
been paid to the implementation of the LHC Run 1 constraints on a variety of different SUSY
production and decay channels and their respective branching fractions. Two important
points are worth noting. In the case of the gluino, the lower limit on its mass from LHC Run 1
is significantly weaker than for the other models, reflecting the importance of
taking into account the complexity of possible SUSY
cascade decay channels seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:SUSY3}. In the stop case, the pMSSM10
features a compressed stop region with $\Delta \chi^2 \lesssim 2$ that is not visible in the
NUHM2, NUHM1, and CMSSM cases. Understanding the interplay between several different
production and decay mechanisms is essential to estimate correctly the LHC reach in this
region.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\resizebox{8.0cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pmssm10_n12c_abs_mg_4K_chi2}}
\resizebox{8.0cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pmssm10_n12c_mstop1_4K_chi2}}
\caption{\it One-dimensional profile likelihood functions
for \ensuremath{m_{\tilde g}}\ and \mstop{1}:
the solid black lines are for the pMSSM10, the solid blue lines for the NUHM2,
the dashed blue lines for the NUHM1, and the dotted blue lines for the
CMSSM~\protect\cite{pMSSM10}.}
\label{fig:SUSY4}
\end{figure*}
Therefore, we conclude that care must be taken in interpreting simplified models: {\it many competing decay modes are possible in
realistic models, which are not likely to feature simple decay chains.}
\subsection{Interplay of Collider and Direct Detection Searches in SUSY}
Figure~\ref{fig:SUSY5} emphasizes that the interplay between LHC and direct DM
searches is quite different in different SUSY models~\cite{MCDM}. The detectability of a specific model
depends on the dominant mechanism for fixing the DM density via its spin-independent DM scattering
cross section \ensuremath{\sigma^{\rm SI}_p}, as can be seen in each of the panels.
For example, in the CMSSM, the stop coannihilation regions lie very close to the current
LUX exclusion, whereas the $H/A$ annihilation region likely lies within the future reach
of the LZ experiment~\cite{LZ} and the stau coannihilation region may require a more sensitive experiment.
On the other hand, in the pMSSM10 the chargino coannihilation region apparently lies
mainly within reach of LZ, whereas portions of the chargino coannihilation region,
the stau coannihilation region, and the $h$ and $Z$ funnels may lie below the neutrino `floor'
where there is an irreducible neutrino background. Overall assessments of the LHC and
direct search sensitivities for these models, the NUHM1 and the NUHM2, are given in
Table~\ref{tab:SUSY1}.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{CMSSM_mN1_SI_DMmeas}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{NUHM1_mN1_SI_DMmeas}}\\[1em]
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{NUHM2_mN1_SI_DMmeas}}
\resizebox{7.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{pMSSM_mN1_SI_DMmeas}}\\
\resizebox{15cm}{!}{\includegraphics{n12c_dm_legend}}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{\it The $(\mneu1, \ensuremath{\sigma^{\rm SI}_p})$ planes in the CMSSM (upper left),
the NUHM1 (upper right), the NUHM2 (lower left), and the pMSSM10 (lower right)~\protect\cite{MCDM}.
The red and blue solid lines are the $\Delta \chi^2 = 2.30$ and 5.99 contours,
and the solid purple lines show the projected 95\% exclusion sensitivity of the LZ experiment~\protect\cite{LZ}. The green and black lines show the current sensitivities of the XENON100~\protect\cite{Xe100}
and LUX~\protect\cite{LUX} experiments,
respectively, and the dashed orange line shows the
astrophysical neutrino `floor'~\protect\cite{Billard:2013qya, Snowmass}, below which astrophysical neutrino backgrounds dominate (yellow region).
}
\label{fig:SUSY5}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table*}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\caption{\it
\label{tab:SUSY1}
Summary of SUSY detectability in the CMSSM, NUHM1, NUHM2, and pMSSM10
models at the LHC in searches for $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$ events, long-lived charged particles (LL), and heavy $A/H$
Higgs bosons, and in direct DM search experiments, depending on the dominant mechanism for
bringing the DM density into the cosmological range~\protect\cite{MCDM}. The symbols $\checkmark$, ($\checkmark$) and
$\times$ indicate good prospects, interesting possibilities and poorer prospects, respectively.
The symbol -- indicates that a DM mechanism is not important for the corresponding model.
}
\vspace{5mm}
\begin{tabular}{ | c || c || c | c | c | c|}
\hline
DM & Exp't & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{Models} \\
mechanism & & CMSSM & NUHM1 & NUHM2 & pMSSM10 \\ \hline
${\tilde \tau_1}$ & LHC & {$\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$, $\checkmark$ LL} & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$, $\checkmark$ LL) & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$, $\checkmark$ LL) & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$), $\times$ LL \\
coann. & DM & ($\checkmark$) & ($\checkmark$) & $\times$ & $\times$ \\ \hline
$\cha{1}$ & LHC & -- & $\times$ & $\times$ & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$) \\
coann. & DM & -- & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & ($\checkmark$) \\ \hline
${\tilde t_1}$ & LHC & -- & -- & $\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$ & -- \\
coann. & DM & -- & -- & $\times$ & -- \\ \hline
$A/H$ & LHC & $\checkmark$ $A/H$ & ($\checkmark$ $A/H$) & ($\checkmark$ $A/H$) & -- \\
funnel & DM & $\checkmark$ & $\checkmark$ & ($\checkmark$) & -- \\ \hline
Focus & LHC & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$) & -- & -- & -- \\
point & DM & $\checkmark$ & -- & -- & -- \\ \hline
$h,Z$ & LHC & -- & -- & -- & ($\checkmark$ $\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}$) \\
funnels & DM & -- & -- & -- & ($\checkmark$) \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
Based on these findings, we see that {\it a detailed consideration of the relevant DM mechanisms is as important for direct searches as it is for LHC searches}, and needs to be taken into account in assessing the interplay between these search strategies.
\subsection{Lessons from SUSY for simplified DM models}
In this Section we have discussed the lessons we can learn for the development for simplified models from a complete theory like SUSY. This is important to identify potential oversimplification of simplified models and how this can be overcome. For example, one should check that a simplified model can reasonably be extended to yield an acceptable DM density, remembering that there are many different mechanisms for bringing the DM density into the cosmological range. In addition to the conventional
annihilation and freezeout, one should consider extending the
simplified model approach to include other possibilities such as coannihilation with some other,
almost degenerate particle (e.g., the stau, stop, wino in SUSY), as well as the possibility of
rapid annihilation via direct channel resonances. One should keep in mind possible
non-\ensuremath{/ \hspace{-.7em} E_T}\ final-state signatures such as displaced vertices
and/or massive long-lived particles in coannihilation scenarios. One should also remember that DM
particles appear typically at the ends of cascade decays of heavier particles, and it may be misleading
to assume that any particular production or decay channel dominates. The sensitivities of both the LHC and direct
DM detection experiments are quite dependent on these features, and it is desirable for
simplified models to be extended to take at least some of these possibilities into account.
\section{Introduction}
This White Paper summarises discussions during the brainstorming meeting ``Next generation of simplified Dark Matter models"
held at the Imperial College, London on May 6, 2016 \cite{Agenda} and expands on a few selected topics that were considered to be the most important for the near future.
This informal brainstorming meeting followed thematically the one hosted at Imperial in May 2014, which focused on the interplay and characterization of Dark Matter (DM) searches at colliders and in direct detection experiments, summarised in a White Paper~\cite{Malik:2014ggr}, which in part builds upon work documented in~\cite{Buchmueller:2014yoa}.
Since then several important developments in the characterisation of DM searches at colliders have taken place, most notably the activities of the LHC DM forum (LHC~DMF)~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb} and the newly-founded LHC DM working group~\cite{Boveia:2016mrp}.
Central to this effort are simplified DM models (SDMM), which have replaced interpretations using a universal set of operators in an effective field theory (EFT)
\cite{Beltran:2010ww,Goodman:2010yf,Bai:2010hh,Goodman:2010ku,Rajaraman:2011wf,Fox:2011pm} as the main vehicle to characterise DM searches at colliders. However, as discussed in~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb}, EFT interpretations can still provide useful information and complement the SDMM approach for collider searches. Today, SDMM are also used for comparisons with other searches, such as those conducted by direct detection and indirect detection experiments (see~\cite{Boveia:2016mrp}).
The majority of these SDMMs are derived from simple Lagrangians that are governed by four basic parameters: a mediator mass ($m_{\rm med}$), the DM candidate mass~($m_\chi$), the coupling of the mediator to Standard Model (SM) particles (usually quarks or gluons,~$g_{\rm SM}$),
and the coupling of the mediator to DM particles ($g_{\rm DM}$).
While these simplistic models have been very useful to map out the general characteristics of DM searches at colliders, they are often too simple to capture fully the detailed physics of all relevant searches.
Therefore, a well-defined extension of these SDMMs is required in order to allow for a more refined characterisation and comparison of all relevant DM searches. This should also include resonance searches in the dijet, dilepton, diphoton and other channels with only~SM particles in the final state, which are not directly looking for the DM particles but can nevertheless be very powerful in constraining the mediator mass and couplings.
Furthermore, this next generation of SDMMs should ideally also address some of the theoretical shortcomings inherent to the simplistic first-generation SDMMs.
The scope of the brainstorming meeting was to discuss options for defining the next generation of SDMMs and, if deemed relevant/possible, to contribute to the development of consistent, state-of-the-art SDMM extensions.
In Section~\ref{scalar} of this White Paper we discuss in detail a simplified scalar singlet mediator model, which includes mixing between the
SM Higgs boson and another scalar. In contrast to the simplified scalar model recommended in~\cite{Abercrombie:2015wmb} this class of mixing models allows for a more consistent interpretation of missing transverse energy searches, such as monojet, mono-$V$, and VBF-tagged analyses that are sensitive to different production modes --- gluon fusion, associated, and vector boson fusion (VBF) production, respectively.
In Section~\ref{750} we use the example of the observed $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ excess in high-mass diphoton searches at ATLAS and CMS
with the 2015 data to outline how a hypothetical signal for the production of a new mediator can be connected to DM using simplified models.
While this excess was not confirmed by the new data collected by both experiments up to mid 2016,
this exercise is an example of a case study on how to correlate searches with different experimental signatures to characterise the properties of a new particle discovery in the context of DM studies.
Following these two detailed examples comparing and combining different experimental searches using SDMMs, in Section~\ref{otherSMS} we outline qualitatively other interesting options for simplified models that could be studied in more detail in the future, while in Section~\ref{SUSY}
we review some aspects of supersymmetric (SUSY) models that are important for DM physics.
We summarise the White Paper and make recommendations for future work on the extension and refinement of SDMMs in Section~\ref{summary}.
\include{scalar-singlet}
\include{750model}
\include{OtherSMS}
\include{SUSYlessons}
\section{Summary and Recommendations}
\label{summary}
In this White Paper we have summarised the discussions and corresponding follow-up studies of the brainstorming meeting ``Next generation of simplified Dark Matter models" held at the Imperial College, London on May 6, 2016 \cite{Agenda}. Based on this work we have defined a short list of recommendations, which we think will be important for defining both short-term and long-term strategies for the evolution of simplified Dark Matter models. This White Paper is an input to the
ongoing discussion within the experimental and theoretical community about the extension and refinement of simplified Dark Matter models.
In Section 2 we studied in detail the extension of SDMMs with a scalar mediator, as currently used by ATLAS and CMS, to include mixing with the SM
Higgs boson. We conclude that including mixing provides a more realistic description of the underlying kinematic properties that a complete physics model would possess. The addition of the mixing with the
Higgs also provides the opportunity to interpret this class of models in the context of LHC Higgs
measurements, as these results constrain the required mixing angle in these models. Furthermore,
the scalar mixing model also provides the option to compare and combine consistently searches targeting different experimental signatures. For example, in this model a consistent interpretation of missing transverse energy searches, such as monojet, mono-$V$, and VBF-tagged analyses, which are sensitive to different production modes --- gluon fusion, associated, and VBF production, respectively --- is possible.
Therefore, connecting the missing energy DM searches with
other LHC measurements of properties of SM final states will result in a more complete and rigorous interpretation.
{We recommend that the class of SDMMs with scalar mediator and mixing with the
Higgs boson should become part of the portfolio of simplified models studied by the LHC experiments.}
Using the example of the recently observed excess in the high-mass diphoton searches in ATLAS and CMS for definiteness, we have discussed in Section~3 how a hypothetical signal for
production of a new mediator can be connected to DM using simplified models. This exercise was intended as an example of a case
study of how to correlate
searches with different experimental signatures in order to characterise the properties of a newly discovered particle in the context of DM. This study highlights that within the framework of simplified models, possibly combined with effective couplings, it is rather straightforward to connect a new physics signal observed in a visible channel with DM searches or vice versa.
Using the simplified DM model with scalar (pseudoscalar) mediator and extending it using effective couplings, we have shown that it is possible to not only connect the diphoton excess with different important visible signatures such as $\gamma Z$, $ZZ$, $WW$, and dijets, but also with generic DM signatures such as the monojet search. Therefore, this pragmatic ansatz enables one to link a potential signal in one channel with searches for other experimental signatures, which then can be used to verify/falsify potential signal models and to study their underlying nature. We believe that exploring these links
is vital for guiding the experimental search programme in case of a discovery of a new particle. {\ We recommend that the development of discovery-oriented simplified models that manifest themselves in a variety of experimental signatures, such as the one used in the example to characterise the $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ diphoton excess, should be an important part of future activities of the LHC DM working group.}
We highlighted in Section 4 the importance of $t$-channel and spin-2 mediator SDMMs, as well as models in which the properties of the DM candidate are different from the currently canonically assumed Dirac fermion, such as pseudo-Dirac DM. {\ We recommend that SDMMs with $t$-channel exchange and other properties like a spin-2 mediator or different DM candidates should be studied with higher priority in the future}.
Last but not least, we have discussed in Section 5 important properties of SUSY DM and how these could aid the development of new simplified DM models that possess more realistic mechanisms for bringing the DM density into the cosmological range. In addition to the conventional annihilation and freezeout, SDMMs could be extended to include other possibilities such as coannihilation with an almost degenerate particle, as well as the possibility of rapid annihilation via direct-channel resonances. {We recommend that properties of complete models, such as SUSY and its DM sector, should become a stronger guide
for the development of more realistic SDMMs in the future}.
\subsection{Recommendations of the White Paper in a nutshell}
\begin{itemize}
\item {\it We recommend that the class of SDMMs with scalar mediator and mixing with the
Higgs boson should become part of the official portfolio of simplified models studied by the LHC experiments. }
\item {\it We recommend the development of discovery-oriented SDMMs that manifest themselves in a variety of experimental signatures, such as the one used to characterise the $750 \, {\rm GeV}$ diphoton excess, should be an important part of future activities of the LHC DM working group.}
\item {\it We recommend that SDMMs with $t$-channel exchange and other properties such as a spin-2 mediator or different DM candidates should be studied with higher priority in the future}.
\item {\it We recommend that properties of complete models, such as SUSY and its DM sector, should become a stronger guide for the development of more realistic SDMMs}.
\end{itemize}
\section{Acknowledgements}
The work of JE was partially supported by STFC Grant ST/L000326/1, that of GL by DOE Award DE-SC0010010, and that of KH by DOE Award DE-SC0015973. UH is grateful to the CERN Theoretical Physics Department and the MITP in Mainz for their hospitality and their partial support during the completion of this work.
|
\section{Introduction}
Correlation functions of half-BPS operators
in ${\cal N}=4$ super Yang-Mills (SYM) theory --- in particular of the stress-tensor multiplet ---
have been extensively studied because their strong coupling regime is accessible via the AdS/CFT correspondence. Subsequently, the integrability of the model's spectrum problem was discovered, and in an initially unrelated effort, many results were obtained for scattering amplitudes and a dual set of Wilson loops. These two developments were brought together by the construction of an integrable system \cite{Alday:2009dv,Basso:2013vsa} for the so-called remainder function in amplitudes.
The stress-tensor correlators came back to center stage when it became clear that they can act as generating objects for both scattering amplitudes and the dual polygonal Wilson loops \cite{Alday:2010zy,Eden:2010zz}. It is then a natural question whether these correlators can also
be analyzed from an integrable systems perspective. In \cite{Basso:2015zoa} such ideas have been put forward for general three-point functions in weak coupling perturbation theory.
Unfortunately, comparison to perturbative ``data''
is possible only indirectly because it is a fairly hard task to obtain exact field theory results for non-trivial three-point functions at higher loops. However, three-point couplings for two half-BPS and one twist operator are available from OPE limits of half-BPS four-point functions.
The explicit result for the two-loop four-point stress-tensor correlator from a decade ago \cite{Eden:2000mv,Bianchi:2000hn}
has been a guideline for the construction of the ``hexagon proposal'' of \cite{Basso:2015zoa}, and more recent
work \cite{Eden:2011we,Eden:2012rr,Drummond:2013nda,Chicherin:2015edu} for the three-loop part of the four-point
function has been successfully compared to the hexagon prediction \cite{Eden:2015ija,Basso:2015eqa}; a vital test of the proposal.
At the next order it is not yet clear how to handle the hexagon due to problems with a double pole. On the field
theory side, the integrand of the four-point function of stress-tensor multiplets has been
elaborated in \cite{Eden:2011we,Eden:2012tu,Ambrosio:2013pba,Bourjaily:2015bpz} up to eight loops.
It takes the form of a kinematic factor \cite{Eden:2000bk} times a sum of scalar conformal integrals
in a propagator representation. At four loops (and beyond), the largest part of the integrals has not yet
been evaluated: there are 26 genuine four-loop integrals in the planar part of the correlator
(so the part relevant to integrability), of which five can be related to the ladder with four
rungs by flip identities on subintegrals. One further integral could be solved in \cite{Drummond:2013nda}
as it obeys a Laplace equation, see below. The recent paper \cite{Goncalves:2016vir} considers the leading terms in an asymptotic expansion for the entire set of integrals.
A possible way to exactly evaluate conformal integrals is to follow the idea advocated in \cite{Brown:2008um}
and to try to perform integration over Feynman parameters in an appropriate order.
If it turns out that there is an order in which the dependence of the denominator of integrand
on the Feynman parameters is linear then the whole integral can be solved in terms of
multiple polylogarithms. This strategy was successfully applied for example in
\cite{Panzer:2013cha,Panzer:2014gra,vonManteuffel:2014qoa,Brown:2012ia,Schnetz:2013hqa}
and implemented as the computer code {\tt HyperInt} in \cite{Panzer:2014caa}.
We initiate here the study of the remaining 20 integrals by the method of differential equations, choosing at will
the simplest looking diagram. The goal of this paper is thus to evaluate the coordinate-space Feynman integral
associated with the graph of Fig.~\ref{fig1}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{ci40.eps}
\caption{A four-loop conformal integral.}
\label{fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Although this integral is linearly reducible, in the sense of \cite{Brown:2008um},
and an analytical result can be obtained with {\tt HyperInt} in \cite{Panzer:2014caa},
we are going to evaluate it with differential equations, keeping in mind that many cases in our set of 20 remaining four-loop conformal integrals will be linearly irreducible, although knowledge on polynomial reduction is constantly increasing. Indeed, it is helpful to be able to test our result against a different method.
The previous paper \cite{Drummond:2013nda}
chiefly aimed at three loops, but it also contains the aforementioned application of the Laplace equation to one of the 26 four-loop integrals.
Upon flipping a subintegral, one external vertex is connected to the rest of this diagram only by a single line. Acting by the operator $\Box=\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{\mu}}\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}}$,
where $x$ is the four-coordinate of this vertex,
is described in graph-theoretical language as the contraction of the corresponding line,
so that we easily obtain a differential equation in four dimensions.
In Figure 1, conformal invariance allows us to send the point $x_4$ to infinity to reduce to the Feynman integral whose graph is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{ci4.eps}
\caption{A vertex integral obtained from our four-loop conformal integral.}
\label{fig2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Here two lines are incident to each of the three external vertices so that we cannot
derive a differential equation of the same type as in the previous case.
The approach based on differential equations and integration by parts substantially enlarges any problem, because instead of a single integral one considers a family of master integrals closed under IBP relations.
A four-dimensional version of the method \cite{Caron-Huot:2014lda}
is more economical with respect to the size of the basis of integrals.
However, an obvious complication for our set of conformal integrals is that there are potentially ultraviolet and infrared divergences, and it is not straightforward
to choose a subspace of Feynman integrals which includes a given conformal integral and other finite integrals (both in the ultraviolet and infrared sense) closed under four-dimensional integration by parts relations.
We believe that the strategy outlined in \cite{Caron-Huot:2014lda} can be adjusted to the case
of conformal integrals as well. In this paper, however, we decided to employ the well-known straightforward
technique within dimensional regularization based on $D$-dimensional integration by parts \cite{Chetyrkin:1981qh} and differential equations \cite{Kotikov:1990kg,Kotikov:1991pm,Remiddi:1997ny,Gehrmann:1999as,Gehrmann:2000zt,Gehrmann:2001ck,Henn:2013pwa}.
On the one hand, we certainly make the situation more complicated, because dimensional regularization
means involving a fairly large number of integrals. Indeed, as we will see shortly,
there are 213 master integrals in the corresponding extended family of Feynman integrals;
the integral of Fig.~\ref{fig2} is only one of them.
On the other hand, we obtain the possibility to apply the very well-known powerful machinery of differential equations.
To solve these linear differential equations we follow the strategy suggested by Henn \cite{Henn:2013pwa}
(see also \cite{Henn:2014qga}) and first applied in \cite{Henn:2013tua,Henn:2013woa,Henn:2013nsa}
and then in many other papers. To this end we switch to a uniformly transcendental basis of master integrals.
We obtain a solution to these equations up to weight eight in terms of multiple polylogarithms \cite{Goncharov:1998kja}. An analytical result for the given four-loop conformal integral
considered in four-dimensional space-time is given in terms of harmonic polylogarithms \cite{Remiddi:1999ew} of weight eight.
This result can naturally be represented in terms of single-valued harmonic polylogarithms \cite{BrownSVHPLs}.
As a by-product we obtain analytical results for all the other 212 master integrals considered in $D$
dimensions.
In the next section, we present definitions, describe master integrals and differential equations and
explain how we arrived at a canonical basis, in the sense of \cite{Henn:2013pwa}.
In Section~3, we solve the differential equations in our canonical basis and describe
our results. We discuss perspectives in the conclusions.
\section{Master integrals and differential equations}
Since after going to $D=4-2\epsilon$ dimensions we have to deal with a complete set of integrals closed under
integration by parts relations, we introduce eight more numerators (in the form of propagators) in addition to the ten existing propagators. Thus, we arrive at the following family of integrals
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{a_1,\ldots,a_{18}} &=&
\int\ldots\int \frac{{\rm d}^Dx_5 \, {\rm d}^Dx_6 \, {\rm d}^Dx_7\, {\rm d}^Dx_8}
{[-x_5^2]^{a_1} [-x_6^2]^{a_2} [-(x_1 - x_5)^2]^{a_3}[-(x_1 - x_7)^2]^{a_4}[-(x_2 - x_6)^2]^{a_5}}
\nonumber \\ && \hspace*{-15mm}
\times \frac{
[-(x_2 - x_5)^2]^{-a_{11}}[-(x_1 - x_6)^2]^{-a_{12}}[-(x_2 - x_7)^2]^{-a_{13}}
[-(x_6 - x_7)^2]^{-a_{14}}[-x_7^2]^{-a_{15}}}
{ [-(x_2 - x_8)^2]^{a_6} [-(x_5 - x_6)^2]^{a_7}
[-(x_5 - x_7)^2]^{a_8}}
\nonumber \\ && \hspace*{-15mm}
\times \frac{[-(x_1 - x_8)^2]^{-a_{16}}[-(x_5 - x_8)^2]^{-a_{17}}[-x_8^2]^{-a_{18}}}{[-(x_6 - x_8)^2]^{a_9} [-(x_7 - x_8)^2]^{a_{10}}} \; .
\label{integrals}
\end{eqnarray}
The powers of the propagators (indices) $a_i$ are integer and $a_i\leq 0$ for $i\geq 11$.
Although the situation is of Euclidean type we prefer to deal with propagators in Minkowski space, with
$x^2=x_0^2-\vec{x}^2$ because some computer codes are oriented at Minkowski propagators.
This is a family of vertex Feynman integrals depending on $x_1,x_2$ and $x_3$. In the last formula translation
invariance was used to set $x_3$ to zero. We put $(x_1-x_2)^2=-1$ and introduce standard conformal variables by
\begin{eqnarray}
x_1^2&=&-z\bar{z}\;,
x_2^2=-(1-z)(1-\bar{z})\;.
\label{confvar}
\end{eqnarray}
Using {\tt FIRE} \cite{Smirnov:2008iw,Smirnov:2013dia,Smirnov:2014hma} combined with {\tt LiteRed} \cite{Lee:2012cn}
we reveal 213 master integrals. In particular, there are four master integrals in the top sector, i.e. with all the first ten indices positive. The integral number 210 is the integral $F_{1,\ldots,1,0,\ldots}$ equal to the conformal integral in
Figure~2 which was our starting point. The full list of primary master integrals is present in a file attached to this submission.
The derivation of differential equations for a family of master integrals is a straightforward
procedure. We take derivatives of the master integrals in $z$ and $\bar{z}$ with the help of
the package {\tt LiteRed} \cite{Lee:2012cn} and then apply {\tt FIRE} to reduce the
resulting integrals to master integrals. As a result we obtain two systems of
linear differential equations.
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial}{\partial z} f &=& A_1(z,\bar{z},\epsilon) f\;,
\\
\frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{z}} f &=& A_2(z,\bar{z},\epsilon) f\;,
\end{eqnarray}
where $f$ is the vector of primary master integrals and $A_1,A_2$ are $213\times 213$-matrices.
We follow the strategy suggested in \cite{Henn:2013pwa} and turn to a new basis where the differential equations take the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial}{\partial z} f &=&\epsilon \bar{A}_1(z,\bar{z}) f\;,
\label{canonicalde1}
\\
\frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{z}} f &=& \epsilon \bar{A}_2(z,\bar{z}) f\;,
\label{canonicalde2}
\end{eqnarray}
where the matrices $\bar{A}_1,\bar{A}_2$ are independent of $\epsilon$.
In differential form, we have
\begin{eqnarray} \label{DEdifferentialform}
d\,f(z,\bar{z}) = \epsilon\, ( d \, \tilde{A}(z,\bar{z})) \, f(z,\bar{z}) \,.
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{align
\tilde{A} = \sum_{k} \tilde{A}_{\alpha_k} \, \log(\alpha_{k} ) \,.
\end{align}
The matrices $ \tilde{A}_{\alpha_k}$ are {\it constant} matrices and
the arguments of the logarithms $\alpha_{i}$ ({\it letters}) are
functions of $z,\bar{z}$. One calls this form of differential equations canonical.
In our case, the list of letters is
\begin{equation}
\{z, 1 - z, \bar{z}, 1 - \bar{z}, -z + \bar{z}, 1 - z - \bar{z}, 1 - z \bar{z},
z + \bar{z} - z \bar{z}\}\;.
\label{alphabet}
\end{equation}
In the case of one variable there exists an algorithm \cite{Lee:2014ioa} which provides
the possibility of arriving at a canonical basis\footnote{In fact, some parts of it can be applied in the
case of several variables as well.}.
In our case there are two variables. We followed recipes formulated in \cite{Henn:2013pwa,Henn:2014qga} and successfully applied in \cite{Henn:2013tua,Henn:2013woa,Henn:2013nsa,Henn:2016men} and many other papers. In particular, one tries to choose basis integrals that have constant leading singularities\footnote{Leading singularities are multidimensional residues of the integrand. They determine rational factors in front of the otherwise logarithmic functions in explicit expressions for Feynman integrals.} \cite{Cachazo:2008vp}.
Sometimes we also used small additional rotations of
the basis to 'integrate out' terms with an $\epsilon^0$ dependence, as it was done in many cases, see e.g.
\cite{Henn:2013tua,Henn:2013woa,Henn:2013nsa,Henn:2016men}.
We have implemented these recipes in a code which we successfully applied in the case at hand.
A description of this code will be given in a future publication together with
results on more complicated four-loop conformal integrals. Our canonical basis is presented in an ancillary which is attached to this submission.
\section{Solving canonical differential equations}
We solve the linear system (\ref{canonicalde1},\ref{canonicalde2}), in a power expansion in $\epsilon$ according to the strategy described in detail in \cite{Henn:2014lfa,Caola:2014lpa}. We solve the first linear system, Eq.~(\ref{canonicalde1}),
which results into multiple polylogarithms of the argument $z$, up to unknown functions of $\bar{z}$.
The multiple polylogarithms are defined recursively by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Mult_PolyLog_def}
G(a_1,\ldots,a_n;z)=\,\int_0^z\,\frac{{\rm d} t}{t-a_1}\,G(a_2,\ldots,a_n;t)
\end{equation}
with $a_i, z\in \mathbb{C}$ and $G(z)=1$. In the special case where $a_i=0$ for all i
one has by definition
\begin{equation}
G(0,\ldots,0;x) = \frac{1}{n!}\,\ln^n x \;.
\end{equation}
Then we substitute this solution into the second system, Eq.~(\ref{canonicalde2}), check that the dependence on $z$ drops
out and solve the resulting linear system depending only on $\bar{z}$, up to constants of weights $w\leq 8$.
To fix these $213\times 9$ unknown constants, we match our results for the canonical basis in terms of
multiple polylogarithms to the leading order asymptotic behaviour of the solution of Eqs.~(\ref{canonicalde1},\ref{canonicalde2}) in the Euclidean limit $x_1 \to 0$, or equivalently $z,\bar{z}\to 0$, found by solving the differential equations in the limit.
The corresponding terms of the expansion can be written in the well-known graph-theoretical language -- see, e.g., \cite{Smirnov:2002pj}.
Alternatively, they can be described in the language of expansion by regions \cite{Beneke:1997zp,Smirnov:2002pj}. The crucial point in the matching is that the leading-order contributions are classified according to the power dependence on the small parameter of the limit, i.e. $\sim z \bar{z}$. This parameter enters
with powers of the form $-k\epsilon$ where $k=0,1,2,3$, and this is seen both from the point of
view of differential equations and expansion by regions.
Upon fixing all the constants in our solution we obtain analytic results for all the 213 elements
of the canonical basis. These are presented in two files (for contributions up to
weight 7 and of weight 8, respectively) which can be downloaded from: \\ \url{http://theory.sinp.msu.ru/~smirnov/ci4}
Element number 210 of the basis is
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{210}=\epsilon^8 (z-\bar{z})^2 F_{1,\ldots,1,0,\ldots}\;.
\end{eqnarray}
Its $\epsilon$-expansion starts from order $\epsilon^8$. We obtain the following result for the original conformal
integral
\begin{eqnarray}
&& F_{1,\ldots,1,0,\ldots}= \frac{4}{(z - \bar z)^2} \times \label{our_result_210} \\
\bigl[ && - {\cal L} _{\{3, 5\}} + {\cal L} _{\{5, 3\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 5\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 4\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 4, 3\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 5, 2\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 5\}} + {\cal L} _{\{2, 5, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{2, 5, 1\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{3, 1, 4\}} - {\cal L} _{\{3, 4, 1\}} + {\cal L} _{\{4, 1, 3\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{4, 3, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{4, 3, 1\}} + {\cal L} _{\{5, 1, 2\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{5, 2, 1\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 5\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 2, 4\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 4, 2\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 5, 0\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 5, 1\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 3, 2\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 4, 1\}} + 2 {\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 1, 3\}} \nonumber \\
&& + {\cal L} _{\{1, 4, 2, 1\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 5, 0, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 5, 1, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 5, 1, 1\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 1, 4\}} - {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 2, 3\}} \nonumber \\
&& + {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 4, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{2, 3, 2, 1\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{2, 4, 1, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{2, 4, 1, 1\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{3, 1, 3, 0\}} - 2 {\cal L} _{\{3, 1, 3, 1\}} \nonumber \\
&& + {\cal L} _{\{3, 2, 1, 2\}} + {\cal L} _{\{3, 3, 0, 0\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{3, 3, 1, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{4, 1, 1, 2\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{4, 1, 2, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{4, 2, 1, 0\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{4, 2, 1, 1\}} + {\cal L} _{\{5, 1, 1, 1\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 2, 3\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 3, 2\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 4, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 2, 1, 3\}} \nonumber \\
&& + {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 2, 3, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 2, 3, 1\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 3, 1, 2\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 3, 2, 1\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 4, 0, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 1, 1, 3\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 1, 3, 1\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 3, 1, 1\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 1, 1, 2\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 1, 2, 1\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 2, 1, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 2, 1, 1\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{1, 4, 1, 0, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 4, 1, 1, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 1, 1, 3\}} - {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 1, 3, 1\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 3, 0, 0\}} + 2 {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 3, 1, 0\}} \nonumber \\
&& + {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 3, 1, 1\}} - {\cal L} _{\{2, 2, 1, 2, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{2, 3, 0, 0, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{2, 3, 1, 0, 0\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{2, 3, 1, 1, 1\}} + {\cal L} _{\{3, 1, 1, 1, 2\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{3, 1, 1, 2, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{3, 1, 1, 2, 1\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{3, 1, 2, 0, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{3, 1, 2, 1, 1\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{3, 2, 1, 0, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{3, 2, 1, 1, 0\}} \nonumber \\
&& + {\cal L} _{\{3, 2, 1, 1, 1\}} - {\cal L} _{\{4, 1, 1, 1, 0\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 3, 1, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 3, 0, 0, 0\}} - 2 {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 3, 1, 0, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 2\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 1, 2, 0, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1\}} \nonumber \\
&& + {\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 1, 0, 0, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 1, 1, 1, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 1, 1, 2, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1\}} + {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 1, 2, 0, 0\}} \nonumber \\
&& + {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{2, 2, 1, 0, 0, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{2, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{2, 2, 1, 1, 1, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{3, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0\}} +
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 0, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0\}} \nonumber \\
&& - {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 0, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0\}} \nonumber \\
&& + {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0\}}+ {\cal L} _{\{1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{2, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0\}}
+ {\cal L} _{\{1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0\}} \ \bigr] \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which is, of course, of weight 8. In the last formula $ {\cal L} $ denotes a single-valued harmonic polylogarithm
\begin{equation}
{\cal L} _{\{a_1,\ldots,a_8\}} = (-1)^{\sum a_i} G(a_1, \ldots a_8; z) + \sum c_{ij} \, G(\underline a_i;z) \, G(\underline a_j;\bar z)
\end{equation}
where $\underline a_i \cup \underline a_j$ has length 8 and $\underline a_j$ is never the empty word. The coefficients $c_{ij}$ are polynomials of multiple zeta values such that all branch cuts cancel. The entries in the weight vectors are in the set $\{0,1\}$ and we are using the ``condensed notation" $\ldots 0,0,0,1 \ldots = \ldots 4 \ldots$ etc.
These are the SVHPL's introduced by Brown in \cite{BrownSVHPLs}.
Note that (\ref{our_result_210}) takes a much simpler form after flipping points $x_2 \leftrightarrow x_3$ (i.e. $z \to 1/z, \, \bar z \to 1/\bar z$) followed by $x_1 \leftrightarrow x_2$ (which implies $z \to 1-z, \, \bar z \to 1 - \bar z$): the pure function in the square bracket transforms as
\begin{equation}
[ \ldots ] \to - {\cal L} _{\{3, 5\}} + {\cal L} _{\{5, 3\}} + {\cal L} _{\{2, 5, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{4, 3, 0\}} - {\cal L} _{\{1, 5, 0, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{3, 3, 0, 0\}} -
{\cal L} _{\{2, 3, 0, 0, 0\}} + {\cal L} _{\{1, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0\}}
\end{equation}
We checked our result (\ref{our_result_210}) by a numerical calculation with {\tt FIESTA} \cite{Smirnov:2015mct},
as well as those for some other elements in the basis.
Our result (\ref{our_result_210}) is in agreement with a calculation by different means \cite{Schnetz}
about which we knew in advance and with a calculation\footnote{Thanks to Erik Panzer for the comparison.}
based on {\tt HyperInt} \cite{Panzer:2014caa}.
\section{Conclusions}
To evaluate a four-loop conformal integral we applied powerful techniques designed for
dimensionally regularized Feynman integrals, although we still believe that one can develop an efficient purely four-dimensional
technique to evaluate conformal integrals.
We have also evaluated a family of four-loop vertex master integrals with all the
differences of the external coordinates
off the light-cone. The corresponding dual momentum space Feynman integrals
are vertex integrals with all the end-points off the light-cone.
We believe that this is a first example of a complete calculation of such
a family of vertex integrals at the level of four loops.
We hope to report on further results on four-loop conformal integrals obtained with the help
of $D$-dimensional differential equations.
\vspace{0.2 cm}
{\em Acknowledgments.}
We thank Johannes Henn for various pieces of advice,
Oliver Schnetz for comparison of our results with his which were obtained by an independent technique,
and Johannes Broedel and Claude Duhr for help in performing computer manipulations with
multiple polylogarithms.
We thank Paul Heslop, Vladimir Mitev, Erik Panzer and Oliver Schnetz for careful reading of the
draft of the paper.
VS is grateful to Matthias Staudacher for kind hospitality at the Humboldt University of Berlin
where this project started.
The work of VS was partially supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (Humboldt Forschungspreis).
BE acknowledges support by SFB 647 of the DFG, and the Cluster of Excellence ``Image, Knowledge, Gestaltung'' at Humboldt-University Berlin, funded by the Excellence Initiative and DFG.
\bibliographystyle{JHEP}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quantum information protocols mainly rely on the fact that particle can be in a complex superposition of states. Polarization state of photons is used extensively to implement many quantum protocols. The polarization of a photon spans in a two dimensional Hilbert space. So the polarization state of a photon is considered as a qubit. Also, one can generate photons entangled in polarization using spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC) of a laser beam. All four maximally entangled states, Bell states, can be achieved in the polarization degree of freedom (DOF).
Orbital angular momentum (OAM) is another degree of freedom of photon that can be used in quantum protocols along with polarization so that the information carried per photon can be increased \cite{torres}. OAM entanglement can also be achieved by SPDC and many quantum protocols were demonstrated using the same \cite{Mair2001,PhysRevLett.91.227902, PhysRevA.72.052114, PhysRevLett.89.240401,PhysRevA.67.052313, Dada2011, Malik2016, PhysRevA.88.032305}. The basis states of OAM span an infinite dimensional Hilbert space. This higher dimensionality is really useful for the denser coding of information in single photons \cite{PhysRevA.86.032334}. One can achieve OAM entanglement in higher dimensions which can be used for many quantum protocols. However, we often need to use two dimensional OAM states for the ease of measurements. Also for many protocols using hybrid-entanglement, entanglement between polarization and OAM of photons, we need the 2 dimensional OAM sub-space\cite{Nagali:10, PhysRevA.80.042322}.
Experimentally the restriction of OAM states to 2D is done by post selection using diffractive holograms and a single mode fibre \cite{Mair2001}. This results in the loss of photons which reduces efficiency of the protocol. We investigate the possibility of using a 2D OAM space without any photon loss. This is possible since any infinite set of integers can be grouped into two natural categories: even and odd. In the case of OAM, this becomes possible because of an effective even/odd OAM sorter, an optical set up designed to separate even and odd states of OAM. However, the even/odd states of OAM have not been extensively explored for quantum information tasks. For that, we need to develop projective measurement in even/odd basis. We propose simple interferometric method for the projective measurements.
We demonstrate the tomography of the even/odd states with projective measurement in Pauli's operator bases. We also describe hyper-entanglement and hybrid-entanglement with polarization as another DOF and propose interferometric set up for the spin orbit Bell state analysis (SOBA). Measurements for checking the Bell's inequality in even/odd OAM entanglement is discussed for the first time. This can be applied in entanglement based cryptographic protocol. It is theoretically impossible to distinguish all Bell states using local operations and classical communications (LOCC) \cite{Sibasish}. However, with hyper-entanglement and SOBA, one can distinguish all the Bell states of polarization using LOCC. Using the same, we describe efficient super dense coding.
\section{From Infinite Dimensional OAM Space to Two Dimensional Even/odd OAM Space}
The general infinite dimensional OAM space is spanned by the OAM values from $-\infty, .. -1,0,+1,... +\infty$. A general state in this infinite dimensional basis can be written as
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi\rangle = \sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{m} \vert m\rangle \label{1}
\end{equation}
with $\sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty}\vert c_m\vert^2 =1$. However, many quantum experiments were realized using the OAM qubits in the reduced Hilbert space \{$m,-m$\}. In such cases OAM encoding or measurements were performed using diffraction through holograms and the mode filtering. Basically here one neglects the photons generated with OAM $l\neq m,-m$ which result in photon loss. Moreover, the efficiency of mode filtering is also a limiting factor for quantum experiments with OAM. Thus to make an equivalent qubit state, Eq. \ref{1} can be re written as
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi\rangle = \sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle + c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle\right).\label{1a}
\end{equation}
We define the appropriate operators in order to perform the measurements in the even/odd basis. The general projection operator is
\begin{equation}
P(\theta,\phi) =\sum\limits_k \left(\text{cos}(\theta)\vert 2k\rangle+e^{i\phi}\text{sin}(\theta)\vert2k+1\rangle\right)\left(\text{cos}(\theta)\langle2k\vert+e^{-i\phi}\text{sin}(\theta)\langle 2k+1\vert\right).\label{1b}
\end{equation}
With these projective measurements we can consider the whole OAM state as a qubit state and use for quantum protocols.
\\
In the case of OAM entanglement, when we work with \{$m,-m$\} basis, photons corresponding to other modes are lost in the measurement. For example, when we pump a non-linear crystal for SPDC using a Gaussian beam, the signal and idler photons are entangled in OAM. The two photon state is given as
\begin{equation}
\vert\Psi\rangle_{12} =c_0 \vert 0\rangle\vert 0\rangle + \sum_{m=1}^{+\infty} c_{m} \left( \vert m\rangle\vert -m\rangle+\vert -m\rangle\vert m\rangle \right)\label{2}
\end{equation}
with $\sum_{m=0}^{+\infty} \vert c_{m}\vert ^2 =1$
In many of the OAM entanglement experiments, this state is projected in $\{+1,-1\}$ basis for treating it as a two qubit entangled state. In such cases, the probability of getting photons entangled in $\{+1,-1\}$ OAM states is $\vert c_1\vert ^2 \ll 1$. Thus most of the down converted photons remain unused.
For even/odd OAM entanglement, we consider the parametric down conversion of an optical vortex of order 1 and having vertical polarization in a type I second order non-linear crystal. The state corresponding to the pair of photons produced by SPDC of this beam is given by
\begin{equation}
\vert\Psi\rangle_{12} = \sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_m \vert m\rangle_1 \vert 1-m \rangle_2 \otimes \vert H\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_2\label{5}
\end{equation}
By grouping all even and odd OAM states, one can rewrite the expression for the OAM state in Eq. \ref{5} as
\begin{equation}
\sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{m} (\vert m\rangle_1 \vert 1-m \rangle_2) \nonumber
= \sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{2k} (\vert 2k\rangle_1 \vert 1-2k \rangle_2) +
\sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{1-2k} (\vert 1-2k\rangle_1 \vert 2k \rangle_2).\label{6}
\end{equation}
Thus
\begin{equation}
\vert\Psi\rangle_{12} =\left(\sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{2k} (\vert 2k\rangle_1 \vert 1-2k \rangle_2) +
\sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{1-2k} (\vert 1-2k\rangle_1 \vert 2k \rangle_2)\right)\otimes \vert H\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_2\label{6a}
\end{equation}
From the conservation of OAM, we have
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty} (c_{2k})^2 = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty} (c_{1-2k})^2= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty} (c_{m})^2 = \frac{1}{2}.\label{6b}
\end{equation}
Thus one can arrive at an operational expression for even/odd OAM entanglement as
\begin{equation}
\vert\Psi\rangle_{12} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\vert E\rangle_1 \vert O \rangle_2 +\vert O\rangle_1 \vert E \rangle_2 \right) \otimes \vert H\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_2. \label{7}
\end{equation}
Here $\vert E\rangle$ and $\vert O\rangle$ correspond to the even/odd states on detection. Thus, we get a two qubit entanglement in OAM without loosing any photons.
\section{State tomography for OAM states in even/odd basis}\label{sc.2}
Similar to polarization, we need to find the Stokes vector for the super position state given in Eq. \ref{1a} by projective operators which are
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
P_0 &=\sum_k (\vert 2k\rangle\langle 2k\vert+\vert 2k+1\rangle\langle 2k+1\vert)\\
P_1&=\sum_k (\vert 2k\rangle\langle 2k\vert-\vert 2k+1\rangle\langle 2k+1\vert)\\
P_2&=\sum_k (\vert 2k\rangle\langle 2k+1\vert+\vert 2k+1\rangle\langle 2k\vert)\\
P_3&=\sum_k i(\vert 2k\rangle\langle 2k+1\vert-\vert 2k+1\rangle\langle 2k\vert)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Now, we define the Stokes parameters as
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
s_0 &= \langle \psi\vert P_0\vert\psi\rangle\equiv \sum_k \left(c_{2k}c_{2k}^*+ c_{2k+1}c_{2k+1}^*\right) \\
s_1 &= \langle \psi\vert P_1\vert\psi\rangle \equiv \sum_k \left(c_{2k}c_{2k}^*-c_{2k+1}c_{2k+1}^*\right)\\
s_2 &= \langle \psi\vert P_2\vert\psi\rangle \equiv \sum_k \left(c_{2k}^* c_{2k+1}+ c_{2k}c_{2k+1}^*\right) \\
s_3 &= \langle \psi\vert P_3\vert\psi\rangle\equiv i\sum_k \left(c_{2k}^* c_{2k+1}- c_{2k}c_{2k+1}^*\right)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Measurements in Linear Even/odd Basis for $s_0$ and $s_1$}
We consider an OAM sorter \cite{Leach, PhysRevLett.92.013601, 2040-8986-18-5-054015} for the measurement of $s_0$ and $s_1$. The setup is given in Fig.~\ref{fg.1}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.5]{sort11.pdf}
\caption{Even/odd OAM sorter}\label{fg.1}
\end{figure}
Consider a general even/odd OAM superposition state given in Eq.~\ref{1a}. Applying beam splitter operation, the state evolves through two arms of the interferometer with a $\frac{\pi}{2}$ phase. In the reflected arm, a dove prism is inserted which is rotated by an angle $ \frac{\alpha}{2}$. The dove prism angle can be calibrated using an Hermite Gaussian beam $HG_{01}$ passing through it, as the rotation of the dove prism will result in rotation of the two lobes. Dove prism introduces an OAM dependent phase $\text{exp}(im\alpha)$, where $m$ correspond to OAM state $\vert m\rangle$. When $\alpha = \pi$, the even states will acquire a phase of $\text{exp}(i2k\pi)$ which leaves the state unchanged. However, odd states acquire a phase of $\text{exp}(i(2k+1)\pi)$ which brings a negative sign to all odd states. Thus the state $\vert\psi_2\rangle = \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle + c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle\right)$ transforms to $\vert\psi_2\rangle' = \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle - c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle\right)$. The state $\vert\psi_1\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle + c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle\right)$ of the other arm remains unchanged since the dove prism angle is $0^{\circ}$. These states combines at the second beam splitter. The phase due to reflections on both the beams are same and therefore neglected in the calculation. One port of the second beam splitter gives
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi_3\rangle = \frac{i}{2}\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle - c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle\right)+\frac{i}{2}\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle + c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle\right) = i\sum\limits_k c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle
\end{equation}
Thus the detection (refer Fig.~\ref{fg.1}) yields
\begin{equation}
I_1 = \sum\limits_k \vert c_{2k}\vert^2
\end{equation}
Similarly the other port gives
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\vert\psi_4\rangle &= \frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_k \left( -c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle + c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle\right)+\frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle + c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle\right)\\ &= \sum\limits_k c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
which gives $I_2 = \sum\limits_k \vert c_{2k+1}\vert^2$ on detection (refer Fig.~\ref{fg.1}) . Thus we can calculate the stokes parameters $s_0= I_1+I_2$ and $s_1=I_1-I_2$ from this setup.
\subsection{Measurements in Diagonal Basis for the Estimation of $s_2$}
For measuring $s_2$, a modified Mach-Zhender interferometer is introduced which contains a spiral phase plate in one arm and the first beam splitter is replaced by an OAM sorter. The setup is given in Fig.~\ref{fg.2}. As described earlier, a general OAM state $\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle + c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle\right)$ is split into $i\sum\limits_k c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle $ and $ \sum\limits_k c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle $ in both ports. A spiral phase plate (SPP) of order $m=\pm1$ is introduced in one arm of the interferometer. This will act as a ladder operator in $\{..\vert -m\rangle ..,\vert -1\rangle,\vert 0\rangle,\vert 1\rangle,..,\vert m\rangle\} $ basis. However in the even/odd basis, SPP with $m=\pm1$ works as NOT gate. So the state $ \sum\limits_k c_{2k+1}\vert 2k+1\rangle $ will convert to $ \sum\limits_k c_{2k+1}\vert 2k\rangle $ . This is combined with state $i\sum\limits_k c_{2k}\vert 2k\rangle $ on another 50:50 beam splitter. One port of the beam splitter yields the state
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.5]{S_2.pdf}
\caption{Setup for measuring stoke's parameter $s_2$}\label{fg.2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi_3\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k+1}-c_{2k}\right)\vert 2k\rangle
\end{equation}
On detection (refer Fig.~\ref{fg.2}) it gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber I_1 &=& \vert \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k+1}-c_{2k}\right)\vert 2k\rangle \vert ^2\\ &=& \nonumber \frac{1}{2}\left(\sum\limits_l \left( c_{2l+1}^*-c_{2l}^*\right)\langle 2l\vert\right).\left( \sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k+1}-c_{2k}\right)\vert 2k\rangle\right) \\
\nonumber &=&\frac{1}{2} \sum\limits_{k,l} \left( c_{2l+1}^*-c_{2l}^*\right)\left( c_{2k+1}-c_{2k}\right)\langle 2l\vert 2k\rangle\\
\nonumber &=& \frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{k} \left( c_{2k+1}^*-c_{2k}^*\right)\left( c_{2k+1}-c_{2k}\right) \\
I_1= \frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{k} ( c_{2k+1}^*c_{2k+1}&-& c_{2k}^*c_{2k+1}-c_{2k}c_{2k+1}^*+c_{2k}^*c_{2k})
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly the other port of the BS (refer Fig.~\ref{fg.2}) gives
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi_4\rangle = \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\sum\limits_k \left( c_{2k+1}+c_{2k}\right)\vert 2k\rangle
\end{equation}
which gives
\begin{equation}
I_2= \frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{k} ( c_{2k+1}^*c_{2k+1} + c_{2k}^*c_{2k+1} +c_{2k}c_{2k+1}^*+c_{2k}^*c_{2k})
\end{equation}
Thus we obtain Stokes parameter $s_2$ by simply subtracting the intensities as
\begin{equation}
I_2-I_1=\sum\limits_{k} ( c_{2k}c_{2k+1}^*+c_{2k}^*c_{2k+1}) = s_2.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Measurement in Circular Basis for the Estimation of $s_3$}
For the measurement of $s_3$, an extra phase delay of $\text{exp}(i\pi/2) $ is inserted after the spiral phase plate as shown in Fig.~\ref{fg.2a}. Thus the states combining at the BS are $ ic_2\vert E\rangle $ and $ ic_1\vert E\rangle $. In this case one port of the BS (refer Fig.~\ref{fg.2a}) gives
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi_3\vert = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sum\limits_k \left( ic_{2k+1}-c_{2k}\right)\vert 2k\rangle
\end{equation}
so that
\begin{equation}
I_1=\frac{1}{2} \sum\limits_{k} ( c_{2k+1}^*c_{2k+1} - i c_{2k}^*c_{2k+1} +ic_{2k}c_{2k+1}^*+c_{2k}^*c_{2k})
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.5]{S_3.pdf}
\caption{Setup for measuring stoke's parameter $s_3$. PD - phase delay}\label{fg.2a}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The other port of the BS (refer Fig.~\ref{fg.2a}) gives
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi_4\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sum\limits_k \left( ic_{2k}-c_{2k+1}\right)\vert 2k\rangle
\end{equation}
which gives
\begin{equation}
I_2= \frac{1}{2}\sum\limits_{k} ( c_{2k+1}^*c_{2k+1} + i c_{2k}^*c_{2k+1} -ic_{2k}c_{2k+1}^*+c_{2k}^*c_{2k})
\end{equation}
To obtain $s_3$ the intensities are subtracted as
\begin{equation}
I_2-I_1=i\sum\limits_{k} ( c_{2k}c_{2k+1}^*-c_{2k}^*c_{2k+1}) = s_3.
\end{equation}
Thus, once can do the complete state tomography in even/odd OAM states.
\subsection{General Linear Basis Projection }\label{sc.21}
A general linear projection is essential for the measurement of Bell's inequality and quantum cryptography. The general linear projections are given as
\begin{align}
\nonumber P_{\theta} &= \sum\limits_{k}(\text{cos}^2(\theta) \vert 2k \rangle\langle 2k\vert+ \text{sin}(\theta)\text{cos}(\theta)\vert 2k \rangle\langle 2k+1\vert+ \\ & \ \ \ \ \ \text{sin}(\theta)\text{cos}(\theta)\vert 2k+1 \rangle\langle 2k\vert+ \text{sin}^2(\theta) \vert 2k+1\rangle\langle 2k+1\vert ) \label{8}\\
\nonumber P_{\theta^{\perp}} &=\sum\limits_{k}(\text{cos}^2(\theta) \vert 2k \rangle\langle 2k\vert- \text{sin}(\theta)\text{cos}(\theta)\vert 2k \rangle\langle 2k+1\vert- \\ & \ \ \ \ \ \text{sin}(\theta)\text{cos}(\theta)\vert 2k+1 \rangle\langle 2k\vert+ \text{sin}^2(\theta) \vert 2k+1\rangle\langle 2k+1\vert ) \label{9}
\end{align}
These operators acting on $\vert \psi\rangle$ will give
\begin{align}
C(\theta) &= \langle\psi\vert P_{\theta}\vert\psi\rangle = \sum\limits_{k}\vert (\text{cos}(\theta)c_{2k}+\text{sin}(\theta)c_{2k+1})\vert^2 \label{10}\\
C(\theta^\perp) &= \langle\psi\vert P_{\theta^{\perp}}\vert\psi\rangle = \sum\limits_{k} \vert(\text{sin}(\theta)c_{2k}-\text{cos}(\theta)c_{2k+1})\vert^2 \label{11 }
\end{align}
Consider the setup given in Fig. \ref{fg.2}. In the case of measurement of $s_2$ we used a 50:50 beam splitter. Now consider a beam splitter with transmission coefficient $\text{cos}(\theta)$ and reflection coefficient $\text{sin}(\theta)$ instead of 50:50 beam splitter. Thus the states after the beam splitter becomes,
\begin{align}
\psi_4 &= \sum\limits_{k} (\text{cos}(\theta)c_{2k}+\text{sin}(\theta)c_{2k+1})\vert 2k\rangle \\\
\psi_5 &= i\sum\limits_{k} (\text{sin}(\theta)c_{2k}-\text{cos}(\theta)c_{2k+1}\vert 2k\rangle
\end{align}
On detection, we get
\begin{align}
I_1 & = \sum\limits_{k}\vert (\text{cos}(\theta)c_{2k}+\text{sin}(\theta)c_{2k+1})\vert^2 \\
I_2 &= \sum\limits_{k} \vert(\text{sin}(\theta)c_{2k}-\text{cos}(\theta)c_{2k+1})\vert^2
\end{align}
Thus we achieve the general linear projections on a given state.
Alternatively, one can also implement the same measurement with polarization as an additional degree of freedom. We consider the initial photons with OAM state $\psi_1$ as horizontally polarized. In both arms of the interferometer, a half wave plates at angle $\theta/2$ is introduced which will convert the horizontal polarization to any other linear polarization along $\hat{\theta}$. The beam splitter is replaced by a polarizing beam splitter. It will transmit horizontal polarization and reflect vertical polarization. Thus by changing the HWP's angle $(\theta/2)$ we can tune the transmission and reflection function as $\text{sin}(\theta)$ and $ \text{cos}(\theta) $. The polarization assisted projection is easy to implement. However, when we consider OAM and polarization together for quantum protocols, for example hyper-entanglement, this cannot be used since the polarization operations affect the entanglement.
\section{Hyper-entanglement, hybrid entanglement and SOBA}
Along with the OAM entanglement in even/odd states one can have polarization entanglement between the two photons \cite{PhysRevLett.95.260501}. For this, one needs to use a cascaded type I non linear crystals with optics axis perpendicular to each other for the parametric down conversion of a light beam of azimuthal index 1. The generated state will be
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi\rangle_{12} = \frac{1}{2}\left(\vert H\rangle_{1} \vert H \rangle_{2}+\vert V\rangle_{1} \vert V\rangle_{2} \right)\otimes\left(\vert E \rangle_{1} \vert O\rangle_{2}+\vert O \rangle_{1} \vert E\rangle_{2}\right)
\end{equation}
This state has many applications including hyper entangled assisted Bell state analysis (HBSA) and super dense coding. Note that in hyper-entanglement, the polarization and OAM states are always separable. In other words, there is no entanglement between polarization and OAM.
Hybrid entanglement, as the name suggests, is the entanglement between two independent properties of light. The state of a single particle or two particles in two degrees of freedom are non-separable in the case of hybrid entanglement. In the biphoton systems, the polarization of one photon and orbital angular momentum of other, can be made non-separable. To generate this state, we consider two photons entangled in OAM even/odd states but separable in polarization, Eq. \ref{7}. We consider a modified OAM controlled polarization $C_{NOT}$ gate ($^oC_p$) \cite{perumangatt2} with an extra spiral phase plate as given in Fig. \ref{fg.3}. This $C_{NOT}$ gate will do a NOT operation on both control and target.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.5]{CNOT.pdf}\label{fg.3}
\caption{Modified OAM controlled polarization $C_{NOT}$ gate. }
\end{figure}
This modified $^oC_p$ is introduced to the first photon of the state, given in Eq. \ref{5}. Thus the two photon state will become
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi\rangle_{HE} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left(\vert H\rangle_1\vert O\rangle_2+\vert V\rangle_1\vert E\rangle_2\right)\vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_2
\end{equation}
This is an interesting case, since there is no OAM-OAM entanglement or polarization polarization entanglement between the photons. However, the polarization state of photon 1 and OAM state of photon 2 are non-separable. With this state one can steer the OAM state of photon 2 by polarization measurements in photon 1.
Single photon non-separable state also considered as a hybrid entangled state is the one in which the OAM and polarization of a single photon are inseparable. However, this won't give rise to any non-local effects and hence there are objections to call such states as entangled. We consider the state given in Eq. \ref{5} where state is post selected to state $\vert O\rangle_2\vert H\rangle_2$
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi\rangle'_1=\vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1.
\end{equation}
Here $\vert\psi\rangle'$ corresponds to the state of photon 1 upon the post selection of photon 2 to the state $\vert O\rangle_2\vert H\rangle_2$. Now, we apply a Hadamard operation in polarization using a half wave plate at $22.5^{\circ}$ and a polarization controlled OAM $C_{NOT}$ gate $^pC_o$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\vert\psi\rangle'_1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1+\vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1\right).
\end{equation}
Here the polarization and OAM of a single photon are non-separable. One can construct a complete Bell basis as
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\psi^{+} &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1+\vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1\right)\label{17} \\
\psi^{-} &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1-\vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1\right) \\
\phi^{+} &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\vert O\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1+\vert E\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1\right) \\
\phi^{-} &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\vert O\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1-\vert E\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1\right)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
A spin orbit Bell state analyser (SOBA) is a set up which distinguishes all the single photon spin orbit Bell states given above. Fig. \ref{fg.4} describes the proposed setup for the SOBA. Consider the above four Bell states as inputs of the SOBA set up. Initially an even/odd sorter sorts according to the OAM state. Lets first consider $\vert\psi^{\pm}\rangle$ as the input states. The
port 1 \& 2 will be
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\text{port 1} \rightarrow \pm \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1, \
\text{port 2} \rightarrow \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}} \vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
A half wave plate is introduced in port 2 which will convert $\vert H\rangle_1$ to $\vert V\rangle_1$ which will be the input of PBS 2. The PBS 2 will reflect the state since it is vertically polarized. In the reflected port a spiral phase plate of order 1 is introduced which will convert $\vert E\rangle_1$ to $\vert O\rangle_1$. At the same time, PBS 1 reflects the state in port 1. Thus at input ports 3 and 4 of the BS 1 we get
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\text{port 3} \rightarrow \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}& \vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1\\
\text{port 4} \rightarrow \mp \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} & \vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Two output ports of the BS 1 gives
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\psi_a &= -\frac{1}{2}(\vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1 \pm \vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1)\\
\psi_b &= i\frac{1}{2}(\vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1 \mp \vert O\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
So $\vert\psi^{+}\rangle$ will go to detector $D_1$ and $\vert\psi^{-}\rangle$ will go to detector $D_2$.
Now if the input states are $\vert\phi^{\pm}\rangle$ ports 1 and 2 will have states
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\text{port 1} \rightarrow \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \vert O\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1
\text{port 2} \rightarrow \pm \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}} \vert E\rangle_1\vert V\rangle_1
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In port 2 after the HWP the polarization will convert to $\vert H\rangle_1$, and in both ports the state will be transmitted by the PBS1 and PBS2. In port 2, after PBS2, a SPP is inserted. Hence at the input ports 5 and 6 of the BS 2 the states will be
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\text{port 5} \rightarrow \pm \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}& \vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1\\
\text{port 6} \rightarrow \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} & \vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Now two output ports of the BS 2 gives
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\psi_c &= -\frac{1}{2}(\vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1 \mp \vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1)\\
\psi_d &= \frac{1}{2}(\vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1 \pm \vert E\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_1)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
So $\vert\phi^{-}\rangle$ will go to detector $D_3$ and $\vert\phi^{+}\rangle$ will go to detector $D_4$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.5]{SOBANew.pdf}
\caption{Set up for spin orbit Bell state analysis \label{fg.4} }
\end{figure}
Hence we can have complete deterministic unambiguous Bell state analysis.
\section{Quantum Information Protocols Using Even/odd OAM States}
Our final aim is to implement quantum information protocols using even/odd state of OAM. This could increase the efficiency of quantum communication with photons since we can have a high bright source of OAM entanglement equivalent to the polarization entanglement. We show that the even/odd entangled states violate Bell's inequality which has direct application in Ekert protocol. With hyper-entanglement we show it can be used in superdense coding.
\subsection{Violation of Bell's Inequality and Ekert Protocol}
As explained in section \ref{sc.21}, one can do projections to general linear states. Now consider a two photon state entangled in even/odd OAM state produced by the parametric down conversion of an optical vortex of order one \cite{PhysRevA.69.023811, Khoury2011}. The state is given as
\begin{equation}
\vert\Psi\rangle_{12} =\left(\sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{2k} (\vert 2k\rangle_1 \vert 1-2k \rangle_2) +
\sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{1-2k} (\vert 1-2k\rangle_1 \vert 2k \rangle_2)\right)\otimes \vert H\rangle_1\vert H\rangle_2
\end{equation}
Consider the photon 1 with Alice and photon 2 with Bob. Alice does $P_{\theta}$ and $ P_{\theta^\perp}$ measurements on her photon and Bob does $P_{\chi}$ and $ P_{\chi^\perp}$ measurements on his photon. Eq. \ref{8} and \ref{9} describes $\vert\theta\rangle, \vert\theta^\perp\rangle$ and $\vert\chi\rangle, \vert\chi^\perp\rangle$ with replacing $\theta$ by $\chi$. The measurement is given in section \ref{sc.21}, $\theta$ and $\chi$ correspond to $\text{sin}^{-1}(t)$ where $ t$ is the transmissivity of the beam splitter. In the case of polarization assisted projection as given in Fig. \ref{fg.5}, $\theta$ and $\chi$ correspond to twice of the angle of the HWPs .
Instead of intensity/photon counting output, which is described in \ref{sc.21}, here we consider the coincidence between Alice's and Bob's detectors.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{bell.pdf}
\caption{Setup for checking Bell's inequality and quantum cryptography. M1 and M2 are two measurements explained in Section \ref{sc.21} with angles $\theta$ and $\chi$ respectively. }\label{fg.5}
\end{figure}
Coincidence between $D_1$ and $D_3$ will give the measurement result $_{12}\langle\Psi\vert P_{\theta}\otimes P_{\chi}\vert\Psi\rangle_{12}$, where $P_{\theta}$ and $P_{\chi}$ are defined by Eq. \ref{9} with angle $\theta$ and $\chi$ that act on photon 1 and 2 respectively.
\begin{equation}
D_{13} = c(\theta,\chi) = {}_{12}\langle\Psi\vert P_{\theta}\otimes P_{\chi}\vert\Psi\rangle_{12}
\end{equation}
Similarly
\begin{align}
D_{14} =& c(\theta,\chi_{\perp}) = _{12}\langle\Psi\vert P_{\theta}\otimes P_{\chi^{\perp}}\vert\Psi\rangle_{12}\\
D_{23} =& c(\theta_{\perp},\chi) = _{12}\langle\Psi\vert P_{\theta^{\perp}}\otimes P_{\chi}\vert\Psi\rangle_{12}\\
D_{23} =& c(\theta_{\perp},\chi_{\perp}) = _{12}\langle\Psi\vert P_{\theta^{\perp}}\otimes P_{\chi^{\perp}}\vert\Psi\rangle_{12}
\end{align}
The operator is defined as
\begin{align}
\nonumber P_{\theta}\otimes P_{\chi} &\equiv \sum\limits_{k}(\text{cos}^2(\theta) \vert 2k \rangle\langle 2k\vert+ \text{sin}(\theta)\text{cos}(\theta)\vert 2k \rangle\langle 1-2k\vert+ \\ &\nonumber \ \ \ \ \ \text{sin}(\theta)\text{cos}(\theta)\vert 1-2k \rangle\langle 2k\vert + \text{sin}^2(\theta) \vert 1-2k\rangle\langle 1-2k\vert )\otimes \\ \nonumber & \sum\limits_{l}(\text{cos}^2(\chi) \vert 2l \rangle\langle 2l\vert+ \text{sin}(\chi)\text{cos}(\chi)\vert 2l \rangle\langle 1-2l\vert+ \\ & \ \ \ \ \ \text{sin}(\chi)\text{cos}(\chi)\vert 1-2l \rangle\langle 2l\vert+ \text{sin}^2(\chi) \vert 1-2l\rangle\langle 1-2l\vert )
\end{align}
Operating this on Eq. \ref{6a}
\begin{align}
\nonumber {}_{12}\langle \Psi\vert P_{\theta}\otimes P_{\chi}\vert\psi\rangle_{12} = & \frac{1}{2} \left(\sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{2m}^* (_1\langle 2m\vert _2\langle 1-2m \vert) +
\sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{1-2m}^* (_1\langle 1-2m\vert _2\langle 2m \vert)\right)\\ & P_{\theta}\otimes P_{\chi} \left(\sum_{n=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{2n} (\vert 2n\rangle_1 \vert 1-2n \rangle_2) +
\sum_{n=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{1-2n} (\vert 1-2n\rangle_1 \vert 2n \rangle_2)\right)
\end{align}
gives
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
C(\theta,\chi) = \sum_{m,n,k,l= -\infty}^{+\infty}\bigg [ & \text{cos}^2(\theta)\text{sin}^2(\chi)c_{2m}^*c_{1-2n}\langle 2m\vert 2k\rangle \langle 2k\vert 2n\rangle \langle 1-2m\vert 1-2l\rangle \\ & \langle 1-2l\vert 1-2n\rangle+ \text{cos}(\theta)\text{sin}(\theta)\text{cos}(\chi)\text{sin}(\chi)c_{2m}^*c_{2n} \langle 2m\vert 2k\rangle \\ & \langle 1-2k\vert 1-2n\rangle \langle 1-2m\vert 1-2l\rangle\langle 2l\vert 2n\rangle+
\text{cos}(\theta)\text{sin}(\theta)\\ & \text{cos}(\chi)\text{sin}(\chi)c_{1-2m}^*c_{2n}\langle 1-2m\vert 1-2k\rangle\langle 2k\vert 2n\rangle\langle 2m\vert 2l\rangle\\ &\langle 1-2l\vert 1-2n\rangle+
c_{1-2m}^*c_{1-2n} \text{sin}^2(\theta)\text{cos}^2(\chi)\langle 1-2m\vert 1-2k\rangle \\ &\langle 1-2k\vert 1-2n\rangle \langle 2m\vert 2l\rangle\langle 2l\vert 2n\rangle \bigg ]
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Now using the inner product
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
C(\theta,\chi) = \sum_{k= -\infty}^{+\infty}\bigg [ & c_{2k}^*c_{1-2k} \text{cos}^2(\theta)\text{sin}^2(\chi)+ \\ & \text{cos}(\theta)\text{sin}(\theta)\text{cos}(\chi)\text{sin}(\chi)(c_{2k}^*c_{2k} + c_{1-2k}^*c_{2k})+\\ &
c_{1-2k}^*c_{1-2k} \text{sin}^2(\theta)\text{cos}^2(\chi) \bigg ]\label{23}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
With Eq.\ref{6b} we can argue that $\vert c_{2k}\vert = \vert c_{1-2k}\vert $. Also we consider there is no phase between the states $\vert 2k\rangle_1 \vert 1-2k \rangle_2 $ and $\vert 1-2k\rangle_1 \vert 2k \rangle_2$. Thus the joint probability reduces to
\begin{align}
C(\theta,\chi) =& \sum_{k= -\infty}^{+\infty} \vert c_{2k}\vert^2 [ \text{cos}^2(\theta)\text{sin}^2(\chi)+2\text{cos}(\theta)\text{sin}(\theta)\text{cos}(\chi)\text{sin}(\chi)+ \text{sin}^2(\theta)\text{cos}^2(\chi) ] \nonumber\\
=& \text{cos}^2(\theta-\chi). \label{23a}
\end{align}
We can have a parameter
\begin{equation}
E(\theta,\chi) =\frac{C(\theta,\chi)+C(\theta_{\perp},\chi_{\perp})-C(\theta_{\perp},\chi)-C(\theta,\chi_{\perp})}{C(\theta,\chi)+C(\theta_{\perp},\chi_{\perp})+C(\theta_{\perp},\chi)+C(\theta,\chi_{\perp})}
\end{equation}
and the Bell's inequality \cite{chsh} can be calculated as
\begin{equation}
B(\theta,\theta ',\chi,\chi ') = \vert E(\theta,\chi)-E(\theta,\chi ')+ E(\theta ',\chi)+E(\theta ',\chi ')\vert \leq 2 \label{12}
\end{equation}
With $\theta =0^{\circ}, \chi =22.5^{\circ} $ in Eq. \ref{23a} give a maximum Bell's inequality violation of $2\sqrt{2}$. One can check the Bell inequality for a two photon state in even/odd OAM basis with the setup given in Fig. \ref{fg.5}. Thus Ekert protocol \cite{Ekert} can be implemented by choosing proper measurement settings.
\subsection{Superdense coding}
In super dense coding, Alice and Bob share entangled pair of photons. Alice encodes two bits of classical information by applying unitary operation on her entangled photon changing the combined state from one Bell state to another. Thus, by acting on one particle she can encode 2 bits of information. Alice sends her entangled particle to Bob and he does a complete Bell state analysis on both the photons, which discriminate all the Bell states. But, the efficiency of the experimental Bell state analysis is very low. In polarization entanglement, all the Bell states has not been distinguished efficiently and deterministically. At the same time if we use entanglement in another degree of freedom, one can distinguish all the Bell states. This is known as hyper-entanglement assisted Bell state analysis (HBSA) \cite{wei, Barreiro2008}.
We describe hyper-entanglement assisted super dense coding protocol with even/odd OAM entanglement. Consider a two photon state which is entangled both in polarization and OAM.
\begin{equation}
\vert \Psi\rangle_{12} = \vert \beta^p\rangle\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle
\end{equation}
where $\vert \beta^p\rangle$ is one of the polarization Bell states and
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\vert \Psi^o\rangle =& \sum_{k=-\infty}^{+\infty} c_{k} (\vert 2k\rangle_1 \vert 1-2k \rangle_2 +
\vert 2k+1\rangle_1 \vert -2k \rangle_2)\\
\equiv & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\vert E\rangle_1 \vert O \rangle_2 +\vert O\rangle_1 \vert E \rangle_2 \right)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Alice encodes her two bits of information in the polarization Bell states. The final states will be
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\vert \Psi^p\rangle^{\pm}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle =& \frac{1}{{2}}\left(\vert H\rangle_1 \vert V \rangle_2 \pm \vert V\rangle_1 \vert H \rangle_2 \right)\otimes\left(\vert E\rangle_1 \vert O \rangle_2 +\vert O\rangle_1 \vert E \rangle_2 \right),\\
\vert \Phi^p\rangle^{\pm}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle =& \frac{1}{{2}}\left(\vert H\rangle_1 \vert H \rangle_2 \pm \vert V\rangle_1 \vert V \rangle_2 \right)\otimes\left(\vert E\rangle_1 \vert O \rangle_2 +\vert O\rangle_1 \vert E \rangle_2 \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Expanding
\begin{align}
\nonumber \vert \Psi^p\rangle^{\pm}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle = \frac{1}{{2}}&(\vert H\rangle_1\vert E\rangle_1 \vert V \rangle_2\vert O \rangle_2+\vert H\rangle_1\vert O\rangle_1 \vert V \rangle_2\vert E \rangle_2 \pm\\& \vert V\rangle_1\vert E\rangle_1 \vert H \rangle_2\vert O \rangle_2\pm \vert V\rangle_1\vert O\rangle_1 \vert H \rangle_2\vert E \rangle_2 )\label{18a}\\
\nonumber \vert \Phi^p\rangle^{\pm}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle = \frac{1}{{2}}&(\vert H\rangle_1\vert E\rangle_1 \vert H \rangle_2\vert O \rangle_2+\vert H\rangle_1\vert O\rangle_1 \vert H \rangle_2\vert E \rangle_2 \pm\\& \vert V\rangle_1\vert E\rangle_1 \vert V \rangle_2\vert O \rangle_2\pm \vert V\rangle_1\vert O\rangle_1 \vert V \rangle_2\vert E \rangle_2 )\label{18}
\end{align}
Single particle two qubit Bell states are defined as
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\psi^{\pm} =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \vert H\rangle\vert E\rangle \pm \vert V\rangle\vert O\rangle\right),\\
\phi^{\pm} =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \vert H\rangle\vert O\rangle \pm \vert V\rangle\vert E\rangle\right).\label{19}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Using Eq.\ref{19} in Eq.\ref{18a} and Eq.\ref{18} we get
\begin{align}
\nonumber \vert \Psi^p\rangle^{\pm}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle = \frac{1}{{4}}&((\psi^{+}_1+\psi^{-}_1) (\psi^{+}_2-\psi^{-}_2)+(\phi^{+}_1+\phi^{-}_1) (\phi^{+}_2-\phi^{-}_2) \pm\\&(\phi^{+}_1-\phi^{-}_1) (\phi^{+}_2+\phi^{-}_2)\pm(\psi^{+}_1-\psi^{-}_1) (\psi^{+}_2+\psi^{-}_2) )\label{20}\\
\nonumber \vert \Phi^p\rangle^{\pm}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle = \frac{1}{{2}}&((\psi^{+}_1+\psi^{-}_1)(\phi^{+}_2+\phi^{-}_2)+(\phi^{+}_1+\phi^{-}_1) (\psi^{+}_2+\psi^{-}_2) \pm\\& (\phi^{+}_1-\phi^{-}_1) (\psi^{+}_2-\psi^{-}_2)\pm (\psi^{+}_1-\psi^{-}_1) (\phi^{+}_2-\phi^{-}_2) )\label{21}
\end{align}
giving
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\vert \Psi^p\rangle^{+}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle = &\frac{1}{{2}}(\psi^{+}_1\psi^{+}_2-\psi^{-}_1\psi^{-}_2+ \phi^{+}_1\phi^{+}_2-\phi^{-}_1\phi^{-}_2)\label{22}\\
\vert \Psi^p\rangle^{-}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle = &\frac{1}{{2}}(\psi^{-}_1\psi^{+}_2-\psi^{+}_1\psi^{-}_2+ \phi^{-}_1\phi^{+}_2-\phi^{+}_1\phi^{-}_2)\\
\vert \Phi^p\rangle^{+}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle = &\frac{1}{{2}}(\psi^{+}_1\phi^{+}_2-\psi^{-}_1\phi^{-}_2+ \phi^{+}_1\psi^{+}_2-\phi^{-}_1\psi^{-}_2)\\
\vert \Phi^p\rangle^{-}\otimes\vert \Psi^o\rangle = &\frac{1}{{2}}(\psi^{-}_1\phi^{+}_2-\psi^{+}_1\phi^{-}_2+ \phi^{-}_1\psi^{+}_2-\phi^{+}_1\psi^{-}_2)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{SDC.pdf}
\caption{Setup for hyper entanglement assisted super sense coding. SHEP - source of hyper-entangled photons. }\label{fg.6}
\end{figure}
The individual single photon spin-orbit Bell state can be distinguished using SOBA which is given in Fig. \ref{fg.4}. Thus one can achieve efficient dense coding using hyper-entanglement assisted Bell state analysis. This Bell state analysis is interesting since it can be done with LOCC. A schematic for super dense coding with hyper entanglement is given in Fig. \ref{fg.6}.
\section{Conclusion}
We have described the possibility of using even/odd OAM states for quantum information. We formulate appropriate measurement system for the even/odd OAM state based quantum information. Since even-odd OAM entanglement can be implemented like two qubit polarization entanglement, we describe the measurement and violation of Bell's inequality for such states. We have described hyper-entanglement and hybrid entanglement with OAM and polarization degrees of freedom. We have proposed an experimental scheme for spin orbit Bell state analysis to distinguish all the spin-orbit Bell states. This is applied in hyper entanglement assisted polarization Bell state analysis for efficient dense coding.
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Phase separation into domain structures of distinct chemical compositions occurs in a wide range of technological materials.
Nucleation and growth of second phase precipitates inside the matrix of a primary phase is commonly
used as a strengthening mechanism of structural materials \cite{Porter1992}. Domain structures also
commonly form by spinodal decomposition into two phases, which has been widely investigated in
various contexts
\cite{Cahn1961,Ramanarayan2003,Haataja2004,Haataja2005,Hu2004,Tang2010,Hoyt2011,Lu2012,
Tang2012,Tao2012,Wang2013}. Due to the dependence of the crystal lattice spacing on composition, domain formation typically generates a misfit strain that can be large in some cases, e.g. several percent in phase-separating lithium iron phosphate battery electrode materials \cite{Tang2010}.
The effect of a coherency stress has been investigated theoretically in the context
of both single-crystalline and polycrystalline materials. In single-crystalline materials, Cahn demonstrated that coherency stress hinders spinodal decomposition, requiring a larger chemical driving force than in the absence of misfit to generate phase-separation inside a bulk material \cite{Cahn1961}. A recent extension of this analysis showed that stress relaxation near a free surface can lead to spinodal decomposition for smaller chemical driving forces than inside a bulk material, with compositional domain formation confined at the surface \cite{Tang2012}.
In polycrystalline materials, numerical simulations have been used to investigate the interaction
between compositional domain boundaries (DBs) and dislocations using continuum dislocation-based
models \cite{Haataja2004,Haataja2005,Hoyt2011} phase-field approaches \cite{Hu2004}.
More recently, the interaction between DBs and grain boundaries (GBs) has also been investigated using phase-field-crystal (PFC) simulations \cite{Tao2012,Wang2013}, and amplitude equations derived from the PFC framework \cite{Elder2010}. Those studies have shown that dislocations generically migrate to
DBs to relax the coherency stress thereby strongly impacting microstructural evolution and domain coarsening behavior \cite{Haataja2005,Tao2012,Wang2013}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\linewidth]{Fig1a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig1b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig1c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig1d.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig1e.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth] {Fig1f.pdf}
\begin{picture}(1,0)(0,0)
\put(-90.,440.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\textbf{(a)}}}}
\put(-99.,330.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(b)}}}}
\put(5.,330.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(c)}}}}
\put(-99.,225.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(d)}}}}
\put(5.,225.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(e)}}}}
\put(62.,110.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\textbf{(f)}}}}
\end{picture}
\end{center}
\vskip -1.0cm
\caption{(a) Scheme representing the configuration consisting of a misfitting lamellar precipitate centered on a low angle grain boundary.
(b-e) Color plots of the composition field $c$ at times of (b) $0.03\times10^6$,
(c) $0.9\times10^6$, (d) $1.4\times10^6$ and (e) $6.37\times10^6$ illustrating the destabilization of a
low-angle GB ($\theta=7.2\degree$) due to the presence of a misfitting precipitate (red domain)
computed with the amplitude equation model for hexagonal symmetry and with a misfit eigenstrain $\varepsilon_0=0.043$.
Dislocations are visible because the composition profile is altered in their vicinity.
The system size is $249.6 a\times 361.6 a$ ($a$ being the lattice spacing)
and periodic boundary conditions are used in both $x$ and $y$ directions.
Only part of the system is shown in the $y$ direction. (f) Time evolution of the free energy,
showing the relaxation of the system towards an equilibrium state. Black dots locate the snapshots
of panels (b-e).
}
\label{fig:nonlinear}
\end{figure}
Experimental observations also testify of strong interactions between GBs and precipitates. For example,
in Ni-Al superalloys, $\gamma'$ precipitates in the vicinity of GBs have been shown to be
responsible for GB serration, leading to improved mechanical properties at high temperature \cite{Koul1983,Mitchell2009a}.
In addition, in steel and Ti-based alloys submitted to thermo-mechanical treatments, acicular Widmanst\"{a}tten precipitates, are observed to grow from the GBs in a direction normal
to the GB plane \cite{DaCostaTeixeira2006,Cheng2010}. While the stationary growth kinetics of these
structures have been recently clarified \cite{Cottura2014}, the initial stage of growth that involves
the nucleation of precipitates along the GBs is not understood. In both examples, elastic interactions
between GBs and precipitates might play a central role in the development of these microstructures.
However, these interactions remain largely unexplored due to the complexity of the problem at hand
that involves elastic interactions, grain boundary migration, and solute diffusion.
In a recent study \cite{Geslin2015}, we provided further insight into the complex interaction between crystal defects and precipitates
by investigating the situation in which a planar GB is centered inside a misfitting lamellar precipitate (see Fig.~\ref{fig:nonlinear}.a). This
choice of geometry is physically motivated by the fact that dislocations act as preferred sites of
nucleation \cite{Cahn1957,Hu2001,leonard2005}. Hence GBs naturally seed the formation of lamellar
precipitates of this approximate geometry \cite{Ramanarayan2003,Zhao1998}. Using a nonlinear elastic
model \cite{Geslin2014a,Geslin2014b} and amplitude equations (AE) that describe the interaction
between composition and stress \cite{Spatschek2010}, we showed that this configuration is morphologically unstable. This instability is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:nonlinear}.b-e that shows a sequence of GB and precipitate configurations obtained by AE simulations \cite{Geslin2015}. Furthermore, we carried out a linear stability analysis to predict the onset and wavelength of this instability. The starting point of this analysis is a free-boundary problem governing the coupled evolution of DBs and GBs, which corresponds to the sharp-interface limit of the AE model (i.e. the limit where the DBs and GB can be treated as sharp boundaries).
The physical mechanism of this instability can be qualitatively understood by considering a small
initial sinusoidal perturbation of DBs of wavelength $\Lambda=2\pi/k$. In the case of isotropic
elasticity, the elastic energy is unchanged by this perturbation because the Bitter-Crum theorem
\cite{Bitter1931,Fratzl1999} implies that this energy is independent of the shape of the precipitate
and only depends on its volume, which remains constant. In the absence of a GB inside the
precipitate, the DB is stable because the perturbation of its interface increases the total DB surface, therefore increasing the total energy of the system. In contrast, with a GB present, the elastic energy can be decreased by the relaxation of the shear stress, induced by the DB perturbation, along the GB plane via shear-coupled GB motion
\cite{Cahn2004, Cahn2006, Ivanov2008, Gorkaya2009, Olmsted09b, Molodov2011, Trautt2012a, Karma2012, Rajabzadeh2014, Rupert2009, Sharon2011, Winning2010, Lim2012}.
Namely, the GB can move normal to its plane under an applied shear stress. This behavior referred as \emph{coupling} is characterized by the relation
\begin{equation}
v_\parallel=\beta v_n \label{eq:coupling}
\end{equation}
between the velocity $v_n$ of the GB normal to the GB plane and the rate $v_\parallel$ of parallel grain
translation. In the case of pure coupling, the coefficient $\beta$ is a geometrical factor depending
only on GB bicrystallography with the coupling factor $\beta$ obtained from the geometrical relation between dislocation glide motion and crystal lattice translation \cite{Sutton1995, Cahn2004,Cahn2006}. Computations and experiments have shown that a wide range of both low- and high-angle GBs display shear-coupled motion \cite{Cahn2006,
Ivanov2008, Gorkaya2009, Olmsted09b, Molodov2011, Trautt2012a, Karma2012, Rajabzadeh2014}.
Furthermore, GB coupling has been found to influence significantly
the coarsening behavior of polycrystalline materials in more complex multi-grain geometries where GBs form a complex network
\cite{Rupert2009, Sharon2011, Wu2012, Trautt2012a, Adland2013}.
Our recent study \cite{Geslin2015} has highlighted the fundamental role of shear-coupled GB motion in the interaction between GBs and precipitates. However, this study only considered a limited range of misfit strain and GB misorientation and was limited to isotropic elasticity and a lamellar precipitate geometry. Materials forming second phase precipitates are often elastically anisotropic. This anisotropy is known to influence the shape of misfitting precipitates by inducing DBs to align along preferred crystallographic directions to minimize the elastic energy \cite{Khachaturyan2013}. Moreover, it also influences the elastic interaction between GBs and precipitates. In particular, the Bitter-Crum theorem \cite{Bitter1931,Fratzl1999} invoked above to explain the destabilization of the GB for isotropic elasticity no longer applies within elastic anisotropy. In this case, deformation of the precipitate shape increases the elastic energy and can hinder or even potentially suppress the GB morphological instability. Furthermore, in several important experimental situations, precipitates interacting with GBs have a circular or cuboid geometry if nucleation occurs away from the GB at multiple sites, e.g. $\gamma'$ precipitates in Ni-Al superalloys. It is unclear how in those situations, closed-shape precipitates interact with GBs and what role shear-coupled motion plays in this interaction.
In this paper, we extend the study of Ref.~[\onlinecite{Geslin2015}] to investigate the interaction between GBs and precipitates of different shapes with and without elastic anisotropy. We first focus on the lamellar precipitate geometry and extend the linear stability analysis of Ref.~[\onlinecite{Geslin2015}] to anisotropic elastic behavior. This extension is conceptually straightforward even though the anisotropy makes the analysis more lengthy. The analysis predicts that elastic anisotropy hinders the instability, because of the energetic cost of deforming the lamellar precipitate, but does not suppress it. We test this prediction using the same AE approach as in Refs. [\onlinecite{Spatschek2010}] and [\onlinecite{Geslin2015}], albeit with a free-energy form that favors an elastically anisotropic 3D body-centered-cubic (BCC) structure. The simulation results are in good quantitative agreement with the predictions of the linear stability analysis. For a free-energy form that favors an elastically isotropic two-dimensional (2D) hexagonal structure, we investigate the nonlinear development of the instability over a wider range of misfit strain and misorientation than in Ref.~[\onlinecite{Geslin2015}]. Simulations yield the novel insight that, in a well-developed non-linear regime, this instability can lead to the break-up of low-angle GBs when the misfit strain exceeds a threshold that depends on misorientation. Next, we investigate in 2D the interactions between a circular precipitate and a grain boundary. We find that a similar elastic interaction mediated by shear-coupled GB motion leads to the attraction of the precipitate to the GB. The GB and precipitate shape are simultaneously deformed in this process that can also lead to GB break-up for large enough misfit strain.
Some properties of the amplitude equations (AE) approach relevant to the present study are worth pointing out. AE models can be generally derived from the phase-field-crystal (PFC) model \cite{Elder2002,Elder2004,Berry2006} via a multiscale expansion \cite{Goldenfeld2005,Athreya2006,Spatschek2010}. This expansion is formally valid in the limit where the correlation length of liquid density fluctuations (which sets of the width of the spatially diffuse solid-liquid interface at the melting point of a pure material) is much larger than the lattice spacing. AE models can also be derived in the spirit of Ginzburg-Landau expansions of a free-energy functional in terms of complex density wave amplitudes from symmetry considerations (see Ref. [\onlinecite{Wu2015}] and earlier references therein for a comparison of both approaches for solid-liquid interface properties). The latter approach provides more flexibility to formulate AE models with a minimal set of model parameters that can be related to material parameters. For this reason, it was used in Ref. [\onlinecite{Spatschek2010}] to derive the set of AEs that describes the interaction of composition, stress, and crystal defects. The parameters of this AE model, used here and in our previous study \cite{Geslin2015}, are uniquely fixed by the DB energy $\gamma$, the misfit strain $\varepsilon_0$, linear elastic properties, and the dislocation core size that is proportional to the correlation length. Like PFC, the AE method describes dislocation glide, therefore reproducing salient features of GB shear-coupled motion for a wide range of GB bi-crystallography \cite{Trautt2012a}, and also dislocation climb. Since PFC and AE models do not track explicitly the vacancy concentration, the climb kinetics is modeled only heuristically. However, the incorporation of dislocation climb is important in that it provides an additional mechanism to relax the total free-energy as is apparent in Fig.~\ref{fig:nonlinear} where the final equilibrium configuration was attained by a combination of both dislocation glide and climb. Finally, as shown in Ref.~[\onlinecite{Spatschek2010}], the AE model can only describe GBs over a limited range of misorientation due to the choice of a fixed reference set of crystal axes to represent the crystal density waves. However, this limitation is not too stringent as the method is able to describe both low-angle GBs with separate dislocations and higher angle ones with overlapping dislocation cores.
This paper is organized as follows. We start by introducing in \cref{sec:AE} the AE model for both hexagonal (isotropic elasticity) and BCC ordering (anisotropic elasticity).
The following \cref{sec:LSA} is dedicated to generalizing the linear stability analysis
to the case of anisotropic elasticity. In particular, we show that the introduction of
elastic anisotropy inhibits the instability by reducing the growth rate and decreasing the range of unstable wavelengths.
Next, in \cref{sec:GBB}, we investigate more closely the nonlinear regime of instability for isotropic elasticity, showing that
a sufficiently large misfit strain can lead to GB break-up.
Finally, in \cref{sec:CPG}, we investigate the interactions between circular precipitates
and a GB, showing that similar elastic interaction leads to the attraction of the precipitate
to the GB and can also lead to GB break-up.
\section{Amplitude-Equation model}
\label{sec:AE}
\subsection{Free-energies}
In the present study, we used the AE approach developed by Spatschek and Karma \cite{Spatschek2010}, which provides a general methodology for modeling the interaction of composition and stress \cite{Spatschek2010}.
In this AE framework, the atomic density field is expanded as a sum of crystal density waves
\begin{equation}
n(\vec r,t)=n_0+\delta n_s\sum_{n=1}^{N/2} \left(A_n e^{i\vec k_n\cdot \vec r}+A_n^* e^{-i\vec k_n\cdot \vec r}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\pm \vec{k}_n$ ($1\le n\le N/2$) correspond to the $N$ principal reciprocal lattice vectors (RLVs)
of equal magnitude $|\vec k_n|=q_0=2\pi/ a$, where $a$ is the lattice spacing,
$n_0$ is a reference average value of this field, and $\delta n_s$ is a scale factor that
can be adjusted to match arbitrary values of solid density wave amplitudes.
The amplitudes have a constant value $|A_n|=A_s$ in a perfect crystal, and decrease to low values in the atomically disordered core region
of dislocations, which is similar to the liquid phase where the amplitudes vanish.
The total free-energy of the system is given by the functional:
\begin{equation}
F = \int dV f_c+ \int dV f_{el},
\end{equation}
where the chemical and elastic parts of the free-energy density are defined respectively by
\begin{equation}
f_c=\frac{K}{2}|\nabla c|^2
+f_{dw}(c)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align}
f_{el} = F_0 \bigg[ & \xi_d^2\sum_{n=1}^{N}|(\Box_n +i\varepsilon_0 q_0 c)A_n|^2 \nonumber\\
&+ f_{b}(\{A_n\},\{A_n^*\}) \bigg], \label{eq:aefed}
\end{align}
where the ``box operator'' is defined by $\Box_n=\hat{k}_n\cdot{\nabla}-\frac{i}{2q_0}{\nabla}^2$. This elastic free energy density
represents the energy cost of an arbitrary perturbation
of the atomic density field associated with linear elastic deformations
and crystal defects (nonlinear deformations) such as dislocations or grain boundaries.
The free-energy cost of defects is captured by the box operator that is introduced to insure that the elastic part
of the free-energy is rotationally invariant \cite{Spatschek2010}. In addition, the operator $i\varepsilon_0 q_0 c$,
accounts for the influence of the
compositional field on the lattice spacing through the misfit strain $\varepsilon_{0}$, where
we assume a linear relationship between strain and concentration (Vegard's law).
The parameter $\xi_d$ is a dimensionless coefficient that is proportional to the width of the solid-liquid interface at the melting point and
also sets the scale of the dislocation core.
As in our previous study \cite{Geslin2015}, we use a version of the AE model where the bulk chemical free-energy density has a standard double-well Cahn-Hilliard-like contribution \cite{Cahn1959} $f_{dw}(c)$ that favors phase separation into two solid phases of distinct chemical compositions \cite{Geslin2015}.
The bulk chemical free-energy density has the double-well form
\begin{equation}
f_{dw}(c) = g (c-c_0^-)^2(c-c_0^+)^2,
\label{eq:fch}
\end{equation}
where the minima ($c_0^\pm$) represent the equilibrium concentrations in the composition domains in the absence of stress and the expressions
\begin{align}
g=&\frac{12\gamma}{w_i(c_0^+-c_0^-)^4}\label{gdef}\\
K=&\frac{3w_i\gamma}{2(c_0^+-c_0^-)^2},\label{Kdef}
\end{align}
relate the parameters $g$ and $K$ to the width $w_i$ and excess free-energy $\gamma$ of the spatially diffuse boundary between those domains.
The RLVs and the bulk part of the elastic energy density, $f_b(\{A_n\}, \{A_n^*\})$, can be chosen to stabilize different crystalline structures \cite{Wu2010,Greenwood2011,Toth2010}.
In this study, we consider the 2D hexagonal lattice described by $N=6$ RLVs $\vec k_n=\pm q_0\hat k_n$ where
\begin{equation}
\hat{k}_1=\left( -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}, -\frac{1}{2} \right),\enskip
\hat{k}_2=\left(0, 1\right),\enskip
\hat{k}_3=\left( \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2},-\frac{1}{2} \right) \nonumber
\end{equation}
and
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}
f_b^{HEX}(\{A_n\},\{A_n^*\})=\frac{1}{6} \sum_{n=1}^{3} A_n A_n^* + \frac{1}{2} (A_1 A_2 A_3 + A_1^* A_2^* A_3^*) + \frac{1}{15} \left( \sum_{n=1}^{3} A_n A_n^* \right)^2 - \frac{1}{30} \sum_{n=1}^{3} |A_n|^4,
\end{equation}
which reproduce isotropic elasticity for small deformations \cite{Spatschek2010}. To investigate the effect of anisotropic elasticity, we also consider BCC ordering described by $N=12$ RLVs $\vec k_n=\pm q_0\hat k_n$ where:
\[ \hat{k}_1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(1,1,0),\quad
\hat{k}_2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(1,0,1), \quad
\hat{k}_3=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(0,1,1),\quad
\hat{k}_4=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(1,-1,0),\quad
\hat{k}_5=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(1,0,-1), \quad
\hat{k}_6=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(0,1,-1), \]
and the function \cite{Spatschek2010}
\begin{align}
f_b^{BCC}(\{A_n\},\{A_n^*\}) =& \frac{1}{12}\sum_{n=1}^6A_nA_n^* +
+ \frac{1}{90}\Bigg\{\bigg(\sum_{n=1}^6A_nA_n^*\bigg)^2
- \frac{1}{2}\sum_{n=1}^6|A_n|^4
+ 2A_{1}^*A_{2} A_{4}^*A_{5}
+ 2A_{1} A_{2} A_{4}^*A_{5}^* \nonumber \\
& + 2A_{1}^*A_{3} A_{4} A_{6}
+ 2A_{1} A_{3}^*A_{4}^*A_{6}^*
+ 2A_{2} A_{3}^*A_{5}^*A_{6}
+ 2A_{2}^*A_{3} A_{5} A_{6}^*\Bigg\}\nonumber \\
& -\frac{1}{8}\Big\{
A_{2} A_{3}^*A_{4}^*
+ A_{2} A_{3}^*A_{4}
+ A_{1} A_{3}^*A_{5}^*
+ A_{1}^*A_{3} A_{5} \nonumber \\
& + A_{1} A_{2}^*A_{6}^*
+ A_{1}^*A_{2} A_{6}
+ A_{4}^*A_{5} A_{6}^*
+ A_{4} A_{5}^*A_{6} \Big\}.
\label{eq:fbBCC}
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
The effect of the anisotropic elasticity of the BCC structure on the precipitate morphology is
illustrated in \Cref{fig:bcc-sketch}. An initially circular precipitate
of radius $R=40.5a$ and eigenstrain $\varepsilon_0=0.043$ (\Cref{fig:bcc-sketch}.a) evolves into
a square with rounded corners (\Cref{fig:bcc-sketch}.b).
Even though this morphology increases the surface energy, it is the equilibrium state of the system
because of the drop of elastic energy due to anisotropic elasticity effects \cite{Khachaturyan2013}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{Fig2a.pdf}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{Fig2b.pdf}
\begin{picture}(1,0)(0,0)
\put(-97.,140.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(a)}}}}
\put(8.,140.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(b)}}}}
\end{picture}
\caption{An initially circular precipitate of radius $R=40.5a$ and eigenstrain $\varepsilon_0=0.043$
(a) relaxes to a square shape with rounded corners (b) due to the anisotropic elasticity in the BCC AE model.}
\label{fig:bcc-sketch}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Determination of model parameters}
\label{param}
The free-energies of the AE model depend on eight parameters $c_0^\pm$, $g$, $K$, $q_0$, $\xi_d$, $\varepsilon_0$, and $F_0$. Their value can be generally determined uniquely in terms of material parameters as follows. The phase diagram determines $c_0^\pm$, the lattice spacing $a$ determines $q_0=2\pi/a$, the compositional domain width $w_i$ and the interface free-energy $\gamma$ determine $g$ and $K$ via Eqs. (\ref{gdef}) and (\ref{Kdef}). The misfit strain $\varepsilon_0$ is a known material parameter and the microscopic
length $\sim \xi_d$ can be in principle estimated by matching the dislocation core size to experimental measurement or the results of atomistic simulations; for simplicity here we choose $\xi_dq_0=1$. In addition,
$F_0$ can be related to elastic constants of the material using relations derived in Ref.~[\onlinecite{Spatschek2010}].
In the case of the elastically isotropic hexagonal model, the elastic constants are
$C_{11}=C_{22}=\lambda+2G=\frac{9}{4}F_0A_s^2\xi_d^2q_0^2$ and
$C_{12}=C_{44}=\lambda=\frac{3}{4}F_0A_s^2\xi_d^2q_0^2$, yielding a Poisson ratio
$\nu=\lambda/[2(\lambda+G)]=0.25$ ($\lambda$ and $G$ denote the Lam\'{e} coefficients). For the elastically anisotropic BCC model, $C_{11}=C_{22}=C_{33}=2F_0A_s^2\xi_d^2q_0^2$ and
$C_{12}=C_{23}=C_{44}=F_0A_s^2\xi_d^2q_0^2$. In these definition, the coefficient $A_s$ denotes the amplitude of solid density waves in a perfect crystal and can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
A_s=\frac{3+\sqrt{1 - Z \varepsilon_0^2 c_0^2\xi_d^2q_0^2}}{4}, \label{As}
\end{equation}
where $Z=48$ ($Z=96$) for the hexagonal (BCC) lattice. Let us notice that for small values of $\varepsilon_0$, $A_s$ depends weakly on composition $c_0$ via a shift of the lattice constant induced by the misfit strain.
In this study, simulations are performed for a generic set of material parameters
similar to the one used to model phase separation in Li-ion
battery materials \cite{Tang2012}. In particular, we choose $c_0^-=0.05$, $c_0^+=0.95$, $\gamma=\unit{0.2}{J/m^2}$, and $w_i=\unit{2}{nm}$, yielding $g=\unit{1.8\times 10^9}{J/m^3}$ and $K=\unit{7.4 \times 10^{-10}}{J/m}$ using Eqs.~(\ref{gdef}) and (\ref{Kdef}). In addition, we take $a=\unit{0.5}{nm}$, $\xi_dq_0=1$, and $G=C_{44}=\unit{39}{GPa}$, yielding $F_0=4G/(3A_s^2\xi_d^2q_0^2)=\unit{5.2\times 10^{10}}{J/m^3}$ for the hexagonal lattice and $F_0=C_{44}/(A_s^2\xi_d^2q_0^2)=\unit{3.9\times 10^{10}}{J/m^3}$ for the BCC lattice where $A_s \approx 1$ is used in those relations to compute $F_0$. This is equivalent to neglecting the dependence of $A_s$ on $c_0$ in Eq.~(\ref{As}), which is negligible for small misfit strain. In the following, the simulations used to test the predictions of the linear stability analysis are carried out with $\varepsilon_0=0.043$ for both the hexagonal and BCC models. Additional simulations are carried out for various values of $\varepsilon_0$ to explore the influence of the misfit strain on the equilibrium state of the microstructure. Mathematically, the AE model is only valid for small misorientations between grains. However, it has been shown \cite{Spatschek2010} that the predictions of the GB energy from AE remain valid over roughly half the complete range allowed by the full crystal symmetry. Therefore, the limitations of the AE model on grain rotations does not influence significantly the results obtained for misorientations below $30\degree$ investigated in this article.
\subsection{Dynamical equations}
The concentration field $c$ is assumed to follow a conserved dynamics
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial c}{\partial t} = M\nabla^2 \frac{\delta F}{\delta c}.
\label{eq:aemecd}
\end{equation}
where the mobility $M=Df_{dw}''(c_0^\pm)$ is chosen such that Fickian diffusion is recovered for vanishing stresses and composition close to the equilibrium values $c_0^{\pm}$. We note here that for finite misfit, the equilibrium concentrations in the low ($c^-$) and high ($c^+$) concentration domains are slightly shifted from their equilibrium values $c_0^\pm$ as described further in the paper, but this shift has a negligible effect on the effective value of the mobility.
On the other hand, The amplitudes $A_n$ are evolved using a formulation of non-conserved dynamics introduced previously in the context of the PFC model \cite{Stefanovic2006,Stefanovic2009} to relax the elastic field rapidly over the entire system by the damped propagation of density waves:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:aemead}
\rho\frac{\partial^2 A_n}{\partial t^2} + \frac{\partial A_n}{\partial t} = -M_A \frac{\delta F}{\delta A_n^*},\quad (n=1\dots N)
\end{equation}
where the parameters $M_A$ and $\rho$, which control the wave damping rate and propagation velocity are chosen such that the amplitudes and hence the elastic field relax quickly on the diffusive time scale of the concentration field evolution.
To see how to choose those parameters, and for the purpose of numerical implementation, it is useful to rewrite Eqs. (\ref{eq:aemead}) and (\ref{eq:aemecd}) in dimensionless form by measuring lengths in unit of $1/q_0$ and time
in unit of $1/(M g q_0^{d})$ where the space dimension is $d=2$ ($d=3$) for the hexagonal (BCC) lattice.
After rescaling space and time, Eqs.~(\ref{eq:aemead}-\ref{eq:aemecd}) become for the hexagonal lattice:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
c_w^{-2}\frac{\partial^2 A_n}{\partial t^2} + \beta_w\frac{\partial A_n}{\partial t}
&= \alpha_d^2\left[\Box_n^2A_n + 2i\varepsilon_0 c\Box_n A_n + i\varepsilon_0 A_n\Box_n c +\varepsilon_0\nabla A_n\cdot\nabla c -\varepsilon_0^2 c^2A_n\right] \label{eq:aemea} \\
&- \frac{1}{6}A_n- \frac{1}{2}\prod_{j\neq n}^{3}A_j^{*} -\frac{2}{15}A_n\sum_{j=1}^{3}A_jA_j^{*} +\frac{1}{15}A_n|A_n|^2, \nonumber \\
\frac{\partial c}{\partial t}
&= \nabla^2 \Bigg\{-\alpha_c^2\nabla^2c + 2(c-c_0^-)(c-c_0^+)(2c-c_0^--c_0^+) \label{eq:aemec} \\
& + 2F_0'\alpha_d^2 \bigg( \varepsilon_0 \sum_{j=1}^{3} \operatorname{Im} \left\{A_j^{\ast}\hat{k}_{j} \cdot \nabla A_j \right\}
-\frac{1}{2}\varepsilon_0 \sum_{j=1}^{3} \operatorname{Re} \left\{A_j^{\ast}\nabla^2 A_j \right\}
+ \varepsilon_0^2 c\sum_{j=1}^{3}A_j A_j^{*}\bigg) \Bigg\}, \nonumber
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
where we have defined the dimensionless parameters $\alpha_c=q_0\sqrt{K/g}=q_0w_i(c_0^+-c_0^-)/(2\sqrt{2})$,
$\alpha_d=q_0\xi_d$, $F'_0=F_0/g$, $c_w^{-2}=\rho(M g q_0^d)^2/(M_AF_0)$, and $\beta_w=M g q_0^d/(M_AF_0)$.
For the choice of parameters given in section~\ref{param}, $\alpha_d=1$, $\alpha_c=8$, and $F_0'=29.1$ ($F_0'=21.7$)
for the hexagonal (BCC) lattice. Furthermore, in rescaled units, $c_w$ and $\beta_w$ determine
the wave propagation velocity and damping rate, respectively.
Since the diffusion constant is of order unity in those units, choosing $c_w=1$ and $\beta_w=0.05$ insures that
the mechanical degrees of freedom relax faster than the concentration field.
For the BCC lattice, the dimensionless dynamical equations analogous to Eqs.~(\ref{eq:aemea}) and (\ref{eq:aemec})
are quite lengthy and are detailed in \cref{sec:AE-BCC}.
\subsection{Numerical implementation}
We use a pseudo-spectral method to solve the dynamical Eqs.~(\ref{eq:aemea}) and (\ref{eq:aemec}).
Following the same steps as in Ref.~[\onlinecite{Adland2013a}],
the evolution equations of the amplitude equations in Fourier space read
\begin{equation}
c_w^{-2}\partial_{tt}\tilde{A}_n^k + \beta_w \partial_t\tilde{A}_n^k = L_A^k\tilde{A}_n^k+\tilde{f}_A^k(\{A_n\},c)
\label{eq:aemeak}
\end{equation}
where the linear operator $L_A^k=\alpha_d^2(\tilde\Box_n^k)^2-1/6$ is the Fourier
transform of $L_A=\alpha_d^2\Box_n^2-1/6$, and
$\tilde{f}_A^k$ is the Fourier transform of the non-linear term of $f_A$ which
contains all the remaining terms in the right hand side of \Cref{eq:aemea}. We use
the algorithm described in appendix A.2 of Ref.~[\onlinecite{Adland2013a}] to
solve efficiently \Cref{eq:aemeak}.
The evolution equation for the concentration field becomes in Fourier space
\begin{equation}
\partial_t\tilde{c}^k = L_c^k\tilde{c}^k+\tilde{f}_c^k(\{A_n\},c),
\label{eq:aemeck}
\end{equation}
where the Fourier transform of the linear operator $L_c=-\alpha_c^2\nabla^4$ is
$L_c^k=-\alpha_c^2k^4$, and $\tilde{f}_c^k$ is the Fourier
transform of the non-linear term $f_c$ containing all the remaining terms in the right
hand side of \Cref{eq:aemec}. The algorithm described in appendix A1 of Ref.
[\onlinecite{Adland2013a}] is used to solve \Cref{eq:aemeck}.
Periodic boundary conditions are used in both directions.
Thus, two grain boundaries are introduced in the simulation cell, located respectively
at the center and the edge of the simulation box. The domain size in the
direction $y$ (normal to the GBs) is chosen sufficiently large to consider that the
influence of the second grain boundary is negligible. The simulations
to obtain the growth rate of the instability (see \Cref{fig:omegak}) are performed
using a fine grid spacing $\Delta x \approx 1$ and a time step $\Delta t=0.05$ to obtain fully converged numerical results for an accurate quantitative comparison with analytical predictions. The simulations presented in
\Cref{fig:nonlinear,fig:nobreak,fig:hvbreak,fig:sumbreak,fig:circlelow,fig:circlehigh}
are performed with coarser discretization parameters $\Delta x\approx$ 2 and $\Delta t=0.2$ to
follow the fully nonlinear development of the instability on much longer time scales
while retaining a reasonable level of convergence.
\section{Linear stability analysis}
\label{sec:LSA}
We now analyze the morphological stability of a lamellar precipitate centered on a GB such that the GB is sandwiched between two parallel DBs as depicted schematically in Fig.~\ref{fig:schema}. This geometry arises naturally when it is energetically favorable for the second phase precipitate to nucleate along the GB. We denote by $w$ the half-width of the lamellar precipitate. Its value depends on the composition and growth history of the second phase after nucleation. In the case of isotropic elasticity, the linear stability is detailed in the supplemental
material of Ref.~[\onlinecite{Geslin2015}]. In this section, we will follow similar steps to extend this calculation to
the more complicated case of anisotropic elasticity for a cubic crystal symmetry.
We take advantage of the fact that the GB shape and the elastic field (i.e. the displacive degrees of freedom) adapt instantaneously to a change of DB shape that occurs on a slow diffusive time scale. In other words, the elastic fields and GB evolutions are slaved to the DB evolution. This allows us to split the analysis into two main steps.
In a first step, carried out in subsections A, B, and C, we compute the equilibrium GB shape and stress field resulting from imposing a wavy perturbation of the DBs. We first write down the anisotropic elastostatic equations in subsection A. We then solve those equations in the four separate domains depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:schema}.b by imposing appropriate boundary conditions on the
displacement and stress fields at the different interfaces (GB and DBs) separating those domains. We then compute the solutions for unperturbed planar interfaces in subsection B, and for an imposed DB perturbation of the form $h(x)\sim \sin (kx)$ in subsection C. In particular, it will be shown that under the geometrical coupling relation given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:coupling}), the GB relaxes to a stationary shape $H(x)\sim \cos kx$ with vanishing shear stress on the GB.
The second main step of the analysis carried out in subsection D consists of computing the growth rate of the instability. For this we write down the equivalent free-boundary problem governing the evolution of the DBs in the limit where the DB width is much smaller than the wavelength of the perturbation, which allows to treat the DB as a sharp interface. This free-boundary problem consists of the diffusion equation for concentration coupled to two boundary conditions that must be self-consistently satisfied at the DBs: a Stefan-like mass conservation condition that relates the normal interface (DB) velocity to the normal gradient of chemical potential, and a local equilibrium condition that determines how the value of the chemical potential at the interface is shifted by stresses and interface curvature (as in the standard Gibbs-Thomson condition).
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig3a.pdf}\\
\vspace{1.0cm}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig3b.pdf}
\end{center}
\begin{picture}(1,0)(0,0)
\put(-123.,280.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\textbf{(a)}}}}
\put(-123.,150.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\textbf{(b)}}}}
\end{picture}
\caption{Schematic representation of lamellar precipitate geometry. (a) A low-angle symmetrical tilt GB of angle $\theta$ with the reference frame $(x,y)$
and the frames $(x_1',y_1')$ and $(x_2',y_2')$ associated with both grains.
(b) a GB centered on a slightly perturbed lamellar precipitate. We
distinguish four regions (numbered 1 to 4). The displacement fields and chemical potentials
in the different regions are respectively denoted $u_x^{(n)}$, $u_y^{(n)}$ and $\mu^{(n)}$ ($n=1...4$).
The horizontal arrows show the directions of grain translation
resulting from GB coupled motion via Eq.~(\ref{eq:coupling}), which relaxes the
shear stress induced by the perturbation of the surface of the precipitate.}
\label{fig:schema}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Elastostatic equations}
\label{ES_eqs}
We consider a straight symmetric tilt grain boundary of angle $\theta$ obtained from a rotation of the two grains
of angles $\pm \theta/2$ around the $z$-axis as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:schema}.a. For low angle GBs, this tilt grain boundary can be seen as a wall of edge dislocations.
We consider that the reference frame $(x,y)$ coincides with the cubic axes of the crystal structure. In this frame,
the elastic constants are $\bar{C}_{11}=\bar{C}_{22}=\bar{C}_{33}$,
$\bar{C}_{12}=\bar{C}_{13}=\bar{C}_{23}$ and $\bar{C}_{44}=\bar{C}_{55}=\bar{C}_{66}$.
The system is invariant along the $z$ direction such that we can consider plain strain conditions.
We define $S$ as the anisotropy coefficient by:
\begin{equation}
S=1-\frac{\bar{C}_{11}-\bar{C}_{12}}{2\bar{C}_{44}}.
\label{eq:eqS}
\end{equation}
We note that for isotropic elasticity, we have $S=0$. In the frames $(x'_1,y'_1)$ and $(x'_2,y'_2)$
associated to the grains rotated by an angle $\pm \theta/2$, the values of the elastic constants are given by:
\begin{align}
C_{11}(\psi) =& \bar{C}_{11} + S \bar{C}_{44}\sin^2 (2\psi),\\
C_{12}(\psi) =& \bar{C}_{12} - S \bar{C}_{44}\sin^2 (2\psi),\\
C_{44}(\psi) =& \bar{C}_{44} - S \bar{C}_{44}\sin^2 (2\psi),\\
C_{14}(\psi) =& \frac{S\bar{C}_{44}}{2} \sin (4 \psi)
\end{align}
where $\psi=\pm \theta/2$ is the rotation angle between the crystal axis of the
grains 1 and 2 and the reference frame.
To keep the elastostatic equations analytically solvable, we consider the limit of small $\theta$ where the elastic constants
are the same in both grains and in the reference frame and we note them $C_{11}$, $C_{12}$ and $C_{44}$.
We consider that the concentration is homogeneous in the different domains and is denoted by
$c^{(n)}$ (where the superscript $(n)$ denotes different domains, $n = 1 \dots 4$).
The stresses can therefore be simply expressed in terms of the displacements in the different domains:
\begin{align}
\sigma^{(n)}_{xx} =& C_{11}(\partial_x u^{(n)}_x-\varepsilon_0c^{(n)})+C_{12}(\partial_y u^{(n)}_y-\varepsilon_0c^{(n)}) \label{eq:stsxx} \\
\sigma^{(n)}_{yy} =& C_{12}(\partial_x u^{(n)}_x-\varepsilon_0c^{(n)})+C_{11}(\partial_y u^{(n)}_y-\varepsilon_0c^{(n)}) \label{eq:stsyy} \\
\sigma^{(n)}_{xy} =& C_{44}(\partial_x u^{(n)}_y+\partial_y u^{(n)}_x) \label{eq:stsxy}
\end{align}
where the coordinate $x$ and $y$ refer to the reference basis $(x,y)$. Substituting these equations
for stresses into the elastic equilibrium $\nabla \cdot \sigma=0$, we obtain the following
elastostatic equations in terms of the displacements fields:
\begin{align}
C_{11} \frac{\partial^2u^{(n)}_x}{\partial x^2} + C_{44}\frac{\partial^2u^{(n)}_x}{\partial y^2}
+ (C_{12} + C_{44})\frac{\partial^2u^{(n)}_y}{\partial x\partial y} =& 0 \label{eq:ese1} \\
(C_{12}+C_{44})\frac{\partial^2u^{(n)}_x}{\partial x\partial y}+C_{44}\frac{\partial^2u^{(n)}_y}{\partial x^2}
+ C_{11}\frac{\partial^2u^{(n)}_y}{\partial y^2} =& 0 \label{eq:ese2}
\end{align}
\subsection{Non-perturbed problem}
We first consider the non-perturbed problem where the DBs and the GB
are perfectly straight ($h(x)=H(x)=0$) and solve for the equilibrium displacement field $\bar{u}$ and composition field.
In this case, the problem is invariant along the $x$ direction and $\bar{u}_x=0$ in all the domains. For the component $\bar{u}_y$, Eqs.~(\ref{eq:ese1}-\ref{eq:ese2}) admit the following solution in the different domains
\begin{align}
\bar{u}_y^{(1)} =& \alpha^-(y+w)-\alpha^+w \nonumber\\
\bar{u}_y^{(2)} =& \bar{u}_y^{(3)}=\alpha^+y \label{eq:nonpd}\\
\bar{u}_y^{(4)} =& \alpha^-(y-w)+\alpha^+w \nonumber
\end{align}
where $\alpha^+=(C_{11}+C_{12})\varepsilon_0c^+/C_{11}=\varepsilon_0 c^+\left(1+\frac{1}{\zeta} \right)$ and
$\alpha^-=(C_{11}+C_{12})\varepsilon_0c^-/C_{11}=\varepsilon_0 c^-\left(1+\frac{1}{\zeta} \right)$ with
$\zeta=C_{11}/C_{12}$.
Because of the stresses arising from the precipitate eigenstrain, the equilibrium concentrations $c^+$ and $c^-$
inside and outside the precipitate differ slightly from $c_0^+$ and $c_0^-$.
This deviation can be computed by minimizing the total free energy
with respect to $\Delta c=c_0^+-c^+=c^--c_0^-$. The free energy is minimum for
\begin{equation}
\Delta c=\frac{1}{2}\left[(c_0^+-c_0^-)-\sqrt{(c_0^+-c_0^-)^2-\frac{(C_{11}^2-C_{12}^2)\varepsilon_0^2}{gC_{11}}}\right].
\end{equation}
\subsection{Perturbed problem}
\subsubsection{Solutions of the elastostatic equations}
We consider now that the DBs position are perturbed by a periodic function $h(x)=h_0\sin(kx)$
whose amplitude $h_0$ is assumed to be small compared to its wave length $2\pi/k$ and the width of the precipitate $w$.
The total displacement $u^{(n)}(x,y)$ can be decomposed into a non-perturbed part
$\bar{u}^{(n)}(x,y)$ derived in \Cref{eq:nonpd} and a perturbed part $\tilde{u}^{(n)}(x,y)$
arising from the perturbation:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:totdisx}
u_x^{(n)}(x,y) =& \bar{u}_x^{(n)}(x,y)+\tilde{u}_x^{(n)}(x,y)\\
u_y^{(n)}(x,y) =& \bar{u}_y^{(n)}(x,y)+\tilde{u}_y^{(n)}(x,y)
\label{eq:totdisy}
\end{align}
Following the supplemental material of Ref.~[\onlinecite{Karma2012}], we consider that
the perturbed displacements take the following form in the different domains:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{itemize}
\item In domain (1):
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ux1}\tilde{u}_x^{(1)} =& \operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(A_1e^{-ikp_1(y+w)}+B_1e^{-ikp_2(y+w)})\right\}\\
\label{eq:uy1}\tilde{u}_y^{(1)} =& \operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(M_1A_1e^{-ikp_1(y+w)}+M_2B_1e^{-ikp_2(y+w)})\right\}
\end{align}
\item In domain (2):
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ux2}\tilde{u}_x^{(2)} =&
\operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(A_2e^{ikp_1(y+w)}+B_2e^{ikp_2(y+w)})\right\}+\operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(C_2e^{-ikp_1y}+D_2e^{-ikp_2y})\right\}\\\nonumber
\label{eq:uy2}\tilde{u}_y^{(2)} =&
-\operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(M_1A_2e^{ikp_1(y+w)}+M_2B_2e^{ikp_2(y+w)})\right\}+\operatorname{Re}\left\{[e^{ikx}(M_1C_2e^{-ikp_1y}+M_2D_2e^{-ikp_2y})\right\}\\
\end{align}
\item In domain (3):
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ux3}\tilde{u}_x^{(3)} =&
\operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(A_3e^{-ikp_1(y-w)}+B_3e^{-ikp_2(y-w)})\right\}+\operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(C_3e^{ikp_1y}+D_3e^{ikp_2y})\right\}\\\nonumber
\label{eq:uy3}\tilde{u}_y^{(3)} =&
\operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(M_1A_3e^{-ikp_1(y-w)}+M_2B_3e^{-ikp_2(y-w)})\right\}-\operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(M_1C_3e^{ikp_1y}+M_2D_3e^{ikp_2y})\right\}\\
\end{align}
\item In domain (4):
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ux4}\tilde{u}_x^{(4)} =& \operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(A_4e^{ikp_1(y-w)}+B_4e^{ikp_2(y-w)})\right\}\\
\label{eq:uy4}\tilde{u}_y^{(4)} =& -\operatorname{Re}\left\{e^{ikx}(M_1A_4e^{ikp_1(y-w)}+M_2B_4e^{ikp_2(y-w)})\right\},
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\end{widetext}
where $A_i$, $B_i$, $C_i$, $D_i$, $M_i$ and $p_i$ are constants left to be determined.
One can show (see \onlinecite{Karma2012}) that these equations are solutions of the elastostatic equations \Cref{eq:ese1,eq:ese2} only if the coefficients $M_1$ and $M_2$ are written as:
\begin{align}
M_1 =& \frac{(C_{12}+C_{44})p_1}{C_{44}+C_{11}p_1^2}\\
M_2 =& \frac{(C_{12}+C_{44})p_2}{C_{44}+C_{11}p_2^2},
\end{align}
where $p_1$ and $p_2$ are solutions of the equation
\begin{equation}
p^4+\frac{C_{11}^2-C_{12}^2-2C_{12}C_{44}}{C_{11}C_{44}}p^2+1=0.
\label{eq:eqp}
\end{equation}
This polynomial admits two complex roots of the form
\begin{align}
p_1=e^{i\xi}, \qquad p_2=-e^{-i\xi}
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation}
\xi=\frac{1}{2}\arccos\frac{C_{12}^2-C_{11}^2+2C_{12}C_{44}}{2C_{11}C_{44}}\label{eq:xi}.
\end{equation}
In the limiting case of isotropic elasticity, $p_1=p_2=i$ and \Crefrange{eq:ux1}{eq:uy4} reduce to the displacements function used in Refs.~[\onlinecite{Srolovitz1989}],[\onlinecite{Karma2012}] and [\onlinecite{Geslin2015}].
The other coefficients $A_i$, $B_i$, $C_i$, $D_i$ can be determined from the boundary
conditions at the DBs and GB as detailed in the following sections.
\subsubsection{Boundary conditions on the DBs}
\label{sec:DB_BC}
We first examine the boundary conditions at the DB located at $y=w+h(x)$ separating domains (3) and (4).
Because the DB is coherent, the total displacement $u(x,y)$ must be continuous across the boundary.
We first consider the continuity of the $x$-component: $u_x^{(3)}(x,w+h(x)) = u_x^{(4)}(x,w+h(x))$.
Using Taylor expansions around $y=w$ and keeping only the lowest order terms in $h_0 k$ yields a continuity equation
on the perturbed part of the displacements:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bcd1} \tilde{u}_x^{(4)}(x,w) = \tilde{u}_x^{(3)}(x,w).
\end{equation}
For the same boundary, a similar procedure applied to the component $u_y$ yields
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bcd2} \tilde{u}_y^{(4)}(x,w) = \tilde{u}_y^{(3)}(x,w) + \alpha h(x),
\end{equation}
where $\alpha=\alpha^+-\alpha^-=\varepsilon_0\left(1+\frac{1}{\zeta}\right)(c^+-c^-)$.
Also, the stress vector across the DBs of normal $\bold{n}$ defined as $\bold{T} = [T_x,T_y] = \boldsymbol{\sigma} \cdot \bold{n}$ must be continuous\footnote{The components of normal $\bold{n}$ to the perturbed interface are $n_x=-\frac{\partial_x h}{\sqrt{1+(\partial_x h)^2}}$ and $n_y=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+(\partial_x h)^2}}$}.
Substituting \Cref{eq:totdisx,eq:totdisy} into \Cref{eq:stsxx,eq:stsyy,eq:stsxy} and using \Cref{eq:nonpd},
we get the stress expressed in terms of the perturbed displacements in different domains:
\begin{align}
\sigma_{xx}^{(n)} =& C_{11}\partial_x\tilde{u}^{(n)}_x+C_{12}\partial_y\tilde{u}^{(n)}_y-\frac{C_{11}^2-C_{12}^2}{C_{11}}\varepsilon_0c^{(n)} \nonumber\\
\label{eq:stsp}\sigma_{yy}^{(n)} =& C_{11}\partial_y\tilde{u}^{(n)}_y+C_{12}\partial_x\tilde{u}^{(n)}_x\\\nonumber
\sigma_{xy}^{(n)} =& C_{44}[\partial_y\tilde{u}^{(n)}_x+\partial_x\tilde{u}^{(n)}_y]
\end{align}
where $c^{(2)}=c^{(3)}=c^+$ and $c^{(1)}=c^{(4)}=c^-$.
Substituting \Cref{eq:stsp} for domains (3) and (4) into the continuity of the stress vector
and keeping only the lowest order terms after performing Taylor expansions in $h_0k\ll 1$,
we obtain two additional boundary conditions on the perturbed displacement components $\tilde{u}_x$
and $\tilde{u}_y$. Finally, the boundary conditions on the DB located at $y=w+h(x)$ can be summarized as follow:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:bc34-1}
\tilde{u}_x^{(4)}(x,w)-\tilde{u}_x^{(3)}(x,w) =& 0\\
\label{eq:bc34-2}
\tilde{u}_y^{(4)}(x,w)-\tilde{u}_y^{(3)}(x,w) =& \alpha h(x)\\
\label{eq:bc34-3}
\left[\partial_y\tilde{u}_x^{(4)}+\partial_x\tilde{u}_y^{(4)}\right]_{y=w}-\left[\partial_y\tilde{u}_x^{(3)}+\partial_x\tilde{u}_y^{(3)}\right]_{y=w}=& \frac{C_{11}-C_{12}}{C_{44}}\alpha h^\prime(x)\\
\label{eq:bc34-4}
\left[\partial_x\tilde{u}_x^{(4)}+\zeta\partial_y\tilde{u}_y^{(4)}\right]_{y=w}-\left[\partial_x\tilde{u}_x^{(3)}+\zeta\partial_y\tilde{u}_y^{(3)}\right]_{y=w}=& 0
\end{align}
We derive similar boundary conditions for the DB between domains (1) and (2) located at $y=-w+h(x)$:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:bc12-1}
\hspace{-0.3cm}\tilde{u}_x^{(1)}(x,-w)-\tilde{u}_x^{(2)}(x,-w) =& 0\\
\label{eq:bc12-2}
\hspace{-0.3cm}\tilde{u}_y^{(1)}(x,-w)-\tilde{u}_y^{(2)}(x,-w) =& \alpha h(x)\\
\label{eq:bc12-3}
\hspace{-0.3cm}\left[\partial_y\tilde{u}_x^{(1)}+\partial_x\tilde{u}_y^{(1)}\right]_{y=-w}-\left[\partial_y\tilde{u}_x^{(2)}+\partial_x\tilde{u}_y^{(2)}\right]_{y=-w}=& \frac{C_{11}-C_{12}}{C_{44}}\alpha h^\prime(x)\\
\label{eq:bc12-4}
\hspace{-0.3cm}\left[\partial_x\tilde{u}_x^{(1)}+\zeta\partial_y\tilde{u}_y^{(1)}\right]_{y=-w}-\left[\partial_x\tilde{u}_x^{(2)}+\zeta\partial_y\tilde{u}_y^{(2)}\right]_{y=-w}=& 0
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
\subsubsection{Boundary conditions on the GB}
\label{sec:GB_BC}
The perturbation of DBs produces shear stresses on the GB which is considered to relax entirely
the shear stresses by coupling. We note $H(x)$
the perturbation of the GB position whose amplitude is assumed to be of the order of $h_0$.
Boundary conditions accounting for the GB coupling behavior can then be written assuming that the
GB behaves like a sharp interface located at $H(x)$.
As explained in \Cref{sec:intro}, the coupling behavior of the GB can be translated into
the well-known geometrical relation of \Cref{eq:coupling}
between the normal GB velocity $v_n$ and the velocity of parallel grain translation $v_{\parallel}$
\cite{Cahn2004,Cahn2006}. A simple time integration of this equation leads to
a relationship between the GB perturbation, $H(x)$, and the jump of the total displacement
$u_x$ across the GB. After performing Taylor expansions around $y=H(x)$ and keeping the dominant term, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bcgb-2}
\tilde{u}_x^{(3)}(x,0) - \tilde{u}_x^{(2)}(x,0) = \beta H(x).
\end{equation}
Substituting the displacements $\tilde{u}_x^{(2)}$ and $\tilde{u}_x^{(3)}$
described in \Cref{eq:ux2,eq:ux3} into this equation, we deduce that the
function $H(x)$ takes the form $H(x)=H_0 \cos(kx)$, where $H_0$ is a constant unknown at the
moment. Therefore, the GB perturbation $H(x)$ is out of phase compared to the DB perturbation $h(x)$,
as depicted in \Cref{fig:nonlinear}.
The coupling behavior of the GB does not influence the component $u_y$ of the displacement field,
which remains continuous across the boundary. The procedure explained in \cref{sec:DB_BC} can
be applied straightforwardly to the component $u_y$, yielding:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bcgb-1}
\tilde{u}_y^{(3)}(x,0) - \tilde{u}_y^{(2)}(x,0) = 0.
\end{equation}
Just like in the case of DBs, the components of the stress vector $\bold{T}$ is continuous across the GB.
The continuity of the component $T_x$ leads to the following equation:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bcgb-3}
\left[\partial_x\tilde{u}_x^{(3)}+\zeta\partial_y\tilde{u}_y^{(3)}\right]_{y=0}-\left[\partial_x\tilde{u}_x^{(2)}+\zeta\partial_y\tilde{u}_y^{(2)}\right]_{y=0} = 0
\end{equation}
In addition to the continuity of the component $T_y$, we assume that the GB relaxes completely
the shear stresses through coupling. In other words, the GB adapts its shape to the shear stress environment produced
by the perturbation on the DBs such that the shear stresses vanish at $y=H(x)$. This leads to the following
relation on the perturbed displacements:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:bcgb-4}
\left[ \partial_y \tilde{u}_x^{(2)} + \partial_x \tilde{u}_y^{(2)} \right]_{y=0} =& 0\\
\label{eq:bcgb-5}
\left[ \partial_y \tilde{u}_x^{(3)} + \partial_x \tilde{u}_y^{(3)} \right]_{y=0} =& 0
\end{align}
Finally, we obtained five boundary conditions (\Crefrange{eq:bcgb-1}{eq:bcgb-5})
that have to be fulfilled on the GB by the displacement field.
\subsubsection{Solution of the elastostatic equations}
Substituting the expression of the displacements \Crefrange{eq:ux1}{eq:uy4} into
the boundary conditions (\ref{eq:bc34-1})-(\ref{eq:bcgb-5}) yields
13 linear equations. The 13 unknowns of the problem ($A_i$, $B_i$,
$C_i$, $D_i$, $H_0$) are then determined uniquely by solving the linear system of equations.
In particular, we obtain an expression of the GB amplitude $H_0$:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
H_0 =& \left(2 i h_0 (M_1 p_1 - M_2 p_2) \alpha (1 + \zeta) \left[(e^{i k p_1 w} M_2 (-M_1 + p_1) - e^{i k p_2 w} M_1 (-M_2 + p_2)) (-1 + \zeta) C_{12}\right.\right.\nonumber\\
\label{eq:eqH0}
&+ \left.\left.(e^{i k p_1 w} - e^{i k p_2 w}) (-M_1 + p_1) (-M_2 + p_2) C_{44}\right]\right)\\
& /\left((M_2 p_1 - M_1 p_2) \left[-p_1 + p_2 + M_1 (1 + M_2 (p_1 - p_2) \zeta - p_1 p_2 \zeta) + M_2 (-1 + p_1 p_2 \zeta)\right] C_{44} \beta\right)\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
The full expression of the other unknowns $A_i$, $B_i$ $C_i$ and $D_i$ are quite lengthy and are detailed in \cref{sec:RLE}.
To highlight the influence of the anisotropic elasticity on the instability,
we express the elastic constants $C_{11}$, $C_{12}$ and $C_{44}$ as a function of an equivalent shear modulus $G=C_{44}$, Poisson's
ratio $\nu=C_{12}/(C_{11}+C_{12})$ and the anisotropic factor $S=1-\frac{C_{11}-C_{12}}{2 C_{44}}$:
\begin{align}
C_{44} = & G \label{eq:C12G} \\
C_{12} = & \frac{2(1-S)G\nu}{1-2\nu}\\
C_{11} = & \frac{2(1-S)G(1-\nu)}{1-2\nu}
\label{eq:C11G}
\end{align}
Finally, we expand \Cref{eq:xi} in the limit of small $S$: $\xi=\left(\pi-\sqrt{2S/(1-\nu)}\right)/2$.
After substituting these expressions into \Cref{eq:eqH0} and performing a Taylor expansion
for small $S$, we obtain
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}
H_0 = -\frac{4\varepsilon_0(c^+-c^-)h_0e^{-kw}}{\beta}+\frac{\varepsilon_0(c^+-c^-)h_0e^{-kw}(1-3kw+k^2w^2)S}{\beta(1-\nu)}+O(S^{3/2})
\label{eq:eqH0te}
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig4.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Ratio $|H_0\beta/h_0|$ versus the dimensionless wave-vector $kw$ obtained from \Cref{eq:eqH0te}
for different values of the anisotropic coefficient $S$, showing the influence of the elastic anisotropy on
the relative amplitudes of the GB and DB perturbations.}
\label{fig:Hbeta-kw}
\end{figure}
In the isotropic limit ($S=0$), we recover exactly our previously derived result
(Eq.~(13) in Ref.~[\onlinecite{Geslin2015}]).
The role of anisotropic elasticity enters as a correction
proportional to $\varepsilon_0 h_0/\beta$ in the limit of small $S$.
We note that the term $(1-3kw+k^2w^2)$ entering this corrective term
can be positive or negative depending on value the $kw$. This is illustrated in \Cref{fig:Hbeta-kw}
where $|H_0\beta/h_0|$ is plotted as a function of $kw$ for different values of $S$.
\subsection{Linear stability analysis}
\label{sec:SIA}
In the previous section, we solved the elastostatic equations when the DB position is modified by a periodic
perturbation.
In this section, we formulate a Stefan-like free boundary problem that governs the diffusion-controlled motion of the DBs in the sharp-interface limit where the DB width is much smaller than the perturbation wavelength. Furthermore, we perform a linear stability analysis of the evolution equations for the DBs to obtain the growth rate of the morphological instability driven by the elastic interaction between the DBs and GB. This analysis makes use of the results of the previous section for the stresses on the perturbed DBs.
Far from the DBs, the concentration is close to its equilibrium value $\bar{c}^{\pm}$
such that \Cref{eq:aemecd} reduces to the diffusion equation. Moreover, in this limit, the
chemical potential defined as $\mu=\delta F/\delta c$ is proportional to the solute concentration.
Therefore, the same diffusion equation holds for $\mu$:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial\mu^{(n)}}{\partial t} = D\nabla^2\mu^{(n)},\quad n=1\dots4,
\label{eq:mume}
\end{equation}
where $D=Mf_{dw}^{\prime\prime}(c^{\pm})$ is the diffusion coefficient.
Similarly to what has been done for the displacement field in the previous section, the chemical potential
is decomposed as a sum $\mu=\bar{\mu}+\tilde{\mu}$ where $\bar{\mu}$ is the equilibrium chemical
potential for the non-perturbed configuration and $\tilde{\mu}$ is a small variation due to DB perturbations.
We first consider the non-perturbed DB located between domains (1) and (2), at $y=-w$.
The composition field $c(x,y)$ does not depend on $x$ and adopts an equilibrium profile along $y$ denoted by $\bar{c}(y)$, reaching the values $\bar{c}^-$ and $\bar{c}^+$ in domains (1) and (2) respectively.
At equilibrium, the chemical potential is constant across the DB interface and is given by
\begin{equation}
\bar{\mu}=f_{dw}^\prime(\bar{c}(y))-\varepsilon_0(\bar{\sigma}_{xx}(y)+\bar{\sigma}_{yy}(y))-K\partial_y^2\bar{c}(y)
\label{eq:unpmu}
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\sigma}_{xx}(y)$ and $\bar{\sigma}_{yy}(y)$ are the stress profiles along the $y$ direction.
The second term emerges from the derivative of the elastic energy density \Cref{eq:aefed} lineralized for small deformations $f_{el}^{lin} = \frac{1}{2}\sigma_{ij}(\varepsilon_{ij} - \delta_{ij}\varepsilon_0 c)$.
We then consider a perturbation $h(x)$ of the DBs and elastic displacements.
Using the linearity of elasticity, the total stress fields can be written as
$\sigma_{ij} = \bar{\sigma}_{ij}+\tilde{\sigma}_{ij}$, where $\sigma_{ij}$
is the stress field induced by the perturbation.
Considering that the perturbation $h(x)$ is a slowly varying function of $x$,
we can assume that, in the vicinity of the DB, the concentration field takes the form
$c(x,y) \approx \bar{c}(y-h(x))$. Substituting these expressions for the stress and composition fields
into the definition of the chemical potential and keeping only the dominant terms, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\mu=\bar{\mu}-\varepsilon_0(\tilde{\sigma}_{xx}+\tilde{\sigma}_{yy})+K\partial_y\bar{c}\kappa
\label{eq:totmu}
\end{equation}
where $\kappa$ is the domain interface curvature. The chemical potential $\mu$ and the stress fields
$\tilde{\sigma}_{xx}$ and $\tilde{\sigma}_{yy}$ vary on a much larger length-scale than the interface width and can be
assumed to be constant across the DB. We then multiply \Cref{eq:totmu} by $\partial_y\bar{c}$
and integrate over the interval $[-w-\delta, -w+\delta]$ where $\delta$ is an arbitrary intermediate length,
larger than the interface width but much smaller than the characteristic scale on which the stresses
and chemical potential vary. We finally obtain the chemical potential acting on the DBs:
\begin{equation}
\mu_{\text{\tiny DB}} = \bar{\mu} - \varepsilon_0[\tilde{\sigma}_{xx}+\tilde{\sigma}_{yy}]_{\text{\tiny DB}} + \frac{\gamma\kappa}{\bar{c}^+-\bar{c}^-}
\label{eq:DBmu}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma=K\int_{-w-\delta}^{-w+\delta}(\partial_y\bar{c})^2dy$ is the
interfacial energy and $[\tilde{\sigma}_{xx}+\tilde{\sigma}_{yy}]_{\text{\tiny DB}}$ is the sum
of the stresses at the DB.
In the case of a periodic perturbation $h(x) = h_0 \sin(kx)$, the stresses at the DB
are obtained by substituting \Crefrange{eq:ux1}{eq:uy4} into
\Cref{eq:stsp} and using the expression of $A_i$, $B_i$, $C_i$ and $D_i$ listed
in \Cref{sec:RLE}. Similarly to the expression of the GB perturbation,
the stresses can be expressed as a Taylor expansion, treating the anisotropic coefficient
$S$ as a small parameter:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:stsxxyy1} [\tilde{\sigma}_{xx}+\tilde{\sigma}_{yy}]_{DB} =& \operatorname{Re}\{-k(C_{11}+C_{12})[(A_1+B_1)-(M_1p_1A_1+M_2p_2B_1)]_{y=-w}\}\\\nonumber
=& \operatorname{Re}\{-k(C_{11}+C_{12})[(A_4+B_4)-(M_1p_1A_4+M_2p_2B_4)]_{y=w}\}\\\nonumber
\label{eq:stsxxyy2}=& \left\{-\frac{4\varepsilon_0(\bar{c}^+-\bar{c}^-)k G e^{-2kw}}{1-\nu}+\frac{\varepsilon_0(\bar{c}^+-\bar{c}^-) k G S[1+(4(1-\nu)-4kw+2k^2w^2)e^{-2kw}]}{(1-\nu)^2}+O(S^{3/2})\right\}h\\
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
In the limit of isotropic elasticity ($S=0$), we recover the stresses obtained in Ref.~[\onlinecite{Geslin2015}].
We now perform a linear stability analysis by considering that the amplitude of the perturbation $h_0(t)$ evolves exponentially in time: $h_0(t) = h_i \exp(\omega_k t)$, with $\omega_k$ the growth rate of the instability and $h_i$ the initial amplitude of the perturbation.
For simplicity, we define the function\footnote{We note that $\Gamma(k)$ does not depend on time because the stresses $\sigma_{xx}$ and $\sigma_{yy}$ depend linearly on $h(x,t)$}
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(k)=-\frac{\varepsilon_0[\tilde{\sigma}_{xx}+\tilde{\sigma}_{yy}]_{\text{\tiny DB}}}{h(x,t)} + \frac{\gamma k^2}{\bar{c}^+-\bar{c}^-},
\end{equation}
such that the chemical potential on the DB between domains (1) and (2) is simply given by
\begin{equation}
\mu_{\text{\tiny DB}}^{(1,2)}(t) = \bar{\mu} + \Gamma(k)h(x,t)
\label{eq:DB12mu}
\end{equation}
Similarly, the chemical potential on the DB between domains (3) and (4) is:
\begin{equation}
\mu_{\text{\tiny DB}}^{(3,4)}(t) = \bar{\mu} - \Gamma(k)h(x,t).
\label{eq:DB34mu}
\end{equation}
\Cref{eq:DB12mu,eq:DB34mu} serve as boundary conditions for the solution of \Cref{eq:mume}.
In addition, two additional boundary conditions are obtained by considering that the chemical potential reaches $\bar{\mu}$ far from the DBs (i.e. for $y \to \pm \infty$). The solution of
\Cref{eq:mume} satisfying these boundary conditions is of the form
\begin{align}
\label{eq:mu1}
\mu^{(1)} =& \bar{\mu} + \Gamma(k)e^{q(y+w)}h(x,t) \\
\label{eq:mu23}
\mu^{(n)} =& \bar{\mu} - \Gamma(k)\frac{\sinh(qy)}{\sinh(qw)}h(x,t), \quad n=2,3\\
\label{eq:mu4}
\mu^{(4)} =& \bar{\mu} - \Gamma(k)e^{-q(y-w)}h(x,t)
\end{align}
where $q=\sqrt{k^2+\omega_k/D}$.
Next, the normal velocity of the DBs is given by the mass conservation (Stefan-like) condition
\begin{equation}
v_{\text{\tiny DB}} = -\frac{M}{\bar{c}^+-\bar{c}^-}\llbracket\partial_y\mu\rrbracket_{\text{\tiny DB}},
\label{eq:DBv}
\end{equation}
where the double brackets denotes the jump of the normal gradient of chemical potential $\partial_y\mu$ across the DB, neglecting higher order nonlinear terms originating from the change of normal direction induced by the perturbation of the DB (i.e. $\sqrt{1+(\partial_xh)^2}\approx 1$). Using the fact that $v_{\text{\tiny DB}}=\partial_t h=\omega_kh(x,t)$ and
\Crefrange{eq:mu1}{eq:mu4} to evaluate the right-hand-side of \Cref{eq:DBv}, we obtain an implicit transcendental equation for $\omega_k$:
\begin{equation}
\omega_k=\frac{M\Gamma(k)}{c^+-c^-}\sqrt{\frac{\omega_k}{D}+k^2}\left(1+\coth\left(w\sqrt{\frac{\omega_k}{D}+k^2}\right)\right).
\label{eq:omegak_full}
\end{equation}
We can consider the quasistatic limit where the concentration field that evolves on a time-scale $1/Dk^2$
reaches quickly an equilibrium profile compared to the time-scale of the evolution of the DB $1/\omega_k$. Our simulations are performed within this quasistatic limit. With $\omega_k \ll Dk^2$, $q \simeq k$ and \Cref{eq:omegak_full} reduces to a straightforward expression for $\omega_k$:
\begin{equation}
\omega_k=\frac{M\Gamma(k)k}{c^+-c^-}\left(1+\coth(kw)\right)
\label{eq:omegak_approx}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig5a.pdf}\\
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig5b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{Fig5c.pdf}
\end{center}
\begin{picture}(1,0)(0,0)
\put(77.,245.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\scriptsize {Isotropic}}}}
\put(77.,235.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\scriptsize {\Cref{eq:stsxxyy1}}}}}
\put(77.,225.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\scriptsize {\Cref{eq:stsxxyy2}}}}}
\put(-99.,430.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\textbf{(a)}}}}
\put(-99.,270.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\textbf{(b)}}}}
\put(-99.,120.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\textbf{(c)}}}}
\end{picture}
\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
\begin{picture}(10,1)(0,0)
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\color{red}
\put(19.,87.0) {\line(1,0){1.4}}
\put(21.0,87.0) {\circle*{0.1}}
\put(21.6,87.0) {\line(1,0){1.4}}
\color{blue}
\put(19.,83.5) {\line(1,0){1.6}}
\put(21.8,83.5) {\line(1,0){1.6}}
\put(19.,80.0) {\line(1,0){4}}
\end{picture}
\vspace*{-0.7cm}
\caption{(a) Amplitude of perturbed DB v.s. time for the simulation shown in
\Cref{fig:nonlinear}. Black dots locate the snapshots in \Cref{fig:nonlinear}. The
dashed line represents the exponential fit performed to obtain the
growth rate of the instability. (b) Dimensionless growth rate $\omega_k$ as a function of the normalized wavevector $kw$
($w$ is the half-width of the compositional domain) in the isotropic case (red) and anisotropic case
(blue) with $S=0.5$. In both cases, $w=32a$ and $\varepsilon_0=0.043$ while the
GB misorientation is $7.2\degree$ and $11.5\degree$ in the isotropic and anisotropic case, respectively.
For the anisotropic case, both the exact solution (derived using \Cref{eq:stsxxyy1}) and the approximate
solution (derived using \Cref{eq:stsxxyy2}) are represented respectively with a dashed and continuous line.
(c) Marginal wavevector $k_s$ as a function of the domain half-width $w$
for both isotropic (red) and anisotropic (blue) elasticity. The theoretical prediction in the anisotropic case
is obtained from the exact solution (derived using \Cref{eq:stsxxyy1}).}
\label{fig:omegak}
\end{figure}
We note that for typical material values of $\nu<1/2$, the second term of \Cref{eq:stsxxyy2} has the same sign
as the anisotropic coefficient $S$. Therefore, if $S>0$ ($S<0$), the elastic anisotropy inhibits (promotes) the
development of the instability compared to the isotropic case.
To check the validity of this analysis, we performed AE simulations with both the isotropic hexagonal and anisotropic BCC models.
In both cases, we choose $C_{44}=\unit{39}{GPa}$. In the BCC AE model, we have necessarily $C_{11}=2C_{12}=2C_{44}$, fixing $S=0.5$.
The misfit eigenstrain is $\varepsilon_0=0.043$. In addition,
the GB misorientation is $7.2\degree$ and $11.5\degree$ in the isotropic and anisotropic simulations, respectively.
To obtain the growth rate numerically, we perform simulations where the DBs
are initially gently deformed from their planar configuration with a small amplitude sinusoidal perturbation.
As demonstrated by the linear stability analysis, the stresses induced by this perturbation lead
to an increase of the perturbation amplitude $h_0(t)$. \Cref{fig:omegak}.a displays the amplitude of the DB perturbation
as a function of time for the simulation presented in \Cref{fig:nonlinear}. The black dots along the curve locate the snapshots shown in
\Cref{fig:nonlinear}. We can distinguish two regimes. First, the perturbation amplitude grows exponentially with time as
predicted by the linear stability analysis. The growth rate of the simulation is obtained by performing
an exponential fit on this part of the curve. Second, at longer times, nonlinearities play
a significant role and are responsible for
the deviation of the simulation results from the exponential fit. As depicted in \Cref{fig:nonlinear}.c, the DBs collide
with the GB, leading to a highly non-linear regime where GB breaks-up and the position of the individual dislocations are
relaxed by both glide and climb (see \Cref{fig:nonlinear}.d).
The growth rates are obtained for different simulations performed with various wavevector $k$
and for a precipitate width $w=32\,a$.
We note that large wave-lengths (i.e. $kw<0.7$) are not investigated computationally due to the large simulation box sizes
necessary to explore this part of the dispersion diagram.
For both the isotropic and anisotropic AE models, the results are compared to analytical predictions in \Cref{fig:omegak}.b.
For the sake of consistency with Ref.~[\onlinecite{Geslin2015}], the growth rate $\omega_k$ is normalized
by the characteristic time $d_0^2/G M$ where $d_0$ is
defined for an isotropic material by $d_0=\gamma(1-\nu)/[8G\varepsilon_0^2(c^+-c^-)]$.
As already discussed in Ref.~[\onlinecite{Geslin2015}], the simulation results in the isotropic case ($S=0$)
agree well with the analytical prediction.
As discussed previously, \Cref{fig:omegak}.b clearly shows that for our choice of parameters ($S=0.5$),
the anisotropic elasticity reduces significantly the growth rate and shifts the unstable range (where $\omega_k>0$)
to larger wavelengths, therefore inhibiting the instability. This can be understood with the following
qualitative argument: in the isotropic case, the Bitter-Crum theorem \cite{Bitter1931,Fratzl1999}
insures that the elastic energy of a precipitate does not depend on its shape. Therefore, the perturbation
of the DB interface leads automatically to a decrease of the elastic energy due to the relaxation of the shear stresses
at the GBs. If this energy drop compensates the increase of energy attributed to the lengthening of the perturbed DBs, the system is unstable. This reasoning does not hold in the anisotropic case where the Bitter-Crum theorem does not apply. In our case, the lamellar precipitate is oriented along an elastically soft direction. Any perturbation of such a well-oriented precipitate increases the elastic energy. Therefore, the destabilization of the system occurs only if the stress relaxation
at the GB compensates this additional amount of energy. We note that a lamellar precipitate oriented along an elastically hard direction (e.g. with a $45 \degree$ angle with the $x$-axis) is intrinsically unstable \cite{Khachaturyan2013}.
The simulations performed with the BCC AE model show a good agreement with the growth rate predicted by the linear stability analysis. The small discrepancy between the numerical and analytical results is attributed to the homogeneous elasticity approximation.
Indeed, to perform the linear stability analysis, we considered that the elastic constants are the same in both grains, regardless of the
rotations introduced by the GB. Also, numerical limitations such as limited system sizes might also
contribute to this small discrepancy.
The marginally stable wavevetor $k_s$ defined as the positive root of $\omega_k=0$ can be deduced
for both numerical and theoretical results and is plotted as a function of the normalized composition
domain half-width $w$ in the isotropic and anisotropic case in \Cref{fig:omegak}.c. This plot shows
again that the elastic anisotropy shifts the domain of instability to longer wavelengths, thus
inhibiting the morphological instability. Even though we only presented numerical results for one value of
$w$, the dependence of the results on $w$ can be deduced from the predictions of the linear stability analysis. For isotropic elasticity, this analysis predicts that, in the physically relevant limit $w\gg d_0$ where the precipitate width is much larger than the microscopic capillary length scale $d_0$, the marginally stable wavector $k_s\approx \frac{1}{2w}\ln(w/d_0)$ and the fastest growing wavector $k_0\approx C/w$ where $C=0.797...$ is a numerical constant \cite{Geslin2015}.
The same scalings holds for the anisotropic case but with the constant $C$ depending generally on the magnitude $S$ of the anisotropy. As can be seen in Fig. \ref{fig:omegak}.b, the fastest growing wavector is smaller in the anisotropic case than the isotropic case, consistent with the fact that anisotropy has a stabilizing effect when the lamellar precipitate is oriented along an elastically soft direction. However, in both the isotropic and anisotropic cases, the most unstable wavelength $2\pi/k_0$ is proportional to $w$ so that the instability will generally develop on the scale of the precipitate width.
\section{Grain boundary break-up}
\label{sec:GBB}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig6a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig6b.pdf}
\begin{picture}(1,0)(0,0)
\put(-100.,19.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(a)}}}}
\put(5.,19.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(b)}}}}
\end{picture}
\end{center}
\caption{Snapshots of the concentration field during a simulation performed with
a GB misorientation angle $\theta=30.4\degree$ centered on a lamellar precipitate of
eigenstrain $\varepsilon_0=0.043$.
The system size is $7.8w \times 10.8w$ where $2w$ is the initial width of the precipitate
(the vertical length of each frame is smaller than the box dimension).
The snapshots correspond to dimensionless times (a) $1.2\times10^6$ and
(b) $5.12\times10^6$. See online supplementental material\cite{SupplMat} for the movie of this simulation (file movie1.avi).}
\label{fig:nobreak}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig7a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig7b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig7c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig7d.pdf}
\begin{picture}(1,0)(0,0)
\put(-99.,126.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(a)}}}}
\put(5.,126.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(b)}}}}
\put(-99.,19.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(c)}}}}
\put(5.,19.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(d)}}}}
\end{picture}
\end{center}
\caption{Snapshots of the concentration field during a simulation performed with
a GB misorientation angle $\theta=30.4\degree$ centered on a lamellar precipitate of
eigenstrain $\varepsilon_0=0.086$.
The system size is $7.8w \times 10.8w$ where $2w$ is the initial width of the precipitate
(the vertical length of each frame is smaller than the box dimension).
The snapshots correspond to dimensionless times (a) $4\times10^3$,
(b) $7.6\times10^4$, (c) $2.84\times10^5$ and (d) $4.2\times10^6$.
See online supplementental material\cite{SupplMat} for the movie of this simulation (file movie2.avi).}
\label{fig:hvbreak}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig8.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{GB behavior as a function of misorientation angle $\theta$ and misfit strain $\varepsilon_0$.
Simulations where the GB breaks up are represented
with red dots while the ones where the GB is morphologically unstable but remains continuous are shown with blue squares. The dashed
line is a second order polynomial fit of the boundary between break-up and non-break-up regions of the ($\theta$, $\varepsilon_0^2$) plane.}
\label{fig:sumbreak}
\end{figure}
In polycrystalline materials, the density and properties of GBs influence significantly the properties
of the bulk material. They are preferred nucleation sites for second phase precipitates \cite{Sutton1995}.
and also facilitate impurities diffusion though a pipe diffusion effect \cite{Hirth1968}. Moreover, GBs are
natural obstacles to dislocation motion, and fine grain structures often present high yield stresses \cite{Sutton1995}.
Therefore, controlling the GB density and properties is of first importance to obtain high material properties.
The instability described in this article affects significantly the GB
and can even lead to the break-up of the GB as shown in \Cref{fig:nonlinear}.
For this low angle GB ($\theta = 7.2\degree$), $\beta=0.126$ and the perturbation of the GB expressed
in \Cref{eq:eqH0te} is significant as shown in \Cref{fig:nonlinear}.b.
In the equilibrium state represented in \Cref{fig:nonlinear}.e.,
the dislocations that were forming the low-angle GB
decorate the precipitate interface, relaxing the misfit stresses.
Increasing the GB angle does not modify the development nor the growth rate of the instability. However,
for higher misorientation angles, the coupling factor $\beta$ is greater and therefore the amplitude of the GB
perturbation is smaller. So, one can expect the influence of the instability on the GB to be less important.
\Cref{fig:nobreak} shows the late stages of the development of the instability
for a misorientation angle $\theta=30.4\degree$ GB, everything else being identical to the simulation
presented in \Cref{fig:nonlinear}. As expected, the GB is less affected by the instability: its position
is only slightly modified and the precipitate shape evolves until the DBs wet the GB. \Cref{fig:nobreak}.b
represents the equilibrium state of the system where the GB remains continuous and the precipitate forms
lobes on both sides of the GB. We note here that this destabilization can represent the first stage of development of
the Widmanst\"{a}tten structure found in steel and Ti-based alloys \cite{DaCostaTeixeira2006,Cheng2010}. It has been shown
experimentally that Widmanst\"{a}tten structures develop in two steps: first, an thin elongated precipitate
nucleates on the GB and grow laterally; then, the precipitate develops acicular arms growing perpendicularly
to the GB, towards the center of the grain.
The instability presented in this paper and more precisely the morphology shown in \Cref{fig:nobreak}.b
could trigger the growth of elongated precipitates perpendicular to the GB.
However, increasing the misfit strain can destabilize a high angle GB as well:
\Cref{fig:hvbreak} shows a simulation performed with $\theta=30.4\degree$ and
a misfit eigenstrain of $\varepsilon_0=0.086$. During the development of the instability,
we notice the nucleation of low composition domains close to the GB (blue droplets in \Cref{fig:hvbreak}.b)
promoted by the high compressive stress appearing in the vicinity of the deformed GB. Later in the simulation,
the high angle GB breaks up (\Cref{fig:hvbreak}.c) and the system relaxes
into a configuration presenting two lower angle GBs (\Cref{fig:hvbreak}.d).
The equilibrium configuration also shows that dislocations decorate the precipitate surface, relaxing
the high misfit stresses.
The appearance of GB break-up then depends on a balance between the misfit stresses and the GB misorientation.
This is summarized in \Cref{fig:sumbreak} where the results of several simulations for various values
of the misorientation angle $\theta$ and eigenstrain $\varepsilon_0$ are presented: the GB break-up occurs for
low angle GBs and high values of $\varepsilon_0^2$. The dashed line separating both regions serves as a guide
to the eye and is linear for small values of the misorientation angle. It also shows that for a large
enough misfit, the instability break up all GBs.
\section{Interaction between circular precipitates and grain boundaries}
\label{sec:CPG}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig9a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig9b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig9c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig9d.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig9e.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig9f.pdf}
\begin{picture}(1,0)(0,0)
\put(-99.,181.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(a)}}}}
\put(5.,181.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(b)}}}}
\put(-99.,100.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(c)}}}}
\put(5.,100.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(d)}}}}
\put(-99.,19.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(e)}}}}
\put(5.,19.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(f)}}}}
\end{picture}
\end{center}
\caption{Snapshots of the concentration field during a simulation performed with
a GB misorientation $\theta=7.2\degree$ and a circular precipitate with a
misfit eigenstrain $\varepsilon_0=0.043$.
The system size is $7.8R \times 11.3R$ where $R$ is the radius of the circular
precipitate. The snapshots correspond to dimensionless times (a) $1\times10^4$,
(b) $1.6\times10^5$, (c) $5.1\times10^5$, (d) $1.01\times10^6$, (e) $2.72\times10^6$
and (f) $6.18\times10^6$. See online supplementental material\cite{SupplMat} for the movie of this simulation (file movie3.avi).}
\label{fig:circlelow}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig10a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig10b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig10c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig10d.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig10e.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{Fig10f.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=1.00\linewidth]{Fig10g.pdf}
\begin{picture}(1,0)(0,0)
\put(-99.,330.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(a)}}}}
\put(5.,330.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(b)}}}}
\put(-99.,249.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(c)}}}}
\put(5.,249.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(d)}}}}
\put(-99.,168.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(e)}}}}
\put(5.,168.) {\mbox{\textcolor{white}{\textbf{(f)}}}}
\put(-60.,60.) {\mbox{\textcolor{black}{\textbf{(g)}}}}
\end{picture}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.6cm
\caption{Snapshots of the concentration field during a simulation performed with
a GB misorientation $\theta=20.8\degree$ and a circular precipitate with a
misfit eigenstrain $\varepsilon_0=0.043$.
The system size is $7.7R \times 10.8R$ where $R$ is the radius of the circular
precipitate. The snapshots correspond to dimensionless times (a) $1\times10^4$,
(b) $5.1\times10^5$, (c) $1.01\times10^6$, (d) $1.61\times10^6$, (e) $2.75\times10^6$
and (f) $5.52\times10^6$. The evolution of the total free energy is represented in panel (g)
in which black dots locate the snapshots in (a-f). See online supplementental material\cite{SupplMat} for the movie of this simulation (file movie4.avi).}
\label{fig:circlehigh}
\end{figure}
In the previous sections, we considered configurations consisting of a lamellar precipitate
centered on a GB. Even though this geometry is relevant for heterogeneous nucleation
of precipitates on GBs, circular precipitates also commonly appear
in the vicinity of a GB as exemplified by Ni-Al superalloys
\cite{Koul1983,Safari2006,Mitchell2009a}. The $\gamma'$ precipitates in these alloys
are known to influence the GB morphology by causing
their serration and this mechanism has been shown to improve the creep properties
of the alloy by preventing GB sliding \cite{Koul1983}. The GB serration has been proposed to be due to
a balance between the elastic energy released by the coherency loss of the precipitate interface
in contact with the GB and the GB surface tension \cite{Koul1983,Safari2006},
two ingredients that are naturally taken into account in the AE model.
We consider a configuration consisting of a circular precipitate of radius $R=32a$ and of misfit $\varepsilon_0=0.043$
located at a distance $2R$ of a symmetrical GB. Snapshots of simulations performed with two different
misorientation angles $\theta=7.2\degree$ and $\theta=20.8\degree$ are presented in
\Cref{fig:circlelow,fig:circlehigh}, respectively. Even though the circular and lamellar precipitate geometries differ significantly, the simulations reveal that the mechanism of the GB instability is similar in both cases. The GB deforms slightly by shear-coupled motion to relax shear stresses produced by the misfitting particle.
In turn, the deformed GB produces an heterogeneous stress field, inducing the migration of the precipitate
towards the GB (see \Cref{fig:circlelow}.a-c and \Cref{fig:circlehigh}.a-b). This migration
is mediated by the elongation of the precipitate. The additional surface energy caused by this
elongation is compensated by the relaxation of shear stresses by the GB coupling mechanism. Therefore, the interplay
between the elastic energy and the surface energy lead to the destabilization of the configuration through a
mechanism similar to the morphological instability of lamellar precipitates described previously.
Eventually, the misfitting particle enters in contact with the GB. For the low angle GB,
the misfit stress is large enough to break-up the GB (see \Cref{fig:circlelow}.d), allowing the GB dislocations
to relax part of the misfit stress. For the higher angle GB, the precipitate interface wets the GB without
leading to its break-up (see \Cref{fig:circlehigh}.d). In both cases, the equilibrium configuration show a slightly elliptic
precipitate centered on the somewhat perturbed GB. This configuration relaxes the total energy as
shown in \Cref{fig:circlehigh}.g.
Despite a large value of the misfit compared to $\gamma'$ precipitates in Ni-Al superalloys, these simulations
show that elastic interactions between the misfitting particle and the GB
induce a driving force for the migration of the particle, thereby providing a mechanism for how $\gamma'$ precipitates nucleated in the GB vicinity migrate towards the GB. In the case of an isolated misfitting particle, the shear stress induced along the GB by the particle decays as $(R/\ell)^d$ where $R$ and $\ell$ are the particle radius and its initial perpendicular distance to the GB, respectively, and $d$ is the dimension of space. Hence, in both two and three dimensions, the GB will be deformed on a scale comparable to $\ell$. This deformation will in turn perturb the stress field on a scale $\ell$ , thereby causing the precipitate to migrate at a rate that becomes vanishingly small in the limit $\ell\gg R$. In the case where several particles are present, the interaction between particles and GB is more complex. However, significant migration is generally expected to only occur when a particle is located at a distance from the GB comparable to its size.
\section{Conclusions and outlook}
In summary, we used the AE framework to investigate computationally the interaction between GBs and second phase precipitates in two-phase coherent solids in the presence of misfit strain. We focused on two generic geometries where a GB is centered inside a lamellar precipitate formed by heterogeneous nucleation on the GB, and where the GB is adjacent to a circular precipitate that nucleates inside a grain. We find that, in both geometries, the GB becomes deformed away from its initial planar configuration by a coordinated motion of the GB and the adjacent compositional DB(s) that relaxes the elastic strain energy created by the misfit precipitate. The motion of the GB is driven by shear stresses along the GB (shear-coupled motion) while the motion of the DBs is driven by concentration gradients and controlled by atomic diffusion.
For the lamellar precipitate geometry, the coordinated motion of the GB and DBs is manifested as a pattern-forming instability with a fastest growing wavelength. This instability bears similarities with the Asaro-Tiller-Grinfeld (ATG) instability \cite{Asaro1972,Grinfeld1986} where destabilization is mediated by the relaxation of the normal stresses at a free surface or a solid-liquid interface. However, the present instability is more complex in that it involves the interaction of two fundamentally different types of interfaces (GB and DBs). Furthermore, it is mediated by the relaxation of a shear stress at the GB. We have characterized analytically this instability by extending our previous linear stability analysis for isotropic elasticity \cite{Geslin2015} to the more complex case of anisotropic elasticity. The analysis predicts that, if the lamellar precipitate is oriented along an elastically soft direction, elastic anisotropy hinders the instability by reducing the growth rate of the instability and the range of unstable wavelengths. However, anisotropy does not suppress the instability even though the lamellar precipitate would be stable in this configuration in the absence of misfit. Analytical predictions for the growth rate of perturbations and the range of unstable wavelengths are in good overall quantitative agreement with the results of AE simulations for three-dimensional BCC crystal structures.
For a circular precipitate adjacent to a planar GB, the coordinated motion of the GB and DB is manifested by an elongation of the precipitate shape and concomitant migration of the precipitate towards the deformed GB.
The increase of interfacial energy associated with this elongation is compensated by the relaxation of shear stresses by the GB coupling mechanism. Hence, the interplay between elastic and interfacial energy leads to the destabilization of the initial GB-precipitate configuration by a physical mechanism similar to the morphological instability of the GB inside a lamellar precipitate.
Simulations also reveal that, in the lamellar geometry, instability can lead to the break-up of low-angle GBs when the misfit strain exceeds a threshold that depends on the grain boundary misorientation. Stationary equilibrium configurations after break-up can be quite complex and consist of dislocations that reside inside or outside the precipitate and decorate its surface to relax the misfit stress. For the circular precipitate, GB break-up also occurs for low angle GBs even though the final equilibrium configuration is typically an oval shape precipitate centered on an approximately flat GB, at least for the few cases investigated here. For both the lamellar and circular precipitates, dislocation climb is seen to provide an important mechanism to relax the total free-energy in addition to glide.
The present findings should be relevant for interpreting a host of experiments where GBs interact strongly with precipitates, including the aforementioned examples of
Ni-Al superalloys where $\gamma'$ precipitates lead to GB serration \cite{Koul1983,Mitchell2009a} and Widmanst\"{a}tten precipitates in steel and Ti-based alloys, which are observed to grow out in a direction normal to the GB plane \cite{DaCostaTeixeira2006,Cheng2010}.
In the more general setting of spinodal decomposition occurring in a
polycrystalline material, our results suggest that a large difference of lattice spacing between compositional domains
could influence significantly the grain structure by the break-up of GBs
or the nucleation of new grains (e.g. \Cref{fig:hvbreak}), thereby affecting
the resulting properties of the bulk material. {\it In situ} experimental observations that characterize the interactions between GBs and precipitates in both controlled bi-crystal geometries and complex networks of GBs remain needed to validate more directly the instability mechanisms highlighted in the present study.
\acknowledgments{This research was supported by Grant No. DE-FG02-07ER46400 from the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences.}
|
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\noindent We express our gratitude to our colleagues in the CERN
accelerator departments for the excellent performance of the LHC. We
thank the technical and administrative staff at the LHCb
institutes. We acknowledge support from CERN and from the national
agencies: CAPES, CNPq, FAPERJ and FINEP (Brazil); NSFC (China);
CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG and MPG (Germany); INFN (Italy);
FOM and NWO (The Netherlands); MNiSW and NCN (Poland); MEN/IFA (Romania);
MinES and FANO (Russia); MinECo (Spain); SNSF and SER (Switzerland);
NASU (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); NSF (USA).
We acknowledge the computing resources that are provided by CERN, IN2P3 (France), KIT and DESY (Germany), INFN (Italy), SURF (The Netherlands), PIC (Spain), GridPP (United Kingdom), RRCKI and Yandex LLC (Russia), CSCS (Switzerland), IFIN-HH (Romania), CBPF (Brazil), PL-GRID (Poland) and OSC (USA). We are indebted to the communities behind the multiple open
source software packages on which we depend.
Individual groups or members have received support from AvH Foundation (Germany),
EPLANET, Marie Sk\l{}odowska-Curie Actions and ERC (European Union),
Conseil G\'{e}n\'{e}ral de Haute-Savoie, Labex ENIGMASS and OCEVU,
R\'{e}gion Auvergne (France), RFBR and Yandex LLC (Russia), GVA, XuntaGal and GENCAT (Spain), Herchel Smith Fund, The Royal Society, Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851 and the Leverhulme Trust (United Kingdom).
\section{Detector and simulation}
\label{sec:Detector}
The \mbox{LHCb}\xspace detector~\cite{Alves:2008zz,LHCb-DP-2014-002} is a single-arm forward
spectrometer covering the \mbox{pseudorapidity} range $2<\eta <5$,
designed for the study of particles containing {\ensuremath{\Pb}}\xspace or {\ensuremath{\Pc}}\xspace
quarks. The detector includes a high-precision tracking system
consisting of a silicon-strip vertex detector surrounding the $pp$
interaction region, a large-area silicon-strip detector located
upstream of a dipole magnet with a bending power of about
$4{\mathrm{\,Tm}}$, and three stations of silicon-strip detectors and straw
drift tubes placed downstream of the magnet.
The tracking system provides a measurement of momentum, \mbox{$p$}\xspace, of charged particles with
a relative uncertainty that varies from 0.5\% at low momentum~\footnote{Natural units with $c=1$ are used throughout the
paper} to 1.0\% at 200\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace.
The minimum distance of a track to a primary vertex~(PV), the impact
parameter (IP), is measured with a resolution of $(15+29/\mbox{$p_{\mathrm{ T}}$}\xspace)\ensuremath{{\,\upmu\mathrm{m}}}\xspace$,
where \mbox{$p_{\mathrm{ T}}$}\xspace is the component of the momentum transverse to the beam, in\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace.
Different types of charged hadrons are distinguished using information
from two ring-imaging Cherenkov
detectors.
The online event selection is performed by a trigger,
which consists of a hardware stage, based on information from the calorimeter and muon
systems, followed by a software stage, which applies full event
reconstruction.
At the hardware trigger stage, events are required to have high
transverse energy in the calorimeters. For hadrons,
the transverse energy threshold is 3.5\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace.
The software trigger requires the presence of a two-, three- or four-track
secondary vertex with significant displacement from the primary
$pp$ interaction vertices. At least one charged particle
must have $\mbox{$p_{\mathrm{ T}}$}\xspace$ larger than $1.7\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace$ and be
inconsistent with originating from a PV.
A multivariate algorithm~\cite{BBDT} is used for
the identification of secondary vertices consistent with the decay
of a {\ensuremath{\Pb}}\xspace hadron.
Simulated decays of $B^+ \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \eta_{c}(2S) (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p) K^{+}$, $B^+ \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace X(3872) (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)
K^{+}$, $B^+ \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \psi(2S) (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)
K^{+}$ and $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p K^{+}$, generated uniformly in
phase space, are used to
optimise the signal selection and to evaluate the ratio of the efficiencies for each considered
channel with respect to the $B^+ \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p) K^{+}$ mode. In the simulation, $pp$
collisions are generated using \mbox{\textsc{Pythia}}\xspace\!8~\cite{Sjostrand:2007gs, *Sjostrand:2006za} with a specific \mbox{LHCb}\xspace
configuration~\cite{LHCb-PROC-2010-056}. Decays of hadronic particles
are described by \mbox{\textsc{EvtGen}}\xspace~\cite{Lange:2001uf}, in which final-state
radiation is simulated using \mbox{\textsc{Photos}}\xspace~\cite{Golonka:2005pn}. The
interaction of the generated particles with the detector, and its
response, are implemented using the \mbox{\textsc{Geant4}}\xspace
toolkit~\cite{Allison:2006ve, *Agostinelli:2002hh} as described in Ref.~\cite{LHCb-PROC-2011-006}.
\section{Event selection}
\label{sec:eventselection}
The selection of the $B^{+}$ candidates is done in two stages. A loose preselection is based on track quality,
momentum, transverse momentum, impact parameter of the $B^+$ candidate
and its daughters, $B^+$
flight distance, and particle identification (PID) of the $p$ and $\bar p$ candidates.
The reconstructed $B^+$ candidates are required to have a $p\bar p K^{+}$
invariant mass in the range $5.08 \-- 5.68 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace$. The asymmetric invariant mass range
around the known $B^+$ mass is chosen to select $B^+ \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p
\bar p \pi^{+}$ candidates also.
The reconstructed candidates that meet the above criteria are further filtered using a boosted
decision tree (BDT) algorithm~\cite{Breiman,Roe}. The BDT is trained
on a signal sample of simulated $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p K^{+}$ decays and a background sample of data taken from the
upper $B^{+}$-mass sideband in the range $5.34 \-- 5.48 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace$. The upper sideband is exploited to avoid partially reconstructed
background.
Input quantities include
variables related to the $B^{+}$ candidate
and its daughter particles, {\ensuremath{\Bu}}\xspace decay vertex quality and
its displacement from the PV, {\ensuremath{\Bu}}\xspace flight direction inferred from the
two vertex positions, {\ensuremath{\Bu}}\xspace momentum and final-state particle identification.
The selection criterion on
the BDT response is chosen by maximising the significance of the $\chi_{c1}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar{p}$ signal yield in data. The number of
events from this well-known transition
provides a control sample comparable in size to that of the $\eta_{c}(2S)$.
\section{Invariant mass spectra and event yields}
\label{sec:eventyields}
An extended unbinned maximum likelihood fit is performed to the
$p\bar p K^{+}$ invariant mass distribution.
The backgrounds observed in the $p\bar p K^{+}$ mass distribution are subtracted using
the \mbox{\em sPlot}\xspace technique~\cite{Pivk:2004ty} to extract the $p\bar p$ mass spectrum in $B^{+}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p\bar p K^{+}$ decays.
Signal yields for the resonant contributions are then determined from an
extended unbinned maximum likelihood fit to the $p\bar p$ mass
spectrum. To improve the
$p\bar p$ invariant mass resolution, the fit to the $B^{+}$ decay
vertex is performed with the $B^{+}$
mass constrained to the known value~\cite{PDG2014} and the $B^{+}$ candidate
pointing to the PV~\cite{Hulsbergen:2005pu}. The $p\bar p$ mass spectrum is also used to
determine the mass differences $M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}-M_{\eta_{c}(1S)}$ and
$M_{\psi(2S)}-M_{\eta_{c}(2S)}$ and the natural width of the
$\eta_{c}(1S)$ state. In order to have accurate mass measurements, a calibration is applied to the
momenta of the final-state particles. Large samples of $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace K^{+}$ decays with ${\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace {\ensuremath{\Pmu^+}}\xspace\mun$ are used to calibrate the momentum scale of the spectrometer~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2012-048}.
The $p \bar p K^{+}$ invariant mass distribution is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:massfit}. The signal peak is parameterised using an Apollonios
probability density function (PDF)~\cite{Santos:2013gra}. The yield,
mean and resolution are allowed to
vary freely in the fit, while the tail parameters are fixed to the values obtained from simulation.
\begin{figure}[b!!!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Fig1.pdf}
\caption{Invariant mass spectrum of the $p \bar{p} K^+$
candidates. The total fit curve and individual fit components are
superimposed on the data.}
\label{fig:massfit}
\end{figure}
The combinatorial background component is parameterised by an
exponential function. Partially reconstructed background due to $B^{+}
\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p K^{+} \pi^{0}$ decays
is parameterised using an ARGUS PDF~\cite{Albrecht:1994tb} convolved
with a Gaussian resolution function with parameters fixed to the values obtained from simulation.
The misidentified background due to $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p \pi^{+}$ decays,
where the charged pion is misidentified as a kaon, is parameterised
with a bifurcated Gaussian PDF~\cite{delAmoSanchez:2010ae} and parameters fixed to the values obtained from simulation. The yields of partially reconstructed and misidentified backgrounds are determined from data.
Six charmonium resonances are included in the nominal fit to the
$p\bar p$ invariant mass spectrum: $\eta_{c}(1S)$, ${\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace$,
$\chi_{c0}$, $\chi_{c1}$, $\eta_{c}(2S)$ and $\psi(2S)$. Alternative fits including the
$\psi(3770)$ or the $X(3872)$ resonances are performed in order
to estimate upper limits on their branching fractions. The ${\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace$
and $\psi(2S)$ peaks are parameterised with a
double Gaussian PDF. The $\eta_{c}(1S)$, $\eta_{c}(2S)$,
$\chi_{c0}$ and $\psi(3770)$ shapes are modelled with a
relativistic Breit-Wigner PDF convolved with a Gaussian PDF. The
$X(3872)$ and the $\chi_{c1}$ are described with a Gaussian
PDF.
Due to the $B^{+}$ mass constraint in
the vertex fit, the $p \bar p$ mass resolution is effectively constant in the entire
$p\bar p$ spectrum. The
resolution for all charmonium states is fixed to that of the ${\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace$ state. The masses of the $\chi_{c0}$,
$\chi_{c1}$, $X(3872)$ and $\psi(3770)$ states are fixed to the
known values~\cite{PDG2014}.
The ${\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace$ and $\psi(2S)$ peak positions ($M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}$ and
$M_{\psi(2S)}$), the mass differences ($M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}-M_{\eta_{c}(1S)}$ and
$M_{\psi(2S)}-M_{\eta_{c}(2S)}$), and the natural width of the $\eta_c$(1S)
state ($\Gamma_{\eta_c({\rm 1S})}$) are free parameters and are obtained from the fit to the data. A Gaussian constraint to the
average value for the natural width of the $\eta_{c}(2S)$ is
applied~\cite{PDG2014}.
The $p \bar p$ non-resonant component is assumed to have no relative
orbital angular momentum, $J=0$.
The fit includes a possible interference effect between the
$\eta_{c}(1S)$ state and the $J=0$ non-resonant component. The
amplitude is given by $|A|^{2} = |A_{\rm non \mbox{-}res} + f \, e^{i\delta} \,
A_{\eta_{c}(1S)}|^{2}$, where $A_{\rm non\mbox{-}res} $ is the amplitude of the
non-resonant component, $A_{\eta_{c}(1S)}$ is the amplitude of the
$\eta_{c}(1S)$ state, $\delta$ is the phase difference and $f$ a
normalisation factor. The shape of the non-resonant component in the
$p \bar p$ mass spectrum follows a phase-space distribution~\cite{PDG2014}. The fit result is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pp}.
\begin{figure}[b!!!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{Fig2.pdf}
\caption{Invariant mass spectrum of the $p \bar{p}$ candidates. Background in the $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p K^{+}$
distribution is subtracted using the \mbox{\em sPlot}\xspace technique as described
in the text. The total fit
curve is superimposed.}
\label{fig:pp}
\end{figure}
Using Wilks' theorem~\cite{Wilks:1938dza}, the statistical significance for the $\eta_{c}(2S)$ signal is
found to be $6.4$ standard deviations.
No evidence for the $\psi(3770)$ and $X(3872)$ resonances
is found. The signal yields are reported in Table~\ref{tab:yields}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\caption{Signal yields from the fit to the $p \bar p$ mass spectrum
in $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p K^{+}$ decays. The fit fractions of the $\eta_c(1S)$ and the non-resonant component in
the $J=0$ amplitude are $25\%$ and $65\%$ respectively.
The fit fractions do not include uncertainties due to the
ambiguities in the relative phase of the interfering amplitudes. Uncertainties are
statistical only.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c r@{}@{}l}
State & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Signal Yield}\\
\hline
$\eta_{c}(1S)$+non res.& $11246$ & $\,\pm\,119$ \\
${\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace$ & $6721$ & $\,\pm\,93$ \\
$\chi_{c0}$ & $84$ & $\,\pm\,22$\\
$\chi_{c1}$ & $95$ & $\,\pm\,16$\\
$\eta_{c}(2S)$ & $106$ & $\,\pm\,22$\\
$\psi(2S)$ & $588$ & $\,\pm\,30$\\
$\psi(3770)$ & $-6$ & $\,\pm\, 9$\\
$X(3872)$ & $-14$ & $\,\pm\,8$\\
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:yields}
\end{table}
\section{Efficiencies and systematic uncertainties}
The branching fraction of the $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace [c\bar c] (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)
K^{+}$ decay for a specific $[c\bar c]$ resonance relative to that of the ${\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace$ is given by
\begin{equation}
{\cal R}_{[c\bar c]} \equiv \frac{{\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace [c\bar c] K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}([c\bar c]\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
p \bar p)}{{\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace {\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}({\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
p \bar p)} = \frac{N([c\bar c])}{N({\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace)}\times
\frac{\epsilon_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}}{\epsilon_{c\bar c}}\label{eq:main},
\end{equation}
where $N([c\bar c]) \equiv N(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace [c\bar c] (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p) K^{+})$ and
$N({\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace) \equiv N(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace {\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p) K^{+})$ are the
numbers of decays and
$\epsilon_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}/\epsilon_{c\bar c}$ is the total efficiency ratio. The total efficiency is the product of the detector geometrical acceptance,
the trigger efficiency, the reconstruction and selection efficiency,
the PID efficiency, and the BDT classifier efficiency. The ratio of
the efficiencies between the signal and the normalising
${\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace$
channels is determined using simulated samples. To account for any
discrepancy between data and simulation, the PID efficiencies of kaons and protons are calibrated from data samples of $D^{*+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D^{0}
(\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K^{-}\pi^{+})
\pi^{+}$ and ${\ensuremath{\PLambda}}\xspace^0
\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p
\pi^{-}$ decays. For each simulated candidate, its PID value is
replaced by a value extracted
randomly from the corresponding PID curves determined from control samples.
The selection is then applied to the PID-corrected simulated sample to estimate the efficiency.
Systematic uncertainties originate from the determination of the signal yields, efficiencies, selection procedure and branching fractions.
Since the final state is common for all considered decays, most of
the systematic uncertainties cancel in the ratios.
Imperfect knowledge of the invariant mass distributions for the signal
and background causes systematic uncertainties
in the signal yield determination, the mass difference and width measurements.
The contribution from the fit model is studied by using alternative
shapes for the $B^{+}$ component, for the $[c\bar c]$ states and for the background.
For the $B^{+}$ signal shape, a Gaussian PDF with power-law tails
on both sides and the
sum of two Gaussian PDFs with power-law tails are used as alternatives to the
Apollonios PDF. The combinatorial background
component in the $p\bar p K^{+}$ invariant mass is parameterised using a linear PDF. The effect of
removing the peaking background due to misidentified $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p
\bar p \pi^{+}$ decays is investigated by checking the variation of
the ratio of the
branching fractions by including or neglecting this component in the
fit. Incorrect modelling of the partially
reconstructed background can also introduce a systematic
uncertainty. This is estimated by removing the $p \bar p K^{+}$
invariant mass fit range below $5.20 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace$ in order to
exclude its contribution. In the fit to the $p\bar p$ spectrum, for the ${\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace$ signal, the Apollonios PDF is
used as an alternative to the sum of two Gaussian PDFs. The range of the $p\bar p$ invariant mass
spectrum is also varied. The systematic uncertainty due to the
variation of the fit range gives a negligible contribution to the
branching fraction measurement while it is the largest contribution to
the $M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}-M_{\eta_{c}(1S)}$ difference. The largest variation in the ratio of the
branching fractions due to the fit model is assigned as the
corresponding systematic uncertainty.
Possible biases related
to the signal selection criteria are
investigated by varying the BDT requirement and by checking the effect on the
branching fraction ratio and on the efficiency ratio, after accounting for statistical fluctuations. The maximum variation in the
ratio of the yields or the maximum variation in the mass
difference and width measurements are considered as an estimate of the
corresponding source of systematic uncertainty. In addition, variations in the procedure used to determine the
PID efficiency and the uncertainty due to the finite size of the
simulated samples, lead to an uncertainty on the efficiency ratio in the
the branching fractions evaluation. The total systematic uncertainties on the relative
branching fraction measurements, determined by adding the
individual contributions in quadrature, are listed in
Table~\ref{tab:totsyst}.
\begin{table}[t!!!]
\caption{Systematic uncertainties in units of $10^{-4}$ on the $\eta_{c}(2S)$, $X(3872)$ and
$\psi(3770)$ branching fraction measurements relative to that of the {\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace. The efficiency
contribution includes both the PID efficiency variation and the
statistical error due to the finite size of the simulated samples.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\eta_{c}(2S)$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$X(3872)$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\psi(3770)$}\\
\hline
Fit & 5 & 3 & 5 \\
BDT & 8 & 2 & 11 \\
Efficiency & 2 & 1 & 1 \\
\hline
Total & 9 & 4 & 12\\
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:totsyst}
\end{table}
The significance, including systematic uncertainties, of the signals
is determined by convolving the profile likelihoods used in the yield
determinations with a Gaussian with a width equal to the size of the
systematic uncertainties that affect the yield. From the modified
profile likelihood the significance of the $\eta_c(2S)$ signal is found to
be $6.0$ standard deviations. The
upper limits at 90\% and 95\% confidence level on the $X(3872)$ and $\psi(3770)$ ratio of branching
fractions are determined from integrating the profile likelihood functions.
The measurements of the mass differences $M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}-M_{\eta_{c}(1S)}$ and
$M_{\psi(2S)}-M_{\eta_{c}(2S)}$ and the natural width of the
$\eta_{c}(1S)$ state are further affected by the uncertainty in the
momentum scale calibration. This systematic uncertainty is small for
the mass differences and negligible $(< 0.003 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace)$ for the natural width.
Table~\ref{tab:systmassa} summarises the systematic uncertainties on the measurement of the \mbox{$M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace} -M_{\eta_{c}(1S)}$}, \mbox{$M_{\psi(2S)} -M_{\eta_{c}(2S)}$} mass differences and on the $\eta_{c}(1S)$ natural width.
\begin{table}[t!!!]
\caption{Systematic uncertainties on the mass differences $M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}
- M_{\eta_c(1S)}$, $M_{\psi(2S)} - M_{\eta_c(2S)}$ and the
$\Gamma_{\eta_c(1S)}$ measurements. The systematic uncertainty associated to the momentum scale
calibration is negligible for the total width $\Gamma_{\eta_c(1S)}$ measurement.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
& $M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}-M_{{\ensuremath{\Peta_\cquark}}\xspace(1S)}$ &
$M_{\psi(2S)} - M_{\eta_{c}(2S)}$
& $\Gamma_{\eta_{c}(1S)}$ \\
& [\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace] &
[\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace] & [\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace]\\
\hline
Fit & 0.90 & 0.10 & 1.20 \\
BDT & 0.21 & 0.55 & 0.40 \\
Momentum scale & 0.03 & 0.06 & - \\
\hline
Total & 0.92 & 0.56 & 1.27 \\
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:systmassa}
\end{table}
\section{Results and conclusions}
A search for the $\eta_{c}(2S)$, $\psi(3770)$ and $X(3872)$ contributions in $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p K^{+}$ decays is performed using data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $3.0\rm \, fb^{-1}$ recorded at centre-of-mass energies of $\sqrt{s}=7 \rm \, TeV$ and $8 \rm \, TeV$.
The branching fractions are determined using the $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace {\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)K^{+}$ decay as normalization channel.
The $\eta_{c}(2S) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p$ decay is observed for the first time
with a total significance of $6.0$ standard deviations. The relative branching fraction is measured to be
\begin{equation*}
\frac{{\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \eta_{c}(2S) K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}(\eta_{c}(2S) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
p \bar p)}{{\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace {\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}({\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
p \bar p)} =\\ (1.58 \pm 0.33 \pm 0.09)\times 10^{-2},
\end{equation*}
where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic.
For the $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace X(3872) (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)K^{+}$ and the $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
\psi(3770) (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)K^{+}$ decays, the upper limits at 90 (95)\% confidence level are
\begin{equation*}
\frac{{\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \psi(3770) K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}(\psi(3770)\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)}{{\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace J/\psi K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}({\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
p \bar p)} <\\
9 \, (10) \times 10^{-2},
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\frac{{\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace X(3872) K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}(X(3872)\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)}{{\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace {\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}({\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
p \bar p)} <\\
0.20 \, (0.25) \times 10^{-2}.
\end{equation*}
The visible branching fraction calculated using the value of
${\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace {\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}({\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p
\bar p) = (2.2 \pm 0.1) \times 10^{-6}$~\cite{PDG2014} is determined to be
\begin{equation*}
{\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \eta_{c}(2S) K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}(\eta_{c}(2S) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
p \bar p) =\\ (3.47 \pm 0.72 \pm 0.20
\pm 0.16) \times 10^{-8},
\end{equation*}
where the last uncertainty is due to the uncertainty on ${\mathcal B}(B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace K^{+}) \times {\mathcal B}({\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)$.
The differences between $M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace}$ and $M_{\eta_{c}(1S)}$ and between $M_{\psi(2S)}$ and $M_{\eta_{c}(2S)}$ are measured
to be
\begin{equation*}
M_{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace} - M_{\eta_{c}(1S)} = 110.2 \pm 0.5 \pm
0.9 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
M_{\psi(2S)} - M_{\eta_{c}(2S)}= 52.5 \pm 1.7 \pm 0.6\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace.
\end{equation*}
The natural width of the $\eta_{c}(1S)$ is found to be
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma_{\eta_{c}(1S)} = 34.0 \pm 1.9 \pm 1.3 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace.
\end{equation*}
In contrast to the determinations using radiative decays, these mass and
width determinations do not depend on the knowledge of the line shapes
of the magnetic dipole transition.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:Introduction}
Charmonium has proved to be a remarkable laboratory for the study of quantum
chromodynamics in the non-perturbative regime. By comparing theoretical
predictions with experimental results one can verify and tune the parameters of theoretical models in order to improve the accuracy of the predictions. In addition, in recent
years, many exotic charmonium-like states have been observed, renewing
interest in charmonium spectroscopy above the open-charm
threshold~\cite{Brambilla:2010cs,Eidelman:2014}.
The $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p K^{+}$ decay\footnote{The inclusion of
charge-conjugate modes is implied throughout the paper.} offers a clean environment to study
intermediate resonances, such as charmonium and charmonium-like states
decaying to $p\bar p$.
The presence of $p\bar p$ in the final state allows intermediate
states of any quantum number to be studied
The first radial excitation $\eta_{c}(2S)$ of the charmonium ground
state $\eta_{c}(1S)$ was observed at the {\ensuremath{\PB}}\xspace factories~\cite{Choi:2002na,
Aubert:2003pt, Asner:2003wv} and, to date,
only a few of its decay modes have been observed.
The BESIII collaboration has recently searched for the $\eta_{c}(2S)
\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p\bar p$ decay in $\psi(2S)$ radiative
transitions~\cite{Ablikim:2013hdv}, and set an upper limit on the
product of branching fractions ${\mathcal B}(\psi(3686) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace
\eta_{c}(2S)\gamma) \times {\mathcal B}(\eta_{c}(2S) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p)$.
The $\eta_{c}(1S)$ state is the lowest-lying S-wave spin-singlet charmonium state
and has been observed in various processes.
The measurements of the $\eta_{c}(1S)$ mass and width in radiative charmonium
transitions show a tension with those determined in different processes such as photon-photon fusion and {\ensuremath{\PB}}\xspace decays~\cite{PDG2014}. Detailed investigations of the
line shape of the magnetic dipole transition by the
KEDR~\cite{Anashin:2014wva} and CLEO~\cite{Mitchell:2008aa}
collaborations indicate that additional factors modify the na\"\i ve
$k^3$ dependence on the photon momentum, $k$, assumed in earlier measurements. This
would affect the measurements of the mass and width in radiative
charmonium transitions.
In this paper, the first observation of $\eta_{c}(2S) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar
p$ decay and a search for $\psi(3770) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p$ and $X(3872) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p$ decays are
reported. The measurements of the branching fractions are relative to that of the $B^{+}
\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace {\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace (\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p \bar p) K^{+} $ decay.
Additional measurements of the $\eta_c(1S)$ and $\eta_c(2S)$ mass and the $\eta_c(1S)$ width are reported.
This new measurement of the $\eta_c(1S)$ resonance parameters in
exclusive $B^{+} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace [c
\bar c] K^{+}$ decays, where $[c\bar c]$ stands for a generic
charmonium resonance, is independent of the above-mentioned
line-shape complications.
\section{Layout}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Unnecessary blank space should be avoided, between paragraphs or
around figures and tables.
\item Figure and table captions should be concise and use a somewhat smaller typeface
than the main text, to help distinguish them. This is achieved by
inserting \verb!\small! at the beginning of the caption.
(NB with the latest version of the file \verb!premable.tex! this is automatic)
Figure captions go below the figure, table captions go above the
table.
\item Captions and footnotes should be punctuated correctly, like
normal text. The use of too many footnotes should be avoided:
typically they are used for giving commercial details of companies,
or standard items like coordinate system definition or the implicit
inclusion of charge-conjugate processes.\footnote{If placed at the end
of a sentence, the footnote symbol normally follows the
punctuation; if placed in the middle of an equation, take care to
avoid any possible confusion with an index.}$^,$\footnote{The standard footnote reads: The inclusion of charge-conjugate processes is implied.}
\item Tables should be formatted in a simple fashion, without
excessive use of horizontal and vertical lines. See
Table~\ref{tab:example} for an example.
\item Figures and tables should normally be placed so that they appear
on the same page as their first reference, but at the top or bottom
of the page; if this is not possible, they should come as soon as
possible afterwards. They must all be referred to from the text.
\item If one or more equations are referenced, all equations should be numbered using parentheses as shown in
Eq.~\ref{eq:CKM},
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:CKM}
V_{{\ensuremath{\Pu}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}V_{{\ensuremath{\Pu}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\Pb}}\xspace}^* +
V_{{\ensuremath{\Pc}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}V_{{\ensuremath{\Pc}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\Pb}}\xspace}^* +
V_{{\ensuremath{\Pt}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}V_{{\ensuremath{\Pt}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\Pb}}\xspace}^* = 0 \ .
\end{equation}
\item Displayed results like
\begin{equation*}
{\ensuremath{\mathcal{B}}}\xspace(\decay{{\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}}\xspace}{{\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}}\xspace}) < 1.5 \times 10^{-8} \text{ at 95\% CL}
\end{equation*}
should in general not be numbered.
\item Numbered equations should be avoided in captions and footnotes.
\item Displayed equations are part of the normal grammar of the
text. This means that the equation should end in full stop or comma if
required when reading aloud. The line after the equation should only
be indented if it starts a new paragraph.
\item Sub-sectioning should not be excessive: sections with more than three
levels of index (1.1.1) should be avoided.
\item Acronyms should be defined the first time they are used,
\mbox{\itshape e.g.}\xspace ``Monte Carlo~(MC) events containing a doubly
Cabibbo-suppressed~(DCS) decay have been generated.''
The abbreviated words should not be capitalised if it is not naturally
written with capitals, \mbox{\itshape e.g.}\xspace quantum chromodynamics (QCD),
impact parameter (IP), boosted decision tree (BDT).
Avoid acronyms if they are used three times or less.
A sentence should never start with an acronym and its better to
avoid it as the last word of a sentence as well.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{
Background-to-signal ratio estimated in a $\pm 50\ensuremath{{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V\!/}c^2}}\xspace$
mass window for the prompt and long-lived backgrounds, and the
minimum bias rate.}
\begin{center}\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
Channel & $B_{\mathrm{pr}}/S$ & $B_{\mathrm{LL}}/S$ & MB rate \\
\hline
\decay{\Bs}{\jpsi\phi} & $ 1.6 \pm 0.6$ & $ 0.51 \pm 0.08$ & $\sim 0.3$ Hz \\
\decay{\Bd}{\jpsi\Kstarz} & $ 5.2 \pm 0.3$ & $1.53 \pm 0.08 $ & $\sim 8.1$ Hz \\
\decay{{\ensuremath{\Bu}}\xspace}{{\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace{\ensuremath{\kaon^{*+}}}\xspace} & $ 1.6 \pm 0.2$ & $0.29 \pm 0.06$ & $\sim 1.4$ Hz \\
\hline
\end{tabular}\end{center}
\label{tab:example}
\end{table}
\section{List of all symbols}
\label{sec:listofsymbols}
\subsection{Experiments}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash lhcb} & \mbox{LHCb}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash atlas} & \mbox{ATLAS}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash cms} & \mbox{CMS}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash alice} & \mbox{ALICE}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash babar} & \mbox{BaBar}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash belle} & \mbox{Belle}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash cleo} & \mbox{CLEO}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash cdf} & \mbox{CDF}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dzero} & \mbox{D0}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash aleph} & \mbox{ALEPH}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash delphi} & \mbox{DELPHI}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash opal} & \mbox{OPAL}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash lthree} & \mbox{L3}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash sld} & \mbox{SLD}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash cern} & \mbox{CERN}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash lhc} & \mbox{LHC}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash lep} & \mbox{LEP}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash tevatron} & Tevatron\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{LHCb sub-detectors and sub-systems}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash velo} & VELO\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash rich} & RICH\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash richone} & RICH1\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash richtwo} & RICH2\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ttracker} & TT\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash intr} & IT\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash st} & ST\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ot} & OT\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash spd} & SPD\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash presh} & PS\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ecal} & ECAL\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash hcal} & HCAL\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash MagUp} & \mbox{\em Mag\kern -0.05em Up}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash MagDown} & \mbox{\em MagDown}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ode} & ODE\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash daq} & DAQ\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash tfc} & TFC\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ecs} & ECS\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash lone} & L0\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash hlt} & HLT\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash hltone} & HLT1\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash hlttwo} & HLT2\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsection{Particles}
\subsubsection{Leptons}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash electron} & {\ensuremath{\Pe}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash en} & \en & \texttt{\textbackslash ep} & {\ensuremath{\Pe^+}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash epm} & \epm & \texttt{\textbackslash epem} & {\ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash muon} & {\ensuremath{\Pmu}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash mup} & {\ensuremath{\Pmu^+}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mun} & \mun & \texttt{\textbackslash mumu} & {\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash tauon} & {\ensuremath{\Ptau}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash taup} & {\ensuremath{\Ptau^+}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash taum} & {\ensuremath{\Ptau^-}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash tautau} & {\ensuremath{\Ptau^+\Ptau^-}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash lepton} & {\ensuremath{\ell}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ellm} & {\ensuremath{\ell^-}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash ellp} & {\ensuremath{\ell^+}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash neu} & {\ensuremath{\Pnu}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash neub} & {\ensuremath{\overline{\Pnu}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash neue} & {\ensuremath{\neu_e}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash neueb} & {\ensuremath{\neub_e}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash neum} & {\ensuremath{\neu_\mu}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash neumb} & {\ensuremath{\neub_\mu}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash neut} & {\ensuremath{\neu_\tau}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash neutb} & {\ensuremath{\neub_\tau}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash neul} & {\ensuremath{\neu_\ell}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash neulb} & {\ensuremath{\neub_\ell}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Gauge bosons and scalars}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash g} & {\ensuremath{\Pgamma}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash H} & {\ensuremath{\PH^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Hp} & {\ensuremath{\PH^+}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Hm} & {\ensuremath{\PH^-}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Hpm} & {\ensuremath{\PH^\pm}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash W} & {\ensuremath{\PW}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Wp} & {\ensuremath{\PW^+}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Wm} & {\ensuremath{\PW^-}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Wpm} & {\ensuremath{\PW^\pm}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Z} & {\ensuremath{\PZ}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Quarks}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash quark} & {\ensuremath{\Pq}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash quarkbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \quark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash qqbar} & {\ensuremath{\quark\quarkbar}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash uquark} & {\ensuremath{\Pu}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash uquarkbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \uquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash uubar} & {\ensuremath{\uquark\uquarkbar}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash dquark} & {\ensuremath{\Pd}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dquarkbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \dquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ddbar} & {\ensuremath{\dquark\dquarkbar}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash squark} & {\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash squarkbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \squark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ssbar} & {\ensuremath{\squark\squarkbar}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash cquark} & {\ensuremath{\Pc}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash cquarkbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \cquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ccbar} & {\ensuremath{\cquark\cquarkbar}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash bquark} & {\ensuremath{\Pb}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash bquarkbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \bquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash bbbar} & {\ensuremath{\bquark\bquarkbar}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash tquark} & {\ensuremath{\Pt}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash tquarkbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \tquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ttbar} & {\ensuremath{\tquark\tquarkbar}}\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Light mesons}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash hadron} & {\ensuremath{\Ph}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash pion} & {\ensuremath{\Ppi}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash piz} & {\ensuremath{\pion^0}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash pizs} & {\ensuremath{\pion^0\mbox\,\mathrm{s}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash pip} & {\ensuremath{\pion^+}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash pim} & {\ensuremath{\pion^-}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash pipm} & {\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash pimp} & {\ensuremath{\pion^\mp}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash rhomeson} & {\ensuremath{\Prho}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash rhoz} & {\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash rhop} & {\ensuremath{\rhomeson^+}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash rhom} & {\ensuremath{\rhomeson^-}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash rhopm} & {\ensuremath{\rhomeson^\pm}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash rhomp} & {\ensuremath{\rhomeson^\mp}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash kaon} & {\ensuremath{\PK}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Kb} & {\ensuremath{\Kbar}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash KorKbar} & \kern 0.18em\optbar{\kern -0.18em K}{}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Kz} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^0}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Kzb} & {\ensuremath{\Kbar{}^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Kp} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^+}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Km} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^-}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Kpm} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Kmp} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^\mp}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash KS} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^0_{\mathrm{ \scriptscriptstyle S}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash KL} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^0_{\mathrm{ \scriptscriptstyle L}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Kstarz} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Kstarzb} & {\ensuremath{\Kbar{}^{*0}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Kstar} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^*}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Kstarb} & {\ensuremath{\Kbar{}^*}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Kstarp} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^{*+}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Kstarm} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^{*-}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Kstarpm} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^{*\pm}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Kstarmp} & {\ensuremath{\kaon^{*\mp}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash etaz} & \ensuremath{\Peta}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash etapr} & \ensuremath{\Peta^{\prime}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash phiz} & \ensuremath{\Pphi}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash omegaz} & \ensuremath{\Pomega}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Heavy mesons}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash D} & {\ensuremath{\PD}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Db} & {\ensuremath{\Dbar}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash DorDbar} & \kern 0.18em\optbar{\kern -0.18em D}{}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Dz} & {\ensuremath{\D^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dzb} & {\ensuremath{\Dbar{}^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dp} & {\ensuremath{\D^+}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Dm} & {\ensuremath{\D^-}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dpm} & {\ensuremath{\D^\pm}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dmp} & {\ensuremath{\D^\mp}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Dstar} & {\ensuremath{\D^*}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dstarb} & {\ensuremath{\Dbar{}^*}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dstarz} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*0}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Dstarzb} & {\ensuremath{\Dbar{}^{*0}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dstarp} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*+}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dstarm} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*-}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Dstarpm} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*\pm}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dstarmp} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*\mp}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Ds} & {\ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Dsp} & {\ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dsm} & {\ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dspm} & {\ensuremath{\D^{\pm}_\squark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Dsmp} & {\ensuremath{\D^{\mp}_\squark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dss} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*+}_\squark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dssp} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*+}_\squark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Dssm} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*-}_\squark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dsspm} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*\pm}_\squark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Dssmp} & {\ensuremath{\D^{*\mp}_\squark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash B} & {\ensuremath{\PB}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bbar} & {\ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bb} & {\ensuremath{\Bbar}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash BorBbar} & \kern 0.18em\optbar{\kern -0.18em B}{}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bz} & {\ensuremath{\B^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bzb} & {\ensuremath{\Bbar{}^0}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Bu} & {\ensuremath{\B^+}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bub} & {\ensuremath{\B^-}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bp} & {\ensuremath{\Bu}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Bm} & {\ensuremath{\Bub}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bpm} & {\ensuremath{\B^\pm}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bmp} & {\ensuremath{\B^\mp}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Bd} & {\ensuremath{\B^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bs} & {\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bsb} & {\ensuremath{\Bbar{}^0_\squark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Bdb} & {\ensuremath{\Bbar{}^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bc} & {\ensuremath{\B_\cquark^+}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bcp} & {\ensuremath{\B_\cquark^+}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Bcm} & {\ensuremath{\B_\cquark^-}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Bcpm} & {\ensuremath{\B_\cquark^\pm}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Onia}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash jpsi} & {\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash psitwos} & {\ensuremath{\Ppsi{(2S)}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash psiprpr} & {\ensuremath{\Ppsi(3770)}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash etac} & {\ensuremath{\Peta_\cquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash chiczero} & {\ensuremath{\Pchi_{\cquark 0}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash chicone} & {\ensuremath{\Pchi_{\cquark 1}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash chictwo} & {\ensuremath{\Pchi_{\cquark 2}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash OneS} & {\Y1S} & \texttt{\textbackslash TwoS} & {\Y2S} \\
\texttt{\textbackslash ThreeS} & {\Y3S} & \texttt{\textbackslash FourS} & {\Y4S} & \texttt{\textbackslash FiveS} & {\Y5S} \\
\texttt{\textbackslash chic} & {\ensuremath{\Pchi_{c}}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Baryons}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash proton} & {\ensuremath{\Pp}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash antiproton} & {\ensuremath{\overline \proton}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash neutron} & {\ensuremath{\Pn}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash antineutron} & {\ensuremath{\overline \neutron}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Deltares} & {\ensuremath{\PDelta}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Deltaresbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \Deltares}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Xires} & {\ensuremath{\PXi}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Xiresbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \Xires}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Lz} & {\ensuremath{\PLambda}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Lbar} & {\ensuremath{\kern 0.1em\overline{\kern -0.1em\PLambda}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash LorLbar} & \kern 0.18em\optbar{\kern -0.18em \PLambda}{}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Lambdares} & {\ensuremath{\PLambda}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Lambdaresbar} & {\ensuremath{\Lbar}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Sigmares} & {\ensuremath{\PSigma}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Sigmaresbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \Sigmares}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Omegares} & {\ensuremath{\POmega}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Omegaresbar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \POmega}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Lb} & {\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Lbbar} & {\ensuremath{\Lbar{}^0_\bquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Lc} & {\ensuremath{\Lz^+_\cquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Lcbar} & {\ensuremath{\Lbar{}^-_\cquark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Xib} & {\ensuremath{\Xires_\bquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Xibz} & {\ensuremath{\Xires^0_\bquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Xibm} & {\ensuremath{\Xires^-_\bquark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Xibbar} & {\ensuremath{\Xiresbar{}_\bquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Xibbarz} & {\ensuremath{\Xiresbar{}_\bquark^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Xibbarp} & {\ensuremath{\Xiresbar{}_\bquark^+}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Xic} & {\ensuremath{\Xires_\cquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Xicz} & {\ensuremath{\Xires^0_\cquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Xicp} & {\ensuremath{\Xires^+_\cquark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Xicbar} & {\ensuremath{\Xiresbar{}_\cquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Xicbarz} & {\ensuremath{\Xiresbar{}_\cquark^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Xicbarm} & {\ensuremath{\Xiresbar{}_\cquark^-}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Omegac} & {\ensuremath{\Omegares^0_\cquark}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Omegacbar} & {\ensuremath{\Omegaresbar{}_\cquark^0}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Omegab} & {\ensuremath{\Omegares^-_\bquark}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Omegabbar} & {\ensuremath{\Omegaresbar{}_\bquark^+}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsection{Physics symbols}
\subsubsection{Decays}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash BF} & {\ensuremath{\mathcal{B}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash BRvis} & {\ensuremath{\BF_{\mathrm{{vis}}}}} & \texttt{\textbackslash BR} & \BF \\
\texttt{\textbackslash decay[2] \textbackslash decay\{\Pa\}\{\Pb \Pc\}} & \decay{\Pa}{\Pb \Pc} & \texttt{\textbackslash ra} & \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash to} & \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Lifetimes}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash tauBs} & {\ensuremath{\tau_{{\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash tauBd} & {\ensuremath{\tau_{{\ensuremath{\B^0}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash tauBz} & {\ensuremath{\tau_{{\ensuremath{\B^0}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash tauBu} & {\ensuremath{\tau_{{\ensuremath{\Bu}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash tauDp} & {\ensuremath{\tau_{{\ensuremath{\D^+}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash tauDz} & {\ensuremath{\tau_{{\ensuremath{\D^0}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash tauL} & {\ensuremath{\tau_{\mathrm{ L}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash tauH} & {\ensuremath{\tau_{\mathrm{ H}}}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Masses}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash mBd} & {\ensuremath{m_{{\ensuremath{\B^0}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mBp} & {\ensuremath{m_{{\ensuremath{\Bu}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mBs} & {\ensuremath{m_{{\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash mBc} & {\ensuremath{m_{{\ensuremath{\B_\cquark^+}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mLb} & {\ensuremath{m_{{\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{EW theory, groups}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash grpsuthree} & {\ensuremath{\mathrm{SU}(3)}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash grpsutw} & {\ensuremath{\mathrm{SU}(2)}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash grpuone} & {\ensuremath{\mathrm{U}(1)}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash ssqtw} & {\ensuremath{\sin^{2}\!\theta_{\mathrm{W}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash csqtw} & {\ensuremath{\cos^{2}\!\theta_{\mathrm{W}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash stw} & {\ensuremath{\sin\theta_{\mathrm{W}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash ctw} & {\ensuremath{\cos\theta_{\mathrm{W}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ssqtwef} & {\ensuremath{{\sin}^{2}\theta_{\mathrm{W}}^{\mathrm{eff}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash csqtwef} & {\ensuremath{{\cos}^{2}\theta_{\mathrm{W}}^{\mathrm{eff}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash stwef} & {\ensuremath{\sin\theta_{\mathrm{W}}^{\mathrm{eff}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ctwef} & {\ensuremath{\cos\theta_{\mathrm{W}}^{\mathrm{eff}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash gv} & {\ensuremath{g_{\mbox{\tiny V}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash ga} & {\ensuremath{g_{\mbox{\tiny A}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash order} & {\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ordalph} & {\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}(\alpha)}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash ordalsq} & {\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}(\alpha^{2})}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ordalcb} & {\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}(\alpha^{3})}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{QCD parameters}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash as} & {\ensuremath{\alpha_s}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash MSb} & {\ensuremath{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash lqcd} & {\ensuremath{\Lambda_{\mathrm{QCD}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash qsq} & {\ensuremath{q^2}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{CKM, CP violation}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash eps} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash epsK} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_K}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash epsB} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_B}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash epsp} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon^\prime_K}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash CP} & {\ensuremath{C\!P}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash CPT} & {\ensuremath{C\!PT}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash rhobar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \rho}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash etabar} & {\ensuremath{\overline \eta}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vud} & {\ensuremath{V_{\uquark\dquark}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Vcd} & {\ensuremath{V_{\cquark\dquark}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vtd} & {\ensuremath{V_{\tquark\dquark}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vus} & {\ensuremath{V_{\uquark\squark}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Vcs} & {\ensuremath{V_{\cquark\squark}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vts} & {\ensuremath{V_{\tquark\squark}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vub} & {\ensuremath{V_{\uquark\bquark}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Vcb} & {\ensuremath{V_{\cquark\bquark}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vtb} & {\ensuremath{V_{\tquark\bquark}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vuds} & {\ensuremath{V_{\uquark\dquark}^\ast}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Vcds} & {\ensuremath{V_{\cquark\dquark}^\ast}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vtds} & {\ensuremath{V_{\tquark\dquark}^\ast}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vuss} & {\ensuremath{V_{\uquark\squark}^\ast}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Vcss} & {\ensuremath{V_{\cquark\squark}^\ast}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vtss} & {\ensuremath{V_{\tquark\squark}^\ast}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vubs} & {\ensuremath{V_{\uquark\bquark}^\ast}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Vcbs} & {\ensuremath{V_{\cquark\bquark}^\ast}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Vtbs} & {\ensuremath{V_{\tquark\bquark}^\ast}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Oscillations}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash dm} & {\ensuremath{\Delta m}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dms} & {\ensuremath{\Delta m_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dmd} & {\ensuremath{\Delta m_{{\ensuremath{\Pd}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash DG} & {\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash DGs} & {\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash DGd} & {\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{{\ensuremath{\Pd}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Gs} & {\ensuremath{\Gamma_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Gd} & {\ensuremath{\Gamma_{{\ensuremath{\Pd}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash MBq} & {\ensuremath{M_{{\ensuremath{\PB}}\xspace_{\ensuremath{\Pq}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash DGq} & {\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{{\ensuremath{\Pq}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Gq} & {\ensuremath{\Gamma_{{\ensuremath{\Pq}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dmq} & {\ensuremath{\Delta m_{{\ensuremath{\Pq}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash GL} & {\ensuremath{\Gamma_{\mathrm{ L}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash GH} & {\ensuremath{\Gamma_{\mathrm{ H}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash DGsGs} & {\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}/\Gamma_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Delm} & {\mbox{$\Delta m $}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ACP} & {\ensuremath{{\mathcal{A}}^{{\ensuremath{C\!P}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Adir} & {\ensuremath{{\mathcal{A}}^{\mathrm{ dir}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Amix} & {\ensuremath{{\mathcal{A}}^{\mathrm{ mix}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ADelta} & {\ensuremath{{\mathcal{A}}^\Delta}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash phid} & {\ensuremath{\phi_{{\ensuremath{\Pd}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash sinphid} & {\ensuremath{\sin\!\phid}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash phis} & {\ensuremath{\phi_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash betas} & {\ensuremath{\beta_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash sbetas} & {\ensuremath{\sigma(\beta_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace})}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash stbetas} & {\ensuremath{\sigma(2\beta_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace})}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash stphis} & {\ensuremath{\sigma(\phi_{{\ensuremath{\Ps}}\xspace})}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash sinphis} & {\ensuremath{\sin\!\phis}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Tagging}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash edet} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{ det}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash erec} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{ rec/det}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash esel} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{ sel/rec}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash etrg} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{ trg/sel}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash etot} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{ tot}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mistag} & \ensuremath{\omega}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash wcomb} & \ensuremath{\omega^{\mathrm{comb}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash etag} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash etagcomb} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{tag}}^{\mathrm{comb}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash effeff} & \ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{eff}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash effeffcomb} & \ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{comb}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash efftag} & {\ensuremath{\etag(1-2\omega)^2}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash effD} & {\ensuremath{\etag D^2}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash etagprompt} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{ tag}}^{\mathrm{Pr}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash etagLL} & {\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{ tag}}^{\mathrm{LL}}}}\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Key decay channels}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash BdToKstmm} & \decay{\Bd}{\Kstarz\mup\mun} & \texttt{\textbackslash BdbToKstmm} & \decay{\Bdb}{\Kstarzb\mup\mun} & \texttt{\textbackslash BsToJPsiPhi} & \decay{\Bs}{\jpsi\phi} \\
\texttt{\textbackslash BdToJPsiKst} & \decay{\Bd}{\jpsi\Kstarz} & \texttt{\textbackslash BdbToJPsiKst} & \decay{\Bdb}{\jpsi\Kstarzb} & \texttt{\textbackslash BsPhiGam} & \decay{\Bs}{\phi \g} \\
\texttt{\textbackslash BdKstGam} & \decay{\Bd}{\Kstarz \g} & \texttt{\textbackslash BTohh} & \decay{\B}{\Ph^+ \Ph'^-} & \texttt{\textbackslash BdTopipi} & \decay{\Bd}{\pip\pim} \\
\texttt{\textbackslash BdToKpi} & \decay{\Bd}{\Kp\pim} & \texttt{\textbackslash BsToKK} & \decay{\Bs}{\Kp\Km} & \texttt{\textbackslash BsTopiK} & \decay{\Bs}{\pip\Km} \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Rare decays}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash BdKstee} & \decay{\Bd}{\Kstarz\epem} & \texttt{\textbackslash BdbKstee} & \decay{\Bdb}{\Kstarzb\epem} & \texttt{\textbackslash bsll} & \decay{\bquark}{\squark \ell^+ \ell^-} \\
\texttt{\textbackslash AFB} & \ensuremath{A_{\mathrm{FB}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash FL} & \ensuremath{F_{\mathrm{L}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash AT\#1 \textbackslash AT2} & \AT2 \\
\texttt{\textbackslash btosgam} & \decay{\bquark}{\squark \g} & \texttt{\textbackslash btodgam} & \decay{\bquark}{\dquark \g} & \texttt{\textbackslash Bsmm} & \decay{\Bs}{\mup\mun} \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Bdmm} & \decay{\Bd}{\mup\mun} & \texttt{\textbackslash ctl} & \ensuremath{\cos{\theta_\ell}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ctk} & \ensuremath{\cos{\theta_K}}\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Wilson coefficients and operators}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash C\#1 \textbackslash C9} & \C9 & \texttt{\textbackslash Cp\#1 \textbackslash Cp7} & \Cp7 & \texttt{\textbackslash Ceff\#1 \textbackslash Ceff9 } & \Ceff9 \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Cpeff\#1 \textbackslash Cpeff7} & \Cpeff7 & \texttt{\textbackslash Ope\#1 \textbackslash Ope2} & \Ope2 & \texttt{\textbackslash Opep\#1 \textbackslash Opep7} & \Opep7 \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Charm}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash xprime} & \ensuremath{x^{\prime}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash yprime} & \ensuremath{y^{\prime}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ycp} & \ensuremath{y_{\CP}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash agamma} & \ensuremath{A_{\Gamma}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dkpicf} & \decay{\Dz}{\Km\pip} & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{QM}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash bra[1] \textbackslash bra\{a\}} & \bra{a} & \texttt{\textbackslash ket[1] \textbackslash ket\{b\}} & \ket{b} & \texttt{\textbackslash braket[2] \textbackslash braket\{a\}\{b\}} & \braket{a}{b} \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsection{Units}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash unit[1] \textbackslash unit\{kg\}} & \unit{kg} & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Energy and momentum}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash tev} & \ifthenelse{\boolean{inbibliography}}{\ensuremath{~T\kern -0.05em eV}\xspace}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Te\kern -0.1em V}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash gev} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mev} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash kev} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,ke\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ev} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,e\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash gevc} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V\!/}c}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash mevc} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V\!/}c}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash gevcc} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V\!/}c^2}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash gevgevcccc} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V^2\!/}c^4}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash mevcc} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V\!/}c^2}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Distance and area}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash km} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,km}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash m} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,m}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ma} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,m}}^2}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash cm} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,cm}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash cma} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,cm}}^2}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mm} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,mm}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash mma} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,mm}}^2}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mum} & \ensuremath{{\,\upmu\mathrm{m}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash muma} & \ensuremath{{\,\upmu\mathrm{m}^2}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash nm} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,nm}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash fm} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,fm}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash barn} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,b}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash mbarn} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,mb}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mub} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,\upmu b}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash nb} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,nb}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash invnb} & \ensuremath{\mbox{\,nb}^{-1}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash pb} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,pb}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash invpb} & \ensuremath{\mbox{\,pb}^{-1}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash fb} & \ensuremath{\mbox{\,fb}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash invfb} & \ensuremath{\mbox{\,fb}^{-1}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ab} & \ensuremath{\mbox{\,ab}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash invab} & \ensuremath{\mbox{\,ab}^{-1}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Time }
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash sec} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{{\,s}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ms} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,ms}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mus} & \ensuremath{{\,\upmu{\mathrm{ s}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash ns} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,ns}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ps} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,ps}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash fs} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,fs}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash mhz} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,MHz}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash khz} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,kHz}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash hz} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Hz}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash invps} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,ps^{-1}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash invns} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,ns^{-1}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash yr} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,yr}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash hr} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,hr}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Temperature}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash degc} & \ensuremath{^\circ}{C}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash degk} & \ensuremath {\mathrm{ K}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Material lengths, radiation}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash Xrad} & \ensuremath{X_0}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash NIL} & \ensuremath{\lambda_{int}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mip} & MIP\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash neutroneq} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,n_{eq}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash neqcmcm} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,n_{eq} / cm^2}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash kRad} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,kRad}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash MRad} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,MRad}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ci} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,Ci}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mci} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,mCi}}\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Uncertainties}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash sx} & \sx & \texttt{\textbackslash sy} & \sy & \texttt{\textbackslash sz} & \sz \\
\texttt{\textbackslash stat} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,(stat)}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash syst} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,(syst)}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Maths}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash order} & {\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash chisq} & \ensuremath{\chi^2}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash chisqndf} & \ensuremath{\chi^2/\mathrm{ndf}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash chisqip} & \ensuremath{\chi^2_{\text{IP}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash chisqvs} & \ensuremath{\chi^2_{\text{VS}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash chisqvtx} & \ensuremath{\chi^2_{\text{vtx}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash chisqvtxndf} & \ensuremath{\chi^2_{\text{vtx}}/\mathrm{ndf}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash deriv} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}} & \texttt{\textbackslash gsim} & \gsim \\
\texttt{\textbackslash lsim} & \lsim & \texttt{\textbackslash mean[1] \textbackslash mean\{x\}} & \mean{x} & \texttt{\textbackslash abs[1] \textbackslash abs\{x\}} & \abs{x} \\
\texttt{\textbackslash Real} & \ensuremath{\mathcal{R}e}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash Imag} & \ensuremath{\mathcal{I}m}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash PDF} & PDF\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash sPlot} & \mbox{\em sPlot}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsection{Kinematics}
\subsubsection{Energy, Momenta}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash Ebeam} & \ensuremath{E_{\mbox{\tiny BEAM}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash sqs} & \ensuremath{\protect\sqrt{s}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ptot} & \mbox{$p$}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash pt} & \mbox{$p_{\mathrm{ T}}$}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash et} & \mbox{$E_{\mathrm{ T}}$}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mt} & \mbox{$M_{\mathrm{ T}}$}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash dpp} & \ensuremath{\Delta p/p}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash msq} & \ensuremath{m^2}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dedx} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}\hspace{-0.1em}E/\mathrm{d}x}\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{PID}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash dllkpi} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{DLL}_{\kaon\pion}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dllppi} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{DLL}_{\proton\pion}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dllepi} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{DLL}_{\electron\pion}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash dllmupi} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{DLL}_{\muon\pi}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Geometry}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash degrees} & \ensuremath{^{\circ}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash krad} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,krad}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mrad} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,mrad}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash rad} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ \,rad}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Accelerator}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash betastar} & \ensuremath{\beta^*} & \texttt{\textbackslash lum} & \lum & \texttt{\textbackslash intlum[1] \textbackslash intlum\{2 \,\ensuremath{\mbox{\,fb}^{-1}}\xspace\}} & \intlum{2 \,\ensuremath{\mbox{\,fb}^{-1}}\xspace} \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsection{Software}
\subsubsection{Programs}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash bcvegpy} & \mbox{\textsc{Bcvegpy}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash boole} & \mbox{\textsc{Boole}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash brunel} & \mbox{\textsc{Brunel}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash davinci} & \mbox{\textsc{DaVinci}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dirac} & \mbox{\textsc{Dirac}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash evtgen} & \mbox{\textsc{EvtGen}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash fewz} & \mbox{\textsc{Fewz}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash fluka} & \mbox{\textsc{Fluka}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ganga} & \mbox{\textsc{Ganga}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash gaudi} & \mbox{\textsc{Gaudi}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash gauss} & \mbox{\textsc{Gauss}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash geant} & \mbox{\textsc{Geant4}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash hepmc} & \mbox{\textsc{HepMC}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash herwig} & \mbox{\textsc{Herwig}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash moore} & \mbox{\textsc{Moore}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash neurobayes} & \mbox{\textsc{NeuroBayes}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash photos} & \mbox{\textsc{Photos}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash powheg} & \mbox{\textsc{Powheg}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash pythia} & \mbox{\textsc{Pythia}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash resbos} & \mbox{\textsc{ResBos}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash roofit} & \mbox{\textsc{RooFit}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash root} & \mbox{\textsc{Root}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash spice} & \mbox{\textsc{Spice}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash urania} & \mbox{\textsc{Urania}}\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Languages}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash cpp} & \mbox{\textsc{C\raisebox{0.1em}{{\footnotesize{++}}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ruby} & \mbox{\textsc{Ruby}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash fortran} & \mbox{\textsc{Fortran}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash svn} & \mbox{\textsc{SVN}}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Data processing}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash kbytes} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,kbytes}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash kbsps} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,kbits/s}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash kbits} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,kbits}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash kbsps} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,kbits/s}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mbsps} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Mbytes/s}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mbytes} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Mbytes}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash mbps} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Mbyte/s}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mbsps} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Mbytes/s}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash gbsps} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Gbytes/s}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash gbytes} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Gbytes}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash gbsps} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Gbytes/s}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash tbytes} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Tbytes}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash tbpy} & \ensuremath{{\mathrm{ \,Tbytes/yr}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash dst} & DST\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsection{Detector related}
\subsubsection{Detector technologies}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash nonn} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{{ \mathit{n^+}} \mbox{-} on\mbox{-}{ \mathit{n}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ponn} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{{ \mathit{p^+}} \mbox{-} on\mbox{-}{ \mathit{n}}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash nonp} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{{ \mathit{n^+}} \mbox{-} on\mbox{-}{ \mathit{p}}}}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash cvd} & CVD\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash mwpc} & MWPC\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash gem} & GEM\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Detector components, electronics}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash tell1} & TELL1\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ukl1} & UKL1\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash beetle} & Beetle\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash otis} & OTIS\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash croc} & CROC\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash carioca} & CARIOCA\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash dialog} & DIALOG\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash sync} & SYNC\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash cardiac} & CARDIAC\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash gol} & GOL\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash vcsel} & VCSEL\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ttc} & TTC\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash ttcrx} & TTCrx\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash hpd} & HPD\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash pmt} & PMT\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash specs} & SPECS\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash elmb} & ELMB\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash fpga} & FPGA\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash plc} & PLC\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash rasnik} & RASNIK\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash elmb} & ELMB\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash can} & CAN\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash lvds} & LVDS\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ntc} & NTC\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash adc} & ADC\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash led} & LED\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ccd} & CCD\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash hv} & HV\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash lv} & LV\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash pvss} & PVSS\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash cmos} & CMOS\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash fifo} & FIFO\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ccpc} & CCPC\xspace \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsubsection{Chemical symbols}
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash cfourften} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ C_4 F_{10}}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash cffour} & \ensuremath{\mathrm{ CF_4}}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash cotwo} & \cotwo \\
\texttt{\textbackslash csixffouteen} & \csixffouteen & \texttt{\textbackslash mgftwo} & \mgftwo & \texttt{\textbackslash siotwo} & \siotwo \\
\end{tabular*}
\subsection{Special Text }
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l@{\extracolsep{0.5cm}}l}
\texttt{\textbackslash eg} & \mbox{\itshape e.g.}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ie} & \mbox{\itshape i.e.}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash etal} & \mbox{\itshape et al.}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash etc} & \mbox{\itshape etc.}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash cf} & \mbox{\itshape cf.}\xspace & \texttt{\textbackslash ffp} & \mbox{\itshape ff.}\xspace \\
\texttt{\textbackslash vs} & \mbox{\itshape vs.}\xspace & \\
\end{tabular*}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{1}
Quantum gravity unites quantum mechanics and classical gravity with ultraviolet completeness. This theory remains mysterious, but some suitable constraints and principles possibly help us to approach it. One approach is to count the physical degrees of freedom in a system from its thermal entropy. The thermal entropy is defined by the Von Neumann entropy of the thermal density matrix. To obtain generic understanding for counting physical degrees of freedom, we also need to consider the entanglement entropy, defined by the reduced density matrix from a partial trace operation. The entanglement entropy, which can also be defined at zero temperature helps us to count the physical degrees of freedom in a subsystem.
One motivation is to find the relationship between the black hole entropy and the entanglement entropy. This relationship possibly provides some deep insights to understand the black hole. One conjecture is that the one-loop correction black hole entropy is equivalent to the entanglement entropy of some fields. This conjecture motivates us to study the entanglement entropy to obtain the black hole entropy. Unfortunately, this attempt failed in a two dimensional Abelian gauge theory \cite{Kabat:1995eq}. The two dimensional Abelian gauge theory is topological and so it does not have dynamics. In other words, the entanglement entropy vanishes. The black hole entropy is not zero in a covariant gauge. The difference between the black hole entropy and entanglement entropy is a contact term, which arises from coordinate singularity. We brought up this example of entanglement entropy in gauge theories to emphasize the importance of a contact term. The negative contact term also appears in higher spin theory \cite{He:2014gva}.
A generic approach in the entanglement entropy is to consider operator algebras that belong to Von Neumann algebra \cite{Casini:2013rba, Ma:2015xes}. This approach gives a clear understanding of the connection between a Hilbert space and the entanglement. In this method, we choose centers, which commute with all operators in a Hilbert space to give a generic definition of the entanglement. This approach also includes the extended lattice model in the lattice Yang-Mills gauge theory. The concept of non-tensor product decompositions (explained below) is previously overlooked because it is not easy to define a partial trace operation. However, the obstruction in gauge theories motivate us to take this different perspective to redefine the entanglement. In this
new approach, we can define the entanglement from a partial trace operation in a non-tensor decomposition of a Hilbert space.
The use of Von Neumann algebra makes it easier to understand the intrinsic physical properties of entanglement, which nevertheless remains hard to compute practically. This problem also arises in many different contexts as it is usually hard to compute a quantity in the operator formalism. However, computation is simplified in the Lagrangian formalism, in which the choice of center is equivalent to a choice of the boundary \cite{Ma:2015xes, Donnelly:2015hxa}.
The main goal of this paper is to analyze the entanglement with centers. Usually, quantum field theory only has trivial center (center being identity), but we can remove operators to construct non-trivial centers. However, the removing technique is not completely understood now. Removing operators should modify the theory, and it is not guaranteed that the entanglement in the new Hilbert space should be the entanglement in the original Hilbert space. A simple and physical interpretation of removing operators is that this act is equivalent to making different observation in an entangling surface. Intuitively, removing operators modifies the decomposition because of the dynamics of removed operators. Hence, topological field theories should not have a non-tensor product decomposition. Our analysis supports this result, and moreover we do not find a non-tensor product decomposition in the fermion theory either. The analysis of decomposition only relies on the quantization algebra and constraints. Indeed, the precise form of the equations of motion determine strength of the entanglement, but not the existence of ambiguity. To numerically compute the entanglement entropy in an interacting theory, it is often necessary to put the theory on lattice. We propose a method to study the entanglement entropy with centers in a theory with a finite lattice spacing. In this approach, we do not break gauge symmetry. On lattice, we also give a simple reason why the entanglement entropy in the extended lattice model is equivalent to an electric choice of the entanglement entropy. For the same simple reason, we find it is possible to define magnetic choices
in the extended lattice model in a similar way. There are two different ways to compute the entanglement entropy with centers. The first way is to consider the boundary terms \cite{Ma:2015xes, Donnelly:2015hxa}, and the second is to consider a regularization for the zero modes of the eigenfunction in the heat kernel \cite{Donnelly:2012st}. The two methods should be equivalent, and give consistent entanglement entropy from different regularization schemes. We also find that only gauge theories receive universal contributions from boundary terms (edge modes), and we further determine the universal terms of the entanglement entropy in $p$-form free theory in $2p+2$ dimensions in terms of the universal terms of 0-form (scalar) theories in various dimensions, and also discuss the cases in other dimensions. The universal terms of $p$-form free theory is obtained in this way can be understood as the sum of the contributions from the bulk and the boundary. As in the case of Abelian vector gauge theory, the sum agrees with the known anomaly coefficients and the bulk part can be reproduced from the heat kernel on $S \times H^{2p+1}$. We also show that the strong subadditivity is correct in free theories. Finally, we consider massive scalar field theory with an equal probability distribution of centers, and two dimensional conformal field theory \cite{Ohmori:2014eia, Calabrese:2004eu} to support the conjecture that the mutual information does not depend on centers.
The outline of the paper is as follows. We first review the Von Neumann algebra in the context of entanglement with centers in Sec.~\ref{Review of the Von Neumann Algebra in the Entanglement with Centers}, and the Lagrangian formulation for the entanglement with centers in Sec.~\ref{Review of the Lagrangian Formulation in the Entanglement with Centers}. We then perform analysis of the decomposition in two dimensional gauge theory, three dimensional Chern-Simons gauge theory, and fermion field theories in Sec.~\ref{Analysis of Decomposition}. We discuss lattice theories in Sec.~\ref{5}. In Sec.~\ref{6}, we present the results of $p$-form free theory and new understanding of the subtlety in the computation methods. The strong subadditivity of free theories is also discussed. Computation of the mutual information with centers is given in Sec.~\ref{7}. Finally, we conclude in Sec.~\ref{8}. We also discuss basis of two dimensional conformal field theory in Appendix \ref{appa} and give details to computing the R\'enyi entropy of multiple intervals in Appendix \ref{appb}.
\section{Review of the Von Neumann Algebra in the Entanglement with Centers}
\label{Review of the Von Neumann Algebra in the Entanglement with Centers}
We review the entanglement from the algebraic point of view
\cite{Casini:2013rba, Ma:2015xes}. We will particularly emphasize the role of
the Von Neumann algebra, which is generically assumed in quantum field theory. Now we consider the following operator algebras in two spatial regions ($V$ and its complement $\bar{V}$) satisfying
\bea
A_V=A_{\bar{V}}^{\prime}, \qquad A_{\bar{V}}=A_V^{\prime},
\eea
where $A_V$ is an algebra in region $V$ and $A_{\bar{V}}$ is an algebra in region $\bar{V}$. We also denote $A^{\prime}$ as the commutant of $A$. A Von Neumann algebra $A$ satisfies $A=A^{\prime\prime}$. We will assume the algebras $A_V, A_{\bar{V}}$ are Von Neumann algebra.
A tensor product decomposition of a Hilbert space corresponds to the so-called
trivial center, in which case the only operator to commute with all operators is the identity operator.
We should also include non-trivial centers in our discussion without loss
of generality. Under the assumption of $A_V, A_{\bar{V}}$ being Von Neumann algebra, the non-trivial
centers in a Hilbert space imply that the Hilbert space has no tensor product decomposition.
Most quantum field theory naturally has a trivial center. To construct non-trivial centers in quantum field theory, we remove operators in an entangling surface. For example, we can remove momentum operators in an entangling surface and let position operators become centers. Removing operators or a choice of centers can possibly be viewed as a choice of measurements in an entangling surface (see \cite{Ma:2015xes} for more discussions). This possibly gives a more general definition to the entanglement.
We first discuss how to define a reduced density matrix in the presence of non-trivial centers. First of all, we find a basis to diagonalize the center as
\begin{equation}
Z\equiv\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\lambda^11 & 0 & \hdots & 0 \\
0 & \lambda^21 & \hdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & &\vdots \\
0 & 0 & \hdots & \lambda^m 1
\end{array}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
The algebra ($A\cup A^{\prime}$) is then isomorphic to
\bea
\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
A_1\otimes A_1^{\prime} & 0 & \hdots & 0 \\
0 & A_2\otimes A_2^{\prime} & \hdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & &\vdots \\
0 & 0 & \hdots & A_m\otimes A_m^{\prime}
\end{array}\right)\ ,
\eea
and the algebra $A$ also takes a block-diagonal form
\bea
\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
A_1 & 0 & \hdots & 0 \\
0 & A_2 & \hdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & &\vdots \\
0 & 0 & \hdots & A_m
\end{array}\right)\,.
\eea
Therefore, the total Hilbert space ($H$) is isomorphic to $\bigoplus_k \bigg(H_V^k\otimes H_{\bar{V}}^k\bigg)$. Although the decomposition (which we will call non-tensor decomposition henceforth) is not a tensor product decomposition, it is possible to perform a partial trace operation in each subspace to define a reduced density matrix \cite{Casini:2013rba, Ma:2015xes}.
The reduced density matrix in region $V$ is
\bea
\mbox{Tr}_{\bar{V}}\rho_{A_VA_{\bar{V}}}=\rho_{A_V}=
\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
p_1\rho_{A_1} & 0 & \hdots & 0 \\
0 & p_2\rho_{A_2} & \hdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & &\vdots \\
0 & 0 & \hdots & p_m\rho_{A_m}
\end{array}\right)\,,
\eea
where $\mbox{Tr}\rho_{A_k}=1$, $p_i$ is the probability for the center being
$i$ and $\mbox{Tr}_{\bar{V}}$ denotes the partial trace over $\bar{V}$. The entanglement entropy $S_{EE}(A)\equiv -\mbox{Tr}\big(\rho_A\ln\rho_A\big)$ is then given
by
\bea
\label{eewithshannon}
-\mbox{Tr}\big(\rho_A\ln\rho_A\big)
=-\sum_k p_k\ln p_k-\sum_k\mbox{Tr}\big(p_k\rho_{A_k}\ln\rho_{A_k}\big).
\eea
The first term is the classical Shannon entropy and the second term is the average entanglement entropy. If we consider centers with a continuous distribution, the classical Shannon entropy becomes
\bea
-\int_{\phi} \big(f(\phi)\Delta\big)\ln(f(\phi)\Delta)\longrightarrow-\ln(\Delta)-\int d\phi\ f(\phi)\ln f(\phi),
\eea
where we replace $p_k$ by $f(\phi)\Delta$ ($\xD$ for normalization $\int_\phi f(\phi)\xD = 1$). The classical Shannon entropy depends on $\Delta$ or the regularization schemes and therefore the entanglement entropy can possibly be negative. The second term in the classical Shannon entropy is called the continuous entropy and we use the term continuous entanglement entropy for the combination of this term with the average entanglement entropy. To avoid the regulator in our computation, we can consider the mutual information $M(A, B)\equiv S_{EE}(A)+S_{EE}(B)-S_{EE}(A\cup B)$.
\section{Review of the Lagrangian Formulation in the Entanglement with Centers}
\label{Review of the Lagrangian Formulation in the Entanglement with Centers}
We quickly go through the Lagrangian method for computing the entanglement entropy with centers, and also review the replica trick and conical method.
\subsection{Lagrangian Method}
The definition of the entanglement entropy with centers is based on removing operators in an entangling surface as we remove some operators to let the operators of the center commute with all others in an entangling surface. This act of operator removing results in the suppression of (some) quantum fluctuation in an entangling surface. Hence, we adopt an on-shell action \cite{Ma:2015xes, Donnelly:2015hxa} and consider only quantum fluctuation in the bulk.
In free theories, the bulk and boundary entanglement entropy can be separated as it can be seen from the Hamiltonian formulation. In interacting theories, boundary fields do not decouple from bulk fields. However the entanglement entropy in interacting theories is also in the form of \er{eewithshannon} as a sum of the classical Shannon entropy and the average entanglement entropy, but $\rho_{A_k}$
generally depends on the value $k$ of centers. A choice of centers in an entangling surface is translated into a choice of boundary condition in the Lagrangian method.
\subsubsection{Replica Trick and Conical Method}
To compute the entanglement entropy, we can use the replica trick or conical method in a $n$-sheet manifold. The entanglement entropy is rewritten as
\bea
S_A=\lim_{n\rightarrow 1}\frac{\mbox{Tr}(\rho_A^n)-1}{1-n}=-\frac{\partial}{\partial n}\mbox{Tr}\rho_A^n\bigg|_{n=1}
\eea
using the replica trick. In order to compute $\mbox{Tr}\rho_A^n$, we consider $n$ copies
\bea
(\rho_A)_{\phi_{1+}\phi_{1-}}(\rho_A)_{\phi_{2+}\phi_{2-}}\cdots (\rho_A)_{\phi_{n+}\phi_{n-}}\,,
\eea
with $\phi_{i-}=\phi_{(i+1)+}$. Then the path integral representation for $\mbox{Tr}\rho_A^n$ in the $n$-sheet manifold is given by
\bea
\mbox{Tr}\rho_A^n=(Z_1)^{-n}\int D\phi\ e^{-S(\phi)},
\eea
where $(Z_1)^{-n}$ is inserted to normalize the reduced density matrix. The entanglement entropy from the conical method is given by
\bea
S_A=\bigg(1-\beta\frac{\partial}{\partial\beta}\bigg)\ln Z(\beta)\bigg|_{\beta=2\pi}\,.
\eea
We can see that the two methods are equivalent with the identification of $\beta=2\pi n$ ($Z(\beta)=Z(2\pi n)=Z(2\pi)^n\mbox{Tr}\rho_A^n$), and this helps us to define the entanglement entropy in an infinite dimensional Hilbert space.
\section{Analysis of Decompositions}
\label{Analysis of Decomposition}
We study decompositions in a few examples: two dimensional Yang-Mills gauge
theory, three dimensional Chern-Simons theory and fermion theory. We start the analysis with the quantization algebras and constraints in the Hilbert space.
\subsection{Two Dimensional Yang-Mills Gauge Theory}
The quantization algebras and constraints in the two dimensional Yang-Mills gauge theory is given by
\bea
\lbrack A_1^a(x), F_{01}^b (y)\rbrack=i\delta^{ab}\delta(x-y), \;\lbrack A_1^a(x), A_1^b(y)\rbrack=0, \;\lbrack F_{01}^a(x), F_{01}^b(y)\rbrack=0, \; D_1F^{10, a}=0,\quad
\eea
where the Lie algebra indices run from $a$-$z$ and $D$ is the covariant derivative. The field strength is defined as $F_{\mu\nu}^a\equiv \partial_{\mu}A_{\nu}^a-\partial_{\nu}A_{\mu}^a+f^{abc}A_{\mu}^bA_{\nu}^c$, where we use Greek letters to denote spacetime indices, and $f^{abc}$ are the structure constants for the gauge group.
We first choose a gauge fixing condition $A_0^a=0$, then we have $\partial_1A^{1, a}=0$. As a result, $A_1^a$ only depends on time. In other words, there is no entanglement
in two dimensional gauge theory unless the topology is non-trivial. Even for non-trivial topology, the Hilbert space of the two dimensional Yang-Mills gauge theory admits a tensor product decomposition. Thus, we do not have non-trivial centers in the Hilbert space.
\subsection{First-Order Formulation}
Theories with first-order formulation, \eg three dimensional Chern-Simons theory and fermion theories have very special quantization algebras that
affect the decomposition of the Hilbert space.
The quantization algebra and constraint in three dimensional Chern-Simons gauge theory are given by
\bea
\lbrack A_1^a(x), A_2^b (y)\rbrack=\delta^{ab}\delta(x-y), \quad \lbrack A_1^a(x), A_1^b(y)\rbrack=0, \quad \lbrack A_2^a(x), A^b_2(y)\rbrack=0 , \quad F_{12}^a=0.
\eea
We again choose the gauge fixing condition $A_0^a=0$ and $\partial_1A^{1, a}+\partial_2A^{2, a}=0$. Combining with the constraint one can see that
the gauge field in the entangling surface only depends on time after one of its component is removed. This implies that we cannot remove operators to obtain non-trivial centers in three dimensional Chern-Simons gauge theory.
We can reach the same conclusion via a different route. The only physical operators in three dimensional Chern-Simons gauge theory is the Wilson loop. For Wilson loops of contractible cycles, we obtain $F_{\mu\nu}=0$. In other words, there are no local operators in the three dimensional Chern-Simons theory on space with trivial topology. Non-trivial topology allows a tensor product decomposition of a Hilbert space. Hence, we also get to the same conclusion.
We also find that the situation of two dimensional Yang-Mills gauge theory is the same as in the three dimensional Chern-Simons gauge theory. Hence, the possible reason could be that removing non-dynamical operators does not have any affects on the entanglement.
Finally, we will discuss fermion theory. The quantization algebra is given by
\bea
\{\psi_i^{\dagger}(x), \psi_j(y)\}=-i\delta_{ij}\delta(x-y), \qquad \{\psi_i(x), \psi_j(y)\}=0, \qquad
\{\psi_i^{\dagger}(x), \psi_j^{\dagger}(y)\}=0.
\eea
If we remove a fermionic field $\psi_i$ in an entangling surface, then it appears that $\psi_i^{\dagger}$ is also removed. Therefore, we do not seem to have any non-trivial centers in fermion theories either. This result is mainly due to the particular form of a quantization algebra in the first order formulation. Hence, we argue that any systems with the first-order formulation do not have non-trivial centers from removing operators, and we also suspect that topological theories do not have non-trivial centers.
\section{Lattice Entanglement with Centers}
\label{5}
The entanglement with non-trivial centers implies the absence of (some) quantum fluctuation in an entangling surface. Now we want to consider the entanglement with centers in the case of finite lattice spacing. To compute on a lattice, we find a way to formulate this problem without breaking gauge symmetry. Finally, we also discuss the extended lattice model and the magnetic choice in the Yang-Mills gauge theory.
\subsection{ Lattice Scalar Field Theory}
The Euclidean action is given by
\bea
S_S=\sum_x\bigg(\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\phi_x^{A}\partial^{\mu}\phi_x^{A}+\frac{1}{2}m_0^2\phi_x^{A}\phi_x^{A}+\frac{1}{4}\lambda_0(\phi_x^{A}\phi_x^{A})^2\bigg)\,,
\eea
where $m_0$ and $\lambda_0$ are bare parameters. We set the lattice spacing to 1 and make the replacement $\partial_{\mu}\phi_x^{A}\to \phi_{x+\hat{\mu}}^{A}-\phi_x^{A}$.
The lattice action is
\bea
S_{LS}=-\sum_{x\mu}\phi_x^{A}\phi_{x+\hat{\mu}}^{A}+\sum_x\bigg(\frac{1}{2}(2D+m_0^2)\phi_x^{A}\phi_x^{A}+\frac{1}{4}\lambda_0(\phi_x^{A}\phi_x^{A})^2\bigg),
\eea
where $D$ is the number of total spacetime dimensions and $A$ is the number of the
components of the scalar field. For path integration to make sense, we choose positive $\lambda_0$. To study the entanglement with centers, we can consider the asymptotic solutions (solutions near an entangling surface) of
\bea
\sum_\mu (\phi_{x+\hat{\mu}}^{A}+\phi_{x-\hat{\mu}}^{A})-(2D+m_0^2)\phi_x^{A}
-\lambda_0\phi_x^{A}(\phi_x^{A}\phi_x^{A})=0.
\eea
\subsection{Lattice Yang-Mills Gauge Theory}
The Yang-Mills gauge theory in the Euclidean spacetime is given by
\bea
S_\zt{EYM}=\int d^Dx\ \frac{1}{4g^2}F_{\mu\nu}^aF^{\mu\nu a}.
\eea
The lattice action is
\bea
S_\zt{LYM}= -\frac{1}{g^2}\sum_\sq\left(\Tr U_\sq + \Tr U_\sq^\hc\right) \,,
\eea
where $U_\sq$ is the plaquette operator on the spatial plaquette $\sq$. The Wilson loop at the leading non-trivial order gives
\bea
U_{\mu\nu}U_{\nu\rho}=\exp(iA_{\alpha})\exp(iA_{\beta})=\exp\bigg(iA_{\alpha}+iA_{\beta}
+\frac{i}{2}\lbrack A_{\alpha}, A_{\beta}\rbrack+\cdots\bigg),
\eea
\bea
U_{\rho\delta}U_{\delta\gamma}&=&\exp(-iA^{\prime}_{\alpha})\exp(-iA^{\prime}_{\beta})=\exp\bigg(-iA^{\prime}_{\alpha}-iA^{\prime}_{\beta}+\frac{i}{2}\lbrack A_{\alpha}, A_{\beta}\rbrack+\cdots\bigg)
\nn\\
&=&\exp\bigg(-iA_{\alpha}-iA_{\beta}-i\partial_{\beta}A_{\alpha}+i\partial_{\alpha}A_{\beta}+\frac{i}{2}\lbrack A_{\alpha}, A_{\beta}\rbrack+\cdots\bigg)\,,
\eea
\bea
U_{\mu\nu}U_{\nu\rho}U_{\rho\delta}U_{\delta\gamma}=\exp\bigg(iF_{\alpha\beta}+\cdots\bigg)\,.
\eea
We denote $F_{\alpha\beta}\equiv F_{\alpha\beta}^aT^a$ and $A_\mu\equiv A_\mu^aT^a$. Hence, the lattice action can return to the Yang-Mills action in the continuum limit. The gauge transformation on the lattice is
\bea
U_{\mu\nu}\rightarrow \Omega^{\dagger}U_{\mu\nu}\Omega
\eea
and so the link field $U_{\mu\nu}$ transforms homogeneously. The lattice covariant derivative is
\bea
D_{\mu}\psi_x=U_{x, x+\hat{\mu}}\psi_{x+\hat{\mu}}-\psi_x.
\eea
The covariant derivative in
\bea
C_{\mu\nu}=i\bigg(U_{x, x+\hat{\mu}}U_{x+\hat{\mu}, x+\hat{\mu}+\hat{\nu}}-U_{x, x+\hat{\nu}}U_{x+\hat{\nu}, x+\hat{\mu}+\hat{\nu}}\bigg),
\eea
gives $D_{\mu}F_{\mu\nu}$ in the continuum limit. We notice that $D_{\mu}C_{\mu\nu}$ also transforms homogeneously. Hence, we can study the asymptotic solutions of $D_{\mu}C_{\mu\nu}=0$ to compute the entanglement entropy with centers. In the lattice Yang-Mills gauge theory, we need to concern more about the decompositions because we have the link field. All the centers can be included from the asymptotic solutions. Therefore, we can compute quantities related to the entanglement in a lattice model without breaking gauge symmetry.
\subsection{Solving Asymptotic Solutions on Lattice}
If we compute the entanglement entropy with centers on a lattice, we should have classical solutions on the lattice with certain boundary conditions. This problem is not hard to solve, provided that a solution $f(x)$ is already known in the continuous space. The lattice solutions can be obtained from the following rewriting
\bea
f(x)\rightarrow f\bigg[\frac{L}{2\pi}\sin(\frac{2\pi x}{L})\bigg],
\eea
where $L$ is the lattice size. When the lattice size goes to infinity, we can recover the asymptotic solutions in continuous space from the asymptotic solutions on lattice. After we obtain the asymptotic solutions, we can use the replica trick to compute the entanglement entropy on lattice as \cite{Buividovich:2008kq}. If we have two regions $A$ and $B$ sharing the same boundary and we want to trace over $A$, then the region $B$ has $n$ cuts when we do the replica trick. If we consider the electric choice or other suitable choices in gauge theories, then defining a suitable common boundary between regions $A$ and $B$ is possible.
\subsection{Comments on the Extended Lattice Model and a Magnetic Choice}
In the extended lattice model, some spatial link variables are products of two spatial link variables. This is equivalent to cutting a link into two links. The entanglement entropy in the extended lattice model is equivalent to the electric choice of the entanglement entropy. We can show that the
expectation values of all original operators are unchanged in the extended lattice model, and the link operators or electric fields on boundary commute with the reduced density matrix \cite{Casini:2013rba, Ma:2015xes, Buividovich:2008gq}. Then we can prove that the entanglement entropy in the extended lattice model is that of the electric choice. Although we increase degrees of freedom by adding new vertices in the entangling surface, we do not add any new spatial Wilson loops in the entangling surface. Thus, center consists of electric fields in the lattice Yang-Mills gauge theory. We can also think that the extended lattice model is equivalent to putting a boundary condition in the entangling surface to define the entanglement entropy.
A tensor product decomposition of the Hilbert space in the lattice Yang-Mills gauge theory is difficult because of the spatial Wilson loops. Thus, removing spatial Wilson loops is a simple way to define the entanglement entropy. From the method of the extended lattice model, we find a similar way to define the magnetic center. Because the difficulties in defining the entanglement entropy come from spatial Wilson loops, which mix the two Hilbert spaces, we can add new spatial Wilson loops and do not add new electric fields in the entangling surface to give a way of clear cutting of the Hilbert space. Thus, we can define a magnetic choice of the entanglement entropy in the lattice Yang-Mills gauge theory.
\section{The Entanglement with Centers in a $p$-Form Free Theory}
\label{6}
We move on to the entanglement with centers in a $p$-form free theory. From our computation, we can gain some insights to two problems. The first is whether we can get contribution to the universal term of the entanglement entropy from the boundary terms of the on-shell action in theories other than gauge theory. The second question is whether introducing boundary terms is equivalent to doing regularization for the zero-modes of the cone directions. Since only free theories are considered, we will separately discuss bulk entanglement and boundary entanglement. In free theories, we find a suitable form of strong subadditivity with centers. We first review the results of the boundary entanglement entropy in the Abelian one-form gauge theory \cite{Donnelly:2015hxa}. Then we extend the study to massive free scalar field and $p$-form gauge theories. Finally, we discuss the strong subadditivity in free theories.
\subsection{Review of Boundary Entanglement Entropy in the Abelian One-Form Gauge Theory}
The action for the Abelian one-form gauge theory in the Euclidean spacetime is given by
\bea
S_\zt{EAOG}=\frac{1}{4}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\ F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu},
\eea
where $g_{\mu\nu}$ is the metric field, $F_{\mu\nu}\equiv\nabla_{\mu}A_{\nu}-\nabla_{\nu}A_{\mu}$ and $\nabla_{\mu}$ is the covariant derivative. When computing the entanglement entropy with non-trivial centers, we need to choose a classical (in the sense
of no fluctuation) entangling surface. Here, we do not include the gauge fixing and ghost terms because these terms are not relevant for finding the on-sell boundary action. We split the one-form gauge field as $A_{\mu}=A^{CL}_{\mu}+A^Q_{\mu}$, where $A^{CL}_{\mu}$ is a classical solution which is compatible with a boundary condition, and $A^Q_{\mu}$ is the quantum fluctuation which vanishes in the entangling surface. The action is
\bea
S_\zt{EAOG}&=&\frac{1}{4}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\ F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}
\nn\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\ \bigg(\nabla_{\mu}A_{\nu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{\nu}-\nabla_{\mu}A_{\nu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{\mu}\bigg)
\nn\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\ \bigg(\nabla_{\mu}A^{CL}_{\nu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{CL}{}^{\nu}-\nabla_{\mu}A^{CL}_{\nu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{CL}{}^{\mu}
\nn\\
&&+\nabla_{\mu}A_{\nu}^Q\nabla^{\mu}A^{CL}{}^{\nu}
+\nabla_{\mu}A_{\nu}^{CL}\nabla^{\mu}A^Q{}^{\nu}-\nabla_{\mu}A^{Q}_{\nu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{CL}{}^{\mu}
-\nabla_{\mu}A_{\nu}^{CL}\nabla^{\nu}A^Q{}^{\mu}
\nn\\
&&+\nabla_{\mu}A^{Q}_{\nu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{Q}{}^{\nu}-\nabla_{\mu}A^{Q}_{\nu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{Q}{}^{\mu}\bigg)
\nn\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\ \bigg(\nabla_{\mu}A^{CL}_{\nu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{CL}{}^{\nu}-\nabla_{\mu}A^{CL}_{\nu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{CL}{}^{\mu}+\nabla_{\mu}A^{Q}_{\nu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{Q}{}^{\nu}\nn \\
& & -\nabla_{\mu}A^{Q}_{\nu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{Q}{}^{\mu}\bigg),
\eea
where we used $\nabla_{\mu}g_{\nu\rho}=0$, $\nabla_{\mu}F^{CL\mu\nu}=0$, $F^{CL}_{\mu\nu}\equiv\nabla_{\mu}A^{CL}_{\nu}-\nabla_{\nu}A^{CL}_{\mu}$, $\hat{n}_{\nu^{\prime}}$ and $\nabla_{\mu} V^{\mu}=\bigg(1/\sqrt{\det g_{\nu\rho}}\bigg)\partial_{\mu}\bigg(\sqrt{\det g_{\sigma\delta}}V^{\mu}\bigg)$. The action can be rewritten with a boundary term as
\bea
&&\frac{1}{2}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\ \bigg(\nabla_{\mu}A^{CL}_{\nu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{CL}{}^{\nu}-\nabla_{\mu}A^{CL}_{\nu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{CL}{}^{\mu}+\nabla_{\mu}A^{Q}_{\nu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{Q}{}^{\nu}-\nabla_{\mu}A^{Q}_{\nu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{Q}{}^{\mu}\bigg)
\nn\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\ \bigg(-A_{\nu}^{CL}\nabla_{\mu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{CL}{}^{\nu}+A^{CL}_{\nu}\nabla_{\mu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{CL}{}^{\mu}-A_{\nu}^{Q}\nabla_{\mu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{Q}{}^{\nu}+A^{Q}_{\nu}\nabla_{\mu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{Q}{}^{\mu}\bigg)
\nn\\
&&+\frac{1}{2}\int d^{D-1}x\ \hat{n}_{\mu^{\prime}}\sqrt{\det h_{\rho^{\prime}\sigma^{\prime}}}\ \bigg(A^{CL}_{\nu^{\prime}}F^{CL}{}^{\mu^{\prime}\nu^{\prime}}\bigg)
\nn\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\ \bigg(-A_{\nu}^{Q}\nabla_{\mu}\nabla^{\mu}A^{Q}{}^{\nu}+A^{Q}_{\nu}\nabla_{\mu}\nabla^{\nu}A^{Q}{}^{\mu}\bigg)
\nn\\
&&+\frac{1}{2}\int d^{D-1}x\ \hat{n}_{\mu^{\prime}}\sqrt{\det h_{\rho^{\prime}\sigma^{\prime}}}\ \bigg(A^{CL}_{\nu^{\prime}}F^{CL}{}^{\mu^{\prime}\nu^{\prime}}\bigg),
\eea
where $\hat{n}_{\nu^{\prime}}$ is the unit normal vector, and the induced metric $h_{\mu^{\prime}\nu^{\prime}}$ is defined as
\bea
ds^2=g_{\mu\nu}dx^{\mu}dx^{\nu}=g_{\mu\nu}\frac{\partial x^{\mu}}{\partial x^{\mu^{\prime}}}\frac{\partial x^{\nu}}{\partial x^{\nu^{\prime}}}dx^{\mu^{\prime}}dx^{\nu^{\prime}}\equiv h_{\mu^{\prime}\nu^{\prime}}dx^{\mu^{\prime}}dx^{\nu^{\prime}}.
\eea
We denote the boundary spacetime using the Greek indices with primes. Now we compute the boundary on-shell action. We first find an asymptotic solution. The metric is
\bea
ds^2=dr^2+r^2d\theta^2+dx_{\bot}^2,
\eea
where the period of $\theta$ is $\beta$, and $x_{\bot}$ is the orthogonal coordinates. We choose
\bea
A^{CL}_{\theta}=\sum_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}(r)\psi_{n^{\prime}}(x_{\bot}),
\eea
where
\bea
\int_{x_{\bot}}\psi_{m^{\prime}}\psi_{n^{\prime}}=\delta_{m^{\prime}n^{\prime}}, \qquad \nabla^2\psi_{n^{\prime}}(x_{\bot})=-\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\psi_{n^{\prime}}(x_{\bot}).
\eea
The equation of motion is $\nabla_{\mu}F^{CL}{}^{\mu\nu}=\partial_{\mu}F^{CL}{}^{\mu\nu}+\Gamma^{\mu}{}_{\mu\rho}F^{CL}{}^{\rho\nu}=0$
and we also have
\bea
\Gamma^{\mu}{}_{\nu\rho}\equiv\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\sigma}(\partial_{\rho}g_{\sigma\nu}+\partial_{\nu}g_{\sigma\rho}-\partial_{\sigma}g_{\nu\rho}),
\eea
\bea
\Gamma^r{}_{\theta\theta}=-r, \qquad \Gamma^{\theta}{}_{r\theta}=\frac{1}{r}.
\eea
We need to solve three equations. The first one near the boundary is $\partial_{\theta}F^{CL}{}^{\theta r}=0$, the second one near the boundary is $\partial_{\theta}F^{CL}{}^{\theta x_{\bot}}+\partial_rF^{CL}{}^{rx_{\bot}}=0$ and the final one near the boundary is $\partial_rF^{CL}{}^{r\theta}+\frac{1}{r}F^{CL}{}^{r\theta}+\partial_{x_{\bot}}F^{CL}{}^{x_{\bot}\theta}=0$. Because our classical field strength does not depend on $\theta$ near the boundary, the first equation will be satisfied. Due to $F^{rx_{\bot}}=0$ near the boundary, the second equation will also be satisfied. Hence, we only need to consider the last equation, which
gives \bea
&&\sum_{n^{\prime}} \partial_r\bigg(\frac{1}{r^2}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}\bigg)\psi_{n^{\prime}}+ \frac{1}{r^3}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}\psi_{n^{\prime}}+\frac{1}{r^2}\phi_{n^{\prime}}\nabla^2\psi_{n^{\prime}}
\nn\\
&=&\sum_{n^{\prime}}\bigg(-\frac{1}{r^3}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}+\frac{1}{r^2}\partial_r^2\phi_{n^{\prime}}\bigg)\psi_{n^{\prime}}-\frac{1}{r^2}\phi_{n^{\prime}}\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\psi_{n^{\prime}}=0.
\eea
Now we rewrite the equation above as
\bea
\frac{d^2}{d r^2}\phi_{n^{\prime}}-\frac{1}{r}\frac{d}{dr}\phi_{n^{\prime}}-\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}=0.
\eea
We then choose $\phi_{n^{\prime}}\approx a_{n^{\prime}}+b_{n^{\prime}} r^2\ln r$ near the boundary. The computation is given by
\bea
\frac{d}{dr}\phi_{n^{\prime}}=b_{n^{\prime}}(2r\ln r+ r), \qquad \frac {d^2}{dr^2}\phi_{n^{\prime}}=2b_{n^{\prime}}\ln r+3b_{n^{\prime}}, \qquad -\frac{1}{r}\frac{d}{dr}\phi_{n^{\prime}}=-2b_{n^{\prime}}\ln r-b_{n^{\prime}},
\nn
\eea
\bea
\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}=\lambda_{n^{\prime}} a_{n^{\prime}}+\lambda_{n^{\prime}}b_{n^{\prime}}r^2\ln r.
\nn
\eea
Thus, we obtain
\bea
2b_{n^{\prime}}-\lambda_{n^{\prime}}a_{n^{\prime}}-\lambda_{n^{\prime}}b_{n^{\prime}}r^2\ln r=0
\eea
near the boundary. We set boundary at $r=0$ and so we get $2b_{n^{\prime}}=\lambda_{n^{\prime}}a_{n^{\prime}}$ near the boundary. Now we define an electric field in terms of $n^{\prime}$ near boundary as
\bea
F^{CL}{}^{\theta r}\sim\frac{1}{r^2}F^{CL}_{\theta r}=-\frac{1}{r^2}\sum_{n^{\prime}}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}\psi_{n^{\prime}},
\eea
\bea
E_{n^{\prime}}\equiv-\frac{1}{r}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}\big|_{r=\epsilon\rightarrow 0}=-\frac{b_{n^{\prime}}}{r}(2r\ln r+r)\big|_{r=\epsilon\rightarrow 0}\sim 2b_{n^{\prime}}\ln(\epsilon^{-1}),
\eea
\bea
E^{CB}\equiv F^{CL}{}^{\theta r}=\frac{1}{r}\sum_{n^{\prime}}E_{n^{\prime}}\psi_{n^{\prime}}.
\eea
We determine $\phi_{n^{\prime}}$ in terms of $E_{n^{\prime}}$ as
\bea
\phi_{n^{\prime}}\big|_{r=\epsilon\rightarrow 0}=a_{n^{\prime}}=\frac{2b_{n^{\prime}}}{\lambda_{n^{\prime}}}\sim\frac{E_{n^{\prime}}}{\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\ln\epsilon^{-1}}.
\eea
Hence, we compute the on-shell boundary action as
\bea
&&\frac{1}{2}\int d^{D-1}x\ \hat{n}_{\nu^{\prime}}\sqrt{\det h_{\rho^{\prime}\sigma^{\prime}}}\bigg(A^{CL}_{\nu^{\prime}}F^{CL}{}^{\mu^{\prime}\nu^{\prime}}\bigg)
=-\frac{1}{2}\int d\theta d^{D-2}x_{\bot}\sum_{n_1^{\prime}}\phi_{n_1^{\prime}}\psi_{n_1^{\prime}}\sum_{n_2^{\prime}}E_{n_2^{\prime}}
\psi_{n_2^{\prime}}
\nn\\
&=&-\frac{1}{2}\int d\theta\sum_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}E_{n^{\prime}}\sim-\sum_{n^{\prime}}\frac{\beta E_{n^{\prime}}^2}{2\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\ln\epsilon^{-1}}.
\eea
We note that that if $\lambda_{n^{\prime}}=0$, the on-shell action vanishes because $E_{n^{\prime}}=0$.
Our measure is defined as
\bea
\int DA_{\mu}\sim\int DA^Q_{\mu}DA^{CL}_{\nu}\sim \int DA^Q_{\mu}DE_{n^{\prime}}.
\eea
Because the boundary field does not couple to the bulk field, the partition function can be obtained from the product of the partition function of the bulk field and that of the boundary field. In the one-form Abelian gauge theory, the partition function of the boundary field is given by
\bea
Z^\zt{BOAG}\sim\Pi_{n^{\prime\prime}}\bigg(-\frac{\ln(\epsilon^{-1})\lambda_{n^{\prime\prime}}}{\beta}\bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}}=\det{}^{\prime} \bigg(\frac{\ln(\epsilon^{-1})\nabla_{x_{\bot}}^2}{\beta}\bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}},
\eea
where we exclude the modes with $\lambda_{n^{\prime\prime}}=0$ and the operation $\det{}^{\prime}$ only has product of non-zero eigenvalues. Then we can use the conical method to obtain the boundary entanglement entropy in the Abelian one-form gauge theory.
\subsection{Boundary Entanglement Entropy in the Massive Free Scalar Field Theory}
We use a similar method to analyze an on-shell boundary action in the massive free scalar field theory. The equation of motion is
\bea
\bigg(\nabla_{\mu}\nabla^{\mu}+m^2\bigg)\phi=0,
\eea
and we solve the equations of motion in the metric
\bea
ds^2=dr^2+r^2d\theta^2+dx_{\bot}^2.
\eea
The form of the solution is
\bea
\phi=\sum_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}(r)\psi_{n^{\prime}}(x_{\bot}),
\eea
where
\bea
\nabla^2\psi_{n^{\prime}}(x_{\bot})=-\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\psi_{n^{\prime}}(x_{\bot}).
\eea
Plugging the solution into the equation of motion, we get
\bea
&&\sum_{n^{\prime}}\bigg\lbrack\bigg(\partial_r\partial^r\phi_{n^{\prime}}(r)\bigg)\psi_{n^{\prime}}+\phi_{n^{\prime}}(r)\partial_{x_{\bot}}^2\psi_{n^{\prime}}+\Gamma^{\theta}{}_{\theta r}\partial^r\phi_{n^{\prime}}\psi_{n^{\prime}}(x_{\bot})\bigg\rbrack+m^2\phi
\nn\\
&=&\sum_{n^{\prime}}\bigg(\partial_r^2\phi_{n^{\prime}}-\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}+\frac{1}{r}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}\bigg)\psi_{n^{\prime}}+m^2\phi
\nn\\
&=&\sum_{n^{\prime}}\bigg(\partial_r^2\phi_{n^{\prime}}+\frac{1}{r}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}-\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}\bigg)\psi_{n^{\prime}}
+m^2\phi
=0.
\eea
Hence, the equation for $\phi_{n'}$ follows as
\bea
\partial_r^2\phi_{n^{\prime}}+\frac{1}{r}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}+(m^2-\lambda_{n^{\prime}})\phi_{n^{\prime}}=0.
\eea
Because the entangling surface is set at $r=0$ and $\phi$ should not be singular near the entangling surface, the asymptotic behavior follows from
\bea
2\partial_r^2\phi_{n^{\prime}}+(m^2-\lambda_{n^{\prime}})\phi_{n^{\prime}}=0,
\eea
where we assumed that $\partial_r\phi_n\sim 0$ near the entangling surface to avoid the singularity.
Thus, the solution near the entangling surface is given by
\bea
\phi_n\sim a_n\cos\bigg(\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}(m^2-\lambda_n)}r\bigg),
\eea
where $a_n$ are arbitrary constants.
This result is interesting because it implies that the universal term of the entanglement entropy does not receive contributions from the on-shell boundary term in the case of massive free scalar field theory with planar entangling surface because $\partial_r\phi_n\sim 0$ near the boundary. The ambiguities still persist in this case although we do not find universal contributions of the entanglement entropy from the boundary on-shell action. In this case, all values of centers have the same weight. Thus, the non-tensor product decomposition or the non-trivial centers in the massive free scalar field theory do not lead to any universal contributions. We also give a quick comment on the interacting scalar field theories (local interaction). If we use the same method to analyze an interacting scalar field theory, then we still have $\partial_r\phi_n\sim 0$ near the entangling surface. Thus, the result is the same as in the massive free scalar field theory. In other words, the non-tensor product decompositions of the Hilbert space in scalar field theories possibly do not give any interesting results. We already showed that the fermion theories do not have non-trivial centers from removing operators. Hence, it is possible that gauge symmetry connects bulk and boundary sides to allow a universal contribution to the entanglement entropy from the on-shell boundary action in gauge theories.
\subsection{Boundary Entanglement Entropy in the Abelian $p$-Form Gauge Theory}
We generalize the computation of the Abelian one-form gauge theory to the case of the Abelian $p$-form gauge theory. The equation of motion in the Abelian $p$-form gauge theory is
\bea
\nabla_{\mu_1}F^{\mu_1\mu_2\cdots\mu_{p+1}}=0.
\eea
As before, we also look for the asymptotic solution of the equation of motion. To analyze the asymptotic behavior of the equation of motion more easily, we choose
\bea
A_{\theta x_{\bot}}=\sum_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}(r)\psi_{n^{\prime}}(x_{\bot}),
\eea
where $\nabla_{x_{\bot}}^2\psi_{n^{\prime}}=-\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\psi_{n^{\prime}}$, and other components are zero, and $A_{\theta x_{\bot}}$ is a $p$-form field, where $x_{\bot}$ indicate the multiple indices for the transverse space. The equation of motion reads
\bea
\nabla_{\mu_1}F^{\mu_1\mu_2\cdots\mu_{p+1}}=
\partial_{\mu_1}F^{\mu_1\mu_2\cdots\mu_{p+1}}+\Gamma^{\mu_1}{}_{\nu\mu_1}
F^{\nu\mu_2\mu_3\cdots\mu_{p+1}}=0,
\eea
when $p> 0$. The non-trivial part of the equation of motion gives
\bea
\partial_rF^{r\theta x_{\bot}}+\partial_{x_{\bot}^{\prime}}F^{x_{\bot}^{\prime}\theta x_{\bot}}+\Gamma^{\theta}{}_{r\theta}F^{r\theta x_{\bot}}=0.
\eea
Hence, we get
\bea
\sum_{n^{\prime}}\bigg\lbrack\partial_r\bigg(\frac{1}{r^2}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}\bigg)+\frac{1}{r^3}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}-\frac{1}{r^2}\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}\bigg\rbrack\psi_{n^{\prime}}=0.
\eea
Therefore, we obtain
\bea
\partial_r^2\phi_{n^{\prime}}-\frac{1}{r}\partial_r\phi_{n^{\prime}}-\lambda_{n^{\prime}}\phi_{n^{\prime}}=0.
\eea
Thus, the boundary partition function of the $p$-form free theories is
\bea
Z^\zt{BOPAG}\sim\Pi_{n^{\prime\prime}}\bigg(-\frac{\ln(\epsilon^{-1})\lambda_{n^{\prime\prime}}}{\beta}\bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}}=\det{}^{\prime} \bigg(\frac{\ln(\epsilon^{-1})\nabla_{x_{\bot}}^2}{\beta}\bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}},
\eea
where as before we exclude $\lambda_{n^{\prime \prime}}=0$ in the product. The partition function can give the boundary entanglement entropy via the conical method.
\subsection{Bulk Entanglement Entropy in the Massive Free Scalar Field Theory}
We use the conical method to compute the entanglement entropy as
\bea
S_{EE}=\bigg(1-\beta\frac{\partial}{\partial\beta}\bigg)\ln Z(\beta)\bigg|_{\beta=2\pi}.
\eea
Thus, the entanglement entropy is obtained from the partition function. The Lagrangian of the free scalar field theory is
\bea
S_{SF}=\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\nu\rho}}\ \bigg( \frac{1}{2}\nabla_{\mu}\phi\nabla^{\mu}\phi+\frac{m^2}{2}\phi^2\bigg).
\eea
The bulk term of the action after dropping all the boundary terms is
\bea
\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\nu\rho}}\ \bigg\lbrack \frac{1}{2}\phi\bigg(-\nabla_{\mu}\nabla^{\mu}+m^2\bigg)\phi\bigg\rbrack.
\eea
Hence, the partition function in bulk is determined by
\bea
\bigg(\det\big(-\Box+m^2\big)\bigg)^{-\frac{1}{2}},
\eea
up to a normalization constant. Thus, the free energy of the free scalar field theory is
\bea
\frac{1}{2}\ln\det\big(-\Box+m^2\big)\sim-\frac{1}{2}\int d^Dx\sqrt{\det g_{\mu\nu}}\int_{\epsilon^2}^{\infty}\frac{ds}{s}e^{-sm^2}K(s, x, x),
\eea
where
\bea
K(s, x, x^{\prime})=<x\mid e^{-s(-\Box)}\mid x^{\prime}>.
\eea
We used the following formula
\bea
\ln\big(\det W\big)=\Tr\ln(W)\sim-\int_0^{\infty}\frac{ds}{s}\Tr\bigg(e^{-sW}\bigg),
\eea
where $W$ is a hermitian operator.
The formula can be proved as
\bea
-\frac{\partial}{\partial a}\int_0^{\infty}\frac{ds}{s}e^{-as}=\int_0^{\infty} ds\ e^{-as}=\frac{1}{a} \Rightarrow -\int_0^{\infty}\frac{ds}{s}e^{-as}\sim \ln a.
\eea
After we compute the bulk free energy, we can obtain the bulk entanglement entropy from the conical method.
\subsection{Bulk Entanglement Entropy in the Abelian $p$-From Gauge Theory}
We start by discussing the Abelian one-form gauge theory, and then we generalize the results to the Abelian $p$-form gauge theory. The action of the Abelian one-form gauge theory is given by
\bea
S_\zt{AOG}=\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\bigg(\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{2}\big(\nabla_{\mu}A^{\mu}\big)^2-\bar{c}\Box c\bigg),
\eea
where we introduce the gauge fixing term and the ghost field. Although the ghost field does not couple with the gauge field, it couples to the metric. Hence, the ghost field should affect the results of the entanglement entropy.
The bulk action is
\bea
\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\rho\sigma}}\ \bigg(-\frac{1}{2}A^{\mu}\big(g_{\mu\nu}\Box+\lbrack\nabla_{\mu}, \nabla_{\nu}\rbrack\big)A^{\nu}-\bar{c}\Box c\bigg).
\eea
The free energy in the bulk is given by
\bea
\frac{1}{2}\ln\det\big(-g_{\mu\nu}\Box-\lbrack\nabla_{\mu}, \nabla_{\nu}\rbrack\big)-\ln\det(-\Box).
\eea
To compute the free energy, we introduce a complete basis $\phi_n$ as
\bea
-\Box\phi_n=\lambda_n\phi_n.
\eea
Then we can define the scalar heat kernel as
\bea
K_s(s, x, y)=\sum_ne^{-s\lambda_n}\phi_n(x)\phi_n(y).
\eea
We also introduce a complete set of eigenfunctions as
\bea
\big(-g_{\mu\nu}\Box-\lbrack\nabla_{\mu}, \nabla_{\nu}\rbrack\big)A_n^{\nu}=\lambda_nA_{n, \mu}.
\eea
Then the one-form gauge heat kernel is defined as
\bea
K_{og}(s, x, y)_{\mu\nu}=\sum_ne^{-s\lambda_n}A_{\mu, n}(x)A_{\nu, n}(y).
\eea
The scalar eigenfunctions can be used to express the one-form gauge eigenfunctions as
\bea
A^L_{\mu^{\prime}, n}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda^{\prime}_n}}\nabla_{\mu^{\prime}}\phi_n,\qquad A^T_{\mu^{\prime}, n}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda^{\prime}_n}}\epsilon_{\mu^{\prime}\nu^{\prime}}\nabla^{\nu^{\prime}}\phi_n, \qquad A_{\mu^{\prime}, n}=A^L_{\mu^{\prime}, n}+A^T_{\mu^{\prime}, n},
\eea
and the other components of the one-form gauge eigenfunctions are identified as scalar eigenfunctions directly. We use $\mu^{\prime}$ to denote directions of a two dimensional cone. We define $\lambda_n^{\prime}$ as
\bea
-\nabla^{\mu^{\prime}}\nabla_{\mu^{\prime}}\phi_n=\lambda_n^{\prime}\phi_n.
\eea
Therefore, we obtain
\bea
K_{og}( s, x, x)_{\mu}^{\mu}&=&\sum_n\bigg(\frac{e^{-s\lambda_n}}{\lambda^{\prime}_n}\big(2\nabla_{\mu^{\prime}}\phi_n\nabla^{\mu^{\prime}}\phi_n\big)\bigg)+\sum_{n,\ \lambda_n\neq\lambda_n^{\prime}}(D-2)e^{-s\lambda_n}\phi_n^2
\nn\\
&=&\sum_n\bigg\lbrack\frac{e^{-s\lambda_n}}{\lambda^{\prime}_n}\bigg(-2\phi_n\nabla^{\mu^{\prime}}\nabla_{\mu^{\prime}}\phi_n
+2\nabla_{\mu^{\prime}}\big(\phi_n\nabla^{\mu^{\prime}}\phi_n\big)\bigg)\bigg\rbrack+\sum_{n,\ \lambda_n\neq\lambda_n^{\prime}}(D-2)e^{-s\lambda_n}\phi_n^2
\nn\\
&=&\sum_n e^{-s\lambda_n}\bigg(2\phi_n^2+\frac{\nabla^{\mu^{\prime}}\nabla_{\mu^{\prime}}(\phi_n^2)}{\lambda^{\prime}_n}\bigg)+\sum_{n,\ \lambda_n\neq\lambda_n^{\prime}}(D-2)e^{-s\lambda_n}\phi_n^2
\nn\\
&=&2K_s(s, x, x)+(D-2)K_s^{\prime}(s, x, x)+\sum_n \frac{e^{-s\lambda_n}}{\lambda^{\prime}_n}\nabla^{\mu^{\prime}}\nabla_{\mu^{\prime}}(\phi_n^2),
\eea
where $K_s^{\prime}$ is the heat kernel that does not include the zero modes of the transverse directions (a unit sphere). When we consider the four dimensional one-form Abelian gauge theory in the Euclidean flat background with a $S^2$ entangling surface, the zero mode of transverse directions should not have any contributions to the entanglement. Because $\nabla\cdot\vec{E}=\nabla\cdot\vec{B}=0$, where $\vec{E}$ is the electric field and $\vec{B}$ is the magnetic field, we have
\bea
\frac{\partial E_{l=0}}{\partial r}+\frac{2}{r}E_{l=0}=\frac{\partial B_{l=0}}{\partial r}+\frac{2}{r}B_{l=0}=0,
\eea
where $E_{l=0}$ is the electric field for the zero mode in transverse directions and $B_{l=0}$ is the magnetic field for the zero mode of transverse directions. As a result, we need zero electric and magnetic fields in order to have finite energy. This then implies that the zero mode in transverse directions does not give universal contributions to the entanglement entropy. In other words, we cannot naively use scalar field to replace one-form Abelian gauge field due to the over-counting of the zero mode in the transverse directions \cite{Casini:2015dsg}.
The free energy is given by
\bea
&&-\frac{1}{2}\int_{\epsilon^2}^{\infty}ds\frac{e^{-m^{\prime}{}^2s}}{s}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\nu\rho}}\ \bigg(K_{og}(s, x, x)_{\mu}^{\mu}-2K_s(s, x, x)\bigg)
\nn\\
&=&-\frac{1}{2}\int_{\epsilon^2}^{\infty}ds\frac{e^{-m^{\prime}{}^2s}}{s}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\mu\nu}}\ \bigg((D-2)K^{\prime}_s(s, x, x)+\sum_n \frac{e^{-s\lambda_n}}{\lambda^{\prime}_n}\nabla^{\mu^{\prime}}\nabla_{\mu^{\prime}}(\phi_n^2)\bigg),
\nn\\
\eea
where $m^{\prime}$ is an infrared regulator. The second term in the last equality is dominant for the zero modes of two dimensional cone directions and this term is also a total derivative term. Thus, the second term in the last equality should correspond to the boundary entanglement entropy.
Now we extend the computation of the entanglement entropy to the $p$-form free theory. We first discuss how to introduce ghost \cite{Obukhov:1982dt} to
compute the partition function of bulk fields in the $p$-form free theory. The action for the $p$-form theory is
\bea
\frac{1}{2(p+1)!}(H, H),
\eea
where $H=dB$, $H$ is the field strength associated with the $p$-form field $B$, and the inner product between two $p$-forms in $D$ dimensions is defined as
\bea
(\alpha, \beta)\equiv\int d^Dx\ \big[\det(g_{\mu\nu})\big]^{\frac{1}{2}}\alpha^{\mu_1\mu_2\cdots\mu_p}\beta_{\mu_1\mu_2\cdots\mu_p}.
\eea
We can define the adjoint operator for differential $d$ using the inner product (when neglecting the boundary term)
\bea
(\alpha, d\beta)\equiv -(\delta\alpha, \beta),
\eea
where
\bea
\delta\alpha=\nabla^{\mu_1}\alpha_{\mu_1\mu_2\cdots\mu_p}dx^{\mu_2}\wedge dx^{\mu_2}\wedge\cdots dx^{\mu_p}\,.
\eea
The operators $\delta$ and $d$ also satisfy
\bea
d^2=\delta^2=0.
\eea
The generalization of the Laplacian in the $p$-form free theory is defined as
\bea
\Box_p\equiv d\delta+\delta d.
\eea
Thus, the action in the $p$-form free theory without considering a boundary term can be rewritten as
\bea
\frac{1}{2(p+1)!}(dB, dB)&=&-\frac{1}{2(p+1)!}(B, \delta dB)=-\frac{1}{2(p+1)!}\big(B, (\delta d+d\delta)B\big)+\frac{1}{2(p+1)!}(B, d\delta B),
\nn\\
&=&-\frac{1}{2(p+1)!}(B, \Box_p B)-\frac{1}{2(p+1)!}(\delta B,\delta B).
\eea
Then we introduce a gauge fixing term as
\bea
\frac{1}{2(p+1)!}(\delta B, \delta B)
\eea
and a ghost action as
\bea
-\frac{1}{2p!}(dG, \Box_p d G)&=&-\frac{1}{2p!}(dG, d\delta dG)=\frac{1}{2p!}(G, \delta d\delta d G)\nn\\
& = & \frac{1}{2 p!}\big(G, (\delta d\delta d+d\delta d\delta)G\big)-\frac{1}{2p!}(G, d\delta d\delta G)
\nn\\
&=&\frac{1}{2p!}(G, \Box^2_{p-1} G)+\frac{1}{2p!}(\delta G, \delta d\delta G)\nn\\
& = & \frac{1}{2p!}(G, \Box_{p-1}^2 G)+\frac{1}{2p!}(\delta G, \Box_{p-2}\delta G).
\eea
Because the $(p-1)$-form ghost field also has its own gauge symmetry, we need to choose an additional gauge fixing term
\bea
-\frac{1}{2p!}(\delta G, \Box_{p-2}\delta G)
\eea
and a ghost action
\bea
\frac{1}{2(p-1)!}(d\tilde{G}, \Box_{p-1}^2d\tilde{G}),
\eea
where $\tilde{G}$ is a commuting field to remove the non-physical degrees of freedom. It is necessary to continue the procedure until we encounter a ghost field that is a zero-form field, which does not have gauge symmetry. We would also like to remind the reader that ghost fields are commuting when they are $(p-2j)$-from fields and anti-commuting in other cases. In summary, the action for the $p$-from free theory is
\bea
S_p=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=0}^p\frac{(-1)^{j+1}}{(p+1-j)!}(A_{p-j}, \Box_{p-j}^{j+1} A_{p-j}),
\eea
where we use $A_p$ to denote the $p$-form gauge field and all the ghost fields, and $A_{p-j}$ is commuting when $j$ is an even non-negative integers while anti-commuting for odd $j$. Hence, the bulk partition function for the $p$-form free theory is determined as
\bea
\prod\limits_{j=0}^{p}\det\bigg((-1)^{j+1}\Box_{p-j}^{\big(\frac{j+1}{2}\big){(-1)^{{}^{(j+1)}}}}\bigg),
\eea
and we can use the heat kernels to rewrite the bulk partition function as
\bea
-\frac{1}{2}\int_{\epsilon^2}^{\infty}ds\ \frac{e^{-m^{\prime 2}s}}{s}\int d^Dx\ \sqrt{\det g_{\mu\nu}}\ \mbox{Tr}\bigg(K_p(s, x, x)-2K_{p-1}(s, x, x)+\cdots +(-1)^ppK_0\bigg),
\nn\\
\eea
where $K_p$ is defined as
\bea
K_{p-j}(s, x, x^{\prime})=\bigg<x\bigg| e^{-s\bigg((-1)^{j+1}\Box_{(p-j)}^{\big(\frac{j+1}{2}\big) (-1)^{(j+1)}}\bigg)}\bigg|x^{\prime}\bigg>.
\eea
Computation of the entanglement entropy with a boundary term is equivalent to computation of the entanglement entropy considering regularization of the zero mode of two dimensional cone directions \cite{Kabat:1995eq}.
\subsection{Universal Term of the Entanglement Entropy}
We discuss the universal term of the entanglement entropy in the $p$-form free theory. We compute the entanglement entropy in the Euclidean flat background with a $S^{2p}$ entangling surface. In this case the universal term of the entanglement entropy can be expressed in terms of the universal terms of massless free scalar field theories in various different dimensions. We also give the results for the universal terms of the entanglement entropy in the case of the $p$-form free theory in $p+1$ and $p+2$ dimensions.
We first show that the computation of the entanglement entropy in the Euclidean polar coordinate with an entangling surface $S^{D-2}$ is equivalent to the case of $S^D$ with a unit radius in a conformal field theory \cite{Casini:2011kv}. The Euclidean polar coordinate is
\bea
ds^2=dt^2+dr^2+r^2d\Omega^2_{D-2},
\eea
where $\Omega_{D-2}$ is the solid angle, and the entangling surface is at $r=R$ and $t=0$. We use the coordinate transformation
\bea
t=R\frac{\sin\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)}{\cosh\big(u\big)+\cos\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)}, \qquad r=R\frac{\sinh\big(u\big)}{\cosh\big( u\big)+\cos\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)},
\nn\\
0\le u <\infty, \qquad 0\le\frac{\tau}{R}< 2\pi n\ \mbox{for the $n$-sheet manifold},
\eea
which gives
\bea
dt&=&\frac{\bigg(1+\cos\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\cosh\big(u\big)\bigg)d\tau}{\bigg(\cosh\big(u)+\cos\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\bigg)^2}-\frac{R\sin\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\sinh\big(u\big)du}{\bigg(\cosh\big( u\big)+\cos\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\bigg)^2},
\nn\\
d\rho&=&\frac{R\bigg(1+\cos\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\cosh\big(u\big)\bigg)du}{\bigg(\cosh\big(u)+\cos\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\bigg)^2}+\frac{\sin\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\sinh\big(u\big)d\tau}{\bigg(\cosh\big( u\big)+\cos\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\bigg)^2},
\nn\\
dt^2+d\rho^2&=&\frac{d\tau^2}{\bigg(\cosh^2\big(u\big)+\cos^2\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\bigg)^2}+R^2\frac{du^2}{\bigg(\cosh^2\big(u\big)+\cos^2\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\bigg)^2},
\nn
\eea
and then we obtain the metric in the new coordinate as
\bea
ds^2&=&\frac{d\tau^2}{\bigg(\cosh^2\big(u\big)+\cos^2\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\bigg)^2}+R^2\frac{du^2}{\bigg(\cosh^2\big(u\big)+\cos^2\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\bigg)^2}
\nn\\
&&+R^2\frac{\sinh^2\big(u\big)d\Omega_{D-2}^2}{\bigg(\cosh^2\big(u\big)+\cos^2\big(\frac{\tau}{R}\big)\bigg)^2}.
\nn\\
\eea
In a conformal field theory, we can omit the common pre-factor and the new metric becomes
\bea
ds_1^2 = \frac{d\tau^2}{R^2}+du^2+\sinh^2\big(u\big)d\Omega^2_{D-2}.
\eea
Then we redefine $\sinh\big(u\big)=\tan\big(\theta\big)$, where $0\le\theta <\pi/2$ and get
\bea
ds_2^2 = \frac{d\tau^2}{R^2}+\frac{d\theta^2}{\cos^2\big(\theta\big)}+\tan^2\big(\theta\big)d\Omega^2_{D-2},
\eea
where we used
\bea
du^2=\frac{d\theta^2}{\cos^2\big(\theta\big)}.
\eea
In conformal field theory, we can omit the pre-factor and get
\bea
ds_3^2 = d\theta^2+\cos^2\big(\theta\big)\frac{d\tau^2}{R^2}+\sin^2\big(\theta\big)d\Omega^2_{D-2}.
\eea
Then we can also relate the sphere to a product geometry of two dimensional cone and unit sphere near the entangling surface ($\theta\rightarrow\pi/2$) from conformal mapping as
\bea
ds_4^2&=&\frac{1}{\sin^2(\theta)}d\theta^2+\frac{\cos^2(\theta)}{\sin^2(\theta)}\frac{d\tau^2}{R^2}+d\Omega^2_{D-2},\qquad r=\frac{\cos(\theta)}{\sin(\theta)},
\nn\\
ds_4^2&=&\sin^2(\theta)dr^2+r^2\frac{d\tau^2}{R^2}+d\Omega^2_{D-2},
\nn\\
ds_4^2&\rightarrow&dr^2+r^2\frac{d\tau^2}{R^2}+d\Omega^2_{D-2}, \qquad \theta\rightarrow\frac{\pi}{2}.
\eea
This implies that we can introduce a two dimensional cone and set boundary condition on the cone to compute the boundary entanglement entropy on a sphere. Thus, we can identify the universal term of the partition function on a sphere and that of the entanglement entropy across a spherical entangling surface in the Euclidean flat space. When we use a sphere or a regularized cone to compute the entanglement entropy, there is no boundary term, but the effects of the boundary term will appear from the regularization.
To obtain the universal term of the entanglement entropy in the $p$-form free theory in $2p+2$ dimensions, we need to rewrite the heat kernel of the $p$-form theory in terms of those of theories of lower forms. Because the $p$-form field has $(p-1)$-form gauge parameter, we need to cancel the degrees of freedom of $(p-1)$-form degrees of freedom. The $(p-1)$-form field also has its own gauge symmetry and so we also need to cancel $(p-2)$-form degrees of freedom. The procedure continues until we meet scalar fields. Therefore, we obtain
\bea
2K^{2p+2}_{p-1}-3K^{2p+2}_{p-2}+\cdots+(-1)^p(p+1)K^{2p+2}_0+C^{2p}_{p}K_0^{2p+2}
\eea
from $K_p^{2p+2}$ in the bulk up to zero modes, where $K_p^q$ is the heat kernel of $p$-from on $S^q$. The contributions of the ghost fields in the
bulk are
\bea
-2K^{2p+2}_{p-1}+3K^{2p+2}_{p-2}+\cdots+(-1)^{p+1}(p+1)K^{2p+2}_0.
\eea
We need to subtract the zero modes of two dimensional cone directions, which come from the boundary terms, and zero modes of the transverse directions. Eventually, we get
\bea
-2C^{2p-2}_{p-1}K_0^{2p}+3C^{2p-4}_{p-2}K_0^{2p-2}+\cdots +(-1)^p(p+1)K_0^2.
\eea
Thus, the universal term of entanglement entropy in the $p$-form free theory in $2p+2$ dimensions can be written as
\bea
\label{uni_total}
C^{2p}_pK_0^{2p+2}-2C^{2p-2}_{p-1}K_0^{2p}+\cdots +(-1)^p(p+1)K_0^2.
\eea
Therefore, we can use the universal terms of entanglement entropy in massless free scalar field theory in various dimensions to determine the universal term of entanglement entropy in $p$-from free theory in $2p+2$ dimensions. The universal terms of the entanglement entropy in massless free scalar field theories on even spheres can be found in \cite{Casini:2010kt}. The boundary contributions of the universal terms are of opposite sign to the universal terms of $(p-1)$-form free theory on $S^{2p}$. Thus, we can also determine universal terms of bulk entanglement entropy in $p$-form free theory in $2p+2$ dimensions as
\bea
&&C_p^{2p}K_0^{2p+2}-\bigg(\mbox{universal terms of $(p-1)$-form free theory on $S^{2p}$}\bigg)
\nn\\
&&-\bigg(\mbox{universal terms of $(p-2)$-form free theory on $S^{2p-2}$}\bigg).
\eea
The universal terms of entanglement entropy \er{uni_total} is also consistent with the known anomaly coefficients \cite{Cappelli:2000fe} (see also \eg \cite{CamporesiHiguchi} for the computation of the bulk part).
From our computation methods, it is very easy to determine the universal terms of the entanglement entropy of the $p$-form free theory in $p+1$ and $p+2$ dimensions. In the case of $p+1$ dimensions, we do not have dynamical degrees of freedom. Thus the universal term should vanish. In the case of $p$-from free theory in $p+2$ dimensions, the universal term of the boundary entanglement entropy should be determined from the $(p-1)$-from in $p$ dimensions. Hence the universal term of the boundary entanglement entropy should vanish for the $p$-form free theory in $p+2$ dimensions. Then the $p$-form free theory in $p+2$ dimensions can dual to 0-form free theory in $p+2$ dimensions. Therefore, we know that the universal terms of the entanglement entropy of the $p$-form free theory in $p+2$ dimensions can be the same as that of
the 0-form free theory in $p+2$ dimensions.
\subsection{Strong Subadditivity in Free Theories}
We discuss the strong subadditivity \cite{Araki:1970ba} in this section. The strong subadditivity is satisfied generically if the centers include only the identity. In the case of non-trivial centers, the strong subadditivity is not satisfied generically \cite{Ma:2015xes, Casini:2014aia}. In the case of free scalar field theory, the centers have equal probability distribution. Then it is easy to show that the strong subadditivity holds in free scalar field theory. Even if we consider equal probability distribution in an interacting scalar field theory, the strong subadditivity may not hold. We wonder whether it is possible to define a suitable strong subadditivitty in free theories.
We first use
\bea
\mathrm{Tr}\bigg(A\ln A-A\ln B-A+B\bigg)\ge 0
\eea
with $A=\rho_{123}$ and $B=\exp(-\ln\rho_2+\ln\rho_{12}+\ln\rho_{23})$ to find
\bea
F(\rho_{123})=S_{123}+S_2-S_{12}-S_{23}\le\mbox{Tr}\bigg(\exp(\ln\rho_{12}-\ln\rho_2+\ln\rho_{23})-\rho_{123}\bigg),
\eea
and apply
\bea
\mathrm{Tr}\bigg(e^CT_{\exp(-A)}\big(e^B\big)\bigg)\ge\mathrm{Tr}\bigg(e^{A+B+C}\bigg),
\eea
where
\bea
\frac{d}{dx}\ln(\alpha+x\beta)|_{x=0}\equiv T_{\alpha}(\beta)\equiv \int_0^{\infty} dy\ (\alpha+y1)^{-1}\beta(\alpha+y1)^{-1},
\eea
to obtain
\bea
\mbox{Tr}\bigg(\exp(\ln C-\ln D+\ln E)\bigg)\le\mbox{Tr}\bigg(\int_0^{\infty}dx\ C(D+x1)^{-1}E(D+x1)^{-1}\bigg).
\eea
Hence, we get
\bea
F(\rho_{123})&\le&\mbox{Tr}\bigg(-\rho_{123}+\int_0^{\infty}dx\ \rho_{12}(\rho_2+x1)^{-1}\rho_{23}(\rho_2+x1)^{-1}\bigg)
\nn\\
&=&-\mbox{Tr}\ \rho_{123}+\mbox{Tr} \bigg(\int_0^{\infty}dx\ \rho_2(\rho_2+x1)^{-1}\rho_2(\rho_2+x1)^{-1}\bigg)
\nn\\
&=&\mbox{Tr}\ \rho_2-\mbox{Tr}\ \rho_{123}=0
\eea
where we use $C=\rho_{12}$, $D=\rho_2$ and $E=\rho_{23}$. The reduced density matrix is $\rho=\oplus_i p_i\rho_i$, where $p_i$ is the probability distribution of centers and $\rho_i$ depends on the choice of centers. But if we only focus on free theories, each $\rho_i$ gives the same entanglement entropy. In free theories, we can use a reduced density matrix with a probability distribution of centers to describe the entanglement in different regions. Thus, we can show that the strong subadditivity remains valid in free theories. The proof cannot not be extended to interacting theories because it is hard to use a reduced density matrix with a probability distribution of centers to describe entanglement in different regions.
The above proof shows that we also have the strong subadditivity in the Abelian gauge theory. But if we consider the Abelian gauge theory on a lattice, then the entanglement in this theory is hard to be described by a reduced density matrix with a probability distribution. Therefore, the strong subadditivity is not satisfied generically \cite{Casini:2014aia} in the case of finite lattice spacing. The violation of the strong subadditivity in the lattice Abelian gauge theory is not in contradiction with the result in the continuum limit above. This is not surprising because we expect that the long-range entanglement does not depend on centers if we consider continuum limit. In the continuum limit, we also need to define the entanglement entropy from the same total Hilbert space. Otherwise, the strong subadditivity is not satisfied.
Finally, we rewrite the strong subadditivity in a different form. From $S_{123}=S_4$ and $S_{12}=S_{34}$, the strong subadditivity is
\bea
S_4+S_2\le S_{34}+S_{23}.
\eea
Hence, we can rewrite the strong subadditivity as
\bea
S_1+S_2\le S_{13}+S_{23}.
\eea
We remind the reader that the strong subadditivity is satisfied due to the fact that the entanglement entropy is the sum of the bulk entanglement entropy and classical Shannon entropy. Thus, this proof cannot be extended to interacting theories in general.
\section{Mutual Information with Centers}
\label{7}
The entanglement entropy with centers is not a physical quantity and it also depends on the centers. Hence, we want to find a physical quantity, which can be measured from experiments. If this quantity does not depend on centers, it implies that the measurement is free from ambiguities. A candidate of this quantity is the mutual information. We consider massive free scalar field theory, and two dimensional conformal field theory. To analyze the
effects of centers in the mutual information, we consider disjoint regions
and a tensor product decomposition of the Hilbert space, but we create the non-trivial centers by removing some operators in each region. We consider planar case in free massive scalar field theory to show that the mutual information does not depend on centers. In the case of two dimensional conformal field theory, we can compute mutual information for multiple intervals. The result also supports that the mutual information does not depend on centers.
\subsection{Free Massive Scalar Field Theory}
When we compute the free massive scalar field theory, we can choose a boundary condition and consider planar case to obtain equal weight of centers. We also find that the universal contributions of the boundary term should vanish and so it is easy to see that the mutual information does not depend on a choice of centers.
This example is also interesting and motivates us to consider conformal field theories because massless free scalar field theory is a special case of conformal field theories.
\subsection{Two Dimensional Conformal Field Theory}
We review necessary techniques of two dimensional conformal field theory in the Appendix~\ref{appa}. Then we compute mutual information with centers by considering boundary conditions. This computation can be extended to multiple intervals. Our results support that the mutual information in a field theory does not depend on a choice of centers.
\subsubsection{Mutual Information for Single Interval}
In two dimensional conformal field theory, the entanglement entropy can be computed by the replica trick. One way is to take the field on different sheets as different fields (\ie working in CFT$^n$/$Z_n$), and introduce twist operators. We then do the computation (of $n$-point functions of twist operators)
on the sphere. Here, we are more interested in the other approach, in which
one performs path integral in the covering space. The conical singularity is usually taken care of by cutting off the tip of a two dimensional cone and gluing back a disk \eg \cite{Faulkner:2013yia}. This is essentially the smooth cone regularization (see \eg \cite{Lewkowycz:2013laa}). Alternately,
one can impose a boundary condition on the little circle of radius $\xe$ around the tip of a two dimensional cone, which creates a boundary state. The boundary state for the smooth cone prescription follows from an insertion of the identity operator. In
principle, we can choose other boundary states, and hence the ambiguities arise.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (X)
{\begin{tikzpicture}[ultra thick,scale=.6]
\draw[thick] (0,0) coordinate (a) -- ++(2,0) coordinate (b) ++ (1,0) coordinate (c)
++(2,0) coordinate (d) ++(1,0) coordinate (e) -- ++(2,0) coordinate(f);
\draw[double,dashed] (c)--(d);
\draw[red] (b) arc(0:360:-.5 and -.25) ;
\draw[red] (d) arc(0:360:-.5 and -.25) ;
\node[anchor= south] at ($(a)!0.5!(b)$) {$\bar A$};
\node[anchor= south] at ($(c)!0.5!(d)$) {A};
\node[anchor= south] at ($(e)!0.5!(f)$) {$\bar A$};
\node at ($(b)!0.5!(c)+(0,-.6)$) {$a_1$};
\node at ($(d)!0.5!(e)+(0,-.6)$) {$a_2$};
\draw[|<->|,thick] ($(b) + (0,.3)$) coordinate (ab) -- ($(c) + (-.5,.3)$) coordinate (ac);
\node[anchor=south] at ($(ab) !.5! (ac)$) {$\epsilon$};
\draw[|<->|,thick] ($(d) + (0,.3)$) coordinate (ad) -- ($(e) + (-.5,.3)$) coordinate (ae);
\node[anchor=south] at ($(ad) !.5! (ae)$) {$\epsilon$};
\draw[|<->|,thick] ($(c) + (0,-.3)$) coordinate (bc) -- ($(d) + (0,-.3)$) coordinate (bd);
\node[anchor=north] at ($(bc) !.5! (bd)$) {$L$};
\end{tikzpicture}};
\node[anchor=west] (Y) at ($(X.east)+(1.0,0.2)$)
{ \begin{tikzpicture}[scale = 0.4,ultra thick, baseline =-20]
\draw[red] (0,0) coordinate(a) arc (90:450:.5 and 1);
\draw[thick] (a) -- ++ (3,0) coordinate (b);
\draw[red] (b) arc (90:-90:.5 and 1) coordinate (c);
\draw[double,dashed] (c) -- ++ (-3,0);
\node[anchor=east] at (-0.5,-1) {$a_1$};
\node[anchor=east] at (3.5,-1) {$a_2$};
\draw[thick,|<->|] ($(a)+(0,.3)$) -- ($(b)+(0,.3)$);
\node[anchor=south] at ($(a)!.5!(b)+(0,.3)$) {$\ell$};
\end{tikzpicture}};
\draw[ultra thick,->] ($(X.east)$) to ++ (1.0,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{ The path integral representation for the reduced density matrix $\rho_A$ under conformal transformations.
In two dimensions, the entangling surface consists of two points, which become two tiny circles after imposing the cutoff. We can then specify different boundary conditions $a_1, a_2$ on the boundary circles.
\label{fig:2cut}}
\end{figure}
To see how the boundary conditions affect the entanglement entropy, let us consider a single interval of length $L$ \cite{Ohmori:2014eia}. In computing the R\'enyi entropy $S_n$
using the replica trick, the two conical singularities (end points of the interval at $z_1, z_2$) are removed and, some boundary conditions $a_{1,2}^{(n)}$ are imposed on the little circle of radius $\xe$. A conformal mapping of the form of
\be
w = \log \frac {z - z_1}{z-z_2}\,,
\ee
gives a cylinder of circumference $2\pi$ and length $\ell = \log \lb \frac
L \xe\rb^{2}$. The partition function then reads
\begin{equation}
Z_n=\br a_1^{(n)}| \exp\left(\frac{\ell}{n} (\frac{c+\tilde{c}}{24}- L_0-\tilde{L}_0)\right) \st{a_2^{(n)}} \label{eq:Zn}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\st{a_{1,2}^{(n)}}$ are the boundary states from the cutoff circle. We can insert a complete set of states as intermediate states,
\be
\el{cylinderamp}
Z_n =
\br a_1^{(n)}\st{0} \exp\left(\frac{\ell}{n}\frac{c}{12}\right) \br 0\st{a_2^{(n)}} + \br a_1^{(n)}\st{\mathcal{O}}\exp\left(\frac{\ell}{n}(\frac{c}{12}-\Delta_\CO)\right) \br\CO \st{a_2^{(n)}} +\cdots.
\ee
The R\'enyi entropy is computed using
\be
\el{Renyi}
S_n = \frac {\log \Tr \rho^n} {1-n} =\frac {\log Z_n - n \log Z_1} {1-n}\,,
\ee
has the following the expansion in terms of $L/\xe$ as
\ba
S_n &= &(1+\frac1n)\frac{c}{6}(\log\frac{L}{\epsilon}) + \frac{1}{1-n}(s(a_1^{(n)})-ns(a_1^{(1)}) + s^*(a_2^{(n)})-ns^*(a_2^{(1)})) \nb
& + & \frac{1}{1-n}
\frac{\br a_1^{(n)}\st{\mathcal{O}}\br \mathcal{O}\st{a_2^{(n)}}}{\br
a_1^{(n)}\st{0}\br 0\st{a_2^{(n)}}}
\left(
\frac{L}{\epsilon}
\right)^{-2\Delta_{\mathcal{O}}/n}
+\cdots\,, \label{eq:subleadingRenyi}
\ea
where $s(a_1^{(n)}) = \log \br 0\st{a_1^{(n)}}$ is the boundary entropy. The boundary entropy may not be a real number so the R\'enyi entropy has a complex conjugate of the boundary entropy. It is easy to see the leading term $(1+\frac1n) \frac{c}{6} \log\frac{L}{\epsilon}$ of the R\'enyi entropy agrees with our familiar result. The rest depends on a choice of $a_{1,2}^{(n)}$, and hence is ambiguous.
Thus, the explicit form the entanglement entropy can be obtained from the R\'enyi entropy by taking $n\rightarrow 1$. A finite and real entanglement entropy depends on a choice of quantum states. There must be some constraints in what
states can be inserted as $\st{a_{1,2}^{(1)}}$.
In fact, we can see some features of the state $\st{a_{1,2}^{(n)}}$
by comparing a cylinder amplitude with that on a sphere. According to a
state-operator mapping, a vertex operator inserted in the past or future infinity, that is $z=0$ or $z=\infty$ can be considered as the initial or final states. The inner product is just path integral with two insertions at the two positions at $0, \infty$ as
\be\label{2Pf}\br \br i|j\ke = \br {\mathscr{A'}}_i (\infty,\infty) {\mathscr{A}}_j (0,0) \ke_{S_2}.\ee
The prime operator is defined in the $u$-frame at the other pole ($u=1/z$)
and hence is related to the unprimed by
\[\mathscr{A'}{}_i (z,\bar z) = z^{-2h_i} {\bar z}^{-2{\tilde h}_i}\mathscr{A}{}_i (z,\bar z)\,.\]
The dual state $\br \br i|$ is not the conjugate of $\st{i}$ and they are
different from a finite normalization factor
\be\label{normfactor}\br \br i| = K \br i|,\quad K = i C_{S_2}\,,\ee
where $C_{S_2}$ is the vacuum partition function on the sphere. Now a conformal
mapping to cylinder gives a partition function that can be interpreted as
\begin{equation}
Z= \br \tilde i| \exp\lsb\ell \lb \frac{c+\tilde{c}}{24}- L_0-\tilde{L}_0\rb\rsb \st{\tilde j} \,,
\end{equation}
The factor $\exp\lsb \frac{(c+\tilde{c})\ell}{24}\rsb$ can be understood as
rising from conformal anomaly. To make the rest agree with the ground state of the sphere
partition function, we need to take
\[\st{\tilde j} = \exp (+\frac \ell 2 L_0+\frac \ell 2 \tilde L_0)\st{j}\,,\]
which is essentially the evolution of a state from $\tau=0$ ($|z| = 1$) to
$\tau = - \frac \ell 2$. This is consistent with the time evolution
in radial quantization since the time revolution is generated by $e^{-(L_0+\tilde
L_0)(\tau_2 - \tau_1)}$. Notice that the exponential factor blows up in the limit of $\ell
\to \infty$. If we want to obtain a finite entanglement entropy, then it is necessary to have a constraint on the boundary state.
In fact, the above case implies that the boundary condition is conformally invariant
(at least in the limit of $\xe \to 0$). To see what precisely this means,
one can consider the inner product between the state determined by some boundary conditions (specified by some field configuration $\phi_\xe$) and the reference state $\br\br\CO_i|$. This can be expressed as the partition function $Z_\xe$ on a sphere with $\CO_i$ at $u=0$ and a boundary condition at $|z|=\xe$. Now we can move to a new boundary at $\xe' =
\xl \xe$. To compare with the previous case, one can perform a conformal transformation $z' = \iv \xl z$ and
$u' = \xl u$ so that the transition function remains invariant as $z' u' = 1$.
The insertion of primary operators $\CO_i$ becomes $\xl^{-h_i} \bar \xl^{-\tilde h_i} \CO_i'$ in the new coordinate. Imposing the same boundary condition $\phi_\xe$ and the total partition function $Z_{\xl \xe}$, which is invariant under the conformal transformation as
\be\el{diffbnd} Z_{\xl \xe} = \xl^{-h_i} \bar \xl^{-\tilde h_i} Z_{\xe}, \ee
up to conformal anomaly.
Switching back to the cylinder, each partition function can be expressed as
\[Z_{\xl \xe} = \exp\lsb(\ell+\log \xl)\lb\frac{c+\tilde{c}}{24}- h_i-\tilde h_i\rb\rsb \br\br i \st{\phi_{\xl \xe}},\quad Z_{\xe} = \exp\lsb\ell \lb \frac{c+\tilde{c}}{24}- h_i-\tilde h_i\rb\rsb \br\br i \st{\phi_{\xe}}\,.\]
This computation is done without doing the conformal transformation $z' = \iv \xl z$ and the extra factor $\log \xl$ in $Z_{\xl \xe}$ is due the difference in the boundary (propagation from $\log \xl \xe$ to $+\infty$ instead of from $\log \xe$).
This extra factor is precisely what gives the difference in \er{diffbnd} (there is another $c$-dependent factor which follows from conformal anomaly). As a result, we can have
\[\br\br i\st{\phi_{\xl \xe}} = \br\br i \st{\phi_{\xe}}\,,\]
if the boundary configuration $\phi_{\xl \xe}$ (at $|z| = \xl \xe$) that defines the state $\st{\phi_{\xl \xe}}$ is obtained from a conformal transformation of the configuration $\phi_{\xe}$ (at $|z| = \xe$). In other words, the boundary condition $\phi_{\xe \to 0}$ follows from the dilation of some arbitrary boundary condition at $|z| = 1$, which seems to be a quite natural way to impose a boundary condition. However, the massless free scalar field theory is an example to know the existence of a finite and real boundary entropy.
Ignoring all the issues and simply playing with their formula, we can get
some interesting results. For example, we can compute the mutual information
of $I(A^{\prime}:B^{\prime}) = S(A^{\prime}) + S(B^{\prime})- S(A^{\prime} \cup B^{\prime})$ with $A^{\prime}: z< z_1,\, B^{\prime}: z> z_2$. Computation of $S(A^{\prime} \cup B^{\prime})$ is the same as computing the entanglement entropy in an interval between $z_1$ and $z_2$. Then $S(A^{\prime})$ and $S(B^{\prime})$ can be obtained
by sending $L/\xe \to \infty$. In the limit of $\xe \to 0$, the only ambiguous
contribution follows from the boundary entropy, which is local. Moreover,
$S(A^{\prime})$ and $S(B^{\prime})$ should vanish if the vacuum at infinity (there is
no boundary essentially). Hence, we can see that the ambiguous terms are canceled, and the mutual information is unambiguous as expected.
\subsubsection{Mutual Information for Multiple Intervals}
The mutual R\'enyi information in a region $A$ of $N$ intervals
\be
A = \bigcup_{i=1}^N A_i = [z_1, z_{2}] \cup [z_3, z_4 ] \ldots \cup [z_{2N-1},z_{2N}]\,.
\ee
can be computed from a partition function for a higher genus surface $\CM$ \cite{Faulkner:2013yia}. More details can be found in the Appendix~\ref{appb}.
Different boundary conditions are realized by replacing the identity (in the case of smooth cone) by other states. The partition function for a higher
genus surface is then computed with an appropriate boundary condition. We put the boundary at $|z|=\xe$ of some local coordinate systems, then consider the cutting over $|z|=1$, and also insert a complete set of operators (states) $\CO_i$ which turns the partition function on $\CM$ to
\be\el{SCCFT:1} \int_\CM (\dots_1)e^{-S[\phi]}[d\phi]{\Psi(\phi_\xe)} = \sum_{ij} \br \dots_1 \CO_i\ke_{\CM} G^{ij} \int_{S^2}\CO_j e^{-S[\phi]}[d\phi]{\Psi(\phi_\xe)}\,,\ee
where $\Psi$ is a wave function determined by the boundary condition at $|z|=\xe$. We can further perform a mapping of $w = \log z$ to take the sphere into a long cylinder of length $-\log \xe^2$. Therefore, we get to the conclusion that only the contribution from $\CO_j = 1$ survives in the limit of $\xe \to 0$ if we only consider a unique vacuum state, and hence the difference due to replacing the boundary condition by an identity is just an extra term that corresponds to the boundary entropy. This surgery procedure can be performed locally for all the end points $z_i$ of intervals. As a result, the R\'enyi entropy $S_n[A;\{a_i^{(n)}\}]$ in the region $A$ that consists of multiple intervals gives
\be\label{eq:multiRenyi} S_n[A;\{a_i^{(n)}\}] = S_n[A;\{1\}] + \sum_{i=1}^{N} \frac{1}{1-n}\bigg(s(a_{2i-1}^{(n)})-ns(a_{2i-1}^{(1)})+s^*(a_{2i}^{(n)})-ns^*(a_{2i}^{(1)})\bigg) + \CO(\xe),\ee
which is the generalization of \er{eq:subleadingRenyi} to multi-interval. The notation $\{a_i^{(n)}\}$ denotes the boundary conditions at various points $z_i$, and $\{1\}$ means inserting identity everywhere. The extra contribution due to boundary condition is given by
\[s(a_i^{(n)}) = \log \br 0\st{a_i^{(n)}}.\]
Now we can replace each term in the mutual R\'enyi information
\[I_n(A^{\prime}:B^{\prime}) = S_n (A^{\prime}) + S_n(B^{\prime}) - S_n(A^{\prime}\cup B^{\prime})\]
by \er{eq:multiRenyi} and get
\be I_n[A^{\prime}:B^{\prime};\{a_i^{(n)}\}] = S_n[A^{\prime};\{1\}] + S_n[B^{\prime};\{1\}] - S_n[A^{\prime} \cup B^{\prime};\{1\}] + \CO(\xe)\ee
with $A^{\prime}_i:z <z_{2i-1}$ and $B^{\prime}_i:z>z_{2i}$
since all the local terms $s(a_i^{(n)})$ cancel each other.
As discussed in the previous section, it remains unclear what kind of states $\st{a^{(n)}}$
gives us a finite and real boundary entropy, but the point is that as long as
it exists, we can prove that the mutual information is independent of a choice of centers.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{8}
We analyze the entanglement with centers in various ways. We first analyze the decompositions of a Hilbert space in topological field theories and first-order formulation. These theories deserve a detailed mathematical analysis for the decompositions. In our analysis, the conclusion supports that in these theories one cannot obtain non-tensor product decompositions or non-trivial centers by removing operators. The possible reason is that removing non-dynamical fields does not lead to a different decomposition. In the case of the first-order formulation, this is possibly due to the special quantization algebra. Our results also support that the constraints do not always give non-trivial centers after removing operators as both the topological field theories and the first-order formulation have constraints in quantization. Particularly, three dimensional Chern-Simons gauge theory also has gauge symmetry. Hence, our analysis should provide clear understanding on the relation between constraints and non-trivial centers.
We develop methods to consider entanglement with centers on a lattice. The non-trivial aspect is to consider gauge symmetry in finite lattice spacing and hence entanglement with centers. This motivates a lattice Monte-Carlo simulation on the interacting theories with centers. The existence of decompositions only requires certain properties of the quantization algebra and constraints, but is independent of the equations of motion. To see the strength of entanglement, we still need numerical simulation, especially for interacting theories. We also provide a simple reason to relate boundary conditions to the extended lattice model. From this simple reason, it is not hard to construct a magnetic choice of the entanglement entropy in the extended lattice model.
We also extensively study the entanglement entropy in free theories. Our computation supports that only in gauge theories the universal terms receive contribution from the boundary entanglement entropy. This possibly points out that the presence of the contact term is due to gauge symmetry. Hence, our computation gives some motivations to further investigate the contact terms in gauge theories. We also compare two different computation methods. The first one is to regularize the zero modes of eigenfunctions in heat kernel without imposing boundary condition and the second one is to consider classical boundary effects. Two methods should be equivalent, except for the different regularization methods in field theories. The universal terms of the entanglement entropy in the $p$-form free theories in $2p+2$ dimensions are also expressed in terms of those of the massless free scalar field theories. We can obtain universal terms consistent with the anomaly coefficients. We expect that this result should give us better understanding to holography, and help us to learn more about higher dimensional conformal field theories. For the $p$-form free theory in $p+1$ dimensions, we should not have any universal terms because we do not have dynamical degrees of freedom. From the results of the $p$-form free theory in $p+1$ dimensions, the universal terms of the $p$-from free theory in $p+2$ dimensions is equivalent to that of the 0-form free theory in $p+1$-dimensions. In free theories, the entanglement entropy is the sum of the classical Shannon entropy and the bulk entanglement entropy. Thus, this has some special properties that allow us prove the strong subadditivity generically. This result can possibly be extended to other cases like two dimensional conformal field theory, in which we also find that the entanglement entropy has the same form as in free theory. Thus, it would be interesting to understand whether conformal field or holographic gravity theories satisfy the strong subadditivity. We leave this interesting question to future study.
Finally, we compute the mutual information with centers. This computation sheds light on understanding whether the mutual information depends on a choice of centers. Since the mutual information is in general hard to compute, we only consider massive free scalar field and two dimensional conformal field theories. In the former case, we consider disjoint regions and a tensor product decomposition. We then remove operators in an entangling surface for each region. Our computation of two dimensional conformal field theory is for the mutual information of single interval and multiple intervals. The results support that the mutual information does not depend on centers.
It is most interesting to consider the universal terms of the entanglement entropy, which do not depend on regulators. There are many interesting questions for the universal terms in field theories that have not been studied. The first one is whether or not the universal terms depend on the centers in the strong coupling limit. Since the holographic results imply that for conformal field theory dual to gravity theory, the universal terms should follow from minimal surface of bulk gravity theory and hence do not depend on the centers in the strong coupling limit.
The entanglement entropy in the infinitely strong coupling limit in the lattice $SU(N)$ Yang-Mills gauge theory is zero from the strong coupling expansion. This result is interesting and we may ask whether in general the entanglement in a local lattice theory (of finite lattice spacing) at infinitely strong coupling constant vanishes. For such a theory, infinitely strong coupling constant implies that all terms on different sites decouple and hence the entanglement entropy should vanish. If this conjecture is correct, we need to consider topological field theory because the non-topological part of entanglement entropy vanishes.
It would also be interesting to study the affect of centers for the universal terms in conformal field theory. Because conformal field theory allows us to relate black hole entropy and entanglement entropy via a conformal mapping, we can compute the partition function on a sphere to obtain universal terms of the entanglement entropy. The computation of the partition function on a sphere in conformal field theories does not consider boundary conditions so we expect that the universal terms of the entanglement entropy in conformal field theories are insensitive to a choice of centers.
There are still not enough principles to construct quantum gravity. Nevertheless it would be interesting to know what properties or symmetries in quantum gravity allow us to understand unambiguously from entanglement. We believe that these can be studied from practical computation and our paper could be a starting point to understand the entanglement for more difficult field theories.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
We would like to thank for Arpan Bhattacharyya, Horacio Casini, Dimitri Fursaev, Song He, Ling-Yan Hung, Charles Melby-Thompson and Jie-Qiang Wu for their useful discussion. Chen-Te Ma would like to thank Nan-Peng Ma for his suggestion and encouragement, and Xing Huang would also like to thank Fudan University, the organizers of the workshop ``Entanglement at Fudan 2015", the organizers of the 8th Taiwan String Workshop, Huazhong University of Science and Technology as well as the organizers of the YITP workshop ``Quantum Information in String Theory and Many-body Systems" for their hospitality while this work was being completed. The work is supported by MOST Grant 103-2811-M-003-024.
|
\section{Introduction}
{\color{black}\subsection{Main result}
In this note, we consider the following class of nonlinear wave equations,
\begin{equation}\label{wave ac}
\partial_t^2 u - \partial_x^2 u = m u +f(u), \quad (t,x)\in {{\mathbb R}}\times{{\mathbb R}},
\end{equation}
where $m\in \R$ and the nonlinearity $f\colon \R\to \R$ is a $C^1$, \emph{odd} function such that for some $p>1$,
\[
|f'(u)|\lesssim |u|^{p-1}, \qquad \forall |u|<1.
\]
Denote $F(u)=\int_0^u f$.
An important property of (\ref{wave ac}) is the conservation of \emph{energy}
\begin{equation}\label{Energy0}
E(u,\partial_t u):=\int \frac{1}{2}\partial_t u^2+\frac{1}{2}\partial_x u^2 - \frac{m}2 u^2- F(u),
\end{equation}
along the flow. In particular, $H^1\times L^2$ perturbations of the zero solution are referred as \emph{perturbations in the energy space}. For many standard examples, the Cauchy problem for the model \eqref{wave ac} is globally well-posed
for initial data
$(u(0),\partial_t u(0)) = (u_1^{in},u_2^{in}) \in H^1\times L^2$ small enough.
Here, we do not make any {\it a priori} assumption on the sign of $m$ nor the nature of $F(u)$ that would guarantee that $E(u)$ is coercive and controls the $H^1\times L^2$ norm of some solutions. Instead, for general nonlinearity $f$ as above, we consider global solutions whose energy norm is uniformly small in time.
Another important property of \eqref{wave ac} is that for odd initial data the associated solution is also odd for all time. For the rest of this paper, we work in such framework, and we consider only odd perturbations in the energy space. Note that \eqref{wave ac} is invariant under space translation and under the Lorentz transformation but since we consider only odd solutions, these invariances are irrelevant here.
Set
\begin{equation}\label{eqvarphi0}
u_1 =u ,\quad u_2= \partial_t u ,
\end{equation}
so that in terms of $(u_1, u_2)$, equation (\ref{wave ac}) becomes
\begin{equation}\label{eqvarphi}\left\{\begin{aligned}
& \partial_t u_1 = u_2 \\ & \partial_t u_2 = \partial_{x}^2 u_1 +m u_1 + f(u_1). \end{aligned}\right.\end{equation}
Our main result is the following property for small, odd solutions of (\ref{eqvarphi}).
\begin{theorem}\label{TH1}
There exists $\varepsilon>0$ such that any odd global $H^1\times L^2$ solution $(u_1, u_2)$ of (\ref{eqvarphi}) such that \[
\sup_{t\geq 0}\|(u_1(t),u_2(t))\|_{H^1\times L^2}< \varepsilon,
\]
satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{Conclusion_0}
\lim_{t \to +\infty} \|(u_1(t),u_2(t))\|_{H^1(I)\times L^2(I)} =0,
\end{equation}
for any bounded interval $I\subset {{\mathbb R}}$.
In particular, no odd, small breather solutions exist for (\ref{wave ac}).
\end{theorem}
By \emph{breather}, we mean a solution in $H^1\times L^2$ which is periodic in time, up to the symmetries of the equation. Several integrable equations have \emph{stable} breather solutions, including the sine-Gordon model \cite{Lamb}
\begin{equation}\label{SG}
\phi_{tt}-\phi_{xx}=-\sin \phi.
\end{equation}
See also \cite{AM,AM1,AM2} and references therein for more details on the literature.
\medskip
Our paper was motivated by (and gives a partial answer to) a conjecture of Soffer and Weinstein \cite{MR1681113} which says that no small amplitude breathers should exist for
\[
\phi_{tt}-\phi_{xx}=-\phi+\phi^3.
\]
Our assumptions allows other classical examples such as the $\phi^4$ model \cite{MR2282481,MR2318156,MR1402248}
\[
\phi_{tt}-\phi_{xx}-\phi+\phi^3=0,
\]
the $\phi^6$ model \cite{Lohe},
\[
\phi_{tt}-\phi_{xx}=-\phi+4\phi^3-3\phi^5,
\]
and the sine-Gordon equation \eqref{SG}.
\medskip
Let us discuss the sine-Gordon model \eqref{SG} in more details.
The energy of the sine Gordon equation is
\[
E(\phi, \phi_t)=\int \frac{1}{2} \phi_t^2+\frac{1}{2} \phi_x^2 +(1-\cos \phi).
\]
Recall that an explicit family of breathers is known \cite{Lamb}
\[
B_{\beta}(t,x)= 4\arctan \Big( \frac{\beta}{\alpha} \frac{\cos(\alpha t)}{ \cosh(\beta x)}\Big), \qquad \alpha^2 +\beta^2 =1.
\]
The function $B_{\beta}$ has arbitrarily small energy norm provided $|\beta|$ is small.
Such breathers oscillate around the constant, finite energy state $u=0$, which is linearly stable.
Note that
for all $t$, $B_{\beta}(t)$ is an even function, which proves in some sense the necessity of the oddness assumption to obtain a general result of asymptotic stability of the zero solution such as Theorem~\ref{TH1}.
\medskip
At a more technical level, the oddness assumption allows to avoid an {\it even} resonance of the linear operator, supporting the belief that the existence of breathers is partly related to the presence of resonances.
However, the case of the $\phi^4$ model suggests that the situation is more subtle in general. For this model, in the presence of a resonance, a formal argument due to Kruskal and Segur \cite{kruskal_segur} excludes the existence of breathers of small amplitude oscillating around $\pm 1$, which are linearly stable, constant states. As we mentioned above Theorem~\ref{TH1} implies nonexistence of odd breathers of the $\phi^4$ model oscillating about $0$, however our result does not apply for the case considered in \cite{kruskal_segur} since the nonlinearity written for $u=\phi\pm 1$ is not odd.
\medskip
For the proof of Theorem \ref{TH1}, we follow a simplified version of the method developed in our recent work \cite{KMM} on asymptotic stability of the kink under odd perturbations for the $\phi^4$ model.
The main idea in \cite{KMM} and in this paper is the introduction of a generalized \emph{virial identity}, suitably constructed for each considered problem.
Such approach is inspired by previous works by the second author and Merle \cite{MR1753061,zbMATH01631995,MM3} for the generalized Korteweg-de Vries equations and by Merle and Rapha\"el \cite{MR2150386} for nonlinear Schr\"odinger equations. Unlike in those works, here the analysis is performed for solutions in the neighborhood of $0$ and the spectral analysis reduces to classical operators.
\subsection{Previous results}
Rigorous proofs of nonexistence of breathers solutions in scalar field equations date back to the work by Coron \cite{Coron}. He showed that under the assumption of vanishing energy and $L^\infty$ norm of the solution at infinity in space, and an $L^1_{tx}$ integrability condition, breathers cannot have arbitrarily small periods. Later, Vuillermot \cite{Vuillermot} showed that under some growth and convexity assumptions on the nonlinearity, there are no breather solutions for suitable scalar field equations. Some formal arguments for existence and nonexistence of breather solutions can be found in Kichenassamy \cite{Kich}, and Birnir-McKean-Weinstein \cite{Birnir}, respectively. Finally, Denzler \cite{denzler} provided a proof of nonexistence of breather solutions for nonlinearities that are small, complex-analytic perturbations of the sine-Gordon case. From his result, it is concluded that the existence of breathers is a very rare property, probably related to the integrability of the equation.
\medskip
As in the present paper, the nonexistence of breather solutions for \eqref{wave ac} can also be seen as a consequence of the asymptotic stability of the vacuum solution in some topology. From this point of view, we refer to the original works of Buslaev and Perelman \cite{bus_per1,bus_per2}, and Buslaev-Sulem \cite{buslaev_sulem} on the NLS case, and Soffer-Weinstein \cite{MR1681113} on nonlinear Klein-Gordon models in 3D. See also the works by Delort \cite{Delort,Delort_fourier}, Lindblad-Soffer \cite{LS1,LS2,LS3}, Bambusi and Cuccagna \cite{Bam_Cucc} and Sterbenz \cite{Ste} on decay of small solutions for nonlinear Klein-Gordon equations in one dimension. This method has been pushed forward by considering different nonlinearities and lower dimensions. For recent results in this area, see e.g. \cite{MR1664792,Tsai_Yau, Rod_Soffer_Schlag, MR2373326,cuccagna_3, cuccagna_4, MR2835867,Kr_Sch, Bet_Gra_Smets1,Lin_Tao}.
}
\section{Proof of the theorem}\label{VIRIAL}
\medskip
\noindent
{\underline{Step 1: Virial identity.}}
Recall the set of coupled equations \eqref{eqvarphi}. For a smooth and bounded function $\psi$ to be chosen later, let
\begin{equation}\label{defI}
\mathcal I (u) := \int \psi (\partial_x u_1) u_2 + \frac 12 \int \psi' u_1 u_2 = \int \left(\psi \partial_x u_1 + \frac 12 \psi' u_1\right) u_2.
\end{equation}
Let $(u_1,u_2)$ be a solution of (\ref{eqvarphi}). {\color{black} Since for any $v\in H^1$, $\int (\left(\psi v_x+\frac{1}{2} \psi' v\right) v=0$, one computes}
\begin{equation}\label{Ione}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt} \mathcal I (u) & = \int \left(\psi u_{1,x}+\frac{1}{2} \psi' u_1\right) u_{1,xx}
+ \int \left(\psi u_{1,x}+\frac{1}{2} \psi' u_1\right) f(u) \\
& =-\mathcal B(u_1)-\int \psi'\left[ F(u_1)-\frac{1}{2} u_1 f(u_1)\right],
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where we have denoted
\[
\mathcal B(u_1)=-\int \left(\psi u_{1,x}+\frac{1}{2} \psi' u_1\right) u_{1,xx}=\int \psi' (\partial_x u_1)^2 -\frac{1}{4}\int\psi'''u_1^2.
\]
Therefore,
\begin{equation}
\label{moondawn}
-\frac d{dt} {\mathcal I} =\mathcal B(u_1) + \int \psi'\left[ F(u_1)-\frac{1}{2} u_1 f(u_1)\right].
\end{equation}
\medskip
\noindent
{\underline{Step 2: Coercivity of the bilinear form $\mathcal B$.}}
Now we choose a specific function $\psi$ and we consider the question of the coercivity of the bilinear form $\mathcal B$.
Let $\lambda>0$ be fixed. We set
\begin{equation}\label{defpsi}
\psi(x) : = \lambda\operatorname{tanh}\left(\frac{x}{\lambda}\right),
\end{equation}
in the definition of $\mathcal I$.
Note that $\zeta>0$ everywhere. Let $w$ be the following auxiliary function
\begin{equation}\label{def w}
w:=\zeta u_1;
\quad \zeta(x) :=\sqrt{\psi'(x)}=\mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits \left(\frac{x}{\lambda}\right).
\end{equation}
First, note that by integration by parts,
\begin{align*}
\int w_x^2
&= \int (\zeta \partial_x u_1 +\zeta' u_1 )^2
= \int \psi' (\partial_x u_1)^2 + 2 \int \zeta \zeta' u_1 (\partial_x v_1) + \int (\zeta')^2 u_1^2 \\
& = \int \psi' (\partial_x u_1)^2 - \int \zeta \zeta'' u_1^2 \\
& = \int \psi' (\partial_x u_1)^2 - \int\frac{\zeta''}{\zeta} w^2.
\end{align*}
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{idgrad}
\int \psi' (\partial_x u_1)^2 = \int w_x^2 + \int\frac{\zeta''}{\zeta} w^2.
\end{equation}
Second,
$$
\int\psi'''u_1^2 = \int \frac{(\zeta^2)''}{\zeta^2} w^2
= 2 \int \left(\frac {\zeta''}{\zeta}+ \frac{(\zeta')^2}{\zeta^2} \right) w^2.
$$
Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{change}\begin{aligned}
\mathcal B(u_1) &= \int \psi' (\partial_x u_1)^2 -\frac{1}{4}\int\psi'''u_1^2\\
& = \int w_x^2 + \frac 12 \int \left( \frac {\zeta''}{\zeta} -\frac{(\zeta')^2}{\zeta^2} \right) w^2.
\end{aligned}\end{equation}
Set
\[
{\mathcal B}^\sharp(w):= \int \left(w_x^2 - V w^2\right),\quad \hbox{where} \quad
V:= - \frac 12 \left( \frac {\zeta''}{\zeta} -\frac{(\zeta')^2}{\zeta^2} \right),
\]
so that
\begin{equation}\label{B sharp}
{\mathcal B}^\sharp(w)=\mathcal B(u_1).
\end{equation}
Note that by \eqref{defpsi} and direct computations,
\begin{equation}\label{V}
V(x)=
\frac{1}{2\lambda^2}\mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac{x}{\lambda}\right).
\end{equation}
{\color{black}
Recall that the index of the operator
$
-\frac{d^2}{dx^2}-V
$
associated to $\mathcal B^\sharp$ is $1$, which means that this operator has only one negative, discrete eigenvalue with an even corresponding eigenfunction. This follows from the well known fact (see e.g. Titchmarsh \cite[\S 4.19]{Tit} and \cite[p. 55]{Goldman}) that for any $\lambda>0$, the index $\kappa$ of the operator
\[
-\frac{d^2}{dx^2}-\frac{V_0}{\lambda^2}\mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac{x}{\lambda}\right), \quad V_0\in [0,+\infty),
\]
is the largest integer such that
\[
\kappa<\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{4 V_0+1}+\frac{1}{2}.
\]
Here, our claim concerning $\mathcal B^\sharp$ follows from
$
1< \frac{\sqrt{3}+1}{2}<2.
$
In fact, we claim the following more precise result.
\begin{lemma}\label{le:posVir}
For any $\lambda>0$ and for any odd function $w\in H^1$,
\begin{equation}\label{posVir1}
{\mathcal B}^\sharp(w)
\geq \frac{3}{4} \int w_x^2.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We write
\begin{equation}
\mathcal B^\sharp(w)=\frac 34 \int w_x^2+\frac 14 \int \left(w_x^2 - \frac{2}{\lambda^2}\mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac{x}{\lambda}\right) w^2\right).
\label{decomp pos Vir}
\end{equation}
Since $ \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{4.2+1}+\frac{1}{2}=2$,
the second term in the right-hand side above is nonnegative for any odd function $w$, and the result follows.
\end{proof}}
\medskip
\noindent
{\underline{Step 3: Control of the error terms and conclusion of the Virial argument.}}
{\color{black} As in statement of Theorem \ref{TH1}, we consider an odd solution $(u_1(t),u_2(t))$ of \eqref{eqvarphi} global in $H^1\times L^2$ for $t\geq 0$ and satisfying, for all $t\geq 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{smallphi}
\|(u_1(t),u_2(t))\|_{H^1\times L^2} < \varepsilon.
\end{equation}
We define}
\begin{equation}\label{nloc}
\|u_1\|_{H^1_{\omega}}^2 :=
\int \left( |\partial_x u_1|^2 + u_1^2 \right) \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(x\right),\quad
\|u_2\|_{L^2_{\omega}}^2 :=
\int u_2^2 \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(x\right),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{nloc2}
\|(u_1,u_2)\|_{H^1_{\omega}\times L^2_{\omega}}^2 :=\|u_1\|_{H^1_{\omega}}^2 + \|u_2\|_{L^2_{\omega}}^2.
\end{equation}
The key ingredient of the proof of asymptotic stability in the energy space is the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{pr:11}
For $\varepsilon>0$ small enough,
\begin{equation}\label{11un}
\int_{0}^{+\infty} \|(u_1(t),u_2(t))\|_{H^1_{\omega}\times L^2_{\omega}}^2 dt
\lesssim \varepsilon^2 .
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{pr:11}]
We consider the virial-type quantity $\mathcal I(t)$ defined in \eqref{defI} with $\lambda=100$.
\medskip
The proof of \eqref{11un} is based on the following two estimates, which hold for some constant $C_1, C_2>0$:
\begin{align}
-\frac d{dt} \mathcal I
& \geq C_1 \|u_1\|_{H^1_{\omega}}^2 ,
\label{10un} \\
\frac d{dt} \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(x\right) u_1 u_2
&\geq \|u_2\|_{L^2_{\omega}}^2
-C_2 \|u_1\|_{H^1_{\omega}}^2 .
\label{10trois}
\end{align}
\medskip
{\color{black}
First we prove \eqref{11un} assuming \eqref{10un} and \eqref{10trois}.
Integrating \eqref{10un} on $[0,t_0]$, using the bound \eqref{smallphi}, and passing to the limit as $t_0\to +\infty$, we find
\begin{equation}\label{11unbis}
\int_{0}^{+\infty} \|u_1(t)\|_{H^1_{\omega}}^2 dt
\lesssim \varepsilon^2 .
\end{equation}
Then, using
\eqref{10trois} similarly, we obtain \eqref{11un}.}
\medskip
Thus, to finish the proof, we only have to prove \eqref{10un} and \eqref{10trois}. We begin with the proof of \eqref{10un}. We have from \eqref{moondawn} and \eqref{B sharp},
{\color{black}
\[
-\frac d{dt} {\mathcal I} = \mathcal B (u_1) - \int \psi'\left[ F(u_1)-\frac{1}{2} u_1 f(u_1)\right] .
\]
Recall from Section \ref{VIRIAL} the notation $w = u_1 \zeta=u_1 \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(\frac x{100}\right)$ (see \eqref{def w}).
From Lemma \ref{le:posVir}, we have
\[
\mathcal B (u_1)= \mathcal B^\sharp(w) \geq \frac 34 \int w_x^2 \quad \text{and equivalently}\quad
\int w_x^2 \geq \frac {1}{5.10^3} \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac{x}{100}\right) w^2.
\]
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{h1}
\mathcal B (u_1)\gtrsim\|\partial_x w\|_{L^2}^2\gtrsim
\int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac {x}{100}\right) w^2=
\int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^4\left(\frac {x}{100}\right) u_1^2\gtrsim
\int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left({x}\right) u_1^2 .
\end{equation}
Next, we have
\begin{align*}
\|\partial_x w\|_{L^2}^2 &\gtrsim \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac {x}{100}\right) |\partial_x w|^2
= \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac {x}{100}\right) |\zeta \partial_x u_1 + \zeta' u_1 |^2\\
& \gtrsim \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^4\left(\frac {x}{100}\right) |\partial_x u_1|^2
+ 2 \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac {x}{100}\right) \zeta \zeta' (\partial_x u_1) u_1 + \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac {x}{100}\right) (\zeta')^2 u_1^2\\
& \gtrsim \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(x\right)|\partial_x u_1|^2
+ \int u_1^2\left( - \left(\mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(\frac {x}{100}\right) \zeta \zeta'\right)' + \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2\left(x\right) (\zeta')^2\right).
\end{align*}
Thus, using \eqref{h1},
\[
\int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits (x )|\partial_x u_1|^2
\lesssim \|\partial_x w\|_{L^2}^2+\int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits^2 (x ) u_1^2
\lesssim \|\partial_x w\|_{L^2}^2 \lesssim \mathcal B (u_1).
\]
This implies
\begin{equation}\label{rwv}
\mathcal B (u_1)\gtrsim\|\partial_x w\|_{L^2}^2 \gtrsim \|u_1\|_{H^1_{\omega}}^2.
\end{equation}}
{\color{black} Now, we claim that for any $q>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{SFcinq}
\int \psi' |u_1|^{2+q} \lesssim \|u_1\|_{L^\infty}^q \|\partial_x w\|_{L^2}^2 \lesssim \varepsilon^q \|\partial_x w\|_{L^2}^2.
\end{equation}
Indeed, by parity, the definition of $\psi$ \eqref{defpsi} and $w$ \eqref{def w}, we have (with $\lambda=100$)
\begin{align*}
\int \psi' |u_1|^{2+q}
\lesssim \int_0^{+\infty} e^{-\frac {2 x}{{\lambda }}} |u_1|^{2+q}
\lesssim \int_0^{+\infty} e^{q \frac x{\lambda}} |w|^{2+q}.
\end{align*}
Integrating by parts and using $w(0)=0$ (the function $w$ is odd)
\begin{align*}
\int_0^{+\infty} e^{q \frac x{\lambda}} |w|^{2+q}
&= - \frac{\lambda}q \int_0^{+\infty} e^{q \frac x{\lambda}} \partial_x(|w|^{2+q})
= - \frac {2+q}q \lambda \int_0^{+\infty} e^{q\frac x{\lambda}} (\partial_x w) w |w|^q\\
&\leq C \|u_1\|_{L^\infty}^{\frac q2} \int_0^{+\infty} e^{q \frac x{2 \lambda}} |\partial_x w| |w|^{1+\frac q2}
\leq C^2 \|u_1\|_{L^\infty}^q \int_0^{+\infty} |\partial_x w|^2 +\frac 14 \int_0^{\infty} e^{q\frac x{\lambda}} |w|^{2+q}.
\end{align*}
Thus,
\[
\int_0^{+\infty} e^{q \frac x{\lambda}} |w|^{2+q}
\lesssim \|u_1\|_{L^\infty}^q \|\partial_x w\|_{L^2}^2,
\]
and \eqref{SFcinq} is proved. Since, for some $p>1$,
\[
\left| F(u_1)-\frac{1}{2} u_1 f(u_1) \right |\lesssim |u_1|^{p+1},
\]
we estimate by \eqref{SFcinq},
\begin{equation}\label{SFsix}
\left|\int \psi'\left[ F(u_1)-\frac{1}{2} u_1 f(u_1)\right]\right| \lesssim \varepsilon^{p-1} \|\partial_x w\|_{L^2}^2.
\end{equation}}
Combining \eqref{rwv} and \eqref{SFsix} proves \eqref{10un} for $\varepsilon$ small enough.
Finally, we show \eqref{10trois}. From \eqref{eqvarphi}, we compute
\[
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt}\int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits(x) u_1 u_2&=\int\mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits(x) u_2^2-\int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits(x) u_{1,x}^2+\int \left[a\mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits(x)+\frac{1}{2}\mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits''(x)\right] u_1^2 + \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits(x) u_1 f(u_1).
\end{aligned}
\]
From this, \eqref{10trois} follows readily by definition of the norm in $H^1_\omega\times L^2_\omega$ and (\ref{SFsix}).
This ends the proof of Proposition \ref{pr:11}.
\end{proof}
\medskip
\noindent
{\underline{Step 4: Conclusion of the proof of Theorem \ref{TH1}.}}
Let
\begin{equation}\label{defH}
\mathcal H(t):= \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(x\right)\left[u_{1,x}^2 +u_1^2 + u_2^2\right](t) .
\end{equation}
Then, using \eqref{eqvarphi}, we have {\color{black}
\begin{equation}\label{Kone}\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt}{\mathcal H} &= 2 \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(x\right) \left(u_{1,xt} u_{1,x} + u_{1,x} u_1 + u_{2,t} u_2\right)\\
& = 2 \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(x\right) \left[ u_{2,x} u_{1,x} + u_2 u_1 + \left(u_{1,xx} +m u_1+f(u_1)\right)u_2 \right]\\
& = 2 \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(x\right) \left[\left(1+m\right)u_1+f(u_1)\right]u_2 - 2 \int \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits'(x) u_2 u_{1,x} ,
\end{aligned}\end{equation}
and so
\begin{equation}\label{Ktwo}
\left| \frac{d}{dt}{\mathcal H} \right|
\lesssim \int \left(u_{1,x}^2+u_1^2+{u_2^2} \right) \mathop{\mbox{\normalfont sech}}\nolimits\left(x\right) \lesssim \|u(t)\|_{H^1_{\omega}\times L^2_{\omega}}^2.
\end{equation}}
From \eqref{11un} there exists a sequence $t_n\to +\infty$ such that $\mathcal H(t_n)\to 0$.
Let $t\in {{\mathbb R}}$. Integrating on $[t,t_n]$ and passing to the limit as $n\to +\infty$ we obtain
\[
\mathcal H(t) \lesssim \int_{t}^{+\infty} \|u(t)\|_{H^1_{\omega}\times L^2_{\omega}}^2 dt.
\]
From \eqref{11un} it follows that $\lim_{t\to +\infty} \mathcal H(t)=0.$
Thus, $\lim_{t\to + \infty} \|u\|_{H^1_{\omega}\times L^2_{\omega}}=0.$
This implies (\ref{Conclusion_0}) and finishes the proof of the Theorem.
\providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace}
\providecommand{\MR}{\relax\ifhmode\unskip\space\fi MR }
\providecommand{\MRhref}[2]{%
\href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{#2}
}
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
|
\section{Introduction}
Dynamo action is believed to be ubiquitous throughout the Universe. It is generally agreed that in planetary and stellar interiors as well as in the interstellar and intergalactic medium, turbulent fluid motions are responsible for the presence of magnetic fields \cite{Zweibel,Brandenburg,Kulsrud-Zweibel,Durrer,Roberts}, i.e., pre-existing ``seed'' fields have been amplified to their present level and are now maintained by dynamo action. The precise mechanism by which this happens is, however, still a matter of debate. It is therefore of interest to identify the conditions under which dynamo action is (im)possible.
The great majority of all research into dynamo theory has been carried out within the framework of magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), although most interplanetary, interstellar and intergalactic plasmas are too weakly collisional to be accurately described by this approximation. In the present paper, we investigate how dynamo action is different in mathematical plasma models that go beyond MHD and capture some of the underlying kinetic dynamics of collisionless plasmas. In order to isolate this consideration from the question of how the geometry of the flow or external forces affect the dynamo, we first consider the free evolution (i.e., without external forces) of a conducting fluid from an arbitrary state at time $t=0$ and ask to what extent the resulting motion can amplify a pre-existing magnetic field. This question is meaningful even for an ideally conducting fluid, where steady-state dynamo action would inevitably give rise to magnetic fields at infinitely small scales (see, e.g., \cite{Zeldovich}). In general, an arbitrarily prepared state at $t=0$ is not in equilibrium, and the ensuing motion will be chaotic, stretching and bending magnetic field lines, thereby increasing the magnetic field energy, even in the absence of resistivity and reconnection.\footnote{In a steady-state situation, the question of taking these effects into account is usually about whether the field can survive in their presence \cite{Zeldovich,Chertkov,Schekochihin-2004}. The basic {\em amplification} mechanism for turbulent, small-scale dynamo is ideal and relies on chaotic stretching of field lines.} But how much can the magnetic energy increase above its initial value? To what extent can the thermal and kinetic energy of the fluid be converted into magnetic energy?
This problem was first considered in an early paper by Batchelor \cite{Batchelor}, who used the visco-resistive MHD equations and considered homogeneous and isotropic turbulence as the underlying fluid flow. He concluded that, if the conductivity is large and the initial magnetic field weak, the magnetic energy will in general grow exponentially with time until ``the large wave-number components contain comparable amounts of kinetic and magnetic energy''. In a contemporaneous article, Biermann and Schl\"uter \cite{Biermann} similarly concluded that ``the magnetic energy density will finally reach the energy density of the turbulence''.\footnote{Although their view was that it would be the {\em total} energy density of the turbulence that the magnetic energy would become comprabale to --- this indeed appears to be the case \cite{Haugen,Beresnyak}.} While there was then, and is now, some level of disagreement or uncertainty about the detailed state resulting from turbulent dynamo action in MHD, simplified analytical models \cite{Zeldovich,Kazantsev,Chertkov,Boldyrev} and numerical simulations \cite{Meneguzzi,Schekochihin-2004,Haugen,Beresnyak} as well as recent laboratory experiments \cite{Monchaux,Tzeferacos} demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that a sufficiently chaotic three-dimensional flow of a conducting MHD fluid at large enough magnetic Reynolds numbers will generate tangled magnetic fields with energy densities comparable to that of the fluid motions.
The situation can be very different in mathematical models other than MHD, as was first realised by Kulsrud et al. \cite{Kulsrud-1997} who pointed out that conservation of the first adiabatic invariant (magnetic moment) for each gyrating particle implied that changing the magnetic field strength by a finite factor would require changing the perpendicular energy of the particles (i.e., the perpendicular pressure) by a similar factor, which is usually not possible due to energy-source constraints.\footnote{They further argued that in the presence of pressure anisotropy, which would that arise from any local increase of the magnetic-field strength, the magnetic mirror force might modify the velocity field in such a way as to prevent any further field amplification, independently of the absolute magnitude of the field (i.e., even for dynamically weak fields). The microphysical feedback on the macroscopic motions remains poorly understood and a subject of much current interest \cite{Kunz,Melville,Riquelme-2016,Squire}.} In this work, we extend the arguments of Kulsrud et al. \cite{Kulsrud-1997} by exploring a hierarchy of plasma models of increasing complexity, starting from ideal and resistive MHD and proceeding to the double-adiabatic theory of Chew, Goldberger and Low (CGL) \cite{CGL}, kinetic MHD \cite{Kulsrud}, and more complete kinetic models. In each case, it is possible to derive a rigorous upper bound on the magnetic energy that is valid at all times, and this bound turns out to depend crucially on the conservation properties of the equations, particularly on the equation of state. In all models appropriate for a collisionless plasma with vanishingly small gyroradii, the growth of the magnetic energy is severely limited. Having established these results, we introduce external forcing and show that the constraints found on the growth of magnetic energy are still valid if the energy input from the external forces is not too large. These conclusions are tested in numerical simulations of the CGL equations (cf. \cite{Lima}). The conclusion is that no dynamo action is possible within any model of a gyrotropic plasma that does not allow the conservation of the first adiabatic invariant of any species to be broken.
\section{MHD and CGL equations}
We first consider the question whether the flow of a conducting fluid can cause amplification of a ``seed'' magnetic field when evolving freely from an initial state according to the inviscid, ideal MHD equations \cite{Kulsrud}
\bn \frac{d \rho}{dt} + \rho \nabla \cdot {\bf V} = 0, \label{conteq} \en
\bn \rho \frac{d {\bf V}}{dt} = {\bf j} \times {\bf B} - \nabla \cdot {\sf P}, \label{momeq} \en
\bn \frac{\partial {\bf B}}{\partial t} = \nabla \times ( {\bf V} \times {\bf B}), \label{indeq} \en
\bn \nabla \times {\bf B} = {\bf j}, \label{Ampere} \en
where the symbols have their usual meaning, $d/dt = \p / \p t + {\bf V} \cdot \nabla$ denotes the convective derivative, and the pressure tensor is gyrotropic,
\bn {\sf P} = p_\perp {\bf I} + (p_\| - p_\perp) {\bf bb}, \label{P} \en
with ${\bf b} = {\bf B}/B$. The components of $\sf P$ are determined either by ideal MHD entropy conservation,
$$ p_\perp = p_\| = p, $$
\bn \frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{p}{\rho^\gamma} \right) = 0,
\label{ideal MHD}
\en
where $\gamma = 5/3$, or by the CGL equations \cite{CGL}
\bn \frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{p_\perp}{\rho B} \right) = 0, \label{1} \en
\bn \frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{p_\| B^2}{\rho^3} \right) = 0. \label{2} \en
The adiabatic law (\ref{ideal MHD}) holds in this latter case, too, if it is understood that $p$ is formally replaced by $(p_\perp^2 p_\|)^{1/3}$.
The boundary conditions are either periodic in all three directions or it is assumed that the fluid is surrounded by a rigid, ideally conducting boundary, at which the normal components of $\bf V$ and $ {\bf B}$ vanish.
In both cases, and for both the MHD and the CGL models, the total energy, defined by
\bn W = \lang \frac{\rho V^2}{2} + p_\perp + \frac{p_\|}{2} + \frac{B^2}{2} \rang,
\label{W}
\en
is then conserved, where the angular brackets denote a volume average.
\subsection{Available energy in ideal MHD} \label{sec_A_MHD}
Eliminating the density from the continuity equation (\ref{conteq}) and the adiabatic law (\ref{ideal MHD}) gives
$$ \frac{\p p^{1/\gamma}}{\p t} + \nabla \cdot \left( p^{1/\gamma} {\bf V} \right) = 0, $$
which implies that the quantity
$$ S = \lang p^{1/\gamma} \rang $$
is conserved, $d S / dt = 0$. We thus have two conserved quantities, and may seek the maximum of the magnetic energy
$$ M = \lang \frac{B^2}{2} \rang $$
under the constraint of constant $W$ and $S$. Since $M < W$, it is clear that this maximum indeed exists and represents a mathematical upper bound on the magnetic energy at all times $t\ge 0$. It may, however, be inaccessible from the initial conditions, because there is an infinity of other constraints associated with the topology of the magnetic field lines \cite{Taylor-Newton}, but we ignore this issue as we only seek an upper bound on $M$ that need not be the best possible one.
Thus, we consider the maximum of the functional
$$ T[\rho,{\bf V},{\bf B}, p; \lambda, \mu] = M - \lambda (W-W_0) - \mu (S-S_0), $$
where $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are Lagrange multipliers, and initial conditions are denoted by a $0$ subscript. Since this functional does not involve any derivatives of the fields $(\rho, {\bf V}, {\bf B}, p)$, these must be constant at the maximum in question; this becomes obvious if one writes down the Euler-Lagrange equations for the minmising fields. Denoting these quantities by the subscript $1$, we thus have
$$ S = \lang p_0^{1/\gamma} \rang = p_1^{1/\gamma} $$
and $V_1 = 0$, so that
$$ M_1 = W - \frac{\lang p_0^{1/\gamma} \rang^\gamma}{\gamma-1}. $$
The difference between the upper bound $M_1$ and the intial value of the magnetic energy, $M_0$, is thus
\bn A = M_1 - M_0 = \frac{\lang p_0 \rang- \lang p_0^{1/\gamma} \rang^\gamma}{\gamma-1} + \lang \frac{\rho_0 V_0^2}{2} \rang,
\label{A}
\en
This quantity is always positive because, for $\gamma > 1$,
$$ \lang p_0^{1/\gamma} \rang \le \lang p_0 \rang^{1/\gamma} $$
by H\"older's inequality.
The expression (\ref{A}) represents an upper bound on the amount of thermal and kinetic energy that is available for conversion into magnetic energy, and will in the following be referred to as the ``available energy'' for dynamo action. This upper bound is usually inaccessible: not only does it ignore topological constraints on the evolution of the magnetic field, but it is also in general incompatible with the boundary conditions. As we shall see, it can nevertheless be surprisingly restrictive.
If the initial state is such that either the Mach number is of order unity or the pressure $p_0$ varies substantially (by order unity) across the domain, then a substantial fraction of the thermal and kinetic energy is available for conversion into magnetic energy, $A/W = O(1)$. If, however, the initial pressure fluctuations are small,
$$ p_0({\bf r}) = P + \delta p({\bf r}), $$
where $P = \lang p_0 \rang$ and $\delta p \ll P$, then the available energy from these fluctuations is quadratic in their amplitude and is relatively small:
\bn A_{\delta p} = \frac{\lang \delta p^2 \rang}{2 \gamma P} \ll W.
\label{A_dp}
\en
If we consider specifically the limit of small Mach numbers (subsonic motions):
\bn {\rm Ma} \equiv \frac{V_0}{\sqrt{\gamma p_0/\rho_0}} \ll 1,
\label{small_Ma}
\en
the dynamics are pressure-balanced and, typically, pressure perturbations are $\delta p/p_0 \sim {\rm Ma}^2$. This means that, to lowest order in ${\rm Ma}$, the available energy is just the {\em kinetic} energy in the initial state, $K_0 = \lang \rho_0 V_0^2/2 \rang$:
\bn \frac{A}{K_0} = 1 + {\cal O}({\rm Ma}).
\label{A_subsonic}
\en
\subsection{Finite resistivity and viscosity}\label{sec_diss}
Most dynamos considered in the literature involve resistivity, which enables field-line diffusion and reconnection to take place. A justified question is, therefore, to what extent the above conclusions remain valid if a finite resistivity is introduced. The induction equation (\ref{indeq}) then becomes
$$ \frac{\partial {\bf B}}{\partial t} = \nabla \times ( {\bf V} \times {\bf B}) + \eta \nabla^2 {\bf B}, $$
and the entropy conservation law (\ref{ideal MHD}) is replaced by
\bn \frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{p}{\rho^\gamma} \right) = \frac{(\gamma - 1) \eta j^2}{\rho^\gamma}.
\label{entropy production}
\en
The energy $W$ is still conserved, but the quantity $S = \lang p^{1/\gamma} \rang$ now increases with time
$$ S(t) > S_0, $$
reflecting positive entropy production. However, regardless of how much $S$ increases, we may still seek the maximum magnetic energy $M_1$ at a given $W$ and $S=S_1$ and thus find an upper bound on the available energy
\bn A = M_1 - M_0 = \frac{\lang p_0 \rang- S_1^\gamma}{\gamma-1} + \lang \frac{\rho_0 V_0^2}{2} \rang.
\label{A_diss}
\en
Since $S_1 > S_0$, this bound is lower than in the ideal-MHD case, and we conclude that less energy is available for conversion to magnetic energy. In other words, the bound (\ref{A}) still holds, but is even tighter than before.
The addition of viscosity to the MHD equations has a similar effect, with viscosity now contributing to entropy production (\ref{entropy production}). Since the total energy (\ref{W}) is conserved and $S(t)$ increases with time, the magnetic energy is again bounded from above by Eq.~(\ref{A}).
\subsection{Available energy in the double-adiabatic model} \label{sec_A_CGL}
As we shall now see, the situation is very different in the double-adiabatic model of Chew, Goldberger and Low \cite{CGL,Kulsrud}. Eliminating the density from the continuity equation (\ref{conteq}) and from the equations of state (\ref{1}) and (\ref{2}) gives
$$ \frac{\p }{\p t} \left( \frac{p_\perp}{B} \right) + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{p_\perp {\bf V}}{B} \right) = 0, $$
$$ \frac{\p }{\p t} \left( p_\|^{1/3} B^{2/3} \right) + \nabla \cdot \left( p_\|^{1/3} B^{2/3} {\bf V} \right) = 0, $$
implying that the following two quantities are conserved\footnote{Additional invariants are derived in Appendix A, but we do not consider the additional constraints implied by their existence.}
\bn I = \lang \frac{p_\perp}{B} \rang,
\label{I}
\en
$$ J = \lang p_\|^{1/3} B^{2/3} \rang. $$
We may thus ask for the maximum of the magnetic energy $M$ under the constraint that $W$, $I$ and $J$ are fixed. Proceeding as before, we find that all the fields $(p_\perp, p_\|, B, \ldots)$ are constant and the flow velocity vanishes, so in the state of maximum magnetic energy we have
$$ W = IB_1 + \frac{J^3}{2 B_1^2} + \frac{B_1^2}{2}. $$
This equation is a quartic for $B_1$ as a function of the invariants $I$, $J$, and $W$, and in terms of the normalised magnetic field $b = B_1 / \sqrt{W}$, it becomes
\bn b^4 + \frac{2Ib^3}{\sqrt{W}} - 2 b^2 + \frac{J^3}{W^2} = 0.
\label{quartic}
\en
The sum of all four roots is equal to $-2 I / \sqrt{W} < 0$, while their product equals $J^3/W^2 > 0$. There are, therefore, two positive and two negative roots. The negative ones can obviously be discarded, and the largest positive root is the upper bound that we are seeking. The other positive root is a {\em lower} bound on the magnetic energy, for the constancy of $J$ implies that $B$ cannot be made arbitrarily small at constant $W$, since small $B$ implies large $p_\|$. This is different from the ideal-MHD case, where the analogous calculation yields no lower bound on $M$ other than $B=0$.
In the intial state, the ratio of thermal to magnetic energy is equal to
$$ \frac{3\beta_0}{2} = \frac{\lang p_{\perp 0} + p_{\|0}/2 \rang}{M_0} = \frac{W - \rho_0 V_0^2/2}{M_0} - 1, $$
and in the state of maximum magnetic energy it is
$$ \frac{3 \beta_1}{2} = \frac{W}{M_1} - 1 = \frac{2}{b^2} - 1. $$
The general solution of Eq.~(\ref{quartic}) is not particularly edifying, but it does yield interesting information in the limit of high $\beta_0$. In this limit,
$$ \frac{I}{\sqrt{W}} \sim \sqrt{\beta_0} \gg 1, $$
$$ \frac{J^3}{W^2} \sim \frac{1}{\beta_0} \ll 1, $$
and it is helpful to write $x = b \sqrt{\beta_0}$, so that Eq.~(\ref{quartic}) becomes
\bn \frac{x^4}{\beta_0} + 2 a x^3 - 2 x^2 + c = 0,
\label{x_eqn}
\en
where $a = I / \sqrt{\beta_0 W}$ and $c = \beta_0 J^3 / W^2$ are of order unity. Since $\beta_0$ is large, one of the negative roots is obtained by balancing the first two terms, $x = - 2 a \beta_0$, whereas the three remaining roots are of order unity and are found by neglecting the first term. We thus come to the conclusion that if the initial state is one with little magnetic field, so that $\beta_0$ is large, then $\beta$ will remain large at all times. Indeed, $\beta$ can only change by order unity {\em in either direction} because there is a lower as well as an upper bound on the magnetic energy, both of order $b^2 \sim 1/\beta_0$ since $x = O(1)$. In other words, in the high-$\beta$ limit, the available energy is a small fraction of the total energy,
\bn A \sim \frac{W}{\beta_0}, \label{CGL limit}
\en
in contrast to conventional MHD, where $A \sim W$.
In the small-Mach-number-limit (\ref{small_Ma}), the fact that only a small fraction of the total energy is available to be converted into magnetic field is not by itself very surprising and it is relevant to ask how much of the {\em kinetic} energy in the initial state can be converted into magnetic energy. Since
\bn \frac{A}{K_0} \sim \frac{1}{{\rm Ma}^2 \beta_0},
\label{A_CGL_subsonic}
\en
only a small fraction of $K_0$ is available for conversion if $\beta_0 \gg {\rm Ma}^{-2}$. This is in contrast to MHD, where all of $K_0$ is available: see (\ref{A_subsonic}).
\section{Available energy in kinetic plasma models}
The upper bound on the magnetic energy that we have derived arises because the invariant $I$ dictates that the magnetic field cannot be increased without a similar {\em relative} increase in $p_\perp$, just as anticipated in \cite{Kulsrud-1997}. Thus, even if the magnetic field is very weak, it ``costs'' a significant amount of energy to increase it by a finite factor. This property of the CGL equations only relies on the constancy of the magnetic moment and is, therefore, shared by any plasma model that conserves this quantity.
\subsection{Kinetic MHD} \label{sec_A_KMHD}
An example of such a model is kinetic MHD, which is obtained by expanding the Vlasov-Maxwell system of equations in the small-gyroradius limit, ordering the plasma flow velocity to be at most comparable to the ion thermal speed, $V \sim v_{Ti}$ \cite{Kulsrud,Hazeltine}. The fluid equations then obtained coincide with our Eqs.~(\ref{conteq}) - (\ref{P}), but the components $(p_\perp, p_\|)$ of the pressure tensor are determined by the kinetic equation
\bn \frac{\p f_s}{\p t} + \left( v_\| {\bf b} + {\bf V} \right) \cdot \nabla f_s + \dot \epsilon \frac{\p f_s}{\p \epsilon} = 0,
\label{dke}
\en
\bn \dot \epsilon = e_s v_\| E_\| - m_s v_\| {\bf b} \cdot \frac{´d {´\bf V}}{dt} - \mu B \nabla \cdot {\bf V} - (m_s v_\|^2 - \mu B) {\bf bb} : \nabla {\bf V},
\label{epsilon}
\en
rather than by Eqs.~(\ref{1}) and (\ref{2}) (which follow from kinetic MHD only if heat fluxes are neglected). Here, $f_s$ denotes the distribution function of the particles of species $s$, whose charge is denoted $e_s$ and mass by $m_s$, the magnetic moment is $\mu = m_s v_\perp^2/2B$, and the particle velocity $\bf v$ is measured relative to the mean velocity ${\bf V}({\bf r}, t)$, so that the laboratory-frame velocity of a particle is ${\bf u} = {\bf V} + {\bf v}$. From the solution of the kinetic equation (\ref{dke}), the pressures needed in the equation of motion (\ref{momeq}) are computed by
$$ {p_\perp \choose p_\|} = \sum_s \int {\mu B \choose m_s v_\|^2 } f_s \; d^3v. $$
Another difference with conventional MHD is that $E_\|$, the component of the electric field that is parallel to $\bf B$, appears in Eq.~(\ref{epsilon}). As in MHD, $E_\|$ is relatively small, as follows from the observation that the first term on the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{epsilon}) is comparable to the others when $E_\| / B \sim \rho_i v_{Ti} / L$, where $\rho_i = m_i v_{Ti}/e_iB$ is the ion gyroradius. However, unlike in MHD, $E_\|$ affects the motion of the plasma and must be determined by the quasineutrality condition
$$ \sum_s e_s \int f_s \; d^3v = 0, $$
which closes the kinetic-MHD system of equations.
This system conserves both the energy (\ref{W}) and the total magnetic moment (\ref{I}), the latter for each species individually. This is most easily shown by first writing the kinetic equation (\ref{dke}) in conservative form,
\bn \frac{\p}{\p t} \left( \frac{B f_s}{v_\|} \right) + \nabla \cdot \left[ \left( {\bf B} + \frac{B {\bf V}}{v_\|} \right) f_s \right]
+ \frac{\p}{\p \epsilon} \left( \frac{\dot \epsilon B f_s}{v_\|} \right) = 0.
\label{conservative form}
\en
Multiplying this equation by
$$ \frac{\mu v_\|}{B} \; d^3v = \mu \sum_{\sigma} \frac{2 \pi}{m_s^2} d\mu d\epsilon, $$
where $\sigma = v_\| / |v_\| |$, and integrating over velocity and real space gives $dI_s/dt = 0$. Obviously, the total magnetic moment
$$ I = \sum_s I_s $$
is also conserved. To prove energy conservation, one multiplies Eq.~(\ref{conservative form}) by $(\epsilon v_\| /B) \; d^3v$ integrates similarly, and sums over species, giving
$$ \frac{d}{dt} \lang p_\perp + \frac{p_\|}{2} \rang = \lang j_\| E_\| - p_\perp \nabla \cdot {\bf V} + (p_\perp - p_\|) {\bf bb} : \nabla {\bf V} \rang, $$
where
$$ j_\| = \sum_s e_s \int v_\| f_s d^3v = 0 $$
to the requisite order \cite{Kulsrud}. The evolution of the kinetic energy can be computed from the continuity and momentum equations (\ref{conteq})-(\ref{momeq}),
$$ \frac{d}{dt} \lang \frac{\rho V^2}{2} \rang
= \lang {\bf V} \cdot ({\bf j} \times {\bf B}) + p_\perp \nabla \cdot {\bf V} - (p_\perp - p_\|) {\bf bb} : \nabla {\bf V} \rang, $$
and the magnetic energy evolves according to
$$ \frac{d}{dt} \lang \frac{B^2}{2} \rang = \lang ({\bf V} \times {\bf B} ) \cdot {\bf j} \rang, $$
as found from the induction equation (\ref{indeq}). The sum of these energy relations implies that the total energy (\ref{W}) is conserved.
Knowing that $W$ and $I$ are conserved, we again proceed to seek the state of maximum magnetic energy
$$ M = W - L - \lang p_\perp \rang, $$
where we have denoted
$$ L = \lang \frac{\rho V^2}{2} + \frac{p_\|}{2} \rang. $$
As before, this state has constant magnetic field strength, so $M = B_1^2/2$ and
$$ B_1^2 + 2 I B_1 - 2(W-L) = 0, $$
i.e.,
$$ B_1 = I \left( \sqrt{ 1 + \frac{2 (W-L)}{I^2}} - 1 \right). $$
At high beta, $W \ll I^2$, we conclude that $B_1 \simeq (W-L)/I$, and the maximum magnetic energy is a small fraction of the total energy,
\bn \frac{M_1}{W} = \frac{(W-L)^2}{2 W I^2} \le \frac{W}{2I^2} \sim \frac{1}{\beta_0} \ll 1.
\label{bound in kinetic MHD}
\en
As in the case of the CGL model (to which the present argument also applies), if the Mach number of the initial flow is small, the fraction of kinetic energy that can be converted to magnetic energy is
$$ \frac{M_1}{K_0} \sim \frac{1}{{\rm Ma}^2 \beta_0}, $$
and is small at high enough $\beta_0$. This is the same result as (\ref{A_CGL_subsonic}).
\subsection{More general plasma models} \label{sec_A_other}
The analysis leading to the bound (\ref{bound in kinetic MHD}) on the magnetic energy shows that it is the conservation of the magnetic moment that leads to the available energy being so limited at high beta. The limit (\ref{bound in kinetic MHD}) is thus applicable beyond the approximations made in kinetic MHD and will hold in any plasma model where the total magnetic moment and energy are conserved and the latter can be written in the form
\bn W = L + \lang p_\perp \rang + M,
\label{general W}
\en
where $L$ is a positive definite quantity. Mathematically, the argument is exactly the same as that just given for kinetic MHD. Any kinetic description of the plasma in which the gyroradius is small, all frequencies are lower than the ion cyclotron frequency, and collisions are negligible has this property. Drift kinetics, which is similar to kinetic MHD but treats the plasma flow velocity as smaller than the ion thermal speed is an example \cite{Hazeltine},\footnote{This is the kind of ordering that can, for example, be argued to be appropriate for the turbulent plasma in galaxy clusters \cite{Rosin}.} under the proviso that collisions can be ignored, so that the total magnetic moment $I$ is conserved. The magnetic field can therefore only grow appreciably on time scales longer than the collision time, at which point $I$ is no longer conserved.
The perpendicular pressure $p_\perp$ entering in Eq.~(\ref{general W}) and the definition (\ref{I}) of $I$ need not refer to the entire plasma, but could denote just the perpendicular pressure of one of its components. For the bound (\ref{bound in kinetic MHD}) to hold, it is sufficient that the magnetic moments for the particles of {\em one} plasma component be conserved (as long as its number density is not so small as to render the high-$\beta$ approximation invalid). For instance, if we consider dynamo action on time scales that are longer than the collision time for electrons but shorter than that for ions, the collision operator needs to be retained in the electron kinetic equation but can be ignored in the ion dynamics. If, in this situation, the initial ion beta is large and $p_\perp$ denotes the perpendicular ion pressure, the bound (\ref{bound in kinetic MHD}) implies that the magnetic energy cannot grow significantly, even though the conservation of the magnetic moment of the electrons is broken by collisions.
\section{Case of external forcing}
\subsection{MHD model} \label{sec_forced_MHD}
Numerical dynamo simulations usually involve external forcing \cite{Meneguzzi,Schekochihin-2004,Haugen,Beresnyak,Lima}, and we now ask how this may affect our results. If a force is added to the equation of motion,
$$ \rho \frac{d {\bf V}}{dt} = {\bf j} \times {\bf B} - \nabla \cdot {\sf P} + {\bf F}({\bf r}, t), $$
the total energy $W$ is no longer conserved, but increases (or decreases), as the force adds kinetic energy to the system. In a dissipative plasma, this energy is continually processed: it is transferred to thermal energy by viscosity and resistivity.\footnote{It can also then be radiated, possibly leading to a statistically constant $W$, as, for example, is believed to happen in galaxy-cluster cores \cite{Zhuravleva}. Examining further arguments in this section, one might expect this approximate conservation of $W$ to help establish better upper bounds on the attainable magnetic energy. However, in subsonically turbulent systems, this steady state is achieved on the heating/cooling time scales, which, as we will argue in what follows, are much longer than the dynamical time scales on which dynamo action matters.} Since entropy is constantly produced by these dissipation processes, $S$ is also no longer conserved. If, over some period of time, the total energy increases from $W_0$ to $W_1$ and entropy from $S_0$ to $S_1$ and we maximise $M_1$ at given values of $W_1$ and $S_1$, we find (similarly to the calculation in section \ref{sec_diss})
$$ M_1 = W_1 - \frac{S_1^\gamma}{\gamma - 1}, $$
and the available energy becomes
\bn A = M_1 - M_0 = W_1 - W_0
+ \frac{\lang p_0 \rang- S_1^\gamma}{\gamma-1} + \lang \frac{\rho_0 V_0^2}{2} \rang.
\label{A_forced}
\en
Compared to the ideal, unforced case (\ref{A}), this makes additional energy available for conversion into magnetic energy (the work done by the external force can go into magnetic energy), attenuated, as in (\ref{A_diss}), by the fact that $S_1 > S_0 = \lang p_0^{1/\gamma}\rang$ (continuous forcing will produce motions and magnetic fields that will eventually reach dissipative scales and be thermalised, producing entropy). If $F$ is arbitrary, the above calculation does not establish any bound on the increase of the magnetic energy.
Considering again the low-Mach-number limit (\ref{small_Ma}), we can, as we did at the end of section \ref{sec_A_MHD}, neglect the term in (\ref{A_forced}) that contains $S_1$ and can be bounded from above by (\ref{A_dp}) because $S_1>S_0$. For simplicity, let us assume an initially motionless state ($V_0=0$), which, for a forced system, does not restrict generality in any significant way. If external forcing injects energy into the system at the mean rate $\varepsilon$, then the available energy after time $t$ is
$$ A \approx W_1 - W_0 = \varepsilon t. $$
In a subsonically forced and, therefore, low-Mach-number system, the time that it takes the external forcing to inject an amount of energy comparable to the total energy is asymptotically long.
If the {\em kinetic} energy of the plasma flows at time $t$ is $K_1 \sim {\rm Ma}^2 W_1$, we may define the ``dynamical'' time as the typical time over which external forcing can build up motions with this energy, $\tau_{\rm dyn} = K_1/\varepsilon$. The total energy can only change by an amount of order unity after the ``heating'' time $t\sim W_1/\varepsilon\sim \tau_{\rm dyn}/{\rm Ma}^2 \gg \tau_{\rm dyn}$. The interesting question in the context of dynamo action in such a forced system is how much energy is available for conversion into magnetic fields over times of order $\tau_{\rm dyn}$, which immediately gives us
$$ A \sim \varepsilon \tau_{\rm dyn} \sim K_1. $$
This is just a (perhaps overcomplicated) way of stating that in subsonic MHD turbulence, over dynamical times, a possible dynamo mechanism has at its disposal energies of order the kinetic energy of the motions, a result analogous to (\ref{A_subsonic}).
\subsection{CGL and other kinetic plasma models} \label{sec_forced_CGL}
Let us assume that the external forcing does not directly break adiabatic invariance, i.e., that it occurs on sufficiently long scales in time and spaces. Nevertheless, the dissipation of the injected energy will in general occur on small scales and via processes (e.g., collisional viscosity and resistivity) that do not conserve $I$ and $J$. Thus, just like in the case of the MHD model, we are left without exact conservation laws that would allow us to constrain dynamo action. Let us, however, again focus on the limit of low Mach numbers and consider the evolution of the system over dynamical (rather than heating) time scales. Over such times, both the total energy of the plasma and the CGL invariants can only change by small amounts: at most,
$$ W_1 - W_0 \sim \varepsilon \tau_{\rm dyn} \sim {\rm Ma^2} W_1,$$
$$ I_1 - I_0 \sim \frac{\varepsilon \tau_{\rm dyn}}{B_0} \sim {\rm Ma}^2\sqrt{\beta_0 W_0},$$
and similarly for $J$. This implies that if we seek to maximise magnetic energy in a subsonically forced CGL model subject to some fixed values of $W_1$, $I_1$ and $J_1$, the argument presented in section \ref{sec_A_CGL} continues to be valid, with the coefficients $a$ and $c$ in (\ref{x_eqn}) still of order unity because they only differ by ${\cal O}({\rm Ma}^2)$ from the values they would have had if $I$ and $J$ had been precisely conserved. We conclude that the upper bound (\ref{A_CGL_subsonic}) survives, with $K_0$ replaced with $K_1$, the kinetic energy of the forced plasma flows.\footnote{It is not hard to see that the upper bound (\ref{CGL limit}) still holds in the somewhat more general case of $W$ changing by an order-unity (rather than small) amount if one can argue that the dynamics nevetheless preserves $I$ and $J$. The upper bound (\ref{CGL limit}) is only broken if the total energy increases by a large factor.}
Obviously, the same line of argument can be used to extend to the forced case the arguments that we have proposed for kinetic MHD (section \ref{sec_A_KMHD}) and other kinetic models that conserve the magnetic moment of one of the bulk particle species (section \ref{sec_A_other}).
\subsection{Numerical tests}
To illustrate the above considerations of the dependence of dynamo action on the equation of state, we contrast a series of numerical simulations of the conventional MHD equations with isotropic pressure against the anisotropic-pressure CGL equations, both in the subsonically forced regime. Equations (\ref{conteq})-(\ref{Ampere}) are solved numerically in three spatial dimensions using a MUSCL-type scheme with a van Leer flux limiter \cite{Kurganov}. A divergence-free magnetic field is ensured by applying a flux-constrained approach (also known as a specific variation of staggered mesh or Yee grid method) \cite{Balsara}. Either the MHD energy equation (\ref{ideal MHD}) with isotropic pressure or the CGL equations (\ref{1})-(\ref{2}) are used. No resistive or viscous terms are included explicitly, so dissipation is due only to a small amount of numerical diffusion introduced by the numerical scheme. Periodic boundary conditions are applied in all three spatial directions. The simulation grid is uniform, with resolution of $128^3$ points (which is enough for the purposes of capturing dynamo action \cite{Meneguzzi,Haugen,Schekochihin-2004}).
A stochastic flow in the simulation box is established by including a forcing term in the momentum equation \cite{Alvelius} that is uniform in wave-vector space and concentrated to the two smallest wave numbers. The forcing is random and white in time. Solenoidal ($\nabla \cdot {\bf F} = 0$) forcing is used because this provides the most effcient amplification of the initial magnetic field by the turbulent small-scale dynamo \cite{Federrath}. Note that, although the forcing is solenoidal, the equations that we solve allow for compressible dynamics and small ($\nabla \cdot {\bf V} \sim {\rm Ma}^2$) compressive fluctuations are present in the system. The injected power is constant in time and relatively small to ensure that the generated velocity fluctuations are subsonic. A small uniform mean seed magnetic field is set up in the initial condition,\footnote{In a periodic box, such a field cannot, of course, decay, and a certain amount of its amplification will be due just to the turbulent tangling of field lines, rather than to {\em bona fide} dynamo action \cite{Schekochihin-2007}. However, if the system does support dynamo action, the latter will quickly take over and bring the field energy to within a finite factor of the kinetic energy of the motions. Starting with small random magnetic perturbations whose mean is zero did not change any of our results.} and different strengths are used in the simulations described below, whereby the dependence on initial $\beta_0$ is investigated. All fields (velocity, density, magnetic field, perpendicular and parallel pressures) are initially constant across the simulation box, so their fluctuations are driven solely by forcing.
Since we are interested in the consequences of accurate conservation of $S$ in the case of isotropic pressure and $I$ and $J$ in the CGL case, we use either the isotropic-pressure relation (\ref{ideal MHD}) or the CGL equations (\ref{1})-(\ref{2}) instead of the total energy conservation equation in the explicit form.\footnote{Since our initial state is homogeneous, equations (\ref{ideal MHD}), (\ref{1}) or (\ref{2}) can be solved simply by enforcing pointwise conservation of $p/\rho^\gamma$, $p_\perp/\rho B$ or $p_\parallel B^2/\rho^3$, respectively.}. This implies that the part of the kinetic energy injected into the system that is dissipated numerically rather than being transformed into magnetic energy or into thermal energy via adiabatic mechanisms (compressional heating or, in CGL, pressure-anisotropy heating, i.e., parallel viscosity), is lost and thus constitutes an implicit energy sink in the total energy budget. As we argued in section \ref{sec_forced_MHD}, this is a small effect over a finite number of dynamical times. Various other schemes for solving our pressure equation(s) (enforcing total energy conservation or depositing the balance of numerically dissipated energy into $p_\parallel$ and/or $p_\perp$ according to physical assumptions about the nature of sub-grid heating) do not result in any change of the results on dynamo action or lack thereof reported below.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{f1a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{f1b.eps}
\caption{Typical time evolution of the total thermal (green), kinetic (red) and magnetic (black) energies in (a) forced MHD equations with isotropic pressure and (b) forced CGL equations. The energies are in the units of the initial thermal energy $3p_0/2$. The time is in the units of the sound-crossing time $L/\sqrt{\gamma p_0/\rho_0}$, where $L=1$ is the size of the box. The largest-eddy turnover time, referred to as ``dynamical time'' in sections \ref{sec_forced_MHD} and \ref{sec_forced_CGL}, is approximately $\tau_{\rm dyn}\sim 10$ units. Note that the MHD dynamo operates on the time scale of order $\tau_{\rm dyn}$.}
\label{f1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{f0a_000035.eps}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{f0b_000035.eps}
\caption{Snapshots from the two simulations shown in Figure \ref{f1}, taken at $t=107$ (in the saturated state): (a) MHD, (b) CGL. 3D rendering of field lines is used to exhibit their spatial structure, while the colour shows the local value of the magnetic-field strength $B$ (normalised to the initial value $B_0$). The initial mean seed field was in the $x$ direction. The field lines that are displayed start at (a) $x = 0.5$, (b) $x = 0$.}
\label{f0}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{f1} shows the evolution of the kinetic $\lang \rho V^2/2 \rang$, magnetic $\lang B^2/2 \rang$ and thermal $\lang 3 p/2 \rang$ energies in a simulation starting from $\beta_0 = 10^8$. In the MHD model, the magnetic energy grows exponentially until a saturated state is achieved, as it always does in dynamo simulations \cite{Meneguzzi,Haugen,Schekochihin-2004}. In contrast, in the CGL model, the dynamo action is suppressed, and no significant increase of the magnetic energy density is obtained, confirming the result of \cite{Lima}.
A 3D rendering of the magnetic field in the saturated state of these two simulations is given in Figure \ref{f0}. In the isotropic-pressure MHD plasma, plasma motions were able to amplify the magnetic field via the standard stretch-and-fold mechanism, giving rise to a characteristic pattern of intertwined and folded magnetic field lines and to intermittent high- and low-field regions. The contrast between the highest- and the lowest-$B$ regions is of order of 10, and even the lowest-magnitude regions have been amplified by a factor of $\sim60$ from the initial field. In the CGL case, the same initial condition and forcing resulted in very weak bending of the lines and very small amplification of the magnetic field strength (a few per cent), the spatial alignment of the lines displays no signature of stretching or folding, just gentle wave-like perturbations (these are CGL slow waves, which propagate at the sound speed even at high $\beta$ \cite{Shrauner}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{f2a.eps}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{f2b.eps}
\caption{Time evolution of the magnetic energy
for (a) the MHD model with isotropic pressure and (b) the CGL model,
for five runs starting with different initial magnetic fields. The units are
the same as in Figure \ref{f1}.}
\label{f2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{f3a.eps}
\caption{The saturated magnetic energy $M_1$ vs.\ the initial one $M_0$
for the MHD (red) and CGL (blue) models.}
\label{f3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{f2} show the evolution of the magnetic energy for the two models in simulations starting from the magnetic field strength $B_0$ corresponding to the range $10^4 < \beta_0 < 10^8$. The amplitude of the forcing and the thermal pressure are the same for all these simulations, implying approximately the same Mach number of the velocity fluctuations in all of them. We see that the saturated magnetic energy is essentially independent of $\beta_0$ in the MHD model and entirely determined by it in the CGL model. This point is reinforced by Figure \ref{f3}, which shows the final saturated magnetic energy $M_1$ vs.\ the initial one $M_0$. Thus, the initial magnetic energy cannot be increased in a double-adibatic, pressure-anisotropic plasma even in the presence of external forcing and the upper bound (\ref{CGL limit}) is tight.
\section{Conclusions}
As we have seen, any mathematical plasma model that conserves the magnetic moment of at least one particle species is subject to an anti-dynamo theorem in the sense that there is a strict limitation on the growth of the total magnetic energy, as indeed anticipated by \cite{Kulsrud-1997}. If the initial magnetic field is small enough that $\beta_0 \gg 1$ (or $\beta_0 \gg {\rm Ma}^{-2}$ for plasma flows in which the Mach number is small), the magnetic energy cannot grow by more than a factor of order unity as long as the external forcing does not significantly increase the total energy of the system.
These results have immediate implications for dynamo simulations of the collisionless CGL or kinetic-MHD equations. If such a simulation should exhibit significant growth of the magnetic energy, it must be due to the accumulation of numerical errors that effectively break the adiabatic invariance of the plasma. Our own simulations of the CGL equations, as well as those of \cite{Lima}, find that dynamo action is, indeed, practically absent at high beta. Moreover, the modest growth of the magnetic energy that does occur is observed to stop at magnetic energy inversely proportional to $\beta_0$, as expected from the bound (\ref{CGL limit}), suggesting that this scaling is the correct one and that the bound is tight within a factor of order unity. In simulations that instead use the conventional MHD equation of state (\ref{ideal MHD}), the magnetic energy grows to much larger values, independent of the inital beta.
These results do not, however, imply the absence of dynamo action in a real plasma, even if collisions are rare and the gyroradii of all particle species are small. There are at least two reasons why such a conclusion cannot be drawn. First, whether or not external forcing is present, the flow of the plasma will usually be turbulent. The ensuing free-energy cascade will tend to create small-scale structures both in real space and in velocity space, with fluctuations arising on Larmor scales and collisions eventually becoming important \cite{Schekochihin-2008}. The precise adiabatic invariance of the magnetic moment will thus be broken, which may unchain the dynamo. Secondly, the growth of pressure anisotropies caused by magnetic-field changes can lead to the excitation of kinetic mirror and firehose instabilities that have a similar effect \cite{Kunz,Melville}. Without a detailed understanding of these processes, it is not possible to rule out dynamo action. Indeed, it would be unwise to do so, given that the Universe {\em is} magnetised, the observed magnetic fields tend to be of dynamical strength (and so likely result from plasma motions), and first numerical evidence of collisionless plasma dynamo action has appeared \cite{Rincon}. What we can conclude with certainty is that plasma dynamo action must be a multiscale process, with breaking of adiabatic invariance at microscales playing an existentially important role.
\subsection*{Acknowledgment} The work of AAS was supported in part by grants from the UK STFC and EPSRC. MS was supported
by funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and
innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No
657251 (ASTROMULTISCALE). The discussion presented in the paper reflects
only the authors' view and the European Commission is not responsible for
any use that may be made of the information it contains. Numerical simulations
presented in this paper
were performed on supercomputers of the Academic Computer Centre in Gdansk
(CI TASK).
\section*{Appendix A: Invariants of the CGL equations}
The double-adiabatic equations of state can be expressed as
$$ \frac{d}{dt} \left[ \alpha \ln \left( \frac{p_\perp}{\rho B} \right) + (1-\alpha) \ln \left( \frac{p_\|^{1/3} B^{2/3}}{\rho} \right) \right] = 0, $$
where $\alpha$ is arbitrary. Since $d \ln \rho / dt = - \nabla \cdot {\bf V}$ from the continuity equation, we can thus write
$$ \frac{d}{dt} \ln \left( p_\perp^\alpha p_\|^{(1-\alpha)/3} B^{(2-5 \alpha)/3} \right) + \nabla \cdot {\bf V} = 0, $$
and conclude that there is an infinity of conserved quantities that can be constructed from the three fields $p_\perp$, $p_\|$ and $B$, namely,
$$ \frac{d}{dt} \lang p_\perp^\alpha p_\|^{(1-\alpha)/3} B^{(2-5 \alpha)/3} \rang = 0. $$
Three of these invariants depend on only two of the fields: $I = \lang p_\perp/B \rang$ and $J= \lang p_\|^{1/3} B^{2/3} \rang$ correspond to $\alpha = 1$ and $\alpha = 0$, respectively, and $\alpha = 2/5$ yields an invariant that is independent of $B$,
$$ \frac{d}{dt} \lang p_\perp^{2/5} p_\|^{1/5}\rang = 0. $$
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction}
Various notions of quantumness of correlations in a given quantum state give essentially the
same information in the case of pure states. A pure state of bipartite quantum system is either
separable (i.e. a product state) or nonseparable. This mathematical notion of nonseparability can be extended to
the mixed states, giving the natural (but formal) definition of entanglement of general quantum states:
a (mixed) state is entangled if it cannot be expressed as a convex combination of pure separable states \cite{W}.
It was widely accepted that such defined entanglement is the only source of quantumness of correlations. In the recent
years however, other, more general features of correlations have attracted much interest. They arise from the observation that
for pure separable state, there exists von Neumann measurement on a part of composite system that do not disturb the state, whereas nonseparable states are always disturbed by such local measurements . Extension of this feature to the mixed states, gives rise of the notion of quantum discord \cite{Z,HV,M}.
For pure states discord coincides with entanglement, but in the case of mixed states discord and entanglement differ significantly.
For example, almost all quantum states have non-vanishing discord and in particular there exist discordant separable
mixed states \cite{F}.
\par
A pure separable state of bipartite systems has also important
algebraic property: the expectation value $\om$ in such state
factorizes i.e.
\begin{equation}
\om(AB)=\om(A)\om(B)\label{prod}
\end{equation}
for the product of all local observables. On the other hand, for
nonseparable states there are such pairs of local observables that
(\ref{prod}) is not valid. Therefore the maximum of the numbers
\begin{equation}
|\om(AB)-\om(A)\om(B)|\label{omab}
\end{equation}
taken over all pairs of local observales, can serve as a kind of an
algebraic measure of quantumness of correlations. This idea was
applied to the case of two qubits in Ref. \cite{DGJ}, where it was
shown that the suitably normalized maximum of (\ref{omab}) exactly
equals to the pure state entanglement. In the present note we study the extension of
that measure of correlations to the mixed two-qubit states. The extended measure we call
\textit{maximal mutual correlation} between subsystems in a given state. In contrast to the entanglement
or quantum discord, this quantity can be non - zero even for classically correlated (i.e. non - discordant)
quantum states.
\par
In this article we compute maximal mutual correlation for several
classes of states and study the relation of this quantity to other
measures of correlations in two - qubit quantum systems. In
particular we show that in the case of so called "classical -
quantum" states, this measure depends on the classical probability
distribution defining such states but also encodes some information
about quantum states of the second subsystem, whereas for "classical
- classical" states it depends only on the properties of the
corresponding classical probability distribution. In the states
containing some quantum correlations, maximal mutual correlation is
always greater or equal to geometric measure of quantum discord.
This relation is proved to be valid in the class of Bell - diagonal
states
and it is conjectured that is also true for general two - qubit states.
\section{Bipartite correlations in the algebraic framework}
\subsection{General discussion}
For the unambiguous discussion of quantum non-separability, the crucial is a clear
identification of subsystems of the total system. In the context of algebraic quantum
theory such identification is given by the proper choice of the factorization of the total
algebra of observables into subalgebras describing subsystems (see e.g. \cite{B}).
In the algebraic formulation of quantum theory (see e.g. \cite{Emch}), the total system is described by the
$\ast$ - algebra $\Atot$ of all observables. Since in the present note we consider only
the systems with finite number of levels, $\Atot$ is isomorphic to the full matrix algebra.
The most general state on $\Atot$ is given
by the linear functional
\begin{equation}
\om\,:\,\Atot\to \C,\label{state}
\end{equation}
which is positive i.e. for all $A\in \Atot$
\begin{equation*}
\om(A^{\ast}A)\geq 0,
\end{equation*}
and normalized i.e.
\begin{equation*}
\om(\I)=1.
\end{equation*}
For the matrix algebras, any state $\om$ is normal i.e. there exists density matrix $\ro$ such that
\begin{equation}
\om(A)=\tr (\ro A)\label{mstate}
\end{equation}
To describe subsystems of the total system, we consider subalgebras
$\cA$ and $\cB$ of $\Atot$. We assume that $\cA\cap \cB=\{c\I\}$
and $\Atot=\cA\vee \cB$ i.e. $\Atot$ is generated by $\cA$ and
$\cB$. For the discussion of correlations between observables in
$\cA$ and $\cB$ in a given state $\om$, the crucial is the notion of
uncorrelated states. The formal definition is as follows: the state
$\om$ on $\cA\vee \cB$ is $(\cA,\, \cB)$ - \textit{uncorrelated} if
\begin{equation}
\om(AB)=\om(A)\,\om(B)
\end{equation}
for every $A\in \cA$ and $B\in \cB$. As it was shown in Ref.
\cite{BS} the very existence of such uncorrelated or product states
depends on the mutual commutativity of the algebras $\cA$ and $\cB$.
Thus in the context of the theory of correlations in bipartite
systems, the total algebra of observables should be such that
$\Atot= \cA\vee \cB$, where $ \cA\cap \cB=\{c\I\}$ and for all $A\in \cA$ and $B\in \cB,\; [A,B]=0$.
In the case of full matrix algebras, much more can be said about the structure of $\Atot$. One can show that
$\cA\vee\cB$ is isomorphic to the tensor product $\cA\otimes \cB$. So $\cA$ is generated by elements $A\otimes \I$
and $\cB$ is generated by $\I\otimes B$.
\par
Now we pass to the discussion of correlations between subsystems. A
state $\om$ on $\Atot$ is $(\cA,\, \cB)$ - \textit{correlated} if it
is not a product state with respect to subalgebras $\cA$ and $\cB$.
Next we introduce a quantity which we call maximal mutual correlation
between $\cA$ and $\cB$ in $\om$. It is defined as \cite{DGJ}
\begin{equation}
\cm(\om)=\sup\limits_{A,B}\,|\om(AB)-\om(A)\om(B)|.\label{MMC}
\end{equation}
In the formula (\ref{MMC}), the supremum is taken over all normalized elements $A\in \cA$ and $B\in \cB$.
The quantity $\cm(\om)$ gives the information how much a state differs from the product state of
its marginals, when we take into account only local measurements. Since the states $\om$ are of the form (\ref{mstate}),
we put $\cm(\om)=\cm(\ro)$. Notice that
\begin{equation}
\cm(\ro)\leq ||\om-\om^{\cA}\otimes \om^{\cB}||=||\ro-\ro^{\cA}\otimes\ro^{\cB}||_{1},
\end{equation}
where $||\cdot||_{1}$ is a trace norm and the marginal states $\om^{\cA}$ and $\om^{\cB}$ are given by
partial traces $\ro^{\cA}$ and $\ro^{\cB}$ of a density matrix $\ro$.
Thus $\cm(\ro)$ is always dominated by so called \textit{correlation distance} $C(\ro)$, given by
\begin{equation}
C(\ro)=||\ro-\ro^{\cA}\otimes\ro^{\cB}||_{1} \label{cd}
\end{equation}
and introduced recently by Hall \cite{Hall} in the context of the analysis of quantum mutual information.
\subsection{Two qubit case}
In the case of two qubits, the total algebra $\Atot$
can be considered as generated by matrix unit $\I$ and elements
$\la{1},\ldots,\la{15}$, where
\begin{equation}
\la{i}=\I\otimes \si{i},\quad \la{3+i}=\si{i}\otimes \I,\quad
i=1,2,3
\end{equation}
and $\la{j},\; j=7,\ldots,15$ are given by tensor products of the
Pauli matrices $\si{i}$ taken in the lexicographical order. So
\begin{equation}
\Atot=\left[\,\I,\la{1},\ldots,\la{15}\,\right],
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\cA=\left[\, \I,\, A_{1},\, A_{2},\, A_{3}\,\right],\quad
\cB=\left[\, \I,\, B_{1},\, B_{2},\,
B_{3}\,\right],\label{A0B0}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
A_{i}=\la{3+i},\; B_{i}=\la{i},\quad i=1,2,3.
\end{equation}
It is convenient to take elements $A\in \cA$ and $B\in \cB$ defined as
\begin{equation}
A=a_{1}A_{1}+a_{2}A_{2}+a_{3}A_{3},\quad B=b_{1}B_{1}+b_{2}B_{2}+b_{3}B_{3},
\end{equation}
where $\tl{a}=(a_{1},a_{2},a_{3}),\; \tl{b}=(b_{1},b_{2},b_{3})$
are normalized vectors in $\R^{3}$. Then $A^{2}=\I,\; B^{2}=\I$ and
\begin{equation}
\om(AB)-\om(A)\om(B)=\ip{\tl{a}}{Q\,\tl{b}},
\end{equation}
where the covariance matrix $Q=(q_{ij})$ has the matrix elements
\begin{equation}
q_{ij}=\tr(\ro A_{i}B_{j})-\tr(\ro A_{i})\tr(\ro B_{j}).
\end{equation}
So \cite{DGJ}
\begin{equation}
\cm(\ro)=\sup\limits_{||\tl{a}||=||\tl{b}||=1}|\ip{\tl{a}}{Q\,\tl{b}}|.\label{cm2q}
\end{equation}
Notice that the right hand side of (\ref{cm2q}) is the norm of the matrix $Q$, thus for two qubits
\begin{equation}
\cm(\ro)=\max\,(t_{1},\, t_{2},\, t_{3}),
\end{equation}
where $\{t_{1},\, t_{2},\, t_{3}\}$ are singular values of the covariance matrix $Q$.
\par
In the two - qubit case, there is also an explicit expression for the correlation distance $C(\ro)$ \cite{Hall}.
Again it is given in terms of singular values of $Q$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
C(\ro)=&\frac{1}{4}\big(|t_{1}+t_{2}+t_{3}|+|t_{1}+t_{2}-t_{3}|+|t_{1}-t_{2}+t_{3}|\\
&\hspace*{4mm}+|-t_{1}+t_{2}+t_{3}|\big)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\section{Relation of $\cm(\ro)$ to other measures of correlations}
In the general case, the maximal mutual correlation $\cm(\ro)$ is
upper bounded by the correlation distance $C(\ro)$. In this section
we focus on the case of two qubits and compare $\cm(\ro)$ with other
measures of correlations corresponding to entanglement and quantum
discord. As a measure of entanglement we choose normalized
negativity $N(\ro)$, given by
\begin{equation}
N(\ro)=||\ro^{PT}||_{1}-1,
\end{equation}
where $PT$ stands for partial transposition. To quantify quantum
discord, we take geometric measure of quantum discord defined by
using trace norm distance in the set of states i.e. the quantity
$D_{1}(\ro)$ defined as \cite{Paula}
\begin{equation}
D_{1}(\ro)=\min\limits_{\PP^{\cA}}\,||\ro-\PP^{\cA}(\ro)||_{1},
\end{equation}
where $\PP^{\cA}$ is the projective measurement on subsystem $\cA$
i.e.
\begin{equation}
\PP^{\cA}(\ro)=\sum\limits_{k}(P_{k}\otimes \I)\,\ro\,(P_{k}\otimes
\I).
\end{equation}
Analytic expression for $D_{1}$ is known only for Bell - diagonal and $X$ - shaped
mixed states \cite{Cic}. In this note we study $X$ - shaped two - qubit
states
\begin{equation}
\ro=\begin{pmatrix}\ro_{11}&0&0&\ro_{14}\\
0&\ro_{22}&\ro_{23}&0\\
0&\ro_{32}&\ro_{33}&0\\
\ro_{41}&0&0&\ro_{44}
\end{pmatrix},\label{X}
\end{equation}
where all matrix elements are real and non - negative. The quantity $D_{1}$ for such states can be computed
as follows. Let $x=2(\ro_{11}+\ro_{22}) -1$ and
\begin{equation}
\al{1}=2(\ro_{23}+\ro_{14}),\quad \al{2}=2(\ro_{23}-\ro_{14}),\quad \al{3}=1-2(\ro_{22}+\ro_{33}).
\end{equation}
Then \cite{Cic}
\begin{equation}
D_{1}(\ro)=\sqrt{\frac{\DS a\,\al{1}^{2}-b\,\al{2}^{2}}{\DS a-b +\al{1}^{2}-\al{2}^{2}}},\label{disc1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
a=\max\,(\al{3}^{2},\, \al{2}^{2}+x^{2}),\quad b=\min\,(\al{3}^{2},\, \al{1}^{2}).
\end{equation}
Notice that the formula
(\ref{disc1}) is not valid in the case when $x=0$ and
\begin{equation}
|\al{1}|=|\al{2}|=|\al{3}|.
\end{equation}
In such a case, one can use general prescription how to compute
$D_{1}$, also given in Ref. \cite{Cic} (eq. (65)).
\par
Now we go to study the relations between $N(\ro),\, D_{1}(\ro)$ and
$\cm(\ro)$ for some specific classes of states of two qubits.
\subsection{Pure two qubit states}
Let us consider first the simple case of pure two qubit states. Up
to the local unitary operations, the corresponding density matrix
$\ro_{\mathrm{pure}}$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
\ro_{\mathrm{pure}}=\frac{1}{2}\,\begin{pmatrix}1+\sqrt{1-N^{2}}&0&0&N\\
0&0&0&0\\
0&0&0&0\\
N&0&0&1-\sqrt{1-N^{2}}\end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
where $N\in [0,1]$. It is straightforward to show that in this case
\begin{equation}
N(\ro_{\mathrm{pure}})=D_{1}(\ro_{\mathrm{pure}})=N.
\end{equation}
Moreover the corresponding covariance matrix is of the form
\begin{equation}
Q=\begin{pmatrix}N&\hspace*{2mm}0&0\\0&-N&0\\0&\hspace*{2mm}0&N^{2}\end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
so
\begin{equation}
\cm(\ro_{\mathrm{pure}})=||Q||=N,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
C(\ro_{\mathrm{pure}})=N+\frac{1}{2}N^{2}.
\end{equation}
Thus we arrive at the conclusion that for the correlated two qubit
pure states
\begin{equation}
N(\ro_{\mathrm{pure}})=D_{1}(\ro_{\mathrm{pure}})=\cm(\ro_{\mathrm{pure}})
< C(\ro_{\mathrm{pure}}).
\end{equation}
\subsection{Classically correlated mixed two qubit states}
We start the analysis of mixed two qubit states by considering so
called classical - quantum and classical - classical states. When we consider projective measurements
on subsystem $\cA$, there is a subclass of states which are left unperturbed by at least one such
measurement. Such "classical - quantum" states $\rocq$ have zero discord and are of the form
\begin{equation}
\rocq=\sum\limits_{k}p_{k}\, P_{k}^{\cA}\otimes \ro_{k}^{\cB},\label{rocq}
\end{equation}
where $\{P_{k}^{\cA}\}$ is a von Neumann measurement on $\cA$, $\{\ro_{k}^{\cB}\}$ are arbitray quantum states on $\cB$
and $\{p_{k}\}$ is the classical probability distribution. One can also consider fully classically correlated quantum states.
Such "classical - classical" states $\rocc$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
\rocc=\sum\limits_{j,k}p_{jk}P_{j}^{\cA}\otimes P_{k}^{\cB},\label{rocc}
\end{equation}
where $\{P_{j}^{\cA}\}$ and $\{P_{k}^{\cB}\}$ are von Neumann measurements on $\cA$ and $\cB$ respectively
and $\{p_{jk}\}$ is a two - dimensional probability distribution. In the case of two qubits, these states are defined in terms
of orthogonal projectors
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&P_{1}=\begin{pmatrix} \cos^{2}\te&\frac{1}{2}e^{-i\vf}\,\sin 2\te\\[2mm]
\frac{1}{2}e^{i\vf}\,\sin 2\te&\sin^{2}\te\end{pmatrix},\\[2mm]
&P_{2}=\begin{pmatrix} \sin^{2}\te&-\frac{1}{2}e^{-i\vf}\,\sin 2\te\\[2mm]
-\frac{1}{2}e^{i\vf}\,\sin 2\te&\cos^{2}\te\end{pmatrix}.
\end{split}\label{P1P2}
\end{equation}
In particular
\begin{equation}
\rocq=p_{1}\,P_{1}\otimes \ro_{1}^{\cB}+p_{2}\,P_{2}\otimes
\ro_{2}^{\cB},\label{rocq2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\ro_{1,2}^{\cB}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\I+\tl{a}_{1,2}\cdot
\sib\right),\label{roB}
\end{equation}
and the vectors $\tl{a}_{1,2}\in \R^{3}$ satisfy $||\tl{a}_{1,2}||\leq 1$. Similarly, up to the local unitary
equivalence, the states $\ro_{cc}$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
\ro_{cc}=\sum\limits_{j,k=1}^{2}p_{jk}\,P_{j}\otimes
P_{k}.\label{rocc2}
\end{equation}
Since the states $\rocq$ and $\rocc$ have zero discord only
maximal mutual correlation and correlation distance can be greater then zero.
\par
Let us start with
classical - quantum state. By a direct calculations one shows that
\begin{equation}
\cm(\rocq)=2\,p_{1}p_{2}\, ||\tl{a}_{1}-\tl{a}_{2}||,\label{cmcq}
\end{equation}
where $||\cdot||$ is the euclidean norm in $\R^{3}$. The factor
$2\,p_{1}p_{2}$ in (\ref{cmcq}) can be interpreted in terms of the
statistical properties of a discrete classical random variable. Let
$X$ be the random variable with values in the set $\{-1,+1\}$ and
probability distribution
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Prob}\{X=+1\}=p_{1},\quad \mathrm{Prob}\{X=-1\}=p_{2}.
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{equation}
\left(\mathrm{Var} X\right)^{2}=4\,p_{1}p_{2}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\cm(\ro_{cq})=\frac{1}{2}\,\left(\mathrm{Var}
X\right)^{2}\,||\tl{a}_{1}-\tl{a}_{2}||.\label{cmrocq}
\end{equation}
Notice that in this case maximal mutual correlation depends on the classical probability distribution
defining the state $\rocq$ but also contains some information about the properties of quantum states of the
subsystem $\cB$. The largest possible value of $\cm(\rocq)$ is achieved for $p_{1}=p_{2}=1/2$ and when
the Bloch vectors
$\tl{a}_{1},\; \tl{a}_{2}$ are normalized and satisfy $\tl{a}_{2}=-\, \tl{a}_{1}$ i.e. when the states
$\ro_{1}^{\cB},\; \ro_{2}^{\cB}$ are projectors on orthogonal one - dimensional subspaces. But such state
is the instance
of classical - classical state (\ref{rocc2}), so for the genuine classical - quantum state $\cm(\rocq)<1$.
\par
In the case of general classical - classical state (\ref{rocc2}) the
calculations show that $\cm(\rocc)$ depends only on the properties
of classical probability distribution $\{p_{jk}\}$. One can check
that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\cm(\rocc)=\big|&(p_{11}-p_{22})^{2}-(p_{12}-p_{21})^{2}\\
&+p_{12}+p_{21}-p_{11}-p_{22}\,\big|.\label{cmrocc}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In this case, the right hand side of (\ref{cmrocc}) can be
interpreted as the modulus of covariance of two discrete random
variables $X$ and $Y$ with values in the set $\{-1,+1\}$. This can
be proved by considering the following join probability distribution
of $X$ and $Y$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\mathrm{Prob}\,\{X=+1,\, Y=+1\}=p_{11},\\
&\mathrm{Prob}\,\{X=+1,\, Y=-1\}=p_{12},\\
&\mathrm{Prob}\,\{X=-1,\, Y=+1\}=p_{21},\\
&\mathrm{Prob}\,\{X=-1,\, Y=-1\}=p_{11}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Since
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\sr{X}=p_{11}+p_{12}-p_{21}-p_{22},\\
&\sr{Y}=p_{11}+p_{21}-p_{12}-p_{22}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\sr{XY}=p_{11}+p_{22}-p_{12}-p_{21},
\end{equation}
then
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathrm{Cov}\,(X,Y)=&p_{11}+p_{22}-p_{12}-p_{21}\\
&+(p_{12}-p_{21})^{2}-(p_{11}-p_{22})^{2}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
So
\begin{equation}
\cm(\rocc)=\big|\,\mathrm{Cov}\,(X,Y)\,\big|.
\end{equation}
Concerning the correlation distance, the states $\rocq$ and $\rocc$
have interesting property: in both cases correlation distance equals
to maximal mutual correlation
\begin{equation}
\cm(\rocq)=C(\rocq),\quad \cm(\rocc)=C(\rocc).
\end{equation}
In particular $C(\rocc)$ is given by covariance of classical random
variables.
\subsection{Some separable states with non - zero discord}
Consider now the following class of two qubit states
\begin{equation}
\ro_{d}=\begin{pmatrix} w&0&0&s\\0&w&s&0\\0&s&\frac{1}{2}-w&0\\
s&0&0&\frac{1}{2}-w\end{pmatrix},\label{rod}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
0<w<\frac{1}{2}, \quad 0<s\leq s_{\mr{max}}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
s_{\mr{max}}=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}w-w^{2}}.
\end{equation}
The states (\ref{rod}) are separable, but
\begin{equation}
D_{1}(\ro_{d})=\frac{\DS 4s\,|1-4w|}{\DS \sqrt{16s^{2}+(1-4w)^{2}}}.
\end{equation}
Thus for all $w\in (0,1/2)$ except of $w=1/4$ and admissible $s$,
$\ro_{d}$ has non - zero discord. On the other hand, for such states
the covariance matrix $Q$ is very simple and equals to
\begin{equation}
Q=\begin{pmatrix}4s&0&0\\0&0&0\\0&0&0\end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
so
\begin{equation}
\cm(\ro_{d})=C(\ro_{d})=4s
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
D_{1}(\ro_{d})<\cm(\ro_{d})=C(\ro_{d})
\end{equation}
\subsection{Some entangled states }
Now we take the states which are entangled. Consider the following family of
two qubit states \cite{Mizra}
\begin{equation}
\ro_{\te}=\begin{pmatrix}\frac{1}{2}\cos^{2}\te&0&0&\frac{1}{4}\sin 2\te\\[2mm]
0&0&0&0\\[2mm]
0&0&\frac{1}{2}&0\\[2mm]
\frac{1}{4}\sin 2\te&0&0&\frac{1}{2}\sin^{2}\te
\end{pmatrix},\label{rote}
\end{equation}
where $\te \in (0,\pi/2)$. For this family we have
\begin{equation}
N(\ro_{\te})=\frac{\DS \sqrt{6-2\cos 4\te}-2}{\DS 4}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
D_{1}(\ro_{\te})=\frac{1}{2}\sin 2\te.
\end{equation}
Moreover, the covariance matrix equals to
\begin{equation}
Q=\begin{pmatrix} \frac{1}{2}\sin 2\te&0&0\\[2mm]0&-\frac{1}{2}\sin 2\te&0\\[2mm] 0&0&\frac{1}{4}\sin^{2} 2\te
\end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
so
\begin{equation}
\cm(\ro_{\te})=\frac{1}{2}\sin 2\te
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
C(\ro_{\te})=\frac{1}{2}\sin 2\te +\frac{1}{8}\sin^{2} 2\te.
\end{equation}
Thus
\begin{equation}
N(\ro_{\te})<D_{1}(\ro_{\te})=\cm(\ro_{\te})<C(\ro_{\te})
\end{equation}
for all $\te\in (0,\pi/2)$.
\subsection{General class of Bell - diagonal states}
Consider now the states of the form
\begin{equation}
\ro_{\mathrm{BD}}=\frac{1}{4}\,\left(\I\otimes \I+\sum\limits_{j=1}^{3}c_{j}\,\si{j}\otimes\si{j}\,\right),\label{BD}
\end{equation}
where $\tl{c}=(c_{1},\, c_{2},\, c_{3})$ is a three - dimensional real vector. Define also
\begin{equation}
c_{+}=\max\, \left(|c_{1}|,\, |c_{2}|,\, |c_{3}|\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
c_{0}=\mathrm{int}\,\left(|c_{1}|,\, |c_{2}|,\, |c_{3}|\right)\label{int}
\end{equation}
where (\ref{int}) represents intermediate among the numbers $|c_{1}|,\, |c_{2}|$ and $|c_{3}|$. It is known that \cite{Paula}
\begin{equation}
D_{1}(\ro_{\mathrm{BD}})=c_{0}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
N(\ro_{\mathrm{BD}})\leq D_{1}(\ro_{\mathrm{BD}}).
\end{equation}
On the other hand, corresponding correlation matrix $Q$ is also diagonal and reads
\begin{equation}
Q=\begin{pmatrix} c_{1}&0&0\\0&c_{2}&0\\0&0&c_{3}\end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
so
\begin{equation}
\cm(\ro_{\mathrm{BD}})=c_{+}.
\end{equation}
Since $c_{0}\leq c_{+}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
N(\ro_{\mathrm{BD}})\leq D_{1}(\ro_{\mathrm{BD}})\leq \cm(\ro_{\mathrm{BD}})\leq C(\ro_{\mathrm{BD}}).
\end{equation}
\section{Conclusions}
In this note we have studied bipartite correlations in the algebraic
formulation of quantum mechanics. The proposed measure of
correlations, called maximal mutual correlation, is a generalization
of a natural measure of nonseparability of pure states. In the case
of pure qubit states, such measure equals to entanglement, but for
mixed states it can be non - zero also for classically correlated
quantum states. As we have shown on explicit examples, maximal
mutual correlation is greater or equal to quantum discord and is
always dominated by the correlation distance.
|
\section*{Introduction}
Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity measures the homological complexity of a graded module, and is therefore central to understanding coherent sheaves on $\mathbb{P}^N$. If we restrict our attention to sheaves supported on an \textit{irregular} smooth subvariety $X \subset \mathbb{P}^N,$ the Fourier-Mukai methods developed by Pareschi and Popa in \cite{PP1,PP3,PP4} can also be brought to bear. In this note, we investigate how the Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity of such sheaves interacts with this "Fourier-Mukai geometry."
The interactions described by our results depend on whether the generalized Brill-Noether locus associated to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ contains a sufficiently positive curve. It is classically known that such curves exist when ${\rm dim}(X) = 1;$ the picture when ${\rm dim}(X) \geq 2$ is not yet clear, even though some dimension estimates exist for generalized Brill-Noether loci \cite{CP,MPP}. We expect recent advances in the positivity theory of cycles (e.g.~ \cite{FL}) to play a role in further progress on the questions raised here.
Turning to details, if $X$ is a smooth projective variety, $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is an ample and globally generated line bundle on $X,$ and $\mc{F}$ is a coherent sheaf on $X$ supported in dimension $\geq 1,$ the \textit{CM (Castelnuovo-Mumford) regularity} of $\mc{F}$ on $X$ with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
{\rm reg}_{\mc{O}_{X}(1)}(\mc{F}) := \min\{ m \in \mathbb{Z} : {\forall}i > 0~ H^{i}(\mc{F}(m-i))=0\}
\end{equation}
In addition to measuring the complexity of $\mc{F},$ CM-regularity also helps measure the positivity of $\mc{F}$; the Castelnuovo-Mumford lemma implies that $\mc{F}(m)$ is globally generated for all $m \geq {\rm reg}_{\mc{O}_{X}(1)}(\mc{F})$, while $\mc{F}(m)$ may not have any global sections at all if $m < {\rm reg}_{\mc{O}_{X}(1)}(\mc{F}).$ In what follows, a polarization is understood to be a line bundle which is globally generated as well as ample.
We are interested in the CM-regularity of a coherent sheaf $\mc{F}$ on $X$ in the case $H^{1}(\mc{O}_{X}) \neq 0,$ where the \textit{cohomological support loci}
\begin{equation}
V^{i}(\mc{F}) := \{\alpha \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(X) : H^{i}(\mc{F} \otimes \alpha) \neq 0\}, \hskip5pt 0 \leq i \leq {\rm dim}(X)
\end{equation}
are fundamentally important. The dimensions of the $V^{i}(\mc{F})$ are invariant under tensoring by elements of ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$; however, the CM regularity of $\mc{F}$ is generally not. We define the \textit{continuous CM-regularity of $\mc{F}$ with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$} as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cont-cm}
{\rm reg}^{\rm cont}_{\mc{O}_{X}(1)}(\mc{F}) := \min\{ m \in \mathbb{Z} : {\forall}i > 0~ V^{i}(\mc{F}(m-i)) \neq {\rm Pic}^{0}(X)\}
\end{equation}
This gives a slightly coarser measure of positivity than CM-regularity; see Lemma \ref{lem:cgg} for a precise statement. The structure of cohomological support loci was addressed in \cite{GL} and \cite{Ha}, and their connections with positivity were pursued in \cite{De,PP1,PP4}. A key notion in these papers, as well as this note, is the following: $\mc{F}$ is said to be a \textit{GV-sheaf} if ${\rm codim}(V^{i}(\mc{F})) \geq i$ for all $i > 0.$ This property can be viewed as a weak form of positivity in at least one sense; when the Albanese map of $X$ is finite, the stronger condition that ${\rm codim}(V^{i}(\mc{F})) > i$ for all $i > 0$ (this is known as \textit{M-regularity}) implies that $\mc{F}$ is ample (\cite{De}, Corollary 3.2).
In recent years a special class of sheaves with CM-regularity 0 on a polarized variety of dimension $n \geq 1$ has been intensely studied; this is the class of \textit{Ulrich bundles}, i.e.~ vector bundles whose twist by $-i$ has no cohomology for $1 \leq i \leq n.$ Very recently, Beauville produced a family of rank-2 Ulrich bundles on abelian surfaces via the Serre method \cite{Bea}. Each rank-2 bundle $\mc{F}$ arising from his construction has the property that $\mc{F}(1)$ is Ulrich; in particular $\mc{F}$ has CM-regularity 1. It can be verified directly that this $\mc{F}$ is a GV-sheaf. On a different note, every polarized curve admits an Ulrich bundle $\mc{E}$ (e.g.~ \cite{ESW}) and the vanishing $H^{1}(\mc{E}(-1))=0$ implies that $\mc{E}( -1)$ is a GV-sheaf in this case.
Since the Ulrich property is an open condition on families of vector bundles, it follows that in general the twist of any Ulrich bundle by $-1$ has continuous CM-regularity equal to 1. Given that irrational curves and abelian surfaces are the only irregular varieties currently known to admit Ulrich bundles, one can ask if the twist of an Ulrich bundle by $-1$ is always a GV-sheaf. Our results address the following question, which is broader in scope.
\medskip
\noindent{$(\star)$ Let $X$ be a smooth projective variety of dimension $n \geq 1$ and let $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ be an ample and globally generated line bundle on $X.$ If $\mc{F}$ is a torsion-free sheaf on $X$ satisfying ${\rm reg}^{\rm cont}_{\mc{O}_{X}(1)}(\mc{F}) \leq 1,$ is $\mc{F}$ a GV-sheaf?}
\medskip
Note that we trivially have an affirmative answer when $H^{1}(\mc{O}_{X})=0.$ One of the motivations for the study of M-regularity and related concepts in \cite{PP1} was to understand subvarieties of abelian varieties via the kind of insight that Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity provides for subvarieties of projective space. Theorems of this type can be found in \cite{PP1,PP2,PP3} and more recently in \cite{LN}. Our inquiries point in a different direction, since we are interested in deducing generic vanishing statements from "honest" Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity.
Our first result highlights the importance of the generalized Brill-Noether locus $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1)).$ Even though the conclusion holds under a weaker hypothesis on $\mc{F},$ the present phrasing emphasizes the connection with $(\star).$
\begin{thma}
Let $X$ be a smooth projective variety of dimension $n \geq 1$, and let $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ be an ample and globally generated line bundle on $X$ satisfying the property that $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1))$ contains a curve $T$ whose numerical class is a proportional to a power of an ample divisor class on ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$ If $\mc{F}$ is a torsion-free sheaf on $X$ satisfying ${\rm reg}^{\rm cont}_{\mc{O}_{X}(1)}(\mc{F}) \leq 1,$ then ${\rm codim}(V^{n}(\mc{F})) \geq n.$
\end{thma}
The hypothesis on $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is trivially satisfied whenever $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1))={\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$ An Euler characteristic calculation shows that this holds if $h^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1)) > 1$ and $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is a GV-sheaf; by Corollary C of \cite{PP4}, any globally generated adjunction of a nef line bundle has this property when $X$ has maximal Albanese dimension. See Remark \ref{rem:symmetric} for a family of examples satisfying $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1)) \neq {\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$
The next result follows easily from the proof of Theorem A (which will be discussed momentarily) but its assumption on $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is much weaker.
\begin{thmb}
Let $X$ be a smooth projective surface with $h^{1}(\mc{O}_{X}) > 0,$ and let $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ be an ample and globally generated line bundle on $X$ such that $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1))$ contains a curve $T$ whose numerical class lies in the interior of the cone of curves of ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$ Then $(\star)$ has an affirmative answer for $(X,\mc{O}_{X}(1))$.
\end{thmb}
The following consequence, immediate from Kawamata-Viehweg vanishing, implies that if $\mc{E}$ is any Ulrich bundle on a polarized abelian surface then $\mc{E}(-1)$ is a GV-sheaf. It is worth noting that Beauville's Ulrich bundles, for which this can be checked explicitly, only account for a hypersurface in the relevant moduli space (Remark 3, \cite{Bea}).
\begin{corc}
If $X$ is a smooth projective surface and $\mc{L}$ is a nef and big line bundle on $X$ for which $\mc{O}_{X}(1) := \omega_{X} \otimes \mc{L}$ is ample and globally generated, then $(\star)$ has an affirmative answer for $(X,\mc{O}_{X}(1))$.
\end{corc}
We also use Theorem B to obtain a positive answer to $(\star)$ for some natural polarizations on Cartesian and symmetric products of curves (Propositions \ref{prop:prod-curves} and \ref{prop:sym-sq}, respectively) and for all polarizations on some surfaces isogenous to a product of curves (Proposition \ref{prop:isog-prod}).
The idea behind our proofs of Theorems A and B is to use the curve $T \subseteq V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1))$ to construct a ``large enough" positive cycle in ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ that does not intersect $V^{n}(\mc{F}).$ For Theorem A, this cycle is a Pontryagin product of $T$ (Definition \ref{def:pont-prod}), and we use a calculation from \cite{DELV} to show that its numerical class is proportional to a product of ample divisors (Lemma \ref{lem:delv}). Our construction suggests a roadmap for settling $(\star)$ in the affirmative: take a sufficiently positive curve $T$ in ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ and for $1 \leq i \leq n-1,$ prove that the $(i-1)$st Pontryagin product of $T$ intersects every effective cycle of codimension $i-1$ but does not intersect $V^{i}(\mc{F}).$ Up to now we have been unable to carry this out in full generality. However, we have verified $(\star)$ for some scrollar embeddings of ruled threefolds over a curve (Proposition \ref{thm:3fold}).
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Acknowledgments:} I would like to thank Alex K\"{u}ronya, Rita Pardini and Mihnea Popa for useful discussions and correspondence related to this work, and for valuable comments on a preliminary draft.
\medskip
\section{Preliminaries}
Throughout, we work over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. In what follows, $X$ is a smooth projective variety of dimension $n \geq 1,$ $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is an ample and globally generated line bundle on $X,$ and $\mc{F}$ is a coherent sheaf on $X$ supported in dimension $\geq 1.$
\subsection{Continuous CM-regularity}
We discuss the definition (\ref{eq:cont-cm}) in more detail.
\begin{defn}
If $k \in \mathbb{Z},$ we say $\mc{F}$ is continuously $k-$regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ if for $1 \leq i \leq n$ we have that $V^{i}(\mc{F}(k-i)) \neq {\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$
\end{defn}
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:basic-cont-reg}
The following are equivalent:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]{$\mc{F} \otimes \alpha$ is continuously $k-$regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ for all $\alpha \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$}
\item[(ii)]{$\mc{F}$ is continuously $k-$regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$}.
\item[(iii)]{$\mc{F} \otimes \alpha$ is continuously $k-$regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ for some $\alpha \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$}
\item[(iv)]{$\mc{F} \otimes \alpha$ is $k-$regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ in the sense of Castelnuovo-Mumford for some $\alpha \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$ \hfill \qedsymbol}
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The implications ${\rm (i)} \Rightarrow {\rm (ii)} \Rightarrow {\rm (iii)} \Rightarrow {\rm (iv)}$ are all immediate. For ${\rm (iv)} \Rightarrow {\rm (i)},$ observe that for all $i$ the dimension of $V^{i}(\mc{F}(k-i))$ is invariant under tensoring by elements of ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$
\end{proof}
The next statement follows from combining (iv) of Lemma \ref{lem:basic-cont-reg} with the corresponding property of Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity.
\begin{cor}
If $\mc{F}$ is continuously $k-$regular, then $\mc{F}$ is continuously $k'-$regular for all $k' \geq k.$ \hfill \qedsymbol
\end{cor}
\begin{defn}
The continuous CM-regularity of $\mc{F}$ with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is the smallest integer $k$ for which $\mc{F}$ is continuously $k-$regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1);$ we denote it by ${\rm reg}^{\rm cont}_{\mc{O}_{X}(1)}(\mc{F}).$
\end{defn}
We conclude this subsection with evidence for our earlier assertion that continuous CM-regularity helps measure positivity. Recall that a coherent sheaf $\mc{F}$ on $X$ is \textit{continuously globally generated} if there is a nonempty Zariski-open subset $U \subseteq {\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ such that the evaluation map
\begin{equation}
\bigoplus_{\alpha \in U}H^{0}(\mc{F} \otimes \alpha) \otimes \alpha^{\vee} \to \mc{F}
\end{equation}
is surjective. The following fact is immediate from (iv) of Lemma \ref{lem:basic-cont-reg}.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:cgg}
If $\mc{F}$ is continuously $k-$regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1),$ then $\mc{F}(k)$ is continuously globally generated. In particular, $\mc{F}(k)$ is nef. \hfill \qedsymbol
\end{lem}
\begin{rem}
One of the main results in \cite{PP1} is that the M-regularity of a coherent sheaf on an abelian variety implies continuous global generation. In light of Lemma \ref{lem:cgg} and the line of inquiry suggested by $(\star),$ it is natural to ask whether 0-regularity with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ implies M-regularity.
\end{rem}
\subsection{Numerical Cycle Classes and Pontryagin Products}
We now collect some statements on intersections of cycles that will be used in the sequel. In what follows, $X$ is a smooth projective variety of dimension $n \geq 1.$
\begin{defn}
For $0 \leq k \leq n,$ $N_{k}(X) := N_{k}(X)_{\mathbb{Z}} \otimes \mathbb{R},$ where $N_{k}(X)_{\mathbb{Z}}$ is the group of algebraic $k-$cycles modulo numerical equivalence. The numerical dual group $N^{k}(X)$ is the dual of $N_{k}(X).$
\end{defn}
Since the evaluation pairing $N^{k}(X) \times N_{k}(X) \to \mathbb{R}$ can be identified with an intersection pairing, we view $N^{k}(X)$ as parametrizing numerical classes of cycles of codimension $k.$ The following result on intersections of divisors will be used in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:prod-curves}.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:pi-exc}
Let $Y$ and $Z$ be projective varieties of respective dimensions $m$ and $n,$ and let $\pi_{Y}$ and $\pi_{Z}$ be the projections from $Y \times Z$ to $Y$ and $Z$. Let $D$ be a nef divisor on $Y \times Z,$ and let $H, H_{Y}, H_{Z}$ be ample divisors on $Y \times Z,$ $Y$ and $Z,$ respectively. Then if $D \cdot H \cdot \pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y}^{m-1} \cdot \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z}^{n-1} = 0$ we have $D = 0.$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The ampleness of $H_{Y}$ and $H_{Z}$ implies that $\pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y}^{m-1} \cdot \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z}^{n-1}$ is proportional to the numerical class of a surface in $Y \times Z.$ Since $D$ is nef, it is a limit of ample divisor classes, so $D \cdot \pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y}^{m-1} \cdot \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z}^{n-1}$ is in the closed cone of curves in $N_{1}(Y \times Z).$ Given that its intersection with $H$ is zero by hypothesis, the fact that $H$ is in the interior of the nef cone of $X$ implies that $D \cdot \pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y}^{m-1} \cdot \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z}^{n-1}=0.$
It follows at once that $D \cdot \pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y}^{m} \cdot \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z}^{n-1}=D \cdot \pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y}^{m-1} \cdot \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z}^{n}=0.$ Consequently, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{tiny}
D \cdot (\pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y} + \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z})^{m+n-1} = D \cdot \biggl(\binom{m+n-1}{m-1}\pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y}^{m-1} \cdot \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z}^{n} + \binom{m+n-1}{m}\pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y}^{m}\cdot \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z}^{n-1} \biggr)=0
\end{tiny}
\end{equation*}
Since $\pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y} + \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z}$ is ample, the class $(\pi_{Y}^{\ast}H_{Y} + \pi_{Z}^{\ast}H_{Z})^{m+n-1}$ is proportional to the class of a complete intersection curve on $Y \times Z,$ and therefore lies in the interior of the cone of curves in $N_{1}(Y \times Z),$ so that our nef divisor $D$ is $0.$
\end{proof}
Specializing to the case where $X$ is an abelian variety, we now introduce the main tool in the proof of Theorem A.
\begin{defn}
\label{def:pont-prod}
If $X$ is an abelian variety of dimension $g \geq 1,$ $T$ is a subvariety of $X,$ and $1 \leq k \leq g,$ the $k-$th Pontryagin product $T^{\ast (k)}$ of $T$ is the image of $T^{k}$ under the addition map $\sigma^{k} : X^{k} \to X.$
\end{defn}
\noindent
Note that when $\text{dim}(T)=1,$ the dimension of $T^{\ast (k)}$ is equal to ${\rm min}\{k,g\}.$ The following result is an immediate consequence of Lemma 1.9(a) in \cite{DELV}.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:delv}
Let $X$ be an abelian variety of dimension $g \geq 2,$ and let $\alpha \in N_{k}(X)$ be given, where $1 \leq k \leq g-1.$ If $H$ is an ample divisor class on $X$ and $T \subset X$ is a curve whose numerical class is proportional to $H^{g-1},$ then for $1 \leq k \leq g-1$ the numerical class of $T^{\ast (k)}$ is a positive multiple of $H^{g-k}.$ \hfill \qedsymbol
\end{lem}
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:bn-locus}
For $1 \leq d \leq g$ and $\mc{L} \in {\rm Pic}^{d}(C),$ the numerical class of $V^{0}(\mc{L})$ in $N^{g-d}({\rm Pic}^{0}(C))$ is a positive rational multiple of $\theta^{g-d},$ where $\theta \in N^{1}({\rm Pic}^{0}(C))$ is the numerical class of the theta-divisor, and the image $V^{0}(\mc{L})^{-}$ of $V^{0}(\mc{L})$ under inversion on ${\rm Pic}^{0}(C)$ is numerically equivalent to $V^{0}(\mc{L}).$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The statement about the numerical class of $V^{0}(\mc{L})$ follows from Theorem (1.3) on p. 212 of \cite{ACGH}, and the invariance of this class under inversion follows from the invariance of $\theta$ under inversion.
\end{proof}
\section{Proofs of Theorems A and B}
\noindent
Theorem A is an immediate consequence of the following stronger statement.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:top-codim}
Let $X$ be a smooth projective variety of dimension $n \geq 2$ and irregularity $q \geq 1,$ and let $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ be an ample and globally generated line bundle on $X$ such that $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1))$ contains a curve $T$ algebraically equivalent to a complete intersection of algebraically equivalent ample divisors on ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$. Then if $\mc{F}$ is a torsion-free sheaf on $X$ for which $H^{n}(\mc{F}(1-n))=0,$ we have that ${\rm codim}(V^{n}(\mc{F})) \geq n.$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We consider the $(n-1)$st Pontryagin product of $T,$ which has the set-theoretic description
\begin{equation}
T^{\ast (n-1)} = \{\alpha_{1} \otimes \cdots \otimes \alpha_{n-1} : \alpha_{1}, \cdots ,\alpha_{n-1} \in T\}
\end{equation}
Fix $\overline{\alpha} := \alpha_{1} \otimes \cdots \otimes \alpha_{n-1} \in T^{\ast (n-1)}.$ Then for each $j$ there exists an effective divisor $D_{j} \in |\mc{O}_{X}(1) \otimes \alpha_{j}|.$ If $D_{\overline{\alpha}}:= \sum_{j}D_{j},$ we have an exact sequence
\begin{equation}
0 \to \mc{F}(1-n) \to \mc{F} \otimes \overline{\alpha} \to \mc{F}|_{D_{\overline{\alpha}}} \otimes \overline{\alpha} \to 0
\end{equation}
It follows at once from our hypothesis on $\mc{F}$ that $H^{n}(\mc{F} \otimes \overline{\alpha}) = 0.$ Letting $\overline{\alpha}$ vary over $T^{\ast (n-1)},$ we conclude that $V^{n}(\mc{F}) \cap T^{\ast (n-1)} = \emptyset.$
There are now two cases to consider. If $n \leq q,$ then by Lemma \ref{lem:delv} and our hypothesis on $T,$ we have that $T^{\ast (n-1)}$ is an $(n-1)-$dimensional subvariety of ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ whose cycle class is proportional to a product of ample classes by Lemma \ref{lem:delv}. In particular, $T^{\ast (n-1)}$ must intersect every subvariety of ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ having codimension at most $n-1.$ It follows that ${\rm codim}V^{n}(\mc{F}) \geq n.$ On the other hand, if $n > q,$ then $T^{\ast (n-1)} = {\rm Pic}^{0}(X),$ so that $V^{n}(\mc{F}) = \emptyset.$
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
\label{rem:symmetric}
For every $n \geq 2$ there is an $n-$dimensional variety $X$ and a line bundle $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ on $X$ satisfying the hypothesis of Theorem A for which $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1)) \neq {\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$ Let $C$ be a smooth projective curve of genus $g \geq 6,$ and let $X:=C^{(n)}$ be its $n-$th symmetric product. The image of the injective map $f_{n} : {\rm Pic}^{0}(C) \to {\rm Pic}^{0}(C^{n}) \cong {\rm Pic}^{0}(C)^{n}$ defined by $f_{n}(\alpha) = \alpha^{\boxtimes n}$ is the locus invariant under the action of the symmetric group, so $f_{n}$ factors canonically through an isomorphism $f_{(n)} : {\rm Pic}^{0}(C) \to {\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$ If $\mc{O}_{C}(1)$ is an ample and globally generated line bundle on $C$ of degree $d < g-3$, there is a line bundle $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ on $X$ whose pullback via the quotient map $\pi : C^{n} \to X$ is isomorphic to $\mc{O}_{C}(1)^{\boxtimes n}.$ By the calculations in Section 6.1 of \cite{Iz} we have for all $\alpha \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(C)$ an isomorphism
\begin{equation}
H^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1) \otimes f_{(n)}(\alpha)) \cong {\rm Sym}^{n}H^{0}(\mc{O}_{C}(1) \otimes \alpha).
\end{equation}
It follows that restricting $f_{(n)}$ to $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C}(1))$ induces an isomorphism $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C}(1)) \cong V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1)).$ Since the numerical class of $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C}(1))$ is proportional to $\theta^{g-d}$ by Proposition \ref{prop:bn-locus}, intersecting $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C}(1))$ with $d-1$ general divisors of numerical class $2\theta$ produces a curve in $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1))$ whose numerical class is proportional to a power of an ample divisor.
\end{rem}
\noindent
\textit{Proof of Theorem B:} By Lemma \ref{lem:basic-cont-reg}, we may assume without loss of generality that $\mc{F}$ is 1-regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1).$ Then $H^{1}(\mc{F})=0,$ and it is immediate that ${\rm codim}(V^{1}(\mc{F})) \geq 1.$
Setting $n=2$ in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:top-codim}, we can also conclude that $V^{2}(\mc{F}) \cap T = \emptyset.$ Since ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ is an abelian variety, its cones of nef and pseudoeffective divisors are equal, so the interiors of their duals in $N^{q-1}({\rm Pic}^{0}(X))$ coincide as well; consequently $T$ must intersect every codimension-1 subvariety of ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$ It follows that ${\rm codim}(V^{2}(\mc{F})) \geq 2.$ \hfill \qedsymbol
\medskip
\section{Products of Curves}
We now give some applications of Theorem B. Observe that the hypothesis of the following result is satisfied when $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is the Segre product of ample and globally generated line bundles on $C_1$ and $C_2.$
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:prod-curves}
Let $C_1$ and $C_2$ be smooth projective curves of respective genera $g_{1}$ and $g_{2}$, and let $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ be an ample and globally generated line bundle on $X := C_1 \times C_2$ such that $|\mc{O}_{X}(1)(-F_{1}-F_{2})|$ is nonempty whenever $F_{1}$ and $F_{2}$ are fibers of the projections from $X$ to $C_{1}$ and $C_{2},$ respectively. Then $(\star)$ has an affirmative answer for $(X,\mc{O}_{X}(1)).$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to construct a curve in $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1))$ satisfying the hypothesis of Theorem B. For $i=1,2$ let $p_{i} : X \to C_{i}$ and $q_{i} : {\rm Pic}^{0}(X) \cong {\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{1}) \times {\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{2}) \to {\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{i})$ be projection maps, and fix a point $x_{i} \in C_{i}.$ If $F_{i} = p_{i}^{-1}(x_{i}),$ our hypothesis on $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ implies that for $\alpha_{1} \in V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_1}(x_{1}))$ and $\alpha_{2} \in V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{2}}(x_{2}))$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:alphas}
0 \neq H^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1)(-F_{1}-F_{2}) \otimes p_{1}^{\ast}\alpha_{1}^{\vee} \otimes p_{2}^{\ast}\alpha_{2}^{\vee}) \subseteq H^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1) \otimes p_{1}^{\ast}\alpha_{1}^{\vee} \otimes p_{2}^{\ast}\alpha_{2}^{\vee})
\end{equation}
For each $i$ the locus $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_i}(x_{i}))$ is the image of $C_{i}$ under an Abel-Jacobi embedding in ${\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{i})$. The canonical identification of ${\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{1}) \times {\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{2})$ with ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ is induced by the map $(\beta_{1}, \beta_{2}) \mapsto p_{1}^{\ast}\beta_{1} \otimes p_{2}^{\ast}\beta_{2},$ so if $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{i}}(x_{i}))^{-}$ is the image of $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{i}}(x_{i}))$ under inversion on ${\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{i})$ we have from (\ref{eq:alphas}) that
\begin{equation}
V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{1}}(x_{1}))^{-} \times V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{2}}(x_{1}))^{-} \cong q_{1}^{-1}V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{1}}(x_{1}))^{-} \cap q_{2}^{-1}V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{2}}(x_{1}))^{-} \subseteq V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1)).
\end{equation}
Let $H$ be a very ample divisor on ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$ Then the numerical cycle class defined by
\begin{equation}
\gamma := H \cdot q_{1}^{\ast}[V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{1}}(x_{1}))^{-}] \cdot q_{2}^{\ast}[V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{2}}(x_{2}))^{-}] \in N_{1}(X)
\end{equation}
represents a curve $\Gamma \subseteq V^{0}(\mc{O}_{X}(1))$ obtained by intersecting the surface $q_{1}^{-1}V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{1}}(x_{1}))^{-} \cap q_{2}^{-1}V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_{2}}(x_{1}))^{-}$ with a general divisor linearly equivalent to $H.$ We will be done once we show that $\gamma$ has positive intersection with every nonzero pseudoeffective divisor on ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$
Suppose $D$ is a pseudoeffective divisor on ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ such that $D \cdot \gamma = 0.$ Since ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ is an abelian variety, $D$ is nef. By Proposition \ref{prop:bn-locus} the classes $[V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_1}(x_{1}))^{-}]$ and $[V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C_2}(x_{2}))^{-}]$ are proportional to products of ample divisor classes on ${\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{1})$ and ${\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{2}),$ respectively; it then follows from Lemma \ref{lem:pi-exc} that $D = 0.$
\end{proof}
Combining the proof of Theorem B with the discussion from Remark \ref{rem:symmetric} yields the following result for symmetric squares of curves.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:sym-sq}
Let $C$ be a smooth projective curve of genus $g \geq 6,$ and let $\mc{O}_{C}(1)$ be an ample and globally generated line bundle of degree $d < g-3$ on $C.$ If $X = C^{(2)}$ and $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is a line bundle on $X$ whose pullback via the quotient map $\pi : C^{2} \to X$ is isomorphic to $\mc{O}_{C}(1)^{\boxtimes 2},$ then $(\star)$ has an affirmative answer for $(X,\mc{O}_{X}(1))$. \hfill \qedsymbol
\end{prop}
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:isog-prod}
Let $C_{1}$ and $C_{2}$ be nonisomorphic smooth projective curves that do not admit nontrivial correspondences, and let $G$ be a finite abelian group which acts freely on $C_{1} \times C_{2}$ and faithfully on $C_1$ and $C_2.$ If $X: = (C_{1} \times C_{2})/G$ and $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ is an ample and globally generated line bundle on $X,$ then $(\star)$ has an affirmative answer for $(X,\mc{O}_{X}(1)).$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to exhibit $\eta \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(A)$ such that $\mc{F} \otimes \eta$ is a GV-sheaf. Let $\pi: C_{1} \times C_{2} \to X$ be the quotient map; this is \'{e}tale by our hypothesis on the action of $G.$ By (1.1) of \cite{Pa}, we have that $\pi_{\ast}\mc{O}_{C_{1} \times C_{2}} \cong \mc{O}_{X} \oplus \mc{G},$ where $\mc{G}$ is a direct sum of nontrivial elements of ${\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$
By upper semicontinuity and Riemann-Roch, we may then choose $\eta \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ such that $h^{i}(\mc{F}(j) \otimes \eta \otimes \xi)= h^{i}(\mc{F}(j))$ for $0 \leq i \leq 2, j \in \mathbb{Z},$ and any $\xi \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(X)$ which is a direct summand of $\mc{G}.$ It follows that $\mc{F}' := \mc{F} \otimes \eta$ is 1-regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$. We will now show that $\mc{F}'$ (and therefore $\mc{F}$) is a GV-sheaf.
It is enough to show that $\pi^{\ast}\mc{F}'$ (which is torsion-free since $\pi$ is \'{e}tale) is 1-regular with respect to $\pi^{\ast}\mc{O}_{X}(1)$. Granting this for the moment, the absence of nontrivial correspondences on $C_{1} \times C_{2}$ implies the existence of ample and globally generated line bundles $\mc{O}_{C_{1}}(1),\mc{O}_{C_{2}}(1)$ on $C_{1},C_{2}$ resp.~ such that
\begin{equation}
\pi^{\ast}\mc{O}_{X}(1) \cong \mc{O}_{C_1}(1) \boxtimes \mc{O}_{C_2}(1)
\end{equation}
Since $\pi^{\ast}\mc{F}'$ is assumed to be 1-regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{C_1}(1) \boxtimes \mc{O}_{C_2}(1),$ Proposition \ref{prop:prod-curves} implies that $\pi^{\ast}\mc{F}'$ is a GV-sheaf on $C_{1} \times C_{2}.$ For any ${\eta}' \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(X),$ we have
\begin{equation}
H^{i}(\mc{F}' \otimes {\eta}') \subset H^{i}(\mc{F}' \otimes {\eta}' \otimes \pi_{\ast}\mc{O}_{C_{1} \times C_{2}}) \cong H^{i}(\pi^{\ast}\mc{F}' \otimes \pi^{\ast}{\eta}')
\end{equation}
\noindent
Consequently $\pi^{\ast}(V^{i}(\mc{E}'(-1))) \subseteq V^{i}(\pi^{\ast}\mc{F}').$ Since the map $\pi^{\ast} : {\rm Pic}^{0}(X) \to {\rm Pic}^{0}(C_{1} \times C_{2})$ is finite onto its image, we have
\begin{equation}
{\rm codim}(V^{i}(\mc{F}')) = {\rm codim}(\pi^{\ast}(V^{i}(\mc{F}'))) \geq {\rm codim}(V^{i}(\pi^{\ast}\mc{F}')) \geq i.
\end{equation}
\noindent
so that $\mc{F}'$ is a GV-sheaf as claimed.
To check that $\pi^{\ast}\mc{F}'$ is 1-regular with respect to $\pi^{\ast}\mc{O}_{X}(1),$ note that for $0 \leq i \leq 2$ and $j \in \mathbb{Z}$ we have that
\begin{equation}
H^{i}(\pi^{\ast}\mc{F}'(j)) \cong H^{i}(\mc{F}'(j) \otimes \pi_{\ast}\mc{O}_{C_{1} \times C_{2}}) \cong H^{i}(\mc{F}'(j)) \oplus H^{i}(\mc{F}'(j) \otimes \mc{G})
\end{equation}
Due the the vanishings guaranteed by our definition of $\mc{F}',$ we have that $\pi^{\ast}\mc{F}'$ is 1-regular as desired.
\end{proof}
\section{Ruled Threefolds}
The purpose of this final section is to prove the following result. Note that when the curve $C$ has large genus, there are many possibilities for $\mc{O}_{X}(1)$ that are not adjunctions.
\begin{prop}
\label{thm:3fold}
Let $C$ be a smooth projective curve of genus $g \geq 1,$ let $\mc{V}$ be an ample and globally generated vector bundle of rank 3 on $C,$ and let $X = \mathbb{P}(\mc{V})$ be the projectivization with structure map $\pi : X \to C.$ If $\mc{O}_{C}(1)$ is a globally generated line bundle of degree $d \geq g$ on $C$ and $\mc{O}_{X}(1) := \pi^{\ast}\mc{O}_{C}(1) \otimes \mc{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mc{V})}(1),$ then $(\star)$ has an affirmative answer for $(X,\mc{O}_{X}(1)).$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mc{F}$ be a torsion-free coherent sheaf which is 1-regular with respect to $\mc{O}_{X}(1).$ It is already clear that ${\rm codim}(V^{1}(\mc{F})) \geq 1;$ we will show that $V^{i}(\mc{F}) = \emptyset$ for $i=2,3.$
Fix reduced divisors $D' \in |\mc{O}_{C}(1)|$ and $Z \in |\mc{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\mc{V})}(1)|,$ and define $Y = \pi^{-1}(D').$ It is immediate that $H:=Y+Z \in |\mc{O}_{X}(1)|.$ Since $d \geq g,$ we have from Riemann-Roch that $V^{0}(\mc{O}_{C}(1)) = {\rm Pic}^{0}(C) \cong {\rm Pic}^{0}(X).$ For each $\alpha \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(C)$ we fix $D'_{\alpha} \in |\mc{O}_{C}(1) \otimes \alpha|$ and define $D_{\alpha} := \pi^{-1}(D'_{\alpha})+Z$; this is algebraically equivalent to $H.$ The 1-regularity hypothesis on $\mc{F}$ implies that for each $\alpha \in {\rm Pic}^{0}(C)$ and $i=2,3$ we have
\begin{equation}
H^{i}(\mc{F} \otimes \pi^{\ast}\alpha) = H^{i}(\mc{F} \otimes \mc{O}_{X}(D_{\alpha}-H)) \cong H^{i}(\mc{F}|_{D_{\alpha}} \otimes \pi^{\ast}\alpha)
\end{equation}
This vanishes for dimension reasons when $i=3$. It follows that $V^{3}(\mc{F}) = \emptyset.$ For the remaining case $i=2,$ we consider the Mayer-Vietoris sequence
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:mv-sequence}
0 \to (\mc{F} \otimes \pi^{\ast}\alpha)|_{D_{\alpha}} \to (\mc{F} \otimes \pi^{\ast}\alpha)|_{\pi^{-1}(D'_{\alpha})} \oplus (\mc{F} \otimes \pi^{\ast}\alpha)|_{Z} \to (\mc{F} \otimes \pi^{\ast}\alpha)|_{\pi^{-1}(D'_{\alpha}) \cap Z} \to 0
\end{equation}
Observe that $\pi^{-1}(D'_{\alpha})$ is the disjoint union of $d$ irreducible components, each of which is isomorphic to $\mathbb{P}^2.$ In particular, $\pi^{-1}(D'_{\alpha}) \cap Z$ is the disjoint union of $d$ smooth irreducible curves, each of which is a line in a copy of $\mathbb{P}^2.$ Since $\mc{F}(1)$ is globally generated and torsion-free, it follows that the torsion-free summand of the restriction of $\mc{F}$ to each irreducible component of $\pi^{-1}(D'_{\alpha}) \cap Z$ is a direct sum of line bundles of degree $-1$ or greater. Moreover, the restriction of $\pi^{\ast}\alpha$ to each component of $\pi^{-1}(D'_{\alpha})$ is trivial, so $H^{1}((\mc{F} \otimes \pi^{\ast}\alpha)|_{\pi^{-1}(D'_{\alpha}) \cap Z}) = H^{1}(\mc{F}|_{\pi^{-1}(D'_{\alpha}) \cap Z})=0.$ Consequently (\ref{eq:mv-sequence}) implies that $H^{2}((\mc{F} \otimes \pi_{1}^{\ast}\alpha)|_{D_{\alpha}})$ injects into $H^{2}((\mc{F} \otimes \alpha)|_{Y_{\alpha}}) \oplus H^{2}((\mc{F} \otimes \pi_{1}^{\ast}\alpha)|_{Z}).$ We will have shown that $V^{2}(\mc{F}) = \emptyset$ once we verify that $H^{2}((\mc{F} \otimes \alpha)|_{Y_{\alpha}})$ and $H^{2}((\mc{F} \otimes \pi_{1}^{\ast}\alpha)|_{Z})$ are both 0.
For the first summand, it is enough to check that $H^{2}(\mc{F}|_{Y_{\alpha}})=0.$ We already know that $H^{2}(\mc{F})=0,$ so $H^{2}(\mc{F}|_{Y_{\alpha}})$ injects into $H^{3}(\mc{F}(-Y_{\alpha})).$ Given that $2H$ is linearly equivalent to $(Y_{\alpha}+Z)+(Y_{-\alpha}+Z),$ we have that $H^{3}(\mc{F}(-Y_{\alpha}))$ is a quotient of $H^{3}(\mc{F}(-2)),$ which is 0.
For the second summand, we observe that $H^{2}((\mc{F} \otimes \pi^{\ast}\alpha)|_{Z}) \cong H^{1}(R^{1}\pi_{\ast}(\mc{F}|_{Z}) \otimes \alpha).$ Since $H^{1}(\mc{F}|_{Y_{\alpha} \cap Z})=0$ for all $\alpha$ by our previous argument, it follows from Grauert's theorem that $R^{1}\pi_{1\ast}(\mc{F}|_{Z})=0,$ so $H^{2}((\mc{F} \otimes \pi_{1}^{\ast}\alpha)|_{Z})=0$ as desired.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
The present paper is a continuation of \cite{1} in which a
reducibility result for the time dependent
Schr\"odinger equation
\begin{align}
\label{schro}
{\rm i} \dot\psi&=(H_0+\epsilon W(\omega t))\psi\ , \ x\in{\mathbb R}
\\
\label{H}
&H_0=-\partial_{xx}+V(x)\ ,
\end{align}
with $W$ a suitable unbounded perturbation was proved. The improvement
we get here is that we deal with a more general class of
perturbations. For example we prove here reducibility, if $V(x)\simeq
|x|^{2l}$, $l\geq1$, as $x\to\infty$, and
\begin{equation}
\label{W}
W(\omega t)=a_0(x,\omega t)-{\rm i} a_1(x,\omega t)\partial_x\ ,
\end{equation}
with $a_i$ functions of class $C^\infty$ fulfilling
\begin{align}
\label{a0}
\left|\partial_x^ka_0(x,\omega t)\right|&\preceq \langle
x\rangle^{\beta_2-k}\ ,\quad \beta_2<l\ ,
\\
\label{a1}
\left|\partial_x^ka_1(x,\omega t)\right|&\preceq \langle
x\rangle^{\beta_3-k}\ ,\quad \left\{
\begin{matrix}
\beta_3<l-1&{\rm if}&1<l\leq 2
\\
\beta_3<{l}/{2}&{\rm if}&2<l
\end{matrix}
\right.\ ;
\end{align}
in the case $l=1$, $a_1$ must vanish identically. The theory developed
in \cite{1} only allowed to deal with the case of polynomial $a_0$ and
$a_1$, but a faster growth at infinity of both $a_0$ and $a_1$ was
allowed.
As usual, boundedness of Sobolev norms and pure
point nature of the Floquet spectrum follow.
We recall that previous results on the reducibility problem for
perturbations of the Schr\"odinger equation have been obtained in
quite a number of papers for the superquadratic case with bounded or
unbounded perturbations (see in particular
\cite{DS96,DSV02,BG01,LY10,EK09}); in the quadratic case the only
available results deal with bounded perturbations
\cite{C87,W08,GT11,GP16}. The result of the present paper allows a
growth of the perturbation at infinity faster then all the previous
papers dealing with the one dimensional case (except \cite{1}). On the
other hand, we assume here that $W$ is a symbol with the property that
its derivatives of suffitiently high order decay fast at infinity
(essentially as in \eqref{a0},\eqref{a1}); this is not required in
most papers on reducibility. Concerning the higher dimensional case,
it is not clear if the present method can be extended in order to
deal with it.
The idea of the proof (following \cite{PT01,BBM14}, see also
\cite{Mtesi,FP15,BM16a}) is to use pseudo-differential calculus in order
to conjugate the original system to a system with a smoothing
perturbation and then to apply KAM theory. In the present paper we
just prove the smoothing result, since afterwards one can
apply the KAM type theorem of \cite{1} in order to conclude the
proof. From the technical point of view the result is obtained by
introducing a new class of symbols. However, when working with such a
class it becomes quite complicated to show that the function used to
generate the smoothing transformation is actually a symbol. The proof
of this property occupy the majority of the paper. We also would like
to mention that the class of symbols we use is a variant of the class
introduced by Hellfert and Robert in \cite{HR82}.
\noindent{\it Acknowledgments}. This paper originated from a series
of discussions with quite a lot of people. In particular I warmly
thank P. Baldi, R. Montalto and M. Procesi who explained to me in a
quite detailed way their works. During the preparation of the present
work I benefit of many suggestions and discussions with A. Maspero and
D. Robert. In particular D. Robert pointed to my attention (and often
explained me) the papers \cite{HR82,HR82D}. I also thank
B. Gr\'ebert for some relevant discussions on the Harmonic case.
\section{Statement of the Main Result}\label{main}
Fix a real number $l\geq 1$ and define the weights
\begin{equation}
\label{lam}
\lambda(x,\xi):=\left(1+\xi^2+|x|^{2l}\right)^{1/2l}\ ,\quad \langle x\rangle:=\sqrt{1+x^2}
\end{equation}
\begin{definition}
\label{Sm}
The space $S^{m_1,m_2}$ is the space of the symbols $g\in C^\infty({\mathbb R})$ such
that $\forall k_1,k_2\geq 0$ there exists $C_{k_1,k_2}$ with the
property that
\begin{equation}
\label{sm}
\left|\partial^{k_1}_\xi\partial^{k_2}_{x}g(x,\xi)\right|\leq
C_{k_1,k_2} \left[\lambda(x,\xi)\right]^{m_1-k_1l}\langle x\rangle^{m_2-k_2}\ .
\end{equation}
The best constants $C_{k_1,k_2}$ such that \eqref{sm} hold form a
family of seminorms for the space $S^{m_1,m_2}$.
\end{definition}
To a symbol $g\in S^{m_1,m_2}$ we associate its Weyl quantization, namely
the operator $g^w(x,D_x)$, $D_x:=-{\rm i} \partial_x$, defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{weyl}
G\psi(x)\equiv g^w(x,D_x)\psi(x):=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{{\mathbb R}^2}e^{{\rm i}(x-y)\cdot
\xi}g\left(\frac{x+y}{2};\xi\right) \psi(y)dyd\xi\ .
\end{equation}
{\it We will denote by a capital letter the Weyl
quantized of a symbol denoted with the corresponding lower case
letter.} The only exception will be the perturbation $W$ (we mainly
think of it as a potential).
In the following we will denote by
${\mathcal S}^{m_1,m_2}:=C^{\infty}({\mathbb T}^n,S^{m_1,m_2})$ the space of
$C^{\infty}$ functions on ${\mathbb T}^n$ with values in $S^{m_1,m_2}$.
The frequencies $\omega$ will be assumed to vary in the set
$$
\Omega:=[1,2]^{n}\ ,
$$
or in suitable closed subsets
$\widetilde\Omega$.
We denote by $S^{m_1,m_2}_N$ the space of the symbols which are only $N$ times
differentiable and fulfill the inequality \eqref{sm} only for
$k_1+k_2\leq N$. This is a Banach space with the norm
\begin{equation}
\label{Sn}
\norm{g}_{S^{m_1,m_2}_N}:=\sum_{k_1+k_2\leq
N}\sup_{(x,\xi)\in{\mathbb R}^2}\frac{\left|\partial^{k_2}_x
\partial_{\xi}^{k_1}g(x,\xi)
\right|}{[\lambda(x,\xi)]^{m_1-lk_1}\langle x\rangle^{m_2-k_2}}\ .
\end{equation}
We remark that for the space ${\mathcal S}^{m_1,m_2}$ a family of seminorms is given by
the standard norms of $C^M({\mathbb T}^n;S^{m_1,m_2}_N)$ as $M$ and $N$ vary.
In the case $l>1$, the potential $V$ defining $H_0$ is assumed to belong to
$S^{0,2l}$ to be symmetric, namely
\begin{equation}
\label{symV}
V(x)=V(-x)\ ,
\end{equation}
and furthermore to admit an asymptotic expansion of the
form
\begin{equation}
\label{quasi.1}
V(x)\sim|x|^{2l}+\sum_{j\geq 1} V_{2l-2j}(x)
\end{equation}
with $V_k$ homogeneous of degree $k$, namely s.t., $V_k(\rho
x)=\rho^kV(x)$, $\forall \rho>0$.
\noindent
We also assume that
\begin{align}
\label{V3}
V'(x)\not=0\ ,\quad \forall x\not=0\ .
\end{align}
\begin{remark}
\label{r.v.1}
The assumptions \eqref{symV}, \eqref{quasi.1} are used in order to
simplify the proofs of Lemmas \ref{lememd} and \ref{lemchi}; they can
probably be relaxed. Assumption \eqref{V3} can also be weakened in
order to deal with the case where the set of the critical points of
$V$ is bounded.
\end{remark}
\noindent
An example of a non-polynomial potential fulfilling the assumptions is
$$
V(x)=\langle x\rangle^{2l}\ .
$$
In the case $l=1$ we assume that
$$
V(x)=x^2\ .
$$
The unperturbed Hamiltonian $H_0$ is the quantization of the
classical Hamiltonian system with Hamiltonian function
\begin{equation}
\label{h0c}
h_0(x,\xi):=\xi^2+V(x)\ .
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
\label{periodic}
As a consequence of the assumptions above all the solutions of the
Hamiltonian system $h_0$ are periodic with a period $T(E)$ which
depends only on $E=h_0(x,\xi)$.
\end{remark}
We will denote by $\Phi^t_{h_0}$ the flow of the Hamiltonian system
\eqref{h0c}.
We denote by $\lambda_j^v$ the sequence of the eigenvalues of $H_0$.
In what follows we will identify $L^2$ with $\ell^2$ by introducing
the basis of the eigenvector of $H_0$.
We use the symbol ${\mathcal A}(x,\xi):=(1+h_0(x,\xi))^{\frac{l+1}{2l}}$ to
{\it define, for $s\geq 0$, the spaces ${\mathcal H}^s=D([{\mathcal A}^w(x,-{\rm i}
\partial_x)]^{s})$ (domain of the $s$- power of the operator
operator ${\mathcal A}^w(x,-{\rm i} \partial_x)$) endowed by
the graph norm}. For negative $s$, the space ${\mathcal H}^s$ is the dual of
${\mathcal H}^{-s}$.
We will denote by $B({\mathcal H}^{s_1};{\mathcal H}^{s_2})$ the space of bounded linear
operators from ${\mathcal H}^{s_1}$ to ${\mathcal H}^{s_2}$.
In order to state the assumptions on the perturbation we define the
average with respect to the flow of $h_0$:
\begin{equation}
\label{mediaW}
\langle
W\rangle(x,\xi,\omega t):=\frac{1}{T(E)}\int_0^{T(E)}W(\Phi^\tau_{h_0}(x,\xi),\omega
t)d\tau\ ;
\end{equation}
then, for $m\in{\mathbb R}$, we denote
\begin{equation}
\label{quad}
[m]:=\max\left\{0,m\right\}\ .
\end{equation}
Concerning the perturbation, we assume that $W\in
{\mathcal S}^{\beta_1,\beta_2}$ and we define
\begin{equation}
\label{betatilde}
\tilde\beta:=\left\{
\begin{matrix}
2\beta_1+[\beta_2]+[\beta_2-1]-2l+1 & {\rm if} \quad\langle W\rangle\equiv
0 \ {\rm and}\ l>1
\\
\beta_1+[\beta_2] & {\rm otherwise}
\end{matrix}
\right.\ .
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}
\label{m.1}
Assume $$\tilde\beta<l\quad {\rm and }\quad
\beta_1+[\beta_2]<2l-1\ ,$$ then there exists $\epsilon_*>0$ and
$\forall \left|\epsilon\right|<\epsilon_*$ a closed set
$\Omega(\epsilon)\subset\Omega$ and, $\forall
\omega\in\Omega(\epsilon)$ there exists a unitary (in $L^2$) time
quasiperiodic map $U_\omega(\omega t)$ s.t. defining $\varphi$ by
$U_\omega(\omega t)\varphi=\psi $, it satisfies the equation
\begin{equation}
\label{rido}
{\rm i} \dot \varphi= H_{\infty}\varphi\ ,
\end{equation}
with $H_{\infty}={\rm diag} (\lambda_j^\infty)$, with
$\lambda_j^\infty=\lambda_j^\infty(\omega,\epsilon)$ independent of time and
\begin{equation}
\label{dla}
\left|\lambda_j^\infty-\lambda_j^v\right|\leq C\epsilon
j^{\frac{\tilde \beta}{\tilde l+1}}\ ,
\end{equation}
for some positive $C$. Furthermore one has
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.]
$\displaystyle{\lim_{\epsilon\to0}\left|\Omega-\Omega(\epsilon)\right|=0}$;
\item[2.] $\forall s,r\geq0$, $\exists \epsilon_{s,r}>0$ and $s_r$
s.t., if $|\epsilon|<\epsilon_{s,r}$ then the map $\phi\mapsto
U_\omega(\phi)$ is of class $C^r({\mathbb T}^n;B({\mathcal H}^{s+s_r};{\mathcal H}^{s}))$; in
particular one has $s_0=0$ and $s_1=\beta_1+[\beta_2]$.
\item[3.] $\exists b>0$ s.t. $\forall |\epsilon|<\epsilon_{s,1}$, one
has
$\norma{U_\omega(\phi)-{\bf 1}}_{B({\mathcal H}^{s+\beta_1+[\beta_2]};{\mathcal H}^{s})
}\leq C_s\epsilon^b$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
\label{r.m.2}
If $W$ is the sum of different addenda, then
Theorem \ref{m.1} applies also if its assumptions are fulfilled by each
of the addenda separately. This is particularly relevant in the case
where the average of some of the addenda vanishes. Thus in this case
the value of $\tilde \beta$ can depend on the addendum one is
considering.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}
\label{c.m.1}
If $W$ is given by \eqref{W}, then Theorem \ref{m.1} applies under the
conditions \eqref{a0} and \eqref{a1}.
\end{corollary}
\proof The condition on $\beta_2$ is obvious. Consider the addendum
$-{\rm i} a_1(x,\omega t)\partial_x$, which has symbol
$$
a_1(x,\omega t)\xi+S^{0,\beta_3-1}\ ,
$$ and remark that, by Eq. \eqref{media} below, the average of the
main term vanishes and therefore for this term $\tilde \beta$ is given
by the first of \eqref{betatilde} which is made explicit by \eqref{a1}. \qed
\begin{remark}
\label{r.m.1}
In the case of the quartic oscillator ($l=2$) and perturbation of the
form \eqref{W}, we have the bounds $\beta_2<2$ and $\beta_3<1$. We
recall that \cite{LY10} had $\beta_2\leq 1$ and $\beta_3\leq0$, but
the perturbation was not assumed to be asymbol. In
\cite{1} we were able to deal also with some cases with $\beta_2=4$
and $\beta_3=2$, but only when $a_0,$ and $ a_1$ are polynomial.
We also remark that the assumption that the functions $a_i$ are
symbols rules out cases like $a_i(x,\omega t)=\cos(x-\omega t)$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{harm}
In the case of the Harmonic oscillator we cover the perturbations of
the class considered in \cite{W08} (in which the decay at infinity of
$a_0$ and its derivatives are exponential) and in the counterexample
of \cite{D14}.
On the contrary the perturbations in \cite{GT11} (which must decay at
infinity) and in \cite{GY00}
can belong to a class of symbols in which the decay at infinity does
not improve as one extracts derivatives.
\end{remark}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{m.1}}\label{egor}
\subsection{Some symbolic calculus}\label{symbol}
First we remark that $S^{m_1,m_2}\subset S^{m_1+[m_2],0}$.
In the proof we will also need the classes of symbols used in
\cite{1}, thus we recall the corresponding definitions
\begin{definition}
\label{Sm.1}
The space $S^{m}$ is the space of the symbols $g\in C^\infty({\mathbb R})$ such
that $\forall k_1,k_2\geq 0$ there exists $C_{k_1,k_2}$ with the
property that
\begin{equation}
\label{sm.1}
\left|\partial^{k_1}_\xi\partial^{k_2}_{x}g(x,\xi)\right|\leq
C_{k_1,k_2} \left[\lambda(x,\xi)\right]^{m-k_1l-k_2}\ .
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
In order to deal with functions $p$ such that
there exist a $\tilde p$ with the property that
$$
p(x,\xi)=\tilde p(h_0(x,\xi))\ ,
$$
we introduce the following class of symbols.
\begin{definition}
\label{d.sm}
A function $\tilde p\in{\mathbb C}^{\infty}$ will be said to be of class
$\widetilde S^m$
if one has
\begin{equation}
\label{sm.12}
\left|\frac{\partial^k\tilde p}{\partial E^k}(E)\right|\preceq \langle
E^{\frac{m}{2l}-k}\rangle \ .
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
By abuse of notation, we will
say that $p\in\widetilde S^m$ if there exists $\tilde p\in \widetilde
S^m$ s.t. $p(x,\xi)=\tilde p(h_0(x,\xi))$.
We will also need to use functions from ${\mathbb T}^n$ to $\widetilde
S^m$. The corresponding class will be denoted by $\widetilde {\mathcal S}^{m}$.
We now give a reformulation of the results of sect. 4.1 of \cite{1} in
the case of the symbols of the classes $S^{m_1,m_2}$.
The application of the Calderon Vaillencourt theorem yields the
following Lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{caderon}
Let $f\in S^{m_1,m_2}$, then one has
\begin{equation}
\label{CV}
f^w(x,D_x)\in B({\mathcal H}^{s_1+s};{\mathcal H}^{s})\ ,\quad \forall s\ ,\quad \forall
s_1\geq m_1+[m_2]\ .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
Given a symbol $g\in S^{m_1,m_2}$ we will write
\begin{equation}
\label{asym}
g\sim\sum_{ j\geq 0}g_j\ ,\quad g_j\in
S^{m_1^{(j)},m_2^{(j)}}\ ,\quad m_1^{(j)}+[m_2^{(j)} ]\leq
m_1^{(j-1)}+[m_2^{(j-1)} ]\ ,
\end{equation}
if $\forall \kappa$ there exist $N$ and $r_N\in
S^{-\kappa,0}$, s.t.
$$
g=\sum_{j=0}^{N}g_j+r_N\ .
$$
\begin{lemma}
\label{l.M}
Given a couple of symbols $a\in S^{m_1,m_2}$ and $b\in S^{m_1',m_2'}$, denote by
$a^w(x,D_x)$ and $b^w(x,D_x)$ the corresponding Weyl
operators, then there exists a symbol $c$, denoted by $c=a\sharp b$ such
that
$$
(a\sharp b)^{w}(x,D_x)=a^w(x,D_x)b^w(x,D_x)\ ,
$$
furthermore one has
\begin{equation}
\label{sharp}
(a\sharp b)\sim \sum_{j\geq 0} c_j
\end{equation}
with
$$
c_j=\sum_{k_1+k_2=j}\frac{1}{k_1!k_2!}\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{k_1}
\left(-\frac{1}{2}\right)^{k_2} (\partial^{k_1}_\xi D^{k_2}_xa)
(\partial^{k_2}_\xi D^{k_1}_xb)\in S^{m_1+m_1'-lj,m_2+m_2'-j} \ .
$$
In particular we have
\begin{equation}
\label{moy}
\left\{a;b\right\}^q:=-{\rm i}(a\sharp b-b\sharp
a)=\left\{a;b\right\}+S^{m_1+m_1'-3l,m_2+m_2'-3}\ ,
\end{equation}
where
$$
\left\{a;b\right\}:=-\partial_\xi a\partial_xb+\partial_\xi
b\partial_xa\in S^{m_1+m_1'-l,m_2+m_2'-1}\ ,
$$
is the Poisson Bracket between $a$ and $b$, while \eqref{moy} means
that $\left\{a;b\right\}^q=\left\{a;b\right\}+$some quantity belonging
to $ S^{m_1+m_1'-3l,m_2+m_2'-3}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{definition}
\label{pseud}
An operator $F$ will be said to be a pseudo-differential operator of
class $O^{m_1,m_2}$ if there exists a sequence $f_j\in
S^{m_1^{(j)},m_2^{(j)}}$ with $m_1^{(j)}+[m_2^{(j)}]\leq
m_1^{(j-1)}+[m_2^{(j-1)}] $ and, for any $\kappa$ there exist $N$ and
an operator $R_N\in B({\mathcal H}^{s-\kappa};{\mathcal H}^{s})$, $\forall s$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{expa}
F=\sum_{j\geq0}^Nf_j^w+R_N\ .
\end{equation}
In this case we will write $f\sim\sum_{j\geq 0} f_j$ and $f$ will be said to
be the symbol of $F$; the function $f_0$ will be said to be the
principal symbol of $F$.
\end{definition}
Concerning maps we will use the following definition
\begin{definition}
\label{pseudomap}
A map ${\mathbb T}^n\ni\phi\mapsto F(\phi)\in O^{m_1,m_2}$, will be said to be
smooth of class ${\mathcal O}^{m_1,m_2}$ if the functions of the sequence $f_j$
also depend smoothly on $\phi$, namely
$f_j\in{\mathcal S}^{m_1^{(j)},m_2^{(j)}}$ and the operator valued map
$\phi\mapsto R_N(\phi)$ has the property that for any $K\geq1 $ there
exists $a_K\geq 0$ s.t. for any $N$ one has
\begin{equation}
\label{propcN}
R_N(.)\in C^K({\mathbb T}^n;B({\mathcal H}^{s-\kappa+a_K};{\mathcal H}^{s}))\ , \forall s \ .
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
Finally we need (Whitney) smooth functions of the
frequencies. Following \cite{1} (and \cite{Stein}), we will denote by
$Lip_\rho(\widetilde\Omega;{\mathcal B})$ the functions of
$\omega\in\tilde\Omega$ with values in a Banach space ${\mathcal B}$ which have
$k$ derivatives of H\"older class $\rho-k$. Here $k$ is the first
integer strictly smaller then $\rho$ and $\widetilde \Omega\subset
\Omega$ is a closed set.
\begin{definition}
\label{why.1}
We will say that a function $f:\widetilde\Omega\to{\mathcal S}^{m_1,m_2}$ is of
class $Lip_\rho^{m_1,m_2}(\widetilde\Omega)$ if forall $N_1,N_2$ it is of
class
$Lip_\rho(\widetilde\Omega;C^{N_1}({\mathbb T}^n;S^{m_1,m_2}_{N_2}))$. Similarly
we will say that $f\in \widetilde{Lip}_\rho^{m}(\widetilde\Omega)$ if
forall $N_1,N_2$, one has
$f\in Lip_\rho(\widetilde\Omega;C^{N_1}({\mathbb T}^n;\widetilde S^{m}_{N_2}))$.
\end{definition}
\subsection{Quantum Lie transform}\label{qliet}
Given a symbol $\chi$, we consider the corresponding Weyl operator
$X$. If $X$ is selfadjoint, then we will consider the unitary operator
$e^{-{\rm i} \epsilon X}$. The following Lemma gives a sufficient
condition for selfadjointness.
\begin{lemma}
\label{MR}
Let $\chi\in S^{m,0}$ have the further property that
$\partial_x\chi\in S^{m-1,0}$. Assume $m\leq l+1$, then
$X:=\chi^w(x,D_x)$ is selfadjoint and $e^{-{\rm i} \epsilon X}$ leaves
invariant all the spaces ${\mathcal H}^s$.
\end{lemma}
\proof We use Proposition A.2 of \cite{MR16}. To ensure the result it
is enough to exhibit a positive selfadjoint operator $K$ such that
both the operators $XK^{-1}$ and $[X,K]K^{-1}$ are bounded. To this
end we take $K$ to be the Weyl operator of the symbol
${\mathcal A}:=(1+h_0)^{\frac{l+1}{2l}}\in S^{l+1}$. From symbolic calculus it
follows that $XK^{-1}\in O^{0,0}$ which is thus bounded and, by the
additional property on the $x$ derivative of $\chi$, one has
$\{\chi;{\mathcal A} \}\in S^{2m-l-1,0}$ so that $[X,K]K^{-1}\in O^{m-l-1,0}$,
which is bounded under the assumption of the Lemma.\qed
Next we use the operator $e^{-{\rm i} \epsilon X}$ to transform
operators.
\begin{definition}
\label{lie}
Let $X$ be a selfadjoint operator; we will say that
\begin{equation}
\label{qlie}
(Lie_{\epsilon X}F):=e^{\im\epsilon X} Fe^{-\im\epsilon X}
\end{equation}
is the quantum Lie transform of $F$ generated by $\epsilon X$.
\end{definition}
It is easy to see that defining
\begin{equation}
\label{serqlie}
F_0=F\ ;\quad F_k:=-{\rm i} [F_{k-1};X]\ ,
\end{equation}
one has
\begin{equation}
\label{r.lie}
\frac{d^k}{d\epsilon^k}Lie_{\epsilon X}F=e^{\im\epsilon X} F_ke^{-\im\epsilon X}\ .
\end{equation}
and therefore (formally)
\begin{align}
\label{qlie1}
Lie_{\epsilon X}F =\sum_{k\geq 0}\frac{1}{k!}\epsilon^k F_k\ .
\end{align}
We will use these formulae in situations where the series are
asymptotic.
We will use the same terminology also when $X$ depends on time and/or
on $\omega$ (which in this case play the role of parameters).
We are interested in the way Hamiltonian operators change their
form in the case where $X$ also depends on time. The following Lemma
is Lemma 3.2 of \cite{1} to which we refer for the proof.
\begin{lemma}
\label{T.1}
Let $F$ be selfadjoint operator which can also depend on time, and let
$X(t)$ be a family of selfadjoint operators smoothly dependent on
time. Assume that $\psi(t)$ fulfills the equation
\begin{equation}
\label{1}
{\rm i}\dot \psi=F\psi\ ,
\end{equation}
then $\varphi$ defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{2}
\varphi=e^{{\rm i}\epsilon X(t)}\psi\ ,
\end{equation}
fulfills the equation
\begin{equation}
\label{3}
{\rm i}\dot \varphi =F_\epsilon(t) \varphi
\end{equation}
with
\begin{align}
\label{4.1.1}
F_\epsilon&:=Lie_{\epsilon X} F-Y_X\ ,
\\
\label{yx}
&Y_X:=\int_0^\epsilon (Lie_{(\epsilon-\epsilon_1)X}\dot X)d\epsilon_1\ .
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
In the case where both $F$ and $X$ are pseudo-differential operators
one can reformulate everything in terms of symbols. Thus, if $f$ and
$\chi$ are symbols and $\chi$ fulfills the assumptions of Lemma
\ref{MR} one can define
\begin{equation}
\label{liqs}
f_0^q:=f\ ,\quad f_k^q:=\left\{ f_{k-1}^q;\chi\right\}^q\ ,
\end{equation}
and one can expect the symbol of $Lie_{\epsilon X}F$ to be
$\sum_{k\geq 0}\epsilon^kf_k^q/k!$. A sufficient condition is given by
the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}
\label{egorov}
Let $\chi\in S^{m,0}$ and let
$f\in S^{m_1,m_2}$ be symbols, assume $m<l$,
then $Lie_{\epsilon X}F\in O^{m_1,m_2}$, and furthermore its symbol, denoted by
$lie_{\epsilon\chi} f$, fulfills
\begin{equation}
\label{liqser}
lie_{\epsilon \chi} f\sim \sum_{k\geq
0}\frac{\epsilon^kf_k^q}{k!} \ .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\proof First remark that $f^q_k\in
S^{m_1+k(m-l),m_2-k}$. From \eqref{r.lie} and the formula
of the remainder of the Taylor expansion one has
$$
Lie_{\epsilon X}F=\sum_{k=0}^{N}\frac{F_k}{k!}\epsilon^k+\frac{\epsilon^{N+1}}{N!}
\int_0^1(1+u)^J e^{-{\rm i} u\epsilon X}F_{N+1}e^{{\rm i}
u\epsilon X}du\ ,
$$
so that, by defining $R_N$ to be the integral term of the previous
formula, we have $R_N\in B({\mathcal H}^{s-\kappa},{\mathcal H}^s)$ with
$\kappa=N(l-m)-m-[-N+m_2]$, which diverges as $N\to\infty$
and thus shows that the expansion \eqref{liqser} is asymptotic in the
sense of definition \ref{pseud}.\qed
\begin{remark}
\label{yx.1}
Let $\chi\in S^{m,0}$ be such that $\partial_x \chi\in S^{m-1,0}$,
with $m<l$, then
the operator $Y_X$ defined by
eq. \eqref{yx} is a pseudo-differential operator of class $O^{m,0}$ with
symbol
\begin{equation}
\label{yx.2}
y_x:=\int_0^\epsilon(lie_{(\epsilon-\epsilon_1)\chi}\dot\chi)d\epsilon_1=
\dot\chi +\epsilon S^{2m-l-1,0}\ .
\end{equation}
\end{remark}
\subsection{Main lemmas}\label{l.s.1}
The algorithm used in order to conjugate the original system to a
system with a smoothing perturbation is the one described in Sect. 4.2
of \cite{1}. In order to make it effective in the present case we have
to prove that the solutions of the homological equations
are symbols. In this sub section we present the homological equations
and give the Lemmas solving them; they will be used in the proof of
the smoothing theorem which will be given in the next subsection. The
proof of these lemmas is the main technical result of the paper and
will be given in Sect. \ref{coho}.
From now on we will use the notation
\begin{equation}
\label{sleq}
a\preceq b
\end{equation}
to mean ``there exists a constant $C$ independent of all the relevant
quantities, such that $a\leq C b$''.
\vskip 5pt
As the example of the period $T(E)$ in the case $V(x)=x^{2l}$ (with
$l$ integer) shows, it is useful to deal with functions which have a
singularity at zero. In order to avoid the problems it creates we will
first regularize the functions at zero and solve the homological
equations only outside a neighborhood of zero.
\vskip10pt
The first homological equation we have to solve is the following one
\begin{equation}
\label{12}
p+\left\{h_0;\chi\right\}=\langle p\rangle\ ,
\end{equation}
where $\langle p\rangle$ is defined by \eqref{mediaW} with $p$ in
place of $W$. The problem is to determine $\chi$ s.t. \eqref{12}
holds.
First we have the following Lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lememd}
Let $p\in S^{m_1,m_2}$ be a symbol supported outside a neighborhood
of zero (in the phase space), then $\langle p\rangle$ is a symbol of
class $ \widetilde S^{m_1+[m_2]}$ and is supported outside a
neighborhood of zero.
\end{lemma}
Concerning the solution of the homological equation we have the
following Lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemchi}
Let $p\in S^{m_1,m_2}$ be a symbol supported outside a neighborhood
of zero, then the homological equation
\eqref{12} has a solution $\chi$ which is a symbol of class $\chi\in
S^{m_1+[m_2]-l+1,0}$ with the further property that $\partial_x
\chi\in S^{m_1+[m_2]-l,0}$ and is supported outside a neighborhood
of zero.
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
\label{funzioni}
In the above lemmas $p$ can also depend on the angles $\phi$ and on
the frequencies $\omega$, but they only play the role of parameters,
so in that case the result is still valid substituting the classes
${\mathcal S}$ or $Lip_\rho$ with the same indexes to the classes $S$.
\end{remark}
In order to iterate the procedure, when $l>1$, we will have to solve an
equation of the form of \eqref{12} with $h_0$ replaced by
\begin{equation}
\label{h1}
h_1:=h_0+\epsilon f(h_0)\ ,
\end{equation}
with $f\in \tilde S^{m}$ and $m<l$, namely equation
\begin{equation}
\label{12.3}
p+\left\{h_1;\chi\right\}=\langle p\rangle\ ,
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemchi.3}
Let $l>1$ and $p\in S^{m_1,m_2}$ be a symbol supported outside a neighborhood
of zero, then the homological equation \eqref{12.3} has a solution
$\chi$ which is a symbol of class $\chi\in S^{m_1+[m_2]-l+1,0}$ and
$\partial_x \chi\in S^{m_1+[m_2]-l,0}$.
\end{lemma}
The third homological equation we have to solve is
\begin{equation}
\label{12.p}
-\omega\cdot\frac{\partial \chi}{\partial\phi}=p-\bar p\ ,
\end{equation}
where $p$ is a symbol and $\bar p$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{media.2}
\bar p(x,\xi):=\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{n}}\int_{{\mathbb T}^n}p(x,\xi,\phi)d\phi\ .
\end{equation}
Such an equation was already studied in \cite{1} and the solution was
obtained in Lemma 4.20 of that paper which is already in the form we
need in the present paper. We now give its statement (for the proof we
refer to \cite{1}).
Fix $\tau>n-1$ and denote
\begin{equation}
\label{diof}
\Omega_{0\gamma}:=\left\{\omega\in\Omega\ :\ \left|k\cdot\omega\right|\geq\gamma
|k|^{-\tau}\right\}\ ,
\end{equation}
then it is well known that
\begin{equation}
\label{sti}
\left|\Omega-\Omega_{0\gamma}\right|\preceq \gamma\ .
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}
\label{coh2}
Let $p\in \widetilde{Lip}_\rho^{m}(\Omega_{0\gamma})$, be a symbol,
then there exists a solution $\chi\in
\widetilde{Lip}_\rho^{m}(\Omega_{0\gamma}) $ of Eq. \eqref{12.p}. Furthermore $\bar p\in
\widetilde{Lip}_\rho^{m}(\Omega_{0\gamma}) $.
\end{lemma}
Finally, in the case of the Harmonic oscillator $l=1$, we will meet the
following homological equation
\begin{equation}
\label{12.1}
\left\{h_0,\chi\right\}-\dot\chi+p=\overline{\langle p\rangle}\ .
\end{equation}
In order to solve it, define the set
\begin{equation}
\label{tigamma}
{\Omega_{1\gamma}}:=\left\{\omega\in\Omega\ :\ \left|\omega\cdot
k+k_0|\geq\frac{\gamma}{1+|k|^\tau}\right|\ ,\ (k_0,k)\in{\mathbb Z}^{n+1}-\left\{0\right\}
\right\}\ .
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemchi1}
Let $p\in Lip_\rho^{m_1,m_2}(\Omega_{1\gamma})$, then there exists a
solution $\chi\in Lip_\rho^{m_1+[m_2],0}(\Omega_{1\gamma}) $ of
\eqref{12.1}. Furthermore $\overline{\langle p\rangle}\in
\widetilde{Lip}_\rho^{m_1+[m_2]}(\Omega_{1\gamma})$.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{The smoothing theorem and end of the proof of Theorem
\ref{m.1}}\label{smot}
\begin{theorem}
\label{smoothing}
Fix $\gamma>0$ small, $\rho>2$ and an arbitrary $\kappa>0$. Assume
\begin{align}
\label{sti.1}
\beta_1+[\beta_2]< 2l-1\quad {\rm and}\quad \tilde \beta<l
\end{align}
then there exists a (finite) sequence of symbols $\chi_1,...,\chi_N$
with $\chi_j\in Lip_\rho^{m^{(j)}_1,m^{(j)}_2}(\Omega_{0\gamma})$,
$m^{(j)}_1+[m^{(j)}_2] \leq \beta_1+[\beta_2]$ $\forall j$, s.t., defining
\begin{equation}
\label{Xj}
X_j:=\chi^w_j(x,D_x,\omega t)\ ,\quad \omega\in\Omega_{0\gamma}\ ,
\end{equation}
such operators are selfadjoint and the transformation
\begin{equation}
\label{transfe}
\psi=e^{-{\rm i}\epsilon X_1(\omega t)}....e^{-{\rm i}\epsilon X_N(\omega t)}\varphi\ ,
\end{equation}
transforms $H_\epsilon(\omega t)$ (c.f. \eqref{H}) into a
pseudo-differential operator $H^{(reg)}$ with symbol $h^{(reg)}$ given
by
\begin{equation}
\label{hreg}
h^{(reg)}=h_0+\epsilon z+\epsilon \widetilde{z}+\epsilon r
\end{equation}
where $z\in \tilde S^{\tilde \beta}$ is a function of $h_0$ independent of
time and of $\omega$; $\tilde z\in \widetilde{Lip}_\rho^{2\tilde\beta-2l+1
}(\Omega_{0\gamma})$ is an $\omega$ dependent function of $h_0$
independent of time, and $r$ depends on
$(x,\xi,\phi,\omega)$. Furthermore one has
\begin{align}
\label{reg.3.1}
r&\in Lip_\rho^{-\kappa,0}(\Omega_{0\gamma})\ .
\end{align}
In the case $l=1$ the set $\Omega_{0\gamma}$ must be substituted by
the set $\Omega_{1\gamma}$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent
{\it Proof of Theorem \ref{smoothing} in the case $l>1$}.
Denote
$$
\beta:=\beta_1+[\beta_2]\ ,\quad m:=\beta-l+1\ .
$$
Let $\eta$ be a $C^\infty$ function such that
\begin{equation}
\label{cutoff}
\eta(E)=\left\{
\begin{matrix}
1 & {\rm if} & |E|>2
\\
0 & {\rm if} & |E|<1
\end{matrix}
\right.
\end{equation}
and split
\begin{equation}
\label{Wsplit}
W=W_0+W_\infty\ ,\quad W_\infty(x,\xi)=W(x,\xi)(1-\eta(h_0(x,\xi)))\ ,\quad
W_0(x,\xi)=W(x,\xi)\eta(h_0(x,\xi))\ ,
\end{equation}
then $W_\infty\in {\mathcal S}^{-\kappa_1,-\kappa_2}$ for any
$\kappa_1,\kappa_2$, and $W_0\in {\mathcal S}^{\beta_1,\beta_2}$ is the actual perturbation
that has to be transformed into a regularizing operator.
The proof of the smoothing theorem is based only on the solution of
the homological equation and the computation of symbols of commutators,
which (up to operators which are smoothing of all orders) are
operations preserving the property of symbols of being zero in the
region $E<1$.
So, we forget $W_{\infty}$ and transform $h_0+\epsilon W_0$ using the
operator $X_1$ with symbol $\chi_1$ obtained by solving the
homological equation \eqref{12} with $p=W_0$, so that $\chi_1\in
{\mathcal S}^{m,0}$, with $\partial_x\chi_1\in {\mathcal S}^{m-1,0}$ so that by Lemma
\ref{MR} the corresponding Weyl operator is selfadjoint provided $m
\leq l+1$ and Lemma \ref{egorov} applies provided $m<l$ (implied by
\eqref{sti.1}).
Then the symbol of the
transformed Hamiltonian is given by
\begin{align}
\label{h1.a}
h^{(1)}&:=h_0+\epsilon(\langle
W_0\rangle-W_0)
+\epsilon {\mathcal S}^{m-l,-3}+\epsilon^2
S^{\beta+m-l-1,0}+\epsilon^2S^{\beta_1+m-l,\beta_2-1}
\\
&+\epsilon W_0+\epsilon^2 S^{\beta_1+m-l,\beta_2-1}
\\
&-\epsilon \dot \chi_1+\epsilon^2 S^{2m-(l+1),0}
\\
\label{h1.b}
&=h_0+\epsilon\langle W_0\rangle-\epsilon\dot\chi_1 +\epsilon p_1\ ,
\end{align}
with $p_1\in S^{\beta+m-l-1,0}+S^{\beta_1+m-l,\beta_2-1}$.
Consider first the case where $\langle W_0\rangle\equiv 0$. In this case
we determine $\chi_2$ by solving the homological equation
\eqref{12} with $p_1$ in place of $p$, A simple analysis shows that
$$
\langle p_1\rangle\in \tilde S^{2\beta_1+[\beta_2]+[\beta_2-1]-2l+1}\equiv
\tilde S^{\tilde\beta} \ ,\quad \chi_2\in S^{\tilde\beta-l+1,0}\ .
$$
Since $\tilde \beta <l$, $lie_{\epsilon\chi_2}$ has the property that,
if $f\in S^{m_1,m_2}$, then
\begin{equation}
\label{err}
lie_{\epsilon\chi_2}f-f\in \sum_{j} S^{m_1^{(j)},m_2^{(j)}}\ ,\quad
m_1^{(j)}<m_1\ {\rm and}\quad m_2^{(j)}<m_2\ .
\end{equation}
Thus, the transformed Hamiltonian has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{tildeh1}
h^{(1_2)}=h_0+\epsilon\langle p_1\rangle-\epsilon \dot
\chi_1+l.o.t
\end{equation}
where l.o.t. means terms with the property analogue to
\eqref{err}. Next we eliminate $-\dot \chi_1$. To this end we
determine $\chi_3$ by solving \eqref{12} with $-\dot \chi_1$ in place
of $p_1$. Remark that $\langle\dot \chi_1\rangle\equiv 0$ so that
$\chi_3\in S^{\beta_1+[\beta_2]-2l+2,0}$ transforms $h^{(1_2)}$ into
$$
h^{(1_3)}:=h_0+\epsilon\langle p_1\rangle-\epsilon\dot \chi_3+l.o.t\ .
$$
Then (if needed) we iterate again until we get
$$ \tilde h^{(1)}=h_0+\epsilon\langle p_1\rangle+\epsilon
\sum_jS^{\beta_1^{(j)},\beta_2^{(j)}}\ ,
$$
with $\beta_1^{(j)}+[\beta_2^{(j)}]< \tilde \beta$, $\forall j$.
Thus, both in the case $\langle W_0\rangle=0$ and in the case $\langle
W_0\rangle\not=0$, we are reduced to a
Hamiltonian of the form
\begin{equation}
\label{htra1}
h^{(1')}:=h_0+\epsilon f(h_0,\omega t)+\epsilon p_2\ ,
\end{equation}
with $f(h_0,.)\in {\mathcal S}^{\tilde \beta}$ and $p_2$ a lower order
correction in the above sense.
We now continue, following \cite{1}, by eliminating the time dependence
from $f$. Thus take $\chi_4$ to be the solution of Eq. \eqref{12.p}
with $p=f(h_0)$, so that $\chi_4\in \widetilde{Lip}_\rho^{\tilde
\beta}(\Omega_{0\gamma})$. Provided $$\tilde \beta<l\ ,$$ one gets
that the corresponding Weyl operator is selfadjoint and the quantum
lie transform it generates, transforms symbols into symbols and has
the property \eqref{err}. Then the
symbol of the transformed Hamiltonian takes the form
\begin{align*}
h^{(2)}=& h_0+\epsilon\overline{f(h_0)}+\epsilon p_2+ l.o.t.
\end{align*}
where all the functions are defined on $\Omega_{0\gamma}$ and
$$
p_2\in \sum_{j} S^{\beta_1^{(j)},\beta_2^{(j)}}\ ,\quad
\beta_1^{(j)}+[\beta_2^{(j)}] <\tilde \beta-l\ .
$$
In particular the l.o.t. is the
lowest order term with a nontrivial dependence on $\omega$.
Denote now
$$h_1:=h_0+\epsilon f(h_0)
$$
and iterate the construction with $h_1$ in place of $h_0$. At each
step of the iteration one gains $l$, in the sense that one passes from
a perturbation (of a time independent Hamiltonian) which belongs to
some classes $S^{\tilde \beta_1,\tilde\beta_2}$ to perturbations
belonging to classes $S^{\tilde \beta_1',\tilde\beta_2'}$ with
$$
\tilde \beta_1'+[\tilde \beta_2']\leq \tilde \beta_1+[\tilde
\beta_2]-l \ .
$$
Thus the result follows.
\qed
\noindent
{\it Proof of Theorem \ref{smoothing} in the case $l=1$.} First remark
that $\beta<1$ implies $\beta_1<1$ and $\beta_2<1$.
We make a first step by taking
$\chi_1\in Lip_\rho^{\beta}$
to be the solution of Eq. \eqref{12.1} with $p=W$. Remarking that in this case,
for any symbol $f$, one has
$$
\left\{h_0,f\right\}^q=\left\{h_0,f\right\}\ ,
$$
it follows that the transformed Hamiltonian is
$$
h^{(1)}=h_0+\epsilon\overline{\langle W\rangle}+\epsilon^2 r_1\ ,
$$
with
$$
r_1\in Lip_\rho^{2\beta-2,0}+ Lip_\rho^{\beta+\beta_1-1,0}\subset L
ip_\rho^{\beta^{(1)},0}\ ,\quad \beta^{(1)}:=\beta+\beta_1-1\ .
$$
Then we iterate getting
$$
h^{(2)}=h_0+\epsilon\overline {\langle W\rangle}+\epsilon^2 \overline
{\langle r_1\rangle} +\epsilon^3r_2\ ,
$$ with $r_2\in
Lip^{\beta+\beta^{(1)}-2,0}+Lip^{\beta^{(1)}+\beta^{(1)}-1,0}$. If
$\beta-2>\beta^{(1)}-1$ the dominant term is the first one and we put
$\beta^{(2)}:= \beta^{(1)}-2+\beta$, otherwise we define
$\beta^{(2)}:= 2\beta^{(1)}-1$. Thus in particular we have
$\beta^{(2)}<\beta^{(1)}$. Then we iterate and at each step we get a
remainder $r_N\in Lip^{\beta^{(N)},0}$, with a sequence $\beta^{(N)}$
diverging at $-\infty$. We remark that, after some steps, one will get
$\beta-2>\beta^{(N)}-1$, and therefore, from such a step one will have
simply $\beta^{(N+1)}=\beta^{(N)}-2+\beta$.
Finally we remark that the average of $r_1$ is the first term in the
time independent part which depends on $\omega$.
\qed
After the smoothing
Theorem \ref{smoothing}, the Hamiltonian of the system is reduced to
the form \eqref{hreg} to which we apply the methods (and the results)
of \cite{1}. Precisely using, Lemmas 5.1 and 5.2 and Corollary 5.4 of
\cite{1} one has the following Lemma
\begin{lemma}
\label{Hop}
For any $\gamma>0$ and $\rho\geq 2$ there exists a positive
$\epsilon_*$ s.t., if $|\epsilon|< \epsilon_*$ then there exists a set
$\Omega^{(0)}_\gamma$, and a unitary (in $L^2$) operator $U_1$
Whithney smooth in $\omega\in\Omega^{(0)}_\gamma$, fulfilling
\begin{align}
\label{diaga.301}
\left|\Omega-\Omega^{(0)}_\gamma\right|\preceq \gamma^a
\\
\label{U2}
U_1^*H^{(reg)} U_1=A^{(0)}+\epsilon R_0\ ,
\end{align}
where $a$ is a positive constant (independent of $\gamma,\epsilon$).
The operator $A^{(0)}$ is given by
\begin{align}
\label{A}
A^{(0)}:={\rm diag}(\lambda_j^{(0)})\ ,
\end{align}
with $\lambda_j^{(0)}=\lambda_j^{(0)}(\omega)$ Whitney smooth in
$\omega$ fulfilling the following inequalities
\begin{align}
\label{diaga.1}
\left|\lambda_j^{(0)}-\lambda_j^v\right|\preceq j^{\frac{\tilde
\beta}{l+1}}\ ,
\\
\label{diaga.2}
\left|\lambda_i^{(0)}-\lambda_j^{(0)}\right|\succeq
\left|i^d-j^d\right|\ ,
\\
\label{diaga.3}
\left|\frac{\Delta(\lambda_i^{(0)}-\lambda_j^{(0)})}{\Delta\omega}
\right|
\preceq
\epsilon|i^d-j^d| \ .
\\
\label{diaga.303}
\left|\lambda_i^{(0)}-\lambda_j^{(0)}+\omega\cdot k\right|\geq
\frac{\gamma(1+| i^d-j^d|)}{1+|k|^\tau}\ ,\quad
\left|i-j\right|+\left|k\right|\not=0\ ,
\end{align}
where, as usual, for any Lipschitz function $f$ of $\omega$, we
denoted $\Delta f=f(\omega)-f(\omega')$.
Furthermore, $\forall s$ $\exists \epsilon_s$, s.t., if
$|\epsilon|<\epsilon_s$ then
\begin{align}
\label{U1}
\norma{U_1-{\bf 1}}_{
Lip_{\rho}(\Omega^{(0)}_\gamma;B({\mathcal H}^{s-\delta};{\mathcal H}^{s})) }\preceq
\epsilon\ ,\quad \delta:=\tilde \beta-(l+1)\ ,
\\
\label{HoR.1}
R_0:=U_1^{-1}RU_1\in Lip_\rho(\Omega^{(0)}_\gamma;
C^\ell({\mathbb T}^n;B({\mathcal H}^{s-\kappa};{\mathcal H}^s)))\ , \quad \forall \ell\ .
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\noindent {\it End of the proof of Theorem \ref{m.1}.} Now Theorem
\ref{m.1} is obtained immediately by applying Theorem 7.3 of \cite{1}
to the system \eqref{U2}.\qed
\section{Proof of the main lemmas}\label{coho}
In this section we prove Lemmas \ref{lememd}, \ref{lemchi},
\ref{lemchi.3} and \ref{lemchi1}.
To prove that $\langle p\rangle$ and $\chi$ are symbols we
use some explicit formulae for the solution of second order equations
in order to write in a quite explicit form the integrals over the
orbits of $h_0$.
Consider the Hamilton equations of $h_0$, namely
\begin{equation}
\label{hameq}
\dot \xi=-\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}\ ,\quad \dot x=\xi\ .
\end{equation}
It is well known that one can exploit the conservation of energy in
order to reduce the system to quadrature, namely to compute the time
as a function of the position:
\begin{equation}
\label{time}
t(x,x_0)=\int_{x_0}^x \frac{dq}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}}\ .
\end{equation}
One also has that the period $T(E)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{per}
T(E)=4\int_{0}^{q_M(E)}\frac{dq}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}}\ ,
\end{equation}
where $q_M=q_M(E)$ is the positive solution of the equation
\begin{equation}
\label{qM.1}
E=V(q_M)\ .
\end{equation}
Before giving the proof of the main Lemmas, we need some preliminary
results. First, in order to compute and estimate integrals of the form
\eqref{time}, \eqref{per}, we will often use the change of variables
\begin{equation}
\label{change.y}
q(y)=q_My\ .
\end{equation}
Furthermore it is useful to define the function
\begin{equation}
\label{tildev}
\tilde v(E,y):=\sqrt{\frac{1-|y|^{2l}}{1-\frac{V(q(y))}{E}}}\ ,
\end{equation}
so that one has
\begin{equation}
\label{tildev.1}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{V(q(y))}{E}}}=\frac{\tilde
v(E,y)}{\sqrt{1-|y|^{2l}}}\ .
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}
\label{qM} The quantity $q_M$
has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{qM.2}
q_M(E)\sim E^{1/2l}\bar q(E)\ ,
\end{equation}
where the function $\bar q$ admits an asymptotic expansion in powers
of $\mu^2:=E^{-1/l}$ and its first term is $1$.
\end{lemma}
\proof Consider equation \eqref{qM.1}, divide by $E=\mu^{-2l}$; using
the asymptotic expansion \eqref{quasi.1} it
takes the form
$$ 1\sim \sum_{j\geq 0} \mu^{2l} V_{2l-2j}(q_M)=\sum_{j\geq 0}
\mu^{2l-2j}\mu^{2j} V_{2l-2j}(q_M)= \sum_{j\geq 0}
\mu^{2j} V_{2l-2j}(\mu q_M)=\bar q^{2l}+ \sum_{j\geq 1}
\mu^{2j} V_{2l-2j}(\bar q)\ .
$$
Thus one sees that $\bar q$ admits an
asymptotic expansion in powers of $\mu^2$. \qed
\begin{lemma}
\label{tildev.3}
For all $E_0>0$, the function $\tilde v(E,y)$ is a
$C^\infty([E_0,\infty))$ function of $E$ and one has
\begin{equation}
\label{tildev.4}
\left|\frac{\partial^k \tilde v}{\partial E^k}(E,y)\right|\preceq
\frac{1}{E^k}\ ,\quad \forall y\in[-1,1]\ ,\quad \forall E\geq E_0\ .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\proof Denote $\tilde V_E(y):=\frac{V(q(y))}{E}$ and remark that, due
to the definition of $q(y)$, one has $\tilde V_E(\pm1)\equiv 1$, so
that $\tilde v$ is regular at $y=\pm1$. Furthermore, by Lemma
\ref{qM} (and its proof), one has
\begin{equation}
\label{tildev.6}
\tilde V_E(y)\sim \bar q^{2l}|y|^{2l}+\sum_{j\geq 1} \mu^{2j}V_{2l-2j}
(\bar q y)\ ,
\end{equation}
(with $\mu=E^{-1/2l}$) which shows that $\tilde V_E(y)$ admits an
asymptotic expansion in $\mu$. First we remark that, by
eq. \eqref{tildev.6} and Lemma \ref{epM}, the thesis of the Lemma
holds true for $y$ outside a neighborhood of $\pm1$. We discuss now
the result for $y$ near 1.
We use the Faa di Bruno formula in order to compute the derivatives of
$$
\tilde v\equiv \frac{\sqrt{1-|y|^{2l}}}{\sqrt{1-\tilde V_E(y)}}
$$
with respect to $E$. Denote $f(x):=(1-x)^{-1/2}$. Remark
that
$$
f^{(j)}(x)=C_j\frac{(1-x)^{-j}}{\sqrt{1-x}}\ ,
$$
and compute
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{\partial^k }{\partial E^k} f(\tilde V_E)\asymp \sum_{j=1}^{k}
f^{(j)}(\tilde V_E )\sum_{h_1+...+h_j=k} \partial_E^{h_1}\tilde
V_E...\partial_E^{h_j}\tilde V_E
\\
\label{tildev.8}
\asymp
\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-x}}\sum_{j=1}^{k} \sum_{h_1+...+h_j=k}\frac{\partial_E^{h_1}\tilde
V_E}{1-\tilde V_E} ... \frac{\partial_E^{h_j}\tilde
V_E}{1-\tilde V_E} \ .
\end{align}
We study the single fraction at r.h.s.. Compute the Taylor expansion
of $\tilde V_E(y)$ at $y=1$, it is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{taytilde}
\tilde V_E(y)\simeq 1+\sum_{k\geq1}\frac{1}{E} V^{(k)}(E^{1/2l}\bar
q)(E^{1/2l}\bar q)^k\frac{(y-1)^k}{k!}\ ,
\end{equation}
from which we get
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial_E^{h}\tilde
V_E}{1-\tilde V_E}\simeq
\frac{\sum_{k\geq1}\partial^h_E\left[\frac{1}{E}V^{(k)}(E^{1/2l}\bar
q)(E^{1/2l}\bar q)^k\frac{(y-1)^{k-1}}{k!} \right]}{\sum_{k\geq1}
\frac{1}{E}V^{(k)}(E^{1/2l}\bar
q)(E^{1/2l}\bar q)^k\frac{(y-1)^{k-1}}{k!} }\ ,
\end{equation*}
which is regular at $y=1$. To get a more usable expression and an
estimate of this fraction we remark that the single term of the sum in
the numerator is a multiple of
$$
\partial_E^h[\partial_y^k\tilde V_E]_{y=1}=[\partial_y^k\partial_E^h\tilde
V_E]_{y=1}\ ,
$$ and one can compute the r.h.s. exploiting the asymptotic expansion
\eqref{tildev.6} of $\tilde V_E$. So one gets that $\partial_y\tilde
V_E$ admits an asymptotic expansion in $\mu^2$. Thus one can apply
Lemma \ref{epM} which shows that the single term in the sum in the
numerator of the fraction is estimated by $E^{-(h+1/l)}$. Inserting in
\eqref{tildev.8} one gets the thesis. \qed
\begin{lemma}
\label{period}
The period $T=T(E)$ is s.t. $T\eta\in S^{1-l}$, where $\eta$ is
the cutoff function defined in \eqref{cutoff}.
\end{lemma}
\proof Due to the presence of the cutoff function it is enough to
study the behavior of $T(E)$ at infinity.
Making the change of variables \eqref{change.y} in the integral
\eqref{per}, we get
\begin{equation}
\label{tq}
T=\frac{4q_M}{E^{1/2}}\int_{0}^{1}\frac{dy}{\sqrt{1-\tilde V_E(y)}}=\frac{4\bar
q}{E^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2l}}} \int_{0}^{1}\frac{\tilde
v(E,y)}{\sqrt{1-y^{2l}}} \ ;
\end{equation}
exploiting the property \eqref{tildev.4} of the function $\tilde v$
one immediately gets the thesis.
\qed
We are now ready for proving that the average of a symbol is a symbol.
\noindent {\it Proof of Lemma \ref{lememd}} Remark that $\langle
p\rangle$ is a function of $E$ only. To compute it we first make a
change of variables in the phase space, namely we will use the
variables $(E,x)$ instead of $(x,\xi)$. Such a change of variables is
well defined in the region $\xi>0$ (or $\xi<0$) and for
$-q_M<x<q_M$. In these variables the flow $\Phi_{h_0}$ is given by
$E(t)=E$ and $x(t)$ given by the inverse of the formula
\eqref{time}. Thus, using the definition of the average and making the
change of variables $t(q)$ in the integrals, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{media}
\langle p\rangle (E)
=\frac{1}{T(E)}\int_{-q_M}^{q_E}\frac{p(q,\sqrt{E-V(q)})}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}}dq +\frac{1}{T(E)}
\int_{-q_M}^{q_E}\frac{p(q,-\sqrt{E-V(q)})}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}}dq \ .
\end{equation}
Consider the first term (the second one can be treated in the same
way); making the change of variables \eqref{change.y} it takes the form
\begin{equation}
\label{m3.1}
\frac{q_M}{ T(E) E^{1/2}}\int_{-1}^1\frac{p\left(q(y),E^{1/2}\sqrt{1-\tilde V_E(y)}\right)\tilde
v(E,y)}{\sqrt{1-|y|^{2l}}}dy \ .
\end{equation}
This quantity and its derivatives with respect to $E$ can be easily
estimate using Lemma \ref{stint.6} and Lemma \ref{stixi}. \qed
We recall a first representation formula
for $\chi$. The next lemma is Lemma 5.3 of \cite{BG93} to which
we refer for the proof (see also Lemma 4.21 of \cite{1}).
\begin{lemma}
\label{solhomo}
The solution of the homological equation \eqref{12} is given by
\begin{align}
\label{coh.2}
\chi=\frac{1}{T(E)}\int_0^{T(E)}t(p-\langle p\rangle)\circ \Phi^t_{h_0} dt\ .
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
To estimate the function $\chi$ we need some more preliminary work.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemchi.1}
Let $p$ be a function, denote $\check p:=p-\langle
p\rangle$ and
\begin{align}
\label{ts}
t_S(x):=\int_{-q_M}^x\frac{dq}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}}\ ,\quad
t^-_S(x):=\int_x^{q_M}\frac{dq}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}}\equiv t_S(-x)\ ,
\\
\label{dmu}
d\mu^+(q):=\frac{\check p(q,\sqrt{E-V(q)})}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}}dq\ ,\quad
d\mu^-(q):=\frac{\check p(q,-\sqrt{E-V(q)})}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}}dq\
\end{align}
($t_S$ is the time taken to go from $-q_M$ to $x$) then, in the
coordinates $(E,x)$ for the upper half plane, the function $\chi$
defined by \eqref{coh.2} is given by
\begin{align}
\label{chif}
\chi(E,x)&=\frac{1}{T(E)}
\int_{-q_M}^{q_M}(t _S(q)d\mu^+(q)+t^-_S(q)d\mu^-(q))
+\frac{1}{2}\int_{-q_M}^{q_M}d\mu^-(q)
\\
\label{chif2}
&+\int_{-q_M}^{x}d\mu^+(q) \ .
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\proof We use again the formula \eqref{time}. In all the integrals $E$
will play the role of a parameter, so we do not write it in the
argument of the functions. We split the interval of integration in
\eqref{coh.2} into three subintervals. For this purpose we
define $t_M(x):=\frac{T}{2}-t _S(x)$, and remark that this is the
time at which a solution starting at $(x,\xi)$ reaches $(q_M,0)$. We
write
$$
[0,T]=[0,t_M(x)]\cup [t_M,t_M+\frac{T}{2}]\cup [t_M+\frac{T}{2},T]\ ,
$$ and we study separately the integrals over the intervals.
The first integral is given by
\begin{align}
\label{1.4.0}
\int_0^{t_M}t\check p(\Phi^t_{h_0}(x,\xi))dt=
\int_x^{q_M}\frac{t(q,x)\check p(q,\sqrt{E-V(q)})}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}} dq
\\
\label{1.4.11}
=\int_x^{q_M}t _S(q)d\mu^+(q) -t _S(x)\int_x^{q_M}d\mu^+(q)\ ,
\end{align}
where of course $t(q,x)$ is defined by \eqref{time}. The
integral over the second interval is given by
\begin{align}
\label{1.4.1}
&-\int_{q_M}^{-q_M}(\frac{T}{2}-t_S (x)+t_S^-(q))d\mu^-(q)=
\\
\label{1.4.2}
&=\frac{T}{2}\int_{-q_M}^{q_M}d\mu^-(q)-t _S(x)\int_{-q_M}^{q_M}
d\mu^-(q)+\int_{-q_M}^{q_M}t_S^-(q)
d\mu^-(q)\ .
\end{align}
Finally the third integral is given by
\begin{align}
\label{1.4.3}
\int_{-q_M}^x\left[\frac{T}{2}+\left(\frac{T}{2}-t_S (x)\right)+t_S (q)
\right]d\mu^+ (q) =
\\
\label{1.4.4}
=T\int_{-q_M}^x d\mu^+(q)-t_S (x) \int_{-q_M}^x d\mu^+(q) +
\int_{-q_M}^xt _S(q)
d\mu^+(q) \ .
\end{align}
Summing up we get
\begin{align}
\label{suchi}
\int_{-q_M}^{q_M}(t _S(q)d\mu^+(q)+t^-_S(q)d\mu^-(q))
\\
\label{suchi2}
-t _S(x)\int_{-q_M}^{q_M}(d\mu^+(q)+d\mu^-(q))
\\
+\frac{T}{2}\int_{-q_M}^{q_M}d\mu^-(q)+T\int_{-q_M}^{x}d\mu^+(q)\ ,
\end{align}
but the integral in \eqref{suchi2} is exactly the integral of $\check
p$ along an orbit of $h_0$ and thus it vanishes, thus we get
\eqref{chif} and \eqref{chif2}. \qed
\begin{lemma}
\label{stichi}
Let $g\in S^{m_1,m_2}$ be a symbol, consider the function
\begin{equation}
\label{G.def}
G(E,x):=\int_{-q_M}^x\frac{g(q,\sqrt{E-V(q)})}{\sqrt{E-V(q)}}dq\ ,
\end{equation}
and the function
$$
\widehat G(x,\xi):=G(\xi^2+V(x),x)\ .
$$ Then $\eta(h_0)\widehat G\in S^{m_1+[m_2]-l+1,0}$ and
$\eta(h_0)\partial_x\widehat G\in S^{m_1+[m_2]-l,0}$.
\end{lemma}
\proof Due to the presence of the cutoff function, it is enough to
study the behavior of $\widehat G$ as $E\to\infty$. First we estimate
the modulus of $G$ (and of $\widehat G$). To this end it is better to
represent the integral in terms of integral over the flow of
$h_0$. Preliminarly remark that
\begin{equation}
\label{stichi.100}
\left|g(x,\xi)\right|\preceq \lambda^{m_1}(x,\xi)\langle
x\rangle^{m_2}\preceq \lambda^{m_1+[m_2]}(x,\xi)\preceq \langle
h_0(x,\xi)\rangle^{m_1+[m_2]} \ .
\end{equation}
Using the notation \eqref{time} one has
\begin{align*}
\left|G(E,x)\right|=\left|\int_0^{t_S(x)}g(\Phi^t_{h_0}(-q_M,0))dt\right|\preceq
\int_0^{T/2}\langle h_0(\Phi^t_{h_0}(-q_M,0))\rangle^{m_1+[m_2]}dt
\\
=
\frac{T}{2} \langle E\rangle^{\frac{m_1+[m_2]}{2l}}\preceq
\lambda^{m_1+[m_2]-l+1}\ .
\end{align*}
To compute the derivatives of $G$ and of $\widehat G$ it is better to
use the formula \eqref{G.def}, to make the change of variables
\eqref{change.y} and to use the function $\tilde v$ defined in
\eqref{tildev}, so that one gets
\begin{equation}
\label{stichi.101}
G(E,x)=\frac{\bar q}{E^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2l}}}\int_{-1}^{\frac{\mu
x}{\bar q}} \frac{\tilde v(E,y)g(q(y),\sqrt{E-V(q(y))})}{\sqrt{1-|y|^{2l}}} dy
\end{equation}
with $\mu=E^{-1/2l}$. From this formula one can easily compute
\begin{align}
\label{stichi.102}
\partial_EG&=\partial_E\left( \frac{\bar
q}{E^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2l}}} \right) \int_{-1}^{\frac{\mu
x}{\bar q}} \frac{\tilde v(E,y)g(q(y),\sqrt{E-V(q(y))})}{\sqrt{1-|y|^{2l}}} dy
\\
\label{stichi.103}
&+ E^{\frac{1}{2l}}\bar
q
\frac{g(x,\sqrt{E-V(x)})}{\sqrt{E-V(x)}}\partial_E\left(\frac{\mu
x}{\bar q}\right)
\\
\label{stichi.104}
&+ \frac{\bar
q}{E^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2l}}} \int_{-1}^{\frac{\mu
x}{\bar q}} \frac{\partial_E\tilde v(E,y)\ g(q(y),\sqrt{E-V(q(y))})}{\sqrt{1-|y|^{2l}}} dy
\\
\label{stichi.105}
&+ \frac{\bar
q}{E^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2l}}} \int_{-1}^{\frac{\mu
x}{\bar q}} \frac{\tilde v(E,y)\partial_E
g(q(y),\sqrt{E-V(q(y))})}{\sqrt{1-|y|^{2l}}} dy\ ,
\end{align}
where, in order to simplify \eqref{stichi.103} we used the definition
of $\tilde v$.
Remark now that one has
\begin{equation}
\label{widehat}
\frac{\partial \widehat G}{\partial x}=\frac{\partial G}{\partial
E}V'+\frac{\partial G}{\partial x}\ .
\end{equation}
We study the contribution of \eqref{stichi.103} to
$\partial\widehat G/\partial x$, which is the most singular one. To
this end we compute
\begin{align}
\label{sti.4}
\frac{\partial G}{\partial x}+V'(x)\,
\eqref{stichi.103}=\frac{g(x,\xi)}{\xi}
\left[1+q_M V'(x) \partial_E\left(
\frac{ x}{q_M}\right) \right]\ ,
\end{align}
where, when explicitly possible we introduced the variables $(x,\xi)$.
We study now the square bracket in \eqref{sti.4} in order to show
that \eqref{sti.4} is regular on the line $\xi=0$; we denote by
\begin{equation}
\label{sti.12}
{\mathcal T}(E,x):= q_M V'(x) \partial_E\left(
\frac{x}{q_M}\right) \
\end{equation}
the second term in the bracket and we simplify it. First remark that
the line $(x,\xi)=(x,0)$, in terms of the variables $(E,x)$, becomes
the curve $(V(x),x)$, which can also be parametrized by $E$ and in such
a parametrization has the form $(E,q_M(E))$. Expanding at
$\xi=0$, one has
\begin{equation}
\label{sti.14}
\widehat
{\mathcal T}(x,\xi):={\mathcal T}(\xi^2+V(x),x)={\mathcal T}(V(x),x)+\partial_E{\mathcal T}(V(x),x)2\xi+O(\xi^2)=
{\mathcal T}(E,q_M)+2\partial_E{\mathcal T}(E,q_M)\xi+O(\xi^2)\ .
\end{equation}
Now,
using \eqref{sti.12} and the definition of $q_M$,
one gets
$$
{\mathcal T}(E,q_M)=-V'(q_M)\partial_E(q_M)=-V'(q_M)\frac{1}{V'(q_M)}=-1\ .
$$ Inserting in \eqref{sti.14} and substituting in \eqref{sti.4} one
sees that \eqref{sti.4} is regular at $\xi=0$.
In conclusion we have
\begin{align}
\label{stichi.108}
\partial_x\widehat G&=V'(x)
\frac{E^{\frac{1}{2}}}{q_M}\partial_E\left(
\frac{q_M}{E^{\frac{1}{2}}} \right) \widehat G(x,\xi)
\\
\label{stichi.109}
&+g(x,\xi)\left[\frac{1+\widehat{\mathcal T}(x,\xi)}{\xi}\right]
\\
\label{stichi.110}
&+V'(x)
q_M \int_{-q_M}^{x} \frac{(\partial_E\tilde
v)(E,y(q))\ g(q,\sqrt{E-V(q)})}{\tilde v(E,y(q))\sqrt{E-V(q)}} dq
\\
\label{stichi.111}
&+ V'(x)
q_M \int_{-q_M}^{x} \frac{\partial_E
g(q(y),\sqrt{E-V(q(y))})}{\sqrt{E-V(q(y))}} dy\ .
\end{align}
Remark that \eqref{stichi.108} and \eqref{stichi.111} clearly have the
same structure as $\widehat G$, so these terms are suitable to start
an iteration which shows that the original quantity is a symbol. One
has still to deal with the other two terms. We start by
\eqref{stichi.109}.
The analysis of the square bracket in \eqref{stichi.109} (the only
nontrivial part) has to be done by analyzing separately a
neighborhood of $\xi=0$. Such a region can be analyzed by exploiting
the expansion \eqref{sti.14}, which allows to show that it is a symbol
in such a neighborhood. The other region is trivial since the
function is smooth in that region. Doing the explicit computations one
easily shows that it is a symbol.
We come to \eqref{stichi.110}. We wrote it in that form, since
exploiting it one can compute its derivative with respect to $x$. An
explicit computation shows that, mutatis mutandis, such a derivative
is given again by \eqref{stichi.108}-\eqref{stichi.111}. The main
difference is that \eqref{stichi.109} has to be substituted by
$$
\frac{g(x,\xi)\partial_E\tilde v(E,x/q_M)}{\tilde
v(E,x/q_M)}\left[\frac{1+\widehat{\mathcal T}(x,\xi)}{\xi} \right]\ ,
$$
which is again a symbol.
To conclude the proof we estimate the different terms of
\eqref{stichi.108}-\eqref{stichi.111}. The estimate of all the
terms, but \eqref{stichi.109} is obtained by the same argument used to
estimate $G$ which gives that all such terms are bounded by $\langle
x\rangle^{2l-1}\lambda^{m_1+[m_2]-3l+1}$.
In order to estimate \eqref{stichi.109} we consider its main term in
the expansion in inverse powers of $E$:
$$
{\mathcal T}(E,x)=V'(x)\left[-x\frac{\partial_E
E^{1/2l}}{E^{1/2l}}\right]= -\frac{V'(x)x}{2l E}\simeq
-\frac{|x|^{2l}}{E}\ ,
$$
so that
$$
\left|\frac{1+{\mathcal T}(E,x)}{\xi}\right|\simeq \left|\frac{E-|x|^{2l} }{\xi
E} \right|= \left|\frac{\xi}{E}\right|\preceq \lambda^{-l}\ .
$$
It follows that
$$
\left|\eqref{stichi.109}\right|\preceq \lambda^{m-(l-1)-1}\ .
$$
\qed
\noindent{\it Proof of Lemma \ref{lemchi}}. First remark that, from
Lemma \ref{stichi}, $\eta t_{S}\in S^{-l+1,0}$ and $\eta \partial_x
t_{S}\in S^{-l,0}$. It follows that $\eqref{chif}\eta\in \tilde S^{m_1+[m_2]-l+1}$
and $\eta\eqref{chif2}\in S^{m_1+[m_2]-l+1,0}$ with
$\eta\partial_x\eqref{chif2}\in S^{m_1+[m_2]-l,0}$, which gives the thesis. \qed
\noindent{\it Proof of Lemma \ref{lemchi.3}}. The proof is based on
the fact that the flow of $h_1$ is essentially a rescaling of the flow
of $h_0$. Precisely, $\Phi^t_{h_1}$ leaves invariant the level
surfaces of $h_0$ and on a level surface $h_0=E$ one has
\begin{equation}
\label{fluh1}
\Phi^t_{h_1}\equiv \Phi^{(1+\epsilon f'(E))t}_{h_0}\ .
\end{equation}
So, we apply the formulae for the average and for $\chi$ getting the
result. We give the explicit proof of the fact that the solution
$\chi$ is a symbol. From \eqref{coh.2}
with $\Phi^t_{h_1}$ in place of $\Phi^t_{h_0}$ we have
\begin{align*}
\chi&=\frac{1}{T_{h_1}}\int_0^{T_{h_1}} t\check p\circ \Phi_{h_1}^tdt
= \frac{1}{(1+\epsilon f')^2 T_{h_1}}\int_0^{T_{h_1}} t(1+\epsilon
f')\check p\circ \Phi_{h_1}^t (1+\epsilon f')dt
\\
&=\frac{1}{1+\epsilon f'} \frac{1}{ T_{h_0}}\int_0^{T_{h_0}} \tau
\check p\circ \Phi_{h_0}^\tau d\tau \ ,
\end{align*}
Now this is just $(1+\epsilon
f')^{-1}$ times the solution of the homological equation with the
original unperturbed Hamiltonian $h_0$. Since, by the assumption $(1+\epsilon
f')^{-1}$ is a symbol, which is a lower order
correction of the identity, the thesis follows. \qed
\subsection{Solution \eqref{12.1}}\label{cho3}
The homological equation \eqref{cho3} will be relevant only when
$l=1$, where we assume that $V(x)=x^2$ is a Harmonic potential.
\begin{lemma}
\label{cohomo3} (Lemma 6.4 of \cite{Bam97})
The solution of the homological equation \eqref{cho3} is given by
$$ \chi(x,\xi,\phi):=\sum_{k\in{\mathbb Z}^n}\chi_k(x,\xi)e^{{\rm i} k\cdot \phi}\ ,
$$
where
\begin{align}
\label{ch.3}
\chi_0=\frac{1}{T(E)}\int_0^{T(E)}t(\overline p-\overline{\langle
p\rangle})\circ \Phi^t_{h_0}dt
\\
\label{ch.4}
\chi_k(x,\xi)=\frac{1}{e^{{\rm i}\omega\cdot k
T(E)}-1}\int_0^{T(E)}e^{{\rm i} \omega\cdot k
t}p_k(\Phi^t_{h_0}(x,\xi))dt \ ,
\end{align}
and $p_k$ is defined by
$$
p_k(x,\xi):=\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{n}}\int_{{\mathbb T}^n}p(x,\xi,\phi)e^{-{\rm i} k\phi}
d\phi\ .
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}
\label{symb3}
Let $p\in S^{m_1,m_2}$, fix $\alpha\in{\mathbb R}$ and consider
\begin{equation}
\label{sym3.1}
I(x,\xi):=\int_0^{2\pi}e^{{\rm i} \alpha t}p\left(\Phi^t(x,\xi)\right)
dt\ .
\end{equation}
One has $I\in S^{m_1+[m_2],0}$ with $\partial_x p\in S^{m_1+[m_2]-1,0}$.
\end{lemma}
\proof First we write the integral using the action angle variables
$(A,\theta)$ for the Harmonic oscillator. Thus we make the change of
variables
$$
x=\sqrt{A}\sin\theta\ ,\quad \xi=\sqrt{A}\cos\theta\ ;
$$
In these variables the flow is simply $\theta\to\theta+t $, so we have
\begin{align*}
I(A,\theta)=\int_0^{2\pi}e^{{\rm i}\alpha t}p_a(A,\theta+t)dt= e^{-{\rm i}
\alpha\theta} \int_0^{2\pi}e^{{\rm i}\alpha t}p_a(A,t)dt
\\
= e^{-{\rm i}
\alpha\theta} \int_0^{2\pi}e^{{\rm i}\alpha t}p(\sqrt{\xi^2+x^2}\cos t,
-\sqrt{\xi^2+x^2}\sin t) dt \ ,
\end{align*}
where $p_a(A,\theta)=p(\sqrt A\sin\theta,\sqrt A\cos \theta)$.
Now using a technique similar to that
used in the proof of Lemmas \ref{stint.6} and \ref{stixi}, one can see
that the integral is of class
$S^{m_1+[m_2]}$.
In order to conclude the proof we have to check the prefactor. The
prefactor can be written as
$$
\left(\frac{\xi-{\rm i} x}{A^{1/2}}\right)^\alpha\ ,
$$ which is easily seen to be a symbol which is bounded and has the
property that its $x$ derivative is bounded by $A^{-1/2}$, from which
the thesis immediately follows.\qed
\noindent{\it Proof of Lemma \ref{lemchi1}.} The result follows using
the previous Lemmas once
one has a lower bound of the small denominators. This is easily
obtained by remarking that, in
$ \Omega_{1\gamma}$ one has
\begin{align*}
\left|e^{{\rm i} \omega\cdot
kT}-1\right|=\left|2\sin\left(\frac{\omega\cdot kT}{2}\right)\right|
\geq2 \left|\frac{\omega\cdot k T}{2}-k_0\pi\right|
\\
=\left|\omega\cdot
k-k_0\right|\geq\frac{\gamma}{1+|k|^{\tau}}\ .
\end{align*}
\qed
|
\section{Introduction}
A well-known issue in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA), especially within a Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) setting, is the presence of large proportions of missing data in either or both the outcome variables, i.e.~the cost and the clinical effectiveness or utility measures. Removing the unobserved cases (a method usually referred to as ``Complete Case Analysis'', CCA) generally leads to a loss in efficiency and possible serious biases in the parameter estimates \citep{Rubina, Schafera, Littlea, Molenberghs}. Consequently, the final conclusions of the study may be strongly influenced by the way in which missingness is handled, thus possibly reversing the decision about the cost-effectiveness of a new treatment compared to the standard option \citep{Manca, Marshall}.
While the problem of missing data is widely discussed in the statistical literature, it has been relatively overlooked in the health economics one. Notable exceptions include \citet{Graves,Briggs,Oostenbrink, Burton, Lambert}, mainly focussing on the cost measures; \citet{Richardson,Wood, Groenwold, Powney,Simons, Rombach}, with reference to health outcome measures; and \citet{Manca, Harkanen, Diaz-Ordaz, Faria}, who consider both outcomes.
Interestingly, recent reviews on the methods applied in within-trial CEAs \citep{Noble, Diaz-Ordaz2} have concluded that CCA has historically represented the standard approach in health economics. As a result, we should be naturally sceptical about the conclusions achieved by CEAs performed in a context where missingness is not addressed in a principled way. This implies the incorporation of uncertainty about the missing values by combining available information from the observed data with statistical assumptions to build a well-defined statistical model. Within this framework, subsequent inferences are valid under these assumptions, which in turn can be varied to test their impact on the decision-making.
The objective of this article is twofold: first, we review the methods used to handle missingness in within-trial CEAs between 2003-2015 by updating and extending the work of \citet{Noble}. This is done with a view to assessing whether the methods have evolved over time. Second, we provide some guidelines about the way in which missingness should be analysed and reported in the studies. The paper is structured as follows: \S\ref{mechanisms} illustrates Rubin's classification of missing data mechanisms \citep{Rubina}. In \S\ref{handling} we provide a brief summary of the most popular missingness methods, while \S\ref{review} presents the methodology used to select the review's articles and the main results derived from the different analyses performed. In \S\ref{analysis} we report a qualitative analysis of the way in which information about the missing data is provided in the studies and use these results to form some guidelines on the approach authors should follow when dealing with missingness in CEAs. Finally, \S\ref{conclusions} summarises our findings and recommendations.
\section{Missing Data Mechanisms}\label{mechanisms}
When analysing partially observed data, it is essential to investigate the possible reasons behind missingness. This formally translates into an \textit{assumed} missing data mechanism that is linked to the data generating process.
We consider a sample of $i=1,\ldots,n$ individuals and for each the relevant outcome is indicated as $y_i$, which is unobserved for some individuals. Typically, trial data also include a set of covariates $\bm{x}_i=(x_{1i},\ldots,x_{Ji})$, e.g.~sex, age or co-morbidities. While in general these may be partially or fully observed, in this section we consider only the latter case. In addition, we define a missingness indicator $m_{i}$ taking value 1 if the $i-$th subject is associated with missing outcome and 0 otherwise.
This setting can be modelled using two sub-models, or ``modules''. The first module is the missing data mechanism, denoted as \textit{Model of Missingness} (MoM). It describes a probability distribution for $m_{i}$, as a function of some unobserved parameters $\pi_{i}$ and $\delta$, defining the probability of missingness in the outcome variable $y_{i}$. The second module is the data generating process of the outcome variable, denoted as \textit{Model of Analysis} (MoA). This contains the main parameters of interest (e.g.~the population average costs and benefits) and describes a probability model for the outcome $y_{i}$. As a general example, we can think of a simple regression model where $y_i\sim\mbox{Normal}(\mu_i,\sigma)$, and $\mu_{i} = \beta_0+\beta_1 x_i$. In this case, the parameters of the MoA are $\bm\beta=(\beta_0,\beta_1)$ and $\sigma$.
The most accepted classification of missing mechanisms is given by \citet{Rubina} and is based on three classes, according to how the missingness probability in the MoM is modelled. A simple graphical representation of the three classes is provided in Figure \ref{FMDM}. Variables and parameters are denoted by nodes of different shapes and colours according to their nature. Parameters ($\beta_0$, $\beta_1$, $\sigma$, $\delta$) are represented through grey circles. ``Logical'' quantities such as $\mu_{i}$ and $\pi_{i}$, which are defined as function of the parameters, are denoted by a double circle notation. Fully observed variables ($m_{i}$) are represented with a white circle while partially observed variables ($y_{i}$) are denoted by a darker grey circle. Finally, we show covariates ($x_{i}$) as white squares to indicate that they are fully observed and not modelled. Rounded rectangles are used to show the extent of the two modules in terms of variables/parameters included. Arrows show the relationships between the nodes, with dashed and solid lines indicating logical functions and stochastic dependence, respectively.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
FIGURE 1 HERE
\end{figure*}
Figure \ref{FMDM} (a) illustrates the class of `Missing Completely At Random' (MCAR), in which the probability of missingness is fully independent of any other partially or fully observed variable. Consequently, in Figure \ref{FMDM} (a) MoA and MoM are not connected and $\pi_{i}$ does not depend on any quantity in the MoA. This amounts to assuming that there is no systematic difference between partially and fully observed individuals in terms of the outcome $y_{i}$. In other words, in this case we would be assuming that observed cases are a representative sample of the full sample.
Figure \ref{FMDM} (b) shows a case of `Missing At Random' (MAR), in which the missingness probability may depend on a fully observed variable. As a result, MoA and MoM are connected by means of the predictor variable affecting both the mechanisms generating $y_{i}$ and $m_{i}$. Because of this relationship, the partially observed cases are systematically different from the fully observed cases; crucially, however, the difference is fully captured~by~$x_{i}$.
Figure \ref{FMDM} (c) provides an example of `Missing Not At Random' (MNAR). This is characterised by dependence of the probability of missingness on both the partially and fully observed variables. Thus, in Figure \ref{FMDM} (c) $\pi_{i}$ depends on both the fully observed predictor $x_{i}$ and the partially observed outcome $y_{i}$. This means that the difference between fully and partially observed cases still depends on the missing values, even after taking $x_{i}$ into account. Therefore it is necessary to make more structured assumptions about this relationship that go beyond the information contained in the data.
While intuitively helpful, this framework may be too simplistic in some cases. Since the scope of this section is to provide a broad overview for Rubin's classification, we assumed the simplest case where missingness is present in a single response variable only, which may not hold in real applications. This is particularly likely in the context of CEA, in which we are concerned with a multivariate outcome, made of suitable measures of clinical benefits and costs, i.e.~$y_i=(e_i,c_i)$. Missingness can occur for either or both the relevant outcomes and this can lead to as many missingness mechanisms as the number of partially observed quantities (covariate missingness must also be considered). Additional complexity is given by whether data are obtained in a cross-sectional or longitudinal setting, static or time-varying covariates and more importantly the possible correlation between variables and missingness mechanisms and between the mechanisms themselves.
\section{Methods to Handle Missing Data}\label{handling}
There are many different statistical methods to account for missingness, each relying on different assumptions. It is important to carefully select the method in line with the setting-specific assumptions we assume to hold. For the sake of simplicity here we only broadly categorise these methods. More in depth and complete presentation and analysis can be found for example in \citet{SchaferMD, Molenberghs}.
\subsection{Complete Case Analysis}
This is a popular method in within-trial CEA studies, despite its limitations due to the strong assumption that only the fully observed cases are needed in order to correctly make inference. The critical disadvantage is that missing cases are simply discarded, thus reducing efficiency and possibly biasing the parameter estimates.
\subsection{Single Imputation}
Single Imputation (SI) methods replace the missing data with a single predicted value, such as the unconditional or conditional mean or the last value observed for a given case. This category includes Last Value Carried Forward \citep{Shao}, Linear Extrapolation \citep{Twisk} and Conditional Imputation \citep{Buck}. Although sometimes valid, these methods are never recommended as they typically require stronger assumptions than MCAR and always fail to take account of the uncertainty underlying the imputation process, i.e.~they do not recognise that the imputed values are \textit{estimated} rather than \textit{known}.
\subsection{Multiple Imputation}
A more sophisticated method is Multiple Imputation \citep[MI,][]{SchaferMI}. The underlying idea is to fill-in each missing data with plausible simulated values, drawn from the conditional predictive distribution of the missing given the observed values. Thus, the set of imputations can properly represent the information about the missing values that is contained in the observed data for the chosen model. This is repeated $K$ times, leading to $K$ imputed datasets that can be analysed via complete-data methods. The individual estimates are then combined into a single quantity, e.g.~using Rubin's rules \citep{Rubina}; this captures the variability within and between imputations. However, the critical aspect is that valid inferences depend on the correct specification of the imputation model in terms of variable selection, distributions and correlations.
\subsection{Sensitivity Analysis}\label{sa}
Sensitivity Analysis (SA) is a technique used to determine how different input values in a model will impact the output, under a given set of assumptions. When applied to missing data this corresponds to exploring as many plausible missing data assumptions as possible and then assessing how consistent results are across the different scenarios. In particular, it is generally recommended to set MAR as the reference assumption and then explore different MNAR departures from MAR, to assess the robustness of the results to different plausible alternative missingness mechanisms. The purpose of such analysis is to account more fully for the uncertainty about the missingness. Usually SA is implemented through more advanced methods that are able to explicitly model a MNAR mechanism such as Selection or Pattern Mixture Models \citep{Molenberghs,Daniels}.
\subsection{Others}
There is a wide list of possible alternatives that could be explored such as Inverse Probability Weighting \citep{Robins2}, Likelihood-based methods \citep{McLachlan}, Doubly Robust \citep{Bang} or Full Bayesian methods \citep{Daniels,Mason}.
\section{Literature Review}\label{review}
\subsection{Methods}
\citet{Noble} (henceforth NHT) reviewed the methods used to handle missing cost measures in 88 articles published during the period 2003-2009. We extend their review, to include missing effects. Further, we use NHT's strategy to identify papers in the subsequent period, 1 April 2009 to 31 December 2015. Articles were considered eligible for the review only if they were cost-effectiveness analyses within RCTs, used individual patient-level data and mentioned \texttt{missing data} in the text. We relied on the search engines of three online full-text journal repositories: \texttt{Science-Direct.com}, \texttt{bmj.com}, and The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED). The key words used in the search strategy were (\texttt{cost effectiveness} OR \texttt{economic evaluation}) AND \texttt{missing data} AND \texttt{trial} AND (\texttt{randomised} OR \texttt{randomized}). The on-line databases identified 1129 articles most of which were duplicates. After abstract review, 128 articles were considered, of which 81 fulfilled the eligibility criteria.
We present and compare the articles reviewed for the two periods by type of analysis performed. First, we look at the base-case methods implemented, i.e.~those used in the main analysis embedding the assumptions about missing data. Second, we consider any alternative methods discussed; when present, these assess the robustness of the results obtained in the main analysis against departures from the initial assumptions on missingness.
\subsection{Base-case Analysis}
As shown in Figure \ref{F2} (a), NHT found that CCA was the most popular base-case method, used in $31\%$ of the papers; 23\% were unclear about the technique adopted. Single imputation methods were well represented, with mean imputation and conditional imputation used in $10\%$ and $9\%$ of the articles respectively. MI was found in $9\%$ of the articles. Our analysis of the methods for missing effectiveness measures shows a similar pattern in Figure \ref{F2} (c). CCA was used in $27\%$ of the cases and with a sizeable proportion of papers unclear about the technique adopted ($24\%$). Single imputation methods are here dominated by LVCF ($10\%$), while a slightly higher proportion uses MI ($15\%$).
In 2009-2015, MI replaces CCA as the most frequently used base-case method in both costs and effects, at $33\%$ and $34\%$ respectively (Figures 2 (b) and (d)). However, CCA is still the method of choice in many papers ($15\%$ for costs and $21\%$ for effects). The proportion of papers that are unclear about the chosen method is similar over the two time periods for costs, but halves in the later period for effects.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
FIGURE 2 HERE
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Robustness Analysis}
With the term robustness analysis we refer to the specific concept introduced in \S\ref{sa}, whose aim is to assess the impact of plausible alternative assumptions about the missing data on the results, with respect to the base-case scenario. This implies varying the structural assumptions about the missingness mechanisms underlying the model, as opposed to the more general definition of sensitivity analysis, which concerns with varying lower level assumptions (e.g.~about the distribution associated with a variable in the model).
Despite having a key role for assessing uncertainty, in practice, robustness analyses are rarely performed in CEAs. This poses an important question related to the reliability of the findings, as they may be affected by the specific assumption about missing data. From both review periods it seems that a robustness analysis is infrequently used and typically involves only one alternative scenario. This is not likely to be an optimal choice as the main objective of this analysis is to explore as many plausible alternative missing data assumptions as possible.
NHT found that $75\%$ (66/88) of the articles did not include any robustness analysis, with the remaining papers typically performing an analysis by comparing CCA and MI. Similar findings apply to missing effects, with about $76\%$ (67/88) of the studies lacking any alternative missing data method. Similarly in the 2009-2015 review, we observe no robustness analysis in the majority of the articles for both costs ($75\%$ or 61/81) and effects ($70\%$, 51/81).
Figure \ref{F3} provides a pictorial overview of the alternative methods used for cost and effect data. For costs most articles describe no alternative analysis. In the earlier period, the choice of alternative missingness methods seems well-spread across CCA, MI and the use of more than one method, with a slightly more frequent adoption of MI. By contrast, in the later period, more cases use CCA as a robustness method in combination with MI as the base-case method.
Figures \ref{F3} (c)--(d) describe the effects, with most of the articles not reporting any robustness analysis and with a significant increase in MI analyses, opposed to a decrease in CCA, between the two periods. We also observe a reduction over time in the number of unclear missing effects method analyses. Excluding this category, there is a similar pattern to the cost graphs towards CCA used as a robustness method in combination with MI as the base-case~method.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
FIGURE 3 HERE
\end{figure*}
\section{Recommendations for Missing Data Analyses}\label{analysis}
We argue that in order to judge whether missing data in a CEA have been adequately handled, a full description of the missingness problem, details of the methods used to address it and a discussion on the uncertainty in the conclusions resulting from the missingness are required. With this in mind, we have assembled guidelines on how information relating to the missing data should be reported (Table \ref{T1}). We define three broad categories (Description, Method, Limitations). For each, information that we consider vital for transparency is listed under `key considerations', while other details that could usefully be provided as supplementary material are suggested under `optimal considerations'. Comparing the information provided in the articles in our review against this list, allows us to qualitatively assess the quality of the reporting of how missingness has been handled in CEA in the two time periods.
To gain a fuller understanding of the current state of play, we also classify the articles from the perspective of the strength of the assumptions about the missingness mechanism. This is related to the choice of method, since each is underpinned by some specific missing data assumption. We can view the quality judgement and strength of assumptions as two dimensions providing a general mapping of how the missingness problem is handled. This applies to both the level of knowledge about the implications of a given missingness assumption on the results and how these are translated into the chosen method. Details of our evaluation of both aspects are provided next, starting with the strength of assumptions.
\subsection{Quality Evaluation Scheme}
We group the methods into five categories, ordered according to the strength of the associated missingness assumptions. These are: \textit{Single Imputation} (SI), typically requiring stronger assumptions than MCAR to hold; \textit{Complete Case Analysis}, usually associated with MCAR; \textit{Multiple Imputation}, generally based on MAR; and \textit{Unknown} (UNK), a residual group in which we classify studies that do not explicitly mention the method used. We associate this class with the strongest level of assumptions, since the lack of any method description may implicitly suggest (over)confidence in a small effect of missingness on the results. By contrast, we define \textit{Sensitivity Analysis} (SA) as the least restrictive approach, which can assess the robustness of the results to different alternative missingness mechanisms.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
FIGURE 4 HERE
\end{figure*}
Using the list of key considerations in Table~\ref{T1}, first we determined whether no (all key considerations absent), partial (one or more key considerations absent) or full (all key considerations present) information has been provided for each component. From this we computed a numerical score to summarise the overall information provided on missingness, weighting the components in a ratio of 3:2:1. Finally, we converted the scores into grades A-E. Figure \ref{F6} shows the process and weights used. Although the importance between the different components is subjective, we believe that the chosen structure represents a reasonable and relatively straightforward assessment scheme.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
TABLE 1 HERE
\end{figure*}
The resulting scores can be interpreted qualitatively as follows:
\begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=1.8cm,rightmargin=.5cm]
\item[\textbf{A (12)\;\;\;}] The highest quality judgement, identified by the upper thicker blue path in Figure~\ref{F6}, including only those studies that simultaneously provide all the key considerations for all the components. It is the benchmark for a comprehensive explanation and justification of the adopted missing data method.
\item[\textbf{B (9-11)}] Includes studies providing full details for either the description or the method and at least partial information for the other components. Studies with no information about the limitations are only included in this category if full detail is provided for both the other components.
\item[\textbf{C (6-8)\;\;}] Studies for which information about missingness is not well-spread across the components. All key considerations are provided either for the description or the method, but with only a partial or no content in the other components.
\item[\textbf{D (3-5)\;\;}] Indicates a greater lack of relevant information about missingness. Despite possibly including key considerations on any of the components, the information provided will at most be partial for the description in which case it will be combined with a total lack of content on either the method or the limitations.
\item[\textbf{E (0-2)\;\;}] The worst scenario where the overall information about the missing data is considered to be totally unsatisfactory. No description is given and we can observe at most only some of the key considerations for the method.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Grading the articles}
Figure \ref{F5} gives a graphical representation of both aspects for the articles reviewed between 2009-2015 in terms of the assumptions and justifications (quality scores) on missingness. In both graphs, more studies lie in the lower than in the upper part, indicating that fewer studies can be classified as high quality in terms of the considerations about missingness. This is highlighted by a greater concentration of points at the bottom of the figures (grade E). As we move along the vertical axis, this tends to reduce up to the top level (grade A), where only very few cases are shown. Of particular interest is the (almost) total absence of articles that performed a sensitivity analysis (SA), clearly indicating very slow uptake of this technique.
A shift along the vertical axis in the graphs indicates an increase in the level of understanding about the implications on the results for different choices of the missing data assumptions. Therefore, we can argue that an upward movement in the plot will always improve the justification of a specific assumption. However, to be able to follow this path we may have to rely on more sophisticated methods that can match the given missingness assumption, i.e.~if we think our data are MNAR, then CCA assumptions are less likely to hold. The aim of an optimal analysis should be to select a method that can be fully justified by matching the description of the missing data problem to the assumptions underpinning the chosen method, i.e.~map onto the upper section of the graphs.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
FIGURE 5 HERE
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion}\label{conclusions}
The objective of this paper is to critically appraise the issue of missing data analysis in within-trial CEAs. In addition, we aim at providing a set of recommendations to guide future studies towards a more principled handling and reporting of missingness. It is important that assumptions about missing data are clearly stated and justified. A robustness analysis is also important, in order to explore the impact of plausible alternative missingness assumptions on the results of the CEA. Often, a variety of techniques and analyses are used but not reported because of space limits; on-line appendices and supplementary material could be used to report these alternatives.
\subsection{Review}
Figure \ref{F2} highlights a shift in the most popular base-case missingness method from CCA to MI, between the two periods of the review. The reasons behind this change may be related to some drawbacks of CCA and the relatively recent wide development of software to perform MI.
First, even under a strong missing data assumption such as MCAR, CCA remains inefficient because it ignores the predictive information contained in the partially observed cases. Non-negligible rates of missingness on a few variables of interest may cause large portions of the sample to be discarded. Second, CCA may cause serious biases in the parameter estimates. Indeed, the condition for validity of CCA does not fit neatly into Rubin's classes \citep{White} in the important cases when: missing data affect the covariates; or the partially observed outcome has a longitudinal nature.
Arguably, a very important factor in the increasing popularity of MI is the recent availability of specific computer routines or packages \citep[e.g.\ STATA or R; see][]{VanBuuren}. This probably led to some abuse of the method as noted by \citet{Molenberghs}. On the one hand, MI generally allows the inclusion of a larger number of variables/predictors in the imputation model than used in the analysis model, which potentially makes the assumption of MAR more plausible and thus the overall analysis less likely to be biased. On the other, the performance of MI depends on the correct specification of the imputation model (i.e.\ complexity in the analysis model is reflected in the imputation model) and care is required in its construction. Although essential, these details can be overlooked and are not often included in the reporting of the analysis, undermining its reliability.
From the comparison of the base-case methods used for the costs and effects between 2009 and 2015 (Figure \ref{F2}), we observe a marked reduction in the number of methods not clearly described for the effects, compared to those for the costs. In CEAs we typically observe effect data to be characterised by higher missing proportions than cost data, probably due to the different methodology used to collect them. While clinical effectiveness measures are usually collected through self-reported questionnaires, which are naturally prone to missingness, cost measures rely more on clinical patient files which may ensure a higher completeness rate. In addition, clinical outcomes are almost invariably the main objective of RCTs and as such they are usually subject to more advanced and standardised analyses. Arguably, costs are often considered as an add-on to the standard trial: for instance, sample size calculations are almost always performed with the effectiveness measure as the only outcome of interest. Consequently, missing data methods are less frequently well thought through for the analysis of the costs.
Our review identified only a few articles using more than one alternative method (Figure \ref{F3}). This situation indicates a gap in the literature associated with an under-implementation of robustness analyses, which may significantly affect the whole decision-making process outcome, under the perspective of a body who is responsible for providing recommendations about the implementation of alternative interventions for health care matters. Limiting the assessment of missingness assumptions to a single case is unlikely to provide a reliable picture of the underlying mechanism. This, in turn, may have a significant impact on the CEA and mislead its conclusions, suggesting the implementation of non-cost-effective treatments. Robustness analysis represents an important tool to properly account for more structured uncertainty related to the missing data and its implementation may provide a more realistic picture of the impact that the assumptions have on the final conclusions.
\subsection{Guidelines}
Generally speaking, most papers in our review achieved an unsatisfactory quality score under our classification (Figure \ref{F5}). Indeed, our benchmark area on the top-right corner of the graphs, is barely reached by less than $7\%$ of the articles, both for cost and effect data. The opportunity of reaching such a target might be precluded by the choice of the method adopted, which may not be able to support less restrictive assumptions about the missingness, even when this would be desirable. As a result, when simple methods cannot be fully justified it is necessary to replace them with more flexible ones that can relax assumptions and incorporate more alternatives. In settings such as those involving MNAR, sensitivity analysis might represent the only possible approach to account for the uncertainty due to the missingness in a principled way. However, due to the lack of studies either performing a SA or providing high quality scores on the assumptions, we argue that missingness is not adequately addressed in most studies. This could have the serious consequence of imposing too restrictive assumptions about missingness and affect the outcome of the decision making process.
The classification of the studies into ordered categories (Figure \ref{F6}) according to the information provided on missing data (Table \ref{T1}) is potentially a valuable tool for meta-analysis. It may be reasonable for analysts to assign different weights to the individual studies based on their specific information provided and methods adopted.
\subsection{Conclusions}
Given the common high proportion of missing cost and effect data in within-trial CEAs, many study conclusions could be based on imprecise economic evidences. This is a potentially serious issue for bodies such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) who use these evaluations in their decision making, thus possibly leading to incorrect policy decisions about the cost-effectiveness of new treatment options.
Our review shows, over time, a significant change from more to less restrictive methods in terms of the assumptions on the missingness mechanism. This is an encouraging movement towards a more suitable and careful missing data analysis. Nevertheless, improvements are still needed as only a small number of articles provide transparent information or perform a robustness analysis.
Our guidelines could represent a valuable tool to improve missing data handling. By carefully thinking about each component in the analysis we are forced to explicitly consider all the assumptions we make about missingness and assess the impact of their variation on final conclusions. The main advantage is a more comparable formalisation of the uncertainty as well as a better indication of possible issues in assessing the cost-effectiveness of new treatments.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
Dr Gianluca Baio is partially funded by a research grant sponsored by Mapi.\\
PhD student Andrea Gabrio is partially funded by a research grant sponsored by The Foundation BLANCEFLOR Boncompagni Ludovisi, n\'{e}e Bildt.\\
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[Missing Completely At Random (MCAR)]{\includegraphics{pic_MCAR}} \hspace{1cm}
\subfloat[Missing At Random (MAR)]{\includegraphics{pic_MAR}} \\
\subfloat[Missing Not At Random (MNAR)]{\includegraphics{pic_MNAR}}
\caption{Graphical representation of Rubin's missing data mechanism classes, namely MCAR (a), MAR (b) and MNAR (c). Variables and parameters are represented through nodes of different shapes and colours. Parameters are indicated by grey circles with logical parameters defined by double circles, while predictor variables are assumed fixed and drawn as white squares. Fully observed variables are denoted by white circles, partially observed variables by darker grey circles. Nodes are related to each other through dashed and solid arrows which respectively represent logical functions and stochastic dependence. MoA=Model of Analysis, MoM=Model of Missingness.}\label{FMDM}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[Missing costs (2003-2009)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{pb_numbers}} \hspace{1cm}
\subfloat[Missing costs (2009-2015)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{pb_numbers_2015}} \\
\subfloat[Missing effects (2003-2009)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{pb_effects_numbers}} \hspace{1cm}
\subfloat[Missing effects (2009-2015)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{pb_effects_numbers_2015}}
\caption{Review of the base-case methods used to handle missing cost and effect data between 2003-2009 and 2009-2015. Legend: Complete Case Analysis (CCA), Last Value Carried Forward (LVCF), Linear Extrapolation (Lin Ext), Mean Imputation (Mean), Conditional Imputation (Cond), Multiple Imputation (MI), any other method present in less than 4 articles (Others), unspecified method (Unclear). The category Unclear includes those articles for which it was not possible, based on the text, to understand the methodology used to deal with the missingness, while the category Others consists of the following methods: Random draw, Linear Mixed Effects Model, Expectation Maximisation algorithm, Input-Case Analysis, Assumed zeros, Two-part regression. The numbers to the right of the bars in the graphs are the numbers of papers including the corresponding method in the base-case analysis.}\label{F2}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[Robustness Analyses Costs (2003-2009)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{SA_plot_costs_2003}} \hspace{1cm}
\subfloat[Robustness Analyses Costs (2009-2015)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{SA_plot_costs_2015}} \\
\subfloat[Robustness Analyses Effects (2003-2009)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{SA_plot_effects_2003}} \hspace{1cm}
\subfloat[Robustness Analyses Effects (2009-2015)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{SA_plot_effects_2015}}
\caption{Comparison of methods used in the base-case analysis ($x$ axis) and those used as alternatives in a robustness analysis ($y$ axis) for the articles between 2003-2009 and 2009-2015 for missing costs and effects. Legend: unspecified methods (Unclear), other methods (Others), Linear Extrapolation (Lin Ext), Last Value Carried Forward (LVCF), Mean Imputation (Mean), Conditional Imputation (Cond), Complete Case Analysis (CCA), Multiple Imputation (MI).The category Unclear includes those articles for which it was not possible, based on the text, to understand the methodology used to deal with the missingness, while the category Others consists of the following methods: Random draw, Linear Mixed Effects Model, Expectation Maximisation algorithm, Input-Case Analysis, Assumed zeros, Two-part regression.}\label{F3}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[!h]
\scalebox{0.55}[0.55]{
\includegraphics{pic_DIAGRAM}
}\caption{Diagram representation for the quality score categories. The table at the bottom shows how scores have been weighted according to the information provided on each component. In accordance with the table, different edges of the diagram correspond to different components. From left to right, the initial edges are related to the Description, edges in the middle to the Method, and final edges to the Limitations. Edges colour represents the different way the information provided in each analysis component is evaluated: Red=No information (N), Light Blue=Partial information (P), Blue=Full information (F). Final scores (0 - 12) with associated ordered categories (E - A) show the overall level of information provided for each combination of component and content evaluation.
}\label{F6}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{table}[!h]
\scalebox{0.75}[0.75]{
\noindent
\hskip1.0cm\begin{tabular}[t]{@{}>{\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{0.4\textwidth}}
\center{\textbf{\textit{\large{Description}}}}
\newline
\begin{itemize}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=0pt]
\item[] \textbf{Key considerations}
\end{itemize}
\begin{enumerate}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=13pt]
\item Report the number of individuals with missing data for each variable in the reported analysis by treatment group.
\item Describe the missing data patterns for all variables included in the economic analysis (is missingness on one variable associated with missingness on another variable?, is there a longitudinal aspect to the data?)
\item Discuss plausible reasons why values are missing (e.g.~death).
\newline
\end{enumerate}
\begin{itemize}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=0pt]
\item[] \textbf{Optimal considerations}
\end{itemize}
\begin{enumerate}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=13pt]
\item[1.] Provide supplementary material about the preliminary analysis on missingness (e.g.~descriptive plots and tables)
\newline\newline
\end{enumerate}
\hskip-2.0cm\begin{tabular}{l}
\hskip2.0cm\textsuperscript{1}\footnotesize{For example, in Multiple Imputation, state the imputation model specification and variables included, the number of imputations, }
\\
\hskip2.0cm\footnotesize{post imputation checks.}
\end{tabular}
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}[t]{@{}>{\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{0.4\textwidth}@{}}
\center{\textbf{\textit{\large{Method}}}}
\newline
\begin{itemize}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=0pt]
\item[] \textbf{Key considerations}
\end{itemize}
\begin{enumerate}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=13pt]
\item Identify a plausible missingness assumption for the specific patterns and setting analysed.
\item State the method and software used in the base-case analysis.
\item For more general methods provide details about their implementation \textsuperscript{1}
\item Perform a plausible robustness analysis; provide and discuss the results.
\newline\newline\newline\newline
\end{enumerate}
\begin{itemize}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=0pt]
\item[] \textbf{Optimal considerations}
\end{itemize}
\begin{enumerate}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=13pt]
\item[1.] Provide supplementary material about the method implementation in the base-case and robustness analysis (e.g.~software implementation code)
\end{enumerate}
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}[t]{@{}>{\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{0.4\textwidth}}
\center{\textbf{\textit{\large{Limitations}}}}
\newline
\begin{itemize}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=0pt]
\item[] \textbf{Key considerations}
\end{itemize}
\begin{enumerate}[topsep=0pt,itemsep=-2pt,leftmargin=13pt]
\item Acknowledge and quantify the impact of the missing data on the results.
\item State possible weaknesses and issues with respect to the method and assumptions.
\newline\newline\newline\newline
\end{enumerate}
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{List of the information content for each of the three components that we would like to observe in the studies in order to achieve a full analysis reporting of the missing data. The contents are divided into two subgroups: key and optimal considerations. The former are the statements to be considered as mandatory for transparency when conducting an economic evaluation in the presence of missing data. The latter are additional considerations that further extend the analysis reporting of the missing data through supplementary materials. The lack of even one single key considerations is considered to be a partial analysis reporting while a null analysis reporting is related to the absence of all key considerations.}\label{T1}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfloat[Missing Cost Analyses (2009-2015)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{sp_costs}}\label{FAC}
\subfloat[Missing Effect Analyses (2009-2015)]{\includegraphics[scale=.45]{sp_effects}}\label{FAE}
\caption{Joint assessment, in the reviewed articles between 2009-2015, for missing costs and effects, of two components. The x-axis is the missingness method assumptions: Unknown (UNK), Single Imputation (SI), Complete Case Analysis (CCA), Multiple Imputation (MI) and Sensitivity Analysis (SA). The y-axis is the ordered classification for the quality judgement (scores) to support these assumptions: E, D, C, B, A.}\label{F5}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{apa}
|
\section{Introduction}
The Monge mass transfer model is widely used in modern social and
economic activities, medical science and mechanical processes, etc.
In these respects, some typical examples include the migration
problem, distribution of industrial products, purification of blood
in the kidneys and livers, shape optimization, etc. Interested
readers can
refer to \cite{LA1,LA2,Evans1,K1,K2,Monge,Su} for more details.\\
The original transfer problem, which was proposed by Monge
\cite{Monge}, investigated how to move one mass distribution to
another one with the least amount of work. In this paper, we
consider the Monge problem in the 1-D case. Let $\Omega=[a,b]$ and
$\Omega^*=[c,d]$, $a,b,c,d\in\mathbb{R}$. Here we focus on the
closed case, and other bounded cases can be discussed similarly.
Moreover, $f^+$ and $f^-$ are two nonnegative density functions in
$\Omega$ and $\Omega^*$, respectively, and satisfy the normalized
balance condition
$$\int_\Omega f^+dx=\int_{\Omega^*}f^-dx=1.$$ Let $c:\Omega\times
\Omega^*\to[0,+\infty)$ be a cost function, which indicates the work
required to move a unit mass from the position $x$ to a new position
$y$. There are many types of cost functions while dealing with
different problems \cite{LA1,Ca1,Evans1,Wang1}. In the Monge
problem, the cost function is proportional to the distance $|x-y|$,
for simplicity, $c(x,y)=|x-y|.$ The Monge problem consists in
finding an optimal mass transfer mapping ${\bf s}^*:\Omega\to
\Omega^*$ to minimize the cost functional $I({\bf s})$: \beq I({\bf
s}^*)=\displaystyle\min_{{\bf s}\in\mathscr{N}}\Big\{I[{\bf
s}]:=\int_{\Omega}|x-{\bf s}(x)|f^+(x)dx\Big\},\eneq where ${\bf
s}:\Omega\to \Omega^*$ belongs to the class $\mathscr{N}$ of
measurable one-to-one mappings driving $f^+(x)$ to $f^-(y)$.\\
In the 1940s, Kantorovich initiated a duality theory by relaxing
Monge transfer problem to the task of finding a maximizer for the
Kantorovich problem \cite{K1,K2}. This mechanism plays an archetypal
role in the infinite-dimensional linear programming \cite{V}. As a
matter of fact, the Kantorovich problem may not be a perfect dual to
the Monge problem unless a so-called {\it dual criteria for
optimality} is satisfied \cite{Ca1,Evans1}. Indeed, a huge body of
mathematical tools have been developed for computing the maximizer,
such as the Monge-Kantorovich-Rubinstein-Wasserstein matrices
\cite{R}, dual potentials for capacity constrained optimal transport
\cite{Mc1}, etc.\\
It turns out that the nonuniform convexity of the cost function
$c(x,y)$ defeats many simple attempts to sort out the structure of
optimal mass allocation. In order to gain some insight into this
problem, many mathematicians introduced lots of approximating
mechanisms. For example, L. A. Caffarelli, W. Gangbo, R. J. McCann
and X. J. Wang \cite{Ca2,GC1,GC2,Wang2}, etc. utilized an
approximation of strictly convex cost functions
$$c_\epsilon(x,y)=|x-y|^{1+\epsilon}\ \ \ \epsilon>0.$$ The existence and uniqueness
of the optimal mapping ${\bf s}^*_\epsilon$ can be proved by convex
analysis. Then let $\epsilon$ tends to $0$, and one can construct an
optimal mapping ${\bf s}^*$ by using transfer rays and transfer sets
invoked by L. C. Evans and W. Gangbo \cite{Evans2}. In addition, N.
S. Trudinger and X. J. Wang etc. used the approximation
$$c_{\epsilon}(x,y)=\sqrt{\epsilon^2+|x-y|^2}$$
in the discussion of regularity \cite{Wang1,Wang2}. Moreover, L. C.
Evans, W. Gangbo and J. Moser \cite{DM,Evans1,Evans2} provided an
ODE recipe to build ${\bf s}^*$ by solving a flow problem involving
$Du$. This
method is very useful but really complicated.\\
In this paper, we consider the approximation of an optimal mapping
through solving the optimization of distribution density in the
probability theory. Here, we mainly consider two typical cases of
$\Omega\bigcap\Omega^*=\emptyset$, namely,
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Assumption I}: $0\leq c<d<a<b$, $a>>0$, $d-c$ sufficiently large, specified in Lemma 2.9;
\item {\bf Assumption II}: $a<b<c<d\leq0$, $b<<0$, $d-c$ sufficiently large, specified in Lemma 2.9.
\end{itemize}
Let $\alpha>0$ be sufficiently large and consider the distribution
densities subject to \beq u\in W_0^{1,\infty}(\Omega^*)\cap
C(\overline{\Omega^*}), \eneq \beq u\geq 0,\ \text{a.e.\ in}\
\Omega^*,\eneq
\beq\|u\|_{L^1(\Omega^*)}=1,\eneq
\beq\|u_y\|_{L^\infty(\Omega^*)}\leq\alpha,\eneq where
$W_0^{1,\infty}(\Omega^*)$ is the Sobolev space and $u_y$ stands for
the weak derivative with respect to $y\in\Omega^*$.
It is evident that the $\delta$-function is excluded from our
discussion.
On the one hand, under the Assumption I, Monge transfer problem (1)
can be converted into a maximization of the expectation of the
real-valued random variable $Y\in\Omega^*$ with respect to the
distribution densities $u$ subject to (2)-(5), \beq (\mathcal
{P}^{(1)}):\displaystyle\max_{{u}}\Big\{\mathbb{E}_{u}(Y)
:=\int_{\Omega^*}yu(y)dy\Big\},\eneq with
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Assumption III}: The optimal mapping ${\bf s^*}$ is strictly
monotonous. Under Assumption I, ${\bf s^*}(a)=d$ or ${\bf
s^*}(b)=d$; while under Assumption II, ${\bf s^*}(a)=c$ or ${\bf
s^*}(b)=c$.
\end{itemize}
On the other hand, under the Assumptions II and III, Monge transfer
problem (1) can be converted into a minimization of the expectation
of the real-valued random variable $Y\in\Omega^*$ with respect to
the distribution densities $u$ subject to (2)-(5),, \beq (\mathcal
{P}^{(2)}): \displaystyle\min_{{u}}\Big\{\mathbb{E}_{u}(Y)
:=\int_{\Omega^*}yu(y)dy\Big\}.\eneq
In this paper, we investigate the analytic approximating mapping
through {\it canonical duality method} introduced by David. Y. Gao
and G. Strang \cite{G1,G2,G3}. This theory was originally proposed
to find minimizers for a non-convex strain energy functional with a
double-well potential. During the last few years, considerable
effort has been taken to illustrate these non-convex problems from
the theoretical point of view. Through applying this method, David
Y. Gao and G. Strang characterized the local energy extrema and the
global energy minimizer for both hard device and soft device and
finally obtained the analytical solutions. Readers can refer to
\cite{G4,G5,G6,G7}.\\
Inspired by the survey paper \cite{Evans3}, we propose a nonlinear
differential equation approach by introducing a sequence of
approximation problems of the primal $(\mathcal {P}^{(1)})$ and
$(\mathcal {P}^{(2)})$, namely,
\begin{equation}(\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)}):
\displaystyle\min_{w_\varepsilon}\Big\{I^{(\varepsilon)}[w_\varepsilon]:=\int_{\Omega^*}
L^{(\varepsilon)}(w_{\varepsilon,y},w_\varepsilon,y)dy:=\int_{\Omega^*}
\Big(H^{(\varepsilon)}(w_{\varepsilon,y})-w_\varepsilon
|y|\Big)dy\Big\},
\end{equation}
where $H^{(\varepsilon)}:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}^+$ is defined as
\[
H^{(\varepsilon)}(\gamma):=\varepsilon{\rm
e}^{(\gamma^2-\alpha^2)/(2\varepsilon)}.
\]
Moreover,
$$L^{(\varepsilon)}(P,z,y):\mathbb{R}\times\mathbb{R}\times\Omega^*\to
\mathbb{R}$$ satisfies the following coercivity inequality and is
convex in the variable $P$, \beq L^{(\varepsilon)}(P,z,y)\geq
p_{\varepsilon}|P|^2-q_\varepsilon,\ P,z\in\mathbb{R}, y\in\Omega^*,
\eneq for constants $p_\varepsilon$ and $q_\varepsilon$.
$I^{(\varepsilon)}$ is called the potential energy functional and is
weakly lower semicontinuous on $W^{1,\infty}_0(\Omega^*)$. It's
worth noticing that when $|\gamma|\leq\alpha$, then
$$\displaystyle\lim_{\varepsilon\to
0^+}H^{(\varepsilon)}(\gamma)=0$$ uniformly. From \cite{Evans4}, one
knows immediately there exists a distribution density
$\bar{u}_\varepsilon$ solving
$$I^{(\varepsilon)}[\bar{u}_\varepsilon]=\displaystyle\min_{w_\varepsilon}\Big\{I^{(\varepsilon)}[w_\varepsilon]\Big\}.$$
Consequently, once such a sequence of functions
$\{\bar{u}_\varepsilon\}_\varepsilon$ is obtained, then it will help
find an optimal distribution density which solves the primal
problems $(\mathcal {P}^{(1)})$ or $(\mathcal {P}^{(2)})$. This
paper is aimed to obtain an explicit representation of this
approximation sequence. Generally speaking, there are plenty of
approximating schemes, for example, one can also let
$$H^{(\varepsilon)}(\gamma):=\varepsilon(\gamma^2-\alpha^2)^2.$$ Then by following the
procedure in dealing with double-well potentials in \cite{G1,G7}, we
could definitely find an optimal distribution density.
By variational calculus, correspondingly, one derives a sequence of
Euler-Lagrange equations for $(\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)})$, \beq
\begin{array}{ll}\displaystyle ({\rm
e}^{(u_{\varepsilon,y}^2-\alpha^2)/(2\varepsilon)}u_{\varepsilon,y})_y+|y|=0,&
\ \text{\rm in}\ U^{(\varepsilon)},
\end{array}\eneq
equipped with the Dirichlet boundary condition, where the compact
support
$$U^{(\varepsilon)}:=\text{Supp}(u_\varepsilon)\subset\Omega^*$$ is connected and will
be determined later. The term ${\rm
e}^{(u_{\varepsilon,y}^2-\alpha^2)/(2\varepsilon)}$ is called the
transport density. As a matter of fact,
$\{u_\varepsilon\}_\varepsilon$ is a sequence of strictly concave
functions. Clearly, like $p-$Laplacian, ${\rm
e}^{(u_{\varepsilon,y}^2-\alpha^2)/(2\varepsilon)}$ is a highly
nonlinear function, which is difficult to solve by the direct
approach \cite{JH,Evans4,LIONS}. However, by the canonical duality
theory, one is able to demonstrate the existence and uniqueness of
the solution of the Euler-Lagrange equation, which establishes the
equivalence between the local minimizer of
($\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)}$)
and the solution of Euler-Lagrange equation (5). This will help find a global minimizer of ($\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)}$).\\
At the moment, we would like to introduce the main theorems. First,
we consider the approximation problem of (8).
\begin{thm}
For any $\varepsilon>0$, there exists a sequence of solutions
$\{\bar{u}_\varepsilon\}_\varepsilon$ satisfying (2)-(5) for the
Euler-Lagrange equations (10), which is at the same time a sequence
of global minimizers for the approximation problems
($\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)}$) in the following form,
\begin{itemize}
\item Under Assumption I,
\[
\bar{u}_\varepsilon(y)= \left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle\int_{d}^{y}(-G(t)+C_\varepsilon(d))/E_\varepsilon^{-1}((-G(t)+C_\varepsilon(d))^2)dt,&
y\in[p_\varepsilon^*(d),d]\subset\Omega^*,\\
\\
0,& \text{elsewhere}\ \text{in}\ \Omega^*;
\end{array}
\right.
\]
\item Under Assumption II,
\[
\bar{u}_\varepsilon(y)= \left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle\int^{y}_{c}(G(t)-D_\varepsilon(c))/E_\varepsilon^{-1}((G(t)-D_\varepsilon(c))^2)dt,&
y\in[c,q_\varepsilon^*(c)]\subset\Omega^*,\\
\\
0,& \text{elsewhere}\ \text{in}\ \Omega^*,
\end{array}
\right.
\]
\end{itemize}
where $E_\varepsilon$ and $G$ are defined as
\[
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
E_\varepsilon(\gamma):=\displaystyle \gamma^2\ln({\rm
e}^{\alpha^2}\gamma^{2\varepsilon}),&
\gamma\in[{\rm e}^{-\alpha^2/(2\varepsilon)},1],\\
\\
G(y):=\displaystyle y^2/2, & y\in[p_\varepsilon^*(d),d]\ \text{or}\
[c,q_\varepsilon^*(c)].
\end{array}
\right.
\]
$E_\varepsilon^{-1}$ stands for the inverse of $E_\varepsilon$,
$C_\varepsilon(d)$ and $p^*_\varepsilon(d)$ are constants depending
on $d$ and $\varepsilon$, while $D_\varepsilon(c)$ and
$q^*_\varepsilon(c)$ are constants depending on $c$ and
$\varepsilon$.
\end{thm}
By letting $\varepsilon\to 0^+$, one can solve the optimization
problems for the expectation of the real-valued variable
$Y\in\Omega^*$.
\begin{thm}
For the maximization problem ($\mathcal{P}^{(1)}$)(or the
minimization problem ($\mathcal{P}^{(2)}$)), there exists a global
maximizing(or minimizing) distribution density $f^-$ satisfying
(2)-(5).
\end{thm}
Furthermore, under Assumption III, one is able to deal with the
Monge transfer problem $(1)$ with the optimal distribution
densities. In the following, we construct a sequence of mass
transfer mappings ${\bf s}_{\varepsilon}$ approximating an optimal
mapping ${\bf s}^*$. Let
$$F(x):=\int_a^xf^+(t)dt,\ x\in[a,b].$$ If $f^+>0$, then $F$ is
monotonously increasing with respect to $x\in[a,b]$, invertible and
its inverse is denoted as
$$F^{-1}:[0,1]\to[a,b].$$ In addition, let
$$Q_{\varepsilon}(y):=\int_{p_\varepsilon^*(d)}^y\bar{u}_\varepsilon(t)dt,\ y\in[p_\varepsilon^*(d),d].$$ Since $\bar{u}_\varepsilon>0$ in $(p_\varepsilon^*(d),d)$, then $Q_{\varepsilon}$ is
monotonously increasing with respect to
$y\in[p_\varepsilon^*(d),d]$, invertible and its inverse is denoted
as
$$Q_{\varepsilon}^{-1}:[0,1]\to[p_\varepsilon^*(d),d].$$
Furthermore, let
$$R_{\varepsilon}(y):=\int_{c}^y\bar{u}_\varepsilon(t)dt,\ y\in[c,q_\varepsilon^*(c)].$$ Since $\bar{u}_\varepsilon>0$ in $(c,q_\varepsilon^*(c))$, then $R_{\varepsilon}$ is
monotonously increasing with respect to
$y\in[c,q_\varepsilon^*(c)]$, invertible and its inverse is denoted
as
$$R_{\varepsilon}^{-1}:[0,1]\to[c,q_\varepsilon^*(c)].$$
\begin{thm}
Assume that $f^+(x)>0$, $x\in[a,b]$. For the Monge transfer problem
(1) under Assumption I and Assumption III, there exists a sequence
of strictly increasing(or decreasing) mappings represented
explicitly as
\[
{\bf s}_\varepsilon(x)=\begin{array}{cl} \displaystyle
Q_{\varepsilon}^{-1}(F(x)),&x\in[a,b];
\end{array}
\]
or
\[
{\bf s}_\varepsilon(x)=\begin{array}{cl} \displaystyle
Q_{\varepsilon}^{-1}(1-F(x)),&x\in[a,b].
\end{array}
\]
While for the Monge transfer problem (1) under Assumption II and
Assumption III, there exists a sequence of strictly increasing(or
decreasing) mappings represented explicitly as
\[
{\bf s}_\varepsilon(x)=\begin{array}{cl} \displaystyle
R_{\varepsilon}^{-1}(F(x)),&x\in[a,b];
\end{array}
\]
or
\[
{\bf s}_\varepsilon(x)=\begin{array}{cl} \displaystyle
R_{\varepsilon}^{-1}(1-F(x)),&x\in[a,b].
\end{array}
\]
\end{thm}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, first
we introduce some useful notations which will simplify the proof
considerably. Then we apply the canonical dual transformation to
deduce a sequence of perfect dual problems
($\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)}_d$), corresponding to
$(\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)})$ and a pure complementary energy
principle. Next we apply the canonical duality theory to prove
Theorem 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3. A few remarks will conclude our discussion.\\
\section{Proof of the main results}
\subsection{Useful notations}
Before proving the main results, first and foremost, we introduce
some useful
notations.\\
\begin{itemize}
\item $\theta_\varepsilon$ is the corresponding G\^{a}teaux derivative of
$H^{(\varepsilon)}$ with respect to $u_{\varepsilon,y}$ given by
$$\theta_\varepsilon(y)={\rm e}^{(u_{\varepsilon,y}^2-\alpha^2)/(2\varepsilon)}u_{\varepsilon,y}.$$
\item $\Phi^{(\varepsilon)}$ is a nonlinear
geometric mapping given by
$$\Phi^{(\varepsilon)}(u_\varepsilon):=(u_{\varepsilon,y}^2-\alpha^2)/(2\varepsilon).$$
For convenience's sake, denote
$$\xi_\varepsilon:=\Phi^{(\varepsilon)}(u_\varepsilon).$$ It is evident that $\xi_\varepsilon$ belongs to the
function space $\mathscr{U}$ given by
$$\mathscr{U}:=
\Big\{\phi\ \Big|\ \phi\leq 0\Big\}.$$
\item $\Psi^{(\varepsilon)}$ is a canonical energy
defined as $$\Psi^{(\varepsilon)}(\xi_\varepsilon):=\varepsilon{\rm
e}^{\xi_\varepsilon},$$ which is a convex function with respect to
$\xi_\varepsilon$.
\item $\zeta_\varepsilon$ is the corresponding G\^{a}teaux derivative of
$\Psi^{(\varepsilon)}$ with respect to $\xi_\varepsilon$ given by
$$\zeta_\varepsilon=\varepsilon{\rm e}^{\xi_\varepsilon},$$ which is invertible with respect to
$\xi_\varepsilon$ and belongs to the function space
$\mathscr{V}^{(\varepsilon)}$,
$$\mathscr{V}^{(\varepsilon)}:=\Big\{\phi\ \Big|\ 0<\phi\leq \varepsilon\Big\}.$$
\item
$\Psi^{(\varepsilon)}_\ast$ is defined as
\[
\Psi^{(\varepsilon)}_\ast(\zeta_\varepsilon):=\xi_\varepsilon\zeta_\varepsilon-\Psi^{(\varepsilon)}(\xi_\varepsilon)=\zeta_\varepsilon(\ln(\zeta_\varepsilon/\varepsilon)-1).
\]
\item $\lambda_\varepsilon$ is defined as $$\lambda_\varepsilon:=\zeta_\varepsilon/\varepsilon,$$ and belongs
to the function space $\mathscr{V}$,
$$\mathscr{V}:=\Big\{\phi\ \Big|\ 0<\phi\leq 1\Big\}.$$
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Canonical duality techniques}
\begin{defi}
By Legendre transformation, one defines a Gao-Strang total
complementary energy functional $\Xi^{(\varepsilon)}$,
\[
\Xi^{(\varepsilon)}(u_\varepsilon,\zeta_\varepsilon):=\displaystyle\int_{U^{(\varepsilon)}}\Big\{\Phi^{(\varepsilon)}(u_\varepsilon)\zeta_\varepsilon-\Psi^{(\varepsilon)}_\ast(\zeta_\varepsilon)
-|y|u_\varepsilon\Big\}dy.
\]
\end{defi}
Next we introduce an important {\it criticality criterium} for
$\Xi^{(\varepsilon)}$.
\begin{defi}
$(\bar{u}_\varepsilon, \bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon)$ is called a
critical pair of $\Xi^{(\varepsilon)}$ if and only if \beq
D_{u_\varepsilon}\Xi^{(\varepsilon)}(\bar{u}_\varepsilon,\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon)=0,
\eneq and \beq
D_{\zeta_\varepsilon}\Xi^{(\varepsilon)}(\bar{u}_\varepsilon,\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon)=0,
\eneq where $D_{u_\varepsilon}, D_{\zeta_\varepsilon}$ denote the
partial G\^ateaux derivatives of $\Xi^{(\varepsilon)}$,
respectively.
\end{defi} Indeed, by variational calculus, we have the following
observation from (11) and (12).
\begin{lem}
On the one hand, for any fixed
$\zeta_\varepsilon\in\mathscr{V}^{(\varepsilon)}$, $(11)$ is
equivalent to the equilibrium equation
\[
\begin{array}{ll}\displaystyle (\lambda_\varepsilon \bar{u}_{\varepsilon,y})_y+|y|=0,& \
\text{\rm in}\ U^{(\varepsilon)}.\end{array}
\]
On the other hand, for any fixed $u_\varepsilon$ satisfying (2)-(5),
(12) is consistent with the constructive law
\[
\Phi^{(\varepsilon)}(u_\varepsilon)=D_{\zeta_\varepsilon}\Psi^{(\varepsilon)}_\ast(\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon).
\]
\end{lem}
Lemma 2.3 indicates that $\bar{u}_\varepsilon$ from the critical
pair $(\bar{u}_\varepsilon,\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon)$ solves the
Euler-Lagrange equation (10).
\begin{defi}
From Definition 2.1, one defines the Gao-Strang pure complementary
energy $I^{(\varepsilon)}_d$ in the form
\[
I^{(\varepsilon)}_d[\zeta_\varepsilon]:=\Xi^{(\varepsilon)}(\bar{u}_\varepsilon,\zeta_\varepsilon),
\]
where $\bar{u}_\varepsilon$ solves the Euler-Lagrange equation (10).
\end{defi}
For convenience's sake, we give another representation of the pure
energy $I^{(\varepsilon)}_d$ by the following lemma.
\begin{lem} The
pure complementary energy functional $I^{(\varepsilon)}_d$ can be
rewritten as
\[
I^{(\varepsilon)}_d[\zeta_\varepsilon]=-1/2\int_{U^{(\varepsilon)}}\Big\{{\varepsilon\theta_\varepsilon^2/\zeta_\varepsilon}+\alpha^2\zeta_\varepsilon/\varepsilon+2\zeta_\varepsilon(\ln(\zeta_\varepsilon/\varepsilon)-1)\Big\}dy,
\]
where $\theta_\varepsilon$ satisfies \beq
\theta_{\varepsilon,y}+|y|=0\ \text{in}\ U^{(\varepsilon)}, \eneq
equipped with a hidden boundary condition.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Through integrating by parts, one has
\[
\begin{array}{lll}
I^{(\varepsilon)}_d[\zeta_\varepsilon]&=&\displaystyle-\underbrace{\int_{U^{(\varepsilon)}}\Big\{(\zeta_\varepsilon
\bar{u}_{\varepsilon,y}/\varepsilon)_y+|y|\Big\}\bar{u}_\varepsilon dy}_{(I)}\\
\\
&&-\underbrace{1/2\int_{U^{(\varepsilon)}}\Big\{\zeta_\varepsilon\bar{u}_{\varepsilon,y}^2/\varepsilon+\alpha^2\zeta_\varepsilon/\varepsilon+2\zeta_\varepsilon(\ln(\zeta_\varepsilon/\varepsilon)-1)\Big\}dy.}_{(II)}\\
\\
\end{array}
\]
Since $\bar{u}_\varepsilon$ solves the Euler-Lagrange equation (10),
then the first part $(I)$ disappears. Keeping in mind the definition
of $\theta_\varepsilon$ and $\zeta_\varepsilon$, one reaches the
conclusion.
\end{proof}
With the above discussion, next we establish a sequence of dual
variational problems to the approximation problems
($\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)}$).
\begin{equation}
(\mathcal{P}_d^{(\varepsilon)}):\displaystyle\max_{\zeta_\varepsilon\in\mathscr{V}^{(\varepsilon)}}\Big\{I^{(\varepsilon)}_d[\zeta_\varepsilon]=-1/2\int_{U^{(\varepsilon)}}\Big\{{\varepsilon\theta_\varepsilon^2/\zeta_\varepsilon}+\alpha^2\zeta_\varepsilon/\varepsilon+2\zeta_\varepsilon(\ln(\zeta_\varepsilon/\varepsilon)-1)\Big\}dy\Big\}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, by calculating the G\^{a}teaux derivative of
$I_d^{(\varepsilon)}$ with respect to $\zeta_\varepsilon$, one has
\begin{lem} The variation of $I_d^{(\varepsilon)}$ with respect to $\zeta_\varepsilon$
leads to the dual algebraic equation (DAE), namely, \beq
\theta_\varepsilon^2={\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon}^2(2\ln(\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon/\varepsilon)+\alpha^2/\varepsilon)/\varepsilon,
\eneq where $\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon$ is from the critical pair
$(\bar{u}_\varepsilon,\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon)$.
\end{lem}
Taking into account the notation of $\lambda_\varepsilon$, the
identity (15) can be rewritten as \beq
\theta_\varepsilon^2=E_\varepsilon(\lambda_\varepsilon)={\lambda}_\varepsilon^2\ln({\rm
e}^{\alpha^2}{\lambda}_\varepsilon^{2\varepsilon}). \eneq It is
evident $E_\varepsilon$ is monotonously increasing with respect to
$\lambda_\varepsilon\in[{\rm e}^{-\alpha^2/(2\varepsilon)},1]$. As a
matter of fact, $\theta_\varepsilon^2$ has the following asymptotic
expansion by using Taylor's expansion formula for
$\ln\lambda_\varepsilon$ at the point 1.
\begin{lem}
When $\varepsilon$ is sufficiently small, $\theta_\varepsilon^2$ has
the asymptotic expansion,
$$\theta_\varepsilon^2=(\alpha^2-2\varepsilon)\lambda_\varepsilon^2+2\varepsilon\lambda_\varepsilon^3+R_\varepsilon(\lambda_\varepsilon),$$
where the remainder term
\[
|R_\varepsilon(\lambda_\varepsilon)|\leq \varepsilon
\] uniformly for any $\lambda_\varepsilon\in[{\rm e}^{-\alpha^2/(2\varepsilon)},1]$.
\end{lem}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem 1.1}
From the above discussion, one deduces that, once
$\theta_\varepsilon$ is given, then the analytic solution of the
Euler-Lagrange equation (10) can be represented as \beq
\bar{u}_\varepsilon(y)=\displaystyle\int^{y}_{y_0}\eta_\varepsilon(t)dt,
\eneq where $y\in U^{(\varepsilon)}, y_0\in\partial
U^{(\varepsilon)}$,
$\eta_\varepsilon:=\theta_\varepsilon/\lambda_\varepsilon$. In the
following, we will determine the support $U^{(\varepsilon)}$. First
and foremost, we prove several useful lemmas.
\begin{lem}
For $\forall\ \varepsilon>0$, \begin{itemize}
\item Under Assumption I, $\forall\ s\in[c,d)$, there exists a
unique solution $\bar{u}_{\varepsilon}\in C^\infty[s,d]$ of the
Euler-Lagrange equation (10) with Dirichlet boundary in the form of
(17). \item Under Assumption II, for $\forall\ t\in(c,d]$, there
exists a unique solution $\bar{u}_{\varepsilon}\in C^\infty[c,t]$ of
the Euler-Lagrange equation (10) with Dirichlet boundary in the form
of (17).
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
{\it First case:}\\
In $[s,d]$, one has a general solution for the differential equation
$\theta_{\varepsilon,y}=-y$ in the form of
\[
\theta_\varepsilon(y)=-G(y)+C_\varepsilon=-y^2/2+C_\varepsilon,\ \
y\in[s,d]\subset(0,+\infty).
\]
From the identity (16), one sees that there exists a unique
$C^\infty$ function $\lambda_\varepsilon\in[{\rm
e}^{-\alpha^2/(2\varepsilon)},1]$. By paying attention to the
Dirichlet boundary $\bar{u}_\varepsilon(s)=0$, one has the analytic
solution $\bar{u}_\varepsilon$ in the following form,
\[
\bar{u}_\varepsilon(y)=\int^{y}_{s}\eta_\varepsilon(x)dx,\ \ \ \
y\in[s,d].
\]
Recall that
\[
\bar{u}_\varepsilon(d)=\int^{G^{-1}(C_\varepsilon)}_{s}\eta_\varepsilon(x)dx+\int^{d}_{G^{-1}(C_\varepsilon)}\eta_\varepsilon(x)dx=0,
\]
and one can determine the constant $C_\varepsilon\in(s^2/2,d^2/2)$
uniquely. Indeed, let
\[
\mu_\varepsilon(y,r):=(-G(y)+r)/\lambda_\varepsilon(y,r)
\]
and
\[
M_{\varepsilon}(r):=\int^{G^{-1}(r)}_{s}\mu_\varepsilon(y,r)dy+\int^{d}_{G^{-1}(r)}\mu_\varepsilon(y,r)dy,
\]
where $\lambda_\varepsilon(y,r)$ is from (16). It is evident that
$\lambda_\varepsilon$ depends on $C_\varepsilon$. As a matter of
fact, $M_\varepsilon$ is strictly increasing with respect to
$r\in(s^2/2,d^2/2)$, which leads to
\[
C_\varepsilon=M_{\varepsilon}^{-1}(0).
\]
In fact, $C_\varepsilon$ depends on $s$ and the contradiction method
shows that $C_\varepsilon$ is strictly increasing with respect to
$s\in[c,d)$.\\
{\it Second case:}\\
In $[c,t]$, one has a general solution for the differential equation
$\theta_{\varepsilon,y}=y$ in the form of
\[
\theta_\varepsilon(y)=G(y)-D_\varepsilon=y^2/2-D_\varepsilon,\ \
y\in[c,t]\subset(-\infty,0).
\]
From the identity (16), one sees that there exists a unique
$C^\infty$ function $\lambda_\varepsilon\in[{\rm
e}^{-\alpha^2/(2\varepsilon)},1]$. By paying attention to the
Dirichlet boundary $\bar{u}_\varepsilon(c)=0$, one has the analytic
solution $\bar{u}_\varepsilon$ in the following form,
\[
\bar{u}_\varepsilon(y)=\int^{y}_{c}\eta_\varepsilon(x)dx,\ \ \ \
y\in[c,t].
\]
Recall that
\[
\bar{u}_\varepsilon(t)=\int^{G^{-1}(D_\varepsilon)}_{c}\eta_\varepsilon(x)dx+\int^{t}_{G^{-1}(D_\varepsilon)}\eta_\varepsilon(x)dx=0,
\]
and one can determine the constant $D_\varepsilon\in(t^2/2,c^2/2)$
uniquely. Indeed, let
\[
\mu_\varepsilon(y,r):=(G(y)-r)/\lambda_\varepsilon(y,r)
\]
and
\[
N_{\varepsilon}(r):=\int^{G^{-1}(r)}_{c}\mu_\varepsilon(y,r)dy+\int^{t}_{G^{-1}(r)}\mu_\varepsilon(y,r)dy,
\]
where $\lambda_\varepsilon(y,r)$ is from (16). It is evident that
$\lambda_\varepsilon$ depends on $D_\varepsilon$. As a matter of
fact, $N_\varepsilon$ is strictly decreasing with respect to
$r\in(t^2/2,c^2/2)$, which leads to
\[
D_\varepsilon=N_{\varepsilon}^{-1}(0).
\]
In fact, $D_\varepsilon$ depends on $t$ and the contradiction method
shows that $D_\varepsilon$ is strictly decreasing with respect to
$t\in(c,d]$.\\
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
For $\forall\ \varepsilon>0$,
\begin{itemize}
\item Under Assumption I, if $d-c$ is sufficiently large such
that
\beq\displaystyle\int_c^d\int_d^y\Big(-x^2/2+C_\varepsilon\Big)/\Big(\lambda_{\varepsilon}(x,C_\varepsilon)\Big)dxdy>1\
\text{\rm when\ $d\in$\ Supp}\bar{u}_{\varepsilon}, \eneq then there
exists a unique $p_\varepsilon^*(d)$ such that
\[
\text{\rm Supp}\bar{u}_{\varepsilon}=[p_\varepsilon^*(d),d]\
\text{and}\ \int_{p_\varepsilon^*(d)}^d\bar{u}_{\varepsilon}(y)dy=1.
\]
\item Under Assumption II, if $d-c$ is sufficiently large such
that
\beq\displaystyle\int_c^d\int_c^y\Big(x^2/2-D_\varepsilon\Big)/\Big(\lambda_{\varepsilon}(x,D_\varepsilon)\Big)dxdy>1\
\text{\rm when\ $c\in$\ Supp}\bar{u}_{\varepsilon},\eneq then there
exists a unique $q_\varepsilon^*(c)$ such that
\[
\text{\rm Supp}\bar{u}_{\varepsilon}=[c,q_{\varepsilon}^{*}(c)]\
\text{and}\ \int^{q_\varepsilon*(c)}_c\bar{u}_{\varepsilon}(y)dy=1.
\]
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
{\it First Part:}\\
Let $\text{\rm Supp}\bar{u}_{\varepsilon}=[s,d]$ and define a
function $\Pi:[c,d)\to\mathbb{R}^+$ as follows,
\[\Pi(s):=\displaystyle\int_s^d\int_d^y\Big(-x^2/2+C_\varepsilon(s)\Big)/\Big(\lambda_{\varepsilon}(x,C_\varepsilon(s))\Big)dxdy.\]
Indeed, since $C_\varepsilon$ is strictly increasing with respect to
$s\in[c,d)$, as a result, it is easy to check that $\Pi$ is a
strictly decreasing function with respect to $s\in[c,d)$. The first
assertion follows immediately when we recall (18).\\
{\it Second Part:}\\
Let $\text{\rm Supp}\bar{u}_{\varepsilon}=[c,t]$ and define a
function $\Pi:(c,d]\to\mathbb{R}^+$ as follows,
\[\Pi(t):=\displaystyle\int_c^t\int_c^y\Big(x^2/2-D_\varepsilon(t)\Big)/\Big(\lambda_{\varepsilon}(x,D_\varepsilon(t))\Big)dxdy.\]
Indeed, since $D_\varepsilon$ is strictly decreasing with respect to
$t\in[c,d)$, as a result, it is easy to check that $\Pi$ is a
strictly increasing function with respect to $t\in(c,d]$. The second
assertion follows immediately when we recall (19).
\end{proof}
Next we verify that $\bar{u}_\varepsilon$ is exactly a global
minimizer for ($\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)}$) and
$\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon$ is a global maximizer for
($\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)}_d$).
\begin{lem}(Canonical Duality Theory)
For $\forall\ \varepsilon>0$, $\bar{u}_\varepsilon$ in Lemma 2.9 is
a global minimizer for the approximation problem
($\mathcal{P}^{(\varepsilon)}$). And the corresponding
$\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon$ is a global maximizer for the dual problem
($\mathcal{P}_d^{(\varepsilon)}$). Moreover, the following duality
identity holds, \beq
I^{(\varepsilon)}[\bar{u}_\varepsilon]=\displaystyle\min_{u_\varepsilon}I^{(\varepsilon)}[u_\varepsilon]=\Xi^{(\varepsilon)}(\bar{u}_\varepsilon,\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon)=\displaystyle\max_{\zeta_\varepsilon}I_d^{(\varepsilon)}[\zeta_\varepsilon]=I_d^{(\varepsilon)}[\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon],
\eneq where $u_\varepsilon$ is subject to the constraints (2)-(5)
and $\zeta_\varepsilon\in\mathscr{V}^{(\varepsilon)}$.
\end{lem}
Lemma 2.10 demonstrates that the maximization of the pure
complementary energy functional $I_d^{(\varepsilon)}$ is perfectly
dual to the minimization of the potential energy functional
$I^{(\varepsilon)}$. In effect, the identity (20) indicates there is
no duality gap between them.
\begin{proof}
On the one hand, for any function $\phi\in
W_0^{1,\infty}(U^{(\varepsilon)})$, the second variational form
$\delta_\phi^2I^{(\varepsilon)}$ is equal to\beq
\int_{U^{(\varepsilon)}}{\rm
e}^{(\bar{u}_{\varepsilon,x}^2-\alpha^2)/(2\varepsilon)}\Big\{(\bar{u}_{\varepsilon,x}
\phi_x)^2/\varepsilon+\phi_x^2\Big\}dx.\eneq On the other hand, for
any function $\psi\in\mathscr{V}^{(\varepsilon)}$, the second
variational form $\delta_\psi^2I_d^{(\varepsilon)}$ is equal to
\beq-\int_{U^{(\varepsilon)}}\Big\{\varepsilon\theta_\varepsilon^2\psi^2/\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon^3+\psi^2/\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon\Big\}dx.
\eneq From (21) and (22), one deduces immediately that
\[
\delta^2_\phi I^{(\varepsilon)}[\bar{u}_\varepsilon]\geq0,\ \
\delta_\psi^2I_d^{(\varepsilon)}[\bar{\zeta}_\varepsilon]\leq0.
\]
\end{proof}
Consequently, we reach the conclusion of Theorem 1.1 by summarizing
the above discussion.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem 1.2}
According to Rellich-Kondrachov Compactness Theorem, since
$$\displaystyle\sup_{\varepsilon}|\bar{u}_\varepsilon|\leq \alpha(d-c)$$ and
$$\displaystyle\sup_{\varepsilon}|\bar{u}_{\varepsilon,y}|\leq\alpha,$$ then, there exists a
subsequence $\{\bar{u}_{\varepsilon_k}\}_{\varepsilon_k}$ and
$f^{-}\in W_0^{1,\infty}(\Omega^*)\cap C(\overline{\Omega^*})$ such
that \beq\bar{u}_{\varepsilon_k}\rightarrow f^-\ (k\to\infty)\
\text{in}\ L^\infty(\Omega^*),\eneq
\beq\bar{u}_{\varepsilon_k,y}\ \overrightharpoon{*}\ f^-_{y}\
(k\to\infty)\ \text{weakly\ $\ast$\ in}\ L^\infty(\Omega^*).\eneq It
remains to check that $f^-$ satisfies (2)-(5). From (23), one knows
\beq\bar{u}_{\varepsilon_k}\rightarrow f^-\ (k\to\infty)\
\text{a.e.\ in}\ \Omega^*.\eneq According to Lebesgue's dominated
convergence theorem,
\[\displaystyle\int_{\Omega^*}f^-(y)dy=\lim_{k\to\infty}\int_{\Omega^*}\bar{u}_{\varepsilon_k}(y)dy=1.\]
From (24), one has
\[\|f^-_y\|_{L^\infty(\Omega^*)}\leq\displaystyle\liminf_{k\to\infty}\|\bar{u}_{\varepsilon_k,y}\|_{L^\infty(\Omega^*)}\leq\sup_{k\to\infty}\|\bar{u}_{\varepsilon_k,y}\|_{L^\infty(\Omega^*)}\leq\alpha.\]
\subsection{Proof of Theorem 1.3}
On the one hand, under Assumption I and III, one solves the
differential problems
\[\bar{u}_\varepsilon({\bf s}_\varepsilon){\rm d}{\bf s}_\varepsilon=f^+(x){\rm d}x,\ \ {\bf s}_\varepsilon(b)=d,\]
or
\[\bar{u}_\varepsilon({\bf s}_\varepsilon){\rm d}{\bf s}_\varepsilon=-f^+(x){\rm d}x,\ \ {\bf s}_\varepsilon(a)=d\]
respectively. On the other hand, under Assumption II and III, one
solves the differential problems
\[\bar{u}_\varepsilon({\bf s}_\varepsilon){\rm d}{\bf s}_\varepsilon=f^+(x){\rm d}x,\ \ {\bf s}_\varepsilon(a)=c,\]
or
\[\bar{u}_\varepsilon({\bf s}_\varepsilon){\rm d}{\bf s}_\varepsilon=-f^+(x){\rm d}x,\ \ {\bf s}_\varepsilon(b)=c\]
respectively. Our conclusion follows immediately.\\
\\
{\bf Concluding Remarks}:\\
\\
In this paper, we mainly focus on the construction of 1-1 mappings
approximating the optimal Monge transfer mapping. Rather than
numerical simulation, we give the explicit representation of the
approximating mappings by applying the canonical duality method.
Together with the other convex approximation mechanisms used by L.
A. Caffarelli, W. Gangbo, R. J. McCann, N. S. Trudinger, L. C.
Evans, W. Gangbo and X. J. Wang
\cite{Ca2,DM,Evans1,Evans2,GC1,GC2,Wang1,Wang2}, we provide another
viewpoint, namely, nonlinear differential equation approach, for the Monge transfer problem.\\
\\
As a matter of fact, in a similar manner, Assumption I and
Assumption II can be relaxed to the whole $\mathbb{R}$ as long as
$\Omega\bigcap\Omega^*=\emptyset$. It remains to discuss various
cases when $\Omega\bigcap\Omega^*\neq\emptyset$, in which case,
several new assumptions will have to be introduced. Furthermore,
optimal transfer mapping in the $n$-dimensional case will be given
in
a sequential paper. The canonical duality method proves to be useful and can also be applied in the discussion of $p$-Laplacian problems and optimal probability density for $p$-th moment etc. \cite{LU2,LU3}.\\
\\
{\bf Acknowledgment}: The main results in this paper were obtained
during a research collaboration at the Federation University
Australia in August, 2016. Both authors wish to thank Professor
David Y. Gao for his hospitality and financial support. This project
is partially supported by US Air Force Office of Scientific Research
(AFOSR FA9550-10-1-0487), Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu
Province (BK 20130598), National Natural Science Foundation of China
(NSFC 71273048, 71473036, 11471072), the Scientific Research
Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, Fundamental
Research Funds for the Central Universities on the Field Research of
Commercialization of Marriage between China and Vietnam (No.
2014B15214). This work is also supported by Open Research Fund
Program of Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Engineering Mechanics,
Southeast University (LEM16B06). In particular, the authors also
express their deep gratitude to the referees for their careful
reading and useful remarks.
|
\section{Introduction}
Since their discovery was reported in 1984,\cite{Shechtman1984} quasicrystals have been extensively studied, and many have unusual electronic\cite{Poon1992} and surface\cite{Rivier1993} properties. While most quasicrystals reported thus far have been metallic alloys,\cite{Steurer2004, Steurer2012} such structures have also increasingly been seen in soft matter systems,\cite{Zeng2005, Tsai2003, Dotera2011} for example in colloidal\cite{Fischer2011} and micellar\cite{Xiao2012,Zeng2004} systems and polymer melts.\cite{Hayashida2007, Zhang2012,Gillard2016} Moreover, quasicrystals have been observed in a number of computer simulations.\cite{Widom1987, Leung1989, Dzugutov1993, Skibinsky1999, Engel2007, Keys2007, Johnston2010b, Johnston2010c, ZhiWei2012, Dotera2012, HajiAkbari2009, HajiAkbari2011, HajiAkbari2011b, Iacovella2011, Kiselev2012, VanDerLinden2012, Reinhardt2013, Dotera2014, Barkan2014, Engel2015, Pattabhiraman2015, Jiang2015, Archer2015} A mean-field approach has shown that dodecagonal quasicrystals are often thermodynamically more stable than other types of quasicrystal,\cite{Narasimhan1988} and a theoretical approach suggests that quasicrystals in soft matter are likely to be dodecagonal.\cite{Lifshitz2007}
We have recently observed an example of such a dodecagonal soft quasicrystal when studying the self-assembly behaviour of a two-dimensional patchy-particle system.\cite{VanDerLinden2012} We studied a system of particles with an angular dependence, such that each particle had five attractive `arms', or patches, which could bond with other particles. For particles with fairly narrow patches, the system forms a crystal where each particle has a co-ordination number of five, albeit in an arrangement that must deviate from perfect five-fold symmetry. For sufficiently wide patches, a competition is set up between such a non-uniform pentavalent co-ordination and the hexagonal co-ordination characteristic of crystals of spherically symmetric particles. These hexa- and pentavalent environments form square--triangle tilings, which are known to be capable of forming dodecagonal quasicrystals.\cite{Gaehler1988,Oxborrow1993} Indeed, we observed precisely such quasicrystals in brute-force simulations.\cite{VanDerLinden2012} In order to confirm whether such quasicrystals are stable rather than just kinetic products, we have also computed explicit phase diagrams for this one-component patchy-particle system.\cite{Reinhardt2013} To do this, we used Frenkel--Ladd integration\cite{Frenkel1984} and direct-coexistence simulations\cite{Vega2008} to compute the free energies of the quasicrystal and its competing phases: the quasicrystal was found to be a robust feature of the system and it persisted as the thermodynamically stable phase over a range of parameterisations of the model and occupied significant portions of the phase diagrams we computed.
In the light of these results, we anticipated that it might not be overly difficult to self-assemble such quasicrystalline structures in experiment. Whilst a true `patchy particle' system\cite{DeVries2007, Cho2007, Yang2008, Kraft2009, Wang2008, Mao2010, Duguet2011, Wang2012, Chen2011, Glotzer2007,Pawar2010, Liu2016} confined in two dimensions, perhaps by density mismatching,\cite{Chen2011} would perhaps be the most obvious candidate, one attractive alternative might be to make use of DNA multi-arm motifs,\cite{Yan2003, He2005b, He2006, Zhang2008, Zhang2013, Zhang2016} which have been shown to be able to self-assemble into a range of effectively two-dimensional structures. DNA multi-arm motifs, or `star tiles', are DNA structures which form a star shape with a certain number of protrusions called `arms'. The DNA strands in these structures are complementary such that the bulk of the structure is fully bonded, but the very ends of each of the arms contain unpaired strands which can bond with other star tiles. Since the bonding between the tiles is mediated by DNA, one important advantage of this approach is that the bonding can be chosen to be as generic or as specific as we wish, simply by selecting appropriate DNA sequences. A similar approach involves the construction of multi-arm motifs using DNA origami.\cite{Zhang2015,Wang2016} Using DNA tiles to construct quasicrystals would be broadly similar to the recently observed lanthanide-directed self-assembly of quasicrystals,\cite{Ecija2013,*Urgel2016} but the underlying framework is different in the sense that DNA star tiles are effectively `patchy particles' with varying numbers of arms, whereas the basic units in the lanthanide-directed self-assembly approach are point vertices (the metal) and separate edges (molecular linkers).
The simple patchy-particle model we have previously introduced describes much of the fundamental physical behaviour of the DNA star tiles; however, unlike colloidal patchy particles with wide patches, DNA star tiles have a well-defined valence, determined by the number of arms, and so a five-arm star tile cannot bond with six neighbours.
Therefore, the DNA tiles best map onto patchy particles with a narrow patch width, and there is no parameter equivalent to the patch width that could be varied in order to facilitate five-arm DNA tiles to form quasicrystals. Indeed, experimentally, five-arm DNA star tiles have been observed just to form the same two-dimensional crystalline arrays with pentavalent co-ordination as the five-patch particles do at narrow patch width.\cite{Zhang2008}
In this work, we suggest a potential means to enable DNA star tiles to self-assemble into a variety of structures at low temperatures, including a quasicrystalline phase. Rather than rely on a competition between hexavalent and pentavalent environments corresponding to patchy particles with five patches, as we have done in previous work,\cite{Reinhardt2013} here, we simulate a two-component mixture of patchy particles with five and six patches of the appropriate composition. We show that such mixtures continue to exhibit stable quasicrystals.
Although the behaviour of patchy particles maps onto star tiles perhaps surprisingly well,\cite{Doye2007,Wilber2009b} this level of abstraction may seem rather extreme. Furthermore, given that quasicrystals to the best of our knowledge do not appear to have been observed with DNA star tiles in experimental work,\footnote{A scaffolded approach has been used to produce a `quasicrystalline' patch of a finite size;\cite{Zhang2015} however, such a finite structure by construction cannot grow and is not a phase in the thermodynamic sense.} it is important to investigate whether the simple coarse-grained model we have considered here is sufficient to capture the underlying physics of the DNA star tile self-assembly process. Unfortunately, it would be prohibitively expensive to perform such simulations using a brute-force all-atom approach, since both the time and the length scales involved are far too large. As a compromise, we use what is still a coarse-grained, but much more realistic model of DNA, oxDNA,\cite{Ouldridge2010, Snodin2015} to make further progress. Even though a number of features of DNA have already been coarse-grained within this model, studying the formation of quasicrystals and phase behaviour with oxDNA is still too computationally intractable to be feasible to attempt in full. However, what we can study is the behaviour of the basic quasicrystalline motifs that we observe in the patchy-particle simulations. We have confirmed from these simulations that the structures predicted by our `toy' patchy-particle model are reasonably well behaved and the patchy model does appear to capture the necessary fundamentals of the physical system. This is a very exciting result because it gives us a considerable degree of confidence that it might be possible in experiment to self-assemble a soft quasicrystal using DNA molecules.
\section{Patchy-particle simulations}
\subsection{Model and methods}
Patchy-particle models have been used extensively to study a wide range of behaviours in computer simulations,\cite{Wilber2007, Noya2007, Noya2010, Williamson2011b, Doppelbauer2012b, Doye2007, VanDerLinden2012, Doppelbauer2010, Kern2003, Zhang2004, Bianchi2006, Sciortino2009, Romano2011b, Bianchi2011, Reinhardt2013, Whitelam2015c, Reinhardt2016b, Whitelam2016} including self-assembly and crystallisation, and represent one of the simplest types of `toy model' which can account for the complexity of behaviour seen in experiments on a number of colloidal systems.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics{fig-quasicrystal-neighClass}
\caption{Neighbour classification of the $\upsigma$, H and Z environments. The nearest neighbours of the central particle are shown in light grey, and where applicable, the second-nearest neighbours in dark grey. The number given for each nearest neighbour specifies how many neighbours that particle shares with the central particle.}\label{fig-quasicrystal-neighClass}
\end{figure}
In our simulations, we use the Metropolis Monte Carlo scheme\cite{Metropolis1953} with volume moves\cite{Frenkel2002,Eppenga1984} and periodic boundary conditions. In simulations with multiple particle types, we furthermore allow moves in which two particles of distinct types are exchanged with one another in order to help facilitate equilibration.
We model particles with attractive patches using a simple angular modulation of the attractive part of the Lennard-Jones potential,
\begin{equation}
V(\boldsymbol{r}_{ij},\varphi_i,\varphi_j)=\begin{cases}
V^{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) & r_{ij}<\sigma_\text{LJ}, \\
V^{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) V^{\text{A}}(\hat{\boldsymbol{r}}_{ij},\varphi_i,\varphi_j) & \sigma_\text{LJ}\le r_{ij} , \\
\end{cases}\label{patchy-potential}
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{r}_{ij}$ is the interparticle vector connecting the particles $i$ and $j$, $r_{ij}$ is the magnitude of this vector, and $\varphi_i$ and $\varphi_j$ are the orientations of the particles $i$ and $j$, respectively. The Lennard-Jones potential is given by
\begin{equation}
V^{\text{LJ}}(r_{ij}) =
4 \varepsilon \left[\left(\frac{\sigma_\text{LJ}}{r_{ij}}\right)^{12}-\left(\frac{\sigma_\text{LJ}}{r_{ij}}\right)^{6}\right],\label{patchy-LJ}
\end{equation}
and we use a potential cutoff of $r_\text{cut}=3\sigma_\text{LJ}$ and shift the potential so that it equals zero at $r_\text{cut}$. The angular modulation term in the potential is given by a product of gaussian functions,
\begin{equation}
V^{\text{A}}(\hat{\boldsymbol{r}}_{ij},\,\varphi_i,\,\varphi_j) = \max_{k,\,l}\mleft\{\exp\mleft[\frac{-\theta_{kij}^2}{2\,\sigma_\text{pw}^2}\mright]\exp\mleft[\frac{-\theta_{lji}^2}{2\,\sigma_\text{pw}^2}\mright]\mright\},\label{eqn-angmod}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_\text{pw}$ is a parameter reflecting the patch `width' and $\theta_{kij}$ is the angle between the patch vector of patch $k$ on particle $i$ and the interparticle vector $\boldsymbol{r}_{ij}$. The product of gaussian functions is evaluated over all possible patch pairs $\{k,\,l\}$, and the optimum combination is chosen, i.e.~a pair of particles can only interact via that pair of patches which is most energetically favourable.
In simulations with multiple patch types, the angular modulation of Eqn~\eqref{eqn-angmod} is modified to include a prefactor that depends on the interaction matrix of the two patches $k$ and $l$ considered. In all simulations considered here, the matrix elements of this matrix are either zero or unity, i.e.~all patches that interact have the same strength, and patches that do not interact do not contribute at all to the energy in the attractive part of the Lennard-Jones potential. The most energetically favourable pair of patches is still chosen in the computation of the angular modulation in Eqn~\eqref{eqn-angmod}.
In order to characterise the structures we observe in our simulations, we classify each particle according to its nearest-neighbour environment.\cite{VanDerLinden2012, Reinhardt2013} To do this, we determine the neighbours of each particle, using a simple spherical cutoff of $1.38\,\sigma_\text{LJ}$,\cite{VanDerLinden2012} and then determine how many neighbours each neighbouring particle shares with the particle we are classifying. We classify particles into three distinct types of environment, $\upsigma$, H and Z, with common neighbour signatures of $\{21111\}$, $\{22110\}$ and $\{222222\}$ respectively, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-neighClass}. This labelling corresponds to the equivalent Frank--Kasper phases.\cite{Frank1958, Frank1959} In all simulation snapshots shown in the next section, particles are coloured according to their classification following the colour-coding shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-neighClass}, namely cyan ($\upsigma$), violet (H) and red (Z), with particles whose environments give any common neighbour signature not listed above depicted in green. In simulations with multiple particle types, the base particle colour corresponding to Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-neighClass} is mixed with varying amounts of black for particles of types A and C (as defined below) in order to help to distinguish them.
\subsection{Results and discussion}
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\includegraphics{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}
\caption{Two of the most common local structures in the dodecagonal quasicrystals studied previously,\cite{VanDerLinden2012, Reinhardt2013} with (a)~edge-sharing and (b)~overlapping dodecagonal motifs. For clarity, the individual dodecagonal motifs are shaded in distinct colours to emphasise their overlap. These individual motifs are rotated by \ang{90} in (b). Each particle is colour-coded based on its classification as per Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-neighClass}. A possible unit cell for each approximant crystal is outlined in violet.}\label{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}
\end{figure}
In all simulations reported here, the patch width was chosen to be $\sigma_\text{pw} = \SI{0.3}{\radian}$. For the patchy potential introduced in Eqn~\eqref{patchy-potential}, this is quite a narrow patch width,\cite{Doye2007} making interactions very angularly dependent. Such a narrow patch width allows us to account for the relatively highly directional nature of DNA multi-arm motif structures and prevent competition between environments of different valencies. However, for precisely the same reason, this choice of patch width leaves us in a region of parameter space where, for pentavalent particles we considered previously,\cite{VanDerLinden2012, Reinhardt2013} the quasicrystal was \emph{not} thermodynamically stable, as the patches are so narrow that it is not possible for six neighbours to bond competitively: instead, the $\upsigma$ phase was stable for pentavalent particles under these conditions.\cite{Reinhardt2013}
We note that in the quasicrystals we studied previously,\cite{VanDerLinden2012, Reinhardt2013} the most common structural feature was a series of edge-sharing dodecagonal motifs; one of the most common such motifs is shown in Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}. In the `unit cell' of the approximant crystal corresponding to this motif, also illustrated in Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}, there are two particles in a hexagonal (Z) environment and 24 particles in a $\upsigma$ environment. Since the former correspond to particles having six neighbours and the latter to only five, we can surmise that in order to achieve our goal of assembling quasicrystals with particles with a narrow patch width, including both hexa- and pentavalent patchy particles in a simulation box in a ratio of $1 : 12$ would be a sensible choice.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{fig-quasicrystal-nonspecific}
\caption{Non-specific patchy particles assembling into a quasicrystal. (a)~Particle types and the mole fraction of each type used in simulations. (b)~An equilibrated quasicrystalline approximant corresponding the structure of Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}. 1040 particles in total. $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon=0.1$, $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$. (c)~A dodecagonal quasicrystalline configuration that was obtained from a cooling run, starting from a liquid state, as the temperature was gradually decreased to $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon=0.16$. $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$. 2496 particles in total. In (b) and (c), the diffraction pattern computed for the configuration depicted is also shown. $S(\boldsymbol{q})$ is the structure factor evaluated at the reciprocal space vector $\boldsymbol{q}=(q_x,\,q_y)$.}\label{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-nonspecific}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{fig-binary-quasi-PW03-phasediagram}
\caption{An approximate phase diagram for the non-specific quasicrystal-forming system. The approximant--quasicrystal coexistence data points come from free-energy calculations; the remaining points all come from direct-coexistence or brute-force simulations. The dotted lines are guides to the eye only. The boundary between the quasicrystal and the quasicrystalline approximant is likely to be an overestimate in temperature, and the true region of stability for the quasicrystal is likely to be somewhat larger than shown here.}\label{fig-binary-quasi-PW0.3-phasediagram}
\end{figure}
We have run simulations with a mixture of hexa- and pentavalent patches in this ratio [Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-nonspecific}]. A quasicrystal phase forms spontaneously when the liquid phase is cooled [Fig.~\refSub{c}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-nonspecific}]; its quasicrystallinity is confirmed by the diffraction pattern shown in Fig.~\refSub{c}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-nonspecific}, which clearly exhibits dodecagonal symmetry: since this dodecagonal order is coherent through the whole of the simulation box, this is a single quasicrystal. There are several features of this quasicrystalline configuration worth noting. The large majority of hexavalent patches are at the centres of dodecagons, and many of these dodecagons are arranged locally in the motif of Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}. However, a common alternative motif for a quasicrystalline approximant is depicted in Fig.~\refSub{b}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}, based on overlapping, rather than edge-sharing, dodecagonal motifs. We can see that there are sections of the structure in Fig.~\refSub{c}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-nonspecific} which are locally like both the edge-sharing and the overlapping approximants, both of which form a triangular lattice with longer and shorter distances between the `vertices' of the lattice. However, it is worth noting that there are also a number of other motifs of dodecagon centres, such as rectangular and isosceles triangular ones, which feature in Fig.~\refSub{c}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-nonspecific}.
As we decrease the temperature further still, the quasicrystalline approximant is expected to become the stable phase, as the configurational entropy of the quasicrystal becomes relatively less important compared to the enthalpic stability of the approximant.\cite{Reinhardt2013} In order to check that the quasicrystal is thermodynamically stable at intermediate temperatures, rather than simply a kinetic product, we have computed the free energies of the competing phases. To find the free energy of the edge-sharing approximant [Fig.~\refSub{b}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-nonspecific}], we used Frenkel--Ladd integration\cite{Frenkel1984} at $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon=0.1$ and $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 0.5$ (where $\beta=1/k_\text{B}T$), and, for consistency checking, also at $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$, and then integrated this free energy along iso-$(\beta P)$ curves.\cite{Vega2008} We found the free energy of the fluid phase by integrating from the ideal gas, bearing in mind that it is a multicomponent gas. The free energy of the quasicrystal was then set by equating it to the free energy of the fluid at the point at which the quasicrystal and the fluid phase are at equilibrium; we determined this condition by direct-coexistence simulations.\cite{Reinhardt2013} By finding where the free energy curves of the approximant and the quasicrystal cross, we can obtain the relevant coexistence curve between the two phases. Finally, at very high pressures, the hexagonal (Z) plastic crystal phase dominates because its density is larger,\cite{Reinhardt2013} whether or not all neighbour--neighbour interactions can be satisfied. However, bearing in mind that the corresponding DNA systems are very dilute solutions, if we work at reasonable pressures, the Z phase does not need to be considered further.
At such reasonable pressures (i.e.~for $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2\beta P \lesssim 10$), the quasicrystal is thermodynamically stable relative to the fluid at temperatures below about $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon = 0.2$. The approximant crystal takes over below about $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon = 0.1$. However, it is worth bearing in mind that it is considerably more difficult to equilibrate the quasicrystal at low temperatures when there is a mixture of hexa- and pentavalent components in the system than in the previously considered work, and the precise coexistence point between the approximant and the quasicrystal depends quite strongly on how well equilibrated the quasicrystal is: the lower temperature limit thus gives the minimum region of stability of the quasicrystal, and its region of stability is expected to be somewhat larger still in practice, since, unlike for pure pentavalent particles, the quasicrystal could largely be fully bonded, and so we expect little difference in energy between such a configuration and the approximant. An approximate phase diagram is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-binary-quasi-PW0.3-phasediagram}.\footnote{It ought to be borne in mind that this phase diagram relates to the two-dimensional set-up considered in the patchy-particle simulations; the true phase diagram of DNA tile systems, which are at equilibrium with a three-dimensional solution of building blocks, is unlikely to feature a two-dimensional fluid, and so the phase diagram of Fig.~\ref{fig-binary-quasi-PW0.3-phasediagram} is only intended to provide a rough idea of what the actual phase behaviour might be.} Interestingly, the quasicrystalline phase is stable over a wider range of temperatures than for the pure pentavalent patchy particle system we previously studied;\cite{Reinhardt2013} this is because the energy difference between the quasicrystal and the approximant in the current system is smaller than that between the quasicrystal and the $\upsigma$ phase for the pentavalent particles.
Unlike in the single-component phase diagram considered in Ref.~\citenum{Reinhardt2013}, the low-temperature phase, at which the configurational entropy afforded by the quasicrystal is no longer as important as it is to maximise the bonding, is the approximant crystal rather than the $\upsigma$ phase, since the presence of hexavalent particles means that bonding cannot be maximised in the $\upsigma$ geometry for all particles. However, it would alternatively be possible that the mixture may phase separate into a $\upsigma$ and a Z phase. We have confirmed that the zero-temperature enthalpy of the approximant phase is lower than the enthalpy of a $1 : 12$ mixture of Z and $\upsigma$ phases comprising solely hexa- and pentavalent particles respectively at all pressures considered, even with no interfacial energy penalty imposed. The approximant crystal is therefore stable with respect to phase separation at zero temperature.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-edgesharing}
\caption{Fully specific patchy particles designed to form the quasicrystalline approximant of Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}. (a) Particle types and the mole fraction of each type used in simulations. Patches only interact with complementary patches, indicated by an asterisk. The basic motif of edge-sharing dodecagons with explicit patch--patch interactions is also shown. (b) An equilibrated approximant crystal corresponding to a structure in which all bonding interactions are satisfied [Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}]. 1040 particles in total. $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon=0.1$, $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$. (c) A crystalline configuration obtained from a cooling run, starting from the fluid, in which the temperature was gradually decreased to $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon=0.16$. $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$. 2496 particles in total. For (b) and (c), the corresponding diffraction patterns are also shown.}\label{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-edgesharing}
\end{figure}
The stability of the quasicrystal over a range of conditions demonstrates that it is possible to set up a competition between penta- and hexavalent co-ordination by means other than having a large patch width. In particular, in previous work, the quasicrystal was never found to be stable for patch widths below $\sigma_\text{pw}\approx 0.45$.\cite{Reinhardt2013} By contrast, we have shown here that a quasicrystal phase is thermodynamically stable even if the patch width is considerably narrower (i.e.~$\sigma_\text{pw}=0.3$). This is very encouraging if our aim is to construct quasicrystals using DNA multi-arm motifs. However, at this stage, the set-up we have considered completely ignores one of the most important reasons why DNA is so popular in experiment: using DNA makes it very easy to design mutually orthogonal interactions. Indeed, the multi-arm DNA tiles equivalent to the patchy particles that we have considered thus far, where all the sticky ends at the end of the arms have a favourable interaction with all other sticky ends, might be rather more difficult to self-assemble than envisaged because growth might be arrested as multiple undesigned bonds are formed, and so it is prudent to investigate whether it remains possible to form quasicrystals if the patches are made to be more specific. However, while the kinetics of self-assembly may be less frustrated as the interactions are made more specific, it is important to bear in mind that it is in the nature of quasicrystals that they are not completely ordered (indeed, this is what affords them their additional entropic stability): it is not possible, by construction, to have a set of interactions for which the fully bonded configuration is uniquely determined to be the quasicrystal.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-overlapping}
\caption{Fully specific patchy particles designed to form the quasicrystalline approximant of Fig.~\refSub{b}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}. (a) Particle types and the mole fraction of each type used in simulations. Patches only interact with complementary patches, indicated by an asterisk. The basic motif of overlapping dodecagons with explicit patch--patch interactions is also shown. (b) An equilibrated approximant crystal corresponding to a structure in which all bonding interactions are satisfied [Fig.~\refSub{b}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}]. 980 particles in total. $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon=0.16$, $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$. (c) A crystalline configuration obtained from a cooling run, starting from the fluid, in which the temperature was gradually decreased to $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon=0.16$. $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$. 2492 particles in total. For (b) and (c), the corresponding diffraction patterns are also shown.}\label{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-overlapping}
\end{figure}
As a first step in exploring the factors that govern quasicrystal self-assembly in binary mixtures corresponding to DNA star tiles, we consider the interaction set required to form two of the quasicrystalline approximants considered above [Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}], before considering how these interactions could be relaxed to allow the variety of environments typical of our target dodecagonal quasicrystal to form. Let us first consider how we can make every distinct type of interaction that can be identified in the unit cell of Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell} different. This can be achieved by making the pentavalent particles of two different types, as depicted in Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-edgesharing}. In this set-up, patches only interact with complementary patches denoted by the same letter and an asterisk; other patch pairs do not interact at all. The unit cell of the edge-sharing approximant of Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell} can readily be identified in the approximant shown in Fig.~\refSub{b}{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-edgesharing}. However, whilst the approximant is stable in roughly the same conditions as it was before, the quasicrystal is not expected to form with such specific interactions. Even when cooled very slowly, kinetic products such as that shown in Fig.~\refSub{c}{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-edgesharing} are obtained. Whilst the underlying approximant crystal ordering can certainly be identified in this figure, the fact that these dodecagonal motifs are not orientated in the same way throughout the simulation box means that large gaps must be left in order to reduce the strain in the system, and since the bonding is so specific, no particles can be used to `glue' the different regions together. The resulting structure is therefore, unsurprisingly, full of defects: it is not a single crystal, but has several crystalline domains with grain boundaries between them. The fact that there are multiple crystallites is confirmed by the smeared out diffraction pattern that involves a superposition of patterns from the different crystallites [Fig.~\refSub{c}{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-edgesharing}].
The alternative approximant motif of Fig.~\refSub{b}{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell} is based on overlapping rather than edge-sharing dodecagonal motifs. In the `unit cell' of this alternative approximant crystal, there are 2 particles in a hexagonal (Z) environment and 12 particles in a $\upsigma$ environment, necessitating a ratio of $1 : 6$ of hexa- and pentavalent patchy particles in the simulation box. If the bonding interactions are made fully specific with this alternative set-up, as shown in Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-overlapping}, we can again stabilise the approximant crystal [Fig.~\refSub{b}{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-overlapping}]. However, similar to the edge-sharing fully specific system, on cooling, multiple nucleation events occur, leading to multiple crystallites of the overlapping approximant separated by highly defective grain boundaries.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{fig-quasicrystal-intermed-specific}
\caption{Patchy particles of `intermediate' specificity that are designed to allow quasicrystal formation. (a) Particle types and the mole fraction of each type used in simulations. Patches only interact with complementary patches, indicated by an asterisk. The basic motifs of both edge-sharing and overlapping dodecagons with explicit patch--patch interactions are also shown. (b) An equilibrated edge-sharing approximant crystal. 1040 particles in total. $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon=0.1$, $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$. (c) A quasicrystal resulting from a cooling run in which the temperature was gradually decreased to $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon=0.16$. $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$. 2496 particles in total. For (b) and (c), the corresponding diffraction patterns are also shown.}\label{fig-quasicrystal-intermed-specific}
\end{figure}
In order to improve the kinetics whilst retaining enough plasticity in the interactions to allow quasicrystals, rather than just crystals, to form, we can aim to strike a balance between the full specificity considered in simulations illustrated by Figs~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-edgesharing} and \ref{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-overlapping} on the one hand and the completely non-specific bonding of Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-nonspecific}. To this end, we have considered an alternative set-up in which we allow a competition between the overlapping and edge-sharing dodecagonal motifs to be set up. As illustrated in Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-intermed-specific}, by permitting the outlying `type C' particles to bond freely with two of the patches of `type B' particles, we can assemble either structures analogous to those of Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-edgesharing}, involving all three types of particle, or of Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-overlapping}, involving only particles of types A and B, with the excess of particles of type C forming regions of $\upsigma$-environments that can fill the gaps between `approximant' motifs that are orientated in different ways. We have chosen the composition of particle types in this set-up to be the same as the one we considered for the edge-sharing approximant system of Fig~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-fully-specific-edgesharing}.
With this set-up, cooling a liquid again results in a quasicrystalline phase, such as that shown in Fig.~\refSub{c}{fig-quasicrystal-intermed-specific}, with the corresponding diffraction pattern confirming its dodecagonal symmetry. As in the non-specific case of Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-nonspecific}, there is again a variety of ways in which the dodecagons pack in addition to the two triangular lattice patterns of the approximants of Fig.~\ref{fig-quasicrystal-dodecagonal-unitcell}. To verify that the quasicrystal is thermodynamically stable, we have repeated the calculations considered above for the non-specific case at $\sigma_\text{LJ}^2 \beta P = 1.5$. In particular, we have computed the free energies of the edge-sharing and overlapping approximants as well as the $\upsigma$ phase using Frenkel--Ladd integration. The free energy of the edge-sharing approximant matches the free energy of a system combining 7 parts of the overlapping approximant and 6 parts of the $\upsigma$ phase; this ratio accounts for the excess of `type C' particles when an overlapping approximant is formed at the considered composition of particles of types A, B and C [cf.~Fig.~\refSub{a}{fig-quasicrystal-intermed-specific}]. At temperatures above $k_\text{B}T/\varepsilon \approx 0.1$, the quasicrystal's free energy is lower than that of the approximants, confirming that it is the thermodynamically stable phase across a range of temperatures.
The fact that the quasicrystalline phase is thermodynamically stable for this system of `intermediate' specificity suggests that a DNA star tile system with interactions chosen in this way would be the most likely to result in a two-dimensional soft DNA-based quasicrystal. However, it is certainly the case that we have ignored a number of considerations when abstracting the system to the toy-model level considered here. For example, it is not at all clear \textit{a priori} that dodecagonal motifs comprising DNA star tile would be sufficiently planar to permit the growth of suitably large two-dimensional quasicrystalline structures, although this consideration may be mitigated to a large extent by performing the self-assembly on a surface. In order to address this point, we turn briefly to a more realistic potential of DNA molecules themselves.
\section{Simulating DNA tile arrays with a realistic model}
\subsection{OxDNA model and methods}
OxDNA\cite{Ouldridge2011,Snodin2015} is a coarse-grained DNA model at the nucleotide level that allows the simulation of systems of large numbers of nucleotides. The nucleotides are modelled as rigid bodies interacting with a series of effective interactions (the solvent is not explicitly modelled) that account for hydrogen bonding between Watson--Crick base pairs, stacking between bases, electrostatic repulsion between the phosphates, excluded volume and chain connectivity. These interactions have been fitted to reproduce the thermodynamics of hybridisation and the structural and mechanical properties of both single-stranded and double-stranded DNA. Here, we use the second version of the model (`oxDNA2') that includes fine-tuned properties to reproduce better the properties of large nanostructures -- in particular DNA origamis.\cite{Snodin2015}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics{fig-oxDNA-star-tiles}
\caption{OxDNA representations of (a) a five-arm tile, (b) a six-arm tile, (c), (d), (e) quasicrystal-like motifs of increasing size when adsorbed onto a surface and (f) the largest motif when in solution. In (a) and (b), flat configurations have deliberately been chosen to most clearly illustrate the design and topology of the star tiles. The simulations of these structures were all performed at \SI{22}{\celsius} and a salt concentration of \SI{0.5}{\mole\per\cubic\deci\metre}.}\label{fig-oxDNA-star-tiles}
\end{figure*}
The oxDNA model is the most widely used coarse-grained model of DNA at the nucleotide level, and has been used to study the biophysical properties of DNA, a wide variety of DNA nanotechnology systems and applications in soft matter materials.\cite{Doye2013} These applications have confirmed the model's robustness and quantitative accuracy (e.g.~Ref.\ \onlinecite{Srinivas2013}'s reproduction of six orders of magnitude variation in the kinetics of strand displacement). Particularly relevant to the current application is the model's ability to account for the structural properties of both bulged duplexes,\cite{Schreck2015} a motif that is crucial to the properties of DNA star tiles, and polyhedral assemblies of star tiles,\cite{Schreck2016} and to rationalise how the kinetics of star tile self-assembly can be controlled through the size of the bulges they contain.\cite{Schreck2016b}
Our aim here is to use oxDNA to explore the structural stability of quasicrystalline arrays made out of DNA star tiles. To achieve this, we first need to generate starting initial structures for these arrays. We do this by first designing the arrays using vhelix,\cite{vhelix} a recent DNA nanostructure design programme that allows free placement of the component DNA helices in space rather than on a lattice.\cite{Benson2015} We then convert the vhelix design into a starting geometry for the oxDNA model. This geometry is not yet a suitable starting point for molecular dynamics simulations, as it may have particle overlaps or extended bonds that give rise to unreasonably large energies and very large forces. We therefore first relax the structure using a steepest-descent-like minimisation technique. The details of these procedures will be described elsewhere.\cite{Romano2016}
The structures are then simulated with a molecular dynamics algorithm employing an Andersen-like thermostat\cite{Russo2009} both to keep the temperature constant and to generate diffusive motion of the nucleotides, as is appropriate for molecules in solution. As the systems we study contain thousands of nucleotides (the largest has 50 tiles and \num{22704} nucleotides), to make the simulations feasible on a reasonable time scale, they are run on GPUs using a specially developed code.\cite{Rovigatti2015} We consider systems of tiles both when free in solution, as is typical during the assembly process, and when adsorbed on a surface, as is the case when visualised by some type of microscopy (e.g.~AFM). The interaction of the nucleotides with the surface is modelled with a simple one-dimensional Lennard-Jones interaction that depends only on the distance of a nucleotide from the surface.
\subsection{Results and discussion}
Our aim here is use oxDNA to check whether there might be any structural reasons why the dodecagonal quasicrystals that we have seen for the above patchy particles might not be realisable using DNA star tiles. Previous experiments do not suggest any obvious hindrances. For example, both five-arm and six-arm tiles have been produced and found to assemble into two-dimensional crystalline arrays, forming $\upsigma$\cite{Zhang2008} and hexagonal\cite{He2006} crystals, respectively. Furthermore, mixtures of three- and four-arm tiles with specifically designed interactions have been shown to be able to produce more complex crystal structures.\cite{Zhang2013,Zhang2016} One possible complication is that, if the tiles are not flat, but rather the arms possess an intrinsic preference to bend in a given direction, then if all tiles face in the same direction, this has the potential to lead to curvature in the resulting structure that could hinder the assembly of an extended two-dimensional structure. One solution is to design the tiles so that they alternate in orientation, and any curvature cancels out,\cite{He2005b} but this approach is not available for structures that possess polygons with an odd number of edges. However, in the examples above,\cite{He2006,Zhang2008,Zhang2013,Zhang2016} conditions and designs were still found for which the assembly of extended two-dimensional arrays dominated over the formation of finite closed objects (e.g.~icosahedra for five-arm star tiles\cite{Zhang2008}). Furthermore, self-assembly of DNA star tiles on a surface has also been shown to be possible.\cite{Sun2009}
Example five- and six-arm star tiles are illustrated in Figs~\refSub{a}{fig-oxDNA-star-tiles} and \refSub{b}{fig-oxDNA-star-tiles}. The tiles consist of a long central strand, five or six medium-length strands that bridge two arms and five or six short strands which bind at the ends of each arm. The bulges on the long strand between the arms provide flexibility, allowing the arms to bend back on themselves. In the current examples, there are four nucleotides in the bulges, the same as was used experimentally to produce extended structures with five- and six-arm tiles.\cite{He2006,Zhang2008}
We have constructed DNA analogues of three example motifs that are important for the quasicrystalline structures observed in our patchy-particle simulations, namely a dodecagon, three overlapping dodecagons, and three edge-sharing dodecagons. The simulations of these structures showed that they are all stable at room temperature with the correct topology of the network maintained throughout the simulation. Example configurations that have been adsorbed on a surface [Figs~\refSub{c}{fig-oxDNA-star-tiles}--\hyperref[fig-oxDNA-star-tiles]{(e)}] clearly show the expected structures. Due to the flexibility of the star tiles, the quadrilaterals in the network need not be perfectly square. Furthermore, bending is not always localised to the bulge regions of the tiles, and can sometimes occur at the four-way junctions in the arms leading to further distortions from the idealised geometries, even for the triangles.
By contrast, when free in solution, although the topology of the network is retained, the motifs are highly fluxional and no longer look anything like the idealised two-dimensional target structure [Fig.~\refSub{f}{fig-oxDNA-star-tiles}]. This is both because of the inherent flexibility of the star tiles and because all tiles face in the same direction, so any tendencies for the arms to bend away from the plane in a preferred direction are additive. The non-planarity is probably also exacerbated by the relative small size of the motifs, as consequently a large number of the arms (over \SI{18}{\percent} even for the largest motif) are on the edge of the motif and lack the constraint of being connected to another tile.
We should emphasise that the flexibility of the structures and the large fluctuations away from planarity do not affect the stability of the networks, nor do they mean that further self-assembly of the networks is necessarily hindered. When a new tile binds to a free arm on the edge of the motif, further binding is probably still most likely to occur in the intended way. However, the non-planarity may also make allowed, but not intended, arm binding more likely than when in a planar geometry because the relevant arms have been brought closer together by the non-planar fluctuations. This again emphasises the importance of annealing to facilitate the melting away of incorrect bindings.
\section{Conclusions}
We have performed simulations of patchy-particle systems with a narrow patch width to investigate the phase behaviour of particles that can be considered to be a `toy model' for DNA star tiles or analogous systems. We have confirmed our hypothesis, originally proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Reinhardt2013}, that mixtures of penta- and hexavalent particles can mutually associate to form stable dodecagonal quasicrystals.
We have explored two designs which lead to quasicrystal formation. The first one of these involved no specificity in the patch--patch interactions: every patch could interact with every other patch in the system. In patchy-particle simulations using this set-up, the quasicrystalline phase formed readily and was shown to be thermodynamically stable using free-energy calculations. However, one might imagine that the self-assembly of the quasicrystal in a DNA context might be trickier with such non-specific interactions, since particles cannot `detect' whether they are in the correct environment from their initial interactions. For example, a hexavalent particle should ultimately end up at the centre of a dodecagonal motif, but has no way of ensuring that this will be the case when it is bonded to only a few of its neighbours. In order to ensure that the thermodynamically stable phase can form at experimentally accessible time scales, particles must be allowed to bind and unbind very readily: the self-assembly process must therefore take place at temperatures at which the driving force to form the target phase is very small. Since non-optimal configurations are less stable, a high temperature means that such motifs are likely to melt off, allowing the stable phase to form over time.
The kinetics of the toy patchy-particle systems are very fast and a quasicrystal forms readily in such a set-up. However, while our simulations certainly do not preclude the possibility of self-assembly being feasible in an equivalent DNA system, we can make use of the information content of the DNA to be more selective in the interparticle interactions and thus attempt to reduce the likelihood of kinetic traps precluding successful self-assembly in DNA tile systems. We must however remember that the stability of quasicrystals is largely down to their configurational entropy.\cite{Reinhardt2013, Oxborrow1993} Unlike for the increasingly complex DNA-based crystalline motifs that have been considered in the literature\cite{Zhang2015, Zhang2016} and as exemplified by the quasicrystalline approximants considered here, it is not therefore possible to design a set of interactions for which the fully bound ground-state configuration is uniquely specified to be a quasicrystal. Instead, we must design a set of interactions that provides sufficient freedom that will allow the full variety of motifs that are typical of the quasicrystal to form. In our design, specific interactions ensure that hexavalent particles are at the centre of dodecagons, but do not prescribe how these dodecagons associate. We have shown that quasicrystals are thermodynamically stable with a design of this kind, while the additional specificity of interactions should permit such structures to be more kinetically accessible than the equivalent non-specific system. An additional advantage of using more specific interactions is that they would counter against possible phase separation into penta- and hexavalent regions that has been seen for non-specific mixtures of three- and four-arm motifs.\cite{He2007} The specific interactions are also likely to reduce the competition with alternative closed polyhedral objects, but choosing the bulge size appropriately to inhibit these assembly pathways further is also likely to be important.
We hope that the designs presented here might help to guide experimentalists in producing a DNA quasicrystal.
It may also be possible to design dodecagonal DNA crystals in other ways than the ones we have considered here. For example, we may consider the `duals' of the motifs considered above, where we interchange the nature of the vertices and faces in the structure. Since there is a bijective mapping between a structure and its dual,\cite{Frank1958} the dual of the quasicrystal we considered is also a quasicrystal. The resulting networks would only have tri- and tetravalent vertices. Although it is possible to design particles that would form the equivalents of the two approximant crystals that we consider here, it is rather less clear how to design specific but not overly constraining interactions which would encourage quasicrystal formation with such a set-up.
Finally, it is worth bearing in mind that there are several significant differences between the patchy particles we have considered here and real DNA multi-arm motifs. Firstly, DNA molecules are flexible, but have a fixed valency, whilst patchy particles have a fixed geometry and gain their flexibility in bonding through a patch width. We have made the patch width fairly narrow to ensure that the valency condition is maintained, but the dynamics of self-assembly may change if the patches were to be more flexible. Secondly, there is comparatively little excluded volume in DNA structures, whilst our patchy particles have a Lennard-Jones-style excluded volume interaction. However, since the structures of interest are stabilised by attractive rather than repulsive forces, we do not think that excluded volume effects would be particularly important. Thirdly, DNA assemblies can behave in rather more complex ways than we have considered here, since they exhibit a kind of structural co-operativity: curvature emerges from the assembly process, rather than being a property of isolated tiles.\cite{Schreck2016} However, several strategies exist for surface-mediated self-assembly,\cite{Hamada2009, Sun2009, Suzuki2015} and surface assembly may help to alleviate such problems with curvature. Nevertheless, even if DNA tiles were to be assembled on a surface, rather than simply being adsorbed on a surface at the end of the process to visualise the structure, there is an important difference between a true two-dimensional system that we considered and assembly from a three-dimensional dilute solution on a surface. Finally, we used particle swap moves to help hexa- and pentavalent particles to find their preferred environment in patchy-particle simulations. Such Monte Carlo moves have no equivalent in real dynamics. However, in this case, the three-dimensional nature of the DNA assembly process may actually be beneficial, as in real DNA systems, even when adsorbed on a surface, the self-assembly is likely to be from a dilute three-dimensional solution, rather than from a two-dimensional fluid: we can envisage that the swap moves might correspond to adsorption and desorption of appropriate molecules from solution.
Of course, it may be possible to alleviate some of the concerns we have listed above by considering a more sophisticated model. For example, in order to address the issue with flexibility in the patchy-particle model, we could allow the patches to shift positions slightly in time, whilst maintaining a fixed valency by keeping the patches narrow. Alternatively, a more rigid DNA structure based on an origami approach\cite{Wang2016} might make it easier to design planar tiles in experiment. However, while there are certainly a number of simplifications and omissions in our patchy-particle approach, broadly speaking, as confirmed by the oxDNA simulations, the simple model we have considered appears to capture a sufficient amount of the underlying physics to serve as a good guide to the self-assembly behaviour of analogous DNA star tiles. We hope that our results will help to invigorate experimental efforts to produce a soft DNA-based quasicrystal.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [Grants EP/I001352/1, EP/J019445/1]. We acknowledge the use of the University of Oxford Advanced Research Computing (ARC) facility in carrying out some of this work [\href{https://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22558}{doi:10.5281/zenodo.22558}]. Supporting data are available at [TBD].
\end{acknowledgments}
\section*{References}
\vspace{-\baselineskip}
|
\section{Problem Statement}
Consider a communication problem
defined by a network,
a collection of sources, and
a collection of sinks.
The network is a directed graph with nodes
representing communication devices
and edges representing
error-free, point-to-point communication channels
with finite capacities.
The sources are independent data streams,
and each is available to precisely one node in the network.
Each sink is a node in the network
that desires some subset of the data streams;
the desired subset may differ from one sink to the next.
The capacity of the network,
also called the ``network coding capacity,''
describes the set of achievable rates
for every possible combination of sources and sinks.
Solving for the capacity is a challenging open problem.
In this paper, we investigate a simpler question:
what is the effect of a single link
on the network coding capacity of such a network?
Specifically,
we wish to understand whether decreasing the capacity
of a single edge $e$ from $C_e\geq\delta$ to $C_e-\delta$
can change the capacity region of the network
by more than $\delta$ in each dimension.
In \cite{EffrosH:10}, we posed this question
and proved that if all sources are available at one node,
then changing the capacity of a single link by $\delta$
reduces each achievable rate vector by at most $\delta$
in each dimension.
In this paper, we extend this result
to a family of multi-source, multi-sink networks.
\section{Notation}
Throughout the paper, finite sets are denoted by script letters such as $\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Y}$. The size of a finite set $\mathcal{A}$ is denoted by $|\mathcal{A}|$. Random variables are denoted by upper case letters such as $X$ and $Y$. We represent the alphabet of random variable $X$ by $\mathcal{X}$. Bold letters, for example ${\bf X}=(X_1,\ldots,X_n)$ and ${\bf x}=(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ represent vectors. The length of a vector is implied in the context, and its $\ell^{\rm th}$ element is denoted by $X_{\ell}$. For a set $\mathcal{F}\subseteq\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, ${\bf x}_{\mathcal{F}}=(x_i)_{i\in\mathcal{F}}$, where the elements are sorted in ascending order of their indices. For a vector ${\bf X}\in\mathds{R}^n$, let ${\bf X}^+=\max(\mathbf{0},{\bf X})$, where $\mathbf{0}$ is a zero-valued vector of length $n$, and the $\max$ operator is applied component-wise.
\section{System Model}\label{sec:model}
Consider an acyclic error-free network $\mathcal{N}$
denoted by a directed graph $G=(\mathcal{V},\mathcal{E})$
with nodes $\mathcal{V}$ and edges $\mathcal{E}\subseteq\mathcal{V}\times\mathcal{V}$.
Each edge $e=(v_1,v_2)\in\mathcal{E}$ represents
an error-free channel from Node $v_1$ to Node $v_2$.
We use $C_e>0$ to denote that channel's capacity.
For each node $v\in\mathcal{V}$,
$\In(v)=\{(v_1,v):(v_1,v)\in\mathcal{E}\}$ and
$\Out(v)=\{(v,v_1):(v,v_1)\in\mathcal{E}\}$
denote the set of incoming and outgoing edges
for Node $v$ respectively.
Let $\mathcal{S}=\{1,2,\ldots,k\}$ denote the set of sources
available in the network,
and let
\[
\alpha:\mathcal{S}\to\mathcal{V},
\]
specify the source availability.
Thus for each $s\in\mathcal{S}$,
$\alpha(s)$ describes the unique node where source $s$ is available.
Likewise, for each $v\in\mathcal{V}$,
let $\sigma(v)\subseteq\mathcal{S}$ denote the set of sources
observed by Node $v$, \ie \[\sigma(v)=\{s: \alpha(s)=v\}.\]
Finally, for each $v\in\mathcal{V}$, let $\beta(v)\subseteq\mathcal{S}$
denote the set of sources that Node $v$ is interested in recovering.
A network code of block length $n$
and rate $\mathbf{R}=(R_s)_{s\in\mathcal{S}}$
over such a network is described as follows.
Each source $s\in\mathcal{S}$ generates some message
$M_s\in\mathcal{M}_s=\{1,2,\ldots,2^{nR_s}\}$.
For each $e\in\mathcal{E}$, let $\mathcal{W}_e=\{1,2,\ldots,2^{nC_e}\}$.
The coding operations performed by each node can be categorized as follows
\begin{enumerate}
\item Encoding functions:\\ For each $v\in\mathcal{V}$ and $e\in\Out(v)$,
the encoding function corresponding to Edge $e$ is a mapping
\begin{align}
g_e:&\prod_{s\in\sigma(v)}\mathcal{M}_{s}
\times\prod\limits_{e'\in\In(v)}\mathcal{W}_{e'}\to\mathcal{W}_e.\nonumber
\end{align}
\item Decoding functions:\\ For each $v\in\mathcal{V}$ and $s\in\beta(v)$,
the decoding function for source $s$ at Node $v$ is a mapping
\begin{align}
g_v^{s}:\prod_{s'\in\sigma(v)}\mathcal{M}_{s'}\times\prod\limits_{e\in\In(v)}
\mathcal{W}_e\to\mathcal{M}_s.\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
A rate vector $\mathbf{R}=(R_s)_{s\in\mathcal{S}}$ is said to be achievable on network $\mathcal{N}$, if for any $\epsilon>0$, there exists a block length $n$ large enough and a coding scheme of block length $n$ operating at rate $\mathbf{R}$ such that for all $v\in\mathcal{V}$ and $s\in\beta(v)$
\begin{align}
\mathrm{P}(\hat{M}_s^{(v)}\neq M_s )\leq \epsilon,\nonumber
\end{align}
where $\hat{M}_s^{(v)}$ denotes the reconstruction
of message $M_s$ at Node $v$.
For sources $\mathcal{S}$, availability mapping $\alpha(\cdot)$,
and demand mapping $\beta(\cdot)$,
let $\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N},\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$ denote the set of achievable rates
on Network $\mathcal{N}$.
In the discussion that follows,
we use $\mathcal{N}$ to describe the original network
and $\mathcal{N}'$ to describe the new network that results
when we reduce the capacity of a single, fixed edge $e\in\mathcal{E}$
from $C_e\geq\delta$ to $C'_e=C_e-\delta$.
If $C_e=\delta$, then edge $e$ is removed from $\mathcal{N}$ to obtain $\mathcal{N}'$.
\section{Prior Work}\label{sec:prior}
Network codes are communication schemes in which every node is allowed to perform arbitrary functions on its inputs in creating its outputs. The idea was first proposed by Ahlswede, Cai, Li, and Yeung in 2000~\cite{Ahlswede:00}.
They proved that Ford and Fulkerson's famous max-flow min-cut theorem for unicast networks \cite{FordF:56}, also holds in multicast networks. (Here a ``unicast network'' refers to a network with a single source and a single sink node,
while a ``multicast network'' refers to a network with one source
and multiple sink nodes,
each requiring all data available at the source.)
While it is always possible to achieve the capacity in a unicast network using only routing at the relay nodes, Ahlswede et al. showed that there exist networks where coding is required to achieve the multicast capacity.
Linear coding operations suffice for achieving the capacity of a multicast network by \cite{LiY:2003}. While both the capacity region and the structure of capacity-achieving codes are known for multicast demands,
neither the capacity nor a low-complexity family of codes
sufficient for achieving the capacity
is known for most demand types.
Linear codes are insufficient
for achieving the capacity under general demands by \cite{DoughertyF:05}.
Computing the capacity region of an error-free network can be cast as a convex optimization problem with a linear cost function over the space of \emph{normalized entropic vectors} with some other linear constraints \cite{HassibiS:07}\cite{YanY:07}. This characterization reveals that network information theory problems over noiseless networks could be solved if we could explicitly characterize the set of entropy vectors. While there has been a lot of effort in recent years
geared towards developing a better understanding
of the set of entropy vectors
(c.f. \cite{Yeung:97,ZhangY:97, ChanY:99, ChanY:02,DoughertyF:06,Matus:07}),
to date the problem remains largely unsolved.
In this paper, we study the problem from a different perspective. Instead of trying to find the capacity region of a network, we focus on the effect
of a single link on that capacity region.
Precisely, we try to understand the effect
on network capacity
of changing the capacity on a single edge $e\in\mathcal{E}$
from $C_e\geq \delta$ to $C_e'=C_e-\delta$,
which effectively changes just one linear constraint
in the problem as described above.
\section{Results}
Before stating our main result in Section \ref{sec:results},
we briefly review some cases where the impact,
in terms of network capacity,
of reducing $C_e$ is already known or straightforward to characterize.
\subsection{Demand Types with Tight Cut-Set Bounds}
For a variety of demand types, including multicast, multi-source multicast, single-source with non-overlapping demands, and single-source with non-overlapping demands and a multicast demand, network coding capacity can be fully characterized by the corresponding cut-set bounds~\cite{KoetterM:03}.
Reducing $C_e$ to $C_e-\delta$ for a single edge $e\in\mathcal{E}$
reduces the capacity of every cut by at most $\delta$.
Therefore, if $(\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$ describes any such demand type,
and $\mathbf{R}\in\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N},\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$,
then $(\mathbf{R}-\delta\cdot\mathbf{1})^+\in\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N}',\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$,
where $\mathcal{N}'$ is the modified network,
as described in Section~\ref{sec:model}, and
$\mathbf{1}$ is the all-ones vector.
\subsection{Links Connected to Terminal Nodes}
Consider a terminal node $v_o\in\mathcal{V}$;
then Node~$v_o$ has no outgoing edges ($\Out(v_o)=\emptyset$).
Let $p=|\In(v_o)|$ denote the number of edges incoming to $v_o$,
and let $W_1,W_2,\ldots,W_p$
denote the messages carried by these links.
Further, assume that the link corresponding
to the message $W_1$ has capacity $\delta$.
For any $s\in\beta(v_o)$,
\begin{align}
&I(M_s;W_2,\ldots,W_p)\nonumber\\
&=I(M_s;W_1,W_2,\ldots,W_p)-I(M_s;W_1|W_2,\ldots,W_p)\nonumber\\
&\geq I(M_s;W_1,W_2,\ldots,W_p)-H(W_1)\nonumber\\
&\geq I(M_s;W_1,W_2,\ldots,W_p)-n\delta.\nonumber
\end{align}
This proves that removing this link
reduces the capacity from source $s$
to node $v$ by at most $\delta$.
Since Node $v$ has only incoming edges,
this change does not affect the capacities
at any other nodes in the network.
As a result,
applying, for each $s\in\sigma(v)$,
an outer code with rate $R_s-\delta$
and codewords drawn uniformly at random
yields expected error probability
approaching 0 as the coding dimension grows without bound.
This proves the existence of a good collection of codes.
Therefore, $\mathbf{R}=(R_s:s\in\mathcal{S})\in\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N},\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$,
implies $\mathbf{R}'=(R_s':s\in\mathcal{S})\in\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N}',\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$,
where $R_s'=R_s$ for all $s\in\mathcal{S}\setminus\sigma(v)$
and $R_s'=(R_s-\delta)^+$ for all $s\in\sigma(v)$.
\subsection{Super Source Node}
For the case where all the sources
are available to a \emph{ super source node}
($\sigma(v_o)=\mathcal{S}$ for some $v_o\in\mathcal{V}$,
as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:net_colloc}),
we showed in~\cite{EffrosH:10}
that changing the capacity of any link $e\in\mathcal{E}$
from $C_e\geq\delta$ to $C_e'=C_e-\delta$
changes the network capacity region by at most $\delta$ in each dimension
(i.e., $\mathbf{R}\in\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N},\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$
implies $(\mathbf{R}-\delta\cdot\mathbf{1})^+\in\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N}',\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\psfrag{s}[c]{$v_o$}
\psfrag{C1}[c]{$\delta$}
\psfrag{C2}[l]{$C$}
\psfrag{N}[l]{$\mathcal{N}$}
\psfrag{M1}[l]{$M_1$}
\psfrag{M2}[l]{$M_2$}
\psfrag{Mk}[l]{$M_k$}
\psfrag{Mh1}[l]{${\hat{M}}_1$}
\psfrag{Mh2}[l]{${\hat{M}}_2$}
\psfrag{Mhk}[l]{${\hat{M}}_k$}
\psfrag{dots}[l]{$\vdots$}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{network_colloc.eps}
\caption{All sources available directly at a super source node $v_o$}
\label{fig:net_colloc}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Linear Network Coding}
Consider a linear network code of block length $n$
and rate $\mathbf{R}=(R_s)_{s\in\mathcal{S}}$
operating on network $\mathcal{N}$.
Let $e\in\mathcal{E}$ be a fixed link of capacity $C_e=\delta$ inside this network.
In this case, we treat both source messages
and the messages traversing each link in the network
as binary vectors.
Since the code is linear,
the message $W_e$ sent across link $e$
can be written as a linear combination
of the source messages $\{M_s\}_{s\in\mathcal{S}}$.
Precisely,
\begin{align}
W_e=\sum\limits_{s\in\mathcal{S}}A_{s,e}M_s,\label{eq:linear}
\end{align}
where for each $s\in\mathcal{S}$, $A_{s,e}$
denotes a binary matrix
of dimension $nC_e\times nR_s$
and all additions in \eqref{eq:linear} are binary additions.
Let $\mathcal{M}_0$ denote the set of messages
that yield message $W_e=\mathbf{0}$ on link $e$
using the given linear code, \ie
\[
\mathcal{M}_0\triangleq\{(M_s)_{s\in\mathcal{S}}:\sum\limits_{s\in\mathcal{S}}A_{s,e}M_s
=\mathbf{0}\}.
\]
If we restrict our attention to this subset of messages,
then we can run the given linear code
in the absence of edge $e$
since the value of $W_e$ for all such messages
is fixed and known.
Unfortunately,
choosing messages from $\mathcal{M}_0$
may require coordination among the source nodes.
We therefore choose messages from a subset of $\mathcal{M}_0$
that requires no such coordination.
Namely, we transmit only messages from $\mathcal{M}_{00}$,
where $\mathcal{M}_{00}$ is defined as
\[
\mathcal{M}_{00}\triangleq\{(M_s)_{s\in\mathcal{S}}:A_{s,e}M_s=\mathbf{0}
\mbox{ for all }s\in\mathcal{S}\}.
\]
By sending only messages $(M_s)_{s\in\mathcal{S}}\in\mathcal{M}_{00}$,
we guarantee that $W_{e}={\mathbf{0}}$;
since $\mathcal{M}_{00}=\prod_{s\in\mathcal{S}}\{M_s:A_sM_s=0\}$,
the source nodes can transmit only messages from $\mathcal{M}_{00}$
without coordination.
The resulting rate is
$(1/n)\log|\{M_s:A_sM_s=\mathbf{0}\}|\geq(R_s-\delta)^+$
for each $s\in\mathcal{S}$.
Thus we can apply the code from $\mathcal{N}$
on the network $\mathcal{N}'$
to achieve reliable communication at rate
$(\mathbf{R}-\delta\cdot\mathbf{1})^+$.
The given argument demonstrates that removing a single link
of capacity $C_e=\delta$ changes the rate achievable
with linear coding by at most $\delta$ in each dimension.
The same argument can be used to
show that reducing the capacity of some edge $e$
with $C_e>\delta$ to $C_e'=C_e-\delta$
reduces the rate achievable
with linear coding by at most $\delta$ in each dimension.
This can be seen by treating a link of capacity $C_e>\delta$
as a pair of parallel links
of capacities $C_e-\delta$ and $\delta$, respectively,
and applying the previous argument.
Unfortunately, as noted in Section~\ref{sec:prior},
linear network codes are not sufficient
for achieving the capacity of general error-free networks.
Thus, the given strategy
proves only that reducing the capacity of a link by $\delta$
changes the set of rates achievable using linear coding
by at most $\delta$ in each dimension.
If rate $\mathbf{R}$ is achievable using linear coding on $\mathcal{N}$,
then rate $(\mathbf{R}-\delta\cdot\mathbf{1})^+$ is achievable
using linear coding on $\mathcal{N}'$.
\subsection{Main Result}\label{sec:results}
Consider the $k$-unicast network $\mathcal{N}$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:net_2link}.
Here, $\alpha(s)=v_s$ and $\beta(v_{k+s})=\{s\}$
for all $s\in\mathcal{S}$;
that is, each message $s\in\mathcal{S}$ is a unicast from node $v_s$
to node $v_{k+s}$.
In a blocklength-$n$ code,
$\mathcal{M}_s\in\{1,2,\ldots,2^{nR_s}\}$
denotes the source message for Source $s$,
and ${\hat{M}}_s$ represents the reconstruction of $M_s$
at sink node $v_{k+s}$.
When we remove the link $e$ of capacity $C_e=\delta$ from $\mathcal{N}$,
we obtain the network $\mathcal{N}'$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:net_1link}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\psfrag{a}[c]{$a$}
\psfrag{b}[l]{$b$}
\psfrag{c}[l]{}
\psfrag{d}[l]{}
\psfrag{C1}[c]{$\delta$}
\psfrag{C2}[l]{$C$}
\psfrag{N1}[l]{$\mathcal{N}_1$}
\psfrag{N2}[l]{$\mathcal{N}_2$}
\psfrag{M1}[l]{$M_1$}
\psfrag{M2}[l]{$M_2$}
\psfrag{Mk}[l]{$M_k$}
\psfrag{Mh1}[l]{${\hat{M}}_1$}
\psfrag{Mh2}[l]{${\hat{M}}_2$}
\psfrag{Mhk}[l]{${\hat{M}}_k$}
\psfrag{dots}[l]{$\vdots$}
\subfigure[Network $\mathcal{N}$]{\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{network_no_link.eps}\label{fig:net_2link}}
\subfigure[Network $\mathcal{N}'$]{\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{network_no_link2.eps}\label{fig:net_1link}}
\caption{A multiple unicast network with special structure}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
For any $\mathbf{R}\in\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N},\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$,
\[
(\mathbf{R}-\delta\cdot\mathbf{1})^+\in\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N}',\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta).
\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Fix $\mathbf{R}=(R_1,R_2,\ldots,R_k)\in\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N},\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)$.
We first consider the case where $\min\{R_1,\ldots,R_k\}\geq \delta$.
Given a code of blocklength $n$,
for each $s\in\mathcal{S}$,
let $P_{e,s}^{(n)}\triangleq\mathrm{P}(M_s\neq {\hat{M}}_s)$
denote the error probability in reconstructing source $s$ at sink $v_{k+s}$.
For any $p\in[0,1]$,
let $h(p)=-p\log(p)-(1-p)\log(1-p)$ be the binary entropy function.
Since $\mathbf{R}$ is achievable on $\mathcal{N}$,
for any $\epsilon>0$ and $n$ large enough
there exists a rate-$\mathbf{R}$ code of blocklength $n$
such that $\max\{P_{e,s}^{(n)}:s\in\mathcal{S}\}\leq \epsilon$
and $\max\{h(P_{e,s}^{(n)}):s\in\mathcal{S}\}\leq \epsilon$.
Given any $\epsilon>0$, fix such a code.
We next use this family of codes to prove the existence
of a multiple access code for communicating the sources
from nodes $v_1,\ldots,v_k$ to node $a$
and a broadcast code for transmitting all sources $s\in\mathcal{S}$
from Node $a$ to nodes $v_{k+1},\ldots,v_{2k}$, respectively,
both at rates $\mathbf{R}-\delta\cdot\mathbf{1}$.
In the arguments that follows,
we use $W_e$, ${\bf W}_i$, and ${\bf W}_o$ to denote
the message sent through the link $e$ of capacity $C_e=\delta$,
the inputs of Node $a$, and
the outputs of Node $a$, respectively (see Fig.~\ref{fig:net_2link}).
Consider the $k$-user multiple access channel
with inputs ${\bf M}=(M_1,M_2,\ldots,M_k)$ and output ${\bf W}_i$.
The capacity region of this $k$-user MAC is the set of rate vectors
${\bf r}=(r_1,r_2,\ldots,r_k)$ satisfying
\begin{align}
\sum_{s\in\mathcal{A}}r_s\leq I({\bf M}_{\mathcal{A}};{\bf W}_i|{\bf M}_{\mathcal{A}^c},Q),\nonumber
\end{align}
for all $\mathcal{A}\subseteq\mathcal{S}$ and some
\[
p(q)p(m_1|q)p(m_2|q)\ldots p(m_k|q).
\]
Define
\[
{\bf r}_{\rm{mac}}\triangleq(I(M_1;{\bf W}_i),I(M_2,{\bf W}_i),\ldots,I(M_k;{\bf W}_i)),
\]
under the distribution imposed by the code fixed above.
In the argument that follows, we first show that ${\bf r}_{\rm{mac}}$
falls in the capacity region of the MAC
and then prove that ${\bf r}_{\rm{mac}}$ satisfies the desired rate constraint.
Since the messages $M_1,\ldots,M_k$ are independent,
for any sets $\mathcal{A}\subseteq\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{A}^c=\mathcal{S}\setminus\mathcal{A}$,
\begin{align}
\sum\limits_{s\in\mathcal{A}} r_{{\rm mac},s} &= \sum\limits_{s\in\mathcal{A}} I(M_s;{\bf W}_i)\nonumber\\
&= \sum\limits_{s\in\mathcal{A}} [H(M_s)-H(M_s|{\bf W}_i)]\nonumber\\
&=H(M_{\mathcal{A}})-\sum\limits_{s\in\mathcal{A}}H(M_s|{\bf W}_i)\nonumber\\
&\leq H(M_{\mathcal{A}}) -H(M_{\mathcal{A}}|{\bf W}_i)\nonumber\\
&\leq H(M_{\mathcal{A}}) -H(M_{\mathcal{A}}|{\bf W}_i,M_{\mathcal{A}^c})\nonumber\\
& =I(M_{\mathcal{A}};{\bf W}_i|M_{\mathcal{A}^c}).\nonumber
\end{align}
Thus, ${\bf r}_{\rm{mac}}$ falls in the capacity region of the MAC.
We next bound each term in ${\bf r}_{\rm{mac}}$.
For each $s\in\mathcal{S}$,
\begin{align}
H(M_s|{\bf W}_i)&\leq H(M_s,W_e|{\bf W}_i)\nonumber\\
&= H(M_s|W_e,{\bf W}_i)+H(W_e|{\bf W}_i)\nonumber\\
&\leq nR_sP_{e,s}^{(n)} +h(P_{e,s}^{(n)})+n\delta \nonumber
\end{align}
by Fano's inequality~\cite{cover}.
Hence,
\begin{align}
I(M_s;{\bf W}_i) &= H(M_s)-H(M_s|{\bf W}_i)\nonumber\\
&\geq n(R_s-\delta) - nR_s\epsilon-\epsilon,\label{eq:mac}
\end{align}
since $\max\{P_{e,s}^{(n)},h(P_{e,s}^{(n)})\}\leq \epsilon$ by assumption.
Recall that $\epsilon>0$ is arbitrary;
thus \eqref{eq:mac} implies that
$(\mathbf{R}-\delta\cdot\mathbf{1})$
is achievable on the described MAC.
We next deliver these messages
to their intended receivers
using the broadcast channel (BC)
from Node $a$ to the sinks $v_{k+1},\ldots,v_{2k}$.
Again, we apply the previously chosen code,
operating the code in the absence of edge $e$
by sending only source messages for which the message across edge $e$
is a fixed value $w_e$ to be chosen next.
Note that
\begin{align}
H({\bf M})&=H(\hat{{\bf M}})+H({\bf M}|\hat{{\bf M}})\nonumber
\end{align}
\begin{align}
&= H(\hat{{\bf M}})+ \sum_{s=1}^kH(M_s|M^{s-1},\hat{{\bf M}})\nonumber\\
&\leq H(\hat{{\bf M}})+ \sum_{s=1}^kH(M_s|\hat{M}_s)\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{\leq} H(\hat{{\bf M}}) + \sum_{s=1}^k( h(P_{e,s}^{(n)})+ nR_s P_{e,s}^{(n)})\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\leq} H(\hat{{\bf M}}) +k\epsilon+n\epsilon \sum_{s=1}^k R_s.\label{eq:1}
\end{align}
where $\rm (a)$ and $\rm (b)$ follow from the Fano's inequality \cite{cover}, and our initial assumption, respectively. Hence, from \eqref{eq:1},
\begin{align}
H(\hat{{\bf M}}) &\geq H({{\bf M}}) -k\epsilon- n\epsilon \sum_{s=1}^k R_s\nonumber\\
&= (1-\epsilon )n\sum_{s=1}^k R_s-k\epsilon.\label{eq:1-1}
\end{align}
On the other hand, we have
\begin{align}
H(\hat{{\bf M}}|W_e)&=H(\hat{{\bf M}},W_e)-H(W_e)\nonumber\\
&\geq H(\hat{{\bf M}})-H(W_e)\nonumber\\
&\geq H(\hat{{\bf M}})-n\delta.\label{eq:2}
\end{align}
Therefore, combining \eqref{eq:1-1} and \eqref{eq:2}, it follows that
\begin{align}
H(\hat{{\bf M}}|W_e) \geq (1-\epsilon )n\sum_{s=1}^k R_s-k\epsilon -n\delta.\label{eq:3}
\end{align}
Since $H(\hat{{\bf M}}|W_e)=\sum_{w_e\in\mathcal{W}_e}H(\hat{{\bf M}}|W_e=w_e)p(w_e)$, there exists some $w_e\in\mathcal{W}_e$ such that
\begin{align}
H(\hat{{\bf M}}|W_e=w_e)&\geq (1-\epsilon )n\sum_{s=1}^k R_s-k\epsilon -n\delta.\label{eq:4}
\end{align}
Fixing the message $W_e$ to a value of $w_e$
that satisfies \eqref{eq:4},
we get a $k$-user deterministic broadcast channel (BC) \cite{cover}
with input ${\bf W}_o$ and outputs $({\hat{M}}_1,\ldots,{\hat{M}}_k)$.
Appendix A summarizes prior results
on the capacity region for this BC,
which achieves reliable transmission
at all rates ${\bf r}=(r_1,r_2,\ldots,r_k)$ for which
\begin{align}
\sum_{s\in\mathcal{A}}r_s\leq H({\hat{M}}_{\mathcal{A}}|W_e=w_e),\nonumber
\end{align}
for all $\mathcal{A}\subseteq\mathcal{S}$.
We now prove that this set of rates
includes the rate ${\bf r}_{\rm bc}=n(\mathbf{R}-\delta\cdot\mathbf{1})$.
For any $\mathcal{A}\subseteq\mathcal{S}$, we have
\begin{align}
& H({\hat{M}}_{\mathcal{A}}|W_e=w_e)+H({\hat{M}}_{\mathcal{A}^c}|W_e=w_e)\nonumber\\
&\geq H(\hat{{\bf M}}|W_e=w_e).\label{eq:entropy_upper_bound_out}
\end{align}
But $H({\hat{M}}_{\mathcal{A}^c}|W_e=w_e)\leq \sum_{s\in\mathcal{A}^c}nR_s$.
Hence, combining \eqref{eq:4}
and \eqref{eq:entropy_upper_bound_out},
\begin{align}
H({\hat{M}}_{\mathcal{A}}|W_e=w_e)\geq n\sum_{s\in\mathcal{A}}R_s- n\sum_{s=1}^kR_s\epsilon-k\epsilon-n\delta.\nonumber
\end{align}
Thus, since $\epsilon$ is arbitrary,
$n(\mathbf{R}-\delta\cdot\mathbf{1})$ is achievable
on the given BC.
This implies that the messages
received by node $a$ at rate ${\bf r}_{\rm mac}$
can be delivered to their intended receivers,
which concludes the proof for the case where $R_s>\delta$ for all $s\in\mathcal{S}$.
Finally, note that if there are some sources with $R_s\leq \delta$,
then we can use the same argument
by sending constant messages for all such sources
in both the MAC and the BC.
\end{proof}
A special case of the network shown in Fig.~ \ref{fig:net_2link}
is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:net_no_link}.
Theorem \ref{thm:main} immediately applies.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\psfrag{a}[c]{}
\psfrag{b}[l]{}
\psfrag{c}[l]{}
\psfrag{d}[l]{}
\psfrag{C1}[c]{$\delta$}
\psfrag{C2}[l]{$C$}
\psfrag{N1}[l]{$\mathcal{N}_1$}
\psfrag{N2}[l]{$\mathcal{N}_2$}
\psfrag{M1}[l]{$M_1$}
\psfrag{M2}[l]{$M_2$}
\psfrag{Mk}[l]{$M_k$}
\psfrag{Mh1}[l]{${\hat{M}}_1$}
\psfrag{Mh2}[l]{${\hat{M}}_2$}
\psfrag{Mhk}[l]{${\hat{M}}_k$}
\psfrag{dots}[l]{$\vdots$}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{network_2link.eps}
\caption{A special case of the network shown in Fig. \ref{fig:net_2link}}\label{fig:net_no_link}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Note that Theorem \ref{thm:main} can also be used to derive an outer bound on the capacity region of the $k$-unicast network $\mathcal{N}$ shown in Fig. \ref{fig:net_2link}. Let $\mathcal{R}_1\triangleq\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N}_1,\mathcal{S},\alpha_1,\beta_1)$ and $\mathcal{R}_2\triangleq\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N}_2,\mathcal{S},\alpha_2,\beta_2)$ denote the capacity regions of the networks $\mathcal{N}_1$ and $\mathcal{N}_2$ shown in Fig. \ref{fig:net_1link}, with $\alpha_1(s)=v_s$, $\alpha_2(s)=a$ and $\beta_2(v_{s+k})=s$, for $s\in\mathcal{S}$. Moreover, $\beta_1(a)=\mathcal{S}$, $\beta_1(v)=\emptyset$ for $v\in\mathcal{V}\backslash a$, and $\beta_2(v)=\emptyset$ for $v\in\mathcal{V}\backslash\{v_{k+1},\ldots,v_{2k}\}$. Note that $\mathcal{R}_1$ and $\mathcal{R}_2$ correspond to a multicast network and a single source network with non-overlapping demands, respectively. Hence, as mentioned before, in both cases the capacity regions are computable and are fully characterized by the cut-set bounds \cite{KoetterM:03}.
\begin{corollary}
Let $\mathcal{R}_o\triangleq \{R+\delta\cdot\mathbf{1}: R\in\mathcal{R}_1\cap\mathcal{R}_2 \}$. Then,
\[
\mathcal{R}(\mathcal{N},\mathcal{S},\alpha,\beta)\subseteq\mathcal{R}_o.
\]
\end{corollary}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper we study the effect
of a single link on the network coding capacity
of a network of error-free bit pipes.
For some special topologies of multi-source multi-sink networks,
we prove that our result from \cite{EffrosH:10} continues to hold;
that is, reducing the capacity of a link by $\delta$
changes the capacity region by at most $\delta$ in each dimension.
The question of whether or not this result holds
for all networks remains an open area for future research.
\renewcommand{\theequation}{A-\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\section*{APPENDIX A\\ Deterministic broadcast channel} \label{app1}
A $k$-user deterministic broadcast channels (DBC)
with input $x\in\mathcal{X}$ and outputs $\{Y_s\in\mathcal{Y}_s\}_{s\in\mathcal{S}}$
is a $k$-user broadcast channel such that
for any $x\in\mathcal{X}$ and $(y_1,\ldots,y_k)\in\mathcal{Y}_1\times\mathcal{Y}_2\times\ldots\times\mathcal{Y}_k$,
\begin{align}
\mathrm{P}((Y_1,\ldots,Y_k)=(y_1,\ldots,y_k)|X=x)\in\{0,1\}.\label{eq:a_1}
\end{align}
Since the capacity region of a BC depends only
on the receivers' conditional marginal distributions \cite{cover},
\eqref{eq:a_1} implies that a $K$-user DBC
can be described by $k$ functions $(f_1,\ldots,f_k)$, \[f_s:\mathcal{X}\to\mathcal{Y}_s,\]
such that $Y_s=f_s(X)$ for $s\in\mathcal{S}$.
While the capacity region for general BCs remains unsolved,
the capacity region of a $k$-user DBC is known
and can be described by the union of the set of
rates $(R_1,R_2,\ldots,R_k)$ satisfying
\begin{align}
\sum\limits_{s\in\mathcal{A} }R_s \leq H(Y_{\mathcal{A}}),\nonumber
\end{align}
for any $\mathcal{A}\subseteq\{1,\ldots,k\}$, for some $P(X)$ \cite{Marton:77,Pinsker:78} .
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported in part by
Caltech's Center for the Mathematics of Information (CMI),
DARPA ITMANET grant W911NF-07-1-0029,
the Air Force Office of Scientific Research
under grant FA9550-10-1-0166,
and Caltech's Lee Center for Advanced Networking.
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
The purpose of this paper is to observe the asymptotic behavior of
the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion for graph manifolds.
In particular, we are interested in graph manifolds
whose $\SL$-representations of the fundamental groups are described by
certain subsets of the $\SL$-representations of hyperbolic knot groups.
A closed orientable irreducible 3-manifold $M$ is called a graph manifold
if there exists disjoint incompressible tori $T^2_1, \ldots, T^2_k$ in $M$
such that each component of $M \setminus (T^2_1 \cup \ldots \cup T^2_k)$
is a Seifert fibered space and the whole space $M$ does not admit any Seifert fibration.
It has been shown in~\cite{Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion} that
the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion for a Seifert fibered space
grows exponentially and its logarithm has
the same order as the dimension of representations.
It is natural to expect that
we have the same growth order in the case of a graph manifold.
In this paper,
we determine the growth order and the limit of the leading coefficient in the sequence given by the logarithm of
the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion for certain graph manifolds.
We will see the difference
in the limit of the leading coefficient between our graph manifolds
and the Seifert fibered spaces studied in~\cite{Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion}.
In the study of exceptional surgeries along a hyperbolic knot, the problem of finding incompressible tori that cut the resulting manifold into Seifert fibered spaces has been investigated.
For example there exists a complete list~\cite{BrittenhamWu}
of exceptional surgeries along two--bridge knots.
The torus decomposition of the resulting graph manifolds
is also given in~\cite{Patton, ClayTeragaito, teragaito13:LO_TwistKnots}.
When a manifold is obtained by a surgery along a knot,
its fundamental group is given by a quotient group of the knot group.
Therefore we can pull--back $\SL$-representations from the fundamental group of the resulting manifold
to the knot group (for the details, see Section~\ref{sec:representations_twist_knot}).
The $\SL$-representation space of a hyperbolic knot group
can be regarded as a parameter space for deformations of the hyperbolic structure
of the knot exterior.
Since exceptional surgeries along a hyperbolic knot yield non--hyperbolic manifolds,
the resulting manifolds induce $\SL$-representations of the hyperbolic knot group
which correspond to degenerate hyperbolic structures.
We are also motivated to see the asymptotic behavior
of the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion
when we choose an $\SL$-representation for a hyperbolic $3$-manifold
which is different from the holonomy representation. Here the holonomy representation is an $\SL$-representation
corresponding to the complete hyperbolic structure.
We wish to investigate the asymptotic behavior of the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion
for degenerate hyperbolic structures through the $\SL$-representations induced by
an exceptional surgery.
For our purpose,
we choose hyperbolic twist knots (see Fig.~\ref{fig:twistknot}) with $4$-surgeries.
According to the torus decomposition in~\cite{Patton},
in the set of exceptional surgeries along two--bridge knots,
only $4$-surgeries along hyperbolic twist knots yield
graph manifolds consisting of two Seifert fibered spaces
which include a torus knot exterior.
More precisely, $4$-surgery along
a twist knot $K_n$ illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:twistknot}
yields the graph manifold $M$ consisting of the torus knot exterior of type $(2, 2n+1)$,
which will be denoted by $T(2, 2n+1)$, and the twisted $I$-bundle over the Klein bottle.
We consider the asymptotic behavior of the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion for $M$.
When we choose a homomorphism $\bar\rho$
from $\pi_1(M)$ into $\SL$, we also have a sequence of homomorphisms $\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar\rho$
from $\pi_1(M)$ into $\SL[2N]$ by the composition with the irreducible representations
$\sigma_{2N}$ of $\SL$ into $\SL[2N]$.
Our main theorem is stated as follows.
\begin{Theorem}[Theorem~\ref{thm:main_theorem} and Corollary~\ref{cor:set_limits}]
The growth of $\log |\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar\rho}|$
has the same order as $2N$ for every irreducible $\SL$-representation $\bar\rho$ of
$\pi_1(M)$.
The limits of the leading coefficients are expressed as
\begin{align*}
&\left\{\left.
\lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log |\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar\rho}|}{2N} \,\right|\,
\hbox{$\bar\rho$ is irreducible}\right\}\\
&=
\left\{\left.
\frac{1}{p_k} (\log|\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(-1)| - \log 2) \,\right|\,
p_k > 1, \hbox{$p_k$ is a divisor of $|\Delta_{K_n}(-1)|$}
\right\}
\end{align*}
where $\Delta_K(t)$ is the Alexander polynomial of a knot $K$.
In particular, the minimum in the limits of the leading coefficients is given by
\[ \frac{1}{|\Delta_{K_n}(-1)|} (\log|\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(-1)| - \log 2).\]
\end{Theorem}
We will show our main theorem by the following procedures.
First we will see that all irreducible $\SL$-representations $\bar\rho$ of $\pi_1(M)$
are induced by irreducible metabelian representations $\rho$ of a twist knot group $\pi_1(E_{K_n})$.
Here $E_{K_n}$ is the knot exterior of a twist knot $K_n$.
Concerning the decomposition of $M$ as the union of $E_{T(2, 2n+1)}$ and
the twist $I$-bundle $N(Kb)$ over the Klein bottle $Kb$,
the restriction of $\bar\rho$ to $\pi_1(E_{T(2, 2n+1)})$ is abelian.
On the other hand, the restriction to $\pi_1(N(Kb))$ is irreducible.
We can also compute the Reidemeister torsion for $M$ and $\bar\rho$
by the product of the Reidemeister torsions for $E_{T(2, 2n+1)}$ and $N(Kb)$
in the JSJ decomposition of $M$.
We will obtain the limits of the leading coefficients in our main theorem from the observation about
the asymptotic behavior of the Reidemeister torsion for
the torus knot exterior $E_{T(2, 2n+1)}$ and abelian representations
given by the restrictions of $\bar\rho$. We remark that, since $|\Delta_K(-1)|$ is always odd,
these limits differ from
the limit of the leading coefficient
for the exterior of the torus knot $T(2, 2n+1)$ and an {\it irreducible} $\SL$-representation
in~\cite{Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion},
which is given by
$(1-1/2-1/q')\log2$ with a divisor $q' ( > 1)$ of $2n+1$.
The maximum of $(1-1/2-1/q')$ is equal to $-\chi$ where
$\chi$ is the Euler characteristic of
the base orbifold in the Seifert fibration of the exterior $T(2, 2n+1)$.
From the viewpoint of hyperbolic structures,
$4$-surgery along a hyperbolic twist knot yields
degenerate hyperbolic structures of the twist knot exterior.
In this paper, we see that such degenerate hyperbolic structures are given by
irreducible metabelian representations in the $\SL$-representation space of a twist knot group.
The above Theorem
(Theorem~\ref{thm:main_theorem} and Corollary~\ref{cor:set_limits})
and the results in~\cite{FerrerPorti:HigherDimReidemeister, porti:survey_Rtorsion}
imply that, in the case of a hyperbolic twist knot exterior,
the growth order of the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion
for any irreducible metabelian representation
decreases from that for the holonomy representation.
Note that the Reidemeister torsion under our convention
is the inverse of that of~\cite{FerrerPorti:HigherDimReidemeister}
(for more details, see~\cite{porti:survey_Rtorsion}).
We will observe that this degeneration occurs for any knot
in the subsequent paper~\cite{tranYam:higherdimTAPmetabelian}.
In other words, we will observe that the growth order of
the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion
for any irreducible metabelian representation of a hyperbolic knot group
is less than that for the holonomy representation.
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{The higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion}
For the Reidemeister torsion,
we follow the notation and definition used in~\cite{Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion}.
For the details and related topics, we refer to the survey articles~\cite{Milnor:1966, porti:survey_Rtorsion} by
J.~Milnor and J.~Porti or the book~\cite{Turaev:2000} by V.~Turaev.
We need a homomorphism from the fundamental group into $\SL$
to observe the Reidemeister torsion for a manifold.
Throughout this paper, a homomorphism from a group $H$ into a linear group $G$
will be referred to as {\it a $G$-representation} of $H$.
The symbol $\sigma_n$ denotes the right action of $\SL$ on the vector space
$V_{n}$, consisting of homogeneous polynomials $p(x, y)$ of degree $n-1$,
defined as
\[
\sigma_n (A) \cdot p(x, y) = p(x', y')\quad \hbox{where}\,
\begin{pmatrix} x' \\ y' \end{pmatrix}
= A^{-1}\begin{pmatrix} x \\ y \end{pmatrix}.
\]
It is known that this action induces a homomorphism from $\SL$ into $\SL[n]$,
which is referred as {\it the $n$-dimensional irreducible representation of $\SL$}.
For the simplicity,
we use the same symbol $\sigma_n$ for the $n$-dimensional irreducible representation of $\SL$.
We mainly use the $2N$-dimensional irreducible representation $\sigma_{2N}$.
If $A \in \SL$ has the eigenvalues $\xi^{\pm 1}$,
then $\sigma_{2N}(A)$ has the eigenvalues $\xi^{\pm 1}$, $\xi^{\pm 3}, \ldots, \xi^{\pm (2N-1)}$.
This is due to the following action
\[\sigma_{2N}(A) \cdot (x^{2N-1 - i}y^i) = \xi^{-2N+1+2i} (x^{2N-1 - i}y^i)
\quad\hbox{for}\quad
A=
\begin{pmatrix}
\xi & 0 \\
0 & \xi^{-1}
\end{pmatrix}
\]
on the standard basis $\{x^{2N-1}, x^{2N-2}y, \ldots, xy^{2N-2}, y^{2N-1}\}$ of $V_{2N}$.
\begin{definition}
Let $W$ be a finite CW-complex and $\rho$ be an $\SL$-representation of $\pi_1(W)$.
The twisted chain complex $C_*(W;V_n)$ with the coefficient $V_{n}$ is defined as
a chain complex which consists of
\[ C_i(W;V_n) = V_n \otimes_{\sigma_n \circ \rho} C_i(\widetilde W;\mathbb{Z}) \]
where $\widetilde W$ is the universal cover of $W$
and $C_i(\widetilde W;\mathbb{Z})$ is a left $\mathbb{Z}[\pi_1(W)]$-module.
\end{definition}
We assume that each twisted chain module $C_*(W;V_n)$ is equipped with
a basis $\bm{c}^i$ given by $v_j \otimes \tilde e^i_{j'}$ where $v_j$ is a vector in a basis of $V_n$
and $\tilde e^i_{j'}$ is a lift of an $i$-dimensional cell $e^i_{j'}$ in $W$.
\begin{definition}
Suppose that the twisted chain complex $C_*(W;V_n)$ is acyclic,
i.e.,\, $\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}\nolimits \bnd{i} = \ker\bnd{i-1}$ for all $i$.
Each chain module $C_i(W;V_n)$ has the following decomposition:
\[C_i(W;V_n) = \bnd{i+1}\tilde B_{i+1} \oplus \tilde B_{i}\]
where $\tilde B_{i}$ is a lift of $\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}\nolimits \bnd{i}$.
Then we will denote by $\Tor{W}{\sigma_{n} \circ \rho}$ the $n$-dimensional Reidemeister torsion for
$W$ and $\rho$, which is given by the following alternating product:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:def_torsion}
\prod_{i \geq 0} \det \left(\bnd{i+1}\tilde{\bm{b}}^{i+1} \cup \tilde{\bm{b}}^i / \bm{c}^i\right)^{(-1)^{i+1}}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{\bm{b}}^i$ is a basis of $\tilde B_i$, $\bm{c}^i$ is an equipped basis of $C_i(W;V_n)$
and $(\bnd{i+1}\tilde{\bm{b}}^{i+1} \cup \tilde{\bm{b}}^i / \bm{c}^i)$ is the base change matrix
from $\bm{c}^i$ to $\bnd{i+1}\tilde{\bm{b}}^{i+1} \cup \tilde{\bm{b}}^i$.
\end{definition}
There are several choices in the definition of the $n$-dimensional Reidemeister torsion.
Let us mention the well-definedness of the Reidemeister torsion without proofs.
We refer to~\cite{porti:survey_Rtorsion, Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion}
for the details.
\begin{remark}
The alternating product~\eqref{eqn:def_torsion} is independent of a choice of a lift of $\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}\nolimits \bnd{i}$.
If the Euler characteristic of $W$ is zero, then $\Tor{W}{\sigma_{n} \circ \rho}$ is also independent
of a choice of a basis of $V_n$.
It is known that $\Tor{W}{\sigma_{n} \circ \rho}$ does not depend on the ordering and orientation
of cells in $\bm{c}^i$
when $n$ is even.
This is a reason why we restrict our attention to $2N$-dimensional ones.
\end{remark}
We give an example of $2N$-dimensional Reidemeister torsion which will be needed in this paper.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Kb.eps}
\caption{a cell decomposition of $Kb$ (left) and
a lift to $\widetilde{Kb}$ (right)}
\label{fig:Kb}
\end{figure}
\begin{example}
\label{example:Kb}
Suppose that the Klein bottle $Kb$ is decomposed as in Fig.~\ref{fig:Kb} and
$\rho$ is an $\SL$-representation of $\pi_1(Kb)$.
The fundamental group has the presentation $\pi_1(Kb) = \langle x, y \,|\, yx = xy^{-1}\rangle$.
The twisted chain complex $C_*(Kb;V_n)$ is expressed as
\begin{gather*}
0 \to
C_2(Kb;V_n)=V_n \xrightarrow{\bnd{2}} C_1(Kb;V_n) = V_n \oplus V_n \xrightarrow{\bnd{1}} C_0(Kb;V_n)=V_n
\to 0 \\
\bnd{2} = \begin{pmatrix} \mathbf{1} - Y \\ - XY - \mathbf{1} \end{pmatrix}, \quad
\bnd{1} = \begin{pmatrix} X - \mathbf{1} & Y - \mathbf{1} \end{pmatrix}
\end{gather*}
where $X = \sigma_n \circ \rho (x)$ and $Y = \sigma_n \circ \rho (y)$.
By the relation $x^{-1}yx=y^{-1}$,
the $\SL$-representation $\rho$ is classified into the following three cases,
up to conjugation:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{item:abelian}
$\rho(y) = \pm \mathbf{1}$ and $\rho(x)$ is arbitrary,
\item \label{item:irreducible}
$\rho(y)
= \begin{pmatrix}
\eta & 0 \\
0 & \eta^{-1}
\end{pmatrix}\, (\eta \not = \pm1)$
and
$\rho(x)
= \begin{pmatrix}
0 & -1 \\
1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}$,
\item \label{item:reducible_nonabelian}
$\rho(y)
= \begin{pmatrix}
\pm 1 & \omega \\
0 & \pm 1
\end{pmatrix}\, (\omega \not = 0)$
and
$\rho(x)
= \begin{pmatrix}
\pm \sqrt{-1} & \omega' \\
0 & \mp \sqrt{-1}
\end{pmatrix}$.
\end{enumerate}
We can express the $2N$-dimensional Reidemeister torsion $\Tor{Kb}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:Rtorsion_Kb}
\Tor{Kb}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}
=\begin{cases}
\displaystyle \frac{\det(\mathbf{1}-Y)}{\det(Y-\mathbf{1})} & (\det(Y-\mathbf{1}) \not = 0) \medskip \\
\displaystyle \frac{\det(-XY-\mathbf{1})}{\det(X-\mathbf{1})} & (\det(Y-\mathbf{1}) = 0 ).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Note that the left edge in Fig.~\ref{fig:Kb} is moved to the right one by the covering transformation of $yx$
since the starting point of the left edge is moved to that of the right edge by $yx \in \pi_1(Kb)$.
\end{example}
We will use the following gluing formula
of the $2N$-dimensional Reidemeister torsion.
This is an application of {\it the Multiplicativity property}
of the Reidemeister torsion to a torus decomposition of a $3$-manifold.
In the case of the $2N$-dimensional Reidemeister torsion,
we can determine the sign in the gluing formula easily.
For the details on applying the Multiplicativity property to a decomposition along a torus,
we refer to~\cite[Subsection~2.3 and Section~3]{Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion}
and the references given there.
\begin{lemma}[Consequence of the Multiplicativity property for a decomposition along a torus]
\label{lemma:mult_prop}
Suppose that a compact $3$-manifold $M$ is the union $M_1 \cup_{T^2} M_2$ and
each $M_i$ is given a CW-structure such that
both of them induce the same CW-structure of $T^2$.
If an $\SL$-representation $\rho$ of $\pi_1(M)$
induces the acyclic complexes $C_*(M_1;V_{2N})$, $C_*(M_2;V_{2N})$ and $C_*(T^2;V_{2N})$,
then the twisted chain complex $C_*(M;V_{2N})$ defined by $\rho$
is also acyclic and the $2N$-dimensional Reidemeister
torsion $\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}$ is expressed as
\[
\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}
= \Tor{M_1}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}\Tor{M_2}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
Usually we have the equality that
\[
\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}\Tor{T^2}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}
= \Tor{M_1}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}\Tor{M_2}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho}
\]
as a consequence of the Multiplicativity property.
It is known that $\Tor{T^2}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \rho} = 1$ if it is defined.
\end{remark}
\subsection{$\SL$-representations of twist knot groups}
\label{sec:representations_twist_knot}
We review several results concerning $\SL$-representations of the fundamental groups
of our graph manifolds.
We write $E_K$ for the knot exterior of a knot $K$,
which is obtained by removing an open tubular neighbourhood of $K$ from $S^3$.
We mainly consider the $n$-twist knot $K_n$, illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:twistknot}.
The horizontal twists are right-handed if $n$ is positive, left-handed if $n$ is negative.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{twistknot.eps}
\caption{a diagram of $K_n$}
\label{fig:twistknot}
\end{figure}
Under our convention, the $1$-twist knot $K_1$ is the figure-eight knot.
It is known that $K_n$ is a hyperbolic knot and that
$4$-surgery along $K_n$ yields a graph manifold $M$ when $n \not = 0, -1$.
The fundamental group $\pi_1(M)$ has the following presentation.
\begin{proposition}[Proposition~$2.2$ in~\cite{teragaito13:LO_TwistKnots}]
\label{prop:pi_1_M}
The graph manifold $M$ consists of a torus knot exterior $E_{T(2, 2n+1)}$ and the twisted $I$-bundle over the Klein bottle.
The fundamental group has a presentation:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:pres_pi_1_M}
\pi_1(M)
= \langle a, b, x, y\,|\,a^2 = b^{2n+1}, x^{-1} y x = y^{-1}, \mu = y^{-1}, h=y^{-1}x^2 \rangle
\end{equation}
where $\mu = b^{-n} a$ and $h$ correspond to
a meridian and a regular fiber of the torus knot exterior (with the Seifert fibration),
respectively.
\end{proposition}
Since $\pi_1(M)$ is isomorphic to the quotient group
$\pi_1(E_{K_n}) / \langle\!\langle m^4\ell \rangle\!\rangle$
where $m$ and $\ell$ are a meridian and a preferred longitude on $\partial E_{K_n}$,
Proposition~\ref{prop:pi_1_M} shows that the quotient
$\pi_1(E_{K_n}) / \langle\!\langle m^4\ell \rangle\!\rangle$
is expressed as~\eqref{eqn:pres_pi_1_M}.
We denote by $\bar \rho$ the induced homomorphism from $\pi_1(M)$ into $\SL$:
\[\xymatrix{
\pi_1(E_{K_n}) \ar[r]^{\rho} \ar[d]& \SL \\
\pi_1(M)\ar[ur]_{\bar\rho} &
}\]
\begin{definition}
An $\SL$-representation $\rho$ of a group $H$ is referred as being {\it irreducible}
if the invariant subspaces of $\mathbb{C}^2$ under the action of $\rho(H)$ are only $\{\bm{0}\}$ and $\mathbb{C}^2$.
An $\SL$-representation $\rho$ is called {\it reducible} if it is not irreducible.
We also call $\rho$ {\it abelian} if the image $\rho(H)$ is an abelian subgroup in $\SL$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:irred_rhobar}
The image of $\pi_1(E_{K_n})$ by $\rho$ coincides with that of $\pi_1(M)$ by $\bar\rho$.
Hence $\bar\rho$ is irreducible if and only if $\rho$ is irreducible.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
We have seen the classification of $\SL$-representations of $\pi_1(Kb)$
in Example~\ref{example:Kb}.
The case~\eqref{item:abelian} gives abelian representations,
the case~\eqref{item:irreducible} gives irreducible ones and
the case~\eqref{item:reducible_nonabelian} gives reducible and non--abelian ones.
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}
We write $R(X)$ for the set of homomorphisms from $\pi_1(X)$ into $\SL$.
We call $R(X)$ the $\SL$-representation space of $\pi_1(X)$.
The symbol $R^{\mathrm{irr}}(X)$ denotes the subset of irreducible representations in $R(X)$.
\end{definition}
The pull-back by the quotient induces an inclusion from $R(M)$ into $R(E_{K_n})$.
We can regard the representation space $R(M)$ as a subset in $R(E_{K_n})$.
From this viewpoint, $R(M)$ is expressed as
\[
R(M) = \{\rho \in R(E_{K_n}) \,|\, \rho(m^4\ell) = \mathbf{1} \}.
\]
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:rep_sp_M}
Every irreducible metabelian representation of $\pi_1(E_{K_n})$ is contained in $R(M)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It was shown in~\cite[Proposition~1.1]{Nagasato07:Finite_of_section}
that any irreducible metabelian representation of a knot group sends a preferred longitude to $\mathbf{1}$
and a meridian to a trace-free matrix in $\SL$, which has the order of $4$.
\end{proof}
For any knot $K$,
we can express the set of irreducible metabelian representations as
the union of $(|\Delta_K(-1)| - 1)/2$ conjugacy classes
where $\Delta_K(t)$ is the Alexander polynomial of $K$.
If $K$ is a twist knot $K_n$,
then we have the following representatives of conjugacy classes.
Here we suppose that $\pi_1(E_{K_n})$ has a presentation
$\pi_1(E_{K_n}) = \langle \alpha, \beta \,|\, \omega^n \alpha = \beta \omega^n \rangle$
where $\alpha$, $\beta$ are meridians and $\omega = \beta \alpha^{-1} \beta^{-1} \alpha$.
A twist knot $K_n$ has $(|4n+1|-1)/2$ conjugacy classes
since its Alexander polynomial is given by $-nt^{2}+(2n+1)t-n$.
\begin{proposition}[Theorem~3 in~\cite{NagasatoYamaguchi} for $K_n$ ]
\label{prop:rho_k}
The set of irreducible metabelian representations of $\pi_1(E_{K_n})$ consists of
$(|4n+1|-1)/2$ conjugacy classes. The representatives are given by
the following $\rho_k$ ($k=1, \ldots, (|4n+1|-1)/2$):
\[
\rho_k(\alpha) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\sqrt{-1} & -\sqrt{-1} \\
0 & -\sqrt{-1}
\end{pmatrix},\quad
\rho_k(\beta) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\sqrt{-1} & 0 \\
-u_k\sqrt{-1} & -\sqrt{-1}
\end{pmatrix},\quad
u_k=-4\sin^2\frac{k\pi}{4n+1}.
\]
\end{proposition}
\section{Representation spaces for resulting graph manifolds}
Let $M$ be the graph manifold obtained by $4$-surgery along a hyperbolic twist knot $K_n$.
\subsection{$R(M)$ as a subspace of $R(E_{K_n})$}
We determine the $\SL$-representation space $R(M)$ as a subset in $R(K_n)$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:rep_sp_M}
Every irreducible representation of $\pi_1(M)$ into $\SL$ is induced
by an irreducible metabelian one of $\pi_1(E_{K_n})$, i.e.,\,
\[R^{\mathrm{irr}}(M) = \{\rho \in R(E_{K_n}) \,|\, \hbox{$\rho$ is irreducible metabelian}\}.\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:rep_sp_M},
it is sufficient to show that if any irreducible representation $\rho$ of $\pi_1(E_{K_n})$ factors through
the quotient group $\pi_1(E_{K_n}) / \langle\!\langle m^4\ell \rangle\!\rangle$, then $\rho$ is metabelian.
When $\mathcal{M}^{\pm 1}$ denote the eigenvalues of $\rho(m)$,
the trace $\mathcal{M} + \mathcal{M}^{-1}$ of $\rho(m)$ must be zero
by Lemmas~\ref{lemma:Apoly_slope} and~\ref{lemma:Apoly_explicit} below.
Since $K_n$ is a two--bridge knot,
it follows from~\cite[Lemma~23]{NagasatoYamaguchi} that $\rho$ must be a metabelian representation.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:Apoly_slope}
If an irreducible representation $\rho \in R(E_{K_n})$ factors through $\pi_1(M)$,
then the eigenvalue $\mathcal{M}$ satisfies that
$A_{K_n}(\mathcal{M}^{-4}, \mathcal{M})=0$ where
$A_{K_n}(\mathcal{L}, \mathcal{M})$ is the A-polynomial of $K_n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The A-polynomial $A_{K_n}(\mathcal{L}, \mathcal{M})$ gives
the defining equation of $R(\partial E_{K_n})$.
Since the peripheral group $\pi_1(\partial E_{K_n})$ is an abelian group,
we can assume that the images of $\rho(m)$ and $\rho(\ell)$ are upper triangular matrices
whose diagonal entries are $\mathcal{M}^{\pm 1}$ and $\mathcal{L}^{\pm 1}$ respectively.
Then we can rewrite the constraint that $\rho(m^4\ell) = \mathbf{1}$ as
$\mathcal{L}=\mathcal{M}^{-4}$.
The lemma follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:Apoly_explicit}
The A-polynomial of $K_n$ for $\mathcal{L}=\mathcal{M}^{-4}$ is expressed as
\[
A_{K_n}(\mathcal{M}^{-4}, \mathcal{M})
= \begin{cases}
\mathcal{M}^{-8n}(\mathcal{M}+\mathcal{M}^{-1})^{2n} & (n>0)\\
\mathcal{M}^{-8|n|+3}(\mathcal{M}+\mathcal{M}^{-1})^{2|n|-1} & (n<0).
\end{cases}
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since the knot $K_n$ is the mirror image of $J(2, -2n)$ in~\cite{HosteShanahan},
the A-polynomial $A_{K_n}(\mathcal{L}, \mathcal{M})$ coincides with
$A_{J(2, -2n)}(\mathcal{L}, \mathcal{M}^{-1})$.
Hence we have that
\[A_{K_n}(\mathcal{M}^{-4}, \mathcal{M}) = A_{J(2, -2n)}(\mathcal{M}^{-4}, \mathcal{M}^{-1}).\]
By induction and the recursive formula in~\cite[Theorem~1]{HosteShanahan},
one can show that
\[
A_{J(2, 2n)}(\mathcal{M}^{-4}, \mathcal{M}^{-1}) =
\begin{cases}
\mathcal{M}^{-8n+3}(\mathcal{M}+\mathcal{M}^{-1})^{2n-1} & (n>0) \\
\mathcal{M}^{-8|n|}(\mathcal{M}+\mathcal{M}^{-1})^{2|n|} & (n<0).
\end{cases}
\]
The lemma then follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The restrictions to Seifert pieces}
We will see the restriction of $\bar\rho \in R^{\mathrm{irr}}(M)$ to
the fundamental group of each Seifert piece.
Recall that the graph manifold $M$ is the union the torus knot exterior $E_{T(2, 2n+1)}$ and
the twisted $I$-bundle $N(Kb)$ over the Klein bottle $Kb$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:torusknot_abelian}
For every $\bar \rho \in R^{\mathrm{irr}}(M)$, the restriction of $\bar \rho$ to $\pi_1(E_{T(2, 2n+1)})$
is abelian.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
It was shown by~\cite[Theorem~1.2]{Teragaito03:ToroidalII} that
a twist knot $K_n$ bounds a once-punctured Klein bottle whose boundary slope is $4$.
We can think of loops in $E_{T(2, 2n+1)}$ as loops
outside a non--orientable spanning surface of $K_n$ in $E_{K_n}$.
A loop $\gamma$ outside a non--orientable spanning surface of $K_n$ has an even linking number with $K_n$.
When we express $\gamma \in \pi_1(E_{K_n})$ as
$\gamma = m^{\mathop{\mathrm{\ell k}}\nolimits(\gamma, K_n)} (m^{-\mathop{\mathrm{\ell k}}\nolimits(\gamma, K_n)} \gamma)$,
we have the even integer $\mathop{\mathrm{\ell k}}\nolimits(\gamma, K_n)$ and the commutator $m^{-\mathop{\mathrm{\ell k}}\nolimits(\gamma, K_n)} \gamma$.
By Proposition~\ref{prop:rep_sp_M},
one can see that $\bar \rho$ is induced by an irreducible metabelian representation $\rho$
of $\pi_1(E_{K_n})$.
Since $\rho$ sends $m^2$ and the commutator subgroup to $-\mathbf{1}$ and an abelian subgroup respectively,
the image of $\pi_1(E_{T(2, 2n+1)})$ by $\rho$ is contained in the abelian subgroup.
\end{proof}
In general, any abelian representation of a knot group $\pi_1(E_K)$ is determined, up to conjugation,
by the eigenvalues of the matrix corresponding to a meridian.
This follows from the fact that any abelian representation factors through
the abelianization $\pi_1(E_K) \to H_1(E_K;\mathbb{Z})$ and
$H_1(E_K;\mathbb{Z})$ is generated by the homology class of a meridian.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:relation_eigenvalue}
Every $\bar\rho \in R^{\mathrm{irr}}(M)$ is determined by the eigenvalues of $\bar\rho(\mu)$
up to conjugation.
\end{lemma}
Furthermore the set of eigenvalues is determined as follows.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:set_eigenvalues}
Suppose that $\rho_k \in R(K_n)$ is an irreducible metabelian representation
in Proposition~\ref{prop:rho_k} and
$\mu$ is a meridian of the torus knot in the presentation~\eqref{eqn:pres_pi_1_M}.
Let $\xi_k^{\pm 1}$ be the eigenvalues of $\bar\rho_k(\mu)$. Then
the set $\{\xi_k^{\pm 1} \,|\, k=1, \ldots, (|4n+1|-1)/2\}$ is given by
$\{e^{\pm \theta \sqrt{-1}} \,|\, \theta = \pi (2j-1)/|4n+1|, j=1,\ldots,(|4n+1|-1)/2\}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $p$ be $|4n+1|$. We regard elements of $\pi_1(E_{T(2, 2n+1)})$ as the products
$m^{2r}\gamma$ where $r \in \mathbb{Z}$ and $\gamma$ is a commutator of $\pi_1(E_{K_n})$
as in the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:torusknot_abelian}.
It follows from~\cite[Proposition~2.8]{yamaguchi:twistedAlexMeta} that
the eigenvalues of $\rho_k(\gamma)$ are $p$-th roots of unity.
Since $\rho_k(m^2) = -\mathbf{1}$ and $p$ is odd,
one can see that for the generators $a$ and $b \in \pi_1(E_{T(2, 2n+1)})$
\[{\bar \rho_k(a)}^p = \pm \mathbf{1} \quad \hbox{and} \quad {\bar \rho_k(b)}^p = \pm \mathbf{1}.\]
By the relation $a^2=b^{2n+1}$, we can conclude that ${\bar \rho_k(b)}^p = \mathbf{1}$.
On the other hand, we can see that ${\bar\rho_k(a)}^p = -\mathbf{1}$
since the image of $\pi_1(E_{T(2, 2n+1)})$ by $\bar\rho_k$ contains $-\mathbf{1}$ and $p$ is odd.
Hence the eigenvalues $\xi_k^{\pm 1}$ of $\bar\rho_k(\mu) = \bar\rho_k(b^{-n}a)$ satisfy that
$\xi_k^{\pm p} = -1$.
We can exclude the case that $\bar\rho_k(\mu)=-\mathbf{1}$ by the irreducibility of $\bar\rho_k$.
There exist at least $(|4n+1|-1)/2$ distinct pairs of eigenvalues
by Proposition~\ref{prop:rep_sp_M} and Lemma~\ref{lemma:relation_eigenvalue}.
On the other hand, there exist at most $(|4n+1|-1)/2$ distinct pairs in the set of $2p$-th roots of unity to be
the eigenvalues $\xi_k^{\pm 1}$ of $\rho_k(\mu)$ ($k=1, \ldots, (|4n+1|-1)/2$).
This proves Proposition~\ref{prop:set_eigenvalues}.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:order_mu}
The order of $\bar\rho_k(\mu)$ is given by $2p_k$ for some divisor $p_k$ of $|\Delta_{K_n}(-1)|=|4n+1|$.
\end{corollary}
We next turn to the restriction to $\pi_1(N(Kb))$.
\begin{proposition}
For every $\bar \rho \in R^{\mathrm{irr}}(M)$,
the restriction of $\bar\rho$ to $\pi_1(N(Kb))$
is irreducible.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Note that ${\rm tr}\, \bar\rho(y) = {\rm tr}\, \bar\rho(\mu)^{-1}$
by~\eqref{eqn:pres_pi_1_M}.
Proposition~\ref{prop:set_eigenvalues} shows that
${\rm tr}\, \bar\rho(y) \not = \pm 2$.
The restriction of $\bar\rho$ to $\pi_1(N(Kb))$ is an $\SL$-representation
in the case~\eqref{item:irreducible} of Example~\ref{example:Kb},
and hence is irreducible.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{remark:rho_y}
By conjugation, we can assume that the $\bar\rho(a)$, $\bar\rho(b)$ and $\bar\rho(y)$ are
diagonal matrices and $\bar\rho(x)$ is
$\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 \\
-1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}$
for any $\bar\rho \in R^{\mathrm{irr}}(M)$.
This is due to that $\bar\rho(a)$, $\bar\rho(b)$ and
$\bar\rho(y)=\bar\rho(\mu)^{-1}$ are contained in the same maximal abelian subgroup
in $\SL$.
\end{remark}
\section{Asymptotic behavior of Reidemeister torsion for graph manifolds}
We will consider the limit of the leading coefficient in the asymptotic behavior of
Reidemeister torsion.
We use the symbols $\xi^{\pm 1}_k$ to denote the eigenvalues of $\bar\rho_k(\mu)$.
We will compute the higher dimensional Reidemeister torsion and its asymptotic behavior
for $M$ from the decomposition of a graph manifold.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:Rtorsion_2N}
Let $\rho_k$ be an irreducible metabelian representation.
Then the Reidemeister torsion $\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}$
is expressed as
\[
\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k} =
\prod_{i=1}^{N}
\frac{
\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{2i-1}_k)
\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{-2i+1}_k)
}{
(\xi^{2i-1}_k -1)(\xi^{-2i+1}_k -1)
}.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Applying Lemma~\ref{lemma:mult_prop} to the decomposition $M=E_{T(2, 2n+1)} \cup N(Kb)$,
we have that
\[
\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}
= \Tor{E_{T(2, 2n+1)}}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}\Tor{N(Kb)}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}.
\]
By Proposition~\ref{prop:torusknot_abelian} and Corollary~\ref{cor:order_mu},
the restriction $\bar \rho_k$ to $\pi_1(E_{T(2, 2n+1)})$ is an abelian representation
such that the matrix $\bar\rho_k(\mu)$ corresponding to a meridian has an even order.
Our claim follows from
Lemmas~\ref{lemma:RtorionTorus_Kb_2N} and~\ref{lemma:higher_dim_abelian} below.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:RtorionTorus_Kb_2N}
The Reidemeister torsion $\Tor{N(Kb)}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}$ is equal to $1$ for all $N$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By the simple homotopy equivalence, the Reidemeister torsion $\Tor{N(Kb)}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}$
coincides with $\Tor{Kb}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}$.
The Reidemeister torsion $\Tor{Kb}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}$ is given by Eq.~\eqref{eqn:Rtorsion_Kb}.
The eigenvalues of $\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k(y) = \sigma_{2N} \circ \bar\rho_k(\mu)^{-1}$
are given by $\xi_k^{\mp (2i-1)}$ $(i=1,\ldots, N)$.
Proposition~\ref{prop:set_eigenvalues}
shows that the orders of $\xi_k^{\pm 1}$ are even. Hence
$\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k(y)$ does not have the eigenvalue $1$ for any $N$.
Hence Example~\ref{example:Kb} shows that
\[
\Tor{N(Kb)}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}
=\Tor{Kb}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}
= \frac{\det(\mathbf{1}-Y)}{\det(Y-\mathbf{1})} = 1
\]
for any $N$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma:higher_dim_abelian}
Let $\varphi$ be an abelian representation of a knot group $\pi_1(E_K)$
which sends a meridian to a matrix with eigenvalues $\xi^{\pm 1}$.
If $\xi$ is not a $(2r-1)$-root of unity for any $r \in \mathbb{N}$,
then the Reidemeister torsion $\Tor{E_K}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \varphi}$ is expressed as
\[
\Tor{E_K}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \varphi}=
\prod_{i=1}^{N}\frac{\Delta_K(\xi^{2i-1})}{\xi^{2i-1}-1} \frac{\Delta_K(\xi^{-2i+1})}{\xi^{-2i+1}-1}
\]
for all $N$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The Reidemeister torsion $\Tor{E_K}{\varphi}$ is given by
$\Delta_K(\xi)\Delta_K(\xi^{-1}) / (\xi - 1)(\xi^{-1}-1)$
(for instance, see the case of $t=1$ in~\cite[proof of Proposition~3.8]{YY2}).
The $\SL[2N]$-representation $\sigma_{2N} \circ \varphi$ is decomposed into the direct sum
$\oplus_{i=1}^{N} \varphi_i$ where $\varphi_i$ is an abelian representation sending a meridian
to an $\SL$-matrix with eigenvalues $\xi^{\pm (2i-1)}$.
For the direct sum of representations, the Reidemeister torsion is given by the product of
those for each direct summand $\varphi_i$. This implies our claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:main_theorem}
Let $\bar \rho_k$ be an irreducible $\SL$-representation of $\pi_1(M)$ and
$p_k$ be a divisor of $p=|\Delta_{K_n}(-1)|$
such that the order of $\bar\rho_k(\mu)$ is given by $2p_k$.
Then the growth order of $\log|\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}|$ is equal to $2N$.
Moreover the convergence of the leading coefficient is expressed as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:main_result}
\lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log|\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}|}{2N}
= \frac{1}{p_k} \big(\log |\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(-1)| - \log 2\big).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
It is sufficient to show that
the left hand side of~\eqref{eqn:main_result} converges to the right hand side.
By Proposition~\ref{prop:Rtorsion_2N},
the left hand side of~\eqref{eqn:main_result} turns out to be
\begin{align*}
&\lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\log|\Tor{M}{\sigma_{2N} \circ \bar \rho_k}|}{2N}\\
&= \lim_{N \to \infty}
\frac{1}{2N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}\log|
\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{2i-1}_k)
\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{-(2i-1)}_k)| \\
&\quad + \lim_{N\to \infty}
\frac{1}{2N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}\log|
(\xi^{2i-1}_k -1)(\xi^{-2i+1}_k-1)|^{-1}
\end{align*}
The eigenvalues $\xi^{\pm 1}_k$ are
primitive $2p_k$-th roots of unity
as in Propositions~\ref{prop:set_eigenvalues} and~\ref{cor:order_mu}.
It follows from~\cite[Proposition~3.9]{Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion} that
the second term in the right hand side converges to $-(\log 2)/p_k$.
Note that we can ignore the indeterminacy of a factor $t^{j}$ ($j \in \mathbb{Z}$) in the Alexander polynomial
in the computation of the first term.
The first term is rewritten as
\begin{align}
&\lim_{N \to \infty}
\frac{1}{2N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}\log|
\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{2i-1}_k)
\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{-(2i-1)}_k)| \notag\\
&=
\lim_{N \to \infty}
\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}\log|
\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{2i-1}_k)| \notag\\
&=
\frac{1}{p_k}\sum_{i=1}^{p_k}\log|
\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{2i-1}_k)| \notag\\
&=
\frac{1}{p_k}
\log\prod_{i=1}^{p_k}|\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{2i-1}_k)|
\label{eqn:1st_term}
\end{align}
by the symmetry that $\Delta_K(t) = t^j\Delta_K(t^{-1})$ $(j \in \mathbb{Z})$
and~\cite[Lemma~3.11]{Yamaguchi:asymptoticsRtorsion}.
The Alexander polynomial $\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(t)$ is given by
$(t^{2n+1}+1)/(t+1)$.
We have seen that $p_k$ is a divisor of $p$ in Corollary~\ref{cor:order_mu}.
Since $\mathrm{gcd}(p, 2n+1)=1$,
we can see that $\mathrm{gcd}(2p_k, 2n+1)=1$.
From this, the denominator coincides with the numerator in
the product of $|\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{2i-1}_k)|$
except for $i=(p_k+1)/2$,
i.e.,\, we have that
\[
\prod_{\substack{1 \leq i \leq p_k, \\ i\not=(p_k+1)/2}}
|\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(\xi^{2i-1}_k)|
=1.
\]
The right hand side of~\eqref{eqn:1st_term} turns into
$(\log |\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(-1)|) / p_k$.
Hence the left hand side of~\eqref{eqn:main_result} turns out to be
$(\log|\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(-1)| - \log 2)/p_k$.
\end{proof}
It follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:set_eigenvalues}
that the integer $p_k$, which gives the order of $\bar\rho(\mu)$ by $2p_k$,
runs over all divisors of $|\Delta_{K_n}(-1)|$ except for $1$.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:set_limits}
The set of the limits of the leading coefficients is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:set_limits}
\left\{\left.
\frac{1}{p_k}(\log |\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(-1)| - \log 2) \,\right|\,
p_k > 1,
\hbox{$p_k$ is a divisor of $|\Delta_{K_n}(-1)|$}\right\}.
\end{equation}
In particular, the minimum in the set~\eqref{eqn:set_limits} is
given by $(\log |\Delta_{T(2, 2n+1)}(-1)| - \log 2) / |\Delta_{K_n}(-1)| =
(\log|2n+1|-\log2)/|4n+1|$.
\end{corollary}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The first author was partially supported by a grant from the Simons Foundation (\#354595 to AT).
The second author was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number $26800030$.
\newcommand{\noop}[1]{}
\providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace}
\providecommand{\MR}{\relax\ifhmode\unskip\space\fi MR }
\providecommand{\MRhref}[2]{%
\href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{#2}
}
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
The hydrogen 1S-2S two-photon transition was first observed by H\"{a}nsch {\it et. al} in 1975 \cite{Hansch:75}. Over the following four decades, the continued improvement in the spectroscopy of this transition has offered stringent tests of quantum electrodynamics (QED) and has led to increasingly precise determinations of the Rydberg constant and proton charge radius \cite{Mohr:12}. The importance of the 1S-2S transition stems in part from the simplicity of hydrogen, which makes it amenable to theoretical study, and also from the its narrow natural linewidth, which is only 1.3 Hz.
When reviewing the well-known measurements of the 1S-2S transition, one can also observe a continual refinement of the spectroscopy lasers used -- first by a transition from pulsed to cw lasers \cite{Couillaud:84, Foot:1985} and then by a continued increase in power, coherence and robustness \cite{Boshier:89, Kallenbach:91, Zimmerman:95, Kolachevsky:06, Kolachevsky:11}. The most recent result was reported by the H\"{a}nsch group in 2011, in which they determined the transition to a fractional frequency uncertainty of $4.2 \times 10^{-15}$ \cite{Parthey:11}. By that time, the UV laser source had evolved to an all solid state system that produced 13 mW of 243 nm cw radiation. This radiation was cavity enhanced to 368 mW within the hydrogen spectrometer. In addition to the impressive intracavity power, this radiation source possessed an extremely narrow linewidth of $\approx$ 1 Hz which is commensurate with the hydrogen 1S-2S transition width itself. More recently, in 2013, Beyer et al. reported on a 243 nm laser which was capable of producing 75 mW before cavity enhancement \cite{Beyer:13}.
Notwithstanding these accomplishments, we believe that continuing to increase the laser power at 243 nm would be very beneficial. For instance, the 1S-2S transition could be excited with laser beams of large transverse dimensions which could decrease transit-time broadening and increase the proportion of atoms in the atomic beam which are excited. With the recent trapping of anti-hydrogen in its ground state, a larger beam would also prove beneficial in mitigating the difficulties created by the low number of trapped anti-hydrogen atoms available \cite{Gabrielse:12, Andersen:11}. However, we are mainly motivated to develop a power scalable 243 nm laser in order to explore proposals to laser cool atomic hydrogen using the 1S-2S transition \cite{Zehnle:2001, Kielpinski:06, Wu:11}.
Spectroscopy of hydrogen and the recently trapped anti-hydrogen would benefit tremendously from robust laser cooling. Two photon laser cooling could be more rapid and flexible than the more traditional approach using Lyman-alpha radiation at 121.6 nm -- mostly due to the greater ease at producing radiation at 243 nm. To obtain reasonable scattering rates with such schemes requires that the 2S state is coupled to a state with short lifetime, for instance either the 2P \cite{Kielpinski:06} or 3P \cite{Wu:11} states, and the average power of the cavity enhanced 243 nm radiation source should be at the $\sim$100 W level. For a beam diameter of $\sim$ 500 $\mu$m, this would lead to a scattering rate of $\sim$500 Hz when maximally coupling the 2S and 2P states \cite{Kielpinski:06}. Power enhancement within an optical cavity can reach factors of $\sim$100 with commercially available mirrors so that Watt-level 243 nm sources could be sufficient for an initial demonstration of cooling.
Here, we present a laser system which is a major step towards laser cooling hydrogen with the two-photon 1S-2S transition. The system is composed of an extended cavity laser diode (ECDL) at 972 nm followed by a tapered amplifier, a Ytterbium-doped double clad fiber amplifier, and two consecutive resonant doubling stages. The Ytterbium (Yb) fiber amplifier is a notable feature of this source since gain is much more readily obtained in Yb systems at $\sim$1030 nm due to the low absorption cross section at this wavelength. Gain near the emission cross section peak at 976 nm is also possible but requires population inversions above $\sim$50\% because the absorption cross section in that spectral region has approximately the same magnitude. Despite this difficulty, there have been demonstrations of 100 W Yb doped fiber lasers near the emission cross section peak at 976 nm \cite{Boullet:08, Roser:08}. To the best of our knowledge, there have been only a few Yb fiber-based laser systems which operate at shorter wavelengths and these produced relatively low power ($\sim10$ mW) \cite{Hanna:90, Yi:12}. The Yb fiber amplifier we demonstrate here produces 6.3 W of power at 972 nm which upon frequency quadrupling gives 530 mW of power at 243 nm. We believe this approach is power-scalable and that we can continue to increase our UV radiation power by scaling the fundamental power at 972 nm.
\section{Seed Laser and Yb Fiber Amplifier}
\label{amplifier}
Our master oscillator is an external cavity diode laser (ECDL) that follows the design in \cite{Kolachevsky:11}, in which the length of the cavity was increased to 20 cm. This reduced the laser linewidth by a factor of 10 in comparison to an ECDL with a more typical 2 cm long cavity. We chose a somewhat shorter cavity length of 10 cm to increase the mode-hop free tuning range. The ECDL produces 30 mW of power at 972 nm and the design is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:setup}. The output of the oscillator is amplified to 3 W with a commercial tapered amplifier (TA). The TA produces a complex mode structure and only $\approx$ 2.4 W is contained within a TEM$_{00}$ mode.
The output from the TA is then further amplified within a double-clad Yb doped fiber with a 20 $\mu$m diameter core and 128 $\mu$m cladding. The core of this fiber has a numerical aperture of 0.075 which is large enough to support the propagation of a few higher-order modes. With careful alignment, we can achieve a TEM$_{00}$ beam at the output of the amplifier.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pdfNIRstage.pdf}
\caption{Schematic of the ECDL Master Oscillator and Amplification Stages. SD: Seed Diode, DG: Diffraction Grating, FI: Faraday Isolator, F1 and F5: Bandpass Filters, F2: Longpass Filter, F3 and F4: Shortpass Filters. The ECDL contains an electro-optic modulator (EOM) for fast frequency control although it was not used for the studies here.}
\label{fig:setup}
\end{figure}
To obtain the necessary population inversion requires that a high pump intensity at 915 nm be maintained along the entire length of the fiber, which results in low pump absorption. In our case, we use a short section of fiber ($\sim$ 10 cm) which absorbs only $13 \%$ of the incident pump power. Due to the high population inversion within the fiber amplifier, there is also significant gain within the 1030 nm and 976 nm spectral regions. This is problematic as significant amplified spontaneous emission (ASE) would degrade the amplifier performance by reducing the population inversion. As shown in \cite{Nilsson:98}, the gain at a given wavelength within a homogeneously broadened amplifier can be written as a function of the gain or absorption at two other wavelengths and their respective absorption and emission cross sections. Using the cross section data for our fiber, we find an expression for the gain ($G_{\lambda}$) at 976 nm given by
\begin{equation}
G_{976}= 2.28 \cdot G_{972} + 1.04 \cdot \beta A_{915}.
\end{equation}
Here $A_{915}$ is the absorption of the pump at 915 nm, and $\beta$ is the ratio of the cladding area to the core area. In our amplifier, $\beta = 40$, $G_{972} =4.2$ dB and $A_{915}=0.6$ dB which results in a gain of $G_{976} = 35$ dB. Similarly, the gain at 1030 nm where Yb doped fiber lasers commonly operate is given by
\begin{equation}
G_{1030}= 0.49 \cdot G_{972} + 1.28 \cdot \beta A_{915},
\end{equation}
which results in $G_{1030} = 32$ dB. As can be seen from the previous expressions, the gain at 976 nm and 1030 nm depends sensitively on the pump absorption due to the large value of $\beta$. As discussed extensively in \cite{Nilsson:98, Boullet:08, Roser:08}, increasing the pump absorption, and therefore efficiency of the amplifier, would need to be accompanied by a decrease in $\beta$ to keep the gain at around 976 nm and 1030 nm manageable. Even in our current configuration, the $= 32$ dB gain at 1030 nm would cause the amplifier to lase if the ends of the gain fiber were flat cleaved. To mitigate these effects, we angle polish the ends of the gain fiber and use bandpass filters (FWHM$=$4 nm) to remove ASE originating from both the fiber amplifier and the TA \cite{Yi:12}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pdf972amp.pdf}
\caption{Fiber Amplified 972 nm radiation as a function of 915 nm pump power. The data shown is with 3 W of seed power incident on the fiber. With 45 W of pump power, approximately 6.3 W of 972 nm radiation is produced from the fiber amplifier. The slight deviation from the linear trend line is due to a shift of the pump to longer wavelengths as the power is increased.}
\label{fig:amp}
\end{figure}
The high inversion in the fiber can also lead to photodarkening -- a poorly understood decrease in the optical transmission of gain fibers which degrades performance \cite{Koponen:06}. Mitigation of this effect is possible by codoping the gain fiber with phosphorous or cerium \cite{Engholm:08, Engholm:09}. We use a fiber codoped with phosphorous because it was commercially available and we have yet to observe any such degradation of the amplifier performance due to this effect.
The output power of the fiber amplifier as a function of 915 nm pump power is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:amp}. At our maximum pump power of 45 W, we obtain an output power of 6.3 W at 972 nm. As seen in Fig. \ref{fig:amp}, there is a near linear increase in the output power as a function of pump power. The small deviation from the linear trend line is due to an increase of the wavelength of the pump radiation as the diode current is increased. We have modeled the 972 nm power, 915 nm pump power and ASE along the length of the fiber based on the method found in \cite{Roser:08}. The model indicates that we can continue to linearly increase the output power with additional pump power. These same models suggest an additional amplification stage will also be an effective means to increase the output power \cite{Clarkson:10}.
\section{Doubling Stages}
\label{doubling}
As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dub}, the output of the fiber amplifier is frequency quadrupled to 243 nm in two consecutive resonant doubling stages. The first stage uses lithium triborate (LBO) as the nonlinear crystal, while for the second we tested both barium borate (BBO) and cesium lithium triborate (CLBO) crystals.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pdfdubstage.pdf}
\caption{Experimental Setup of Doubling Stages. PD: Photodiode, PZT: PiezoElectric Transducer, IC: Input Coupler, M1-M4: 200 mm ROC mirrors. For the servo loops, we use dither locks to maintain the resonance condition.}
\label{fig:dub}
\end{figure}
The first nonlinear doubling stage uses a standard bowtie geometry. The curved mirrors have a radius of curvature (ROC) of 200 mm, producing a beam waist within the LBO of $62 ~\mu$m. This increased mode size, which is $\sim 1.8$ times the optimal waist determined from the Boyd-Kleinman focusing criteria \cite{Boyd:68}, increases the robustness of the doubling stage with minimal effect on the overall conversion efficiency. We use type I non-critical phase matching in order to eliminate spatial walk-off and improve the 486 nm output beam quality, which requires the LBO be kept at a temperature of 283$^\circ$ C. Because the performance of typical dual wavelength antireflection coatings is not guaranteed at high temperatures, we use a Brewster cut crystal to reduce the loss of the resonant 972 nm light.
This led to an 18\% loss of the generated 486 nm radiation from the Fresnel reflection on the crystal output facet. The remaining 82\% of the 486 radiation was coupled out of the cavity through a dichroic curved mirror with high reflectivity at 972 nm and high transmission ($>90\%$) at 486 nm. The 486 nm output power as a function of incident fundamental power is shown in Fig: \ref{fig:LBO}. We obtain 2.4 W of 486 nm radiation with 6.3 W of 972 nm fundamental power.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pdf486conv.pdf}
\caption{Experimental results of frequency doubling fiber amplified 972 nm radiation using LBO as the nonlinear medium. With 6.3 W of power at 972 nm, up to 2.60 W of power at 486 nm is generated. The theoretical fit for harmonic conversion used here follows the model presented in \cite{Polzik:91}.}
\label{fig:LBO}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pdfBBOconv.pdf}
\caption{Experimental results of frequency doubling 486 nm radiation to 243 nm radiation using BBO as the nonlinear medium. With 2.4 W of 486 nm radiation, up to 300 mW of power at 243 nm is generated.}
\label{fig:BBO}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pdfCLBOconv.pdf}
\caption{Experimental results of frequency doubling 486 nm radiation to 243 nm radiation using CLBO as the nonlinear medium. With 2.45 W of 486 nm radiation, up to 530 mW of power at 243 nm is generated.}
\label{fig:CLBO}
\end{figure}
In the second doubling stage, which produces 243 nm radiation, we tested both a BBO crystal and a CLBO crystal \cite{Scheid:07, Sakuma:04, Hu:13, Kaneda:08} in type I critical phase matching configurations. CLBO has a lower nonlinear coefficient than BBO, but also less spatial walk-off and a higher damage threshold \cite{Mori:95}. Similar to the first stage, the second doubling stage is a bow tie design with 200 mm ROC mirrors to produce a focus in the nonlinear crystal. This produces a beam waist of 44 $\mu$m which is $\sim 1.9$ times the Boyd-Kleinman focusing criteria \cite{Boyd:68} in order to prevent damage of the nonlinear crystal at high intensities and to minimize walkoff effects. Both crystals were Brewster cut and 10 mm long. In this case, Brewster cut crystals were used because AR coatings are not yet well-developed for CLBO crystals \cite{Sakuma:04}. This introduced a 27\% output coupling loss for the 243 nm light with the BBO crystal, and an 18\% loss with the CLBO crystal due to the Fresnel reflection on the output facet of the crystal. The BBO crystal is cut at $\theta=$55$^\circ$ and has a double refraction angle of $\rho = 82$ mrad. For CLBO, $\rho = 16$ mrad and the crystal is cut with $\theta=$77$^\circ$. As seen in Fig. \ref{fig:dub}, a Brewster oriented dichroic mirror with high reflectivity at 243 nm and high transmission at 486 nm is used to output couple the 243 nm radiation. The observed 243 nm output power as a function of the 486 nm input power is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:BBO} when using the BBO crystal and in Fig. \ref{fig:CLBO} for the CLBO crystal. As can be seen from the figures, a greater efficiency was obtained with the CLBO crystal which we attribute to the smaller walkoff. This also produced a 243 nm beam with better mode quality and less astigmatism.
Due to the high UV power generated, crystal degradation is a concern. Frequency doubling studies at a similar wavelength have demonstrated 5 W of 266 nm power without damaging the CLBO crystal \cite{Sakuma:04}. This corresponded to $\sim$ 5 times greater UV intensity within the crystal compared to the results reported here. Additional studies have shown that if degradation in CLBO occurs, it appears to be reversible \cite{Takachiho:14}. This is in contrast to BBO, which shows irreversible damage caused by the formation of an absorption center \cite{Scheid:07, Kondo:98, Takachiho:14}. Therefore, by utilizing CLBO we should be able to power scale our UV output as more fundamental power becomes available without crystal degradation.
CLBO is also known to be hygroscopic and some performance change has been reported as the crystal absorbs or desorbs water \cite{Kawamura:08}. For this reason, the CLBO crystal was operated at a temperature of 130$^\circ$ C. Over a few days at this elevated temperature, the conversion efficiency increased slightly above that shown in Fig. \ref{fig:CLBO} and we were able to observe $>$530 mW of 243 nm radiation over 50 minutes with no degradation.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{conclusion}
We have demonstrated a fiber based amplifier laser system capable of generating 6.3 W of power at 972 nm. Upon frequency doubling in successive resonant cavities, this laser source can generate 2.4 W at 486 nm and 530 mW at 243 nm. We are encouraged by the power scalability of our system. It appears that our fiber amplifier platform should be able to produce additional 972 nm radiation through either more powerful, commercially available pump diodes or with an additional fiber amplifier stage of similar design \cite{Clarkson:10}. To use the 915 nm pump radiation more efficiently would require that we obtain fibers with a larger core/cladding area ratio, such as the rod-type fibers used in \cite{Roser:08, Boullet:08}. The doubling stages were designed with relatively loose focusing in the crystals. This in conjunction with the high damage thresholds of LBO and CLBO make us hopeful that these cavities can also be power scaled.
Although we made no in-depth studies of the linewidth of our laser source for the work described here, our seed laser copies many aspects of the low phase noise design described in \cite{Kolachevsky:11} and we were able to couple our radiation into doubling cavities with few MHz resonance widths without any difficulty. For two-photon laser cooling of hydrogen, the transition width will be broadened to $\sim 50$ MHz by coupling the 2S and 2P states. Therefore, the laser source we describe here already has the coherence necessary for that application. That being said, spectroscopy of the hydrogen and anti-hydrogen 1S-2S transition with a power scaled 243 nm system would be very beneficial but would also require the source posses an extremely narrow linewidth. Stabilizing this source to that level will therefore be the subject of future work.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We gratefully acknowledge Jacob Roberts for useful discussions and for carefully reviewing this manuscript.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{spphys}
|
\section{Introduction}
Supergravity can be obtained as a low energy field theory
approximation of string theory \cite{lowe1,lowe}. The leading
order correction to this theory depends on the string used to
obtain the low energy effective field theory expansion. In the
heterotic string theory, the lowest corrections are described by a
Gauss-Bonnet (GB) term \cite{st12,12st,1s2t,s1t2}. Furthermore, it
is known from the renormalization group flow that the constants
depend on the scale at which a theory is probed \cite{renom}. So,
we expect that the different constants in general relativity and
GB gravity also depend on the scale at which these theories are
measured. The renormalization group flow for supergravity
solutions \cite{renor} and GB gravity \cite{regb} has been
analyzed. In fact, a renormalization group flow has been used for
measuring the flow of the cosmological constant \cite{cosmo} and
Newton constant \cite{newt}. Now, as the scale at which a theory
is measured depends on the energy of the probe, it is expected
that these constants will also depend on the energy. Therefore, in
this paper, we will use gravity's rainbow \cite{Magueijo} for
analyzing GB black holes with the energy dependent constants. It
may be noted that the initial motivation of gravity's rainbow came
by analyzing the target space metric of string theory. This was
done by regarding string theory as a two dimensional theory, and
considering the target space metric as a matrix of coupling
constants. Then using renormalization group flow, this matrix of
coupling constants would flow and depend on the scale at which
this theory is measured. This would in turn make them dependent on
the energy that is used for probing this theory \cite{Magueijo}.
Thus, the geometry would also be energy dependent.
Such a modification of a geometry at high energy scale can be viewed as a UV
completion. It may be noted that just like the Horava-Lifshitz gravity \cit
{HoravaPRD,HoravaPRL}, the gravity's rainbow \cite{Magueijo}, has
also been viewed as a UV completion of general relativity. This is
because both of these approaches are based on a modification of
the usual energy-momentum dispersion relation in the UV limit.
Such a modification of the usual energy-momentum dispersion
relation in the UV limit occurs in a large number
of approaches to quantum gravity, such as the discrete spacetime \cite{Hooft
, models based on string field theory \cite{Samuel1}, spacetime foam \cit
{Ellis}, spin-network in loop quantum gravity \cite{Gambini},
non-commutative geometry \cite{Carroll,FaizalMPLA} and ghost
condensation \cite{FaizalJPA}. It may be noted that even the
Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin limit (GZK limit) suggests that the usual
energy-momentum relation could get modified in the UV limit
\cite{Greisen,Zatsepin}. The GZK limit can be used for analyzing
quantum gravitational effects as an upper limit on the energy of
cosmic ray. The Pierre Auger Collaboration and the High Resolution
Fly's Eye experiment have reconfirmed earlier results of the GZK
cutoff \cite{Abraham}. All these observations suggest that there
is a strong experimental motivation for a UV modification of the
usual energy-momentum dispersion relation. Motivated by the
Horava-Lifshitz gravity, the geometries occurring in the types IIA
\cite{Gregory} and IIB string theory \cite{Burda} have been also
modified in the UV limit. Different Lifshitz scaling for space and
time have also been used for analyzing certain aspects of the
AdS/CFT correspondence \cite{Gubser,Chen,Alishahiha,Kachru}. It
may be noted that for a suitable choice of the rainbow functions,
the
Horava-Lifshitz gravity can be related to the gravity's rainbow \cit
{Garattini}. This is because both of these approaches are based on
a modification of general relativity in the UV limit such that the
general relativity is obtained in the IR limit. Basically,
Horava-Lifshitz gravity has been used to study the UV completion
of various interesting geometries. Motivated by the close relation
between the gravity's rainbow and Horava-Lifshitz gravity, the UV
completion of many black hole solutions has
been recently obtained by using the formalism of gravity's rainbow \cit
{Ali341}
One of the most interesting effects of the UV completion of
geometries is the modification of the black hole thermodynamics at
the last stage of the evaporation of the black holes. As the
gravity's rainbow reduces to the general relativity in the IR
limit, the black hole thermodynamics in gravity's rainbow reduces
to the usual black hole thermodynamics for very large black holes.
However, as the black holes evaporate and reduce in size, the
black hole thermodynamics in gravity's rainbow showing deviation
from the usual black hole thermodynamics. This deviation becomes
significant at the
end stage of the evaporation of black hole in gravity's rainbow \cit
{Ali104040}. It has been observed that the temperature of black holes
reaches a maximum value, and then it starts to reduce beyond this maximum
value. At a critical value the temperature of black holes becomes zero, and
the black holes do not radiate Hawking radiation at that stage. So, a black
hole remnant forms in gravity's rainbow. This formation of a black hole
remnant has important phenomenological consequences for the detection of
mini black holes at the LHC \cite{Ali295}. It is known that the usual
uncertainty principle has to be modified to the generalized uncertainty
principle to have an upper bound on the energy of a particle. As this
particle acts as a probe for the geometry of the black hole, it also fixes
the energy scale of the gravity's rainbow. Thus, this bound on the energy of
a particle emitted in the Hawking radiation can be used as energy scale in
the rainbow functions. This modifies the thermodynamics of black holes \cit
{Ali104040,HPEMrainbow}. Such a modification in the black hole
thermodynamics has also been observed for black rings
\cite{Ali159}. The temperature of black rings also reaches a
maximum value and reduces beyond that value to form a remnant. It
has been argued that a remnant will form for all black objects
\cite{Ali341}. This has been explicitly demonstrated for Kerr
black holes, Kerr-Newman black holes in de Sitter space, charged
anti-de Sitter (AdS) black holes, higher dimensional Kerr-AdS
black holes and black saturn \cite{Ali341}. The geometric and
thermodynamic properties of the charged dilatonic black holes in
gravity's rainbow have also been investigated \cite{HFEP}.
The effect of gravity's rainbow on the thermodynamics of black
holes in GB gravity coupled to Maxwell's theory has been studied
\cite{HendiFaizalGB}. In this analysis, it was observed that even
though the thermodynamics of the black holes get modified in the
GB gravity's rainbow, the first law of thermodynamics still holds
for this modified thermodynamics. However, in this analysis,
different constants were not made to depend on the energy of the
probe. As we expect the constant to depend on the energy of the
probe, in this paper, we will generalize this analysis and make
the constants energy dependant. We will also investigate the
critical behavior of black hole solutions in this theory. It may
be noted that the pressure-volume (PV) criticality has been
studied for black holes in GB gravity using extended phase space
thermodynamics \cite{Mo,Cao,Wei,Zou}. In the extended phase space
thermodynamics, the cosmological constant is viewed as a
thermodynamic pressure, and so it is possible to define a
thermodynamic volume conjugate to this thermodynamic pressure
\cite{Kubiznak,OurPV1,OurPV2,OurPV3,OurPV4}. It has been observed
that along with the usual black hole phase transition, a new
phenomenon of reentrant phase transitions occurs for rotating AdS
black holes in extended phase space \cite{Altamirano}. In these
reentrant phase transitions a monotonic variation of the
temperature yields two phase transitions, and this situation is
similar to that which is seen in multi-component liquids. The PV
criticality has also been studied in quasi-topological gravity
\cite{pv}. In this paper, we study the effect of the UV completion
of general relativity on the PV criticality in extended phase
space. Also, we analyze the effects of rainbow functions on PV
criticality in GB gravity's rainbow. In addition, we analyze the
effect of energy dependent constants on thermodynamic properties
of black hole solutions. We also study the effects of such
modification on the critical values and van der Waals like
behavior of the system.
\section{Probe energy dependent constants: exact solutions}
As it was mentioned before, we expect that all the constants
depend on the energy of the probe. Such a dependency of the
constants on the energy of the probe can be explicitly analyzed
using gravity's rainbow. This is an advantage of using the
gravity's rainbow. Now, following earlier work on
Einstein-GB-Maxwell black holes in gravity's rainbow, we will
generalize solutions to the case where different constants are
dependent on the energy of the probe. Our first step is analyzing
the effect of this energy dependency on the field equations.
The $d$-dimensional action of GB-Maxwell gravity with negative cosmological
constant can be written as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{I}=-\frac{1}{2\kappa }\int d^{d}x\sqrt{-g}[\alpha _{0}\mathcal{L
_{0}+\alpha _{1}\mathcal{L}_{1}+\alpha _{2}\mathcal{L}_{2}+\kappa \mathcal{L
(\mathcal{F})], \label{Action}
\end{equation
where $\kappa =8\pi G(E)$ and we set $\alpha _{0}=\alpha _{1}=1$
and $\alpha _{2}=\alpha (E)$ in which the last one is the
so-called GB coefficient. In this paper, we will only consider
positive values of GB coefficient. In addition,
$\mathcal{L}_{i}$'s are the first three terms of Lovelock
Lagrangian which are corresponding to the cosmological constant,
Einstein and GB Lagrangian, with the following explicit forms
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathcal{L}_{0} &=&-2\Lambda (E), \\
\mathcal{L}_{1} &=&\mathcal{R}, \\
\mathcal{L}_{2} &=&R_{\mu \nu \gamma \delta }R^{\mu \nu \gamma \delta
}-4R_{\mu \nu }R^{\mu \nu }+\mathcal{R}^{2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{F})$ is the Lagrangian of electrodynamics in which
we choose linear Maxwell Lagrangian, $\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{F})=-\mathcal{F}$, where
\mathcal{F}=F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }$ is the Maxwell invariant.
Variation of the action (\ref{Action}) with respect to the metric tensor
g_{\mu \nu }$ and the Faraday tensor $F_{\mu \nu }$, leads to the following
field equation
\begin{equation}
G_{\mu \nu }^{0}+G_{\mu \nu }^{1}+\alpha _{2}(E) G_{\mu \nu }^{2}=8\pi G(E)
T_{\mu \nu }, \label{Field equation}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nabla _{\mu }F^{\mu \nu }=0, \label{Maxwell equation}
\end{equation
where
\begin{eqnarray}
T_{\mu \nu } &=&2F_{\mu \lambda }F_{\nu }^{\lambda }-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu
\mathcal{F}, \\
G_{\mu \nu }^{0} &=&-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }\mathcal{L}_{0}, \label{G0} \\
G_{\mu \nu }^{1} &=&R_{\mu \nu }-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu }\mathcal{L}_{1},
\label{G1} \\
G_{\mu \nu }^{2} &=&-2\left( 2R^{\rho \sigma }R_{\mu \rho \nu \sigma
}-R_{\mu }^{\rho \sigma \lambda }R_{\nu \rho \sigma \lambda }-RR_{\mu \nu
}+2R_{\mu \lambda }R_{\nu }^{\lambda }\right) -\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu \nu
\mathcal{L}_{2}. \label{G2}
\end{eqnarray}
Following Ref. \cite{HendiFaizalGB}, one finds the spherical symmetric
metric governing the gravity's rainbow which has dependency on rainbow
functions in following form
\begin{equation}
d\tau =-ds^{2}=\frac{\Psi \left( r\right) }{f(E)
^{2}}dt^{2}-\frac{1}{g(E) ^{2}}\left[ \frac{dr^{2}}{\Psi \left(
r\right) }+r^{2}\left( d\theta
_{1}^{2}+\sum\limits_{i=2}^{d-2}\prod\limits_{j=1}^{i-1}\sin
^{2}\theta _{j}d\theta _{i}^{2}\right) \right] ~. \label{Metric}
\end{equation}
Using Eqs. (\ref{Field equation}) - (\ref{G2}) with metric (\ref{Metric}),
we can find following electromagnetic field tensor and metric function
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{tr} &=&\frac{q(E)}{r^{d_{2}}}, \\
\Psi \left( r\right) &=&1+\frac{r^{2}}{2\alpha ^{\prime }(E)g^{2}(E)}\left(
1-\sqrt{\Theta \left( r\right) }\right) , \label{metric function} \\
\Theta \left( r\right) &=&1+\frac{8\alpha ^{\prime }(E)}{d_{1}d_{2}}\left(
\Lambda (E)+\frac{d_{1}d_{2}m(E)}{2r^{d_{1}}}-\frac{8d_{1}d_{3}\pi
G(E)q^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)}{r^{2d_{2}}}\right) ,
\end{eqnarray
where $d_{i}=d-i$ . Also, $q(E)$ and $m(E)$ are integration constants which
are, respectively, related to the total electric charge and total mass of
the solutions, and $\alpha ^{\prime }(E)=d_{3}d_{4}\alpha (E)$.
For the simplicity and in order to find the contribution of each
parameters, we consider following notations
\begin{equation}
q(E)=h_{1}^{2}(E)q,\;\;\;\Lambda (E)=h_{2}^{2}(E)\Lambda
,\;\;\;G(E)=h_{3}^{2}(E)G,\;\;\;\alpha ^{\prime }(E)=h_{4}^{2}(E)\alpha
^{\prime },\;\;\;m(E)=h_{5}^{2}(E)m,
\end{equation
and since we are working in natural units, we set $8\pi G=1$.
Here, we would like to make some remarks regarding the properties of the
solutions. Calculations show that there is a curvature singularity at $r=0$,
which can be covered with an event horizon. Hence, it will be interesting to
see the effects of the gravity's rainbow on the singularity and asymptotical
behavior of the solutions. In order to study these effects, we use series
expansion of the Kretschmann scalar for small and large values of radial
coordinate. By doing so, one can find following relations
\begin{equation}
{\lim_{r\longrightarrow 0}}R_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }R^{\alpha \beta
\gamma \delta }=\frac{-4d_{3}(d^{2}-7d+13)g(E)
^{d_{3}}f(E)^{2}q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)}{\alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)r^{2d_{2}}},
\label{RR0}
\end{equation
\begin{equation}
{\lim_{r\longrightarrow \infty }}R_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }R^{\alpha
\beta \gamma \delta }=g(E) ^{d_{1}}\left[ \frac{8d_{-1}\Lambda _{eff}^{2}}
d_{1}^{2}d_{2}}-\frac{4\Lambda _{eff}}{d_{1}d_{2}}\right] , \label{RRinf}
\end{equation
wher
\begin{equation}
\Lambda _{eff}=\frac{d_{1}d_{2}}{4\alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)g(E)^{2}
\left[ \sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)\Lambda h_{2}^{2}(E) }
d_{1}d_{2}}}-1\right] . \label{Leff}
\end{equation}
Interestingly, the obtained relations indicate that the rainbow
functions affect the strength of singularity as well as
asymptotical behavior of the solutions. In other words, the
asymptotical behavior of the solutions is AdS with an effective
cosmological constant, $\Lambda _{eff}$. It is clear that the GB
parameter and rainbow function can modify $\Lambda _{eff}$. It
means that $\Lambda _{eff}$ reduces to $\Lambda (E)$ for $\alpha
(E)\rightarrow 0$ and $g(E)\rightarrow 1$, simultaneously.
\section{Thermodynamical quantities}
Now, we are in a position to study thermodynamical quantities of the
solutions. Using the concept of the surface gravity, it is a matter of
calculation to obtain temperature as
\begin{equation}
T=\frac{\left[ d_{2}g^{2}(E)\left( d_{3}r_{+}^{2}+\alpha ^{\prime }
d_{5}h_{4}^{2}(E) g^{2}(E) \right) -2\Lambda h_{2}^{2}(E) r_{+}^{4}\right]
r_{+}^{2d}-2q^{2}d_{3}^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E) h_{3}^{2}(E) g^{2}(E) f^{2}(E)
r_{+}^{8}}{4\pi d_{2}\left( r_{+}^{2}+2\alpha ^{\prime } h_{4}^{2}(E)
g^{2}(E) \right) g(E)f(E)r_{+}^{2d_{-1/2}}}. \label{TNEW}
\end{equation}
One of the conditions for having physical solutions is imposed by positive
temperature. Since we have considered positive values of GB parameter, the
denominator of the temperature is always positive and only numerator has
contribution to negativity of the solutions. For AdS black holes, only
charge term in numerator of the temperature contribute to negativity of it.
Taking closer look at the numerator, one can see that energy dependency of
constants plays a crucial role in domination of different terms. Therefore,
the conditions for having physical solutions (positive temperature) is
highly sensitive to energy variation of different constants.
Since we are working in the context of higher derivative gravity,
it is not allowed to use the area law for calculating entropy. We
use the Wald formula with the following result
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{r_{+}^{d_{2}}\left( 1+\frac{2\alpha ^{\prime } d_{2}h_{4}^{2}(E)
g^{2}(E) }{d_{4}r_{+}^{2}}\right) }{4g^{d_{2}}(E) }. \label{SNEW}
\end{equation}
In addition, the total electric charge of the solutions is obtained through
the use of Gauss's law as
\begin{equation}
Q=\frac{qd_{3}h_{1}^{2}(E) h_{3}^{2}(E) f(E) }{4\pi g^{d_{3}}(E)}.
\label{QNEW}
\end{equation}
For the electric potential, we have
\begin{equation}
U=A_{\mu }\chi ^{\mu }\left\vert _{r\rightarrow \infty }\right. -A_{\mu
}\chi ^{\mu }\left\vert _{r\rightarrow r_{+}}\right.=\frac{h_{1}^{2}(E) q}
r_{+}^{d_{3}}}. \label{UNEW}
\end{equation}
The total mass of the black holes could be obtained through
counter-term method or the Arnowitt-Deser-Misner approach with the
following unique form
\begin{equation}
M=\frac{1}{16\pi }\frac{h_{5}^{2}(E)d_{2}m}{f(E)g^{d_{1}}(E)}, \label{M2}
\end{equation
where by evaluating metric function on outer horizon, one can find
total finite mass as
\begin{equation}
M=\frac{\left[ \frac{1}{2}d_{1}d_{2}g^{2}(E)\left( r_{+}^{2}+\alpha ^{\prime
}h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)\right) -\Lambda r_{+}^{4}h_{2}^{2}(E)\right]
r_{+}^{d_{5}}+q^{2}d_{1}d_{3}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)r_{+}^{-2d_{2}
}{8\pi d_{1}f(E)g^{d_{1}}(E)}. \label{MNEW}
\end{equation}
Before we proceed, it is worthwhile to mention a few remarks about
conserved and thermodynamical quantities. The modification of GB
gravity when the constants are not energy dependent has already
been analyzed \cite{HendiFaizalGB}. Thermodynamical quantities of
the solutions in \cite{HendiFaizalGB} differ from those obtained
here which highlights the effects of dependency of constants on
the probe energy. Especially, the electric potential was shown to
be independent of energy function in Ref. \cite{HendiFaizalGB},
while here, it depends on the energy of the probe. Strictly
speaking, these two types of black holes are phenomenologically
different. Recently, it was pointed out that most of constants in
physics are not actually constant. In fact, a measurement of their
expectation values leads to the result that they should be varying
parameters. Here, we have taken such consideration into account
and shown that thermodynamically speaking, black holes will be
modified in such consideration.
Now, we are in a position to check the validation of the first law
of black hole's thermodynamics. Using total mass of these black
holes (\ref{MNEW}) with the obtained entropy (\ref{SNEW}) and
electric charge (\ref{QNEW}) as extensive parameters, one can
define following intensive parameters
\begin{equation}
T=\left( \frac{\partial M}{\partial r_{+}}\right) _{q}\ \left( \frac
\partial r_{+}}{\partial S}\right) _{q}\ \ \ \ \ \ and\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
U=\left( \frac{\partial M}{\partial q}\right) _{r_{+}}, \label{TU}
\end{equation
where by evaluating these equations, one can confirm that the
obtained temperature and electric potential in Eq. (\ref{TU})
coincide with those extracted from Eqs. (\ref{TNEW}) and
(\ref{UNEW}). Therefore, despite the modifications in
thermodynamical quantities by consideration of energy dependant
constants, the first law of thermodynamics is valid for these
black holes.
\section{Probe energy dependent constants: \newline
critical quantities and van der Waals like behavior \label{PV}}
The extended phase space expression comes from consideration of
the cosmological constant not as a fixed quantity but a
thermodynamical variable which is known as pressure. Although
thermodynamical pressure is generally proportional to the negative
cosmological constant with a proportionality constant
$\frac{-1}{8\pi }$, there are some cases in which we should modify
it \cite{HendiArmanBD,HFEP}. In this paper, it is observed that
the metric function and asymptotical behavior of the system have
been modified due to the existence of rainbow functions.
Therefore, it is necessary to check the possible effects of
rainbow functions on thermodynamical pressure. To do so, we
evaluate the energy-momentum tensor. It is straightforward to
obtain the following relations for different components of
energy-momentum tensor
\begin{equation}
T_{t}^{t}=T_{r}^{r}=-\frac{f^{2}(E) g^{2}(E) F_{tr}^{2}}{8\pi }-\frac
\Lambda (E)}{8\pi },
\end{equation
\begin{equation}
T_{\theta _{i}}^{\theta _{i}}=\frac{f^{2}(E) g^{2}(E) F_{tr}^{2}}{8\pi }
\frac{\Lambda (E)}{8\pi }.
\end{equation}
In these relations, the first term is due to the existence of
electromagnetic field (which is coupled with rainbow functions).
Surprisingly, the $\Lambda (E)$ term is not coupled with any
rainbow functions of the metric. In other words, although rainbow
functions of the metric modify $\Lambda (E)$ term in the metric
function and asymptotical behavior of the solutions, they do not
affect thermodynamical pressure which is related to the
cosmological constant. Therefore, in studying the critical
behavior of the system through the analogy between $\Lambda $ and
$P$, one can use following relation
\begin{equation}
P=-\frac{\Lambda (E)}{8\pi }=-\frac{h_{2}^{2}(E) \Lambda}{8\pi }.
\label{PNEW}
\end{equation}
Thermodynamically speaking, the conjugating thermodynamical
variable corresponding to the pressure is thermodynamical volume
which in the context of enthalpy is calculated by
\begin{equation}
V=\left( \frac{\partial H}{\partial P}\right) _{S,Q}. \label{V}
\end{equation}
It is worthwhile to mention that in order to have a well-defined vacuum
solution with $m=q=0$, the pressure $P$ has to satisfy the following
constraint \cite{Cao,MaximallPressure2,MaximallPressure3}
\begin{equation}
0\leq \frac{64\pi \alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)P}{d_{1}d_{2}}\leq 1,
\end{equation
in which it puts a restriction on the pressure as maximal pressure
\begin{equation}
P\leq P_{\max }=\frac{d_{1}d_{2}}{64\pi \alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)},
\label{maximall}
\end{equation
which indicates that only for sufficiently small pressures, the solution
\ref{metric function}) has an asymptotic AdS region.
Now, remembering that we are working in extended phase space, the total mass
of the black holes will not play the role of internal energy. Instead, it is
interpreted as enthalpy. With this consideration, one can find the Gibbs
free energy as
\begin{equation}
G=H-TS=M-TS. \label{G}
\end{equation}
As for the volume of these black holes, by using Eqs. (\ref{MNEW}), (\re
{PNEW}) and (\ref{V}), we obtain
\begin{equation}
V=\frac{r_{+}^{d_{1}}}{d_{1}g^{d_{1}}(E) f(E) },
\end{equation}
which is modified in the presence of the rainbow functions. In
other words, in the presence of gravity's rainbow, thermodynamical
volume of the black holes is a function of the rainbow functions,
and therefore, the final form of these black holes is determined
by the model of rainbow functions under consideration. On the
other hand, even by consideration of the dependency of different
constants on the probe energy, the volume of these black holes is
same as that of probe energy independent constants. This behavior
is expected, since the abstract form of metric (\ref{Metric}) is
free of any constant.
The equation of state and Gibbs free energy of these solutions could be
found by using Eqs. (\ref{TNEW}), (\ref{PNEW}) and (\ref{G}), which result
into
\begin{eqnarray}
P &=&\frac{d_{2}\left[ r_{+}^{2}+2\alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E
\right] g(E)f(E)}{4r_{+}^{3}}T+\frac
d_{3}^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)}{8\pi r_{+}^{2d_{2}}}q^{2}
\notag \\
&&-\frac{d_{2}\left[ d_{3}r_{+}^{2}+\alpha ^{\prime
}d_{5}h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)\right] g^{2}(E)}{16\pi r_{+}^{4}}, \label{PPNEW}
\end{eqnarray
and
\begin{eqnarray}
G &=&\frac{1}{d_{4}g(E)f(E)\left( r_{+}^{2}+2\alpha ^{\prime
}h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)\right) r_{+}^{4}}\left\{ \frac{d_{4}r_{+}^{d_{-3}}}
16\pi g^{d_{4}}(E)}+\frac{\alpha ^{\prime }}{8\pi }\left( \frac
d_{8}r_{+}^{d_{-1}}}{2g^{d_{6}}(E)}+\frac{\alpha ^{\prime
}d_{2}h_{4}^{2}(E)r_{+}^{d_{1}}}{g^{d_{8}}(E)}\right) h_{4}^{2}(E)\right.
\notag \\
&&\left. -\frac{6P}{d_{1}}\left( \frac{d_{4}r_{+}^{d_{-5}}}
6d_{2}g^{d_{2}}(E)}+\frac{\alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)r_{+}^{d_{-3}}}
g^{d_{4}}(E)}\right) +\frac{d_{3}q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)}{2\pi
d_{2}}\left( \frac{d_{4}d_{5/2}}{2g^{d_{4}}(E)r_{+}^{d_{9}}}+\frac{\alpha
^{\prime }d_{2}d_{7/2}h_{4}^{2}(E)}{g^{d_{6}}(E)r_{+}^{d_{7}}}\right)
\right\} . \label{GNEW}
\end{eqnarray}
There are several approaches toward calculating critical values. In this
paper, we will employ the properties of the inflection points in $P-r_{+}$
diagrams. In this method, one can follow the relations for calculating
critical volume which in case of these black holes, it will be proportional
to the horizon radiu
\begin{equation}
\left( \frac{\partial P}{\partial r_{+}}\right) _{T}=\left( \frac{\partial
^{2}P}{\partial r_{+}^{2}}\right) _{T}=0, \label{infel}
\end{equation
where by using Eqs. (\ref{PPNEW}) and (\ref{infel}), one obtains
\begin{equation}
\frac{4qd_{3}^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E) h_{3}^{2}(E) g(E)f^{2}(E) \left[
d_{5/2}+6\alpha ^{\prime } h_{4}^{2}(E) d_{7/2}g^{2}(E) r_{+}^{2}\right] }
r_{+}^{2d_{5}}}-d_{3}g(E)r_{+}^{4}+12\alpha ^{\prime } h_{4}^{2}(E) g^{3}(E)
\left[ r_{+}^{2}-\alpha ^{\prime } d_{5}h_{4}^{2}(E) g^{2}(E) \right] =0.
\end{equation}
As a special case, we consider $5$-dimensional solutions in the absence of
electric charge to obtain critical horizon radius, temperature and pressure.
So, we can write
\begin{equation}
r_{c}=\sqrt{6\alpha ^{\prime }}h_{4}(E) g(E) ,\;\;\;\; \& \;\;\;\;T_{c}
\frac{1}{2\pi h_{4}(E) f(E) \sqrt{6\alpha ^{\prime }}}, \;\;\;\;\; \&
\;\;\;\;\;P_{c}=\frac{1}{48h_{4}^{2}(E) \alpha ^{\prime }\pi},
\end{equation}
which lead to the following ratio
\begin{equation}
\frac{P_{c}r_{c}}{T_{c}}=\frac{f(E) g(E) }{4}. \label{PVCNEW}
\end{equation}
It is notable that in the absence of rainbow functions ($f(E)=g(E)=1$), this
ratio reduces to $1/4$, and therefore, Eq. (\ref{PVCNEW}) indicates that
consideration of the gravity's rainbow can modify this near universal ratio.
Interestingly, for neutral solutions ($q=0$), the critical pressure is
independent of metric's rainbow functions while the critical horizon radius
and the critical temperature are functions of one of rainbow functions.
Next, we are going to consider the charged GB black holes in the
presence of gravity's rainbow in $5-$dimensions. The critical
horizon radius in this case is given as
\begin{equation}
r_{c-q}=\frac{\sqrt{6\mathcal{B}^{1/3}\left[ \mathcal{B}^{2/3}+3\alpha
^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)\mathcal{B
^{1/3}+15q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)+9\alpha ^{\prime
2}h_{4}^{4}(E)g^{4}(E)\right] }}{3\mathcal{B}^{1/3}}. \label{RCNEW}
\end{equation
wher
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathcal{B} &\mathcal{=}&189\alpha ^{\prime
}q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)+27\alpha ^{\prime
3}h_{4}^{6}(E)g^{6}(E)+3qh_{1}^{2}(E)h_{3}(E)f(E)\times \\
&& \\
&&\sqrt{729\alpha ^{\prime
4}h_{4}^{8}(E)g^{8}(E)-375q^{4}h_{1}^{8}(E)h_{3}^{4}(E)f^{4}(E)+3294\alpha
^{\prime 2}q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)h_{4}^{4}(E)g^{4}(E)f^{2}(E)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
It is worthwhile to emphasize that, in this paper, we consider the
positive values of GB parameter ($\alpha^{\prime}>0$). The
negative value of $\alpha^{\prime}$ enforces other set of
conditions for having positive critical parameters. Furthermore,
$T_{c-q}$ will be given by
\begin{equation}
T_{c-q}=\frac{g(E)\left[ r_{c-q}^{4}-4q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)f^{2}(E
\right] }{\pi \left( r_{c-q}^{2}+6\alpha ^{\prime
}h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)\right) f(E)r_{c-q}^{3}}, \label{TCNEW}
\end{equation
and $P_{c-q}$ is
\begin{equation}
P_{c-q}=\frac{g^{2}(E)\left\{
3r_{c-q}^{6}-4q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)\left[ 5r_{c-q}^{2}+
\alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)\right] -6\alpha ^{\prime
}h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)r_{c-q}^{4}\right\} }{8\pi \left( r_{c-q}^{2}+6\alpha
^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)\right) r_{c-q}^{6}}. \label{PCNEW}
\end{equation}
The obtained relation for $T_{c-q}$ imposes a restriction for
having positive critical temperature. Since denominator of
$T_{c-q}$ is positive, the restriction for having positive
$T_{c-q}$ comes from the numerator of this relation with the
following explicit form
\begin{equation}
r_{c-q}^{4}-4q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)>0.
\end{equation}
It is evident that the positivity of the critical temperature
depends on the energy variations of constants, the electric charge
and energy function of the metric. As for the critical pressure,
similarly, only its numerator may yield negative values. In other
words, the numerator of the critical pressure imposes following
condition for having positive values of $P_{c-q}$
\begin{equation}
3r_{c-q}^{6}-4q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)\left[ 5r_{c-q}^{2}+
\alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)\right] -6\alpha ^{\prime
}h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)r_{c-q}^{4}>0.
\end{equation}
Here, the restriction is rooted in two parts of the action; one is
related to the generalization of GB gravity and the other one is
related to the electrodynamic part. In other words, by cancelling
the contributions of GB gravity and electromagnetic field, the
pressure will always be positive.
Now, we are in a position to calculate $\frac{P_{c-q}r_{c-q}}{T_{c-q}}$.
Using Eqs. (\ref{RCNEW}), (\ref{TCNEW}) and (\ref{PCNEW}), we obtain
\begin{equation}
\frac{P_{c-q}r_{c-q}}{T_{c-q}}=\frac{g(E)f(E)\left\{
3r_{c-q}^{6}-4q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)\left[ 5r_{c-q}^{2}+
\alpha ^{\prime }h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)\right] -6\alpha ^{\prime
}h_{4}^{2}(E)g^{2}(E)r_{c-q}^{4}\right\} }{8\left(
r_{c-q}^{4}-4q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E)h_{3}^{2}(E)f^{2}(E)\right) r_{c-q}^{2}}.
\label{PVTNEWW}
\end{equation}
First of all, contrary to the absence of charge, in this case, all critical
values are functions of both of the rainbow functions of metric. This
emphasizes the fact that thermodynamical structure of the charged black
holes in gravity's rainbow is completely different from the neutral ones.
The critical horizon radius must be real valued and positive. Therefore,
there is a restriction
\begin{equation*}
729\alpha ^{\prime 4}h_{4}^{8}(E) g^{8}(E) -375q^{4}h_{1}^{8}(E)
h_{3}^{4}(E) f^{4}(E) +3294\alpha ^{\prime 2}q^{2}h_{1}^{4}(E) h_{3}^{2}(E)
h_{4}^{4}(E) g^{4}(E) f^{2}(E) >0.
\end{equation*}
We should note that this restriction is due to the existence of charge. In
other words, generalization from neutral to charged solutions, put
restrictions on values that rainbow functions and GB parameter can acquire.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{P-V-q0-Loop.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{T-V-q0-Loop.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{G-T-q0-Loop.eps
\end{array}
\caption{ $P-r_{+}$ (left), $T-r_{+}$ (middle) and $G-T$ (right) diagrams
for $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=5$, $q=0$ and $d=5$. \newline
$g\left(E/E_{p}\right) =\protect\sqrt{1-\protect\eta \left( E/E_{p}\right)
^{n}}$, $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$, $h_{i}(E)=0.9$, $E=1$, $E_{p}=5$, $n=2
, $\protect\eta=1 $ (continuous line), $\protect\eta=10$ (dotted line) and
\protect\eta=20$ (dashed line). \newline
$P-r_{+}$ diagram for $T=T_{c}$, $T-r_{+}$ diagram for $P=P_{c}$ and $G-T$
diagram for $P=0.5P_{c}$. }
\label{Fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{P-V-q0-Gamma.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{T-V-q0-Gamma.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{G-T-q0-Gamma.eps
\end{array}
\caption{ $P-r_{+}$ (left), $T-r_{+}$ (middle) and $G-T$ (right) diagrams
for $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=5$, $q=0$ and $d=5$. \newline
$g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$, $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{e^{\protect\beta
E/E_{p}}-1}{\protect\beta E/E_{p}}$, $h_{i}(E)=0.9$, $E=1$, $E_{p}=5$,
\protect\beta=0.02$ (continuous line), $\protect\beta=0.2$ (dotted line) and
$\protect\beta=2$ (dashed line). \newline
$P-r_{+}$ diagram for $T=T_{c}$, $T-r_{+}$ diagram for $P=P_{c}$ and $G-T$
diagram for $P=0.5P_{c}$. }
\label{Fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{P-V-q0-Light.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{T-V-q0-Light.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{G-T-q0-Light.eps
\end{array}
\caption{ $P-r_{+}$ (left), $T-r_{+}$ (middle) and $G-T$ (right) diagrams
for $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=5$, $q=0$ and $d=5$. \newline
$f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{1}{1-\protect\lambda
E/E_{p}}$, $h_{i}(E)=0.9$, $E=1$, $E_{p}=5$, $\protect\lambda=1$ (continuous
line), $\protect\lambda=2$ (dotted line) and $\protect\lambda=3$ (dashed
line). \newline
$P-r_{+}$ diagram for $T=T_{c}$, $T-r_{+}$ diagram for $P=P_{c}$ and $G-T$
diagram for $P=0.5P_{c}$. }
\label{Fig3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PTq0F1G.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PTq0FG1.eps}
& \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PTq0FequalsG.eps
\end{array}
\caption{ $P-T$ diagrams (left: $g\left(E/E_{p}\right)
=\protect\sqrt{1-\protect\eta \left( E/E_{p}\right) ^{n}}$,
$f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$), (middle: $g\left( E/E_{p}\right)
=1$, $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{e^{\protect\beta
E/E_{p}}-1}{\protect\beta E/E_{p}}$) and (right: $f\left(
E/E_{p}\right) =g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{1}{1-\protect\lambda
E/E_{p}}$) for $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=5$, $q=0$ , $d=5$,
$h_{i}(E)=0.9$, $E=1$ and $E_{p}=5$.
\newline For $g\left(E/E_{p}\right)
=\protect\sqrt{1-\protect\eta \left( E/E_{p}\right) ^{n}}$,
$f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$: $n=2$, $\protect\eta=1 $ (continuous
line), $\protect\eta=10$ (dotted line) and $\protect\eta=20$
(dashed line). \newline
For $g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$, $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac
e^{\protect\beta E/E_{p}}-1}{\protect\beta E/E_{p}}$:
$\protect\beta=0.02$ (continuous line), $\protect\beta=0.2$
(dotted line) and $\protect\beta=2$ (dashed line). \newline
For $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{1}{1
\protect\lambda E/E_{p}}$: $\protect\lambda=1$ (continuous line), $\protec
\lambda=2$ (dotted line) and $\protect\lambda=3$ (dashed line).}
\label{Coexq0}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{P-V-q-Loop.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{T-V-q-Loop.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{G-T-q-Loop.eps
\end{array}
\caption{ $P-r_{+}$ (left), $T-r_{+}$ (middle) and $G-T$ (right) diagrams
for $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=5$, $q=6$ and $d=5$. \newline
$g\left(E/E_{p}\right) =\protect\sqrt{1-\protect\eta \left( E/E_{p}\right)
^{n}}$, $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$, $h_{i}(E)=0.9$, $E=1$, $E_{p}=5$, $n=3
, $\protect\eta=1 $ (continuous line), $\protect\eta=10$ (dotted line) and
\protect\eta=20$ (dashed line). \newline
$P-r_{+}$ diagram for $T=T_{c}$, $T-r_{+}$ diagram for $P=P_{c}$ and $G-T$
diagram for $P=0.5P_{c}$. }
\label{Fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{P-V-q-Gamma.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{T-V-q-Gamma.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{G-T-q-Gamma.eps
\end{array}
\caption{ $P-r_{+}$ (left), $T-r_{+}$ (middle) and $G-T$ (right) diagrams
for $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=5$, $q=6$ and $d=5$. \newline
$g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$, $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{e^{\protect\beta
E/E_{p}}-1}{\protect\beta E/E_{p}}$, $h_{i}(E)=0.9$, $E=1$, $E_{p}=5$,
\protect\beta=1$ (continuous line), $\protect\beta=2$ (dotted line) and
\protect\beta=3$ (dashed line). \newline
$P-r_{+}$ diagram for $T=T_{c}$, $T-r_{+}$ diagram for $P=P_{c}$ and $G-T$
diagram for $P=0.5P_{c}$. }
\label{Fig5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{P-V-q-Light.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{T-V-q-Light.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{G-T-q-Light.eps
\end{array}
\caption{ $P-r_{+}$ (left), $T-r_{+}$ (middle) and $G-T$ (right) diagrams
for $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=5$, $q=6$ and $d=5$. \newline
$f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{1}{1-\protect\lambda
E/E_{p}}$, $h_{i}(E)=0.9$, $E=1$, $E_{p}=5$, $\protect\lambda=1$ (continuous
line), $\protect\lambda=2$ (dotted line) and $\protect\lambda=3$ (dashed
line). \newline
$P-r_{+}$ diagram for $T=T_{c}$, $T-r_{+}$ diagram for $P=P_{c}$ and $G-T$
diagram for $P=0.5P_{c}$. }
\label{Fig6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PTqF1G.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PTqFG1.eps}
& \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PTqFequalsG.eps
\end{array}
\caption{ $P-T$ diagrams (left: $g\left(E/E_{p}\right)
=\protect\sqrt{1-\protect\eta \left(E/E_{p}\right) ^{n}}$,
$f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$), (middle: $g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$, $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac
e^{\protect\beta E/E_{p}}-1}{\protect\beta E/E_{p}}$) and (right:
$f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{1}{1
\protect\lambda E/E_{p}}$) for $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=5$,
$q=6$ , $d=5$, $h_{i}(E)=0.9$, $E=1$ and $E_{p}=5$. \newline For
$g\left(E/E_{p}\right) =\protect\sqrt{1-\protect\eta \left(
E/E_{p}\right) ^{n}}$, $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$: $n=3$,
$\protect\eta=1 $ (continuous line), $\protect\eta=10$ (dotted
line) and $\protect\eta=20$ (dashed line). \newline
For $g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1$, $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac
e^{\protect\beta E/E_{p}}-1}{\protect\beta E/E_{p}}$:
$\protect\beta=1$ (continuous line), $\protect\beta=2$ (dotted
line) and $\protect\beta=3$ (dashed line). \newline
For $f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{1}{1
\protect\lambda E/E_{p}}$: $\protect\lambda=1$ (continuous line), $\protec
\lambda=2$ (dotted line) and $\protect\lambda=3$ (dashed line).}
\label{Coexq}
\end{figure}
The obtained critical parameters indicate that in general, these
black holes with consideration of energy dependent constants,
enjoy second order phase transition in their phase space. Although
the presence of second order phase transition is restricted to
satisfy specific conditions, in general the second order phase
transition is a part of thermodynamical properties of these black
holes. Now, in order to elaborate the existence of second order
phase transition, we choose specific examples for free parameters
and energy functions to plot three set of diagrams which are
$T-r_{+}$, $P-r_{+}$ and $G-T$. The existences of subcritical
isobars for critical pressure in $T-r_{+}$ diagram, the region of
phase transition (reflection point) for critical temperature in
$P-r_{+}$ diagram and swallow-tail for pressures smaller than
critical pressure in $G-T$ diagram, indicate that a second order
phase transition is taking place for the obtained critical values.
Taking into account the rainbow functions, we regard three known models for
considering their effects. The first model is motivated from loop quantum
gravity and non-commutative geometry, in which rainbow functions are \cit
{LQG}
\begin{equation}
f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1,\text{ \ \ }g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\sqrt{1-\eta
\left( E/E_{p}\right) ^{n}}. \label{loop}
\end{equation}
The second model comes from the hard spectra of gamma-rays motivation with
the following form \cite{Amelino}
\begin{equation}
f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{e^{\beta E/E_{p}}-1}{\beta E/E_{p}},\text{ \ \
}g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =1. \label{gamma}
\end{equation
Taking the constancy of the velocity of the light into account, one can find
following relations for the rainbow functions as third model
\begin{equation}
f\left( E/E_{p}\right) =g\left( E/E_{p}\right) =\frac{1}{1-\lambda E/E_{p}}.
\label{light}
\end{equation}
Now, using Eqs. (\ref{TNEW}), (\ref{PPNEW}) and (\ref{GNEW}) with
the obtained critical values (Eqs. (\ref{RCNEW}) - (\ref{PCNEW})),
one can plot the following $T-r_{+}$, $P-r_{+}$ and $G-T$ diagrams
for different models of
rainbow functions in special cases (Eqs. (\ref{loop}) - (\ref{light})) (Figs. \ref{Fig1} -
\ref{Fig3} and \ref{Fig4} - \ref{Fig6}).
It is evident from plotted graphs that the obtained critical
values are representing the second order phase transition points
(due to the characteristic behaviors of the different phase
diagrams). In some classes of rainbow functions, for neutral case,
variations of the parameters of
rainbow functions have no effect (see right and left panels of Figs. \re
{Fig1} and \ref{Fig2}, respectively). This specific behavior was not
observed in the charged solutions.
By excluding right panel of Fig. \ref{Fig1}, in other cases, the critical
temperature, the size of swallow-tail and differences between energy of
different phases are decreasing functions of the parameters of rainbow
functions ($\eta $, $\beta $ and $\lambda $) (see right panels of Figs. \re
{Fig2}, \ref{Fig3} and \ref{Fig4} -- \ref{Fig6}). Meanwhile, by excluding
left panel of Fig. \ref{Fig2}, the critical pressure is a decreasing
function of $\eta $ and $\beta $ (see left panels of Figs. \ref{Fig1}, \re
{Fig4} and \ref{Fig5}) and an increasing function of $\lambda $ (see left
panels of Figs. \ref{Fig3} and \ref{Fig6}). As for subcritical isobar,
except for the neutral case of loop motivated rainbow functions (see middle
panel of Fig. \ref{Fig1}), its length is an increasing function of the
parameters of rainbow functions (see middle panels of Figs. \ref{Fig2}, \re
{Fig3} and \ref{Fig4} -- \ref{Fig6}).
In the absence of charge, presence of the rainbow functions provides
interesting effects. Taking a closer look at the Fig. \ref{Fig1} shows that
while we are varying rainbow function which results into modification of the
$P-r_{+}$ diagram, the critical temperature remains fixed (Fig. \ref{Fig1}
middle and right panels), and interestingly, the total behavior of the Gibbs
free energy versus temperature is not affected by this variation either.
Same behavior is observed in Fig. \ref{Fig2} left panel. This property
enables us to modify different critical values while a specific one of them
remains unchanged.
Using the fact that the Gibbs free energy, temperature, and pressure of the
system are constant during the phase transition, we have plotted the
coexistence line of the black holes (Figs. \ref{Coexq0} and \ref{Coexq}).
The small and large black holes have identical temperature and pressure
along the coexistence line, and the critical points are located at the end
of the coexistence line where above these points the phase transition does
not occur. Fig. \ref{Coexq0} (left panel) shows that the coexistence lines
for variation of $\eta $ are completely identical, because $g\left(
E/E_{p}\right) $ has no effect on the critical pressure and temperature. On
the other hand, Fig. \ref{Coexq} (left panel) indicates that variation of
\eta $ does not have significant effect on the coexistence lines. According
to properties of the coexistence lines, one can conclude that for these
black holes the reentrant of phase transition does not take place.
\section{Closing Remarks}
In this paper, the dependency of all constants on energy functions
was considered, and charged GB black holes in the presence of
gravity's rainbow were studied. Thermodynamical and geometrical
properties of these black holes were investigated and it was shown
that the power of the singularity, asymptotical behavior and
thermodynamical quantities of these black holes were modified due
to the dependency of constants on energy.
Next, using the concepts of extended phase space, van der Waals
like behavior and the second order phase transition of these black
holes were studied.
First of all, we found that in the presence of gravity's rainbow,
thermodynamical volume of the black holes is modified and it is
rainbow function dependent. In other words, the total behavior of
the volume is determined by rainbow functions as well as
dimensions.
Next, we found that, for neutral case, the obtained critical
radius and critical temperature were functions of rainbow
functions of the metric, whereas the critical pressure was
independent of them and was only dependent on energy variation of
the constants, which in return resulted in specific behaviors in
phase diagrams in special cases.
Interestingly, in the presence of the electric charge, a
limitation was found for having real positive critical horizon
radius. In other words, the presence of charge puts restriction on
values that different parameters can acquire. Contrary to the
neutral case, in the case of charged solutions, all critical
values (the critical temperature, the horizon radius and the
pressure) were dependent on rainbow functions of the metric. In
other words, the critical behavior of the system was modified due
to the presence of gravity's rainbow. It is worth mentioning that
the presence of rainbow functions was observed in ratio of
$\frac{P_{c}r_{c}}{T_{c}}$ for both charged and neutral cases,
which is a variation of a similar ratio in van der Waals system of
liquid/gas. In addition, the coexistence lines indicated that for
this type of black holes, the reentrant of phase transition does
not happen.
The specific behaviors and results of the paper motivate one to
analyze new interesting phenomenology for such black hole
thermodynamics. It will be worthwhile to study the effects of
non-linear electrodynamics on critical behavior of GB gravity's
rainbow. It will be interesting to generalize the obtained static
solutions to a case of dynamical ones and investigate the
cosmological consequences of such solutions. The behavior of the
Hawking radiation near the critical point is another subject of
interest.
\begin{acknowledgements}
The author would like to thank anonymous referees for suggesting
important improvements. We thank Shiraz University Research
Council. This work has been supported financially by the Research
Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha, Iran.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section[]{Introduction}
It is widely recognised that the majority of main sequence stars and pre-main sequence stars are in binary systems and that these binaries have various distributions in mass ratio $q$, binary separation, and binary frequency \citep{Duquennoy_Mayor_91, Ghez_etal_93, Kouwenhoven_etal_05,Raghavan_etal_10, Kraus_etal_11, DeRosa_etal_14}.
For main sequence stars, \cite{Duquennoy_Mayor_91} provided statistics of G-dwarf binary systems.
They found that binaries have log-normal separation distribution, and the number of binaries with wide separations decreases with increasing $q$, while the number of binaries with close separations is roughly constant or increase with increasing $q$.
\cite{Raghavan_etal_10} and \cite{DeRosa_etal_14} found a similar distribution of $q$ for A-type binaries as \cite{Duquennoy_Mayor_91}.
For young stellar objects (YSOs), the number of binaries with intermediate mass YSOs decreases with increasing $q$ \citep{Kouwenhoven_etal_05}.
In contrast, the number of binaries with low-mass YSOs increases with increasing $q$ \citep{Kraus_etal_11}, and have a log-normal separation distribution.
Although observers have investigated various distributions of binary properties in detail as mentioned above, formation process of these binaries is not well understood.
The favoured scenario of binary formation is the fragmentation during runaway collapse of cloud core
\citep{Boss_Bodenheimer_79,Miyama_etal_84,Tsuribe_Inutsuka_99b,Tsuribe_Inutsuka_99a},
and the fragmentation in protostellar disc after the runaway collapse \citep{Williams_Tohline_88,Adams_etal_89,Bonnell_94,Bonnell_Bate_94b,Woodward_etal_94,Vorobyov_10}.
Details of the fragmentation process during cloud core collapse is described in \cite{Tohline_02} and the references therein.
In the present paper, we do not discuss the fragmentation process, but focus on the evolution of a seed binary after fragmentation.
After the fragmentation, the binary seeds start to accrete the surrounding envelope and grow towards main sequence stars.
Since the initial mass of seed binary is lower than $1$ per cent of the stellar mass \citep{Bonnell_Bate_94b}, observed physical properties of a binary (i.e., properties at the end of accretion phase) are completely different from those of the seed binaries.
Recently, large-scale hydrodynamical simulations have been performed in order to explain the observed binary properties \citep{Bate_etal_02b,Bate_etal_02c,Bate_Bonnell_Bromm_03,Attwood_etal_09,Bate_09a,Bate_09b,Offner_etal_09}.
\cite{Bate_09a} simulated a large-scale, homogeneous, isothermal, and turbulent cloud core collapse ignoring radiative and magnetic effects, and succeeded in reproducing the observed multiplicity and binary properties such as the frequency of very low-mass binaries, the log-normal separation distribution, and the $q$-distribution of wide and close binaries.
However, they did not mention about how and what physical processes determine the distributions of binaries.
In order to understand that, we need to investigate the gas accretion onto a binary in more detail.
A number of simulations of gas accretion onto a binary have been performed using SPH codes in two dimensions (2D) \citep{Dunhill_etal_15,Young_etal_15,Young_Clarke_15} and 3D \citep{Artymowicz_Lubow_96,Bate_Bonnell_97}, as well as using grid codes in 2D \citep{Ochi_etal_05,Hanawa_etal_10,D'Orazio_etal_13,Farris_etal_14}.
For example, \cite{Bate_Bonnell_97} investigated a steady, isothermal, non-self-gravitating gas accretion onto a binary assuming
constant angular momentum and density of gas at the outer boundary.
They found that, in the case of low gas angular momentum, the $q$-value decreases, because the primary is closer to the mass centre of binary than the secondary.
On the other hand, in the case of high angular momentum, the $q$-value increases because the infalling gas encounters the secondary first.
\cite{Ochi_etal_05} also investigated in a similar model to \cite{Bate_Bonnell_97},
and found contradictory results that the $q$-value can decrease even when the angular momentum of gas is high.
They argued that this discrepancy was caused by the lower numerical resolution in the simulation of \cite{Bate_Bonnell_97},
which may have enhanced the accretion onto the secondary.
However, there were other differences between the simulations of \cite{Bate_Bonnell_97} and \cite{Ochi_etal_05},
such as the gas temperature, computing method, and gravitational potential of the binary,
therefore the ultimate cause of the difference was unclear at that time.
\cite{Young_etal_15} returned to this problem and investigated the dependence on gas temperature in the same model as \cite{Bate_Bonnell_97} and \cite{Ochi_etal_05},
where they fixed the angular momentum of gas and changed only the gas temperature.
As a result, they concluded that the disagreement between \cite{Bate_Bonnell_97} and \cite{Ochi_etal_05} was simply caused by the difference in the gas temperature.
\cite{Young_etal_15} found that, in the case of cold gas, the gas from circum-binary disc is easily trapped inside the secondary's Roche lobe, whereas in the hot case, the flow from the secondary's Roche lobe to the primary's Roche lobe emerges, suppressing the growth of $q$-value.
These previous works that we described above were limited to the most simple situations, i.e.,
isothermal non-self-gravitating gas, constant angular momentum and density of gas at the outer boundary,
and an isolated binary (i.e., no growth of binary by accretion).
However, if we want to compare the simulations with real binary systems in star-forming regions, we need to consider the unsteady gas accretion caused by the non-uniform distribution of angular momentum and density of the envelope.
Motivated by this current situation, we perform SPH simulations to investigate the unsteady gas accretion onto a seed binary considering
the non-uniform distribution of angular momentum and density of infalling envelope.
Note that we still ignore the self-gravity of gas and the growth of binary by accretion, with the aim of understanding physically how these distributions of gas affect the binary evolution.
If the accreted mass exceeds the initial mass of the seed binary, the self-gravity of gas and the growth of binary by accretion might cause non-negligible effects on binary evolution.
Therefore, we focus on the short-term evolution until the accreted mass exceeds the initial binary mass.
Sections~\ref{sec:model} and \ref{sec:method} describe our model and calculation method.
We present the results of our simulations in Section~\ref{sec:results}.
In Section \ref{sec:discussion}, we discuss the results
and give estimates of the long-term evolution of seed binaries.
We conclude in Section~\ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section[]{MODEL OF SEED BINARY AND ENVELOPE}\label{sec:model}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{fig_1a.eps}
\end{center}
\vspace{5mm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{fig_1b.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Schematic diagrams of the initial condition of our simulations in the centre-of-mass frame of the envelope and binary.
The cross shows the origin, two black circles in the centre are the binary seeds, and the gray regions show the envelope. The top (bottom) panel shows the cross section in a face-on (edge-on) view. The specific angular momentum vector of gas is aligned with $z$-axis.
The angle $\theta$ is determined by equation~(\ref{eq:theta}).}
\label{fig:cartoon}
\end{figure}
In the present work, we skip the formation process of the seed binary in order to focus on the gas accretion onto the seed binary.
The seed binary and the surrounding envelope are set up in the initial condition as we describe below
and in Fig.~\ref{fig:cartoon}.
For the density and specific angular momentum distribution of the envelope,
we take the following profiles:
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho(r) &=& \rho_{\rm in} \left( \frac{\Rin}{r} \right)^2 \quad {\rm and} \label{eq:rho_des}\\
j(r) &=& j_{\rm in}\left(\frac{r}{\Rin} \right),
\label{eq:j_des}
\end{eqnarray}
where $r$ is distance from the centre-of-mass of the envelope, the constants $\rho_{\rm in}$ and $j_{\rm in}$ represent the density and specific angular momentum at $r = \Rin$,
and $\Rin$ is the radius of the inner edge of the envelope.
This power-law distribution is motivated by the numerical results often seen for the self-gravitating isothermal cloud core collapse with rotation \citep{Narita_etal_84,Matsumoto_etal_97,Saigo_Hanawa_98}.
Within the above gas distribution, we assume that the seed binary is formed via fragmentation of gas,
carve out the envelope within $r< \Rin$, and convert its mass into the seed binary while conserving mass and angular momentum.
The seed binary is modelled by two point masses, and their masses are
$\Mp$ and $\Ms$ for the primary and secondary, respectively.
The total mass of binary is $\Mb \equiv \Mp + \Ms$,
the initial mass ratio is $q_0\equiv \Ms / \Mp$, and the initial binary separation is $a_0$.
We assume that these seeds move circularly around the centre-of-mass with Keplerian velocities.
By conservation laws, the mass and specific angular momentum of the seed binary is represented by
\begin{eqnarray}
\Mb &=& \int_{0}^{\Rin} 4\pi r^2 \rho(r) {\rm d}r = 4\pi {\Rin}^3 \rho_{\rm in}, \\
J_{\rm b} &=& \int_{0}^{\Rin} 4\pi r^2 \rho(r) j(r) {\rm d}r = \frac{1}{2} \Mb j_{\rm in}\nonumber\\
&=& \frac{q_0}{(1+q_0)^2}j_{\rm circ} \Mb, \label{eq:J_b}
\end{eqnarray}
where $j_{\rm circ} \equiv \sqrt{G \Mb a_0}$ is the reference specific angular momentum.
Once $R_{\rm in}$ and $q_0$ are determined, $j_{\rm in}$ and $\rho_{\rm in}$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{\rm in} &=& \frac{\Mb}{4\pi {\Rin}^3},\\
j_{\rm in} &=& \frac{2q_0}{(1+q_0)^2}\left( G \Mb a_0 \right)^{1/2} \label{eq:j_0}.
\end{eqnarray}
The envelope gas at $r> \Rin$ is distributed as equations~(\ref{eq:rho_des}) and (\ref{eq:j_des}).
We set the velocities of gas at $\Rin < r < R_{\rm out}$ as
\begin{equation}
\frac{j(r)^2}{r_{\rm cyl}^3} < \frac{G \Mb}{r} \frac{r_{\rm cyl}}{r},
\label{eq:theta}
\end{equation}
such that the gravitational force exceeds the centrifugal force (see Fig.~\ref{fig:cartoon}).
The initial radial velocity of gas is assumed as
\begin{equation}
v_r(r) = \left( \frac{2G \Mb}{r} - \frac{{j(r)}^2}{{r_{\rm cyl}}^2} \right)^{1/2},
\end{equation}
such that the kinetic energy of gas is equal to the gravitational energy, where $r_{\rm cyl}$ is cylindrical radius in the centre-of-mass frame.
For simplicity, we assume a non-self-gravitating isothermal gas, and no magnetic fields and radiation.
We emphasize that the important difference between our work and the previous ones \citep{Bate_Bonnell_97,Ochi_etal_05,Young_etal_15,Young_Clarke_15}
is that we aim to investigate unsteady evolution of binary by considering non-uniform distribution of gas density and angular momentum, while we still assume isolated binary and ignore self-gravity of gas.
\section[]{NUMERICAL METHOD}\label{sec:method}
We use {\tt GADGET-3} SPH code (originally described by \citealt{Springel_05})
in three dimension.
In this code, smoothing length of each gas particle is determined by the number of neighbour particles: $(4\pi/3)h^3\rho=N_{\rm ngb}m$, where $h$ is the smoothing length, $m$ is the mass of SPH particle, and $N_{\rm ngb}$ is the number of neighbour particles.
We adopt $N_{\rm ngb}=50$, which corresponds to $h\sim 2.3(m/\rho)^{1/3}$.
For calculation of hydrodynamics, we choose a polytropic index $\gamma=1$ assuming an isothermal gas, and adopt Monaghan-Balsara form of artificial viscosity with the parameters $\alpha = 1.0$ and $\beta=2.0$ (see \citealt{Springel_05} and references therein).
All of our simulations are performed with $128^3$ SPH particles, which is
roughly two orders of magnitude higher than that in \cite{Bate_Bonnell_97}.
In some of our simulations, a steady circum-secondary disc forms,
and the smoothing length is about one-tenth to one-fifth of the scale height at the outer edge of the disc, satisfying the criterion of \cite{Young_etal_15} (see Appendix).
The seed binary is treated as two sink particles with a sink radius of $R_{\rm sink}=0.01a_0$,
following \citet{Young_etal_15}.
The SPH particles are removed from the computational domain once they
fall into the sink radius of each seed or reach the outer boundary, without any feedback to the seeds.
In the case where the envelope has an angular momentum, circum-stellar discs are formed \citep{Artymowicz_Lubow_96,Bate_97,Bate_Bonnell_97,Ochi_etal_05}.
We define our circum-stellar discs as the gas with $J < U_{\rm L1}$, where $J$ is the Jacobi constant of gas and $U_{\rm L1}$ is the sum of gravitational and centrifugal potential at L1 point in the corotating frame of the seed binary.
The Jacobi constant of gas is written by
\begin{eqnarray}
J = \frac{1}{2}v^2 - \frac{GM_{\rm p}}{r_{\rm p}} - \frac{GM_{\rm s}}{r_{\rm s}} + c_s^2 \,{\rm ln}\,\rho,
\end{eqnarray}
where $r_{\rm p}$, $r_{\rm s}$, $c_s$ are the distance from the primary, the distance from the secondary, and the sound speed of gas, respectively.
By our definition of the circum-stellar discs, it is possible that the gas in the circum-stellar discs will be accreted onto each seed via viscous evolution.
Therefore we define the time-dependent mass ratio as
\begin{equation}
q(t) = \frac{\Ms + \Delta\Ms(t) }{\Mp + \Delta\Mp(t)},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta \Mp(t) &=& M_{\rm acc,p}(t) + M_{\rm disc,p}(t),\label{eq:delta_Mp}\\
\Delta \Ms(t) &=& M_{\rm acc,s}(t) + M_{\rm disc,s}(t). \label{eq:delta_Ms}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $M_{\rm acc,p}$ is the mass accreted onto the primary, $M_{\rm acc,s}$ is the mass accreted onto the secondary, $M_{\rm disc,p}$ is the mass of circum-primary disc, and $M_{\rm disc,s}$ is the mass of circum-secondary disc.
We terminate our simulations when $\Delta \Mb(t)\equiv \Delta \Mp(t) + \Delta \Ms(t)$ exceeds $\Mb$, because the self-gravity of gas and the growth of binary cannot be ignored after $\Delta \Mb(t)> \Mb$.
With these setup, we compute the gas accretion onto the seed binary for several values of $q_0$ in the range of $0.1<q_0<1.0$ and the sound speed $c_s/\sqrt{GM_{\rm b}/a_0} = 0.05$ (cold) and $0.25$ (hot).
Hereafter, we use the units of $G=M_b=a_0=1$,
in which the orbital period of the seed binary corresponds to $2\pi$.
\section[]{RESULTS}\label{sec:results}
\subsection{Formation of discs}\label{subsec:results_disc}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_2a.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_2d.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_2b.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_2e.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_2c.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_2f.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Time evolution of gas around the seed binary. The top and middle panels show the face-on logarithmic surface density maps in the centre-of-mass frame for $q_0=0.1$. The hot case is shown in the left column and the cold case on the right column. The top panels are at $t=2\pi$, and the middle panels show the final snapshot at $t=18.1$ (panel ($b$)) and $t=15.1$ (panel ($e$)).
The white crosses show the positions of the secondary.
The bottom panels show the time evolution of mass accreted onto the primary $M_{\rm acc,p}$ (red dashed), mass accreted onto the secondary $M_{\rm acc,s}$ (blue dashed), mass of the circum-primary disc $M_{\rm disc,p}$ (red dotted), mass of the circum-secondary disc $M_{\rm disc,s}$ (blue dotted), change from the initial mass of primary $\Delta \Mp$ (red solid), change from the initial mass of secondary $\Delta \Ms$ (blue solid), change from the initial binary mass $\Delta \Mb$ (black solid).
Note that all values for secondary is divided by the initial mass ratio $q_0$.
All density maps in this paper are produced using {\tt SPLASH} visualization code \citep{Price_07}
}
\label{fig:q01}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_3a.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_3d.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_3b.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_3e.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_3c.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_3f.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{fig:q01}, but with $q_0=0.3$. Panels ($a$) and ($d$) are at $t=2\pi$, panel ($b$) is at $t=6\pi$, and panel ($e$) is at $t=4\pi$.}
\label{fig:q03}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_4a.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_4d.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_4b.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_4e.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_4c.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_4f.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{fig:q01}, but with $q_0=0.7$. Top panels are at $t=4\pi$, and middle panels at $t=6\pi$.}
\label{fig:q07}
\end{figure*}
In Figure~\ref{fig:q01}, we show the time evolution of gas surface density (top and middle panels),
and the time evolution of the circum-stellar discs and accreted mass onto each seed
(bottom panels) for $q_0=0.1$ case.
For both hot (left column) and cold (right column) cases,
the circum-primary disc appears at $t \sim 2\pi$ (Fig. \ref{fig:q01}a,d).
At this time, a clear density enhancement with a bridge-like feature exists between the secondary and the primary.
Inside this bridge, we find that the Jacobi constant of gas is dissipated and becomes $J<U_{\rm L1}$, therefore we regard this region as a shock.
Neither the circum-secondary disc nor the circum-binary disc appears until the final state (Fig.~\ref{fig:q01}b,e).
In Fig.~\ref{fig:q01}c,f,
it is seen that the red solid line ($\Delta \Mp$) is greater than the blue solid line ($\Delta \Ms/q$).
This means that the mass ratio decreases, as $\Delta \Mp$ and $\Delta \Ms/q$ are compared here.
In this case of $q_0=0.1$, we see that the growth of $\Delta \Mb(t)$ is always dominated by that of the circum-primary disc $M_{\rm disc,p}(t)$.
Therefore, the mass ratio monotonically decreases for both hot and cold cases.
Figure~\ref{fig:q03} is the same as Fig. \ref{fig:q01}, except that it is for $q_0=0.3$.
The circum-primary disc and the shock between the primary and the secondary appear at $t\sim 2\pi$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:q03}a,d), similarly to $q_0=0.1$ case.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:q03}b,e, the circum-secondary disc appears.
From Fig.~\ref{fig:q03}c,f, it is seen that $\Delta \Mp < \Delta \Ms/q$ (i.e., mass ratio increases) after $t\sim 3\pi$ for both hot and cold cases.
Fig.~\ref{fig:q07} is the same as Fig.~\ref{fig:q01} and \ref{fig:q03}, but with $q_0=0.7$.
In this case, both of the circum-primary disc and the circum-secondary disc are simultaneously formed after $t\sim 2\pi$.
At $t\sim 4\pi$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:q07}a,d), circum-primary disc and circum-secondary disc are clearly seen.
At $t\sim 6\pi$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:q07}b,e), the circum-binary disc is seen.
After that, gas is accreted onto the circum-binary disc first, before being accreted onto the seeds. Then the gas arrives at circum-stellar discs through L1 or L2 point.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_5a.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_5b.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_5c.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_5d.eps}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Properties of circum-stellar discs at the final state of $q_0=0.7$ and $c_s=0.25$ (hot) case.
In each panel, thick red and thin blue solid lines are for the circum-primary and circum-secondary disc, respectively.
The vertical black dashed and dot-dashed line denote the edge of circum-primary and circum-secondary disc, respectively.
The abscissa is the cylindrical radius from each seed.
{\it Panel (a):} Jacobi constant, with the horizontal black solid line showing $-U_{\rm L1}$.
{\it Panel (b):} Gas surface density.
{\it Panel (c):} Magnitude of vertical gravitational force divided by the magnitude of vertical gas pressure gradient force. The black horizontal dotted line represents the equilibrium of vertical forces.
{\it Panel (d):} Specific angular momentum around each seed, normalised by $r_{\rm cyl} v_{\rm K}(1-c_s^2/v_{\rm K}^2)$.}
\label{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07}
\end{figure*}
Fig.~\ref{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07} shows radial profiles of Jacobi constant (Fig.~\ref{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07}a), gas surface density (Fig.~\ref{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07}b), normalised gravitational force in vertical direction (Fig.~\ref{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07}c), and normalised specific angular momentum (Fig.~\ref{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07}d) of circum-stellar discs at the final state in the hot case with $q_0=0.7$.
In this figure, each distribution is averaged in each cylindrical shell.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07}a, the outer edge of the circum-primary disc $R_{\rm disc,p}$ (dashed line) and the outer edge of the circum-secondary disc $R_{\rm disc,s}$ (point-dashed line) are identified by $J=U_{\rm L1}$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07}b, $R_{\rm disc,p}$ (or $R_{\rm disc,s}$) is indeed consistent with the location where the surface density of the circum-primary disc (or the circum-secondary disc) start to decline in the outer region.
Thus, the circum-stellar discs indeed consists of gas with $J<U_{\rm L1}$.
Another decline in the surface density appears at $r_{\rm cyl} \sim 0.02$, which is caused by the sink particle approximation.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07}c, it is seen that the vertical pressure gradient force roughly balances with gravitational force at the region of $0.02<r_{\rm cyl}<R_{\rm disc,p}$ or $R_{\rm disc,s}$, indicating an equilibrium in the vertical direction.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:DiskValues_hot_q07}d, it is seen that angular momentum of gas is approximately Keplerian inside $R_{\rm disc,p}$ or $R_{\rm disc,s}$.
In summary, the circum-stellar discs consist of gas with $J<U_{\rm L1}$ and are vertically supported by pressure gradient, and rotation velocity of disc is almost Keplerian.
This structure is often seen in the standard disc \citep{Shakura_Sunyaev_73}.
\subsection{Short-term evolution of mass ratio}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.46]{fig_6.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Time evolution of the mass ratio $q(t)$ in hot (thick red lines) and cold (thin blue lines) cases.
The simulations are terminated when the accreted mass reaches $\Delta \Mb(t) = \Mb$.
}
\label{fig:Evo}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:Evo} shows the time evolution of mass ratio $q(t)$.
In the cases with $q_0=0.1$, $q(t)$ decreases monotonically.
With $q_0=0.3$, $q(t)$ decreases until $t\sim 3\pi$,
but it starts to increase after $t\sim 3\pi$, and eventually exceeds $q_0$.
In the cases with $q_0>0.5$, $q(t)$ increases monotonically.
Taken together, our results show that the time evolution of the mass ratio is qualitatively determined by $q_0$.
If $q_0<0.23$ (in hot case) or $q_0<0.26$ (in cold case), the mass ratio at the final state is smaller than $q_0$.
If $q_0>0.23$ (in hot case) or $q_0>0.26$ (in cold case), on the other hand, the mass ratio at the final state is larger than $q_0$.
Dependence on temperature clearly appears at $t>4\pi$ in the cases with $q_0>0.7$.
In these cases, the circum-stellar discs settle in a steady state.
\cite{Young_etal_15} found that, in steady circum-stellar discs, hot gas easily crosses the L1 point from the secondary's Roche lobe to the primary's Roche lobe compared to the cold gas, and in such a case the growth of $q(t)$ is suppressed.
In our simulations, the similar tendency as described above is seen in the cases with $q_0>0.7$.
\cite{Bate_00} investigated the evolution of seed binaries with various distribution of angular momentum and density of gas, using the protobinary evolution (PBE) code which employs the steady state solutions of \cite{Bate_Bonnell_97}. In order to examine the results of PBE code, \cite{Bate_00} also performed three dimensional SPH simulations with $N_{\rm SPH}=1\times 10^5$ including angular momentum and density distribution, although limited to one particular case of $q_0=0.6$.
Although the distributions of $\rho \propto r^{-1}$ and $j\propto r^2$ adopted in \cite{Bate_00} are different from our equations~(\ref{eq:rho_des}) and (\ref{eq:j_des}), our model is similar to one of the models in \cite{Bate_00} because both distributions have the same relation (equation~\ref{eq:rel_j_Mqum}). Thus we can compare our results and that of \cite{Bate_00} except for the time-scale. Focusing on the short-term evolution until $\Delta M_{\rm b} < M_{\rm b}$, our results mentioned in this subsection is consistent with the results of the SPH simulation and the PBE calculations in \cite{Bate_00}. Therefore, our numerical results from SPH simulations confirm the semi-analytical results from PBE calculations in \cite{Bate_00}.
\section{DISCUSSION}\label{sec:discussion}
\subsection{Categorising the Accreting gas}\label{subsec:categorization}
Focusing on the short-term evolution while $\Delta \Mb(t) \lid \Mb$,
the accreting gas onto the seed binary can be categorised into four different modes as we describe below.
To characterise the properties of accreting gas in each mode, it is useful to plot the relation
between initial specific angular momentum of gas and $q_0$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}, $j_{\rm in}$ (thick black dotted line) and $j_{\rm out}$ (thick black dot-dashed line)
denotes the initial gas specific angular momentum at $R_{\rm in}$ and $R_{\rm out}$, respectively, and $j_{\rm M_b}$ (thick black dashed line) denotes the initial gas specific angular momentum at $r_{\rm M_b}$, inside which the gas mass is equal to $\Mb$.
The specific angular momentum of the secondary and the primary are defined as $j_s$ (thick red dashed line) and $j_p$ (thick red solid line).
The specific angular momentum of L1 point is defined as $j_{\rm L1}$ (blue solid line).
The specific angular momentum of the circum-binary disc $j_{\rm cb}$ (green dashed line) is defined as
\begin{equation}
j_{\rm cb} = \sqrt{ \frac{2}{1+q_0} }j_{\rm circ},
\label{eq:j_cb}
\end{equation}
such that the centrifugal potential ${j_{\rm cb}}^2/2{r_{\rm cyl}}^2$ equals to the gravitational potential $G \Mb /r_{\rm cyl}$ at $r_{\rm cyl}=a_0/(1+q_0)$ which is the distance of secondary from the mass centre \citep{Ochi_etal_05}.
Since the initial specific angular momentum of gas is determined by equation~(\ref{eq:j_des}),
gas with $j_{\rm in}$ is expected to fall first onto the seed binary.
At the end of the short-term evolution, gas with $j_{\rm M_b}$ is expected to fall onto the circum-stellar discs if we ignore the complex dynamics until the gas falls.
In all our simulations, at the end of the short-term evolution,
more than $80\%$ of gas in the circum-stellar discs comes from the gas whose initial angular momentum is $j_{\rm in}<j<j_{\rm M_b}$.
Thus $j_{\rm M_b}$ adequately represents the specific angular momentum of accreted gas at the end of the short-term evolution.
Here we define the specific angular momentum of accreted gas as $j_{\rm acc}$, which is in the region filled by backslash, mesh, and single slash in Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}.
The first mode of accreting gas is the ``{\it circum-primary disc mode}" (the region filled by backslash in Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}).
We can see this mode when
\begin{equation}
j_{\rm acc}<j_{\rm L1}.
\label{eq:type1}
\end{equation}
For example, when $q_0=0.1$, all accreted gas satisfies equation~(\ref{eq:type1}), indicating that the gas easily enters inside L1 point where the Jacobi constant of the gas is dissipated by the shock as discussed in Subsection \ref{subsec:results_disc}.
Since L1 point and mass centre of the seed binary are in Roche lobe of the primary, the gas forms a circum-primary disc (Fig.~\ref{fig:q01}b,e), the primary seed grows, and the mass ratio decreases monotonically (Fig.~\ref{fig:Evo}).
The second mode of accreting gas is the ``{\it marginal mode}" (the region filled by mesh in Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}).
This mode is seen when
\begin{equation}
j_{\rm L1} < j_{\rm acc} < j_{\rm s}.
\label{eq:type2}
\end{equation}
When $q_0=0.2$, for example, all accreted gas satisfies equation~(\ref{eq:type2}).
In this case, most of gas is trapped by the primary
similarly to the {\it circum-primary disc mode}.
In the end, the mass ratio decreases.
However, the gas that satisfies equation~(\ref{eq:type2}) enters inside secondary's Roche lobe more easily than in the {\it circum-primary disc mode}.
Inside secondary's Roche lobe, the Jacobi constant of gas is dissipated by the shock.
As a result, $M_{\rm acc,s}$ becomes non-negligible in the end.
The third mode of accreting gas is ``{\it circum-stellar discs mode}" (the region filled by single slash in Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}).
We can see this mode when
\begin{equation}
j_{\rm s} < j_{\rm acc} < j_{\rm cb}.
\label{eq:type3}
\end{equation}
In this case, a circum-secondary disc is formed.
Once the circum-secondary disc is formed, $\Delta M_{\rm s}/q_0$ dominates,
and the mass ratio increases monotonically.
We can see this mode when $q_0=0.7$, for example (see Fig.~\ref{fig:q07}).
The fourth mode is the ``{\it circum-binary disc mode}" (the region filled by double slash in Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}).
We can see this mode when the specific angular momentum of gas is larger than $j_{\rm cb}$ (equation~\ref{eq:j_cb}),
\begin{equation}
j > j_{\rm cb}.
\end{equation}
In this mode, the majority of gas cannot enter inside each Roche lobe because of the centrifugal barrier, and gas settles down to the circum-binary disc first.
Then, the gas enters inside each Roche lobe through L2 or L3 point, and falls onto the circum-stellar discs.
This behaviour is seen at $t>6\pi$ for $q_0=0.7$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:q07}b,e).
Since $j_{\rm M_b}$ is lower than $j_{\rm cb}$ for any $q_0$ in our simulations (Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}), the gas in {\it circum-binary disc mode} is not accreted by the end of short-term evolution.
Therefore, the {\it circum-binary disc mode} is irrelevant for the $q$-evolution in the short term.
To investigate $q$-evolution in this mode, we need to simulate the long-term evolution.
In our simulations, the time evolution of mass ratio qualitatively changes at $q_{\rm c,hot}=0.23$ (hot case) or $q_{\rm c,cold}=0.26$ (cold case).
The values of $q_{\rm c,hot}$ and $q_{\rm c,cold}$ roughly correspond to the intersection point of $j_{\rm s}$ and $j_{\rm {M_b}}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}.
Therefore, we define a critical initial mass ratio $\qc$ at this intersection point,
and we find $\qc=0.25$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}.
The value of $q_{\rm c,cold}$ is somewhat closer to $\qc$ than $q_{\rm c,hot}$.
This is because the gas flow is closer to a ballistic motion in the cold limit than in the hot case.
With a finite gas temperature, pressure gradient force pushes out the gas in radial direction.
Therefore, even if $j_{\rm M_b}<j_{\rm L1}$, the rotation radius of gas with $j_{\rm M_b}$ can reach ${j_{\rm L1}}^2/G \Mb$.
Since $j_{\rm M_b}$ is monotonically increasing function of $q_0$, $q_{\rm c,hot}$ is somewhat lower than $q_{\rm c}$.
The difference between $q_{\rm c,hot}$ and $q_{\rm c,cold}$ is small since this push-out effect is expected to be weak when $c_s/v_{\rm K}<1$.
Here we emphasize that the critical value $\qc=0.25$ was derived only for a particular distribution of angular momentum and density (equation~\ref{eq:rel_j_Mqum}), and that it was evaluated when $\Delta M_{\rm b}(t) = M_{\rm b}$.
In summary, gas accretion onto the primary dominates in
the {\it circum-primary disc mode} and the {\it marginal mode}.
While in the {\it circum-stellar discs mode}, a circum-secondary disc is formed and accretion onto the secondary becomes significant enough to increase the mass ratio.
The gas in {\it circum-binary disc mode} forms a circum-binary disc.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{fig_7.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Relation between the initial mass ratio $q_0$ and the specific angular momentum $j$ of the envelope. Each line shows the specific angular momentum of secondary seed (thick red dashed), primary seed (thick red solid), L1 point (thin blue solid), circum-binary disc (thin green dashed), initial gas specific angular momentum at $R_{\rm in}$ (thick black dotted), at $R_{\rm out}$ (thick-black dot-dashed), and at $r_{\rm Mb}$ (thick black dashed).
The black open circle at the intersection of $j_{\rm p}$ and $j_{\rm M_b}$ indicates the critical value $\qc=0.25$.
Each shaded region indicates a different mode of gas accretion: {\it circum-primary disc mode} (backslash), {\it marginal mode} (mesh), {\it circum-stellar discs mode} (single slash), and {\it circum-binary disc mode} (double slash).
}
\label{fig:AngMomCriterion}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Analytic Estimate of Long-term Evolution}\label{subsec:analytic}
In our numerical simulations, we focus on the short-term evolution until $\Delta \Mb(t) = \Mb$ assuming an isolated binary with no self-gravity.
In this subsection, we discuss the long-term evolution of binary separation analytically including binary growth by accretion.
There are two effects which change the binary separation by accretion.
One is the increase of binary mass.
When the binary mass becomes larger and if the angular momentum is conserved,
then the binary separation becomes smaller because of stronger gravitational force.
The other is the increase of binary angular momentum, which increases the binary separation.
The evolution of binary separation is determined by the competition between above two effects.
These effects become especially important when $\Delta \Mb(t)>\Mb$.
First, we formulate the time evolution of binary in our model.
Then, we discuss one possibility in which the long-term evolution can be predicted based on our numerical results of short-term evolution.
As for the binary, we define the time-dependent binary mass $\Mb(t)$, binary separation $a(t)$, mass ratio $q(t)$.
The reference specific orbital angular momentum can be written as
\begin{equation}
j_{\rm circ}(t)=\sqrt{G\Mb(t)a(t)} \label{eq:j_circ(t)}.
\end{equation}
Then the time-dependent orbital angular momentum of binary $J_{\rm b}(t)$ is written by
\begin{equation}
J_{\rm b}(t) = \frac{2q(t)}{(1+q(t))^2} \Mb(t) j_{\rm circ}(t).
\label{eq:J_b(t)}
\end{equation}
We introduce following non-dimensional variables:
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{M}(t) &=& \frac{M_{\rm b}(t)}{M_{\rm b}} \label{eq:tilde_M},\\
\tilde{J}(t) &=& \frac{J_{\rm b}(t)}{J_{\rm b}} \label{eq:tilde_J},\\
\tilde{a}(t) &=& \frac{a(t)}{a_0} \label{eq:tilde_a},
\end{eqnarray}
and $j_{\rm circ}(t)$ is represented as
\begin{equation}
j_{\rm circ}(t)=\frac{(1+q(t))^2}{q(t)}\frac{q_0}{(1+q_0)^2}\frac{{\tilde J}(t)}{{\tilde M}(t)}j_{\rm circ}.
\end{equation}
Note that we stop our simulations when it becomes $\tilde{M}=2$.
As for the envelope, in our model (equations~\ref{eq:rho_des} and \ref{eq:j_des}),
the specific angular momentum of gas $j$ and the gas mass inside the radius $r$, $M_{\rm gas}$,
has a relationship
\begin{equation}
j\propto M_{\rm gas} \propto r.
\label{eq:rel_j_Mqum}
\end{equation}
From equations~(\ref{eq:tilde_M}) and (\ref{eq:rel_j_Mqum}),
$j_{\rm in}$ as a function of time is given by
\begin{equation}
j_{\rm in}(t) = \tilde{M}j_{\rm in} \label{eq:j_in(t)}.
\end{equation}
From equations~(\ref{eq:j_0}), ~(\ref{eq:j_circ(t)}) and (\ref{eq:j_in(t)}), we have
\begin{eqnarray}
j_{\rm in} &=& \frac{2q_0}{(1+q_0)^2}j_{\rm circ},\label{eq:j_0_again}\\
j_{\rm in}(t) &=& \frac{2q(t)}{(1+q(t))^2}\frac{{\tilde M}^2(t)}{{\tilde J(t)}}j_{\rm circ}(t).
\label{eq:j_0_t}
\end{eqnarray}
Equations~(\ref{eq:j_0_again}) and (\ref{eq:j_0_t}) represent the specific angular momentum at the inner edge of the envelope.
The power indices of ${\tilde M}$ and ${\tilde J}$ in equation~(\ref{eq:j_0_t}) reflect the spatial distribution of density and angular momentum in the envelope.
If the relation
\begin{equation}
\frac{{\tilde M}^2(t)}{{\tilde J}(t)}=1\label{eq:self_similar}
\end{equation}
holds and if $q(t)=q_0$, equations~(\ref{eq:j_0_again}) and (\ref{eq:j_0_t}) are the same in units of $M_{\rm b}(t)=a(t)=1$ and $M_{\rm b}=a_0=1$.
This indicates that the evolution of binary system is self-similar when equation~(\ref{eq:self_similar}) holds and $q(t)=q_0$.
Note that, in equations~(\ref{eq:j_in(t)}) and (\ref{eq:j_0_t}), it is implicitly assumed that all angular momentum and mass of the envelope is converted to the orbital angular momentum and mass of the binary.
After the above preparation, we can now discuss the time evolution of binary separation.
From equations~(\ref{eq:J_b}) and (\ref{eq:J_b(t)}), we have
\begin{equation}
\tilde{a}(t) = \left(\frac{q(t)}{q_0}\right)^{-2} \left(\frac{1+q(t)}{1+q_0} \right)^{4}\frac{{\tilde J}^2(t)}{{\tilde M}^3(t)}.
\label{eq:a_evo}
\end{equation}
From equation~(\ref{eq:a_evo}), we can see that the separation becomes larger with increasing orbital angular momentum of the binary, and that it becomes smaller with increasing mass.
Moreover, the separation also depends on $q(t)$, and this dependence originates from equation~(\ref{eq:J_b(t)}).
For given $J_{\rm b}(t)$ and $M_{\rm b}(t)$, one can see from equation~(\ref{eq:J_b(t)}) that $a(t)$ inside $j_{\rm circ}$ depends on $q(t)$.
If equation~(\ref{eq:self_similar}) and $q(t)=q_0$ hold, binary separation is proportional to accreted mass in our model:
\begin{equation}
\tilde{a}(t) = {\tilde M}(t).\label{eq:a_self}
\end{equation}
The analytic result of equation~(\ref{eq:a_self}) is consistent with the numerical work by \cite{Bate_00}.
Here, we discuss one possibility in which the long-term evolution can be predicted by reusing the result of the short-term evolution.
From equations~(\ref{eq:j_0_again}) and (\ref{eq:j_0_t}), we see that the difference between $j_{\rm in}/j_{\rm circ}$ and $j_{\rm in}(t)/j_{\rm circ}(t)$ is caused only by the mass ratio, if equation~(\ref{eq:self_similar}) always holds.
According to our simulations, in the hot case with $q_0=0.5$, $q \approx 0.7$ when $\tilde{M}=2$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:Evo}.
Under the above assumptions, we can reuse the former result to predict that
the mass ratio would be $q \approx 0.9$ when it reaches $\tilde{M}=3$.
Repeating this procedure, we can predict the long-term evolution of a seed binary.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_8.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Binary separation at the end of the short-term evolution $\tilde{a}(t_{\rm end})$ in the cases of hot (thick red line) and cold (thin blue line). The black horizontal line denotes $\tilde{a}(t_{\rm end}) = 2$.}
\label{fig:a_evo}
\end{figure}
We saw in Fig.~\ref{fig:Evo} that, in the short-term evolution, $q(t)$ increases monotonically if $q_0>\qc$, and vice versa.
Based on this result and the argument in the previous paragraph,
we argue that the long-term evolution of $q(t)$ is qualitatively determined by $q_0$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:a_evo} plots equation~(\ref{eq:a_evo}) at the end of the short-term evolution
(i.e., binary separation at $\tilde{M} = 2$) using our numerical results of $q(t)$ and equation~(\ref{eq:self_similar}).
Fig.~\ref{fig:a_evo} shows that the separation reaches $\tilde{a}(t_{\rm end})=2$ in the cases with $q_0 \rightarrow 1.0$ and $q_0\simeq q_{\rm c}$, indicating that the time evolution of a binary is self-similar in these cases (equation~\ref{eq:a_self}).
Fig.~\ref{fig:a_evo} also shows that $\tilde{a}(t_{\rm end})>1$ for any $q_0$, which suggests that the binary separation is a monotonically increasing function of time and therefore close binaries are difficult to form.
Here, we note again that these analytic results are based on the assumption that all angular momentum of the envelope is converted to the orbital angular momentum of the binary.
In other words, we are disregarding the division of gas angular momentum into orbital angular momentum of binary and that of circum-stellar discs.
In order to investigate the growth of separation more properly, a direct calculation of the binary orbit is needed.
\section{CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK}\label{sec:conclusion}
In the present work, we investigate the short-term evolution of a seed binary using the SPH code {\tt GADGET-3} in three dimensions.
Our simulation setup includes non-uniform distribution of gas and angular momentum with
$\rho \propto r^{-2}$ and $j \propto r$, respectively.
In the initial condition, the seed binary is assumed to have formed around the mass centre of the binary by fragmentation, conserving angular momentum and mass.
The seed binary is isolated, and self-gravity of gas is ignored.
With this setup, we compute the accretion of gaseous envelope onto the seed binary
until the binary mass growth exceeds its initial mass, surveying the parameter ranges of
$0.1<q_0<1.0$ and the sound speeds $c_s/\sqrt{GM_{\rm b}/a_0} = 0.05$ (cold) and $0.25$ (hot).
As a result, we categorise the gas accretion into four different modes as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\it ``Circum-primary disc mode"} is seen when the specific angular momentum of accreting gas is lower than that of L1 point, i.e., $j_{\rm acc} < j_{\rm L1}$.
Most of the gas falls onto the primary and the circum-primary disc, and hence $q(t)$ monotonically decreases.
This is because the specific angular momentum is small enough, and the gas with $j_{\rm acc} < j_{\rm L1}$ enters the primary's Roche lobe.
\item {\it ``Marginal mode"} is seen when $j_{\rm L1}<j_{\rm acc}<j_{\rm s}$.
In this case, although most of the gas is trapped by the primary similarly to the {\it "circum-primary disc mode"}, the gas is able to enter the secondary's Roche lobe, and the secondary starts to accrete gas. As a result $q(t)$ becomes smaller than $q_0$ after the short-term evolution.
\item {\it ``Circum-stellar discs mode"} is seen when $j_{\rm s} < j_{\rm acc} < j_{\rm cb}$.
If the specific angular momentum of gas exceeds that of the secondary, gas starts to rotate around the secondary,
and a circum-secondary disc is also formed.
Once the circum-secondary disc is formed, $q(t)$ monotonically increases.
\item {\it ``Circum-binary disc mode"} is seen when $j_{\rm cb} < j$.
In this case, gas cannot fall onto the circum-stellar discs directly because of its large angular momentum.
Therefore, the gas falls onto the circum-binary disc first, and then later enter the Roche lobes through L2 or L3 point.
\end{enumerate}
We find that the short-term evolution of $q$-value is qualitatively different according to its initial value $q_0$.
If $q_0> \qc = 0.25$, the final mass ratio exceeds $q_0$.
This critical value $\qc$ is determined by the condition $j_{\rm s} = j_{\rm M_{\rm b}}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:AngMomCriterion}.
The critical value $\qc=0.25$ was derived only for a particular distribution of angular momentum and density (equation~\ref{eq:rel_j_Mqum}), and that it was evaluated when $\Delta M_{\rm b} = M_{\rm b}$.
In {\it circum-primary disc mode} or {\it marginal mode},
the dominant accretion onto the primary decreases the $q$-value.
However, once the circum-secondary disc is formed, the accretion onto the secondary becomes significant enough to increase the mass ratio.
The value of $\qc$ does not differ dramatically depending on gas temperature as long as $c_s/v_{\rm K}<1$.
We also estimate the long-term evolution of a seed binary analytically.
Assuming that equation~(\ref{eq:self_similar}) holds,
we argue that the evolution of binary system would be self-similar, and the short-term evolution of $q(t)$ from our simulations
can be reused just by updating the initial mass ratio.
As a result, we find that the binary separation is a monotonically increasing function of time for any $q_0$.
This result suggests that close binaries are difficult to form.
In the future, we will include direct computations of binary orbit in our simulations in order to investigate the effect of binary growth by accretion.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work is partially based on the Master's thesis of Suguru Tanaka \citep{Tanaka_MS}.
We are grateful to Volker Springel for providing us with the original version of {\tt GADGET-3} code,
and to Kengo Tomida and Fumio Takahara for useful discussions and continuous encouragement.
KN acknowledges the partial support by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 26247022.
Numerical simulations were in part carried out on XC30 at the Centre for Computational Astrophysics, National Astronomical Observatory of Japan.
\section*{Appendix}\label{sec:appendix}
\subsection*{Resolution dependence of mass ratio evolution}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_9.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Mean rate of mass ratio change ${\dot q}$ versus $h(t_{\rm end})/H$ which is the ratio of SPH smoothing length to the scale height at the outer edge of the circum-secondary disc. The open symbols are for hot case, and the filled symbols are for the cold case
with $N_{\rm SPH}=64^3$ (triangle), 128$^3$(circle), $2\times 128^3$ (square), $4\times 128^3$ (pentagon), 256$^3$ (diamond).
The value of $h(t_{\rm end})/H$ is smaller for better resolution. All of our simulations presented in the main text is performed with $N_{\rm SPH}=128^3$.}
\label{fig:hoverH}
\end{figure}
In order to investigate the resolution dependence of mass ratio evolution, we rerun several simulations in the cases with $q_0=0.7$ (hot and cold) and varying number of SPH particles $N_{\rm SPH}=64^3,\,128^3,\,2\times 128^3,\,4\times128^3,$ and 256$^3$.
In a steady circum-stellar disc, pressure gradient and gravitational force are in equilibrium in the vertical direction as mentioned in Subsection~\ref{subsec:results_disc}.
Therefore, the scale height of this disc $H$ is represented by
\begin{equation}
H(r_{\rm cyl}) = \frac{c_s}{v_{\rm K}(r_{\rm cyl})} r_{\rm cyl} .
\end{equation}
We introduce $h/H$, the ratio of SPH smoothing length to the scale height at the outer edge of the circum-secondary disc.
Here, we define the edge of the circum-secondary disc where $J=U_{\rm L1}$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:hoverH}, we plot the mean rate of change of the mass ratio, ${\dot q}=(q(t_{\rm end})-q_0)/t_{\rm end}$, as a function of $h(t_{\rm end})/H$. In both hot and cold cases, one can see that the variation of ${\dot q}$ is within $25 \%$ for different resolution.
\cite{Young_etal_15} suggested that ${\dot q}$ is independent of resolution if the SPH smoothing length at the outer edge of circum-secondary disc satisfies $h/H<1$.
Indeed, we also confirm this criterion with our three dimensional simulations.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intr}
The discovery of more than 2000 extrasolar planets by the radial velocity
and transiting techniques
\citep[e.g.,][]{udry2007,borucki2011,batalha2013,fischer2014}
has signaled the next phase in exoplanet research: the
characterization of their atmospheres. Simple molecules such as CO,
\ce{H2O} and perhaps \ce{CO2} and \ce{CH4} are being detected in a
growing number of exoplanet atmospheres
\citep[e.g.,][]{seager2010,snellen2010,birkby2013,fraine2014,crossfield2015,sing2016}.
These atmospheres are thought to be built up largely by the accretion
of pebbles and planetesimals in the natal protoplanetary disk
(see \citealt{johansen2014} and \citealt{benz2014} for reviews),
hence the atmospheres should reflect the chemical composition of the disk.
There are two different views on how to treat the chemistry in the midplanes of disks,
depending on the scientific focus and heritage.
Planet formation and population synthesis models
\citep[e.g.,][]{ida2004,ida2008,alibert13} consider multiple
physical effects taking place in a protoplanetary disk, such as
gravitational interactions between bodies, orbital excitation and
eccentricity damping, gas drag, accretion of material onto planets,
and planet migration in the gaseous disk.
Hence, there is a high degree of physical complexity and detail to
planet formation processes in these simulations.
However, these models do not contain any detailed chemistry.
Either they simply use the observed chemical
abundances in interstellar ices and assume that these abundances are preserved
during disk evolution, or they assume that thermodynamic equilibrium
is attained so that chemical abundances are controlled by temperature
and pressure only \citep[e.g.,][]{mousis2010,johnson2012,
moses2013,marboeuf14,thiabaud2015gascomp}.
The main observational test is through statistical comparisons with the
observed populations of exoplanets and their predicted compositions.
The alternative view starts from detailed physico-chemical models of
protoplanetary disks which are closely linked to, and tested by, a
wide variety of astronomical observations
(see reviews by \citealt{williams11} and \citealt{armitage2011}).
Starting from an assumed (static)
surface density distribution, scale height and disk flaring, such
models first determine the temperature structure of dust and gas
heated by the central star through calculation of the full radiative
transfer of the dust and the thermal balance of the gas
\citep[e.g.,][]{dullemond2007,nomura2005,woitke2009,bruderer2013}.
This physical model is then coupled with an extensive gas-grain
chemistry network to solve the kinetic chemistry equations at each
point in the disk and compute the chemical composition of the gas and
ice as a function of time
\citep[e.g.,][]{bergin2007,furuya2014,cleeves2014water,reboussin2015,walsh2012,walsh15}.
Since planets are formed in the midplanes of disks, it is particularly
important to consider the composition and evolution in the midplanes. To what extent
is the initial chemical composition of material that is accreted onto
a protoplanetary disk preserved, and what happens to the material
after it reaches the midplane of the disk, i.e., to what extent is it
reset \citep{visser2009,pontoppidan2014}? Does planetesimal formation
happen so fast that ices are incorporated into large bodies early on
in the evolution, preventing further chemical processing
\citep{zhang2015}?
Additional clues to the chemical evolution in disks come from the
observations of comets in our own solar system \citep{charnley11}.
Cometary records suggest that the chemical composition of the pre-solar
nebula has been at least partially preserved in the comet-forming zone
throughout its lifetime, pointing to little or no
chemical processing. However, the original composition of the
material that was present in the protoplanetary disk around the Sun
when it formed remains unknown, and studies of other disks are needed
to provide a framework for our own solar system. Particularly
interesting are the recent results from the ESA {\it Rosetta} mission
finding significant amounts of \ce{O2} in comet 67P/C-G
\citep[see][]{bieler15}, with similarly high O$_2$ abundances inferred
for comet Halley from a re-analysis of the {\it Giotto} data
\citep{rubin2015}. Abundances as high as a few~\% of solid \ce{O2} with
respect to solid \ce{H2O} are not yet fully understood. Lastly, the deuteration of water and organics also provides insight into the history of the pristine material from the ISM \citep[see][]{ceccarelli2014}.
\begin{figure*}
\subfigure[][]{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{T_N_profile_corrected.pdf}\label{temp_dens}}
\subfigure[][]{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{cr_level_16.pdf}\label{cr_level}}
\caption{(a) The temperature $T(R)$ in K (blue) and number density $n(R)$ in cm$^{-3}$ (red) profiles
for the disk midplane.
The solid blue line indicates the adjusted temperature profile (as described in the text).
The original temperature profile from \citet{alibert13} beyond 5.2~AU is indicated
by the dashed blue line.
(b) The ionisation rate $\zeta(R)$ in s$^{-1}$ adopted for the disk midplane.
The red dashed line depicts the contribution to the ionisation rate from
short-lived radionuclides (SLRs) only.
The blue dotted line is the contribution from external cosmic rays (CRs) only.
The solid green line represents the total ionisation rate (SLRs and CRs)
as a function of radial distance.}
\label{simple_c}
\end{figure*}
In their planet population synthesis models, \citet{marboeuf14}
assumed the initial chemical abundances to be inherited directly from
the interstellar ices observed in dense interstellar clouds. A set of
eight volatile molecules (\ce{H2O}, CO, \ce{CO2}, \ce{CH4}, \ce{H2S},
\ce{CH3OH}, \ce{N2}, and \ce{NH3}, species also considered in this
work) were homogeneously distributed in their model disk midplane with
relative ratios consistent with interstellar ice observations
\citep{gibb2004,oberg2011ices,boogert2015}. Depending on the physical
conditions in different parts of the midplane, as well as the
sublimation temperatures of the species, these molecules could then
either be assigned to the gas or ice, with the threshold set by the
icelines of the species. Icelines (or snowlines) mark the radius in
the disk midplane beyond which species exist solely in ice form and
are thus depleted from the gas. This occurs at the radius where the
accretion rate onto grain surfaces (or freezeout) exceeds the
desorption rate from grain surfaces due to the negative temperature
gradient in the midplane. The relative rates of these processes are
very strong functions of temperature leading to a narrow transition
region from gas to ice (moving outwards in radius). The position of
the midplane iceline for a particular species will depend on its
volatility (i.e., its binding energy). \citet{marboeuf14} do not
consider any chemical reactions in their models, besides freezeout and
desorption.
The positions of the icelines are important because they determine
which species are gas and ice at any location in the disk, and thus
which material is available to build larger bodies (solids only). If, for example, a
giant planet is forming in the disk, the composition of its core will
reflect the ice compositions at the different positions in the disk
through which the forming planet has moved. The composition of the
planet's atmosphere, on the other hand, will reflect the gas
composition at the position where the planet becomes massive enough to
accrete an atmosphere onto its surface from the surrounding gas in the
disk. Moreover, accretion of icy bodies may still pollute the
atmosphere. These pebbles and planetesimals migrate through the disk
due to radial drift and may therefore have originated at larger
radii. Depending on the pebble and planetesimal sizes, the migration of these objects also affects the location of the icelines \citep[see, e.g.,][]{piso2015}.
Particularly important is the C/O ratio of the solid and gaseous
material in the disk \citep{oberg2011co}. The ratio depends not only on the
different volatilities of the chemical species but also on their production or
destruction as a consequence of chemical processing. Since \ce{H2O}
and \ce{CO2} (which are both O rich) freeze out at higher temperatures
than species that are more C rich, such as \ce{CH4} and CO, the C/O
ratio depends on both the physical structure and chemistry in the
disk. Ultimately, the chemical composition of a planet's core and its
atmosphere may thus differ depending on the history of the disk, the
formation location of the planet, and any subsequent migration.
To address these questions, we use a physical disk model, in
particular its midplane temperature and density, which is the same as
that considered in the \citet{marboeuf14} population synthesis models.
We compute the abundances of chemical species with time using a
comprehensive chemical network and different sets of assumptions (see
below) to investigate the degree to which chemical
evolution/processing affects the resulting abundances of key
volatiles in the disk midplane. The sensitivity of our results to
the choice of (i) initial chemical abundances (parent cloud inheritance or chemical reset),
(ii) the physical conditions (in particular ionisation level), and
(iii) the types of chemical reactions included in the model, are also investigated,
with details provided in Sect.~\ref{methods}.
This generates eight different simulations, the results of which are presented
in Sect.~\ref{results}.
Sect.~\ref{discussion} discusses the validity of the
inheritance and reset scenarios, the implications for planet
formation, and the extent to which the results hold for other
disk models.
Sect.~\ref{conclusions} summarises the conclusions from this work.
\begin{table}
\caption{Initial abundances (with respect to H$_{\rm nuc}$) for atomic and molecular initial abundances setups.
The binding energies $E_{b}$ for all species are also listed.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l l c r}
\hline\hline
Species & Atomic & Molecular &$E_{b}$[K]\\
\hline
\\
H & 9.1$\times 10^{-5}$ & 5.0$\times 10^{-5}$ & 600\\
He & 9.8$\times 10^{-2}$ & 9.8$\times 10^{-2}$ & 100\\
\ce{H2} & 5.0$\times 10^{-1}$ & 5.0$\times 10^{-1}$ & 430\\
N & 6.2$\times 10^{-5}$ & & 800\\
O & 5.2$\times 10^{-4}$ & & 800\\
C & 1.8$\times 10^{-4}$ & & 800\\
S & 6.0$\times 10^{-6}$ & & 1100\\
\ce{H2O} & &3.0$\times 10^{-4}$ & 5770\\
CO & &6.0$\times 10^{-5}$ & 855\\
\ce{CO2} & &6.0$\times 10^{-5}$ & 2990\\
\ce{CH4} & &1.8$\times 10^{-5}$ & 1090\\
\ce{N2} & &2.1$\times 10^{-5}$ & 790\\
\ce{NH3} & &2.1$\times 10^{-5}$ & 3130\\
\ce{CH3OH} & &4.5$\times 10^{-5}$ & 4930\\
\ce{H2S} & &6.0$\times 10^{-6}$ & 2743\\
\ce{O2} & &0 & 1000\\
\ce{HCN} & &0 & 3610\\
\ce{NO} & &0 & 1600
\\
\hline
\label{init_abun}
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Methods}
\label{methods}
\subsection{Physical disk model}
\label{phys_setup}
The protoplanetary disk is taken from the models of
\citet{alibert13}, \citet{marboeuf14}, and \citet{thiabaud2015gascomp} which provide the midplane temperature
$T(R)$, pressure $p(R)$, and surface density profiles $\Sigma(R)$ with radius, $R$.
The disk has a parameterised surface density profile \footnote{\citealp[From][Eq. (1)]{marboeuf14}},
\begin{equation}
\Sigma(R)=\Sigma_{0}\cdot\left(\frac{R}{5.2\mathrm{AU}}\right)^{-\gamma}
\cdot\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{-R}{a_{C}}\right)^{2-\gamma},
\label{eq_sigma}
\end{equation}
where, $a_{C} = 20$~AU, $\gamma = 0.8$ \citep[see the prescription in][Table 1]{alibert13},
and $a_{C}$ and $\gamma$ are constrained by observations \citep{andrews10}.
The surface density is $\Sigma(5.2$ AU$)=16$~g cm$^{-2}$ at $R =5.2$ AU and
the disk is truncated at $R_{\rm out} = 30$~AU. The total mass of the disk is
\begin{align*}
M_{\mathrm{disk}} &=\int_{R_{0}}^{R_{max}} 2\pi R \Sigma(R)\,dR\ = 1.3\times 10^{-3}M_{\odot}\approx 0.13 \mathrm{MMSN},
\end{align*}
with $R_{0}=0.05$ AU, $R_{max}$ defined as the radius at which the cumulative disk mass calculated from inside out reaches the total disk mass within 1\%, $\Sigma(R)$ taken from Eq. \ref{eq_sigma}, and MMSN = $1\times 10^{-2}M_{\odot}$ from \citet{weidenschilling1977}.
The focus here is on the midplane of the disk, where the gas and dust temperatures are assumed to be coupled. Physical disk models have been developed to explain a wide variety of observations where the emission usually arises from higher up in the disk atmosphere, and where gas/grain decoupling for temperature is significant. However, since the disk vertical structure is not relevant for planet formation in the midplane, a midplane-only model is used here.
The radial grid used here consists of 119 points from $R = 0.2$~AU to $R = 30$~AU,
with radial step sizes of $\Delta R=$ 0.1 AU and 1 AU,
inside and outside of 10 AU, respectively.
\begin{table*}[]
\centering
\caption{Chemical reaction types included in the two versions of the chemical network.}
\begin{tabular}{l c c}
\hline\hline
Reaction type & Reduced chemical network & Full chemical network \\
\hline
Two-body gas-phase reactions & x & x \\
Direct cosmic ray ionisation & x & x \\
Cosmic ray-induced photoreaction & x & x \\
Grain-cation recombination & x & x \\
Freezeout & x & x \\
Thermal desorption & x & x \\
\hline
Photodesorption & & x \\
Grain-surface cosmic ray-induced photoreaction & & x\\
Grain-surface two-body reaction & & x \\
\hline
\label{reac_types}
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
The disk model includes irradiation from a central star with
a spectral type similar to the Sun. The temperature profile from
\citet{alibert13} is slightly adjusted to remove two features: (i) a
physically unrealistic drop at 5.2~AU, and (ii) an imposed lower
temperature limit of 20~K in the outer disk. The profile used here
follows their profile in the range 0.2 AU $\leq$ $R$ $<$ 5.3 AU, and
uses a power-law function $T\propto R^{-0.6}$ to extrapolate 5.3 AU
$\leq$ $R$ $\leq$ 30 AU, in agreement with full 2D radiative transfer
models of protoplanetary disks \citep[see, e.g.,][]{bruderer14}. This
adjustment is shown in Fig.~\ref{temp_dens}. In this work, the solid
blue temperature profile in Fig.~\ref{temp_dens} is used throughout
the disk, whereas the original \citet{alibert13} profile in the outer
disk is given by the blue dashed profile. No adjustments are made to
the pressure profile from \citet{alibert13}.
The temperature in the model decreases from $T=434$~K at $R=0.2$ AU to
$T=19.5$~K at $R=30$~AU in the outer disk. The number density over
this radial range spans about 5 orders of magnitude, reaching almost
$n = 10^{15}$~cm$^{-3}$ close to the star, and dropping to about
$n = 10^{10}$~cm$^{-3}$ at 30 AU.
Two different levels for the ionisation rate throughout the disk are considered,
a low level and a high level.
In particular, recent models have shown that cosmic rays can be excluded from
disks by the combined effects of stellar winds and magnetic field structures
\citep{cleeves13crex,cleeves14crex}. The purpose of these two levels of ionisation
is to investigate the effect on chemical reactions that are driven by
ionisation.
Fig. \ref{cr_level} shows the ionisation level profiles used in the simulations.
The case with \emph{low ionisation level} considers ionisation originating from
the decay products of short-lived radionuclides (henceforth referred to as SLRs) only.
Low ionisation is labeled as ``SLR''.
The implementation of this ionisation source into the simulations is done
using a simplified version of the prescription given in Eq.~30 in
\citet{cleeves13slr},
\begin{equation}
\zeta_{\ce{SLR}}(R)=(2.5 \cdot 10^{-19}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1})
\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)\left(\frac{\Sigma(R)}{\mathrm{g~cm}^{-2}}\right)^{0.27},
\label{eq_slr}
\end{equation}
where $\zeta_{\ce{SLR}}$ is the SLR ionisation rate per \ce{H2} molecule in
s$^{-1}$ and $\Sigma(R)$ is the surface density
of a disk at a given radius $R$ (see Eq.~\ref{eq_sigma}).
The simplification ignores the original time dependence of the ionisation rate,
as given in \citet{cleeves13slr}; however, including the time dependence will
change the ionisation rate by no more than a factor of 2.
With this low ionisation level, a higher degree of ionisation is obtained in the inner,
denser disk midplane compared with the outer disk (see the red dashed curve in Fig.~\ref{cr_level}).
This is because the SLR ionisation rate scales with the midplane number density of SLRs,
which is assumed to be homogeneous and thus scales with $\Sigma(R)$, see Eq. \ref{eq_sigma}.
On the other hand, the case of \emph{high ionisation level} (green
solid profile in Fig. \ref{cr_level}) considers contributions from the
decay products of SLRs and from cosmic rays (henceforth referred to as
CRs), originating externally to the disk (high ionisation is labeled
as SLR + CR). Such a high ionisation level has been used in many disk
models in the midplane, \citep[see, e.g.,][]{semenov2004}. These
CRs are able to penetrate the disk to induce UV photons in the
disk midplane via
\begin{equation}
\ce{H2 ->[CR] H2+ ->[e^{*}-] H2^{*} -> H2},\\
\label{cr_reactions}
\end{equation}
with the resulting photons generated by radiative decay of $\mathrm{H}_2^*$
\citep[see][]{prasad1983}.
The CR-ionisation rate contribution, $\zeta_{\ce{CR}}$, is treated by assuming
the following parameterised prescription:
\begin{equation}
\zeta_{\ce{CR}}(R)\approx \zeta_{0}\cdot \mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{-\Sigma(R)}{96\mathrm{~g~cm}^{-2}}\right),
\label{eq_cr}
\end{equation}
where $\zeta_{\ce{CR}}$ is the CR-ionisation rate per \ce{H2} molecule as function of radius $R$,
$\zeta_{0}=10^{-17}\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ is the assumed upper limit to the ionisation rate,
and the exponential term represents an attenuation effect for high surface densities
\citep[see, e.g.,][]{umebayashi2009}.
Hence, a higher CR-ionisation rate is reached in the outer disk
midplane than in the inner disk (opposite to the case with SLRs only), as
represented by the blue dotted profile in Fig.~\ref{cr_level}.
Mutual neutralisation following collisions of ions with grains can lower the
ionisation level, as shown by \cite{willacy1998}. This effect is taken into
account in this work. Deuterium chemistry, however, is not considered here, but will be addressed in a separate paper with overlapping authors \citep{furuya2016}.
\subsection{Chemical model}
\label{chem_model}
A detailed network is used to compute the chemical evolution of
all species, in which many different reactions and
pathways are included.
The gas-phase chemistry is from the latest release of the UMIST Database
for Astrochemistry \citep[see][]{mcelroy13} termed {\sc Rate}12.
Gas-grain interactions and grain-surface chemistry are included
\citep[as described in][and references therein]{walsh15}.
The chemistry is solved time-dependently at each radial grid point in
the disk. The chemical evolution is assumed to be isolated at these
grid points with no exchange of material between the grid points during
the evolution. The differences in chemistry at the
different points are therefore dictated only by the differences in
physical conditions $T(R)$, $n(R)$, and $\zeta(R)$.
Different chemical species have different volatilities,
and thus different temperatures below which the phase change from gas to ice occurs.
For each species a binding energy, $E_{b}$~(K), is adopted.
These values are given in Table~\ref{init_abun}.
\begin{figure*}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{bern16irr_mol_croff_r1_abs-crop.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{bern16irr_atom_croff_r1_abs-crop.pdf}}\\
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{bern16irr_mol_cron_r1_abs-crop.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{bern16irr_atom_cron_r1_abs-crop.pdf}}
\caption{Final abundances with respect to total H nuclei density as function of radial distance $R$ from the
star for key volatile species, when using the reduced chemical network (see Table~\ref{reac_types}).
In all panels, the solid lines show the ice abundances and the dotted curves show the gas abundances.
The top two panels show the results for the low ionisation case (SLRs only)
and the bottom two panels show those for the high ionisation case (SLRs and CRs).
The left-hand panels show the results when assuming the reset scenario and the right-hand panels show those when assuming the reset scenario (see Table 1).
(see Table~\ref{init_abun}). The arrows on the right-hand side of each plot indicate the initial abundances of \ce{H2O}, \ce{CO2}, CO, and \ce{CH4} gases in the inheritance scenario. CO and \ce{CO2} share the same arrow (red with black filling), because they have the same initial abundances. The grey, dashed, vertical lines in panel \textbf{a)} indicate the iceline positions of \ce{H2O}, \ce{CO2}, \ce{CH4} and CO, respectively, from the inner to the outer disk. The positions of these icelines are the same in the other panels.}
\label{simple_chem_plots}
\end{figure*}
Two different versions of the chemical network were utilised to
obtain better insight into the importance of different processes: a reduced chemical network,
and a full chemical network.
The types of chemical reactions considered in the
network versions are outlined in Table~\ref{reac_types}.
The reduced chemical network comprises gas-phase chemical reactions,
freezeout of gas-phase species onto grain surfaces to form ices,
and desorption of ice species off grain surfaces back into the gas phase.
The full chemical network also contains grain-surface chemistry in addition to
the reactions included in the reduced chemical network.
For the reduced chemistry this means that a chemical species becomes
non-reactive as soon as it freezes out onto the surface of a grain, and that freeze-out and desorption of a species depend on the accretion and thermal desorption rates only. Photodesorption is excluded from the reduced chemical network to enable direct comparison to model results of \citet{marboeuf14}, whose only desorption mechanism is thermal desorption. For the
full chemistry, on the other hand, photodesorption is included, and chemical processing can continue
after freezeout. The motivation behind using a reduced and full chemical network, respectively, is to quantify the effects of gas-phase chemistry, and grain-surface chemistry, respectively.
The simulations are run with two different sets of initial abundances:
atomic species or molecular species (see Table \ref{init_abun} for an
overview of the initial species in each type of input). All abundances
in this paper are with respect to the total number of H nuclei. The
molecular abundances in Table \ref{init_abun} are values
representative of interstellar ices
(see \citealt{oberg2011ices}, \citealt{boogert2015},
and Tables 1 and 2 in \citealt{marboeuf14}). For both sets of initial
abundances (atomic and molecular) the elemental ratios are consistent.
The choice of these initial abundances is motivated by the following
two scenarios about the history of the midplane material. The first
scenario is that the material going into protostellar systems is
inherited from the cloud out of which the protoplanetary disk
collapsed and formed. This scenario is denoted ``inheritance'', and it
implies that the material has the same composition as found in dark
clouds, especially their ices \citep[see][]{marboeuf14,charnley11}.
The second scenario is the case
where the material coming from the dark cloud experiences heating
events from the protostar (i.e., accretion bursts or regular stellar
irradiation). These heating events are assumed to alter the chemistry
in disks significantly \citep[see, e.g.,][]{visser2015}. In the extreme
case, the chemistry is reset, meaning that the molecules are assumed to be dissociated into
atoms out to $R=$ 30 AU, which can then reform molecules and solids
in a condensation sequence, as traditionally
assumed for the inner solar nebula \citep[e.g.][]{grossman1972}. Hence, the scenario considering atomic initial abundances is denoted
``reset''.
Early chemical models of protoplanetary disks often assumed a set
atomic initial abundances
\citep[e.g.,][]{willacy1998,aikawa1999accre,semenov2004,vasyunin2008,walsh2010};
however, these early models also did not typically include a
comprehensive grain-surface network and focussed solely on the gas-phase chemistry. Early models that did include grain-surface chemistry \citep[e.g.][]{willacy2007,walsh2010} were limited to simple atom-addition stemming from \citet{tielens1982} and \citet{hasegawa1993}. Here, a more comprehensive grain-surface network is used which includes radical-radical recombination, atom addition, and also ice processing \citep[][]{garrod2008}.
This work differs from earlier protoplanetary disk models
in that we directly compare and quantify the effects of the
inheritance versus reset scenarios for a single disk model
using a comprehensive gas-grain chemical network.
Important for investigating chemical evolution is also the size of the
grains in the disk midplane, which affects the rates of
grain-surface chemical reactions, as well as gas-grain interactions such as freezeout.
Here, spherical grains are considered. Fixed sizes of
$r_{\rm grain} = 0.1 \mu {\rm m} = 10^{-5}$ cm and fixed grain number density
10$^{-12}$ with respect to H nuclei are assumed.
Dust settling from the upper layers of a disk onto the disk
midplane is assumed to happen on a timescale shorter than 1~Myr
\citep{dullemond04,aikawa1999accre},
and this settling will increase the dust density relative to that for the gas.
On the other hand, dust coagulation may decrease the dust surface area
compared with that of standard ISM dust \citep{dullemond05}.
The consequences of assuming fixed values are briefly discussed in
Sect.~\ref{discussion}.
All simulations are run for $t=1$~Myr. The lifetime of a disk before
gas dispersal is found to be in the range $<$ 1 to 10 Myr based on
observations \citep[see][]{williams11,fedele2011}. The time evolution
of the results is briefly discussed in Sects.~\ref{results}
and \ref{discussion}.
\section{Results}
\label{results}
This section presents the results from the
chemical evolution simulations for
key volatiles which contribute significantly to the C/O ratio in the gas and ice:
\ce{CO}, \ce{CO2}, \ce{H2O}, \ce{CH4}, \ce{O2}, O, HCN and NO (\ce{O2}, O, HCN and NO are presented only where relevant).
Chemical evolution results for the key nitrogen bearing species \ce{N2} and \ce{NH3} are also presented.
Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots} presents the results for the reduced chemistry,
and Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots} those for the full chemistry.
All figures show midplane abundances of chemical species with respect to
H$_{\rm nuc}$~as a function of radial distance (in AU) from the central star.
The arrows to the right of each panel indicate the initial abundance levels
assumed for the inheritance scenario, see Table \ref{init_abun}.
Colour coding of arrows matches that of the plots.
CO and \ce{CO2} have the same assumed initial abundances.
In Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}a, the icelines for each key volatile
considered here have positions at 0.7, 2.6, 16 and 26 AU, with temperatures of 177, 88, 28 and 21~K for \ce{H2O},
\ce{CO2}, \ce{CH4}, and CO, respectively (see icelines marked as dashed vertical lines in Fig. \ref{simple_chem_plots}a).
The CO iceline is furthest out, because CO is more volatile than the other species,
due to its low binding energy, see Table \ref{init_abun}.
The positions of the icelines of these four volatiles are indicated with arrows in the top parts of each plot presented here.
\subsection{Reduced chemical network}
\label{simple_chem}
Figs.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}a and \ref{simple_chem_plots}c show the final abundances for
the key volatiles when assuming molecular initial abundances, for
the low ionisation and high ionisation case, respectively.
This is the inheritance scenario.
Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}a, assuming a low ionisation level,
shows negligible changes in the ice abundances of each species
(i.e., the initial molecular cloud abundances are preserved),
and only minor changes to the gas-phase abundances within each iceline
($<$10\% for CO and $<$30\% for \ce{CH4}).
For the higher ionisation rate (see Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}c), the
picture looks slightly different. Larger changes in gas-phase
abundances are seen here for all the species inside their respective
icelines: up to 43\% for \ce{CO2}, up to 62\% for CO, and several
orders of magnitude for \ce{CH4}. However, the \ce{H2O}, \ce{CO2},
and \ce{CO} ice abundances outside their respective icelines are
preserved with their initial assumed abundances. This is due to the
almost instantaneous freezeout onto grains of these species under the
cold and dense physical conditions found in the outer disk, in
conjunction with the assumed chemical non-reactivity of these species
upon freezeout in the reduced form of the chemical network.
The largest difference in the gas-phase abundances in
Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}c when compared with
those in Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}a is the destruction of
\ce{CH4} gas between $1 < R < 15$~AU,
as well as the production of \ce{CH4} ice, reaching a peak abundance
higher than the initial abundance level between $20$ and 25~AU, and also
the production of \ce{O2} ice from $20$ to 30~AU.
The differences in the outer disk can be ascribed to the increasing ionisation level here, as seen in Fig.~\ref{cr_level}.
The higher ionisation rate creates a destruction pathway for abundant gas-phase species, such as \ce{CO},
which releases a small proportion of free C and O into the gas-phase for incorporation into
other C- and O-bearing molecules, such as \ce{CH4}
\citep[via the initiating ionisation-dependent reaction between CO and \ce{He+}, see][]{aikawa99}
and \ce{O2}, via gas-phase reactions \citep[also discussed in][]{walsh15}.
Beyond their respective icelines, \ce{CH4} and \ce{O2}
freeze out onto grain surfaces almost instantaneously whereby they
become depleted from the gas and are thus protected from further chemical modification.
The gas-phase abundances of both species are not preserved within their
respective icelines (16~AU for \ce{CH4} and 21~AU for \ce{O2})
because these species are also destroyed in the gas-phase by
CR-induced photons (see reaction sequence \ref{cr_reactions}).
Figs.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}b and \ref{simple_chem_plots}d show the results
for the low and high ionisation cases (top and bottom panels, respectively)
using atomic initial abundances.
In this reset scenario, it is assumed that the gas has undergone
an extreme heating event which has fully erased the prestellar composition
(see Sect.~\ref{chem_model}).
For both ionisation levels,
\ce{H2O} and CO are the dominant gas-phase species in the very innermost region of the
disk midplane, $R<0.3$~AU.
For $R \geq 0.3$~AU, gas-phase CO and \ce{O2} are efficiently produced and
reach similar abundance levels ($\sim 1.6\times 10^{-4}$ for \ce{O2}
and $\sim 1.8\times 10^{-4}$ for CO)
out to their respective icelines at 21~AU for \ce{O2} and 26~AU for CO.
Gas-phase \ce{O2} is much more abundant (by at least 2 orders of magnitude)
in this reset scenario than in the inheritance scenario. In the reset scenario \ce{O2} is formed is the gas-phase via \ce{O + OH -> O2 + H} \citep[see][]{walsh15}, and remains in the gas-phase because it is very volatile (binding energy of $E_{b}=1000$ K), and only freezes out at 24 K, see Table \ref{init_abun}.
Outside the CO iceline, the CO ice abundance reaches the same level
as that for the gas inside the iceline.
This CO abundance is about half the \ce{H2O} initial abundance
in the inheritance scenario.
The remainder of the available oxygen (63\%) in the outer disk remains in atomic form.
These are oxygen atoms that have not had sufficient time to form molecules before freezeout.
30~AU is just around the atom oxygen iceline (which is at 29 AU),
so both O gas and ice account for the total O abundance of $3.3\times10^{-4}$,
making atomic oxygen the most abundant O carrier here,
almost twice as abundant as CO ice.
This result is particular to the reduced chemistry case because all species
are rendered chemically inert upon freezeout; in reality,
atomic oxygen on and within ice mantles is highly reactive
\citep[see, e.g.,][]{linnartz2015}.
Between $R =0.2$ and 1.6~AU, gas-phase \ce{CO2} is produced for both ionisation levels.
The abundance reaches 9.0$\times 10^{-5}$ for the high ionisation case at $R=1$~AU
(Fig. \ref{simple_chem_plots}d), which is about 5 times higher than the abundance peak for
low ionisation at $R=1$ AU (see Fig. \ref{simple_chem_plots}b).
For both low and high ionisation rates, \ce{CO2} ice reaches an abundance of only about
$10$\% of the value assumed in the inheritance scenario outside
the \ce{CO2} iceline.
In addition, \ce{H2O} ice is not efficiently produced in the outer disk in this reset
scenario. The reset scenario \ce{H2O} abundance levels resemble abundance levels of \ce{H2O} naturally produced in the gas phase of $10^{-7}-10^{-6}$ \citep[see][]{hollenbach2009}.
The abundance of \ce{H2O} ice is about an order of magnitude larger in the
high ionisation case, showing that ion-molecule reactions in the gas-phase are
contributing to the formation of water in the absence of grain-surface chemistry.
However, the peak \ce{H2O} ice abundance of 2.3$\times 10^{-5}$
(reached at 30~AU in Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}d) remains more than an order of
magnitude lower than the initial \ce{H2O} abundance assumed in the inheritance scenario.
The high ionisation level in Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}d also aids the formation of \ce{CH4}
ice beyond its iceline, reaching a peak abundances of 3.0$\times 10^{-6}$.
However, as also found for \ce{H2O} and \ce{CO2} ice, the maximum abundance
reached for \ce{CH4} is only 17\% of the assumed initial abundance for the
inheritance scenario.
\begin{figure*}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{bern16irr_full_chem_mol_croff_r1_abs-crop.pdf}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{bern16irr_full_chem_atom_croff_r1_abs-crop.pdf}}\\%\label{full_atom_croff}}\\
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{bern16irr_full_chem_mol_cron_r1_abs-crop.pdf}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{bern16irr_full_chem_atom_cron_r1_abs-crop.pdf}
\caption{Final abundances with respect to total H nuclei density as function of radial distance from the
star $R$ for key volatile species, when using the full chemical network (see Table~\ref{reac_types}).
In all panels, the solid lines show the ice abundances and the dotted curves show the gas abundances.
The top two panels show the results for the low ionisation case (SLRs only)
and the bottom two panels show those for the high ionisation case (SLRs and CRs).
The left-hand panels show the results when assuming the reset scenario and the right-hand panels show those when assuming the reset scenario (see Table 1).
(see Table~\ref{init_abun}). The arrows on the right-hand side of each plot indicate the initial abundances of \ce{H2O}, \ce{CO2}, CO, and \ce{CH4} gases in the inheritance scenario. CO and \ce{CO2} share the same arrow (red with black filling), because they have the same initial abundances. The grey, dashed, vertical lines in panel \textbf{a)} indicate the iceline positions of \ce{H2O}, \ce{CO2}, \ce{CH4} and CO, respectively, from the inner to the outer disk. The positions of these icelines are the same in the other panels.}
\label{full_chem_plots}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Full chemical network}
\label{full_chem}
Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}a shows the chemical evolution results when assuming the
inheritance scenario and a low ionisation rate (SLRs only) for the full chemical network.
The abundance behaviour in this figure is practically indistinguishable
from that for the case using the reduced chemical network (see Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}a),
that is, the initial assumed abundances are preserved in both the gas
and the ice.
For the higher ionisation rate case (SLRs and CRs, Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}c)
the picture is different.
Chemical processing by cosmic-ray-induced reactions in both gas and ice occurs,
and is most noticeable within the icelines of each species.
A large reduction in the gas-phase CO abundance beyond
2~AU is seen, in contrast with the reduced chemistry results.
This decrease in CO gas (and ice beyond the iceline)
coincides with an overall enhancement in \ce{CO2} ice in the outer disk.
CO molecules accreting onto the grain surfaces can react with OH
radicals produced in the ice via photodissociation of \ce{H2O} ice by
CR-induced photons in the full chemistry.
This produces \ce{CO2} ice in-situ on the grain surfaces via the reaction
\begin{equation} \ce{CO_{surf}} + \ce{OH_{surf}} \longrightarrow \ce{CO2_{,surf}}
+ \ce{H_{surf}},
\label{co2_prod}
\end{equation}
which is responsible for the rise in the \ce{CO2} ice abundance
between 3 and 15~AU (doubling the initially assumed \ce{CO2}
abundance).
Within this radial region the dust temperature is between
27~K and 78~K, and because H atoms are very volatile ($E_{\rm b} = 600$~K)
they can rapidly thermally desorb from the grain surface, impeding
further grain-surface reactions involving atomic H.
In the outermost disk between 20 and 30~AU, the temperature drops to
$T\approx 19.5$~K, enabling the more efficient retention of H atoms
arriving from the gas or produced in-situ within the grain mantles,
and thereby increasing the relative rate of \ce{H2O} ice production via the reaction,
\begin{equation}
\ce{OH_{surf} + H_{surf} <=>[][\gamma_\mathrm{CR}] H2O_{surf}}.
\label{h2o_prod}
\end{equation}
This reaction is more efficient than Reaction~(\ref{co2_prod})
under these colder conditions. Although balanced by destruction due to
photodissociation, the abundance of \ce{H2O} ice is increased at the
expense of \ce{CO2} ice beyond $20$~AU.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{methane_abs.pdf}
\caption{Abundance evolution with time for CO gas, \ce{CO2} ice,
\ce{H2O} ice and \ce{CH4} gas. Dashed curves are for the reduced
chemistry, solid curves are for the full chemistry. Additional time-dependent plots are supplied in Appendix \ref{timescale-app}}
\label{meth_evol}
\end{figure}
\ce{CH4} gas is destroyed between 1 and 16~AU in the full chemistry,
similar to the case for the reduced chemistry (see Fig.~\ref{simple_chem_plots}c).
The reactions responsible for this destruction of
\ce{CH4} at 10~AU, are
\begin{align}
\ce{CH4} & \ce{->[\gamma_\mathrm{CR}] CH2} \ce{->[\ce{H}] CH3} \ce{->[\ce{O}] H2CO},\\
\ce{CH2} & \ce{->[\ce{NO}] HCNO} \ce{->[\ce{O}] CO} \ce{->[\ce{OH}] CO2},
\end{align}
where $\gamma_\mathrm{CR}$ indicates photodissociation by cosmic-ray
induced photons.
The carbon is thus converted from \ce{CH4} into \ce{CO2} and
\ce{H2CO}, but the conversions require CRs (i.e. high ionisation).
However, \ce{H2CO} does not reach an abundance of
more than 10$^{-12}$, so \ce{CO2} is the main reservoir for the
carbon converted from the \ce{CH4} gas, see Fig. \ref{meth_evol}. Some carbon from \ce{CH4} is also converted into unsaturated hydrocarbons in the gas phase \citep[as also seen in][]{aikawa1999accre}, eventually forming gas-phase \ce{C2H4}. This is the reservoir for the converted carbon in the reduced chemistry, because \ce{CO2} ice requires gran-surface chemistry to form, and hence \ce{CO2} ice does not increase in abundance in the reduced chemistry case. For the full chemistry, however, this \ce{C2H4} subsequently freezes out onto grain surfaces, undergoes hydrogenation, and forms \ce{C2H6} which reaches a final abundance of 8.6$\times 10^{-6}$, approximately an order of magnitude lower than that of \ce{CO2} (1.2$\times 10^{-4}$).
The reaction \ce{CO + He+} reported by \citet{aikawa1999accre}, turning carbon from CO into \ce{CH4} and other hydrocarbons, is found here to be a relatively minor channel as compared to the reactions between \ce{CH4} and \ce{He+}, and \ce{H3+}, respectively, turning \ce{CH4} into CO. The result of this is an efficient conversion of carbon from \ce{CH4} into CO. Outside the \ce{CO2} iceline, this conversion is enhanced. This enhancement is due to the accretion of CO onto grain surfaces, and subsequent rapid reaction of CO with OH to form \ce{CO2}, a reaction not included in the models of \citet{aikawa1999accre}.
The destruction of CO gas due to the conversion into \ce{CO2} has been suggested by e.g. \citet{nomura2016} to explain the depletion of CO gas inside the CO iceline of the protoplanetary disk TW Hya. \citet{kama2016codepl} reported overall carbon depletion in the disk atmospheres of some protoplanetary disks using results from a single-dish survey of CO ($J=6-5$) and [CI]($^{3}P_{1}-^{3}P_{0}$) line emission with APEX. \citet{schwarz2016} reported CO depletion in TW Hya from CO isotopologue emission observations with ALMA. Detailed modelling confirmed that carbon is likely depleted in the disk around TW Hya by a factor of $\approx$ 100 (\citealt{kama2016model}, see also \citealp{du2015}). This is in good agreement with the CO gas abundance just inside the CO iceline in Fig. \ref{full_chem_plots}c, and the results presented here therefore provide a possible explanation for the presence of this inner-disk CO depletion, found inside of, but somewhat mimicking, the actual CO iceline in TW Hya.
At a temperature of 37.7~K (at $R=10$~AU), \ce{CO2} freezes out immediately after production.
The abundance increase in \ce{CO2} ice follows the destruction
of \ce{CH4} gas, as seen in Fig.~\ref{meth_evol} which presents the time
evolution.
It is interesting that this effect is seen under these specific
physical conditions, with temperatures ranging from 40 to 150 K.
This indicates that the \ce{CH4} destruction happens at radii between
the \ce{H2O} and \ce{CH4} icelines, where
\ce{H2O} is not chemically active in gas-phase reactions. More generally, for the high ionisation level, the chemical processing becomes significant after a few times $10^{5}$~yrs. That is shown in Appendix \ref{timescale-app}, where jumps in abundance levels are presented for our four key volatiles between 100 kyr and 500 kyr.
When considering initial atomic abundances (Figs.~\ref{full_chem_plots}b
and \ref{full_chem_plots}d) a similar radial behaviour (although not
identical) is seen when comparing the results for reduced and full
chemistry. Inside the icelines, mainly gas-phase \ce{H2O}, \ce{O2}
and CO are produced, reaching peak abundances of $3.6 \times 10^{-4}$,
$1.6 \times 10^{-4}$, and $1.8 \times 10^{-4}$, respectively.
Not as much gas-phase \ce{CO2} is produced within the iceline.
Comparing the results for low and high ionisation, the peak abundances of gaseous \ce{CO2}
are $2.5 \times 10^{-5}$ and $6.6 \times 10^{-5}$, respectively,
and a negligible amount of gas-phase \ce{CH4} is formed. For the high ionisation
rate, Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}d, a larger amount of \ce{H2O} ice (an
order of magnitude at 2~AU) is produced between 1 and 10~AU, than with
a low ionisation rate (Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}b), as is also seen in
the model using the reduced chemical network. For \ce{H2O} ice, a dip in the abundance is seen around 7 AU in Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}d. This is an effect of the competing productions of \ce{H2O} ice and \ce{SO2} ice. At 4 AU, \ce{SO2} ice is produced more slowly than \ce{H2O} ice, and reaches a final abundance of 2.7$\times 10^{-6}$. At 7 AU, however, the lower temperature favours a more efficient and fast production of \ce{SO2} ice, which is able to lock up atomic O, thereby impeding the simultaneous production of \ce{H2O} ice.
Can these models produce abundant O$_2$ in gas or ice? Significant
gaseous \ce{O2} is formed in the inner disk starting from atomic
abundances, as discussed above. Using the low ionisation rate (see
Fig. \ref{full_chem_plots}b), \ce{O2} ice reaches an appreciable
abundance of 1--10\% that of \ce{H2O} ice between 15 and 30~AU,
similar to that seen in the results using the reduced chemical
network. However, little \ce{O2} ice is found when using the higher
ionisation rate, indicating that \ce{O2} ice is susceptible to
chemical processing by CR-induced photons. In
Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}c using molecular initial abundances, \ce{O2}
gas is also produced from 1~AU out to 15~AU but in smaller amounts
than starting from atomic initial abundances. It reaches a peak
abundance of a few percent of that of \ce{H2O} ice at 2~AU.
\subsection{Main nitrogen reservoirs}
\label{nitrogen}
Figs.~\ref{nitros} shows the final abundances for \ce{N2},
\ce{NH3}, HCN and NO (HCN and NO only where relevant) for the full chemistry.
Results for both low and high ionisation levels,
and both gas and ice species, are plotted in each figure.
Fig.~\ref{nitros}a are the results when assuming molecular initial abundances
(i.e. the inheritance scenario), whereas
Fig.~\ref{nitros}b are those assuming atomic initial abundances
(i.e. the reset scenario).
For the inheritance-scenario with low ionisation,
the initial abundances are largely preserved, as for the C- and O-bearing species, and the icelines are of \ce{NH3} and \ce{N2} are nicely outlined at 2.5 and 30 AU, at temperatures of 90 and 20 K, respectively. These icelines are marked with dashed vertical lines in Figs. \ref{nitros}a.
However, for high ionisation there is a destruction of
\ce{NH3} and production of \ce{N2} at $\approx 1.5$~AU.
The reaction pathways responsible for these features are
as follows:
\begin{align}
\ce{NH3} &\ce{ ->[X\ce{H+}] NH4+ ->[e-] NH2 ->[\ce{NO}] N2} \label{nitro_ion1}\\
\ce{NH3} &\ce{ ->[\ce{OH}] NH2 ->[\ce{NO}] N2} \label{nitro_oh}\\
\ce{NH3} &\ce{ ->[\gamma_{CR}] NH2 ->[\ce{NO}] N2} \label{nitro_ion3}
\end{align}
\ce{NH3} is converted into \ce{N2} both through ion-molecule reactions
(reaction sequence \ref{nitro_ion1}),
as well as through CR-induced photoreactions
(reaction sequences \ref{nitro_oh} and \ref{nitro_ion3}). The timescale of this conversion is a few times $10^{5}$ yrs, as was found for the cases of \ce{H2O}, CO, \ce{CO2} and \ce{CH4} and discussed earlier in Section \ref{full_chem}.
When considering atomic initial abundances in Fig.~\ref{nitros}b,
atomic N is seen to form \ce{N2} gas quickly
\citep[as also shown and discussed in][]{schwarz2014}, which is the dominant bearer inside 10~AU.
This holds regardless of the assumed ionisation level.
In the outer disk, HCN ice is the main reservoir, being 5-10 times more
abundant than \ce{NH3} ice outside 10~AU.
For low ionisation around 1~AU, NO and HCN are the second and third
most abundant N-bearing species, although more than an order of magnitude
less abundant than \ce{N2}.
In the outer disk, \ce{NH3}, \ce{N2}, and NO all reach ice
abundances factors of a few to ten times less than the HCN ice abundance.
HCN is produced on very short timescales ($< 1$~yr)
in the gas-phase via the following reaction sequence,
\begin{equation}
\ce{C ->[\ce{H2}] CH2 ->[\ce{H2}] CH3 ->[\ce{O}] HCO ->[\ce{N}] HCN},
\end{equation}
with subsequent freeze-out of HCN onto grains.
NO is produced mainly via the well-known gas-phase reaction between N and OH,
whereas \ce{NH3} ice is formed in situ on the grain surfaces
via hydrogenation of atomic N \citep[see also][]{walsh15}.
Even with grain-surface chemistry included, when beginning with atomic
initial abundances, \ce{NH3} ice formation is less efficient than that
for those species more reliant on gas-phase formation followed by freezeout.
\begin{figure*}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{nitros_mol_abs-crop.pdf}\label{nitro_mol}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{nitros_atom_abs-crop.pdf}\label{nitro_atom}}
\caption{Final abundances for the major nitrogen species obtained with the full chemical network.
Solid curves show ice abundances, dashed curves show gas abundances.
Thin curves are for low ionisation level, and thick curves are for high ionisation level.
The physical conditions and
initial abundances in Fig.~\ref{nitros}a are identical to those
considered in Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}a and c.
Likewise, for Fig.~\ref{nitros}b
the assumptions are identical to those in Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}b and d. The arrow on the right-hand side of each plot indicate the initial abundances of \ce{N2} and \ce{NH3}. They have the same initial abundances and hence share arrow. The grey, dashed, vertical line in panel \textbf{a)} indicates the iceline position of \ce{NH3}. The position of the iceline is the same in panel \textbf{b)}. The iceline of \ce{N2} is at 30 AU, and therefore not seen.}
\label{nitros}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion}
\label{discussion}
\subsection{Compositional diversity at different radii: inheritance vs reset}
\label{comp_div}
The third column of Table \ref{result_composition} shows the final
abundances for the full chemical model with low ionisation level and molecular
initial abundances at three different radii throughout the disk midplane
(see Fig. \ref{full_chem_plots}a).
This is the model for which the results show best preservation of the
initial abundances (listed in Table~\ref{init_abun} for the inheritance case).
The remaining columns show the
fractional abundances of each species at each radial distance for all
other models using full chemistry relative to this reference model. The fractional abundances have been calculated using the formula given in the footnote of Table \ref{result_composition}.
Fractional abundance values smaller than 1 means abundances lowered relative
to the reference model whereas values larger than 1 means increased abundances.
Values of 0 indicate abundances
more than two orders of magnitude lower than for the reference model, so as to avoid large numbers in the table.
A value of 1 means no change from the reference model.
Three different radii are considered which span the radius of
the disk and probe three distinct regions:
(i) \ce{H2O}-ice rich only (1~AU),
(ii) \ce{H2O}-ice rich and \ce{CO2}-ice rich (10~AU), and
(iii) volatile-gas poor (30 AU, i.e., gas fully depleted of volatiles via freezeout).
\begin{table*}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\caption{Fractional deviations in key volatiles between different simulations
using full chemistry
at $R=1$, 10, and 30~AU with respect to the reference model
(the abundances for which are given in the column labelled ``Mol. low ion.''). }
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l l c c c c}
\hline\hline
Radial distance & Species & Abundance& & Fractional deviation & \\
\hline
& &(Reference model) & & & \\
& & Mol. low ion.& Mol. high ion. & Atom. low ion. & Atom. high ion.\\
\hline
$R$ = 1~AU & \emph{Gas} &&&&\\
& \ce{H2O} & 2.2$\times 10^{-6}$ & 1.03 &0.5 &0 \\
& \ce{CO} & 6.4$\times 10^{-5}$ & 1.52 &2.5 &2.4 \\
& \ce{CO2} & 5.8$\times 10^{-5}$ & 0.9 &0.26 &0.53 \\
& \ce{CH4} & 1.9$\times 10^{-5}$ &0.74 &0 &0 \\
& \emph{Ice} &&&&\\
& \ce{H2O} & 3.0$\times 10^{-4}$ & 1 &0 &0 \\
\hline
$R$ = 10~AU & \emph{Gas} &&&&\\
& \ce{CO} & 5.3$\times 10^{-5}$ &0.23 &0.95 &1.31 \\
& \ce{CH4} & 1.6$\times 10^{-5}$ &0.02 &0 &0 \\
& \emph{Ice} &&&&\\
& \ce{H2O} & 3.0$\times 10^{-4}$ & 0.83 &0.04 &0.04 \\
& \ce{CO2} & 6.3$\times 10^{-5}$ &1.79 &1.73 &1.46 \\
\hline
$R$ = 30~AU & \emph{Gas} &&&&\\
& \ce{CO} & 1.2$\times 10^{-6}$ & 0.01 &0.53 &0.02\\
& \emph{Ice} &&&&\\
& \ce{H2O} & 3.0$\times 10^{-4}$ & 1.14 & 1 &1.22\\
& \ce{CO} & 4.1$\times 10^{-5}$ &0.01 &0.5 &0.02\\
& \ce{CO2} & 6.0$\times 10^{-5}$ &0.83 &1.04 &0.84\\
& \ce{CH4} & 1.8$\times 10^{-5}$ &1.67 &1.71 &2.36\\
\hline
\label{result_composition}
\end{tabular}\tablefoot{
Formula for calculating fractional deviations: deviation=abundance(comparison model)/abundance(reference model).\\
The reference model, ``Mol.~low ion.'', is that for which the initial abundances are mainly preserved
throughout the midplane.
In all subsequent column labels, ``Mol'' and ``Atom'' refer to molecular and
atomic initial abundances, and ``low'' and ``high'' refer to a
low assumed ionisation rate (SLRs only) and a high ionisation rate
(SLRs and CRs), respectively.}
\end{table*}
At $R=1$~AU, CO gas is enhanced in all three models
by factors of ~1.5 to 2.5, with a greater enhancement
seen in the atomic case.
This is generally at the expense of all other
considered species: \ce{H2O} ice and gas, \ce{CH4} gas, and
\ce{CO2} gas.
Both \ce{CH4} gas and \ce{H2O} ice show extreme depletion for
the atomic cases, for the reasons discussed in Sect.~\ref{results}.
Moving to 10~AU, i.e., beyond the \ce{CO2} iceline, a different
behaviour is seen.
\ce{CO2} ice is enhanced by factors of ~1.5 to 1.8 in the
other three models, this time generally at the expense of \ce{CO}
and \ce{CH4} gas and \ce{H2O} ice.
The extreme depletion of water ice in the atomic cases
also extends into this region.
However, an enhancement of a factor ~1.3 is seen in CO gas for the atomic
case and high ionisation, showing that the higher ionisation rate
can also facilitate gas-phase formation as well increased ice processing.
Moving outwards to 30~AU, where most volatiles have accreted onto
grain surfaces, different behaviour is seen yet again.
This time \ce{CH4} ice is enhanced by a factor of ~1.7 to 2.4 at
the expense of CO gas and ice (with the latter depleted by almost
an order of magnitude) for the high ionisation cases.
\ce{H2O} and \ce{CO2} ice are enhanced and depleted by
up to 22\% and 17\% respectively, with high ionisation only.
Little change is seen for low ionisation, despite beginning
the calculation with atomic abundances.
For this scenario, it appears that in the outer disk (30~AU),
the resulting abundances of \ce{CO2} and \ce{H2O} ice reproduce the inherited
values to within a few percent.
Finally, it is important to recognize that at all radii and in all
scenarios, including the full reset case, the chemistry is not in
thermodynamic equilibrium, i.e., the abundances are not simply set by
the overall elemental abundances and pressure \citep[see also the
discussion in][]{henning13}.
\begin{figure*}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{c_o_plot_inheritance_croff.pdf}\label{c_o_mol_croff}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{c_o_plot_reset_croff.pdf}\label{c_o_atom_croff}}\\
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{c_o_plot_inheritance_cron.pdf}\label{c_o_mol_cron}}
\subfigure,{\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{c_o_plot_reset_cron.pdf}\label{c_o_atom_cron}}
\caption{C/O ratios in the gas (dashed lines) and ice (solid lines) for the 4 full chemistry model setups as described in the text. \textbf{The solid profile in panel b) peaks at C/O ratio 2.5}.}
\label{c_o}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{C/O ratio}
The results in Table \ref{result_composition} show that for different
sets of assumptions or models setups, a large diversity is seen in the
resulting computed abundances of dominant C- and O-bearing volatiles.
The deviations are also radially dependent, and align with the positions
of icelines. The fractional deviations are sufficiently large to
affect the C/O ratio in the gas and ice which will go into forming the
building blocks of planets.
Fig.~\ref{c_o} shows the C/O ratios for gas (dashed) and ice (solid)
species in the four different model setups using the full chemistry.
In the calculation of the ratio, all dominant C- and O-bearing species
were taken into account. In addition to the main considered volatiles
(\ce{CO}, \ce{H2O}, \ce{CO2} and \ce{CH4}), these also include
\ce{CH3OH}, \ce{O2}, \ce{HCN}, \ce{NO}, and atomic O where
appropriate. The horizontal lines indicate the canonical C/O ratio
(at 0.43) and C/O = 1.
For the inheritance scenario and low ionisation (Fig. \ref{c_o}a), the C/O ratio for the gas resembles a step
function. Moving outwards in radius, the steps coincide with the
icelines of \ce{H2O}, \ce{CO2}, and \ce{CH4}, respectively. This
profile is very similar to that in Fig.~4 in \citet{oberg2011co} in
which the C/O ratios in the gas and ice were assumed to be dictated
solely by the positions of icelines. Only for the case of
inheritance and low ionisation level is there a region in the
disk, between 3 and 16 AU, in which the gas is carbon rich, i.e., C/O
$> 1$. The ice ratio for the same model shows that overall the ice
remains carbon poor (or oxygen rich), but does become relatively more
carbon rich moving outwards in the disk as the icelines for \ce{CO2}
and \ce{CH4} are surpassed.
Considering the inheritance scenario with the high ionisation
level (Fig. \ref{c_o}c), the chemical processing
induced by CRs has a noticeable affect on the C/O ratio in the gas
and ice. The C/O gas-phase ratio remains less than 1 everywhere due
to the destruction of \ce{CH4} gas and the production of \ce{O2} gas.
The gas-phase C/O ratio appears to increase significantly beyond
26~AU; however, this is beyond the CO iceline where most molecules
(except \ce{H2}) are depleted from the gas. The C/O ice ratio looks
similar to that for the case of low ionisation. The ratio is a bit
higher for the low ionisation case within 3~AU (73\% at 1.6 AU), and
slightly lower beyond 3~AU (15\% at 10 AU) reflecting the
repartitioning of atomic carbon and oxygen from \ce{H2O} ice into
\ce{CO2}, \ce{CO}, and \ce{O2} (see Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}).
Turning attention to the reset scenarios in Figs.~\ref{c_o}b and \ref{c_o}d, the picture changes significantly. Between 3
and 16 AU the C/O ratio in the ice is higher than that in the gas
(although both ice and gas remain carbon poor). This is opposite to
both inheritance cases; the dominant carriers of gas-phase C and O
in these models in this region are CO and \ce{O2}, and the dominant
ice component is \ce{CO2} ice as opposed to \ce{H2O} ice. Thus the
C/O ice ratios tends towards $\approx 0.5$ whereas in the gas it tends
towards $\approx 0.3$.
The peak at $\approx 2.5$~AU for the profile in
Fig.~\ref{c_o}d is due to HCN ice being produced and freezing out
at a slightly higher temperature than \ce{CO2}. This causes an
increase in the C/O ice ratio in this local region (see
Fig. \ref{nitros}b). It is only seen in the low ionisation case
because N-bearing species formed via gas-phase chemistry in the inner
disk ($< 3$ AU) are able to survive to $10^{6}$~yrs. The presence or
otherwise of this large peak is dependent upon the relative binding
energies of HCN and \ce{CO2} assumed in the model; recent
measurements of thermal desorption of pure HCN ice do derive a higher
binding energy than both \ce{CO2} and \ce{NH3}
\citep[e.g.,][]{noble2013}, but in a mixed ice they may be more similar.
The C/O ratio plots in Fig. \ref{c_o} highlight that the different
model setups considered here (especially the inheritance versus
reset scenarios) result in very different C/O ratio profiles for
the material in the planet-forming regions of the disk midplane.
\subsection{Implications for planet formation and comets}
\label{planet_imp}
\subsubsection{Giant planet atmospheres}
Giant planets can accrete their atmospheres either directly from the
surrounding gas or through accretion of icy planetesimals, or both. In addition, radial migration of a forming planet can influence the makeup of the resulting atmosphere as the planet moves through a gradient in gas and icy planetesimal composition.
Fig.~\ref{c_o}a suggests that if only accretion from the gas is
considered, a gas-giant planet forming between 3 and 16~AU may be able
to form a carbon-rich atmosphere in the case of inheritance with
low ionisation rates. For high ionisation rates, the atmosphere would
still be relatively carbon rich with respect to the canonical ratio
(horizontal dashed lines at C/O ratio 0.34 in Figs.~\ref{c_o}), yet with a ratio which remains $<1$.
In both cases, the atmosphere can be polluted by accreting icy
planetesimals which are oxygen rich, lowering C/O in the planet's atmosphere.
For the reset scenario, a gas-giant planet forming between 3 and
16 AU would accrete C-poor gas; however, if the volatile component
accreted by the planet were dominated by icy planetesimals, the
resulting atmosphere may become carbon rich relative to the canonical
value.
The low abundance of ice (relative to the gas) inside the \ce{CO2}
iceline for the reset scenario is also interesting from the
perspective of the overall core-envelope partitioning. If the core of
the planet was to form from the solid material available at 1~AU in
Fig.~\ref{full_chem_plots}d, then the bulk of the planet would not be
built up of volatile ices, but rather of more refractory components
(rocks). The composition of the forming atmosphere will then be set
solely by the composition of gas accreted onto the forming planet.
The \ce{CO2}-rich ice mantles formed beyond 16 AU in the reset scenario also
have an interesting implication for the first stage of planet
formation, the formation of pebble-sized objects. The sticking
efficiency of $100 \mu$m-sized \ce{CO2} ice particles was recently
determined to be an order of magnitude lower than that for similarly
sized \ce{H2O} ice particles \citep{musiolik2016}. Hence, under these
particular conditions, the first steps of planet formation may be
impeded.
\subsubsection{Cometary composition}
With molecular initial abundances (i.e., inheritance), the
composition is generally preserved (with a few already mentioned
exceptions, see Sect.~\ref{results}). Hence, planetesimals forming
under these specific conditions will be composed of ``inherited''
material. The overlap in the composition of comets, considered
pristine remnants of the solar nebula, and interstellar ices certainly
supports the hypothesis that a significant fraction of disk midplane
material may be inherited from the molecular cloud \citep[see,
e.g.,][]{charnley11,oberg2011ices}. For the reset case, cometary
and interstellar abundances would be significantly different, at least
for comets formed inside 30 AU.
It is interesting to consider whether a protoplanetary disk midplane,
which inherits only water ice, is able to synthesis \ce{O2} at a level
similar to that seen in comets because this could be an observational
constraint on the inheritance scenario. Our models can produce
significant amounts of O$_2$ gas in the inner disk, as was also seen
and discussed in full 2D protoplanetary disk models of
\citet{walsh15}. \citet{bieler15} find an \ce{O2}-to-\ce{H2O} ice
ratio of $\approx 4$\% in comet~67P/C-G, with \ce{O2}
closely associated with the \ce{H2O} ice. They concluded \ce{O2} was likely
primordial in origin, i.e., originating from the parent molecular
cloud and/or protostellar envelope. This result is surprising due to
the high reactivity of \ce{O2} ice.
The confirmation of \ce{O2} in comet 1P/Halley at a level similar to
that in 67P/C-G suggests that \ce{O2} is a dominant cometary component
\citep{rubin2015}. In Figs.~\ref{full_chem_plots}a and
\ref{full_chem_plots}c, molecular oxygen is produced only for the high
ionisation case and reaches a peak abundance of $<0.1$\% that of water
ice. This reflects the efficient conversion of \ce{O2} into water
ice, once formed. The reset case with low ionisation produces
more O$_2$ gas and ice with respect to \ce{H2O} ice, but it remains
difficult to envisage a scenario in which H$_2$O and O$_2$ ice would
be well mixed. Nevertheless, these results are sufficiently
interesting to warrant a detailed study exploring a broader range of
parameter space, which will be conducted in future work.
HCN has been detected in numerous comets with an abundance ratio of
the order of a few $\times 0.1$\% relative to water \citep[see,
e.g.,][]{charnley11,wirstrom2016}. The results presented here show
that HCN ice is unlikely to be produced in-situ via the processing of ices
containing only \ce{N2} and \ce{NH3}, which is opposite to the case
for \ce{O2}.
\subsection{Caveats of model assumptions}
\label{caveats}
Several assumptions have been made in our models, in addition to the
set of initial abundances, the ionisation rate, and the chemical
network used. We have considered only a single temperature and
density profile, as well as single dust-grain size and density.
Although the disk surface density used is typical of those derived for
nearby protoplanetary disks \citep[see, e.g.,][]{williams11}, in
reality, disk midplane temperature profiles depend on a multitude of
parameters including, disk mass, stellar spectral type, dust
distribution and opacity, and disk flaring index (which influences the
amount of UV absorbed and/or scattered by the disk surface layer).
The iceline locations determined here are consistent with those
determined in protoplanetary disk models which are considered to be
representative of the pre-solar nebula \citep[see, e.g.,][and
references therein]{oberg2011co}. For disks around warmer stars, the
icelines would move outwards in radius, with the opposite result for
disks around colder stars. All else being equal, this will only
affect the radial extent over which we see each chemical effect. A
significantly warmer inner disk will also allow gas-phase reactions
with reactions to occur more readily which may perturb the chemistry
differently to that seen here. Also, our adopted disk structure is static in time. This was chosen to keep focus on chemical evolution for fixed physical conditions. Future work will utilise an physical disk model that is evolving in time.
There is observational evidence for both dust-grain settling and growth
in protoplanetary disks \citep[e.g.,][]{dullemond04,dullemond05,williams11}.
Settling towards the midplane will increase the dust-to-gas mass ratio, whereas dust
growth to $\approx$~mm sizes, will act in the opposite sense to decrease the total
available surface area for freezeout and grain-surface reactions.
The combination of both effects can either decrease or increase the total
surface area of dust grains per unit volume.
A smaller surface area (i.e., generally larger grains) will decrease the rate of
freezeout (although freezeout is found to be almost instantaneous at the high densities of disk midplanes),
and decrease the rate of grain-surface processing of ice mantles.
Hence, this will lessen the effects of grain-surface chemistry, particularly
for the case of high ionisation.
Larger dust grains are also able to drift inwards as they become decoupled
from the gas and affect the locations of icelines, by as much as 60\%
\citep[as argued by][]{piso2015}. The effects of different grain sizes will be investigated and addressed in future work.
Only two ionisation levels have been assumed here, to probe what are considered to be two
extreme cases; however, there is also speculation in the literature that
the pre-solar nebula may have been exposed to an increased cosmic-ray rate due to nearby
supernovae early in the Sun's lifetime \citep[see, e.g., the review by][]{adams2010}.
We have demonstrated here that a relatively high level of ionisation causes more chemical
processing than a lower level.
We would expect this trend to continue for ionisation levels $\gg 10^{-17}$~s$^{-1}$.
A lower level of ionisation would likely not have any effect, as the low level considered here
is already seen not to significantly alter the chemistry.
An increase or decrease in total disk mass (or surface density) will have the same
effect as decreasing and increasing the ionisation rate due to CRs
(especially in the outer disk), and increasing and decreasing the ionisation rate
due to SLRs (especially in the inner disk).
The choice of initial abundances in the inheritance-scenario assumes an instant transition from molecular cloud phase to the disk midplane for the gas, with no chemical processing taking place ``on the way''. Likewise, the reset-scenario assumes all gas content to be dissociated into atoms at the time it reaches the midplane. These two sets of abundances are extremes. Recent models indicate that chemical processing of the material does take place on its way to the midplane (Drozdovskaya et al., MNRAS 2016, submitted), so a realistic initial composition of the material is more likely to be a mix of atoms and molecules. Considering the extreme cases, however, provides insight into the degree of chemical processing taking place.
Finally, we extracted our chemical abundances at a single time step only, at $10^{6}$~yrs,
which is considered to be representative of the lifetime of the pre-solar nebula and nearby young
protoplanetary disks \citep[e.g.,][]{williams11,henning13}.
A shorter time would lead to less extreme effects due to ion-molecule reactions and CR-induced
photoreactions, because these reactions typically have long timescales ($\gtrsim 10^{5}$~yrs) (see Fig.~\ref{meth_evol});
however, this strongly depends on the assumed cosmic-ray ionisation rate.
A longer time would lead to the opposite case.
The ALMA detection of gaps and rings in the disk around the young ($<10^{6}$~yr) protostar,
HL~Tau, suggests that grain growth and planet(esimal) formation in protoplanetary disks may occur much earlier than
heretofore considered \citep{alma2015};
hence, shorter chemical timescales are worthy of further investigation in future work. Specifically, in our models, assuming the inheritance-scenario and high level of ionisation, significant changes to the abundances of key volatiles take place after a few times $10^{5}$ yrs (for more details, see Appendix \ref{timescale-app}).
\section{Conclusions}
\label{conclusions}
The models presented in this work have examined the importance
of kinetic chemistry on the molecular composition
(gas and ice) in protoplanetary disk midplanes.
The main conclusions are listed below.
\begin{itemize}
\item The disk midplane composition reflects that of interstellar ices
only for the case of low ionisation (SLRs only) in the inheritance
scenario. The partitioning between gas and ice is
determined solely by iceline positions, as is assumed in the planet
population synthesis models. The inclusion of grain-surface
chemistry has a negligible effect.
\item Assuming a higher rate of ionisation (SLRs plus CRs) and
inheritance leads to an increase in the abundance of \ce{CH4} ice
beyond its iceline, and a significant depletion of gas-phase
\ce{CH4} in the critical region between 1 and
15~AU. Cosmic-ray-induced chemistry enables the release of free
carbon from CO in the outer disk ($>15$~AU) which is incorporated
into gas-phase methane which freezes out. This naturally leads to
low gas-phase CO abundances as is observed in some disks. On the
other hand, cosmic-ray-induced chemistry efficiently destroys
methane gas in the \ce{CH4}-poor region. The conclusion holds
whether grain-surface chemistry is included or not.
\item When grain-surface chemistry is considered, the \ce{CO2} ice to
\ce{H2O} ice ratio is increased, with \ce{CO} and \ce{CH4} gas
destroyed at the expense of an increase in \ce{CO2} ice. The
critical reactions are the photodissociation of \ce{H2O} ice to form
\ce{OH} radicals within the ice mantle, which subsequently react
with CO to form \ce{CO2} ice. This reaction is able to proceed
faster than H~+~OH recombination within $\approx 20$~AU because the
very volatile H atoms are quickly lost to the gas phase for grains
warmer than 20~K. Beyond this radius, the reformation of water ice
wins. The partitioning between \ce{N2} and \ce{NH3} is similarly
affected.
\item For the extreme reset scenario in which all elements are
initially in atomic form, the picture changes significantly.
Without grain-surface chemistry, gas-phase CO, \ce{O2}, and atomic
oxygen are the main carbon and oxygen-bearing species beyond 1~AU.
The chemistry does not have sufficient time to incorporate all
available initial elemental oxygen into molecules by $10^6$~yrs.
Gas-phase water and \ce{CO2} do form and subsequently freeze out,
albeit achieving much lower abundances than in the inheritance
scenario. A higher ionisation level helps to increase the
production of \ce{H2O} and \ce{CH4}.
\item With grain-surface chemistry, the abundances of \ce{H2O} and
\ce{CO2} ice increase significantly, demonstrating the absolute
necessity of grain-surface chemistry for the synthesis of these two
dominant ice components. The final abundance ratios reached in the
very outer disk (30~AU) for \ce{H2O} and \ce{CO2} are similar to
those for the inheritance scenario, regardless of the ionisation
level; however, the higher ionisation level does impede the
abundance of \ce{O2} ice at the levels seen in comets and enables a
conversion from CO to \ce{CH4}.
\item In the reset scenario, species other than the main
considered volatiles are also produced in non-negligible quantities:
\ce{O2}, \ce{HCN}, and \ce{NO}. The higher ionisation level
generally helps the production of HCN and NO (at the expense of
\ce{N2} and \ce{NH3}) and impedes the survival of \ce{O2} ice.
\item The inclusion of chemistry has a significant impact on the C/O
ratio of both gas and ice in the planet-forming region which is
expected to influence the resulting composition of forming
planet(esimal)s. The ices remain, on the whole, dominated
by oxygen (i.e., C/O $< 1$). For both inheritance cases, the gas is
carbon rich relative to the canonical value; however only for the
low ionisation case is there a reservoir of gas-phase material with
C/O $>1$. For both reset scenarios, the ice becomes more
carbon rich than the gas, which is opposite to the inheritance
case.
\end{itemize}
The results presented here show that under certain conditions,
highlighted above, chemistry can have a profound effect on the
composition of the planet-forming material in disk midplanes.
Chemistry influences the partitioning of elemental carbon, oxygen, and
nitrogen, into molecules of differing volatilities, such that the
positions of ice lines alone, are not necessarily adequate for
determining the ratio of C/O in neither the gas, nor the ice. Only
under the extreme case of full inheritance and low ionisation, are the
elemental ratios determined solely by the positions of icelines. This
conclusion is also similar to that for the assumption that ices are
already locked up in larger bodies by $\approx 10^{5}$~yr.
The work presented here follows the time evolution of chemistry in a
static protoplanetary disk which is the simplest physical case. In
reality, disk conditions evolve with time, at the same time as
planetesimals are forming and migrating within the midplane. Future
plans include determining the influence of chemistry in an evolving
protoplanetary disk (where the density, temperature, and ionisation
rate also vary with time), and to couple the outputs of these models
with planet formation tracks to determine, in a quantitative manner,
the influence on the resulting composition of gas-giant planetary
atmospheres.
\begin{acknowledgements}
The authors thank Amaury Thiabaud and Ulysses Marboeuf for making
their disk density and temperature profile available and for many
inspiring discussions. The authors also thank Karin \"Oberg for a fruitful discussion about CO gas depletion inside the CO iceline. Astrochemistry in Leiden is supported by the
European Union A-ERC grant 291141 CHEMPLAN, by the Netherlands
Research School for Astronomy (NOVA), and by a Royal Netherlands
Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) professor prize. CW also
acknowledges the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research
(NWO, grant 639.041.335).
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:Intro}
Shortly after the publication of Einstein's equations for the gravitational field, Karl Schwarzschild found an exact solution describing the vacuum region surrounding a spherical body of mass $M$. The line element characterizing this space-time takes the form
\begin{equation}
ds^2=-\left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)dt^2+\frac{1}{\left(1-\frac{2M}{r}\right)}dr^2+r^2d\Omega^2
\end{equation}
where $r$ is the radial coordinate and $d\Omega^2\equiv d\theta^2+\sin\theta^2d\varphi^2$ represents the spherical sector. Given the smallness of the quantity $r_S\equiv 2M$, which for a star like the sun is about $r_S\sim 3$km, and the limited astrophysical knowledge about compact objects at that time, this line element was thought to be physically meaningful only in the exterior regions of stars. With the discovery of neutron stars, the physical existence of ultra compact objects was reconsidered and in the 1960's it was understood that geometries such as Schwarzschild's could be a physical reality. In fact, using powerful mathematical techniques it was concluded that under reasonable conditions, complete gravitational collapse is unavoidable for sufficiently massive objects \cite{Theo1,Theo2,Theo3,Theo4,Theo5}. Black holes, therefore, are an important prediction of Einstein's theory of General Relativity (GR). \\
The existence of black holes has a deep impact for the theoretical consistency of GR. In fact, given that the laws of Physics as we know them are defined on top of a dynamical geometry, the space-time, if the geometry becomes ill defined at some event then our ability to describe physical phenomena and make predictions will be seriously affected \cite{Hawking76}. This is precisely what happens in the interior of black holes.
In the Schwarzschild case, for instance, any observer within the region $r<r_S$ is forced to travel towards decreasing values of $r$, being $r=0$ reached in a finite proper time \cite{MTW}. At that location, curvature scalars diverge and gravitational forces are so strong that any extended body is instantaneously crushed to zero volume. Thus, any observer reaching $r=0$ is destroyed and disappears together with its ability to describe the physical processes taking place in that region. Under this circumstance, it is typically stated that the Schwarzschild black hole contains a singularity or that it describes a singular space-time. \\
The notion of singularity is a very elusive concept, though \cite{Curiel2009}. The Schwarzschild example suggests that curvature divergences can somehow be regarded as a signature of their existence. However, if one takes a space-time such as Minkowski and artificially removes a portion of it, any observer or signal that propagates through it and reaches the boundary of the removed portion simply vanishes there, as there is nowhere to go {\it beyond} that boundary. One can also find observer trajectories which intersect this boundary in their past, suggesting that they came into existence out of the blue. The potential creation and/or destruction of physical observers and/or light signals in a given space-time is thus fundamental to determine if an appropriate physical description is possible or not. For this reason, for the characterization of singular space-times one should not focus on the potential existence of infinities in the gravitational fields, which are absent in the amputated Minkowskian example, but rather one should be worried about the existence of physical observers at all times.
Following this line of reasoning, it is generally stated that a singular space-time is one in which there exist incomplete timelike and/or null geodesics, i.e., geodesics which cannot be extended to arbitrary values of their affine parameter in the past or in the future \cite{Geroch:1968ut,Hawking:1973uf,Wald:1984rg} (see also \cite{Senovilla:2014gza} for a more recent discussion of this point and references). Note, in this sense, that observers are identified with geodesic curves. The incompleteness of geodesics, therefore, hinges in the fact that in order to be able to provide a reliable description of phenomena on a given space-time, physical observers and/or signals should never be created or destroyed, i.e., their existence should be unrestricted along their worldline. The presence of curvature divergences is thus irrelevant for the determination of whether a space-time is singular or not: the potential {\it suffering} of observers due to intense tidal forces is not comparable to the importance of their very existence.
The fact that the Schwarzschild solution, as well as all other black hole solutions known to date, represent geodesically incomplete space-times is thus a serious conceptual limitation of GR. Improvements in the theory are thus necessary, which has motivated different approaches to the problem of singularities. Some of those are based on the idea of bounded curvature scalars \cite{Mukhanov:1991zn, Ansoldi:2008jw,Lemos, Spallucci, Bronnikov,Hayward} which, however, is logically unrelated to the notion of geodesic completeness. \\
In these lectures we will be dealing with certain (classical) extensions of GR in which simple non-rotating black hole solutions which are geodesically complete, and hence nonsingular, are possible. The approach presented here does not follow the intuitive and widespread idea that to get a nonsingular theory one should keep curvature scalars bounded. In our case, curvature divergences do arise in some regions but their presence is not an obstacle to have complete geodesic paths\footnote{This provides a counterexample to the correlation typically observed in GR between space-times with incomplete geodesics and which contain curvature divergences.} \cite{Olmo:2015bya}. Making a long story short, this is accomplished by the replacement of the black hole center by a wormhole \cite{wormhole,Lobo:2007zb}. Unlike the case of GR, in our approach one does not need exotic matter sources to generate the wormhole. Rather, a simple free electric field will be able to do the job. Also, our geometries are not designed {\it a priori} but, rather, follow directly by integrating the field equations once the matter fields are specified. It is in this sense that these wormholes are more natural than those typically discussed in the context of GR, where one first defines the metric and then obtains the necessary stress-energy tensor by plugging it in Einstein's equations. \\
It is worth noting at this point that the use of nontrivial topologies (wormholes) in combination with self-gravitating free fields as a way to cure space-time singularities was suggested long ago by J.A. Wheeler \cite{Wheeler:1955zz}. We will see that our solutions represent an explicit example of geons in Wheeler's sense \cite{Lobo:2013adx,Lobo:2013vga} and, as such, avoid the well-known {\it problem of the sources} \cite{Ortin} that one finds in GR for the Schwarzschild and Reissner-Nordstr\"{o}m black holes, for instance. \\
The content is organized as follows. In Sec. \ref{sec:framework} our geometrical scenario is introduced, making emphasis on the importance of understanding gravitation as a geometric phenomenon and geometry as an issue of metrics and connections, i.e., as something else than a theory of just metrics. Once the fundamental notions of metric-affine geometry have been presented, in Sec. \ref{sec:GR} we work out the field equations of GR \`{a} la Palatini, and in Sec.
\ref{sec:EOM} we do the same for two models of interest, namely, a quadratic $f(R)$ theory and a Born-Infeld-like gravity theory. The first example appears naturally in that quadratic corrections in curvature are common to many different approaches to quantum and non-quantum extensions of GR. The simplicity of this model comes at the price of introducing a nonlinear theory of electrodynamics as matter source in order to obtain the desired effects in the equations. The Born-Infeld case, on the contrary, can be easily combined with a standard Maxwell electric field. In both cases, exact analytical black hole solutions can be found, which allows us to explore the behavior of geodesics in both geometries in detail.
The equations governing black hole structure are derived in a generic form in Sec. \ref{sec:generic} and applied to the gravitational Born-Infeld model in Sec.\ref{sec:BI} and to the $f(R)$ model in Sec. \ref{sec:f(R)}. The study of geodesics appears in Sec. \ref{sec:geodesics}. We conclude in Sec. \ref{sec:theend} with a brief summary and discussion of the results.
\section{Basic framework: metric-affine gravity. }\label{sec:framework}
In elementary courses on gravitation \cite{MTW} one learns that general covariance is accomplished by replacing flat Minkowskian derivatives $\partial_\mu$ by covariant derivatives $\nabla_\mu$, whose action on vector components (for instance) is of the form $\nabla_\mu A_\nu=\partial_\mu A_\nu-\Gamma^\lambda_{\mu\nu}A_\lambda$. Here $\Gamma^\lambda_{\mu\nu}$ is the so-called Levi-Civita connection, which is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LC}
\Gamma^\lambda_{\mu\nu}=\frac{g^{\lambda\rho}}{2}\left[\partial_\mu g_{\rho\nu}+\partial_\nu g_{\rho\mu}-\partial_\rho g_{\mu\nu}\right] \ ,
\end{equation}
with $g_{\mu\nu}$ representing the space-time metric.
The connection has a non-tensorial transformation law which compensates the action of $\partial_\mu$ in such a way that $\nabla_\mu A_\nu$ transforms as a tensor under arbitrary changes of coordinates. With the connection one defines the Riemann curvature tensor as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Rie}
{R^\alpha}_{\beta\mu\nu}= \partial_\mu \Gamma^\alpha_{\nu\beta}-\partial_\nu \Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\beta}+ \Gamma^\kappa_{\nu\beta} \Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\kappa}- \Gamma^\kappa_{\mu\beta} \Gamma^\alpha_{\nu\kappa} \ ,
\end{equation}
and Einstein's equations take the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:GR}
R_{\beta\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g_{\beta\nu}R=\kappa^2 T_{\beta\nu} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $R_{\beta\nu}={R^\lambda}_{\beta\lambda\nu}$ is the Ricci tensor, $R=g^{\mu\nu} R_{\mu\nu}$ the Ricci curvature scalar, $T_{\beta\nu}$ the stress-energy tensor of the matter, and $\kappa^2=8\pi G/c^4$. Written in this form, GR is a theory based on the metric tensor $g_{\mu\nu}$ as the field that describes gravitational interactions.\\
Interestingly, at the time Einstein formulated GR, the theory of affine connections had not been developed yet. Only Riemannian geometry, based on the metric tensor, was available to implement his idea of gravitation as a geometric phenomenon. Einstein's theory boosted the interest of mathematicians on differential geometry, giving rise to the study of non-Riemannian spaces \cite{Eisenhart}. It was then established that general covariance could be implemented without defining a metric structure. This is so because the non-tensorial transformation law of the connection is a property that does not depend on the particular form of the connection, i.e., it is independent of the definition (\ref{eq:LC}). As a consequence, the Riemann curvature tensor (\ref{eq:Rie}) can be defined without referring it to a metric.
This point is very important because it opens a whole new range of possibilities to implement the idea of gravitation as a geometric phenomenon. Is the space-time geometry Riemannian? It is rather apparent that the Euclidean space of Newtonian mechanics is not appropriate to describe relativistic phenomena, but that does not lead uniquely to the Riemannian case ({\it the metric as the foundation of all}). Whether the space-time geometry is Riemannian or not is a fundamental question that must be answered by experiments, as Einstein himself stated \cite{Feigl}. We must, obviously, admit that the Riemannian description of GR is very successful at the length scales and energies accessible in laboratory and the Solar system (as well as in other systems whose orbital motions are well understood) \cite{Will:2014kxa}. However, there is still a broad range of energies and length scales that lie beyond direct experimental scrutiny. Demanding that the Riemannian condition (\ref{eq:LC}) , or $\nabla_\mu g_{\alpha\beta}=0$,
be satisfied at all scales might be an excessive assumption/constraint. \\
Aside from the purely theoretical interest in non-Riemannian geometries, there are other reasons to explore the effects that independent metric and affine degrees of freedom could have in gravitation. It turns out that in continuous systems with an ordered microstructure, such as in Bravais crystals or materials as popular as graphene, one needs a metric-affine geometry in order to correctly describe macroscopic properties like viscosity or plasticity \cite{Kroner1,Kleinert}. These properties are intimately related with the existence of defects in the microstructure. And these defects are responsible for the independence between metric and affine degrees of freedom. For instance, in a crystal without defects, one can introduce a notion of distance (metricity) by counting atoms along crystalographic directions (a special set of directions in the structure which minimize distances) \cite{Kroner1,Kroner2,RdWitt,Kroner3,Kroner4}. However, if there exist point defects such as missing atoms, the microscopic process of step counting breaks down and the idea of metricity cannot be translated to the continuum in any natural way.
The microscopic notion of distance can be extended to the continuum by defining an {\it auxiliary or idealized} structure without defects in which the step-counting procedure is naturally implemented. Physical distances can be defined once the density of defects is known, which allows to establish a correspondence between the idealized structure and the physical one. The idealized crystalographic directions need not coincide everywhere with the directions that minimize physical distances, which implies that the physical metric $g_{\alpha\beta}$ is not conserved along the idealized paths, i.e., $\nabla_\mu^{(\Gamma)} g_{\alpha\beta}\neq 0$, where $\Gamma$ is the connection associated to the auxiliary metric. The quantity $Q_{\mu\alpha\beta}\equiv \nabla_\mu^{(\Gamma)} g_{\alpha\beta}$, known as non-metricity tensor, then plays a relevant role in the physical description of the continuized system.
Another interesting geometric structure arises when there exist dislocations (one-dimensional defects). It is well-known that dislocations are the discrete version of torsion \cite{Kondo, Bilby}. Crystals with a certain density of dislocations, therefore, lead to effective geometries with a metric and a non-symmetric connection, which is related to the Einstein-Cartan theory of gravity \cite{Kleinert}. Given that point defects (vacancies and intersticials) can interact with dislocations (creating and/or destroying them), a complete theory should have into account the metric, the non-metricity tensor, and the torsion. If the space-time had a microstructure with defects, such as that suggested by the notion of space-time foam, the continuum that we perceive could require geometric structures beyond those typically considered in Einstein's theory of gravity \cite{Lobo:2014nwa,Olmo:2015bha, Olmo:2015wwa}. \\
It is for the above simple reasons that we are going to explore several examples of theories of gravity assuming that metric and connection are equally fundamental and {\it a priori} independent fields. Imposing a {\it principle of democracy}, we will derive the equations governing the metric and the connection from an action, without imposing any {\it a priori} constraint between them. The field equations should determine how metric and affine degrees of freedom interact between them and with the matter fields.
\section{General Relativity \`{a} la Palatini}\label{sec:GR}
To begin with, it is useful to consider the metric-affine or Palatini version of GR \cite{Origin}. The action functional for the Einstein-Palatini theory can be written as
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\int d^4x \sqrt{-g} g^{\mu\nu}R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)+S_m(g_{\mu\nu},\psi) \ ,
\end{equation}
where $R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)={R^\alpha}_{\mu\alpha\nu}$ is defined in terms of a connection which is {\it a priori} independent of the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$, $S_m$ represents the matter action, and $\psi$ denotes collectively the matter fields\footnote{For simplicity, in the matter action we have only assumed a dependence on the metric. This prescription is compatible with the experimental evidence on the Einstein equivalence principle \cite{Will:2014kxa}. However, dependence on the connection should also be allowed to explore its phenomenology in regimes not yet accessed experimentally. The coupling of fermions to gravity, whose spin may source the torsion tensor (antisymmetric part of the connection), is a particular case of interest which has been considered explicitly in supergravity theories and in the Einstein-Cartan theory \cite{Ortin}, for example.}.
Variation of the action with respect to the (inverse) metric and the connection leads to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:varGR0}
\delta S=\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\int d^4x \sqrt{-g}\left[\left(R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)-\frac{1}{2} g_{\mu\nu}g^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}(\Gamma)-\kappa^2T_{\mu\nu}\right)\delta g^{\mu\nu}+g^{\mu\nu}\delta R_{\mu\nu}\right] \ ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\delta R_{\mu\nu}= \nabla_\lambda\left(\delta \Gamma^\lambda_{\nu\mu}\right)-\nabla_\nu\left(\delta \Gamma^\lambda_{\lambda\mu}\right)+2S^\rho_{\alpha\nu}\delta \Gamma^\alpha_{\rho\mu} \ ,
\end{equation}
and $S^\rho_{\alpha\nu}\equiv \frac{1}{2}\left(\Gamma^\rho_{\alpha\nu}-\Gamma^\rho_{\nu\alpha}\right)$ is the torsion tensor. For simplicity, in the following derivations we will skip all torsional terms\footnote{We do this to focus our attention on the symmetric part of the connection but we do admit the possibility of having an antisymmetric part because fermions do exist in Nature. Note in this sense that, in general, assuming a symmetric connection before performing the variations or setting it to zero after the field equations have been obtained are inequivalent procedures. A detailed discussion with concrete examples can be found in \cite{Olmo:2013lta}.}. After elementary manipulations, and knowing that $\nabla_\mu(\sqrt{-g}J^\mu)=\partial_\mu (\sqrt{-g}J^\mu)+2S^\lambda_{\lambda\mu}(\sqrt{-g}J^\mu)$, Eq.(\ref{eq:varGR0}) turns into
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:varGR1}
\delta S&=&\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\int d^4x \sqrt{-g}\left[\left(R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)-\frac{1}{2} g_{\mu\nu}g^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}(\Gamma)-\kappa^2T_{\mu\nu}\right)\delta g^{\mu\nu}\right.\nonumber \\
&+& \left.\left(-\nabla_\lambda\left(\sqrt{-g}g^{\mu\nu}\right)+\delta^\mu_\lambda\nabla_\rho\left(\sqrt{-g}g^{\rho\nu}\right)\right)\delta \Gamma^\lambda_{\mu\nu}\right] \ .
\end{eqnarray}
The field equations are obtained by setting to zero the coefficients multiplying the independent variations $\delta g^{\mu\nu}$ and $\delta\Gamma^\lambda_{\mu\nu}$, which yields
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)-\frac{1}{2} g_{\mu\nu}g^{\alpha\beta}R_{\alpha\beta}(\Gamma)&=& \kappa^2T_{\mu\nu}\label{eq:metvarGR}\\
-\nabla_\lambda\left(\sqrt{-g}g^{\mu\nu}\right)+\delta^\mu_\lambda\nabla_\rho\left(\sqrt{-g}g^{\rho\nu}\right)&=&0 \ . \label{eq:convarGR}
\end{eqnarray}
Contracting the indices $\mu$ and $\lambda$ in (\ref{eq:convarGR}) one finds that
$\nabla_\rho\left(\sqrt{-g}g^{\rho\nu}\right)=0$, which turns that equation into
\begin{equation}\label{eq:convarGR1a}
\nabla_\lambda\left(\sqrt{-g}g^{\mu\nu}\right)=0 \ .
\end{equation}
Writting this equation explicitly, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:convarGR1b}
g^{\mu\nu}\partial_\lambda \sqrt{-g}+\sqrt{-g}\partial_\lambda g^{\mu\nu}+\sqrt{-g}\left[-\Gamma^\alpha_{\alpha\lambda}g^{\mu\nu}+\Gamma^\mu_{\lambda\alpha}g^{\alpha\nu}+\Gamma^\nu_{\lambda\alpha}g^{\alpha\mu}\right]=0 \ ,
\end{equation}
and contracting with $g_{\mu\nu}$ we find that $\Gamma^\alpha_{\alpha\mu}=\partial_\mu \ln \sqrt{-g}$, where the relation $g_{\mu\nu}\partial_\lambda g^{\mu\nu}=-2\partial_\lambda \ln \sqrt{-g}$ has been used. Inserting this result in (\ref{eq:convarGR1b}), one finds that (\ref{eq:convarGR1a}) is equivalent to $\nabla_\lambda g^{\mu\nu}=0$. Given that $g_{\mu\rho}g^{\rho\nu}=\delta_\mu^\nu$, one readily verifies that $\nabla_\lambda g^{\mu\nu}=0$ also implies $\nabla_\lambda g_{\mu\nu}=0$. This last relation can be used to obtain the form of $\Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$ as a function of the metric and its first derivatives by just using algebraic manipulations \cite{Olmo:2012yv}. The result is simply that $\Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$ boils down to the Levi-Civita connection defined in (\ref{eq:LC}). As a consequence, the Ricci tensor $R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)$ turns into the Ricci tensor of the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ and (\ref{eq:metvarGR}) coincides with the Einstein equations (\ref{eq:GR}).
In summary, the Einstein-Palatini action exactly recovers Einstein's equations (in the torsionless case) and implies that the geometry is Riemannian without the need of imposing the {\it compatibility condition} $\nabla_\lambda g_{\mu\nu}=0$ as an input.
It is important to remark at this point that the constraint $\nabla_\lambda g_{\mu\nu}=0$ between metric and connection is a property that belongs naturally to the Einstein-Palatini theory but which is not {\it a priori} guaranteed in other theories. Nonetheless, in most of the literature on extended theories of gravity it has been implicitly assumed as true, forcing the geometry to be Riemannian from the onset (see, however, \cite{Olmo:2011uz} for a review on Palatini gravity). We will see in the following that relaxing this constraint and allowing the theory to determine the form of the connection from a variational principle, the compatibility between metric and connection is generically lost. The implications of this will be nontrivial, providing new phenomenology that will be relevant in the study of black hole interiors.
\section{Beyond GR} \label{sec:EOM}
Considering extensions of GR to address questions concerning high and very high energies one naturally finds the possibility of adding quadratic and/or higher order curvature corrections in the gravitational Lagrangian. Such corrections arise when one considers quantum fields propagating in curved space-times \cite{QFTCS1,QFTCS2}, in the low-energy limits of string theories \cite{Ortin}, and in effective field theory or phenomenological approaches \cite{Cembranos:2008gj,Schimming:2004yx}. Theories such as $R+\lambda R^2+\gamma R_{\mu\nu} R^{\mu\nu} + \beta {R^\alpha}_{\beta\mu\nu}{R_\alpha}^{\beta\mu\nu}$, for instance, have been typically considered in the literature on the early universe and in black hole scenarios \cite{Q1,Q2,Q3,Q4,Q5,Q6,Starobinsky,Anderson,Economou:1993va,LuPope,Gullu:2011sj,Liu:2011kf}. The Riemann-squared dependence is typically removed because it can be combined with the other quadratic terms to give the so-called Gauss-Bonnet term, which does not contribute to the field equations and simply redefines the coefficients $\lambda$ and $\gamma$.
The standard argument is that high-order curvature corrections could capture some relevant new physics beyond the range of applicability of GR but below the full quantum gravity regime. Given the higher-order character of the resulting field equations, analytical solutions are hard to find in general. Numerical solutions do exist and regular cases (in the sense of bounded curvature scalars \cite{Ansoldi:2008jw}) have been found for static black hole configurations \cite{Berej:2006cc} coupled to nonlinear theories of electrodynamics using perturbative methods. \\
The extensive literature existing on the metric (or Riemannian) formulation of quadratic gravity contrasts with the little attention received by its metric-affine counterpart. Interestingly, through recent work carried out in the last years, it has been established that in the Palatini version of those theories one always finds analytical solutions \cite{or12a,or12b,or12c}. In the following we will study the field equations of models similar to the quadratic theory mentioned above but formulated in the Palatini approach. We will then focus on spherically symmetric configurations in which new black hole solutions can be found.
\subsection{$f(R)$ theories}\label{sec:f(R)}
The derivation of the field equations for theories of the $f(\mathcal{R})$ type, where $f$ represents a certain function of the Ricci scalar\footnote{The typography $\mathcal{R}$ is used here to emphasize that this scalar is built by combining the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ with the Ricci tensor of a connection $\Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$ whose relation with $g_{\mu\nu}$ is {\it a priori} unknown. Whenever $\Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$ be defined in terms of a metric $k_{\mu\nu}$, then we will use the notation $R(k)=k^{\mu\nu}R_{\mu\nu}(k)$.} $\mathcal{R}=g^{\mu\nu}R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)$, is straightforward and follows essentially the same steps as in the case of GR presented in Sec. \ref{sec:GR}. Variation of the action leads to the equations (see, for instance, \cite{Olmo:2012yv,Olmo:2011uz} for details)
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\mathcal{R}} R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)-\frac{1}{2} g_{\mu\nu}f(\mathcal{R})&=& \kappa^2T_{\mu\nu}\label{eq:metvarfR}\\
-\nabla_\lambda\left(\sqrt{-g}f_{\mathcal{R}} g^{\mu\nu}\right)+\delta^\mu_\lambda\nabla_\rho\left(\sqrt{-g}f_{\mathcal{R}}g^{\rho\nu}\right)&=&0 \ , \label{eq:convarfR}
\end{eqnarray}
where we denote $f_{\mathcal{R}}\equiv df/d{\mathcal{R}}$. Manipulating the connection equation (\ref{eq:convarfR}), one finds that it can be reduced to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:convarfR1}
\nabla_\lambda\left(\sqrt{-g}f_{\mathcal{R}} g^{\mu\nu}\right)=0 \ .
\end{equation}
Before proceeding with further manipulations, it is important to interpret this equation in combination with (\ref{eq:metvarfR}). At first sight, one may think that (\ref{eq:convarfR1}) contains up to second order derivatives of the connection because $f_{\mathcal{R}}$ is being acted upon by a derivative operator and it already contains first-order derivatives of $\Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$ via its dependence on $\mathcal{R}$. However, taking the trace of (\ref{eq:metvarfR}) with $g^{\mu\nu}$, one finds the important relation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:tracefR}
\mathcal{R} f_{\mathcal{R}}-2f=\kappa^2 T \ ,
\end{equation}
which establishes an algebraic relation between $\mathcal{R}$ and $T$, generalizing in this way the case $\mathcal{R}=-\kappa^2 T$ to nonlinear Lagrangians. This allows us to reinterpret (\ref{eq:convarfR1}) as an equation in which the independent connection $\Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$ satisfies an algebraic linear equation which involves the matter fields through the function $f_{\mathcal{R}}$ and the metric.
A solution to this equation can be obtained \cite{Olmo:2009xy} by considering the existence of a rank-two tensor $h_{\mu\nu}$ such that $ \sqrt{-g}f_{\mathcal{R}} g^{\mu\nu}$ can be written as $\sqrt{-h}h^{\mu\nu}$. With this identification, Eq. (\ref{eq:convarfR1}) turns into $\nabla_\mu (\sqrt{-h}h^{\alpha\beta})=0$, with $h_{\mu\nu}=f_{\mathcal{R}} g_{\mu\nu}$, and the solution can be obtained in much the same way as in the GR case (see the manipulations following Eq.(\ref{eq:convarGR1a})). As a result, we find that $\Gamma^\alpha_{\mu\nu}$ can be written as the Levi-Civita connection of the {\it auxiliary metric} $h_{\mu\nu}$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LCfR}
\Gamma^\lambda_{\mu\nu}=\frac{h^{\lambda\rho}}{2}\left[\partial_\mu h_{\rho\nu}+\partial_\nu h_{\rho\mu}-\partial_\rho h_{\mu\nu}\right] \ .
\end{equation}
This result is valid for any Palatini theory of the $f(\mathcal{R})$ type, including GR. \\
We now turn our attention to the metric field equations (\ref{eq:metvarfR}), which contains elements referred to the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ and others, like $R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)$, that depend on $h_{\mu\nu}$. Given that $g_{\mu\nu}=(1/f_{\mathcal{R}})h_{\mu\nu}$ are conformally related, one can express $R_{\mu\nu}(\Gamma)$ in terms of $R_{\mu\nu}(g)$ and derivatives of $f_{\mathcal{R}}$ using well-known formulas \cite{Olmo:2005hc,Olmo:2005zr} (see, for instance, Appendix D in Wald's book \cite{Wald:1984rg}). Another possibility is to express everything in terms of $h_{\mu\nu}$. This is the approach we will follow because it leads to a very compact expression of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:FE-fR}
{R^\mu}_\nu(h)=\frac{\kappa^2}{f_{\mathcal{R}}^2}\left[\frac{f}{2\kappa^2}{\delta^\mu}_\nu+{T^\mu}_\nu\right] \ ,
\end{equation}
where ${R^\mu}_\nu(h)=h^{\mu\lambda}R_{\lambda\nu}(h)$ and ${T^\mu}_\nu=g^{\mu\lambda}T_{\lambda\nu}$. Written in this form, it is apparent that the auxiliary metric $h_{\mu\nu}$ satisfies a set of second-order equations with a structure very similar to that found in GR. In fact, on the left-hand side we find a second-order differential operator acting on $h_{\mu\nu}$, whereas on the right-hand side we have the matter, represented by ${T_\mu}^\nu$ and by $f$ and $f_{\mathcal{R}}$, which are both functions of the trace $T$ of ${T_\mu}^\nu$.
With the equations written in this form, one may try to solve for $h_{\mu\nu}$ and then obtain $g_{\mu\nu}$ by just using the conformal relation $g_{\mu\nu}=(1/f_{\mathcal{R}})h_{\mu\nu}$. This strategy might not always be straightforward, but will be very useful in the cases we will be dealing with. \\
To conclude with the discussion of $f(R)$ theories, it is important to consider the vacuum solutions. Such solutions correspond to the case in which ${T_\mu}^\nu=0$, which implies $T=0$. As a result, the algebraic equation (\ref{eq:tracefR}) implies $\mathcal{R}=\mathcal{R}_{vac}$, where $\mathcal{R}_{vac}$ is some constant which may depend on the parameters that characterize the specific $f(\mathcal{R})$ Lagrangian chosen (obviously, some models may yield more than one solution and the good ones should be selected on physically reasonable grounds). A constant $\mathcal{R}$ implies that any function of $\mathcal{R}$ is also a constant. A direct consequence of this is that the conformal factor relating $g_{\mu\nu}$ and $h_{\mu\nu}$ can be absorbed into an irrelevant redefinition of units, making the two metrics coincide. This means that in vacuum the connection (\ref{eq:LCfR}) boils down to the Levi-Civita connection of $g_{\mu\nu}$. Also, the metric field equations (\ref{eq:FE-fR}) recover the equations of GR in vacuum, with an effective cosmological constant. All this implies that the vacuum solutions of the theory are exactly the same as those appearing in vacuum GR (although different boundary conditions may apply). Therefore, in order to explore new physics beyond GR, one must consider explicitly the presence of matter sources. In this sense, we note that though the Schwarzschild solution is a mathematically acceptable solution of all Palatini $f(R)$ theories in vacuum, one should carefully consider the boundary conditions necessary to match that solution with the solution in the region containing the sources. The intuitive view that a delta-like distribution at the center is valid is not guaranteed here, as some models exhibit upper bounds for the density and pressure \cite{Olmo:2009xy,MartinezAsencio:2012xn}. For this reason, vacuum solutions must be handled with care, and non-vacuum solutions should be explored to gain insight on the properties of these theories.
\subsection{Born-Infeld gravity}
The Born-Infeld gravity model is defined by means of the following action
\begin{equation}\label{eq:BI0}
S=\frac{1}{\kappa^2\epsilon}\int d^4x \left[\sqrt{-|g_{\mu\nu}+\epsilon R_{\mu\nu}|}-\lambda \sqrt{-|g_{\mu\nu}|}\right]+S_m[g_{\mu\nu},\psi] \ ,
\end{equation}
where vertical bars inside the square-root denote the determinant of that quantity, and $\epsilon$ is a small parameter with dimensions of length squared. This model was first consider in metric formalism \cite{Deser:1998rj}, where the model suffers from a ghost instability due to its nonlinear dependence on the Ricci tensor. In \cite{Vollick:2003qp}, the theory was studied within the Palatini formalism, finding that in that approach the ghost is avoided. The phenomenological consequences of this theory have since then been extensively explored in cosmology \cite{Du:2014jka, Kim:2013noa,Kruglov:2013qaa, Yang:2013hsa,Avelino:2012ue, DeFelice:2012hq, EscamillaRivera:2012vz, Cho:2012vg, Scargill:2012kg, EscamillaRivera:2013hv,Banados}, astrophysics \cite{Harko:2013xma,Avelino:2012ge}, stellar structure \cite{Sham:2013cya,Kim:2013nna,Harko:2013wka,Sham:2013sya, Avelino:2012qe, Sham:2012qi,Pani:2012qd, Pani:2011mg}, the problem of cosmic singularities \cite{Bouhmadi-Lopez:2013lha, Ferraro:2010at}, black holes \cite{Olmo:2015dba, Olmo:2013gqa}, and wormhole physics \cite{Shaikh:2015oha,Bambi:2015sla, Lobo:2014fma,Harko:2013aya}, among many others. Extensions of the original formulation have also been considered \cite{Odintsov:2014yaa, Makarenko:2014lxa, Makarenko:2014nca,BI-extensions1,BI-extensions2,BI-extensions3,BI-extensions4,BI-extensions5,BI-extensions6,BI-extensions7,BI-extensions8,BI-extensions9,BI-extensions10, Jimenez:2014fla,Jimenez:2015caa,Jimenez:2015jqa}.
In the limit $\epsilon\to 0$, this action recovers the quadratic\footnote{As mentioned before, in the quadratic theory the dependence on the Riemann squared term can be eliminated by a simple redefinition of the coefficients in front of $R^2$ and $R_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu}$. It is this Ricci-dependent theory which is recovered from the Born-Infeld action. We also note that the Ricci tensor in the action is symmetric. Though this is not obvious {\it a priori}, it can be shown that it is indeed true when torsion is set to zero at the level of the field equations \cite{Olmo:2013lta}. } gravity theory mentioned at the beginning of this section with specific coefficients in front of $R^2$ and $R_{\mu\nu} R^{\mu\nu}$
\cite{Olmo:2013gqa}. The parameter $\lambda$ is related to the cosmological constant, which vanishes if $\lambda=1$. From now on we will set $\lambda=1$ for simplicity. Higher-order contractions of the Ricci tensor arise as higher-order corrections in $\epsilon$ are considered. \\
The derivation of the field equations is straightforward if one introduces the definition
\begin{equation}\label{eq:BI-h}
h_{\mu\nu}=g_{\mu\nu}+\epsilon R_{\mu\nu} \ ,
\end{equation}
which allows to express the action (\ref{eq:BI0}) in the more compact form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:BI1}
S=\frac{1}{\kappa^2\epsilon}\int d^4x \left[\sqrt{-h}- \sqrt{-g}\right]+S_m[g_{\mu\nu},\psi] \ .
\end{equation}
Variation of the action with respect to metric and connection\cite{Olmo:2013gqa,Odintsov:2014yaa} leads to
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:metvarBI0}
\sqrt{-h}h^{\mu\nu}-\sqrt{-g}g^{\mu\nu}&=&-\epsilon \sqrt{-g}\kappa^2T^{\mu\nu} \\
\nabla_\mu(\sqrt{-h}h^{\alpha\beta})&=&0 \label{eq:convarBI}
\end{eqnarray}
It is clear from (\ref{eq:convarBI}) that one can formally solve for the connection as the Levi-Civita connection of the {\it auxiliary metric} $h_{\mu\nu}$. Accepting that possibility, then we find that on the right-hand side of our original definition (\ref{eq:BI-h}) the Ricci tensor contains up to second-order derivatives of $h_{\mu\nu}$. This simply indicates that to obtain $h_{\mu\nu}$ we need to solve some differential equations which involve $g_{\mu\nu}$ and $R_{\mu\nu}(h)$ . In order to be able to do it, we must first find the relation that exists between $h_{\mu\nu}$ and the pair $(g_{\mu\nu},T_{\mu\nu})$. This relation is determined by Eq. (\ref{eq:metvarBI0}). In fact, assuming that $h_{\mu\nu}$ and $g_{\mu\nu}$ are related by some {\it deformation} matrix in the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Omega}
h_{\mu\nu}=g_{\mu\alpha}{\Omega^\alpha}_\nu \ , \ h^{\mu\nu}={(\Omega^{-1})^\mu}_\alpha g^{\alpha\nu} \ ,
\end{equation}
then we can write (\ref{eq:metvarBI0}) as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:BI-Omega}
\sqrt{|\Omega|}{(\Omega^{-1})^\mu}_\nu ={\delta^\mu}_\nu-\epsilon \kappa^2 {T^\mu}_\nu \ .
\end{equation}
This equation tells us that the deformation that relates $h_{\mu\nu}$ with $g_{\mu\nu}$ is determined by the local distribution of energy-momentum. This is similar to what we already observed in the case of $f(R)$ theories, where the conformal factor relating the metrics was a function of the trace of ${T_\mu}^\nu$ [see Eq.(\ref{eq:tracefR})]. Note also that for this model the explicit form of ${\Omega^\alpha}_\nu$ is
\begin{equation}
{\Omega^\alpha}_\nu={\delta^\alpha}_\nu+\epsilon g^{\alpha\beta}R_{\beta \nu}(h) \ .
\end{equation}
Eq.(\ref{eq:BI-Omega}) is thus telling us that the object $g^{\alpha\beta}R_{\beta \nu}(h)$, which is a hybrid tensor that mixes $g^{\alpha\beta}$ with $h_{\mu\nu}$, is an algebraic function of the stress-energy tensor ${T^\mu}_\nu$. This is analogous to the relation between the scalar quantities $\mathcal{R}$ and $T$ in the $f(\mathcal{R})$ case. \\
Having established the explicit relation between $h_{\mu\nu}$ and $g_{\mu\nu}$, we can now go back to (\ref{eq:BI-h}) and write an equation for $h_{\mu\nu}$ and the matter. With a bit of algebra, one finds that the corresponding equations can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:FE-BI}
{R^\mu}_\nu(h)=\frac{\kappa^2}{\sqrt{|\Omega|}}\left[\frac{\sqrt{|\Omega|}-\lambda}{\kappa^2\epsilon}{\delta^\mu}_\nu+{T^\mu}_\nu\right] \ .
\end{equation}
The structure of these equations is very similar to that found in the case of $f(\mathcal{R})$ theories, with the Ricci tensor of the metric $h_{\mu\nu}$ on the left-hand side and functions of the matter fields on the right. We will see that in some cases of interest it will be possible to solve for $h_{\mu\nu}$ and then use (\ref{eq:Omega}) to obtain $g_{\mu\nu}$.
We also note here that the vacuum solutions of this model recover the field equations of vacuum GR. This is clearly seen from Eq.(\ref{eq:BI-h}), which in vacuum implies that the matrix ${\Omega_\mu}^\alpha$ is a constant times the identity (when $\lambda=1$, this constant is just unity). As a result the two metrics are physically equivalent and one recovers the equations of vacuum GR. The exploration of new physics should thus be carried out considering explicitly the presence of matter sources.
\subsection{Generic field equations}
The field equations obtained in the previous subsections for two different types of gravity models suggests that there exists a basic structure for the field equations in Palatini theories. This similarity is even more transparent when one realizes that the gravity Lagrangian in the case of $f(\mathcal{R})$ theories is $\mathcal{L}_G=f(\mathcal{R})/2\kappa^2$ and in the Born-Infeld case, $\mathcal{L}_{G}=\frac{\sqrt{|\Omega|}-\lambda}{\kappa^2\epsilon}$. Moreover, in the $f(\mathcal{R})$ theories, the conformal relation between the metrics can be seen as a particular case in which ${\Omega_\mu}^\nu=f_{\mathcal{R}} {\delta_\mu}^\nu$. This allows us to express the field equations in the generic form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:FE-General}
{R^\mu}_\nu(h)=\frac{\kappa^2}{\sqrt{|\Omega|}}\left[\mathcal{L}_G{\delta^\mu}_\nu+{T^\mu}_\nu\right] \ ,
\end{equation}
with ${\Omega_\mu}^\nu$ representing the relations (\ref{eq:Omega}), and the explicit dependence of ${\Omega^\mu}_\nu$ with the matter fields determined by the field equations of the specific theory. With formal manipulations, it is possible to show that this representation of the field equations in terms of the auxiliary metric $h_{\mu\nu}$ is indeed correct for large families of theories of gravity in which $\mathcal{L}_G$ is just a functional of the inverse metric $g^{\mu\nu}$ and the Ricci tensor of an independent connection \cite{Jimenez:2015caa,Bazeia:2015zpa} (when torsion is set to zero at the end of the variation). In vacuum configurations, the field equations recover GR plus an effective cosmological constant. \\
For convenience, we will use the generic equations (\ref{eq:FE-General}) to obtain formal expressions for the solutions of static, spherically symmetric configurations in which the stress-energy tensor possesses certain algebraic properties. These formal expressions will then be particularized to specific gravity plus matter models. \\
\section{Static, spherically symmetric solutions}\label{sec:generic}
In this section we will be concerned with stress-energy tensors with a specific algebraic structure, namely
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Tmn-generic}
{T^\mu}_\nu=\left(\begin{array}{cc} T_+ \hat I_{2\times2} & \hat O \\ \hat O & T_- \hat I_{2\times2} \end{array}\right) \ ,
\end{equation}
where $T_\pm$ are some functions of the space-time coordinates, $\hat I_{2\times2}$ is the $2\times 2$ identity matrix, and $\hat O$ is the $2\times 2$ zero matrix. Examples of stress-energy tensors with this structure arise in the case of electric fields and also for certain anisotropic fluids. The extension to higher-dimensions is straightforward using similar notation (see for instance \cite{Bazeia:2015zpa,Bazeia:2015uia}).
Given that the deformation matrix ${\Omega^\mu}_\nu$ will be determined by the stress-energy tensor, we may assume that it also has a similar algebraic structure, i.e., we can take
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Om-generic}
{\Omega^\mu}_\nu=\left(\begin{array}{cc} \Omega_+ \hat I_{2\times2} & \hat O \\ \hat O & \Omega_- \hat I_{2\times2} \end{array}\right) \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_\pm$ are given functions that should be provided by the field equations of the specific model considered. This point has been verified in several models explicitly and, therefore, appears as a reasonable assumption to proceed in a formal manner. \\
With the above assumptions, we find that the field equations (\ref{eq:FE-General}) become
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Rmn-generic}
{R^\mu}_\nu(h)=\frac{\kappa^2}{\sqrt{|\Omega|}}\left(\begin{array}{cc} (\mathcal{L}_G+T_+) \hat I_{2\times2} & \hat O \\ \hat O & (\mathcal{L}_G+T_-) \hat I_{2\times2} \end{array}\right) \ .
\end{equation}
Now we need to focus on the form of the left-hand side to proceed further. For static, spherically symmetric configurations, we can take the line element of the space-time metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gmn-generic}
ds^2=g_{ab}(x^0,x^1)dx^a dx^b +r^2(x^0,x^1)(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\varphi^2) \ ,
\end{equation}
where $(x^0, x^1)$ represent the coordinates of the $2\times 2$ sector orthogonal to the 2-spheres. Analogously, one can define a line element for the auxiliary metric $h_{\mu\nu}$ of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hmn-generic}
d\tilde{s}^2=h_{ab}(x^0,x^1)dx^a dx^b +\tilde{r}^2(x^0,x^1)(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\varphi^2) \ .
\end{equation}
Using the generic relations (\ref{eq:Omega}) between $h_{\mu\nu}$ and $g_{\mu\nu}$ together with (\ref{eq:Om-generic}), one finds that
\begin{eqnarray}
h_{ab}&=&\Omega_+ g_{ab} \\
\tilde{r}^2&=&\Omega_- r^2 \ . \label{eq:x2r2}
\end{eqnarray}
For static configurations, we further specify the form of $h_{\mu\nu}$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hmn-concrete}
d\tilde{s}^2=-A(x) e^{2\Phi(x)}dt^2+\frac{1}{A(x)}dx^2+\tilde{r}^2(x)(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\varphi^2) \ .
\end{equation}
Computing the Ricci tensor associated to this line element, one finds the following relations:
\begin{eqnarray}
{R_t}^t(h)&=& {R_x}^x(h)+\frac{4}{\tilde{r}}\left(\tilde{r}_{xx}-\Phi_x \tilde{r}_x\right) \\
{R_\theta}^\theta(h)&=& \frac{1}{\tilde{r}^2}\left[1-A \tilde{r}_x^2-\tilde{r} A \left(\tilde{r}_{xx}+\tilde{r}_x\left\{\frac{A_x}{A}+\Phi_x\right\}\right)\right] \ .
\end{eqnarray}
Given that the right-hand side of (\ref{eq:Rmn-generic}) implies that ${R_t}^t= {R_x}^x$, it follows that $\left(\tilde{r}_{xx}-\Phi_x \tilde{r}_x\right)=0$. This equation allows us to take $\Phi(x)\to 0$ and $\tilde{r}\to x$, without loss of generality, and write the line element (\ref{eq:hmn-concrete}) in the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hmn-concrete1}
d\tilde{s}^2=-A(x)dt^2+\frac{1}{A(x)}dx^2+x^2(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\varphi^2) \ .
\end{equation}
As a result, ${R_\theta}^\theta$ gets simplified as
\begin{equation}
{R_\theta}^\theta(h)= \frac{1}{x^2}(1-A -x A_x) \ .
\end{equation}
It is now useful to insert the Ansatz
\begin{equation}
A(x)=1-\frac{2M(x)}{x} \ ,
\end{equation}
which in combination with the right-hand side of (\ref{eq:Rmn-generic}) leads to the general expression
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Mx-general}
\frac{2M_x}{x^2}=\frac{\kappa^2}{\sqrt{|\Omega|}} (\mathcal{L}_G+T_-) \ .
\end{equation}
Given that we are dealing with a static, spherically symmetric space-time, the functions appearing in the right-hand side of this equation are just functions of $x$ (or of $r(x)$). Therefore, by integrating this first-order equation, the geometry will be completely determined. In practice, however, one still needs to find the explicit relation between the area functions $r^2(x)$ and $x^2$, which is specified by Eq.(\ref{eq:x2r2}). Recall, in this sense, that $\tilde{r}(x)\equiv x$ implies that $x^2=\Omega_- r^2$ and that, in general, $\Omega_-$ will be a function of $r$. This point will become clear when we consider explicit examples. \\
In the examples that we will consider below, the functions $\Omega_\pm$ depend on $x$ via $r(x)$. For this reason, it is convenient to express Eq. (\ref{eq:Mx-general}) in terms of the derivative with respect to $r$. This is immediate by just noting that $x^2=\Omega_- r^2$ implies
\begin{equation}
\frac{dr}{dx}=\frac{1}{\Omega_- ^{1/2}\left[1+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\Omega_{-,r}}{\Omega_-}\right]} \ .
\end{equation}
The resulting expression for $M_r$ is thus
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Mr-general}
M_r=\frac{\kappa^2\Omega_-^{1/2}}{2\Omega_+} (\mathcal{L}_G+T_-) r^2\left[1+\frac{r}{2}\frac{\Omega_{-,r}}{\Omega_-}\right] \ .
\end{equation}
By integrating this equation, the space-time line element (defined by the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$) becomes
\begin{equation}
ds^2=-\frac{A(x)}{\Omega_+}dt^2+\frac{1}{A(x)\Omega_+}dx^2+r^2(x)(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\varphi^2) \ .
\end{equation}
In the next two sections we consider explicit examples that give concrete form to the above formulas.
\section{Solutions in Born-Infeld gravity. }\label{sec:BI}
Let us consider the coupling of the Born-Infeld gravity model to a spherically symmetric, static electric field defined by the action $S_M=-\frac{1}{16\pi}\int d^4x \sqrt{-g}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}$, being $F_{\mu\nu}$ the electromagnetic field strength tensor. For this matter source, the stress energy tensor can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Tmn-Maxwell}
{T_\mu}^\nu=\frac{q^2}{8\pi r^4}\left(\begin{array}{cc} -\hat I_{2\times2} & \hat O \\ \hat O & +\hat I_{2\times2} \end{array}\right) \ ,
\end{equation}
where $q$ represents the electric charge. Inserting this expression in (\ref{eq:BI-h}), one finds that the components of ${\Omega^\mu}_\nu$ are just
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Ompm0}
\Omega_\pm= 1\mp \frac{\epsilon \kappa^2 q^2}{8\pi r^4} \ .
\end{equation}
Now we make a specific choice for the parameter $\epsilon$. Given that it has dimensions of squared length, we take $\epsilon=-2l_\epsilon ^2$, where $l_\epsilon$ represents some characteristic length scale. The sign of $\epsilon$ and the factor 2 have been chosen in such a way that the resulting solutions are identical to those found in the quadratic theory\footnote{From an algebraic point of view, it is much easier to deal with the Born-Infeld model \cite{Olmo:2013gqa} than with the above quadratic theory \cite{or12a}, though from an effective field theory approach it is easier to motivate the latter. For this reason we analyzed the field equations of the Born-Infeld model but restrict the discussion of solutions to those with more interest in the quadratic theory. We note that the sign in front of $l_\epsilon^2$ in (\ref{eq:f(R,Q)}) has been chosen in such a way that cosmological models with perfect fluids yield regular, bouncing solutions in both isotropic and anisotropic scenarios \cite{Barragan:2010qb}.}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:f(R,Q)}
S=\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\int d^4x \sqrt{-g}\left[R+l_\epsilon^2(a R^2+R_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu})\right]-\frac{1}{16\pi}\int d^4x \sqrt{-g}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu} \ .
\end{equation}
This is a curious property of the Born-Infeld and quadratic gravity theories that occurs in four space-time dimensions with stress-energy tensors of the form (\ref{eq:Tmn-generic}). With this choice, we can introduce a dimensionless variable $z=r/r_c$ such that $r_c^4\equiv l_\epsilon^2 r_q^2$, with $r_q^2\equiv \kappa^2 q^2/4\pi$, which turns
(\ref{eq:Ompm0}) into
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Ompm1}
\Omega_\pm= 1\pm \frac{1}{z^4} \ .
\end{equation}
We can now use Eq.(\ref{eq:x2r2}), recalling that $\tilde{r}=x$, to find that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:r(x)BI}
r^2=\frac{x^2+\sqrt{x^4+4 r_c^4}}{2} \ .
\end{equation}
This relation puts forward that the area of the $2-$spheres has a minimum of magnitud $A_c=4\pi r_c^2$ at $x=0$. In other words, the sector $r<r_c$ is excluded from the range of values of the area function $A=4\pi r^2(x)$. \\
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{rx.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{ Representation of $r(x)$ (solid curve), defined in (\ref{eq:r(x)BI}), as a function of the radial coordinate $x$ in units of the scale $r_c$. The dotted lines represent the function $|x|$. }\label{fig:r(x)BI}
\end{figure}
The mass function determined by Eq.(\ref{eq:Mr-general}) has a constant contribution and a term that comes from integrating over the electric field. The constant piece is identified with the Schwarzschild mass and will be denoted as $M_0$. To simplify the analysis, it is convenient to parametrize the mass function as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:M}
M(r)=M_0(1+\delta_1 G(z)) \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\delta_1$ is a dimensionless constant and $G(z)$ encodes the contribution of the electric field. Inserting this form of $M(r)$ in (\ref{eq:Mr-general}), one finds
\begin{equation}\label{eq:GzBI}
G_z=\frac{1}{z^4}\frac{(1+z^4)}{\sqrt{z^4-1}} \ ,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:d1BI}
\delta_1=\frac{r_c^3}{2r_S l_\epsilon^2}=\frac{1}{2r_S }\sqrt{\frac{r_q^3}{ l_\epsilon}} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $r_S\equiv 2M_0$ denotes the Schwarzschild radius. The integration of $G_z$ is immediate and yields an infinite power series expansion of the form \cite{or12a}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:G(z)BI}
G(z)=-\frac{1}{\delta_c}+\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{z^4-1}\left[f_{3/4}(z)+f_{7/4}(z)\right] \ ,
\end{equation}
where $f_\lambda(z)={_2}F_1 [\frac{1}{2},\lambda,\frac{3}{2},1-z^4]$ is a hypergeometric function, and $\delta_c\approx 0.572069$ is a constant. Having obtained explicit solutions for $r^2(x)$ and $G(z)$, the space-time metric is completely specified.
\subsection{Properties and interpretation of the solutions}
One can verify from (\ref{eq:GzBI}) that for $z\gg 1$, $G(z)\approx -1/z$ yields the expected Reissner-Nordstr\"{o}m solution of GR, with $\Omega_\pm \approx 1$, $r^2(x)\approx x^2$, and
\begin{equation} \label{eq:RNsolution}
A(x)\approx 1-\frac{r_S}{ r }+\frac{r_q^2}{2r^2}+O\left(\frac{r_c^4}{r^4}\right) \ .
\end{equation}
From this expression one readily verifies that the typical configurations in terms of horizons found for Reissner-Nordstr\"{o}m black holes also arise here, at least when the location of the horizon is much bigger than the scale $r_c$ \cite{or12a}. This occurs, in particular, when the charge-to-mass ratio $\delta_1$ is greater than $\delta_c$. We will refer to these configurations as RN-like. When $\delta_1<\delta_c$, the solutions only have one horizon, like the Scharzschild black hole (Schwarzschild-like from now on). In some sense, the case $\delta_1<\delta_c$ describes the limit in which the charge is much smaller than the mass. When $\delta_1=\delta_c$, one finds a richer structure: depending on the number of charges, one can have one horizon, like in Schwarzschild, or have no horizons. More details on this will be given later. \\
It is apparent from (\ref{eq:GzBI}) and (\ref{eq:G(z)BI}) that the variable $z\equiv r/r_c$ can not become smaller than unity. This is consistent with (\ref{eq:r(x)BI}) and tells us that something relevant occurs at $r=r_c$ (or $z=1$ or $x=0$). Some information in this direction can already be extracted from the action that defines the theory. The fact that we are considering the combination of gravity with an electric field without sources means that our theory does not know about the existence of {\it sources} for the electric field. In GR, the Reissner-Nordstr\"{o}m solution is derived under similar assumptions, and one considers that the solution is only valid outside of the sources, which are supposed to be somehow concentrated at the origin. This picture, however, is not completely satisfactory, and a precise description of the sources is still an open question (see chapter 8 of \cite{Ortin} for details). In our case, the combination of a minimum area for the two-spheres of the spherical sector together with the existence of an electric flux without sources points towards the notions of {\it geon} \cite{Wheeler:1955zz} and {\it wormhole} \cite{Misner:1957mt} suggested by J.A. Wheeler and C.W. Misner in the decade of 1950.
It is well-known that an electric field flowing through a hole in the topology (wormhole) can generate a charge which, from all perspectives, acts exactly in the same way as point charges. Wormholes are characterized by having a minimum area, which defines their throat \cite{Visser:1995cc}. The Born-Infeld theory combined with a free Maxwell field considered here, therefore, is yielding self-gravitating wormhole solutions for which there is no need to consider additional sources \cite{Lobo:2013prg}.
One should now note that in the derivation of the field equations we used a radial variable $x$ which was different from $r(x)$. The reason for this is that $r$ can only be used as a coordinate in those intervals in which it is a monotonic function of $x$ \cite{Stephani:2003ika}, and $r(x)$ has a minimum at the wormhole throat ($x=0$). Consistency of our {\it model of gravity plus electric field without sources} together with this behavior in the radial function implies the existence of a wormhole, in such a way that the range of $x$ is the whole real line (from $-\infty$ to $+\infty$). The theory is thus describing a spherically symmetric electric field which flows from one universe into another through a wormhole located at $x=0$ \cite{Lobo:2013prg}. On one of the sides, the electric field lines point in the direction of increasing area thus defining a positive charge. On the other side, the electric field points into the direction of decreasing area, defining in this way a negative charge. This type of configuration is similar to that envisioned by Einstein and Rosen \cite{Einstein:1935tc} when they used the Schwarzschild geometry to build a geometric model of elementary particles. A clear advantage of our model is that the wormhole structure arises naturally from the field equations and, therefore, one needs not follow a cut-and-paste strategy gluing together two exterior Schwarzschild geometries through the horizon to build the bridge that represents the particle in the Einstein-Rosen model. Moreover, a simple electric field has been able to generate a wormhole. This contrasts with the typical situation in GR, where wormholes supported by electric fields (linear like Maxwell's or nonlinear) are not possible \cite{Arellano:2006np}, being necessary exotic energy sources that violate the energy conditions \cite{Lobo:2007zb,Visser:1995cc}. \\
Having established the wormhole nature of our solutions, one should re-think the meaning of the classification given above regarding event horizons. What we called Schwarzschild-like actually represents a wormhole with one horizon located somewhere on the $x>0$ side of the $x-$axis and another horizon symmetrical with this one but on the $x<0$ side.
The RN-like configurations may have up to two horizons on each side of the $x-$axis. In the case with $\delta_1=\delta_c$, depending on the amount of electric charge (which is a measure of the intensity of the electric flux), we can have Schwarzschild-like configurations (one horizon on each side of the axis), a case in which the two horizons converge at $x=0$, and a horizonless family of (traversable) wormholes. This classification follows from a numerical study of the solutions of the equation $g_{tt}=-A/\Omega_+=0$ (see \cite{or12a} for details). \\
An analytical discussion of the behavior near the wormhole throat is possible and useful. In fact, defining the number of charges as $N_q=q/e$, where $e$ is the proton charge, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gtt_expansion}
\lim_{r\to r_c} g_{tt} \approx \frac{l_P}{2l_\epsilon}\frac{N_q}{N_c}\left[-\frac{\left(\delta _1-\delta _c\right) }{2\delta _1 \delta _c }\sqrt{\frac{r_c}{ r-r_c} }+\left(1-\frac{l_\epsilon}{l_P}\frac{N_c}{N_q}\right)+ O\left(\sqrt{r-r_c}\right) \right]\ ,
\end{equation}
where, for convenience, we have introduced the Planck length $l_P=\sqrt{\hbar G/c^3}$ and $N_c\equiv \sqrt{2/\alpha_{em}}\approx 16.55$, with $\alpha_{em}$ representing the electromagnetic fine structure constant. This expression puts forward that the metric is finite at $r=r_c$ only for $\delta_1=\delta_c$, diverging otherwise. By direct computation one can verify that curvature scalars generically diverge at $r=r_c$ except for those solutions with $\delta_1=\delta_c$, where constant scalars are obtained. For this regular case, Eq. (\ref{eq:gtt_expansion}) also shows that the wormhole is hidden behind an event horizon if the sign of $\left(1-\frac{l_\epsilon}{l_P}\frac{N_c}{N_q}\right)$ is positive, because then $g_{tt}>0$ near the throat.
If we take $l_\epsilon=l_P$, i.e., if the characteristic length scale of the gravity sector coincides with the Planck scale, then the event horizon for the regular solutions exists if $N_q>N_c$. For smaller values of the charge, $N_q\leq 16.55$, the horizon disappears and we are left with a regular horizonless object which could be interpreted as a black hole remnant. The existence of this type of solutions is interesting for theoretical as well as for astrophysical reasons. Theoretically, the existence of regular remnants could have important implications for the quantum information loss in the process of black hole evaporation \cite{Fabbri:2005mw}. From an astrophysical perspective, the existence of remnants could justify the lack of observational evidence for black hole explosions. Moreover, solutions of this type could contribute to the so-called dark matter in the form of very massive neutral atoms \cite{Lobo:2013prg}. In fact, from the charge-to-mass constraint $\delta_1=\delta_c$, one finds that the mass of these solutions is completely determined by their electric charge according to the formula
\begin{equation}\label{eq:M0BI}
M_0= n_{BI} m_P \left(\frac{N_q}{N_c}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{l_P}{l_\epsilon}\right)^{1/2} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $n_{BI}=\pi^{3/2}/(3\Gamma[3/4]^2)\approx 1.23605$ is a number that also arises in the determination of the total electrostatic energy of a point charge in the Born-Infeld theory of electrodynamics\footnote{In fact, using a notation similar to ours, in the Born-Infeld electromagnetic theory , whose Lagrangian is $\mathcal{L}_{BI}=\beta^2\left(\sqrt{-|\eta_{\mu\nu}+\beta^{-1}F_{\mu\nu}|}-\sqrt{-|\eta_{\mu\nu}|}\right)$, one finds that the total electrostatic energy of a point particle is $
\mathcal{E}_{BI}= \sqrt{2}n_{BI} m_P c^2\left(\frac{N_q}{N_c}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{l_P}{l_\beta}\right)^{1/2}$,
where $l_\beta^2\equiv (4\pi/\kappa^2c \beta^2)$ is a length scale associated to the $\beta$ parameter of the theory.} (formulated in flat Minkowski space-time). With the mass formula (\ref{eq:M0BI}), one can verify that Hawking's original predictions regarding the mass and charge spectrum of primordial black holes \cite{Hawking:1971ei} formed in the early universe are in consonance with our results. He found that collapsed objects of order the Planck mass and above and with up to $\pm 30$ electron charges could have been formed by large density fluctuations. It is typically argued that the existence of a quantum instability due to the horizon would make the lightest primordial black holes decay and evaporate. With the above explicit results, it is apparent that new mechanisms could lead to the formation of stable remnants which could survive until our times. \\
As a curiosity, from (\ref{eq:M0BI}) one also finds that a solar mass black hole (with $\sim 10^{57}$ protons) of this type would require only $N_q\sim 3 \times 10^{26}$ charges (or $\sim 484$ moles) to make the metric and all curvature scalars regular at the origin. Moreover, the external horizon of such an object would almost coincide with the Schwarzschild radius predicted by GR, making these objects astrophysically identical to those found in GR. This amount of charge certainly allows us to get rid of a number of important problems at a very low price. However, one should recall that (\ref{eq:M0BI}) is only strictly valid for the $\delta_1=\delta_c$ configuration, which suggests that only fine tuned configurations would be satisfactory. This raises a natural question: given that for $\delta_1=\delta_c$ the geometry is completely regular and that infinitesimal deviations from this relation imply the development of curvature divergences and infinities in the metric, what happens to geodesics? In the $\delta_1=\delta_c$ case we expect geodesics to be complete, as there is no reason to expect any pathological behavior that limits their extendibility at or near the wormhole throat. What happens to them when $\delta_1\neq\delta_c$? Answering this question will provide us with useful information on the relation between curvature divergences and the existence of observers. In other words, this model offers us a good opportunity to better understand the correlation existing in GR between curvature divergences and geodesic incompleteness. We will resume this discussion later on, when we consider the geodesic equation in Sec. \ref{sec:geodesics}.
\section{Solutions in $f(\mathcal{R})=\mathcal{R}-\lambda \mathcal{R}^2$. } \label{sec:f(R)}
In Sec. \ref{sec:EOM} we discussed the field equations of the Palatini version of $f(R)$ theories. Now we would like to find nontrivial black hole solutions and study their properties to see how their geodesic structure compares with that provided by GR.
A natural procedure would be to consider the coupling of an electric field as we did in the previous section in the case of Born-Infeld gravity. However, given that the stress-energy tensor of Maxwell's electrodynamics is traceless and that the modified dynamics of Palatini $f(R)$ theories depends crucially on nonlinear functions of this trace, we find that electrovacuum solutions in these theories are identical to those found in GR with a cosmological constant. Thus, in order to explore new physics, we need to consider matter sources whose stress-energy tensor has a non-zero trace. \\
To proceed, we consider a generic anisotropic fluid with stress-energy tensor of the form \cite{Harko:2013aya,Shaikh:2015oha}
\begin{equation}
{T_\mu}^\nu =\left(\begin{array}{cccc} -\rho & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & P_r & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & P_\theta & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & P_\varphi \end{array}\right)
\end{equation}
and set $P_r=-\rho$ and $P_\theta=P_\varphi=K(\rho)$, where $K(\rho)$ is some function of the fluid density, such that our fluid has the same structure as the generic stress-energy tensor considered in Sec. \ref{sec:generic}
\begin{equation}
{T_\mu}^{\nu}={diag}[-\rho,-\rho, K(\rho),K(\rho)] \ .
\end{equation}
It is worth noting that this structure of the stress-energy tensor allows us to see it as corresponding to a non-linear theory of electrodynamics \cite{Olmo:2015axa}. In fact, for a theory where the electromagnetic Lagrangian goes from $X=-\frac{1}{2}F_{\mu\nu} F^{\mu\nu}$ to $\varphi(X)$, the stress-energy tensor becomes
\begin{equation}
{T_\mu}^{\nu}=\frac{1}{8\pi}{diag}[\varphi-2X\varphi_X, \varphi-2X\varphi_X, \varphi,\varphi] \ .
\end{equation}
We can thus establish the correspondences $-8\pi \rho= (\varphi-2X\varphi_X)$ and $K(\rho)=\varphi(X)$, which allow to solve for $\varphi(X)$ once a function $K(\rho)$ is specified. \\
Considering the fluid representation, the conservation equation $\nabla_\mu {T^\mu}_\nu=0$ for a line element of the form $ds^2=-C(x)dt^2+B^{-1}(x) dx^2+r^2(x)(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\varphi^2)$ leads to the relation $\rho_x+2[\rho+K(\rho)]r_x/r=0$. This expression can be readily integrated to obtain a formal relation between $\rho(x)$ and $r(x)$ given by
\begin{equation}
r^2(x)=r_0^2 \exp\left[{-\int^\rho \frac{d\tilde{\rho}}{\tilde{\rho}+K(\tilde{\rho})}}\right] \ ,
\end{equation}
where $r_0$ is an integration constant with dimensions of length. In order to simplify our discussion, we shall restrict ourselves to the case $K(\rho)=\alpha \rho+\beta \rho^2$, where $\alpha$ is a dimensionless constant and $\beta$ has dimensions of inverse density. This example yields analytical solutions and covers a number of interesting cases. In particular, one finds that the relation between $\rho(x)$ and $r(x)$ turns into
\begin{equation}
\rho(r)=\frac{(1+\alpha) \rho_0}{\left(\frac{r}{r_0}\right)^{2(1+\alpha)}-\beta \rho_0} \ .
\end{equation}
One readily verifies that when $\alpha=1$ and $\beta=0$, this fluid has the same stress-energy tensor as the Maxwell electric field (\ref{eq:Tmn-Maxwell}), with $\rho_0 r_0^4=q^2/8\pi$. The inclusion of the parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ allows to generate a non-zero trace in the stress energy tensor. The case with $\beta=0$ and $0<\alpha<1$ was studied in detail in \cite{Olmo:2015axa}. Here we shall take $\alpha=1$ and focus on the case $\beta<0$ (a more exhaustive discussion will be presented elsewhere \cite{Bejarano}). This family of models rapidly recovers the usual RN solution away from the center but regularizes the energy density, which is everywhere finite and bounded above by $\rho_{m}=\frac{(1+\alpha)}{|\beta|}$. We note that the effect of the parameter $\beta>0$ is to shift the location of the divergence in the density from $r=0$ to $(|\beta|\rho_0)^{1/(2+2\alpha)} r_0$. With our choice of negative $\beta$, we regularize the divergence of the matter sector. \\
To proceed, we set $\alpha=1$, $\beta=-\tilde{\beta}/\rho_0$, and introduce a dimensionless variable $z^4=r^4/\tilde{\beta} r_0^4$, in such a way that the density is now given by
\begin{equation}
\rho=\frac{\rho_m}{1+z^4} \ .
\end{equation}
Using the trace equation (\ref{eq:tracefR}) and the quadratic model $f=\mathcal{R}-\lambda \mathcal{R}^2$, one readily finds that $\mathcal{R}=-\kappa^2T$, which is the same linear relation as in GR (this is just an accident of the quadratic model in four dimensions). We thus find that the function $f_{\mathcal{R}}$ takes the simple form
\begin{equation}
f_{\mathcal{R}}=1-\frac{\gamma}{(1+z^4)^2} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\gamma\equiv \rho_m/\rho_\lambda$ and $\rho_\lambda\equiv 1/8\kappa^2\lambda$. \\
Following the same approach as in the Born-Infeld gravity theory studied above, we find that parametrizing the mass function as $M(r)=M_0(1+\delta_1 G(z))$ leads to
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:GzfR}
G_z&=&\frac{z^2}{(1+z^4)f_{\mathcal{R}}^{3/2}}\left(1-\frac{\gamma}{(1+z^4)^3}\right)\left(1-\frac{\gamma(1-3z^4)}{(1+z^4)^3}\right) \\
\delta_1&\equiv& \frac{\kappa^2\rho_m (r_0\tilde{\beta}^{\frac{1}{4}})^{3}}{r_S}
\end{eqnarray}
The function $G(z)$ can be obtained easily in terms of power series expansions and the solutions are classified in two types, depending on the value of the parameter $\gamma$. If $\gamma>1$ then $z$ is bounded from below, $z\ge z_c$, with $z_c^4=\gamma^{1/2}-1$ representing the location where $f_{\mathcal{R}}=0$.
At that point, the function $G_z$ diverges, as can be easily understood from the expression (\ref{eq:GzfR}), which has a term $f_{\mathcal{R}}^{3/2}$ in the denominator. The lower bound on $z$ signals the presence of a wormhole, in much the same way as we already observed in the case of Born-Infeld gravity. This is confirmed by the relation between the radial functions $x$ and $z$ given by $x^2=f_{\mathcal{R}} z^2$, which is plotted in Fig.\ref{fig:BouncefR}. Having this wormhole structure in mind, one finds that near $z_c$ we have $f_{\mathcal{R}}\approx \frac{8z_c^3}{1+z_c^4}(z-z_c)$ and $G_z\approx C/(z-z_c)^{3/2}$, with $C>0$ a constant (whose explicit form can be computed but is not necessary). This leads to $\lim_{z\to z_c} G(z)\approx -2C/\sqrt{z-z_c}$. \\
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{BouncefR.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{ Representation of $z(x)$ (solid curve) as a function of the radial coordinate $x$ (in units of the scale $r_c=|\tilde{\beta}|^{1/4}r_0$) for different values of the parameter $\gamma$. The solid (red) curve corresponds to $\gamma=1.1$, the dashed (orange) curve is $\gamma=1.5$, and $\gamma=2$ is the dotted (green) one.}\label{fig:BouncefR}
\end{figure}
It is obvious that for $0<\gamma<1$ there are no real solutions for $z_c$. One finds that for that case, and also for $\gamma=1$, the range of $z$ is comprised between $0$ and $\infty$, which implies that there is no wormhole, $G_z$ is finite everywhere, and $G(z)$ tends to a constant as $z\to 0$. In fact, near $z=0$ we can approximate $G(z)\approx -\frac{1}{\delta_c^{(\gamma)}}+(1-\gamma)^{1/2}z^3/3 +\frac{(7\gamma-1)}{\sqrt{1-\gamma}}{z^7}/{7}+O(z^{11})$, where $\delta_c^{(\gamma)}$ is a constant. The case $\gamma=1$ admits an analytical solution in terms of special functions and its series expansion must be considered separately, yielding $G(z)\approx -1/\delta_c^{(1)}+\frac{9 z^5}{5 \sqrt{2}}-\frac{13 z^9}{4 \sqrt{2}}+O(z^{13})$. One can easily verify that for $z\gg 1$ (\ref{eq:GzfR}) rapidly converges to the GR prediction $G_z\approx 1/z^2$ regardless of the value of $\gamma$. \\
Let us now discuss the geometry near the center in the two cases distinguished above in terms of $\gamma$. Consider first the wormhole case, $\gamma>1$, for which $\lim_{z\to z_c} f_{\mathcal{R}}\approx \frac{8z_c^3}{1+z_c^4}(z-z_c)$ and $\lim_{z\to z_c} G(z)\approx -2C/\sqrt{z-z_c}$. The area of the two spheres is determined by solving the relation $x^2=f_{\mathcal{R}} r^2$. Denoting $r=z r_c$, $x=\tilde{x} r_c$, and $r_c=r_0 \tilde{\beta}^{1/4}$, one finds
\begin{equation}
\tilde{x}\approx \sqrt{ \frac{8z_c^5}{1+z_c^4}}(z-z_c)^{1/2} \ ,
\end{equation}
which leads to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:r2fR}
r^2(x)\approx r_c^ 2z_c^2+\frac{(1+z_c^ 4)}{4z_c^4}x^2 \ .
\end{equation}
This relation puts forward that the physical $2-$spheres have a minimum area at $x=0$, thus signaling the presence of a wormhole, as already advanced above. The $g_{tt}$ component of the metric can be written as
\begin{equation}
g_{tt}=-\frac{1}{f_{\mathcal{R}}}\left(1-\frac{r_S (1+\delta_1 G(z))}{x}\right)\approx -\frac{\tilde{C}}{(z-z_c)^2} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{C}$ is a positive constant whose explicit form is not relevant. It is clear that for this type of solutions the metric diverges at $z=z_c$. One can also verify that curvature scalars generically diverge on that surface. We note that the properties of the solutions with $\gamma>1$ are shared by all those models in which $f_{\mathcal{R}}$ has a simple pole at $z=z_c$. One can easily verify that if $f_R=b_0 (z-z_c)$, then the two spheres satisfy a relation like (\ref{eq:r2fR}) and the metric has a quadratic divergence at $z_c$. \\
When $0<\gamma\le 1$, the properties of the solutions largely depart from those observed in the case of having a pole in $f_{\mathcal{R}}$. Given that the function $f_{\mathcal{R}}$ does not vanish in this case, we find that near the center $\tilde{x}\approx \sqrt{1-\gamma} \ z$. The $g_{tt}$ component of the metric then becomes
\begin{equation}
g_{tt}\approx-\frac{1}{(1-\gamma)}\left(1-\frac{r_S (\delta_c^{(\gamma)}-\delta_1)}{r_c \delta_c^{(\gamma)}\sqrt{1-\gamma} \ z}-\frac{r_S\delta_1}{2r_c}z^2\ldots\right) \ .
\end{equation}
This indicates that for the choice $\delta_1=\delta_1^{(\gamma)}$, the metric is regular everywhere. Curvature scalars, however, do have divergences. For $\gamma=1$, the above expression must be replaced by
\begin{equation}
g_{tt}\approx\frac{{r_S}}{2r_c \sqrt{2} z^7}-\frac{1}{2 z^4}+O(z^{-3}) \ .
\end{equation}
We note that the case $\gamma\to 0$ yields the limit in which this anistropic fluid is coupled to GR. One can verify that the behavior of the solutions with $0<\gamma\le 1$ near the origin is similar to that of models of nonlinear electrodynamics coupled to GR \cite{Olmo:2011ja,NED1,NED2,NED3,NED4,AB1,AB2,AB3,NED5,NED6,NED7,NED8,NED9,NED10,NED11}.
\section{Geodesics.}\label{sec:geodesics}
The modified gravitational dynamics generated by the models considered in the previous sections has an impact on the space-time metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ and, consequently, on its associated geodesics. Since we are interested in determining whether the space-times derived above are geodesically complete or not, in this section we solve the geodesic equation and explore their behavior in those regions where GR typically yields incomplete paths. \\
The geodesics of a given connection $\Gamma^\mu_{\alpha\beta}$ are determined by the equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:geodesics}
\frac{d^2x^\mu}{d\lambda^2}+\Gamma^\mu_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}=0 \ .
\end{equation}
Here we will focus on the geodesics of the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$, which are the ones that matter fields can see according to the Einstein equivalence principle. We thus take $\Gamma^\mu_{\alpha\beta}$ as defined in (\ref{eq:LC}). In order to solve these equations, we introduce a Hamiltonian approach that simplifies the analysis. To proceed, we first note that (\ref{eq:geodesics}) can be derived from an action of the form \cite{Chandra}
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{1}{2}\int d\lambda g_{\mu\nu} \frac{dx^\mu}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\nu}{d\lambda} \ ,
\end{equation}
which for a line element like $ds^2=-C(x)dt^2+B^{-1}(x)dx^2+r^2(x)d\Omega^2$ becomes
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{1}{2}\int d\lambda \left[-C(x)\dot{t}^2+\frac{1}{B(x)}\dot{x}^2+r^2(x)\dot{\theta}^2+r^2(x)\sin^2\theta \dot{\varphi}^2\right] \ .
\end{equation}
From this representation, one easily verifies that the momenta associated to the variables $(t,x,\theta,\varphi)$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
P_t&=&-\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{t}}=\dot{t} C(x) \\
P_x&=&\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{x}}=\dot{x}/B(x) \\
P_\theta&=&\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\theta}}=r^2(x)\dot{\theta} \\
P_\varphi &=&\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\varphi}}=r^2(x)\sin^2\theta \dot{\varphi} \ .
\end{eqnarray}
With these momenta one finds that the Hamiltonian $H=-P_t \dot{t}+P_x \dot{x}+P_\theta \dot{\theta}+P_\varphi \dot{\varphi}-L$ coincides with the Lagrangian (due to the absence of potential terms) and can be written as
\begin{equation}
H=\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\nu}(x)P_\mu P_\nu \ .
\end{equation}
The geodesic equations can thus be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{x}^\mu&=& \frac{\partial H}{\partial P_\mu}=g^{\mu\nu}P_\nu \\
\dot{P}_\mu&=& -\frac{\partial H}{\partial x^\mu}=-\frac{1}{2}(\partial_\mu g^{\alpha\beta})P_\alpha P_\beta
\end{eqnarray}
From these equations one readily sees that $P_t$ and $P_\varphi$ are constants of the motion, as $\dot{P}_t=0=\dot{P}_\varphi$. These equations also imply that $dH/d\lambda=0$, showing that $H$ is another conserved quantity.
We thus have
\begin{eqnarray}
P_t&=&\left(\frac{dt}{d\lambda}\right)C(x)=E \\
P_\varphi &=&\left(\frac{d\varphi}{d\lambda}\right)r^2(x)\sin^2\theta=L \\
2H&=& -\frac{P_t^2}{C(x)}+B(x)P_x^2+\frac{P_\theta^2}{r^2(x)}+\frac{P_\varphi^2}{r^2(x)\sin^2\theta}=-\frac{E^2}{C(x)}+\frac{\dot{x}^2}{B(x)}+\frac{L^2}{r^2} \ , \label{eq:2H}
\end{eqnarray}
where in the last equality we have set $\theta=\pi/2$ without loss of generality (because the motion takes place on a plane). When $H\neq 0$, a constant rescaling of the affine parameter $\lambda\to \lambda/\sqrt{|2H|}$ makes it clear that only the sign of $H$ is physically relevant. This sign allows to classify the geodesics in three families: those with $H>0$ (space-like), those with $H<0$ (time-like), and those with $H=0$ (null), which clarifies the meaning of this conserved quantity. Denoting $k\equiv 2H$ (with $k=1,0,-1$ corresponding to spatial, null, and time-like geodesics, respectively), Eq. (\ref{eq:2H}) can be recast as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:geo_general}
\frac{C(x)}{B(x)}\left(\frac{dx}{d\lambda}\right)^2=E^2-C(x)\left(\frac{L^2}{r^2(x)}-k\right) \ ,
\end{equation}
which will be used to study the range of $\lambda$ in different scenarios.
\subsection{Geodesics in GR}
Let us consider the Schwarzschild and Reissner-Nordstr\"{o}m solutions of GR, whose line element takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ds2GR}
ds^2=-C(r)^2dt^2+\frac{1}{C(r)}dr^2+r^2 d\Omega^2 \ ,
\end{equation}
with $C(r)=1-\frac{r_S}{r}+\frac{r_q^2}{2r^2}$, $r_S=2GM_0/c^2$, $r_q^2=\kappa^2 q^2/4\pi$ (for Schwarzschild, $r_q^2=0$), and $\kappa^2=8\pi G/c^4$. Given that here $C(r)=B(r)$, we find that (\ref{eq:geo_general}) turns into
\begin{equation}\label{eq:geoGR}
\left(\frac{dr}{d\lambda}\right)^2=E^2-C(r)\left(\frac{L^2}{r^2}-k\right) \ .
\end{equation}
This equation has the same structure as that of a particle with energy $\mathcal{E}=E^2$ in an effective one-dimensional potential of the form $V_{eff}(r)=C(r)\left(\frac{L^2}{r^2}-k\right) $, which facilitates its interpretation. \\
Let us consider first the uncharged (Schwarzschild) case. In this scenario, the function $C(r)$ becomes negative inside the horizon. As a result, the effective potential becomes an infinitely attractive well of the form $V_{eff}\approx -\frac{r_S}{r}\left(\frac{L^2}{r^2}-k\right)$, and the causal structure is such that all observers and light rays are forced to move in the direction of decreasing $r$ as time goes by.
This can be seen straightforwardly by just writing the line element (\ref{eq:ds2GR}) in ingoing Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ds2GRv}
ds^2=-C(r)^2dv^2+2dvdr+r^2 d\Omega^2 \ ,
\end{equation}
where $dv=dt+dr/C(r)$ now plays the role of time coordinate. Inside the event horizon, where $A(r)<0$, we see that
\begin{equation}
-2dvdr=-C(r)^2dv^2-ds^2+r^2 d\Omega^2 \
\end{equation}
implies that as time goes by ($dv>0$) we must have $dr<0$ for time-like and null trajectories ($ds^2\leq 0$). Thus, regardless of their point of origin, all physical observers and light rays will sooner or later end up at $r=0$. The precise evolution of the affine parameter near the center is determined by $dr/d\lambda\approx - \sqrt{r_S/r}$ for radial timelike geodesics ($L=0$) and by $dr/d\lambda\approx - \sqrt{r_SL^2/r^3}$ for timelike and null geodesics with $L\neq 0$. By integrating these expressions, we find $\lambda(r)=\lambda_0-\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{r^3/r_S}$ and $\lambda(r)=\lambda_0-\frac{2}{5}\sqrt{r^5/r_SL^2}$, respectively, where $\lambda_0$ represents the value of the affine parameter at $r=0$. Given that the affine parameter cannot be extended {\it beyond} the center, these geodesics are incomplete in the future. A similar analysis can be carried out in the {\it white hole} region of the Schwarzschild geometry, where all geodesics are outgoing ($dr>0$ with growing time). In that case, geodesics are incomplete in the past, i.e., they cannot be extended into $\lambda\to -\infty$. This space-time, therefore, can be regarded as singular. \\
In the Reissner-Nordstr\"{o}m case, the situation is quite different from Schwazschild. As one approaches the center, the charge term dominates and $C(r)\sim \frac{r_q^2}{2r^2}>0$ implies that for time-like observers ($k=-1$) $dr/d\lambda$ in (\ref{eq:geoGR}) must vanish at some point before reaching $r=0$ regardless of the value of $L$. These observers, therefore, bounce before reaching the center due to the presence of an infinite potential barrier and continue their trip in the direction of growing $r$, having the possibility of getting into new asymptotically flat regions if horizons are present. Something similar happens also to light rays ($k=0$) with nonzero angular momentum $L$. However, for radial null geodesics ($k=0$ and $L=0$), we find $r(\lambda)=\pm E (\lambda-\lambda_0)$, where the minus sign represents ingoing rays and the plus sign outgoing rays. Ingoing rays cannot be extended beyond $\lambda=\lambda_0$, whereas outgoing rays are {\it created} at some finite $\lambda$. Thus, the Reissner-Nordstr\"{o}m geometry is incomplete as far as radial null geodesics are concerned.
\subsection{Geodesics in Born-Infeld gravity}
From our discussion of the spherically symmetric charged solutions found in Sec. \ref{sec:BI} for the Born-Infeld theory, it is clear that geodesics in that space-time are essentially the same as in GR as soon as one moves a few $r_c$ units away from the central wormhole \cite{Olmo:2015bya}. In fact, in Fig. \ref{fig:r(x)BI} one can readily see that $r(x)\approx x$ as soon as one reaches $|x|\approx 2r_c$. The $g_{tt}$ component of the metric also converges quickly to the GR prediction, as shown in (\ref{eq:RNsolution}), with corrections that decay rapidly as $\sim (r_c/r)^4$. We thus only need to focus on the behavior of geodesics near the wormhole to explore the impact of curvature divergences on their completeness. Recall, in this sense, that the different metric solutions could be classified according to whether the charge-to-mass ratio $\delta_1$, defined in (\ref{eq:d1BI}), was smaller, equal, or larger than the characteristic value $\delta_c\approx 0.572069$ that arises in the electric field contribution to the mass function of Eq.(\ref{eq:G(z)BI}). The case $\delta_1=\delta_c$ was completely regular (no metric or curvature divergences \cite{or12a}), whereas $\delta_1<\delta_c$ (Schwarzschild-like) and $\delta_1>\delta_c$ (RN-like) had divergences at the wormhole throat, $x=0$ (or $r=r_c$ or $z=1$).\\
Using the identifications $C(x)=A(x)/\Omega_+$ and $B(x)=A(x)\Omega_+$ together with the expression for $r^2(x)$ found in (\ref{eq:r(x)BI}), Eq. (\ref{eq:geo_general}) turns into
\begin{equation}\label{eq:geoBI}
\frac{1}{\Omega_+^2}\left(\frac{dx}{d\lambda}\right)^2=E^2-\frac{A(x)}{\Omega_+}\left(\frac{L^2}{r^2(x)}-k\right) \ .
\end{equation}
For radial null geodesics ($L=0, \ k=0$), which are incomplete in both the Schwarzschild and RN solutions of GR, the above equation becomes independent of the function $A(x)$ and an exact solution can be found analytically. Using Eq. (\ref{eq:r(x)BI}), one finds that $dx/dr=\pm\Omega_+/\Omega_-^{1/2}$, with the minus sign corresponding to $x\le 0$. This turns (\ref{eq:geoBI}) into
\begin{equation}\label{eq:geoBI}
\frac{1}{\Omega_-}\left(\frac{dr}{d\lambda}\right)^2=E^2 \ ,
\end{equation}
which can be integrated to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nullradial2}
\pm E \cdot \lambda(x)=\left\{ \begin{array}{lr} {_{2}{F}}_1[-\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{2},\frac{3}{4};\frac{r_c^4}{r^4}] r & \ x\ge 0 \\
{ }\\
2x_0- {_{2}{F}}_1[-\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{2},\frac{3}{4};\frac{r_c^4}{r^4}] r & \ x\le 0
\end{array} \right. \ ,
\end{equation}
where $_{2}F_1[a,b,c;y]$ is a hypergeometric function, $x_0={_{2}{F}}_1[-\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{2},\frac{3}{4};1] =\frac{\sqrt{\pi}\Gamma[3/4]}{\Gamma[1/4]}\approx 0.59907$, and the $\pm$ sign corresponds to outgoing/ingoing null rays in the $x>0$ region. It should be noted that given that $dr/d\lambda$ is a continuous function, the solution (\ref{eq:nullradial2}) is unique. One can easily verify that as $x\to \infty$ the series expansion of (\ref{eq:nullradial2}) yields $\pm E\lambda(x) \approx r+O(r^{-3})\approx x$ and naturally recovers the GR behavior for large radii (see Fig.\ref{Fig:affine_nullradial}). As $x\to -\infty$, we get $\pm E\lambda(x)\approx x+2x_0$, which also recovers the linear behavior of GR but shifted by a (negligible) constant factor.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{Affine_RadNull.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Affine parameter $\lambda(x)$ as a function of the radial coordinate $x$ for radial null geodesics (outgoing in $x>0$). In the GR case (green dashed curve in the upper right quadrant), $\lambda=x$ is only defined for $x\ge 0$. For radial null geodesics in our wormhole spacetime (solid red curve), $\lambda(x)$ interpolates between the GR prediction and a shifted straight line $\lambda(x)\approx x+2x_0$, with $x_0\approx 0.59907$. In this plot $E=1$ and the horizontal axis is measured in units of $r_c$. } \label{Fig:affine_nullradial}
\end{figure}
Given that the radial coordinate $x$ can naturally take negative values due to the wormhole structure, it follows that the affine parameter for radial null geodesics can be extended over the whole real line. As a result, these geodesics are complete. This was expected for the regular case with $\delta_1=\delta_c$, for which the metric and all curvature scalars are finite everywhere, but was not obvious {\it a priori} for the other cases. Remarkably, the fact that this result is independent of the details of the function $A(x)$, which contains the information about $\delta_1$, confirms that radial null geodesics are complete for all our solutions. This puts forward that a space-time can be geodesically complete even when there exist divergences in the metric and/or in curvature scalars. The wormhole has thus crucially contributed to allow the extendibility of the most critical geodesics of GR. \\
For nonradial and/or time-like geodesics, the discussion must take into account whether the geometry is Schwarzschild-like or RN-like. Considering the limit $x\to 0$, Eq.(\ref{eq:geoBI}) turns into
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:geoBInear}
\frac{1}{4}\left(\frac{dx}{d\lambda}\right)^2&=&E^2-V_{eff}(x) \\
\label{eq:Vzero}
V_{eff}(x)&\approx& -\frac{a}{|x|}-b \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
with $a=\left(\kappa+\frac{L^2}{r_c^2}\right)\frac{ (\delta_c-\delta_1)}{2\delta_c \delta_2 }$, $b=\left(\kappa+\frac{L^2}{r_c^2}\right)\frac{(\delta_1-\delta_2) }{2 \delta _2}$, and $\delta_2\equiv \delta_1 \frac{N_c}{N_q}\frac{l_\epsilon}{l_P}$. From the above expression it is easy to see that in the RN-like configuration the coefficient $a$ is negative, thus implying that the right-hand side of (\ref{eq:geoBInear}) must vanish at some point before reaching the wormhole. The situation is thus analogous to that already observed in the case of GR, with $L\neq 0$ geodesics bouncing before reaching the center (or the wormhole in our case). In the Schwarzschild-like configurations, the effective potential represents an infinite attractive well with the possibility of having a maximum before reaching the throat. As a consequence, all geodesics with energy above that maximum hit the wormhole (see \cite{Olmo:2015bya} for more details). Using (\ref{eq:geoBInear}) and (\ref{eq:Vzero}), one finds that the affine parameter behaves as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:affineNull}
\lambda(x)\approx \lambda_0\pm \frac{x}{3}\left|\frac{x}{a}\right|^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(1 -\frac{3(b+E^2)}{10}\left|\frac{x}{a}\right| \right)\ .
\end{equation}
This solution (which is unique) guarantees the extendibility of the affine parameter accross $x=0$. Therefore, all time-like and null geodesics in these space-times are complete regardless of the existence of curvature divergences at the wormhole throat.
\subsection{Geodesics in $f(R)$ gravity}
In the $f(\mathcal{R})$ case, our general approach for the description of geodesics leads to the following equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:geofR}
\frac{1}{f_{\mathcal{R}}^2}\left(\frac{dx}{d\lambda}\right)^2=E^2-\frac{A(x)}{f_{\mathcal{R}}}\left(\frac{L^2}{r^2(x)}-k\right) \ .
\end{equation}
Let us consider first the case with $0<\gamma< 1$, for which there is no wormhole structure. In these cases, as $x\to 0$ we find $f_{\mathcal{R}}\approx (1-\gamma)$, $r(x)\approx x/\sqrt{1-\gamma}$, and
\begin{equation}
A(z)\approx1-\frac{r_S (\delta_c^{(\gamma)}-\delta_1)}{r_c \delta_c^{(\gamma)}\sqrt{1-\gamma} \ z}-\frac{r_S\delta_1}{2r_c}z^2+\ldots
\end{equation}
With this, near the center (\ref{eq:geofR}) can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:geofR1}
\left(\frac{dr}{d\lambda}\right)^2=\tilde{E}^2-A(r)\left(\frac{L^2}{r^2}-k\right) \ ,
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{E}^2=(1-\gamma)E^2$. The discussion now proceeds in much the same way as in models of non-linear electrodynamics coupled to GR. One can find configurations for which the metric is regular at the origin, $\delta_c^{(\gamma)}=\delta_1$, and others with divergences, $\delta_c^{(\gamma)}\neq\delta_1$. A detailed discussion of geodesics in such configurations will be provided elsewhere \cite{Bejarano}. The key point to note here is that the absence of a wormhole implies that radial null geodesics, $\left(\frac{dr}{d\lambda}\right)^2=\tilde{E}^2$, always reach $r=0$ in a finite proper time with no possibility of extension beyond that point. Thus, similarly as in the Reissner-Nordstr\"{o}m case of GR, such solutions can be regarded as singular. \\
Let us now consider the case with $\gamma>1$, for which there is a wormhole. From previous results, we know that as the wormhole is approached, we have $A(x)\approx \tilde{C}/(z-z_c)$ and $f_{\mathcal{R}}\approx \frac{8z_c^3}{1+z_c^4}(z-z_c)$, which implies that the right-hand side of (\ref{eq:geofR}) must vanish at some $z>z_c$ if $L\neq 0$ or $k=-1$ (time-like observers). This means that such geodesics never reach the wormhole throat, which is similar to what we already observed in the case of Reissner-Nordstr\"{o}m in GR, where time-like observers and $L\neq0$ geodesics never reach the center. If we consider radial null geodesics, (\ref{eq:geofR}) turns into
\begin{equation}\label{eq:geofR2}
\frac{1}{f_{\mathcal{R}}^2}\left(\frac{dx}{d\lambda}\right)^2=E^2\ .
\end{equation}
Far from the wormhole $f_{\mathcal{R}}\to 1$ and this recovers the standard behavior $r\approx x\approx \pm E(\lambda-\lambda_0)$, with the $+/-$ sign corresponding to outgoing/ingoing rays. Now, near the wormhole, we can use the relation $r^2 f_{\mathcal{R}}=x^2$ and the fact that $r\to r_c$ as $x\to 0$ to write (\ref{eq:geofR2}) as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:geofR3}
\frac{r_c^4}{x^4}\left(\frac{dx}{d\lambda}\right)^2=E^2\ ,
\end{equation}
which leads to
\begin{equation}
-\frac{1}{x}=\pm \frac{E}{r_c^2}(\lambda-\lambda_0) \ .
\end{equation}
From this it follows that as $x\to 0$, $\lambda\to -\infty$ for outgoing rays, while for ingoing rays $\lambda\to +\infty$. Stated in words, ingoing rays which started their trip from $x\to +\infty$ and $\lambda\to -\infty$ approach the wormhole at $x\to 0$ as $\lambda\to +\infty$, whereas outgoing rays which started their trip near the wormhole at $\lambda\to -\infty$ propagate to infinity as $\lambda\to +\infty$. Thus, all time-like and null geodesics in these configurations ($\gamma>1$) are complete. Curvature divergences, which arise at the wormhole throat, cannot be reached in a finite affine parameter and, therefore, do not belong to the physically accessible region. These solutions are nonsingular even though one can never go through the wormhole. If one considers the region $x<0$, identical conclusions are obtained.
\section{Summary and conclusions}\label{sec:theend}
In these Lectures we have studied the classical problem of black hole singularities from a four dimensional geometric perspective. Motivated by the fact that GR predicts the existence of singularities in simple static, spherically symmetric configurations, we have considered extensions of the theory to test the robustness of this disturbing result. In our study we have not followed the traditional approach of implicitly assuming that the space-time geometry is Riemannian. Rather, we have emphasized that the type of geometry associated with the gravitational interaction is an empirical question that must be settled by experiments, not imposed by convention or tradition. Whether the geometry is Riemannian or not is as fundamental a question as the number of space-time dimensions or the existence of supersymmetry, which are aspects that have received much attention in the last years.
We have thus considered a metric-affine geometrical framework for the formulation of our extensions of GR, with the additional simplification of setting torsion to zero (Palatini approach \cite{Olmo:2011uz,Origin}). This choice is justified on simplicity grounds, as a first step in the exploration of new gravitational physics. The inclusion of fermionic matter, whose spin sources the torsion, would require a detailed treatment beyond the Palatini approach. \\
An unusual property of the gravity theories considered here, as compared to the more standard metric or Riemannian approach, is that their modified dynamics arises as a result of nonlinearities generated by the matter fields rather than by the emergence of new dynamical degrees of freedom. In fact, the field equations of $f(\mathcal{R})$ theories, the Born-Infeld model, or any Lagrangian which is just a function of the inverse metric and the Ricci tensor \`{a} la Palatini admit a generic representation that exactly recovers the equations of GR (with an effective cosmological constant) in vacuum when the matter fields are absent \cite{Olmo:2012yv,Jimenez:2015caa,Bazeia:2015zpa,ERE2011}. This means that generically these theories neither exhibit ghosts nor massive gravitons. These properties together with the second-order character of the field equations should be regarded as general characteristics of the metric-affine formulation. \\
In our opinion, the most remarkable aspect of the theories presented here is that they do what they were expected to do in a simple and clean manner. They were conceived as extensions of GR which could bring new relevant physics at high energies, and they yield solutions which are in agreement with GR almost everywhere, except in regions of very high energy density. The modifications that they introduce are such that black hole centers acquire a nontrivial structure that allows to preserve the completeness of geodesics. In the Born-Infeld type model, geodesics can go through the central wormhole, whereas in the $f(\mathcal{R})$ case, the wormhole (when it exists) lies beyond the reach of the geodesics. \\
Following the standard definition of space-time singularities given in the specialized literature and main text books on gravitation \cite{Geroch:1968ut,Hawking:1973uf,Wald:1984rg,Senovilla:2014gza}, we have concluded that the solutions containing wormholes are nonsingular because they are geodesically complete. And this is so despite the appearance of curvature divergences at the wormhole throat. One should note, however, that there exists a widespread tendency in the literature to simplify the complex notion of space-time singularity and associate the divergence of certain quantities (such as curvature scalars or tensor components) with its definition. This tendency can be partly justified by the {\it strong correlation} existing between the occurrence of divergences and the incompleteness of some geodesics. Somehow, one tends intuitively to associate divergences with geodesic incompleteness as if the former were the cause/reason for the latter \cite{Curiel2009}. We have shown here with several explicit examples that black hole space-times can be geodesically complete and at the same time have curvature divergences, thus breaking the correlation typically found in GR. \\
Divergences in curvature tensors/scalars are obviously associated with strong tidal forces. The effects of such forces have been investigated in the literature by means of geodesic congruences in an attempt to classify the strength of singularities \cite{Ellis,Tipler,CK,Nolan,Ori,Tipler77,Nolan:2000rn}. In that context, extended physical objects are represented as congruences of geodesics, and the evolution of their relative distance as curvature divergences are approached provides information about their fate. Those methods have been applied in the general charged solutions of the Born-Infeld model studied here finding that the different parts of a body that goes through the wormhole never lose causal contact among them despite the existence of infinite accelerations at the throat \cite{AGDip}. This offers a new view on the problem which should be further investigated to better understand if curvature divergences possess any {\it destructive} power. We would like to emphasize that though in the Born-Infeld model physical observers do interact with the curvature divergence as the wormhole is crossed, in the $f(\mathcal{R})$ case, the divergence is never reached in a finite affine distance. Therefore, the $f(\mathcal{R})$ model is free from the potential drawbacks of directly interacting with a curvature divergence, as it lies beyond the physically accessible space-time.\\
Though much research is still needed to better understand gravitational and non-gravitational physics in metric-affine spaces, the point is that two analytically tractable {\it toy models} with nontrivial results about black holes are already available. \\
Before concluding, we must note that our approach has assumed that particles and observers can be viewed as structureless entities (geodesics), whereas physical measurements are carried out by means of probes with wave-like properties because matter fields are of a quantum nature. One should thus study the propagation of waves in these space-times to see how they behave and interact with regions of intense gravitational fields such as wormhole throats, where curvature scalars typically diverge. A first analysis in this direction was carried out in \cite{Olmo:2015dba}, where the scattering of scalar waves in horizonless (naked) configurations was considered. Despite the infinite potential barrier that curvature divergences generate, one verifies that the propagation through the wormhole is smooth and that transmission and reflection coefficients can be computed numerically and contrasted with analytical estimates, yielding good agreement. These results, therefore, give further support to the absence of singularities in these geometries. \\
\begin{acknowledgement}
The author is supported by a Ramon y Cajal contract, the Spanish grants FIS2014-57387-C3-1-P and FIS2011-29813-C02-02 from MINECO, the grants i-LINK0780 and i-COOPB20105 of the Spanish Research Council (CSIC), the Consolider Program CPANPHY-1205388, and the CNPq project No. 301137/2014-5 (Brazilian agency).
\end{acknowledgement}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let ${\mathcal{C}}$ be an abelian category. Approximation Theory by Objects is typically used in Relative Homological Algebra to compute (co)resolutions from either an additive class of objects of ${\mathcal{C}}$ or an additive subfunctor of $\mbox{\rm Ext}$. In the first case, the necessary and sufficient condition for a class ${\mathcal{F}}$ to provide such (co)resolutions is to be either (pre)covering or (pre)enveloping. We recall that a morphism $\phi \mathcolon F \rightarrow X$ with $F \in {\mathcal{F}}$ is said to be an \emph{${\mathcal{F}}$-precover} of $X$ if $\mbox{\rm Hom}(F',F)\rightarrow \mbox{\rm Hom} (F',X) \rightarrow 0$ is exact, for every $F' \in {\mathcal{F}}$; equivalently, the natural transformation of functors $\mbox{\rm Hom}(-,F)|_{{\mathcal{F}}}\rightarrow \mbox{\rm Hom}(-,A)|_{{\mathcal{F}}}\rightarrow 0$ is exact. And the ${\mathcal{F}}$-precover $\phi$ is called an \emph{${\mathcal{F}}$-cover} if any endomorphism $f\mathcolon F \rightarrow F$ is an isomorphism whenever $ \phi \circ f= \phi$. The class ${\mathcal{F}}$
is said to be a \emph{(pre)covering} \emph{class} when every object has an ${\mathcal{F}}$-\emph{(pre)cover}. \emph{(Pre)envelopes} and \emph{(pre)enveloping classes} are defined in a dual way.
When ${\mathcal{F}}$ is a precovering class, we get for each object $A\in {\mathcal{C}}$ a $\mbox{\rm Hom}({\mathcal{F}},-)$-exact sequence
$$\ldots \rightarrow F_1 \rightarrow F_0 \rightarrow A \rightarrow 0$$
with $F_i\in {\mathcal{F}}$, $i \geq 0$, which is unique up to homotopy.
In the second situation of subfunctors of $\mbox{\rm Ext}$, these (co)resolutions are constructed as follows. Let us recall from Mac Lane \cite[Section XII.4]{MacLane} that a class $\mathcal{P}$ of short exact sequences in ${\mathcal{C}}$ is called \emph{proper} if it is closed under certain operations (isomorphisms and pullbacks and pushouts of $\mathcal{P}$-epimorphisms and $\mathcal{P}$-monomorphisms by any other morphism, respectively) and contains all the split short exact sequences. These axioms ensure that this class $\mathcal{P}$ gives rise to an additive subfunctor $\mbox{\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P}}$ of $\mbox{\rm Ext}$. Conversely, any additive subfunctor of $\mbox{\rm Ext}$ provides a proper class. In particular,
for any morphism $f$, the image of the restriction of $\mbox{\rm Ext}(f,-)$ or $\mbox{\rm Ext}(-,f)$ to $\mathcal{P}$ is contained in $\mathcal{P}$. So we may speak of injective objects relative to $\mathcal{P}$ (i.e., $\mathcal{P}$-injective objects) and projective objects relative to $\mathcal{P}$ ($\mathcal{P}$-projective objects).
They are objects having the extension and the lifting property respect to short exact sequences in $\mathcal{P}$, respectively. Therefore, resolutions of objects are computed by using $\mathcal{P}$-projectives and $\mathcal{P}$-epimorphisms; and coresolutions, by using $\mathcal{P}$-injectives and $\mathcal{P}$-monomorphisms. For later use in this introduction, we will denote by $\mathcal{P}_{sp}$ the proper class associated to the zero subfunctor of $\mbox{\rm Ext}$ (i.e., the smallest proper class whose elements are all split short exact sequences).
In \cite{FGHT1} Fu, Guil Asensio, Herzog and Torrecillas introduced the new concept of Approximations by Ideals on an additive exact category $(\mathcal A;\mathcal E)$. This notion not only encompasses the usual Approximation Theory by Objects with respect to an additive subcategory of an abelian category ${\mathcal{C}}$, but it also provides an additive subfunctor of $\mbox{\rm Ext}^1$ (and hence, a proper class of ${\mathcal{C}}$). Recall that an \emph{ideal} $\mathcal{I}$ of an additive category ${\mathcal{C}}$ is just an additive subfunctor of $\mbox{\rm Hom}$. Thus, it associates subgroups $\mathcal{I}(A,A') \subseteq \mbox{\rm Hom}(A,A')$ to each couple of objects $A,A' \in {\mathcal{C}}$ which are closed under left and right composition by other morphisms. This means that one can define functors
$$\mathcal{I}(-,f)\mathcolon \textrm{ } \mathcal{I}(-,M) \rightarrow \mathcal{I}(-,N)$$
$$\mathcal{I}(f,-)\mathcolon \textrm{ }\mathcal{I}(N,-)\rightarrow \mathcal{I}(M,-)$$
for any morphism $f\mathcolon M \rightarrow N$, as in the case of the absolute $\mbox{\rm Ext}^1(-,-)$-bifunctor.
Let us also note that a morphism $f\mathcolon M\rightarrow N$ belongs to $\mathcal{I}$ if and only if $\operatorname{Im} \mbox{\rm Hom}(-,f) \subseteq \mathcal{I} (-,N)$; i.e., the natural transformation $$\mbox{\rm Hom}(-,f)\mathcolon \mbox{\rm Hom}(-,M)\rightarrow \mbox{\rm Hom}(-,N)$$ factors through $\mathcal{I}(-,N)$.
An \emph{$\mathcal{I}$-precover} of an object $A\in {\mathcal{C}}$ is defined as a morphism $f\mathcolon M \rightarrow A$ in $\mathcal{I}$ such that any other morphism $f'\mathcolon M'\rightarrow A\in \mathcal{I}$ factors through $f$. In other words, a morphism $f\mathcolon M \rightarrow A \in \mathcal{I}$ is an $\mathcal{I}$-precover of $A$ if and only if $\operatorname{Im} \mbox{\rm Hom}(-,f)=\mathcal{I}(-,A)$. This $\mathcal{I}$-precover $f\mathcolon M \rightarrow A$ of $A$ is said to be \emph{special} if $\mbox{\rm Ext}(g, \mbox{\rm Ker } f)=0$ for each $g \in \mathcal{I}$.
And an ideal $\mathcal{I}$ is called \emph{(special) precovering} if every object in ${\mathcal{C}}$ has a (special) $\mathcal{I}$-precover. So if $\mathcal{I}$ is a precovering ideal then, for each $A \in {\mathcal{C}}$, $\mathcal{I}(-,A)\mathcolon {\mathcal{C}}^{op}\rightarrow \mathbf{Ab}$ has a presentation
$$
\xymatrix@=.3cm{0 \ar[r] & \mbox{\rm Hom}(-,K) \ar[r]& \mbox{\rm Hom}(-,M) \ar[rr]\ar@{->>}[rd] && \mbox{\rm Hom}(-,A)\ar[r] & \frac{\mbox{\rm Hom}(-,A)}{ \mathcal{I}(-,A)}\ar[r] &0\\
&&&\mathcal{I}(-,A)\ar@{^{(}->}[ru]&&&\\}
$$
where $K$ is the kernel of an $\mathcal{I}$-precover $M\rightarrow A$, that is, $\mathcal{I}(-,A)$ is finitely presentable in the (quasi-)category of all contravariant additive functors from ${\mathcal{C}}$ to $\mathbf{Ab}$.
Given an additive subcategory ${\mathcal{F}}$ of an abelian category ${\mathcal{C}}$, one may define the ideal $\mathcal{I}({\mathcal{F}})$ generated by ${\mathcal{F}}$ as the smallest ideal containing the identity morphisms $\operatorname{id}_F$ for each $F\in {\mathcal{F}}$. That is, the ideal consisting of all morphisms which factor through objects in ${\mathcal{F}}$. This ideal is called in \cite[Section 2]{FGHT1} the \emph{object ideal} generated by ${\mathcal{F}}$. Conversely, given an ideal $\mathcal{I}$, the subcategory $Ob(\mathcal{I})$ of all objects $A\in {\mathcal{C}}$ with $\operatorname{id}_A \in \mathcal{I}$ is additive. Thus, there exists a bijection between the class of all additive subcategories of ${\mathcal{C}}$ and the class of all object ideals of ${\mathcal{C}}$ (see Fu and Herzog \cite[Proposition 1]{FHpowers}). With this notation, an additive subcategory $\mathcal{F}$ of ${\mathcal{C}}$ is precovering if and only if the object ideal $\mathcal{I}({\mathcal{F}})$ is a precovering ideal. Therefore, Approximation Theory by Ideals encompasses the usual Approximation Theory by Objects.
Let us finally observe that we can also associate an ideal to any proper class of ${\mathcal{C}}$. Let us outline the process. Given a proper class $\mathcal{P}$ in ${\mathcal{C}}$, a morphism $f\mathcolon A \rightarrow B$ is called \emph{$\mathcal{P}$-phantom} if $\mbox{\rm Ext}(f,\textrm{-})$ transforms short exact sequences in ${\mathcal{C}}$ into distinguished short exact sequences in $\mathcal{P}$; that is, $\mbox{\rm Ext}(f,\textrm{-})\mathcolon \mbox{\rm Ext}(B,\textrm{-})\rightarrow \mbox{\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P}}(A, \textrm{-})$. The class of $\mathcal{P}$-phantoms morphisms constitutes an ideal of ${\mathcal{C}}$ which is usually denoted by $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$. Conversely, we may associate to any ideal $\mathcal{I}$, the proper class $PB(\mathcal{I})$ consisting of all short exact sequences arising as pullbacks along morphisms in $\mathcal{I}$. For more details on this relation between ideals and proper classes, see \cite{FGHT1}.
This definition of $\mathcal{P}$-phantom morphisms generalizes that of phantom morphisms, which have their origin in triangulated categories. Let us briefly explain it.
Let $\lambda$ be an infinite regular cardinal. Following the terminology of Ad\'amek and Rosick\'y in \cite{AR}, an additive category ${\mathcal{C}}$ is called {\it locally $\lambda$-presentable} if it is cocomplete and there is a set of $\lambda$-presentable objects in ${\mathcal{C}}$ whose $\lambda$-directed colimit completion is ${\mathcal{C}}$ itself, that is, every object of ${\mathcal{C}}$ can be written as a $\lambda$-directed colimit of objects in this set. This means that objects in locally presentable categories are controlled by a set and hence, they are `small' in terms of presentability for sufficiently large cardinals. This means that the Yoneda functor
\begin{equation}\label{yoneda1}
Y\mathcolon \quad {\mathcal{C}} \longrightarrow \mbox{Add}({\mathcal{C}}^{op}_{\lambda}, \mathbf{Ab}),
\end{equation}
$$ \quad \quad \quad A \quad \rightsquigarrow \mbox{\rm Hom}(-,A)|_{{\mathcal{C}}_{\lambda}}$$
is fully faithful,
where $\mbox{Add}({\mathcal{C}}_{\lambda}^{op}, \mathbf{Ab})$ denotes the category of all abelian valued contravariant additive functors in the subcategory ${\mathcal{C}}_{\lambda}$ of all $\lambda$-presentable objects of ${\mathcal{C}}$. Therefore, this embedding induces an equivalence between ${\mathcal{C}}$ and the full subcategory of all $\lambda$-cocontinuous functors in $\mbox{Add}({\mathcal{C}}_{\lambda}^{op}, \mathbf{Ab})$; i.e., ${\mathcal{C}}$ is the $\lambda$-free cocompletion of ${\mathcal{C}}_{\lambda}$ (see \cite[Theorem 1.46]{AR}).
The corresponding notion for triangulated categories is obtained by replacing $\lambda$-presentable objects by
$\lambda$-compact (or just compact when $\lambda=\aleph_0$) objects in the above definition, see Neeman \cite{Neeman3}. However, the notion of generation by a class of objects in triangulated categories is weaker than in the case of (co)complete categories. As a consequence, one may not have the analogous representation type theorem for triangulated categories, as the corresponding version of the Yoneda functor (\ref{yoneda1}) for a compactly generated additive triangulated category $\mathcal{T}$ may fail to be either faithful or full. I.e., if $\mathcal{T}_c$ is the class of all compact objects in $\mathcal{T}$, then the canonical functor
$$Y\mathcolon \quad \mathcal{T} \longrightarrow H(\mathcal{T}_c),$$
does not need to be faithful nor full, where $H(\mathcal{T}_c)$ is the category of cohomological functors on $\mathcal{T}_c$. Morphisms in $\mathcal{T}$ sent to zero by $Y$ are called \emph{phantom}, see Neeman \cite[Definition 2.4]{Neeman4}.
A concrete example of a compactly generated triangulated category is the stable module category $kG\mbox{-}\underline{\mbox{Mod}}$ of modules over $kG$, where $k$ is a field and $G$ is a finite group. Its objects are the $kG$-modules and the morphisms are the usual ones modulo those which factor through projective objects. A $kG$-module $F$ is compact in $kG\mbox{-}\underline{\mbox{Mod}}$ if and only if it is finitely generated. So a morphism $\underline{f}\mathcolon \underline{M}\rightarrow \underline{N}$ in $kG\mbox{-}\underline{\mbox{Mod}}$ is phantom if and only if $f \circ g$ factors through a projective $kG$-module, for any morphism $g\mathcolon F\rightarrow M \in kG\mbox{-Mod}$ with $F$ finitely generated $kG$-module (see also \cite{Gnacadja}).
This fact motivated Herzog \cite{Herzog} to define phantom morphisms for categories of modules over arbitrary rings $R$ by replacing the stable module category $kG\mbox{-}\underline{\mbox{Mod}}$ by the stable $R\mbox{-}\underline{\mbox{Mod}}$ whose objects are the left $R$-modules and its morphisms are the classes of morphisms in $R\mbox{-Mod}$ modulo those which factor through flat modules. In this situation, the subcategory $R\mbox{-}\underline{\mbox{mod}}$ of all finitely presented modules is just the quotient category of $R\mbox{-mod}$ modulo finitely generated projective modules. Therefore, he defines that a morphism $f\mathcolon M \rightarrow N$ of $R$-modules is phantom if $\underline{f}\in R\mbox{-}\underline{\mbox{mod}}$ is in the kernel of the Yoneda functor
$$Y\mathcolon \quad R\mbox{-}\underline{\mbox{mod}}\rightarrow \mbox{Add}(R\mbox{-}\underline{\mbox{mod}}^{op},\mathbf{Ab});$$
that is, for every morphism $g\mathcolon F \rightarrow M$ with $F$ a finitely presented $R$-module, the map $f \circ g$ factors through a projective module.
Note that a morphism $f$ is phantom in $R \mbox{-Mod}$ with this definition if and only if $f$ is $\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0}$-phantom (i.e. $f \in \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$) according to our definition, where $\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0}$ is the proper class of all pure short exact sequences in $R\mbox{-Mod}$. This easy observation provides an interesting connection between phantom morphisms and purity. This was first noticed by Christensen (\cite{Christensen1}) and Christensen and Strickland (\cite{Christensen2}), who showed the existence of phantom precovers in the category of homotopy spectra. Coming back to the category $R\mbox{-Mod}$ of left $R$-modules over an arbitrary ring $R$, Herzog (\cite[Theorem 7]{Herzog}) proved that this ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$ is special covering in $R$-Mod (see also Estrada, Guil Asensio and Ozbek \cite{EGO} for another proof using quiver representations). More generally, in \cite[Theorem 17]{FGHT1}, the authors give sufficient conditions that ensure that the ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is special precovering in an exact category $(\mathcal{A};\mathcal E)$ with enough projective morphisms. We recall that a morphism $f$ in an arbitrary exact category $(\mathcal{A};\mathcal E)$ is {\it projective} if $f\in \Phi(\mathcal E_{sp})$.
The above observation that a morphism $f$ in $R\mbox{-Mod}$ is phantom if and only if $f\in \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$, suggests that the right setup for defining a concept of phantom morphisms is the framework of locally finitely presented additive categories. The reason is that it is possible to define a Theory of Purity for these categories in the sense of Crawley-Boevey \cite{CB}. Namely, a complex $\mathbb{E}=0\to A\to B\to C\to~ 0$ is pure if $\mbox{\rm Hom}(F,\mathbb{E})$ is a short exact sequence, for every finitely presented object $F$. Now, in its recent work \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Krause2} Krause, has proven the existence of {\it right minimal morphisms} determined by a set $\mathsf C$ of finitely presented objects in a locally finitely presented additive category $\mathcal A$. It is easy to realize that, as a by-product of his result \cite[Proposition 1.13]{Krause2}, one can show that the ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$ of phantom maps in $\mathcal{A}$ is special covering. To prove it, one just needs to apply \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Krause2} to an object $Y$ in $\mathcal{A}$, setting $\mathsf{C}$ as the skeleton of the finitely presented objects in $\mathcal{A}$ and $H$, the set of all projective morphisms in $\mbox{\rm Hom}({\sf C},Y)$.
From this perspective, our notion of $\mathcal{P}$-phantom morphisms naturally extends phantom morphisms. And we use the Purity Theory developed in \cite{AR} to set locally $\lambda$-presentable (rather than locally finitely presented) additive category as our ambient category. Thus, the present paper is devoted to showing sufficient conditions that guarantee that the ideal $\Phi(\mathcal P)$ associated to a locally $\lambda$-presentable abelian category is special covering. Namely, one of the main results in this paper is the following theorem (see Theorem \ref{main} and Proposition \ref{cor}).
\medskip\par\noindent
{\bf Theorem 1. } Let ${\mathcal{C}}$ be a locally $\lambda$-presentable abelian category and $\mathcal{P}$, a proper class which is closed under direct limits. Then $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is a covering ideal. If moreover if $\mathcal{P}$ has enough injectives then $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is special covering.
\medskip\par\noindent
As a consequence of this theorem, we recover in Corollary \ref{ejemplos}(1) the aforementioned result of Krause for the existence of special phantom covers in locally finitely presented categories.
\medskip\par\noindent
{\bf Corollary 1. } Let ${\mathcal{C}}$ be a locally finitely presented category. The ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$ is special covering.
\medskip\par\noindent
However, we are also interested in very different frameworks. One of the main reasons why we want to introduce $\mathcal{P}$-phantom morphisms comes from a quite different source of examples. Let us fix a closed symmetric monoidal Grothendieck category $(\mathcal C, -\otimes-, [-,-])$. According to Fox \cite{Fox}, a monomorphism $f\!:\! A\!\to~\!B$ is called {\it $\otimes$-pure} if for all $Z\in \mathcal C$, the morphism $f\otimes Z$ is monic. Following the terminology introduced in Estrada, Gillespie and Odaba\c s\i\ \cite{EGO}, we will call this kind of purity {\it geometrical} and we will denote by $\mathcal P_{\otimes}$ the proper class of all geometrical pure short exact sequences in ${\mathcal{C}}$. We prove in Corollary \ref{ejemplos}(2) that the ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})$ of $\mathcal{P}_{\otimes}$-phantom maps is special covering in ${\mathcal{C}}$.
\medskip\par\noindent
{\bf Corollary 2. } Let ${\mathcal{C}}$ be a closed symmetric monoidal Grothendieck category. The ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})$ is special covering.
\medskip\par\noindent
It is well-known that both notions of purity coincide for the closed symmetric monoidal Grothendieck category $R\mbox{-Mod}$ (where $R$ is a commutative ring), so the $\mathcal{P}_{\otimes}$-phantom maps are just the usual phantom maps. But this is no longer true for arbitrary closed symmetric monoidal Grothendieck categories. Maybe one of the most interesting situations in which both definitions do not coincide appears when one considers the category $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ of all quasi-coherent sheaves over a (non-affine) scheme $X$. This is a closed symmetric monoidal Grothendieck category. The closed structure is given by applying the coherator functor $Q\mathcolon \mathcal O_X\mbox{-Mod}\to \mathfrak{Qco}(X)$, to the usual sheaf hom functor. We recall that the coherator $Q$ is defined as the right adjoint functor of the inclusion functor $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)\to \mathcal O_X\mbox{-Mod}$. In most practical cases ($X$ quasi-compact and quasi-separated) the category $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ is also locally finitely presented (see Grothendieck and Dieudonn\'e \cite[I.6.9.12]{GD} or Garkusha \cite{Garkusha} for a precise statement). So it is possible to define
phantom maps in terms of the proper class $\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0}$ of all categorical pure short exact sequences. However, we show in Corollary \ref{nohay.phantom} that, unless the scheme $X$ is affine, it is unlikely to find non-trivial phantom maps in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. Indeed, the categorical purity is not Zariski-local, see Estrada and Saor\'{\i}n \cite{ES} (again, unless $X$ is affine) whereas the geometrical purity is a local concept for these schemes. We refer to \cite{CEI}, \cite[\S 27.4]{Jong}, \cite{EGT} and \cite[13.5]{Vakil} for a recent update on Zariski-local properties of modules.
Motivated by these arguments, we devote the second part of this paper to define a good Zariski-local notion of phantom maps in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ (see Definition \ref{Zariski-local.phantom} and Theorem \ref{Zariski-local.phantom.theorem}).
\medskip\par\noindent
{\bf Definition 1. } A morphism $f\mathcolon \mathscr{G} \rightarrow \mathscr{F}$ in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ is said to be \emph{locally phantom} if there exists an open affine covering $\mathcal U$ of $X$ such that $f_U$ is phantom in ${\mathcal O}_X(U)\mbox{-Mod}$, for every open affine subset $U\in \mathcal U$. We will denote by $\Phi'$ the ideal of all locally phantom maps in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$.
\medskip\par\noindent
A different notion of purity is also introduced in \cite{EEO} for $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$: the {\it stalk-wise} purity $\mathcal{P}_{st}$. That is, a short exact sequence $\mathbb E$ in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ is stalk-wise pure if the induced short exact sequence on the stalks $\mathbb E_x$ is pure in $\mathcal O_{X,x}\mbox{-Mod}$ for every $x\in X$. We then show in Corollary \ref{covering.ideals.qco} that all of these notions of $\mathcal{P}$-phantom maps in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ give rise to covering ideals.
\medskip\par\noindent
{\bf Theorem 2.} The ideals $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st})$ and $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})$ are special covering in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ and the ideal $\Phi'$ is covering in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. If moreover, $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ has a flat generator (for instance, if $X$ is quasi-compact and semi-separated), then all these covers are epimorphisms.
\medskip\par\noindent
We finish this paper by showing that, for semi-separated schemes, these three new definitions of $\mathcal{P}$-phantoms ideals in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ (which are different of the ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$ of phantom maps) coincide. Thus we have the following result (see Proposition \ref{ph2}).
\medskip\par\noindent
{\bf Proposition 1.} Let $X$ be a semi-separated scheme. Then $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})=\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st})=\Phi'$.
\medskip\par\noindent
\section{Purity in locally presentable categories}
Along this paper, the symbol ${\mathcal{C}}$ will stand for an abelian category.
Recall that, given $A,A'\in {\mathcal{C}}$, the class of Yoneda extensions $\mbox{\rm Ext}(A,A')$ is the class of all representatives of isomorphism classes of short exact sequences in ${\mathcal{C}}$
$$0 \rightarrow A' \rightarrow X \rightarrow A \rightarrow 0.$$ We also point out that defining an exact structure $({\mathcal{C}};\mathcal{P})$ in the sense of Quillen \cite{Quillen} in ${\mathcal{C}}$ is the same as defining a proper class $\mathcal{P}$ in the sense of Mac Lane \cite[Section XII.4]{MacLane}. Given two objects $A,A'\in {\mathcal{C}}$ and a proper class $\mathcal{P}$, we shall denote by $\mbox{\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P}}(A,A')$ the class of all representatives of isomorphisms classes of short exact sequences in $\mathcal{P}$. The class $\mathcal{P}$ is called \emph{injectively generated} (resp., \emph{projectively generated}) by a class $\mathcal M$ if a short exact sequence $\mathbb{E}$ belongs to $\mathcal{P}$ if and only if $\mbox{\rm Hom}(\mathbb{E},M)$ is exact (resp. $\mbox{\rm Hom}(M,\mathbb{E})$ is exact), for all $M\in \mathcal M$. Each proper class $\mathcal{P}$ with enough injectives (resp., projectives) is injectively generated (resp. projectively generated) by the class of $\mathcal{P}$-injective objects (resp. $\mathcal{P}$-projective objects). I.e., the class of objects in ${\mathcal{C}}$ which are injective (resp., projective) respect to any short exact sequence in $\mathcal{P}$.
We can now state our definition of phantom morphism.
\begin{definition}
A map $\phi\mathcolon M\to N$ in ${\mathcal{C}}$ is called \emph{$\mathcal{P}$-phantom} if $$\mbox{\rm Im }(\mbox{\rm Ext}(\phi,-))\subseteq \mbox{\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P}}(N,-).$$
We will denote by $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ the ideal of $\mathcal{P}$-phantom maps in ${\mathcal{C}}$.
\end{definition}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a category and let us fix a cardinal, which we will always assume that is infinite and regular. An object $A$ in $\mathcal{A}$ is called
\emph{$\lambda$-presentable} if the functor $\mbox{\rm Hom}_{\mathcal{A}}(A,-)$
preserves $\lambda$-directed colimits. The category $\mathcal{A}$ is called
\emph{locally $\lambda$-presentable} if it is cocomplete and there is a
set $\mathcal S$ of $\lambda$-presentable objects in $\mathcal{A}$ such that any other object in $\mathcal{A}$ is a $\lambda$-directed colimit of objects in
$\mathcal S$.
For short, $\aleph_0$-directed colimits will be just called \emph{direct
limits;} locally $\aleph_0$-presentable categories, \emph{locally finitely presented}; and $\aleph_0$-presentable objects, \emph{finitely presented}.
\begin{definition}\cite[Definition 2.27]{AR}
A morphism $f\!:\! A \rightarrow B$ in $\mathcal{A}$ is said to be \emph{$\lambda$-pure} if for any commutative diagram
$$\xymatrix{A'\ar[r]^{f'}\ar[d]_u & B' \ar[d]^v \ar@{-->}[ld]_g\\
A\ar[r]^f & B}$$
with $A',B'$ $\lambda$-presentable, there is a morphism $g\mathcolon B' \rightarrow A$ such that $u = g \circ f'$.
\end{definition}
If the category $\mathcal{A}$ is locally $\lambda$-presentable, we infer from \cite[Proposition 2.30]{AR} that a morphism in $\mathcal{A}$ is $\lambda$-pure if and only if it is a $\lambda$-directed colimit of sections.
When the considered category ${\mathcal{C}}$ is abelian, every $\lambda$-pure morphism gives rise to a short exact sequence. Hence a short exact sequence is $\lambda$-pure if and only if it is a $\lambda$-directed colimit of split short exact sequences. In the sequel, we will refer to $\lambda$-pure short exact sequences as \emph{categorical pure} short exact sequences and we will denote by $\mathcal{P}_{\lambda}$ the proper class of all categorical pure short exact sequences. For a detailed treatment on the theory, see \cite{AR}.
Recall that a morphism $f$ is called \emph{projective} if $f \in \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{sp})$, where, $\mathcal{P}_{sp}$ is the smallest proper class whose elements are all split short exact sequences. Note that if ${\mathcal{C}}$ has enough projective objects, then a morphism $f$ is projective if and only if it factors through a projective object.
\begin{proposition}\label{proj.mor}
Let ${\mathcal{C}}$ be a locally finitely presented category. Then $\phi\in \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$ if and only if it is a direct limit of projective morphisms.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Let $\phi\in \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$, $\phi\mathcolon M\to N$. We may write $M=\varinjlim M_i$ as a direct limit of finitely presented objects. Let $\{\tau_i\mathcolon M_i\to M\}$ be the structural morphisms. It is easy to check that the family $\{\phi\circ \tau_i\}$ is a directed system of projective morphisms and that $\phi=\varinjlim(\phi\circ\tau_i)$.
Conversely assume that $\{\phi\mathcolon M_i\to N_i\}$ is a morphism of directed systems with each $\phi_i$, a projective morphism and call $\phi=\varinjlim \phi_i$.
We need to check that the upper row $\mathbb{E}\phi$ in the following pullback diagram
$$\xymatrix{\mathbb{E}\phi: \textrm{ } 0\ar[r] & K \ar@{=}[d]\ar[r] & P\ar[r]\ar[d] &\varinjlim M_i \ar[r]\ar@{->}[d]^{\varinjlim \phi_i} & 0\\
\mathbb{E}: \textrm{ } 0\ar[r] & K\ar[r] & X \ar[r] & \varinjlim N_i\ar[r] & 0
}$$
is categorical pure (i.e. it belongs to $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$). To see this, let $T\to \varinjlim M_i$ be a morphism with $T$, finitely presented. Then $T\to\varinjlim M_i $ factors through $T\to M_i\to \varinjlim M_i$ for some index $i$. Let us compute the pullback
$$\xymatrix{ \textrm{ } 0\ar[r] & K \ar@{=}[d]\ar[r] & P'\ar[r]\ar[d] &N_i \ar[r]\ar@{->}[d]^{\kappa_i} & 0\\
\textrm{ } 0\ar[r] & K\ar[r] & X \ar[r] & \varinjlim N_i \ar[r] & 0
}$$ where $\kappa_i\mathcolon N_i\to \varinjlim N_i$ is the structural morphism. As $\phi_i\mathcolon M_i\to N_i$ is projective, we can find a morphism $M_i\to P'$ making the obvious diagram commutative. Finally, since the $\mathbb{E}\phi$ is a pullback, there is a $T\to P$ such that $T\to P\to \varinjlim M_i$ equals to $T\to \varinjlim M_i$. Hence, the short exact sequence $\mathbb{E}\phi$ is categorical pure.
\end{proof}
For later use, we will denote by $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$ the category whose objects are all morphisms among objects in ${\mathcal{C}}$. It is easy to check that $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$ is also abelian, and if ${\mathcal{C}}$ is, in addition, locally $\lambda$-presentable, so is $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$. In fact, the $\lambda$-presentable objects in $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$ are just the morphisms $A\to B$ in ${\mathcal{C}}$ with $A$ and $B$ $\lambda$-presentable objects in ${\mathcal{C}}$. Given a proper class $\mathcal{P}$ in ${\mathcal{C}}$, the ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ may be regarded as an additive subcategory in $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$. Indeed, it is easy to observe that if $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is a (pre)covering class in $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$ then $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is a (pre)covering ideal in ${\mathcal{C}}$ (see Estrada, Guil Asensio and Ozbek \cite[Proof of Theorem 3.2]{EGO} for a detailed explanation).
\section{Phantom morphisms in Grothendieck categories}
Let $\mathcal{P}$ be a proper class in $R\mbox{-Mod}$. For any left $R$-module $B$ there is always a short exact sequence that serves as a test sequence to check whether $f\mathcolon A\to B$ is $\mathcal{P}$-phantom. Indeed, just take a short exact sequence
$$\mathbb{E}: \quad 0\rightarrow K \rightarrow P \rightarrow B \rightarrow 0$$
with a projective module $P$. Then any short exact sequence $\mathbb{E}'$ ending in $B$
$$\xymatrix{\mathbb{E}: \textrm{ } 0\ar[r] & K' \ar[r]\ar[d]^g & P\ar[r]\ar[d] & B\ar[r]\ar@{=}[d] & 0\\
\mathbb{E}': \textrm{ } 0\ar[r] & K\ar[r] & X \ar[r] & B \ar[r] & 0
}$$
is in fact a pushout of $\mathbb{E}$, i.e. $\mathbb{E}'\cong g \mathbb{E}$ for some morphism $g$. Now, to check that a morphism $f\mathcolon A\rightarrow B$ is $\mathcal{P}$-phantom,
it suffices to show that the pullback of $\mathbb{E}$ along $f$, $\mathbb{E}f$, belongs to $\mathcal{P}$, since any pullback $\mathbb{E}'f\cong (g\mathbb{E})f \cong g(\mathbb{E}f)$ and $\mathcal{P}$ is closed under pushouts. This observation plays an important role in proving the existence of special phantom precovers, see \cite[page 67]{Herzog2}.
The above arguments cannot be applied to more general categories unless they have enough projective morphisms. However, for Grothendieck categories ${\mathcal{C}}$, we can still get, for each object $B\in {\mathcal{C}}$, a set of short exact sequences
$$\mathbb{E}_i: \quad 0 \rightarrow K_i \rightarrow T_i \rightarrow B \rightarrow 0,$$
indexed by $i\in I_B$, such that every short exact sequence $\mathbb{E}$ ending in $B$ is a pushout of some of them. That is, $\mathbb{E} \cong g \mathbb{E}_i$, for some $i\in I_B$ and some morphism $g$, see \v{S}{t}\!\!\! 'ov\'{\i}\v{c}ek \cite[Proposition 5.3]{Sto}. By the same argument as above, a morphism $f\mathcolon A\rightarrow B $ in ${\mathcal{C}}$ is $\mathcal{P}$-phantom if and only if $\mathbb{E}_i f$ belongs to $\mathcal{P}$, for each $i\in I_B$.
As explained in the introduction, the ideal of (classical) phantom morphisms has a direct relation with the usual notion of purity in $R\mbox{-Mod}$. More generally, with the categorical purity $\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0}$ in a locally finitely presented Grothendieck category. However, there are interesting situations in which different kinds of purity are also meaningful. For example, the so-called stalkwise-purity in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$, which will be detailed in the next section, plays an important role in several problems in the category of quasi-coherent sheaves $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$.
Unfortunately, when dealing with a notion of purity which is different from the categorical one, one can not use the standard arguments introduced in \cite{Herzog, Herzog2, EGO} to deduce the existence of phantom precovers. For example, the category $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ has rarely projective objects and the proper class of stalkwise purity is not known to be projectively generated. Therefore the goal of this section will be to give a different approach to the existence of (pre)covering ideals in more general categories which extends the original one in the classical situations. To pursue this aim, we first recall the following result by Krause \cite[Theorem 2.1]{Krause}.
\begin{lemma}\label{krau}
Let ${\mathcal{C}}$ be a locally presentable category and let ${\mathcal{F}}$ be an additive subcategory of ${\mathcal{C}}$ which is closed under direct limits. If ${\mathcal{F}}$ is closed under $\lambda$-pure subobjects or $\lambda$-quotients for some regular cardinal $\lambda$, then it is a precovering class in ${\mathcal{C}}$.
\end{lemma}
We can now prove.
\begin{theorem}\label{main}
Let ${\mathcal{C}}$ be a locally $\lambda$-presentable additive category and $\mathcal{P}$, a proper class which is closed under direct limits. Then $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is a covering ideal.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Note that any proper class contains all the split short exact sequences. Since $\mathcal{P}$ is closed under direct limits, it also contains all direct limits of split short exact sequences, which implies that $\mathcal{P}_{\lambda} \subseteq \mathcal{P}$. The category of morphisms in ${\mathcal{C}}$, $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$, is also locally $\lambda$-presentable. As pointed out in Section 2, the ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ may be regarded as an additive subcategory of $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$. It is also closed under direct limits because a pullback diagram is a finite limit diagram. Moreover, finite limits and direct limits commute and $\mathcal{P}$ is closed under direct limits. To apply Lemma \ref{krau} for $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ as a subcategory of $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$, we claim that $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is also closed under $\lambda$-pure quotients.
Let $f\mathcolon A\rightarrow B$ be a morphism in $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ and $a\mathcolon f \rightarrow f'$, a $\lambda$-pure epimorphism. Then it is of the form
$$\xymatrix{A\ar[r]^{a_0} \ar[d]_f & A' \ar[r]\ar[d]^{f'} & 0\\
B\ar[r]_{a_1} & B'\ar[r] &0.
}
$$
The fact that $a$ is a $\lambda$-pure epimorphism in $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$ implies that $a_0$ and $a_1$ are $\lambda$-pure epimorphisms in ${\mathcal{C}}$ as well, since the $\lambda$-presentable objects in $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$ are exactly the morphisms with $\lambda$-presentable domain and codomain.
By assumption,
$$\mbox{\rm Ext}(a_1 \circ f, \textrm{-})= \mbox{\rm Ext}(f' \circ a_0, \textrm{-})\mathcolon \mbox{\rm Ext}(B', \textrm{-}) \rightarrow \mbox{\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P}}(A, \textrm{-}).$$
Then, for any short exact sequence of the form $\mathbb{E}f'$, we have that $(\mathbb{E}f')a_0=\mathbb{E}(f' \circ a_0)$ belongs to $\mathcal{P}$,
$$\xymatrix{
\mathbb{E}(f'\circ a_0): \quad 0 \ar[r] &X \ar[r]\ar@{=}[d]&Y''\ar[d]\ar[r]^g& A\ar[r]\ar[d]^{a_0}&0\\
\mathbb{E}f': \quad 0 \ar[r] &X \ar[r]\ar@{=}[d]&Y'\ar[d]\ar[r]& A'\ar[r]\ar[d]^{f'}&0\\
\mathbb{E}: \quad 0 \ar[r] &X \ar[r]&Y\ar[r]& B'\ar[r]&0.}
$$
As $a_0$ is a $\mathcal{P}_{\lambda}$-epimorphism, it is also a $\mathcal{P}$-epimorphism. Then $a_0 \circ g$ is a $\mathcal{P}$-epimorphism, which implies $\mathbb{E}f' \in \mathcal{P}$. Therefore, we infer from Lemma \ref{krau} that $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is a precovering class in $\operatorname{Mor}({\mathcal{C}})$. Since $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is closed under direct limits,
it is in fact a covering ideal (note that the argument of Xu \cite[Theorem 2.2.8]{Xu} for modules carries over to our setting). Hence, the ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P})$ is covering by the comments at the end of Section 2.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{pushoutp}
Let $\mathcal{P}$ be a proper class with enough injective or projective objects. Consider the following pushout diagram
\begin{equation}\label{d31}
\xymatrix{&0\ar[d]&0\ar[d]&\\
0 \ar[r]& K \ar@{^{(}->}[r]^u\ar@{^{(}->}[d]_v &B \ar[r]^{\varphi}\ar@{^{(}->}[d]^{v'}&A\ar@{=}[d]\\
0\ar[r]&K'\ar[r]^{u'}\ar[d]_a& B'\ar[r]^{\varphi'}\ar[d]^{a'}& A\\
&K''\ar@{=}[r]\ar[d]&K''\ar[d]&\\
&0&0&
}
\end{equation}
where $v$ is $\mathcal{P}$-monic and $\varphi$ is $\mathcal{P}$-phantom. Then $\varphi'$ is $\mathcal{P}$-phantom, as well.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
First, suppose that $\mathcal{P}$ has enough projectives. Let $f\mathcolon T \rightarrow B'$ be a morphism with $T$ a $\mathcal{P}$-projective object. Since $a$ is a $\mathcal{P}$-epimorphism, there is a morphism $f'\mathcolon T \rightarrow K'$ such that $a \circ f' =a' \circ f$. So $a' \circ (f- u' \circ f')=0$. Then there exists a unique morphism $t\mathcolon T \rightarrow B$ such that $v' \circ t =f- u' \circ f'$. Again,
$$\varphi \circ t= \varphi' \circ v' \circ t=\varphi' \circ (f-u' \circ f')=\varphi ' \circ f,$$
which means that the following diagram is commutative
$$\xymatrix{T\ar[r]^{t}\ar[d]_f& B \ar[d]^{\varphi}\\
B' \ar[r]_{\varphi'}&A.}$$
Finally, the assertion follows from the fact that any pullback of an exact sequence over $\varphi' \circ f=\varphi \circ t$ splits because $\varphi$ is $\mathcal{P}$-phantom and $T$ is $\mathcal{P}$-projective.
Suppose now that $\mathcal{P}$ has enough injectives. Let
$$\mathbb{E}: 0 \rightarrow Y \rightarrow X \rightarrow A \rightarrow 0$$
be an exact sequence. Then there is a commutative diagram
$$\xymatrix@=.5cm{&&&&&0\ar[dd]&&0\ar[dd]&&\\
&&&&0\ar[dd]&&0\ar[dd]&&&\\
&&&&&K\ar@{=}[rr]\ar[dd]^<<<<t\ar@{^{(}->}[dl]^v&&K\ar[dd]^u\ar@{^{(}->}[dl]^v&&\\
&&&&K'\ar@{=}[rr]\ar[dd]^<<<<{t'}&&K'\ar[dd]^<<<<{u'}&&&\\
(\mathbb{E}\varphi):&0\ar[rr]&&Y\ar[rr]^<<<<<{a''}\ar@{=}[dl]\ar@{=}[dd]&&X''\ar[rr]\ar[dl]^{v''}\ar[dd]&&B\ar[rr]\ar[dd]^<<<<{\varphi}\ar[dl]&&0\\
(\mathbb{E}\varphi'):0\ar[rr]&&Y\ar[rr]^>>>>>{a'}\ar@{=}[dd]&&X'\ar[rr]\ar[dd]&&B'\ar[rr]\ar[dd]^<<<<{\varphi'}&&0&\\
&0\ar[rr]&&Y\ar[rr]\ar@{=}[dl]&&X\ar[rr]\ar@{=}[dl]&&A\ar@{=}[dl]\ar[rr]&&0\\
\mathbb{E}:0\ar[rr]&&Y\ar[rr]&&X\ar[rr]&&A\ar[rr]&&0&
.}
$$
We have to show that $\mbox{\rm Hom}(\mathbb{E}\varphi',H)$ is exact for every $\mathcal{P}$-injective object $H$. Let $h\mathcolon Y\rightarrow H$ be a morphism. Since $a''$ is $\mathcal{P}$-monic by assumption, there exists an $h''\mathcolon X'' \rightarrow H$ such that $h'' \circ a''=h$. But $v$ is also $\mathcal{P}$-monic, so there is a morphism $h'\mathcolon K' \rightarrow H$ such that $h' \circ v=h'' \circ t$. But the left-face of the upper cube is a pushout diagram because $\mbox{\rm Coker } v= \mbox{\rm Coker } v''$. So there exists an $\overline{h}\mathcolon X' \rightarrow H$ such that $\overline{h} \circ v''=h''$ and $\overline{h} \circ t'= h'$. Then $\overline{h} \circ a'=\overline{h} \circ v'' \circ a''=h'' \circ a''=h$. Therefore, $\mathbb{E}\varphi'$ belongs to $\mathcal{P}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition} \label{cor}
Let $\mathcal{P}$ be a proper class with enough injectives. Then the kernel of any $\mathcal{P}$-phantom cover is $\mathcal{P}$-injective.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varphi\mathcolon B \rightarrow A$ be a phantom cover and call
$K:=\mbox{\rm Ker } \varphi$. Consider the commutative diagram
$$\xymatrix{0 \ar[r]&K \ar[r]\ar@{^{(}->}[d]&B \ar[r]^{\varphi}\ar[d]_g&A\ar@{=}[d]\\
0 \ar[r]& E\ar[r]&B'\ar[r]^{\varphi'}&A
}$$
where $K \hookrightarrow E$ is the $\mathcal{P}$-injective envelope of $K$.
By Proposition \ref{pushoutp}, $\varphi'$ is $\mathcal{P}$-phantom. Therefore, $K$ is a direct summand of $E$ since $\varphi$ is a $\mathcal{P}$-phantom cover.
\end{proof}
We close this section by introducing new significant examples of $\mathcal{P}$-phantom morphisms in several categories. Recall that a monoidal category is a category ${\mathcal{C}}$ equipped with a bifunctor
$$-\otimes - \mathcolon \quad {\mathcal{C}} \times {\mathcal{C}} \rightarrow {\mathcal{C}},$$
subject to certain coherence conditions which ensure that all relevant diagrams commute. A monoidal category is called symmetric if, for every pair of objects $A, B$ in ${\mathcal{C}}$, there is an isomorphism $A \otimes B \cong B \otimes A$, which is natural in both $A$ and $B$. A monoidal structure $-\otimes - \mathcolon {\mathcal{C}} \times {\mathcal{C}} \rightarrow {\mathcal{C}}$ on ${\mathcal{C}}$ is said to be \emph{closed} if for each $A\in {\mathcal{C}}$, the functor $- \otimes A\mathcolon {\mathcal{C}} \rightarrow {\mathcal{C}}$ has a right adjoint $[A,-]\mathcolon {\mathcal{C}} \rightarrow {\mathcal{C}}$. For the whole axioms and examples of closed symmetric monoidal categories, see Kelly \cite{Kelly}.
A monomorphism $f\mathcolon X \rightarrow Y$ in a closed symmetric monoidal category ${\mathcal{C}}$ is called \emph{$\otimes$-pure} if for all $Z \in {\mathcal{C}}$, $f\otimes Z$ remains monic, see \cite{Fox}. In our context, we will call them \emph{geometrical pure}, as in \cite{EGO15}.
Let ${\mathcal{C}}$ be a Grothendieck category
with a closed monoidal structure. Then ${\mathcal{C}}$ is locally $\lambda$-presentable for some regular cardinal $\lambda$. And two different nontrivial proper
classes naturally arise. On the one hand, the class $\mathcal{P}_{\lambda}$ of all $\lambda$-pure (categorical) short exact sequences. And, on the other, the class $\mathcal{P}_{\otimes}$ of all
geometrical pure short exact sequences. It was proved in \cite{EGO15} that $\mathcal{P}_{\otimes}$ has enough injectives and, in fact, it is injectively generated by a set.
Indeed, it is easy to check that each $[A,\mathcal{E}]$ is geometric pure-injective for any injective cogenerator $\mathcal{E}$ of ${\mathcal{C}}$ and any object $A \in {\mathcal{C}}$.
Let us show that an exact sequence $\mathbb{E}$ is geometric pure if and only if $\mbox{\rm Hom}(\mathbb{E},[A,\mathcal{E}])$ is exact for every $\lambda$-presentable object $A$ of ${\mathcal{C}}$. The necessity is clear since $[A,\mathcal{E}]$ is geometric pure-injective. For the sufficiency, it is enough to show that $\mathbb{E} \otimes A$ is exact in ${\mathcal{C}}$ for any $\lambda$-presentable object $A$, as $\otimes$ preserves any colimit. The assertion now follows since $\mbox{\rm Hom}(\mathbb{E}, [A,\mathcal{E}]) \cong \mbox{\rm Hom}(\mathbb{E}\otimes A,\mathcal{E})$ is exact and $\mathcal{E}$ is a cogenerator.
On the other hand, one may consider, for any set $\mathcal{S}$ of objects, the proper class flatly generated by $\mathcal{S}$, $\tau^{-1}(\mathcal{S})$. This class consists of all short exact sequences $\mathbb{E}$ which remain exact under $-\otimes S$, for every $S\in \mathcal{S}$. Note that it is clearly closed under direct limits and has enough injectives. In particular, when ${\mathcal{C}}=R\mbox{-Mod}$ and $S$ is a set of finitely presented $R$-modules, the proper class of all $\mbox{\rm Hom}(\mathcal{S},-)$-exact sequences coincides with $\tau^{-1}(Tr(\mathcal{S}))$, where $Tr$ is the
Auslander-Bridger transpose of the finitely presented $R$-modules, see \cite[Theorem 8.3]{Sklyarenko}.
\begin{corollary}\label{ejemplos}
The following ideals are special covering in ${\mathcal{C}}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\aleph_0})$, for any locally finitely presented category ${\mathcal{C}}$,
\item $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})$, for any Grothendieck closed symmetric monoidal category ${\mathcal{C}}$,
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
The main advantage of geometrical purity is that it provides a wide class of categories whose proper purity concept may be obtained through a monoidal structure and recovers many of the known exact structures. For instance, the usual purity in $R\mbox{-Mod}$; the componentwise purity, as well as, the categorical purity in the category $\mathbf{C}(R)$ of complexes of $R$-modules; the usual purity on stalks in the category ${\mathcal O}_X \mbox{-Mod}$ of ${\mathcal O}_X$-modules; or the stalkwise purity in the category $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ of quasi-coherent sheaves over a quasi-separated scheme $X$.
\section{Phantom maps in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$}
The goal of this section will be to introduce a notion of phantom maps in the category $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ of quasi-coherent sheaves over a scheme $X$. It was proved in Enochs and Estrada (\cite{EEr}) that $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ is always a Grothendieck category for any scheme. Moreover, it is locally finitely presented when $X$ is quasi-compact and quasi-separated (see \cite[I.6.9.12]{GD} or \cite[Proposition 7]{Garkusha} for a precise formulation).
Let us start by discussing a simple example which will show that the usual notion of (categorical) phantom maps is not suitable in this framework. We are going to check that, in case the scheme $X={\bf P^1}(R)$ is the projective line over any commutative ring $R$, there are no non-zero classical phantom maps in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. Let us cover $X$ by the usual affine open subsets $\mathcal U= U\hookleftarrow U\cap V\hookrightarrow V$. The structure sheaf of $X$ is given by the following representation of $\mathcal U$,
$$\mathcal O= R[x]\hookrightarrow R[x,x^{-1}]\hookleftarrow R[x^{-1}].$$
The Serre's twisting sheaves $\mathcal O(n)$ are given by
$$\mathcal O(n)=R[x]\hookrightarrow R[x,x^{-1}]\stackrel{x^n}{\leftarrow}R[x^{-1}],$$
with
$n\in \mathbb{Z}$. It is known that the family of twisting sheaves $\{{\mathcal O}(n)\}_{n\in \mathbb{Z}}$ generates the category $\mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$. Indeed it suffices to take the family $\{{\mathcal O} (-n)\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ to generate $\mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$.
On the other hand, any quasi-coherent sheaf ${\mathscr M}\in \mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$ is determined by a representation of $\mathcal U$
$${\mathscr M}=M\stackrel{f}{\to} P\stackrel{g}{\leftarrow} N,$$
where $M\in R[x]\mbox{-Mod}$,
$N\in R[x^{-1}]\mbox{-Mod}$, $P\in R[x^{-1},x]\mbox{-Mod}$, $f$ is an $R[x]$-linear map
and $g$, a $R[x^{-1}]$-linear, satisfying that ${S^{-1}} f\!:\! {S^{-1}} M\to P$ and ${T^{-1}} g\!:\!{T^{-1}} N\to P$ are isomorphisms, where $S=\{1,x,x^2,\cdots\}$ and
$T=\{1,x^{-1},x^{-2},\cdots\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{prev}
Let $0\neq {\mathscr T}=(M\stackrel{f}{\to}P\stackrel{g}{\leftarrow}N)\in \mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$.
Given $0\neq m\in M$ (resp., $0\neq p\in P$, $0\neq y\in N$), there exists a
natural number
$k_m$ (resp., $k_p$, $k_y$) such that for every $l\geq k_m$ (resp., $l\geq k_p$, $l\geq k_y$) and every subset $\Delta\subseteq \mathbb Z$, any morphism
$$(\gamma_1,\gamma,\gamma_2)\mathcolon {\mathscr T} \to \oplus_{n\in \Delta}{\mathcal O}(-n-l)$$
maps $m$ (resp., $p$, $y$) to
zero.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Since $T^{-1}g\mathcolon T^{-1}N\to P$ is an
isomorphism, we get that
$f(m)=g(a)/x^{-l}$, for some $a\in N$ and $l\in \mathbb{N}$. That is, $g(a)=x^{-l}f(m)$. Set $k=l+1$.
Let $\Delta\subseteq \mathbb Z$ and consider a morphism $(\gamma_1,
\gamma,\gamma_2):{\mathscr T}\to \oplus_{n\in \Delta}{\mathcal O}(-n-k)$. Let us write
$$\gamma_1(m)=(\ldots,p_1(x),\cdots,p_k(x),\ldots)$$ and
$$\gamma_2(a)=(\ldots,q_1(x^{-1}),\cdots,q_t(x^{-1}),\ldots).$$
Then,
$$\gamma \circ g(a)=\gamma(x^{-l}f(m))=x^{-l}\gamma(f(m))=
\gamma_1(m)=x^{-l}(p_1(x),\cdots,p_k(x)).$$ Thus,
$ord(x^{-l}p_i(x))\geq -l$, for every $1\leq i\leq k$. But, by the
commutativity of the diagram, we also get that
$$\gamma\circ g(a)=\oplus_{n\in \Delta} x^{-(n+k)}(\gamma_2(a))=\oplus_{n\in \Delta}
x^{-(n+k)}(q_1(x^{-1}),\cdots,q_t(x^{-1}))$$ $$
=x^{-k}(r_1(x^{-1}),\cdots,r_t(x^{-1})),$$ with
$ord(x^{-k}r_i(x^{-1}))\leq -k=-l-1$, for all $1\leq i\leq t$. This shows that
$\gamma_1(m)=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{nomorfp}
Assume that ${\mathscr T}\in \mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^ 1}(R))$ is finitely presented. Then, there exists a
natural number $k=k({\mathscr T})$ such that there are no nonzero morphisms from ${\mathscr T}$
into an arbitrary direct sum of the elements of the family $\{ {\mathcal O}(-n-k):\ n\in\mathbb{N}
\}$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} Without lost of generality, we may assume that $M$ is generated by $m_1,\ldots, m_s$;
$P$ is generated by $p_1,\ldots, p_s$; and $N$ is generated by $y_1,\ldots,y_s$. Then,
in view of Lemma \ref{prev}, we just have to take $k\geq
\textrm{max}\{k_{m_i},k_{p_i},k_{y_i}:\ i=1,\ldots, s\}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{nohay}
The only projective morphism in $\mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$ is the zero map.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that ${\mathscr M}\to{\mathscr L}$ is a projective morphism in $\mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$. Since $\mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$ is locally finitely presented, we can assume that ${\mathscr M}$ is finitely presented. There exists an epimorphism $\oplus_{n\in
\mathbb{N}} {\mathcal O}(-n)^{(X_n)}\to {\mathscr L}$. Let $(r,s,v)_{-n}$ be the composition map
$${\mathcal O}(-n)\hookrightarrow \oplus_{n\in
\mathbb{N}} {\mathcal O}(-n)^{(X_n)}\to {\mathscr L}.$$
Let us fix a natural number $n_0$. For any $n\in \mathbb N$, we can consider the morphisms ${\mathcal O}(-n-n_0)\to
{\mathscr L}$ given by $(r,s,x^{-n_0}v)_{-n-n_0}$ and $(x^{n_0}r,x^{n_0}s,v)_{n+n_0}$, respectively. These
two morphisms induce a morphism
$${\mathcal O}(-n-n_0)\oplus {\mathcal O}(-n-n_0)\to {\mathscr L}.$$
In turn, these morphisms induce an epimorphism
$$\label{eqon}\bigoplus_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\left (
{\mathcal O}(-n-n_0)^{(X_n)}\oplus
{\mathcal O}(-n-n_0)^{(X_n)}\right )\stackrel{\psi}{\longrightarrow} {\mathscr L}.
$$
Now, as ${\mathscr M}\in\mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$ is finitely presented,
Corollary
\ref{nomorfp} states that there exists an $n_0\in \mathbb{N}$ such that it is not
possible to factorize any nonzero morphism ${\mathscr M}\to {\mathscr L}$ through ${\psi}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{nohay.phantom}
There are no non-trivial phantom maps in $\mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The category $\mathfrak{Qco}({\bf P^1}(R))$ is locally finitely presented, so the result follows from propositions \ref{nohay} and \ref{proj.mor}.
\end{proof}
In view of this example, we will devote the rest of this section to introduce a new (Zariski-local) definition of phantom morphisms in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$.
Recall that $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ is a coreflective subcategory of the category ${\mathcal O}_X\mbox{-Mod}$ of ${\mathcal O}_X$-modules; that is, the inclusion $i\mathcolon \mathfrak{Qco}(X) \hookrightarrow {\mathcal O}_X \mbox{-Mod}$ has a right adjoint, called \emph{coherator}.
Note that if the scheme $X$ is quasi-separated then, for each open affine $U$ and each inclusion $\iota\mathcolon U\to X$, the restriction functor $res_U\mathcolon~\mathfrak{Qco}(X) \rightarrow \mathfrak{Qco}(U)$ is a left adjoint functor of the direct image functor $\iota_*\mathcolon \mathfrak{Qco}(U)\to \mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ which implies that $\operatorname{res}_U$ preserves all colimits. Therefore a pushout diagram in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ gives rise to a pushout diagram on each module of sections over any affine open subset. Conversely, for any family $\{\mathscr{F}_i\}_{i\in I}$ of quasi-coherent sheaves, $ (\mbox{colim}_I \mathscr{F})(U)\cong \mbox{colim}_{I} (\mathscr{F}_i(U))$, where $U$ is an affine open subset of $X$.
\begin{lemma}\label{pb1}
Let
$$\xymatrix{0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}\ar[r]\ar@{=}[d] & \mathscr{G}'\ar[r]\ar[d] & \mathscr{G}\ar[r]\ar[d] & 0\\
0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}'\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}''\ar[r] & 0
}.$$
be a commutative diagram in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ with exact rows. Then the diagram induced on the modules of sections over any affine open subset $U$ is also a pullback.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $U$ be an affine open subset. Then we have a commutative diagram with exact rows
$$\xymatrix{0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}(U)\ar[r]\ar@{=}[d] & \mathscr{G}'(U)\ar[r]\ar[d] & \mathscr{G}(U)\ar[r]\ar[d] & 0\\
0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}(U)\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}'(U)\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}''(U)\ar[r] & 0
}$$
in ${\mathcal O}_X(U)\mbox{-Mod}$. The right square of such a diagram is always a pullback.
\end{proof}
Our next lemma is straightforward to prove.
\begin{lemma}\label{pb2}
Let
$$\xymatrix{ & & & \mathscr{G}\ar[d] & \\
0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}'\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}''\ar[r] & 0
}$$
be a diagram in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ with the row exact. Let us construct the family of pullback diagrams
$$\xymatrix{ 0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}(U)\ar[r]\ar@{=}[d] & M_U\ar[r]\ar[d]& \mathscr{G}(U)\ar[d]\ar[r] & 0\\
0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}(U)\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}'(U)\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}''(U)\ar[r] & 0
}$$
for each affine open subset $U$ and the pullback diagram in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$
$$\xymatrix{ 0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}\ar[r]\ar@{=}[d] & \mathscr{G}'\ar[r]\ar[d]& \mathscr{G}\ar[d]\ar[r] & 0\\
0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}'\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}''\ar[r] & 0.
}$$
Then $\mathscr{G}'(U) \simeq M_U$ for every affine open subset $U$.
\end{lemma}
We can now introduce a Zariski-local notion of purity in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. The following result was proved in \cite[Proposition 3.4]{EEO}.
\begin{proposition}\label{pure2}
Let $X$ be a scheme and $\mathscr{F}, \mathscr{G} \in \mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. The following statements are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $0\rightarrow \mathscr{F}\stackrel{\tau}{\rightarrow} \mathscr{G}$ is geometrical pure exact in ${\mathcal O}_X \mbox{-Mod}$;
\item There exists an open covering of $X$ by affine open sets, $\mathcal{U}=\{U_i\}$, such that $0\rightarrow \mathscr{F}(U_i)\stackrel{\tau_{U_i}}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{G}(U_i)$ is pure in ${\mathcal O}_X(U_i)\mbox{-Mod}$;
\item $0\rightarrow \mathscr{F}_x\stackrel{\tau_x}{\rightarrow} \mathscr{G}_x$ is pure in ${\mathcal O}_{X,x}\mbox{-Mod}$, for each $x\in X$;
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
We will call a short exact sequence in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ \emph{stalkwise pure} if it satisfies the above equivalent conditions. We will denote by $\mathcal{P}_{st}$ the corresponding proper class. Since stalks, colimits and tensor products in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ commute, we have the following ordering of proper classes in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$
$$\mathcal{P}_{\lambda} \subseteq \mathcal{P}_{st} \subseteq \mathcal{P}_{\otimes},$$
where $\lambda$ is a regular cardinal for which $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ is locally $\lambda$-presentable. Therefore, $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\lambda}) \subseteq \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st}) \subseteq \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes}).$ We want to study how $\mathcal{P}_{st}$-phantom morphisms carry phantom-property on sections.
\begin{definition}\label{Zariski-local.phantom}
A morphism $f\mathcolon \mathscr{G} \rightarrow \mathscr{F}$ in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ is said to be \emph{locally phantom} if $f_U$ is phantom in ${\mathcal O}_X(U)\mbox{-Mod}$, for each affine open subset $U$. The ideal of locally phantom morphisms in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ will be denoted by $\Phi'$.
\end{definition}
Let us begin by characterizing phantom maps among modules over a commutative ring in terms of prime ideals.
\begin{lemma}\label{l1}
Let $R$ be a commutative ring and $f\!:\! M'\rightarrow M$, a homomorphism of $R$-modules. Then $f$ is phantom if and only if $f_P$ is phantom in $R_P \mbox{-Mod}$ for every $P \in \mbox{Spec}(R)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $f$ is a phantom morphism in $R\mbox{-Mod}$ and consider the pullback diagram in $R_P \mbox{-Mod}$ for $P \in \mbox{Spec}(R)$
$$\xymatrix{0 \ar[r]& A \ar[r]\ar@{=}[d]& B' \ar[r]\ar[d]& M'_{P}\ar[d]^{f_P}\ar[r] &0\\
0\ar[r]&A \ar[r]& B\ar[r]&M_P \ar[r] & 0.
}
$$
Using the canonical morphisms $M \rightarrow M_P$ and $M' \rightarrow M'_P$, we get a commutative diagram
$$\xymatrix@!0{
0\ar[rr] &&A\ar[rr]\ar@{=}[dd]\ar@{=}[dr]&&N'\ar[dd]\ar[rr]\ar[dr]&&M'\ar[dd]\ar[rr]\ar[dr]^f&&0\\
& 0\ar[rr]&&A\ar@{=}[dd]\ar[rr]&&N\ar[dd]\ar[rr]&&M\ar[rr]\ar[dd]&&0\\
0\ar[rr]&&A \ar[rr]\ar@{=}[dr]&&B'\ar[rr]\ar[dr]&& M'_P \ar[rr]\ar[dr]^{f_P}&&0\\
&0\ar[rr]&&A\ar[rr]&&B\ar[rr]&&M_P\ar[rr]&&0
}$$
in which each face is a diagram in $R\mbox{-Mod}$ except to the bottom face, which is in $R_P \mbox{-Mod}$. The upper rectangle is a pullback diagram, so by our assumption, the upper row is pure-exact. But purity is preserved under localization and $A_P\simeq A$ when we think of $A$ as $R$-module, see Pinzon\cite[Remark 3.8]{Pinzon}. Therefore, $f_P$ is phantom in $R_P\mbox{-Mod}$.
The converse follows from the fact that the localization functor preserves pullback diagrams of epimorphisms and that a monomorphism $\iota$ is pure if and only if each localization $\iota_P$, $P \in \mbox{Spec}(R)$, is pure.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{Zariski-local.phantom.theorem}
Let $f\mathcolon \mathscr{G} \rightarrow \mathscr{F}$ be a morphism in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. The following are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $f$ is locally phantom;
\item There is a cover $\mathcal{U}$ of $X$ consisting of affine open subsets such that $f_U$ is phantom for every $U \in \mathcal{U}$;
\item $f_x$ is phantom in ${\mathcal O}_{X,x}\mbox{-Mod}$, for all $x \in X$;
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Follows from Lemma \ref{l1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{ph1}
Let $f\mathcolon \mathscr{G} \rightarrow \mathscr{F}$ be a morphism in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. If $f$ is locally phantom then it is also $\mathcal{P}_{st}$-phantom. That is $\Phi'\subseteq \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st})$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let
$$\xymatrix{\mathbb{E}f: \textrm{ }0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}'\ar[r]\ar@{=}[d] & \mathscr{G}'\ar[r]\ar[d] & \mathscr{G}\ar[r]\ar[d]^f & 0\\
\mathbb{E}: \textrm{ }0\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}'\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}''\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}\ar[r] & 0
}$$
be a pullback diagram in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. Note that $\mathbb{E}(U)$ is exact for each affine open subset $U \subseteq X$ and $(\mathbb{E}f)(U)=\mathbb{E}(U) f_U$ by Lemma \ref{pb1}. By assumption, $(\mathbb{E}f)(U)$ is pure-exact for each affine open subset $U \subseteq X$. Hence, $\mathbb{E}\in \mathcal{P}_{st}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{ph2}
If $X$ is semi-separated, then $f\mathcolon \mathscr{G} \rightarrow \mathscr{F}$ is $\mathcal{P}_{st}$-phantom in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ if and only if it is locally phantom. Moreover, in this case, $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})=\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st})=\Phi'$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For an affine open subset $U$, let
$$\xymatrix{0\ar[r] & N\ar[r]\ar@{=}[d] & M'\ar[r]\ar[d] & \mathscr{G}(U)\ar[r]\ar[d]^{f_U} & 0\\
0\ar[r] & N\ar[r] & M\ar[r] & \mathscr{F}(U)\ar[r] & 0
}$$
be a pullback diagram in ${\mathcal O}_X(U)\mbox{-Mod}$. Note that $\iota_* $ is an exact functor from $\mathfrak{Qco}(U)$ to $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ since $X$ is semi-separated. Consider the following commutative diagram
$$\xymatrix@!0{
0\ar[rr] &&\iota_{\ast}\widetilde{N}\ar[rr]\ar@{=}[dd]\ar@{=}[dr]&&\mathscr{T}'\ar[dd]\ar[rr]\ar[dr]&&\mathscr{G}\ar[dd]\ar[rr]\ar[dr]^f&&0\\
& 0\ar[rr]&&\iota_{\ast}\widetilde{N}\ar@{=}[dd]\ar[rr]&&\mathscr{T}\ar[dd]\ar[rr]&&\mathscr{F}\ar[rr]\ar[dd]&&0\\
0\ar[rr]&&\iota_{\ast}\widetilde{N}\ar[rr]\ar@{=}[dr]&&\iota_{\ast}\widetilde{M'}\ar[rr]\ar[dr]&&\iota_{\ast}\mathscr{G}|_U\ar[rr]\ar[dr]&&0\\
&0\ar[rr]&&\iota_{\ast}\widetilde{N}\ar[rr]&&\iota_{\ast}\widetilde{M}\ar[rr]&&\iota_{\ast}\mathscr{F}|_U\ar[rr]&&0
}$$
where each face is a pullback diagram in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. By assumption, the upper exact sequence is stalkwise pure. Then the short exact sequence of modules of sections over $U$, $0 \rightarrow N \rightarrow \mathscr{T}'(U) \rightarrow \mathscr{G}(U) \rightarrow 0$, which is isomorphic to $0 \rightarrow N \rightarrow M' \rightarrow \mathscr{G}(U)$,
is pure-exact. So $f_U$ is a phantom morphism. This shows that $\Phi'=\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st})$. Finally, by \cite[Proposition 2.10]{EGO}, we have that $\mathcal{P}_{\otimes}=\mathcal{P}_{st}$ for any quasi-separated scheme (so, in particular, for any semi-separated scheme). Therefore, $\Phi'=\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st})=\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
The ideals $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st})$, $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})$ and $\Phi'$ in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ are closed under direct limits. The ideal $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\lambda})$ is closed under direct limits when $\lambda=\aleph_0$, that is, when $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ is locally finitely presented.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It follows from the fact that $\mathcal{P}_{st}$ and $\mathcal{P}_{\otimes}$ are closed under direct limits and finite coproducts. Finally, note that the result holds for $\mathcal{P}_{\lambda}$ when $\lambda=\aleph_0$.
\end{proof}
Let $\mathcal{P}^{{\mathcal O}_X}_{\otimes}$ and $\mathcal{P}^{\mathfrak{Qco}(X)}_{\otimes}$ denote the proper classes of geometrical pure short exact sequences in ${\mathcal O}_X\mbox{-Mod}$ and $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$, respectively. As noted in the comments before Corollary \ref{ejemplos}, both proper classes are injectively generated by a set. Then, the proper class $\mathcal{P}_{st}$ in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ is also injectively generated by a set. Indeed, from \cite[Lemma 4.7]{EEO}, we know that the coherator functor $Q$ transforms geometrical pure injectives in ${\mathcal O}_X \mbox{-Mod}$ into stalkwise pure injectives in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$. By Lemma \ref{pure2}, a short exact sequence $\mathbb{E}$ of quasi-coherent sheaves is stalkwise pure if and only if $i(\mathbb{E})$ is geometrical pure in ${\mathcal O}_X\mbox{-Mod}$ (where $i\mathcolon\mathcolon \mathfrak{Qco}(X)\to {\mathcal O}_X \mbox{-Mod}$ is the inclusion functor). Since $\mathcal{P}^{{\mathcal O}_X}_{\otimes}$ is injectively generated by a set, say $\mathcal{S}$, it follows that $\mathcal{P}_{st}$ is injectively generated by the set $Q(\mathcal{S})$ because $(i,Q)$ is an adjoint pair. Thus, we have proved the following
\begin{corollary}\label{covering.ideals.qco}
The following holds for ${\mathcal{C}}:=\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The ideals $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st})$ and
$\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})$, are special covering in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$.
\item The ideal $\Phi'$ is covering in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
Let us close the paper by making the following observation. It is easy to check that any morphism $f\mathcolon \mathscr{F}\to \mathscr{G}$ in $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$, with $\mathscr{F}$ a flat quasi-coherent sheaf, belongs to $\Phi'$ (and thus, to $\Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st})\subseteq \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})$). This means that, when $\mathfrak{Qco}(X)$ has a flat generator, covers with respect to any of the ideals $\Phi' \subseteq \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{st}) \subseteq \Phi(\mathcal{P}_{\otimes})$ are epimorphisms.
For instance, this is the case when $X$ is a quasi-compact and semi-separated scheme (see Alonso Tarr\'{\i}o, Jerem\'{\i}as L\'opez and Lipman \cite{Leo}).
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\noindent
We thank Henning Krause for attracting our attention to the link between his work in \cite{Krause2} and the existence of phantom covers.
|
\section{Introduction}
It is a classical result of Higman, B. Neumann, and H. Neumann \cite{HNN} that every finite or infinite countable group can be embedded into a 2-generated group. In this note, we are concerned with such an emdedding that would preserve the solvability of every quadratic equation of bounded length.
We start with definitions. Let $G$ be a finite or infinite countable group and let
\begin{equation}\label{e0}
G = \langle \, a_1, a_2, \dots \, \| \, R_1=1, R_2=1, \dots \, \rangle
\end{equation}
be a presentation for $G$ by means of generators $a_1, a_2, \dots$ and defining relations
$R_1=1, R_2=1, \dots$, where $R_1, R_2, \dots$ are nonempty \crd\ words over the alphabet $\A^{\pm 1} := \{ a_1^{\pm 1} , a_2^{\pm 1}, \dots \}$. If $U$ is a word over $\A^{\pm 1}$ and the image of $U$ in $G$ is trivial, we write $U \overset G = 1$ or say that $U = 1$ in $G$.
Let $\X$ be a finite or infinite countable set, called a set of variables, $\X^{-1} := \{ x^{-1} \mid x \in \X \}$, and $\X^{\pm 1} := \X \cup \X^{-1}$. Let
$\FF(\X)$ denote the free group with the free base $\X$ and let
$G * \FF(\X)$ denote the free product of $G$ and $\FF(\X)$. Elements of $G * \FF(\X)$ can be regarded as words over the alphabet $\Y^{\pm 1}$, where $\Y := \A \cup \X$.
A word $W = y_1 \dots y_\ell$ over $\Y^{\pm 1}$, where $y_1, \dots, y_\ell \in \Y^{\pm 1}$, is called {\em reduced} if $\ell >0$, i.e., $W$ is not empty, and $W $ contains no subwords of the form $y y^{-1}$ or $y^{-1} y$, where $y \in \Y$. A word $W$ over $\Y^{\pm 1}$ is {\em \crd\ } if $W$ is reduced and every cyclic permutation of $W$ is reduced.
The {\em length} of a word $W = y_1 \dots y_\ell$ over $\Y^{\pm 1}$ is $\ell = | W|$ and the {\em $\X$-length} $| W|_\X$ of $W$ is the number of all occurrences of letters of $\X^{\pm 1}$ in the word $W$.
For example, $| a_1 x_1 x_2 a_2^{-1} x_1^{-1} |_\X =3$ if $a_1, a_2 \in \A$ and $x_1, x_2 \in \X$.
An {\em equation} over $G$ is a formal expression $W = 1$, where $W$ is a \crd\ word over $\Y^{\pm 1}$ with $| W|_\X >0$. The {\em length} of an equation $W = 1$ over $G$ is the number $| W|_\X$.
The {\em total length} of an equation $W = 1$ over $G$ is $| W|$.
An equation $W = 1$ over $G$ is called {\em quadratic} if, for every letter $x \in \X$, the sum of the number of occurrences of $x$ in $W$ and the number of occurrences of $x^{-1}$ in $W$ is either 2 or 0.
We say that an equation $W = 1$ over $G$ has a {\em solution} if there exists a
homomorphism $\psi_W : G*\FF(\X) \to G$ which is identical on $G$ and which takes the word $W \in G*\FF(\X)$ to the identity, i.e., $\psi_W |_{G} = \mbox{id}_G$ and $\psi_W(W) = 1$ in $G$. Let $x_1, \ldots, x_k$ be all letters of $\X$ that occur in $W$ or in $W^{-1}$. A {\em solution tuple } to the equation $W=1$, defined by a homomorphism $\psi_W : G*\FF(\X) \to G$, is a tuple $(U_1, \dots, U_k)$, where $U_1, \dots, U_k$ are some words over $\A^{\pm 1}$, such that
$\psi_W(x_j) = U_j$ in $G$ for every $j=1, \dots, k$. The {\em length} of a solution tuple $(U_1, \ldots, U_k)$ to the equation $W=1$ is the sum $\sum_{j=1}^k |U_j|$.
If $\mu: G\to H$ is a group monomorphism and $W=1$ is an equation over $G$, then we can use $\mu$ and $W=1$ to obtain an equation over $H$ by replacing every letter $a_i^{\e}\in\A^{\pm 1}$, $\e = \pm 1$, that appears in $W=1$ with $\mu(a_i^{\e})$. This new equation over $H$ is denoted by $\mu(W)=1$.
\begin{thm}\label{thm1} Let $n \ge 2$ be an integer and let $G$ be a finite or infinite countable group. Then there exists an embedding $\mu_n : G \to H$ of $G$ into a 2-generated group $H = \langle h_1, h_2 \rangle$, that preserves the solvability of every quadratic equation $W =1$ over $G$ of length $| W|_\X \le n $, i.e., for every
equation $W =1$ over $G$ of length at most $n$, the equation $W =1$ has a solution in $G$ \ifff\ $\mu_n(W)=1$ has a solution in~$H$.
\end{thm}
We remark that the embedding $\mu_n : G \to H$ of Theorem~\ref{thm1} has additional properties that are of interest even in the case when $G$ is already a 2-generated group. For example, a solution tuple to a quadratic equation $W=1$ over $G$ such that $|W|_{\X}\leq n$ may be arbitrarily long relative to the original alphabet $\A$ whereas the equation $\mu_n(W)=1$ has a relatively short solution tuple in $H$ with respect to the alphabet $\{ h_1, h_2\}$. This and other technical properties of the embedding $\mu_n$, that could be useful for potential
future applications, are recorded in the following.
\begin{thm}\label{thm2}
The embedding $\mu_n : G \to H$ of Theorem~\ref{thm1} can be constructed in such a way that
$\mu_n$ has the following properties.
$\rm{(a)}$ Fix an enumeration $W_1 =1$, $W_2 =1, \dots$ of all quadratic equations over $G$ such that, for every $i \ge 1$, $| W_i|_\X \le n $ and $W_i =1$ has a solution in $G$. Then there is a constant $C >0$ such that, for every $i \ge 1$, there exists a solution tuple to the equation $\mu_n(W_i) =1$ over $H$ whose length, in generators $h_1, h_2 $ of $H$, does not exceed $C n^4 i$.
$\rm{(b)}$ Assume that the presentation \eqref{e0} for $G$ is recursively enumerable. Then defining
relations of the 2-generated group $H = \langle h_1, h_2 \rangle$ can be recursively enumerated.
$\rm{(c)}$ Assume that the presentation \eqref{e0} for $G$ is decidable and there is an algorithm that detects whether a quadratic equation over $G$ of length at most $n$ has a solution in $G$. Then the 2-generated group $H = \langle h_1, h_2 \rangle$ has a decidable set of defining relations and the embedding $\mu_n : G \to H$ can be effectively constructed.
\end{thm}
As an example of a quadratic equation, consider the equation $x U_1 x^{\e} U_2 = 1$, where $\e = \pm 1$ and $U_1, U_2$ are some reduced (or possibly empty if $\e = 1$) words over $\A^{\pm 1}$. Note that if $\e =-1$ then this equation has a solution \ifff\
the elements of $G$, represented by the words $U_1, U_2^{-1}$, are conjugate in $G$. If $\e =1$, then this equation has a solution \ifff\ the element of $G$, represented by the word $U_1^{-1} U_2$, is a square in $G$, i.e., there is a word $T$ over $\A^{\pm 1}$ with $U_1^{-1} U_2 \overset G = T^2$. According to Theorem~\ref{thm1} applied with $n=2$,
if $G$ is a finite or infinite countable group, then $G$ embeds into a 2-generated group $H$, $\mu_2 : G \to H$, in which two elements of $\mu_2(G)$ are conjugate \ifff\ they are conjugate in $G$ and every element of $\mu_2(G)$ is a square in $H$ \ifff\ it is a square in $G$. This is reminiscent of an embedding result of Ol'shanskii and Sapir
\cite{OS} that states that a finitely generated group $G$ with the solvable conjugacy problem can be embedded into a finitely presented group $K$ with the solvable conjugacy problem, $\sigma : G \to K$, in such a way that two elements of $\sigma(G)$ are conjugate in $K$ \ifff\ they are conjugate in $G$.
\smallskip
It would be of interest to find out whether Theorem~\ref{thm1} generalizes to arbitrary equations of bounded length
and whether one could drop the upper bound on the length of quadratic equations in Theorem~\ref{thm1}.
The first question seems to be technically relevant to the following interesting problem.
\begin{Prb} For given integer $n >0$, does there exist a real number $\lambda >0$ such that if a presentation \eqref{e0} satisfies the small cancelation condition $C'(\lambda)$, for every relation $R=1$ of \eqref{e0}, $|R| >\lambda^{-1}$ and $R$ is not a proper power,
then every equation $W=1$ over $G$ of total length $|W| \le n$ has a solution in $G$ \ifff\ the equation $W=1$, considered as an equation over the free group $F(\A)$, has a solution in $F(\A)$?
\end{Prb}
We remark that for quadratic equations of total length $\le n$ this problem would likely have a positive solution and a proof would be analogous to the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm1} with additional consideration of contiguity subdiagrams between boundary paths of faces of type F3 and boundary paths of a surface diagram $\D$.
We also mention that the arguments of Frenkel and Klyachko \cite{FK}, which are used to prove that a nontrivial commutator cannot be a proper power in a torsion-free group $G$ that satisfies the small cancelation condition $C'(\lambda)$ with $\lambda \ll 1$, might be useful for making some progress in nonquadratic case.
\smallskip
At the suggestion of the referee, we mention that
connections between compact surfaces and solutions of quadratic equations in free groups, free products and in hyperbolic groups were first studied by Culler \cite{Cq} and Ol'shanskii \cite{Olq}.
Earlier work on quadratic equations in free groups and in free products was done by
Edmunds \cite{E1}, \cite{E2}, Comerford and Edmunds \cite{CE}, see also articles cited in \cite{E1}, \cite{E2}, \cite{CE}. The bound of Theorem 1.2(a) is reminiscent of bounds on the length of a minimal solution of quadratic
equations in free groups obtained by Lysenok and Myasnikov \cite{LM} and by Kharlampovich and Vdovina \cite{KV}.
\section{Group Presentations and Diagrams}
Fix an even integer $n \ge 2$. Since we consider quadratic equations $W =1$ of length $ | W|_\X \le n $, we may assume that the cardinality of $\X$ is $n$, $| \X | = n$. Since $G$ is finite or countably infinite, we can choose an enumeration
\begin{equation}\label{enum0}
W_1 =1 , \ W_2 =1, \ldots,
\end{equation}
of all quadratic equations over $G$ such that, for every $i \ge 1$, $| W_i|_\X \le n $ and $W_i =1$ has a solution in $G$. Let $\cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i$ be an infinite countable alphabet consisting of disjoint copies $\X_i, i =1,2, \dots$, of $\X$. Let $W_i(\X_i)$ denote the word over
the alphabet $\A^{\pm 1} \cup \X_i^{\pm 1}$ obtained by rewriting $W_i$ so that every letter $b \in \A^{\pm 1}$ of $W_i$ is unchanged and every letter $y$ of $W_i$, such that $y \in \X^{\pm 1}$, is replaced with $\beta_i(y) \in \X_i^{\pm 1}$, where $\beta_i : \X^{\pm 1} \to \X_i^{\pm 1}$ is a bijection such that $\beta_i( \X) = \X_i$ and $\beta_i(x^{-1}) = \beta_i(x)^{-1}$ for every $x \in \X$.
Consider the following group presentation
\begin{equation}\label{e1}
\GG_1 = \langle \, \cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i \cup \A \, \| \, R_1=1, \, R_2=1, \dots , \, W_1(\X_1) =1 , \, W_2(\X_2) =1 , \dots \, \, \rangle
\end{equation}
whose generating set is $\cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i \cup \A$ and whose defining relations are those of \er{e0} and $W_i(\X_i) =1, \, i=1,2,\dots$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem1} There is a natural embedding of the group $G$ into the group $\GG_1$ given by presentation \er{e1}, denoted $\nu_1 : G \to \GG_1$. Furthermore, if $W=1$ is an equation over $G$ then $W=1$ has a solution in $G$ \ifff\ the equation $\nu_1(W)=1$ has a solution in the group $\GG_1$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Denote
$\X_i =\{x_{i,1},\dots, x_{i,n} \}$ for $i=1,2, \dots$. Since the equation $W_i(\X_i) = 1$ has a solution in $G$, there exists a homomorphism
$\psi_i : G * \FF(\X_i) \to G$ such that $\psi_i$ is identical on $G$ and $\psi_i( W_i(\X_i) )=1$. Let $U_{i,1}, \dots, U_{i,n}$ be
words over $\A^{\pm 1}$ such that $\psi_i( x_{i,j} )= U_{i,j}$ in $G$, $j=1, \dots, n$. Then the map
$\psi_\infty( x_{i,j} ) := U_{i,j}$, where $1 \le j \le n$, $i=1,2, \dots$, and $\psi_\infty(a) := a$ for all $a \in \A$ induces a homomorphism $\psi_\infty : \GG_1 \to G$ which is identical on $G$. Hence, the group $G$ embeds in $\GG_1$. The existence of this homomorphism $\psi_\infty : \GG_1 \to G$ also implies that, for an arbitrary equation $W=1$ over $G$, the equation $W=1$ has a solution in $G$ \ifff\ the equation $\nu_1(W)=1$ over $\GG_1$ has a solution in $\GG_1$.
\end{proof}
Denote $M := 24n$. For every $i \ge 1$, consider a word $V_i$ over the alphabet $\{ h_1, h_2 \}$ defined by the formula
\begin{align}\label{e2}
V_i = V_i(h_1, h_2) := h_1 h_2^{M i+1 } h_1 h_2^{M i+2 } \dots h_1 h_2^{M (i+1)-1} h_1 h_2^{M (i+1) } h_1 . \end{align}
The literal (or letter-by-letter) equality of two words $U, V$ is denoted $U \equiv V$.
In the following lemma, we establish a small cancelation condition for the words $V_i$, $i=1,2\dots$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem2} Let $U$ be a subword of both words $V_i$ and $V_j$, defined by \er{e2}, so
$V_i \equiv V_{i,1} U V_{i,2}$ and $V_j \equiv V_{j,1} U V_{j,2}$.
Then either $|U| < \tfrac 4 M \min \{ | V_i| , | V_j | \}$ or $i=j$ and $V_{i,1} \equiv V_{j,1}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Suppose that $U$ is a subword of the word $V_i$, where $i =1,2,\dots$, and $|U| \ge \tfrac 4 M | V_i|$. Then
\begin{align}\label{e2a}
|U| \ge \tfrac 4 M | V_i| > 4(Mi +2) > 2M(i +1) +2 .
\end{align}
Since every maximal power of $h_2$ in $V_i$ is no longer than $M(i+1)$, it follows from \er{e2a} that $U$ contains a subword of the form $h_1 h_2^k h_1$, where $Mi+1 \le k \le M(i+1)$. Now our claim follows from the fact
that each word $V_1, V_2, \dots$ contains a unique subword of the form $h_1 h_2^k h_1$, where $Mi+1 \le k \le M(i+1)$.
\end{proof}
Let $\cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i = \{ x_1, x_2, \dots \}$ be an enumeration of elements of $\cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i$ compatible with the enumeration of sets $\X_i$, i.e., if $x_j \in \X_k$, $x_{j'} \in \X_{k'}$ and $k <k'$, then $j <j'$.
Using this enumeration, new generators $h_1, h_2 $ and the words $V_i(h_1, h_2)$, we extend the presentation \er{e1} as follows
\begin{align}\notag
\GG_2 = & \langle \, \cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i \cup \A \cup \{ h_1, h_2 \} \, \| \, R_1=1, \, R_2=1, \dots , \, W_1(\X_1) =1 ,
\\ \label{e3} & W_2(\X_2) =1 , \, \dots , \, x_i V_{2i}^{-1} =1 , \, a_i V_{2i+1}^{-1} = 1 , \, i=1,2, \dots \, \rangle .
\end{align}
To study this group presentation and quadratic equations over $\GG_2 $, we will use diagrams over the presentation \er{e3}. We start with basic definitions.
Let $\D$ be a finite 2-complex and let $\D(i)$ denote the set of closures of $i$-cells of $\D$, $i=0,1,2$. The elements of $\D(i)$ are called {\em vertices, edges, faces} of $\D$ if $i=0, 1, 2$, resp.
We also consider the set $\vec \D(1)$ of oriented 1-cells of $\D$.
If $e \in \vec \D(1)$, then $e^{-1} $ denotes $e$ with opposite orientation.
For every $e \in \vec \D(1)$, let $e_-$, $e_+$ denote the initial, terminal, resp., vertices of $e$.
In particular, $(e^{-1})_- = e_+$ and $(e^{-1})_+ = e_-$. Note that $e \ne e^{-1}$.
A path $p = e_1 \dots e_\ell$ in $\D$ is a sequence of oriented edges $e_1, \dots, e_\ell$ of $\D$ with
$(e_i)_+ = (e_{i+1})_-$, $i =1,\dots, \ell-1$. The length of a path $p= e_1 \dots e_\ell$ is $|p| = \ell$.
The initial vertex of $p$ is $p_- := (e_1)_-$ and the terminal vertex of $p$ is $p_+ := (e_\ell)_+$. A path $p$ is called {\em closed} if $p_- = p_+$. A path $p$ is called {\em reduced} if $|p|>0$ and $p$ contains no subpath of the form $e e^{-1}$, where $e$ is an edge. A {\em cyclic} path is a closed path with no distinguished initial vertex. A path $p= e_1 \dots e_\ell$ is called {\em simple} if the vertices $(e_1)_-, \dots, (e_\ell)_-, (e_\ell)_+$ are all distinct. A closed path is {\em simple} if the vertices $(e_1)_-, \dots, (e_\ell)_-$ are all distinct.
A {\em diagram} $\D$ over presentation \eqref{e3} is a connected finite 2-complex which is equipped with a labeling function
$$
\ph : \vec \D(1) \to \cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i^{\pm 1} \cup \A^{\pm 1} \cup \{ h_1^{\pm 1}, h_2^{\pm 1}, 1 \}
$$
such that, for every $e \in \vec \D(1)$, one has $\ph(e^{-1}) = \ph(e)^{-1}$, where $1^{-1} := 1$, and, for every face $\Pi$ of $\D$, if $\p \Pi = e_1 \dots e_\ell$ is a boundary path of $\Pi$, where $e_1, \dots, e_\ell \in \vec \D(1)$,
then the label $\ph(\p \Pi) := \ph(e_1) \dots \ph(e_\ell)$ of $\p \Pi$ has one of the following three forms.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(F1)] $\ph(\p \Pi) = 1^\ell$.
\item[(F2)] $\ell= 4$ and $\ph(\p \Pi)$ is a cyclic permutation of a word $y 1 y^{-1} 1$, where $y \in \cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i \cup \A \cup \{ h_1, h_2 \}$.
\item[(F3)] $\ph(\p \Pi)$ is a cyclic permutation of one of the words $R^{\pm 1}$, where $R = 1$ is a relation of the presentation \er{e3}.
\end{enumerate}
A face $\Pi$ of $\D$ is said to have {\em type F1, F2, F3} if $\ph(\p \Pi)$ has the form (F1), (F2), (F3), resp.
The set of faces of type $Fj$ is denoted $\D_j(2)$, $j =1,2,3$.
An edge $e \in \vec \D(1)$ is called an {\em $a$-edge, $x$-edge, $h$-edge, $1$-edge } if
$\ph(e) \in \A^{\pm 1}$, $\ph(e) \in \cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i^{\pm 1}$, $\ph(e) \in \{ h_1^{\pm 1}, h_2^{\pm 1} \}$,
$\ph(e) = 1$, resp. An edge $e \in \vec \D(1)$ is termed {\em essential } if $e$ is not a $1$-edge.
We will say that $\D$ is a {\em surface diagram of type $(k, k')$} over \eqref{e3} if $\D$ is a diagram over \eqref{e3} and $\D$, as a topological space, is homeomorphic to a compact (orientable or nonorientable) surface that has Euler characteristic $k$ and contains $k'$ punctures.
This surface is called the {\em underlying} surface for $\D$.
In particular, $\D$ is called a {\em disk} diagram if $\D$ is a surface diagram of type $(1, 1)$, hence, the underlying surface for $\D$ is a disk.
If $\D$ is a surface diagram and the underlying surface is orientable, then a fixed orientation of the underlying surface makes it possible to define
positive (=counterclockwise) and negative (=clockwise) orientation for boundaries of faces of $\D$ and for connected components of $\p \D$.
Regardless of whether the underlying surface is orientable or not, we always consider the boundary $\p \Pi$ of a face $\Pi$ of $\D$ or a connected component $c$ of the boundary $\p \D$ of $\D$ as a cyclic path which is called a {\em boundary path} of $\Pi$ or a {\em boundary path} of $\D$, resp. Note that $(\p \Pi)^{-1}$ or $c^{-1}$ are also boundary paths of $\Pi$ or $\D$, resp., with the opposite orientation.
Suppose that $\D$ is a surface diagram over \er{e3}. Making refinements of $\D$ by using faces of type F1, F2
if necessary (informally, we ``thicken" boundary paths of faces of type F3 and $\p \D$, this should be evident; more formal details can be found in \cite{Ol}), we may assume that the following property holds for $\D$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(A)] Suppose that each of $c_1, c_2$ is either a boundary path of a face of type F3 in $\D$ or a boundary path of $\D$. Then $c_1, c_2$ are closed simple paths and either $c_1$ is a cyclic permutation of one of $c_2$, $c_2^{-1}$ or $c_1, c_2$ have no common vertices.
\end{enumerate}
Note that the property (A) implies that if an essential edge $e$ of $\D$ belongs to a boundary path of a face of type F3 or $e$ belongs to a boundary path of $\D$, then $e$ also belongs to a boundary path of a face of type F2.
From now on we always assume, unless stated otherwise, that a diagram is a surface diagram over \er{e3} with
the property (A).
Recall that the literal (or letter-by-letter) equality of the words $U, V$ is denoted $U \equiv V$.
\begin{lem}\label{vk} Let $W$ be a nonempty word over the alphabet
$$\cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i^{\pm 1} \cup \A^{\pm 1} \cup \{ h_1^{\pm 1}, h_2^{\pm 1}, 1 \} $$ and let $\GG_2$ be the group defined by presentation \er{e3}. Then $W \overset {\GG_2} = 1$ if and only if there is a surface diagram $\D$ of type $(1,1)$, called a {\em disk diagram}, over presentation \er{e3} such that $\ph( \p \D ) \equiv W$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} The proof is straightforward, for details the reader is referred to \cite{Ol}, \cite{Iv94}, see also \cite{LS}. As in \cite{Ol}, faces of type F1, F2 make it possible to ``thicken" the diagram and turn its underlying topological space into a disk.
\end{proof}
Suppose that $\Psi$ is a finite graph on a compact surface $S$.
Consider the following property of $\Psi$ in which $m \ge 2$ is an integer parameter.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(B)] If $f$ is an oriented edge of $\Psi$ with $f_-=f_+$ then the edge $f$ does not bound a disk on $S$ whose interior contains no vertices of $\Psi$. Furthermore, if $f_1, \dots, f_m$ are oriented edges of $\Psi$ such that $(f_i)_- =(f_j)_-$ and $(f_i)_+ =(f_j)_+$ for all $i,j=1,\dots, m$, then it is not true that each path $f_1f_2^{-1}$, $f_2 f_3^{- 1}, \dots$, $f_{m-1}f_m^{-1}$ bounds a disk on $S$ whose interior contains no vertices of $\Psi$.
\end{enumerate}
We finish this section with a lemma about graphs on surfaces.
\begin{lem}\label{gr1}
Let $S$ be a compact surface whose Euler characteristic is $\chi(S) =k$ and let $\Psi$ be a finite graph on $S$ that has the property (B) with parameter $m=2$. If $V_{\Psi}$ and $E_{\Psi}$ denote the number of vertices and nonoriented edges of $\Psi$, resp., then $E_{\Psi} \le 3( V_{\Psi} -k)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Note that the property (B) with parameter $m=2$ can be stated less formally by saying
that the partial cell decomposition of $S$, defined by the graph $\Psi$, contains no 1- and 2-gons whose interiors contain no vertices of $\Psi$.
Preserving this condition, i.e., preserving the property (B) with parameter $m=2$, we will draw as many new edges in $\Psi$ as possible and obtain a graph $\Psi'$ with $V_{\Psi'} = V_{\Psi}$, $E_{\Psi'} \ge E_{\Psi}$. Note that $\Psi'$ is connected and if $c$ is a \cncm\ of $\p \D$ then there is a closed simple path $e_{c,1} \dots e_{c,k_c}$, where $e_{c,1}, \dots, e_{c,k_c}$ are edges of $\Psi'$, such that $e_{c,1} \dots e_{c,k_c}$ and $c$ bound an annulus $A_c$ whose interior contains no vertices of $\Psi'$. Hence, taking $A_c$ out of $S$ and adding back the cycle $e_{c,1} \dots e_{c,k_c}$ for every \cncm\ $c$ of $\p \D$, we obtain a surface $S'$ such that $\chi(S') =\chi(S) =k$. In addition, it follows from definitions that $S' \setminus \Psi'$ is a collection of open disks.
Indeed, if a \cncm\ of $S' \setminus \Psi'$ were different from a disk, then one could draw an additional edge
in $\Psi'$ without creating a 1- or 2-gon, contrary to the maximality of $\Psi'$. Hence, the graph $\Psi'$ defines a cell decomposition of $S'$ and
\begin{equation}\label{Ech}
V_{\Psi'} - E_{\Psi'} + F_{\Psi'} = \chi(S') = k ,
\end{equation}
where $F_{\Psi'}$ is the number of faces of the cell decomposition of $S'$ defined by $\Psi'$. Since there are no
1- and 2-gons in this decomposition, every face has 3 edges in its boundary path which implies that $3 F_{\Psi'} \le 2E_{\Psi'} $ or $F_{\Psi'} \le \tfrac 2 3 E_{\Psi'}$. Hence, it follows from \er{Ech} that $V_{\Psi'} -\tfrac 1 3 E_{\Psi'} \ge k$ or $E_{\Psi'} \le 3(V_{\Psi'} - k)$. Since $V_{\Psi'} = V_{\Psi}$, $E_{\Psi'} \ge E_{\Psi}$, our claim is proved.
\end{proof}
\section{Contiguity Subdiagrams}
As in Sect. 2, let $\D$ be a surface diagram over presentation \er{e3} with
property (A).
Consider a relation $\sim_2$ on the set $\D_2(2)$ of faces
of type F2 so that $\Pi_1 \sim_2 \Pi_2$ \ifff\ there is an essential edge $e$ such that $e$ belongs to $(\p \Pi_1)^{\pm 1} := \p \Pi_1\cup \p \Pi_1^{- 1}$ and $e$ belongs to $(\p \Pi_2)^{\pm 1}$. It is easy to see that this relation is reflexive and symmetric on $\D_2(2)$.
The transitive closure of this relation $\sim_2$ is an equivalence relation on $\D_2(2)$ which we denote by $\sim$. Let $[\Pi]_{\sim}$ denote the equivalence class of a face $\Pi$ of type F2 relative to this equivalence relation. For every $\Pi \in \D_2(2)$, we consider a minimal
subcomplex $\BT_\Pi = \BT ( [\Pi]_{\sim})$ of $\D$ that contains all faces of $[\Pi]_{\sim}$.
It follows from definitions that there exists a surface diagram $\AL_\Pi$ of type (1,1) (meaning that $\AL_\Pi$ is a disk) or of type (0,1) (meaning that $\AL_\Pi$ is an annulus) and a continuous cellular map
$
\mu_\Pi : \AL_\Pi \to \BT_\Pi
$
such that $\mu_\Pi$ preserves dimension of cells, $\ph$-labels of edges, and $\mu_\Pi(\AL_\Pi) = \BT_\Pi$. We also require that
$\AL_\Pi$ consists of faces of type F2 and their number $| \AL_\Pi(2)|$ equals the number $| \BT_\Pi(2)|$ of faces in
$\BT_\Pi$. Note that $\mu_\Pi$ need not be injective and this is the reason we consider an ``ideal" preimage $\AL_\Pi$ of the subcomplex $\BT_\Pi$.
If $\AL_\Pi$ is a disk, then $\p \AL_\Pi = s_1 f_1 s_2 f_2$, where $f_1, f_2$ are essential edges with $\ph(f_1) = \ph(f_2)^{-1} \ne 1$, and $s_1, s_2$ are simple paths consisting of 1-edges with $|s_1| = |s_2| = | \AL_\Pi(2)|$, see Fig.~1(a). In this case, we say that $\BT_\Pi$ is a {\em band} between the edges $e_1$, $e_2$ and that $\p \BT_\Pi = u_1 e_1u_2 e_2 $, where $e_i = \mu_\Pi (f_i )$, $u_i = \mu_\Pi (s_i )$, $i =1,2$, is a {\em standard boundary path} of the band $\BT_\Pi$. Clearly, $e_1, e_2$ are essential edges with $\ph(e_1) = \ph(f_1) =\ph(e_2)^{-1} \ne 1$ and $|u_1 | = |s_1| = | u_2 |$ but $u_1, u_2$ need not be simple paths. If $\ph(e_1)^{\pm 1} = y$, where $y \in \cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i \cup \A \cup \{ h_1, h_2 \}$, then we may also specify that $\BT_\Pi$ is a $y$-band.
Since we neither fix a base vertex for $\p \BT_\Pi$, nor fix an orientation for $ \BT_\Pi$, it follows that if
$\p \BT_\Pi = u_1 e_1u_2 e_2 $ is a standard boundary path for a band $\BT_\Pi$, then $u_2 e_2 u_1 e_1$ and $u_2^{-1} e_1^{-1} u_1^{-1} e_2^{-1}$ are also standard boundary paths for $\BT_\Pi$. We also observe that a standard boundary path of a band $\BT$ need not be the topological boundary of $\BT$ but it can be turned into the topological boundary (of a deformed space) by an arbitrarily small deformation of $\BT$ which pushes $\BT$ into its interior.
On the other hand, if $\AL_\Pi$ is an annulus, then $\p \AL_\Pi = s_1 \cup s_2$, where $s_1, s_2$ are cyclic simple paths consisting of 1-edges, $|s_1| = |s_2| = | \AL_\Pi(2)|$, see Fig.~1(b). In this case, we say that $\BT_\Pi$ is an annulus and that $\p \BT_\Pi = u_1 \cup u_2$, where $u_i = \mu_\Pi (s_i )$, $i =1,2$, are boundary paths of the annulus $\BT_\Pi$.
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.324]
\draw (-2,-5) rectangle (0.5,1);
\draw (-2,0) -- (0.5,0);
\draw (-2,-1) -- (0.5,-1);
\draw (-2,-2) -- (0.5,-2);
\draw (-2,-3) -- (0.5,-3);
\draw (-2,-4) -- (0.5,-4);
\node at (-3,-2) {$s_1$};
\node at (1.5,-2) {$s_2$};
\node at (-.75,1.7) {$f_1$};
\node at (-0.75,-5.7) {$f_2$};
\node at (-.75,-7) {Fig. 1(a)};
\node at (10,-7) {Fig. 1(b)};
\draw (10,-2) circle (1);
\draw (10,-2) circle (2.5);
\draw (10,-3) -- (10,-4.5);
\draw (10,-1) -- (10,0.5);
\draw (11,-2) -- (12.5,-2);
\draw (9,-2) -- (7.5,-2);
\node at (10,-2.35) {$s_1$};
\node at (7.5,-4) {$s_2$};
\node at (-3.5,-4.5) {$\AL_\Pi$};
\node at (7.5,0.5) {$\AL_\Pi$};
\draw (-2,1) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (.5,1) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (-2,-5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (.5,-5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
Note that if $\BT$ is a band and $\p \BT=u_1e_1 u_2 e_2 $ is a standard boundary path of $\BT$, then each of the essential edges $e_1$, $e_2$ belongs either to a boundary path of $\D$ or to a boundary path of a face of type F3. If, say, $e_i$ belongs to $c_i$, where $i=1,2$ and $c_i$ is a boundary path of $\D$ or is a boundary path of a face of type F3, then we say that $\BT ( [\Pi]_{\sim})$ is a band between $c_1$ and $c_2$.
Let $\BT$ be a band between edges $e_1$ and $e_2$. Let $o_1 \in e_1$, $o_2 \in e_2$ be interior points of
edges $e_1, e_2$ and let $\ell(\BT)$ be a simple arc such that $\ell(\BT)$ is contained in $\BT$, the boundary points of
$\ell(\BT)$ are $o_1$, $o_2$ and the intersection of $\ell(\BT)$ with every face $\Pi$ of $\BT$ consists of a single
arc which is properly embedded in $\Pi$ and the boundary points of the arc are interior points of essential edges of $\p \Pi$. Such an arc $\ell(\BT)$ is called a {\em connecting line} for $\BT$. It follows from definitions that if $\BT$ is a band between edges $e_1$ and $e_2$, then a connecting line $\ell(\BT)$ for $\BT$ connects interior points of $e_1$, $e_2$ through faces of $\BT$ of type F2.
Let $s$ be either a subpath of $\p \Pi$ (where $\Pi$ is a face of type F3 in $\D$) or a subpath of $\p \D$ such that $s$ consists of $h$-edges and $s$ is maximal with respect to this property. Such $s$ is called an {\em $h$-section} of $\D$.
Suppose that $s_1, s_2$ are $h$-sections of $\D$, not necessarily distinct, and $\BT_1, \BT_2$ are bands between $s_1, s_2$, perhaps $\BT_1 = \BT_2$, whose standard boundary paths are $\p \BT_i = u_{i1} e_{i1} u_{i2} e_{i2}$, $i=1,2$, where $e_{i1}, e_{i2}$ are essential edges of $\p \BT_i $. Also, assume that $e_{11}, e_{21}$ are edges of $s_1$ so that $s_1 = s_{11} e_{11} s_{12} e_{21} s_{13}$ and $e_{22}, e_{12}$ are edges of $s_2$ so that $s_2 = s_{21} e_{22} s_{22} e_{12} s_{23}$, see Fig.~2.
\vskip 3mm
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.47]
\draw (-5,-1.5) rectangle (9,-5.5);
\draw (2,-1.5) -- (11.5,-1.5);
\draw (9,-5.5) -- (11.5,-5.5);
\draw (-3,-1.5) -- (-7.5,-1.5);
\draw (-1,-5.5) -- (-7.5,-5.5);
\draw (-1,-1.5) -- (-1,-5.5);
\draw (5,-1.5) -- (5,-5.5);
\draw [-latex](-6.4,-5.5) --(-6.6,-5.5);
\draw [-latex](-2.9,-5.5) --(-3.1,-5.5);
\draw [-latex](2.1,-5.5) --(1.9,-5.5);
\draw [-latex](7.1,-5.5) --(6.9,-5.5);
\draw [-latex](10.6,-5.5) --(10.4,-5.5);
\draw [-latex](-6.6,-1.5) --(-6.4,-1.5);
\draw [-latex](-3.1,-1.5) --(-2.9,-1.5);
\draw [-latex](1.9,-1.5) --(2.1,-1.5);
\draw [-latex](6.9,-1.5) --(7.1,-1.5);
\draw [-latex](10.4,-1.5) --(10.6,-1.5);
\draw [-latex](-5,-3.6) --(-5,-3.4);
\draw [-latex](5,-3.6) --(5,-3.4);
\draw [-latex](-1,-3.4) --(-1,-3.6);
\draw [-latex](9,-3.4) --(9,-3.6);
\draw (-5,-1.5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (-1,-1.5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (5,-1.5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (9,-1.5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (-5,-5.5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (-1,-5.5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (5,-5.5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\draw (9,-5.5) [fill = black] circle (.06);
\node at (-5.7,-3.5) {$u_{11}$};
\node at (-0.3,-3.5) {$u_{12}$};
\node at (-3,-.9) {$e_{11}$};
\node at (-3,-6.1) {$e_{12}$};
\node at (2,-.9) {$s_{12}$};
\node at (2,-6.1) {$s_{22}$};
\node at (-6.5,-.9) {$s_{11}$};
\node at (-6.5,-6.1) {$s_{23}$};
\node at (10.5,-.9) {$s_{13}$};
\node at (10.5,-6.1) {$s_{21}$};
\node at (4.3,-3.5) {$u_{21}$};
\node at (9.7,-3.5) {$u_{22}$};
\node at (7,-.9) { $e_{21}$};
\node at (7,-6.1) {$e_{22}$};
\node at (-3,-3.5) {$\BT_1$};
\node at (7,-3.5) {$\BT_2$};
\node at (2,-7.7) {Fig. 2};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\noindent
Note that the path
$
p =u_{11} e_{11} s_{12} e_{21} u_{22}e_{22} s_{22} e_{12}
$
is closed. Furthermore, assume that there exists a connected subcomplex $\Gamma'$ of $\D$ such that $\Gamma'$ contains $\BT_1, \BT_2, p$, $\Gamma'$ has no faces of type F3 with $h$-edges, and the path $p$ is nullhomotopic in $\Gamma'$. Then we consider a minimal (relative to the inclusion relation) such subcomplex $\Gamma$ whose boundary path $\p \Gamma$ (up to arbitrarily small deformation; this time we skip introduction of an ``ideal" disk diagram whose image is $\Gamma$) can be written in the form $\p \Gamma = u_{11} (e_{11} s_{12} e_{21}) u_{22} (e_{22} s_{22} e_{12} )$. Note that if $\BT_1 = \BT_2$, then $\Gamma := \BT_1 $ and $\p \Gamma = \p \BT_1 = u_{11} e_{11} u_{12} e_{12}$.
Such a subcomplex $\Gamma$ of $\D$ is unique and is called a {\em \cntsd\ } between $h$-sections $s_1$ and $s_2$ defined by the bands $\BT_1$, $\BT_2$. Denote $\Gamma \wedge s_1 := e_{11} s_{12} e_{21}$ and $\Gamma \wedge s_2 := e_{22} s_{22} e_{12} $ and call these paths {\em contiguity arcs} of $\Gamma$. If $\BT_1 = \BT_2$, then $\Gamma \wedge s_1 := e_{11}$ and $\Gamma \wedge s_2 := e_{12} $. Since $\Gamma$ contains no faces of type F3 with $h$-edges, $s_1, s_2$ are $h$-sections and $u_{11}, u_{12}$ consist of 1-edges, it follows that $\ph( e_{11} s_{12} e_{21}) \equiv \ph(e_{22} s_{22} e_{12})^{-1}$ and, by definitions and property (A), there exists a simple path $t$, $|t| > 0$, that connects $(u_{11})_- \in s_2$ with $(u_{11})_+ \in s_1$ and consists of 1-edges.
A factorization of $\p \Gamma$ of the form
$$
\p \Gamma = u_{11} (e_{11} s_{12} e_{21}) u_{22} (e_{22} s_{22} e_{12} )
$$
is called a {\em standard boundary path} of the \cntsd\ $\Gamma$.
A \cntsd\ $\Gamma$ between $h$-sections $s_1$, $s_2$ is called {\em maximal} if there is no
\cntsd\ $\Gamma'$ between $s_1$, $s_2$ such that $\Gamma \wedge s_i$ is a subpath of $\Gamma' \wedge s_i$, for both $i=1,2$, and $| \Gamma \wedge s_1 | + | \Gamma \wedge s_2 | < | \Gamma' \wedge s_1 | + | \Gamma' \wedge s_2 |$.
In the following lemma, we record simple facts about bands and \cntsd s.
\begin{lem}\label{cntsd} Suppose that $e$ is an edge of an $h$-section of a surface diagram $\D$ and $\BT$ is an $h$-band in $\D$. Then the following are true.
$(a)$ There is an $h$-band one of whose essential edges is $e$.
$(b)$ There is a unique maximal \cntsd\ $\Gamma$ that contains $\BT$.
$(c)$ There is a unique maximal \cntsd\ one of whose contiguity arcs contains $e$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} (a) Suppose that $e$ belongs to a boundary path of $\Pi$, where $\Pi$ is a face of type F3 in $\D$. Then it follows from property (A) that if $o$ is an interior point of $e$ then a \rgnb\ $N$ of $o$ in $\D$ consists of two parts separated by the arc $N \cap e$, one of which is in $\Pi$ and the other of which is in a face $\Pi'$ of type F2. Then
$\BT_{\Pi'}$ is a desired $h$-band. If $e$ is on $\p \D$ then, again by property (A), there is a face $\Pi''$ of type F2 whose boundary path contains $e$. Then $\BT_{\Pi''}$ is a desired $h$-band.
(b) Let $\BT$ be a band between $h$-sections $s_1, s_2$. Then there exists a \cntsd\ $\Gamma$ between $s_1$ and $ s_2$ that contains $\BT$. For example, $\Gamma = \BT$. If $\Gamma_1$, $\Gamma_2$ are two \cntsd s between $s_1$ and $ s_2$ that contain $\BT$, then it is easy to check that there is also a \cntsd\ $\Gamma_0$ that contains both $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$.
This implies the uniqueness of a maximal \cntsd\ that contains $\BT$.
(c) This follows from parts (a)--(b).
\end{proof}
Let $\D$ be a surface diagram over presentation \er{e3} of type $(k, k')$. Consider the set $\C_h$ of all maximal
\cntsd s between $h$-sections in $\D$. It follows from Lemma~\ref{cntsd} that, for every edge $e$ of an $h$-section $s$ of
$\D$, there is a unique maximal \cntsd\ $\Gamma \in \C_h$ whose contiguity arc contains $e$, i.e., $e$ belongs to
$\Gamma \wedge s$.
For every $\Gamma \in \C_h$, we pick a connecting line $\ell(\BT)$, where $\BT = \BT(\Gamma)$ is a band that defines $\Gamma$. Denote $\ell(\Gamma) := \ell(\BT)$ and call $\ell(\Gamma)$ a {\em connecting line} of $\Gamma$. For every face $\Pi$ of type F3, whose boundary path $\p \Pi$ contains $h$-edges, we pick a vertex $v_\Pi$ in the interior of $\Pi$. Then we connect each point in $(\cup_{\Gamma \in \C_h } \ell(\Gamma) ) \cap \p \Pi$ to $v_\Pi$ by drawing simple arcs in $\Pi$ such that the arcs' pairwise intersections are $\{ v_\Pi \}$ and each arc intersects $\p \Pi$ only at its endpoint different from $v_\Pi$. The union of all such arcs and connecting lines $\ell(\Gamma)$, $\Gamma \in \C_h$, is a graph on $\D$, denoted $\Psi_h$, whose vertex set is the union of the set $\{ v_\Pi \mid \Pi \in \D_3(2), \ \p \Pi \ \mbox{has} \ h\mbox{-edges} \}$ and the set of those boundary points of connecting lines $\ell(\Gamma)$, $\Gamma \in \C_h$, that belong to $\p \D$. Note that the set of nonoriented edges of $\Psi_h$ is in bijective correspondence with the set $\C_h$ of maximal contiguity subdiagrams and that each edge of $\Psi_h$ is obtained from $\ell(\Gamma)$, where $\Gamma \in \C_h$, by extending $\ell(\Gamma)$ into a face $\Pi$ of type F3 whenever a point of $\p \ell(\Gamma)$ belongs to $\p \Pi$.
\medskip
Now we will define reduced diagrams over the presentation \er{e3}.
We say that a pair of distinct faces $\Pi_1, \Pi_2$ of type F3 with $h$-edges in a surface diagram $\D$ over \er{e3} forms a {\em reducible pair} if there is a simple path $t$ such that $t$ connects some vertices $t_- \in \p \Pi_1$, $t_+ \in \p \Pi_2$,
$t$ consists of 1-edges, $|t| >0$, and the label $\ph(\p \Gamma )$ of the boundary path $\p \Gamma = t \p \Pi_2 t^{-1} \p \Pi_1$ of the subdiagram $\Gamma$, consisting of $t, \Pi_1, \Pi_2$, is equal to 1 in the free group whose free base is the alphabet $\cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i \cup \A \cup \{ h_1, h_2 \}$, see Fig.~3.
\vskip 2mm
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.59]
\draw (-4.5,4) ellipse (1 and 1);
\draw (1,4) ellipse (1 and 1);
\draw plot[smooth, tension=.6] coordinates {(-3.5,4) (-2,5) (-1,3.5) (0,4)};
\draw (-3.5,4) [fill = black] circle (.05);
\draw (0,4) [fill = black] circle (.05);
\node at (-4.5,4) {$\Pi_1$};
\node at (1,4) {$\Pi_2$};
\node at (-2.24,4.5) {$t$};
\draw [-latex](-2.12,4.991) --(-2.08,5);
\node at (-1.8,2.2) {Fig. 3};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\vskip 2mm
It is easy to see that if $\Pi_1, \Pi_2$ form a reducible pair in $\D$, then one can perform a surgery on $\D$ that replaces the subdiagram $\Gamma$, whose boundary path is $\p \Gamma = t \p \Pi_2 t^{-1} \p \Pi_1$, by a subdiagram that consists of faces of type F1--F2. If $\D'$ is obtained from $\D$ by this surgery, then $\ph(\p \D')$ is identical to $\ph(\p \D)$ (in fact, the surgery does not affect the boundary of $\D$) and $| \D'_3(2) | = | \D_3(2) |-2$. Hence, by induction on the number $| \D_3(2) |$ of faces of type F3, every diagram $\D$ can be turned into a diagram $\bar \D$ without reducible pairs and with no change in $\ph(\p D)$.
A diagram $\D$ will be called {\em reduced} if $\D$ contains no reducible pairs.
\begin{lem}\label{gr2} Suppose that $\D$ is a reduced surface diagram of type $(k, k')$, there are no
$h$-edges contained in $\p \D$, $\D$ contains a face of type F3 whose boundary path has $h$-edges, and the graph $\Psi_h$ is defined as above. Then there exists a vertex in $\Psi_h$ whose degree is positive and is at most $\max \{ 12(1 - k ), 12 \}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Let $v_\Pi$ be a vertex of $\Psi_h$, let $f$ be an oriented edge of $\Psi_h$ such that $f_- = f_+ = v_\Pi$ and $f$ bounds a disk on $\D$. It follows from the definition of relations in \er{e3} that if $e_1, e_2$ are $h$-edges of $\p \Pi$, then either $\ph(e_1), \ph(e_2) \in \{ h_1, h_2 \}$ or $\ph(e_1), \ph(e_2) \in \{ h_1^{-1}, h_2^{-1} \}$.
On the other hand, let $\Gamma \in \C_h$ be the contiguity subdiagram that $f$ passes through and let
$\BT$ denote the bond that contains the connecting line $\ell(\Gamma)$. If $e_3, e_4$ are $h$-edges of $\p \BT$, then it follows from the fact that $f$ bounds a disk on $\D$ that $\ph(e_3)= \ph(e_2)^{-1}$, hence, the inclusions $e_3, e_4 \in \p \Pi$ are impossible. Thus, there is no 1-gon in the partial cell decomposition of $\D$ defined by $\Psi_h$.
Now assume that the property (B) fails for $\Psi_h$ with parameter $m =3$. This means that
there are three distinct edges $f_1, f_2, f_3$ in $\Psi_h$ such that
$$
(f_1)_- = (f_2)_- =(f_3)_- = v_{\Pi} , \quad (f_1)_+ = (f_2)_+ =(f_3)_+ = v_{\Pi'} ,
$$
where $\Pi, \Pi'$ are some faces of type F3 with $h$-edges, such that both paths $f_1 f_2^{-1}$, $f_2 f_3^{-1}$ bound disks on $\D$ whose interiors contain no vertices of $\Psi_h$. Let $f_i$ be the extension of the connecting line $\ell(\Gamma_i)$, where $\Gamma_i \in \C_h$, $i=1,2,3$, and $s, s'$ be $h$-sections of the faces $\Pi, \Pi'$, resp. Then it is not difficult to check that either $\Gamma_1, \Gamma_2$ or $\Gamma_2, \Gamma_3$ are contained in a \cntsd\ $\Gamma$ between $s$ and $s'$, contrary to the maximality of \cntsd s $\Gamma_1, \Gamma_2, \Gamma_3$. This
contradiction proves that the property (B) holds for $\Psi_h$ with $m=3$.
Consider those pairs $\{ f, f' \}$ of oriented edges of $\Psi_h$ for which the property (B) with $m=2$ fails.
Note that the property (B) with $m=3$ for $\Psi_h$ implies that every oriented edge $e$ of $\Psi_h$ is
contained in at most one such pair $\{ f, f' \}$. For each such pair $\{ f, f' \}$, we remove
edges $(f')^{\pm 1}$ (or $f^{\pm 1}$) from $\Psi_h$. Doing this results in a graph $\wht \Psi_h$ which, as follows from definitions, has the property (B) with $m=2$. Therefore, Lemma~\ref{gr1} applies to $\wht \Psi_h$ and yields that
$ E_{\wht \Psi_h} \le 3(V_{\wht \Psi_h} - k)$, where $V_{\wht \Psi_h}, E_{\wht \Psi_h}$ denote the number of vertices, nonoriented edges, resp., in $\wht \Psi_h$. Note that $V_{\Psi_h} = V_{\wht \Psi_h}$ and $ E_{\Psi_h} \le 2 E_{\wht \Psi_h}$. Hence, $ E_{\Psi_h} \le 6(V_{\Psi_h} - k)$. If $d$ is the minimal positive degree of a vertex in $V_{\Psi_h}$, then it is easy to see from definitions that $d >0$ and $d V_{\Psi_h} \le 2 E_{\Psi_h}$.
Thus $d V_{\Psi_h} \le 12(V_{\Psi_h} - k)$ and
$$
d \le 12(1 - \tfrac {k}{V_{\Psi_h} } ) \le \max \{ 12(1 - k ), 12 \} ,
$$
as desired.
\end{proof}
\section{Proofs of Theorems}
{\em Proof of Theorem \ref{thm1}.}
First we observe that the group $\GG_2$, given by presentation \er{e3}, can also be presented by generators and relations in the following form
\begin{align}\label{prh}
\langle \, h_1, h_2 \, \| \, \wht R_1=1, \, \wht R_2=1, \dots , \, \wht W_1 =1 ,
\wht W_2 =1 , \, \dots \, \rangle ,
\end{align}
where, for every possible $i =1,2, \dots$, the defining words $\wht R_i$, $\wht W_i$ result from rewriting of the words $R_i$, $W_i(\X_i)$, resp., of presentation \er{e3} so that letters $a_{j_1}^{ \e_1}$, $x_{j_2}^{ \e_2}$, where $a_{j_1} \in \A$, $x_{j_2} \in \cup_{i'=1}^\infty \X_{i'}$, $\e_1, \e_2 = \pm 1$, are replaced with the words
$V_{2j_1+1}^{ \e_1}$, $V_{2j_2}^{ \e_2}$ over $\{ h_1^{\pm 1}, h_2^{\pm 1} \}$, see \er{e2}.
Now we will show that the group $G$ given by the presentation \er{e0} naturally embeds into the group $\GG_2$ given by \er{e3}. Assume that $U_0$ is a cyclically reduced word over $\A^{\pm 1}$ and $U_0 = 1$ in $\GG_2$. By Lemma \ref{vk}, there is a disk diagram $\D_0$ over \er{e3} such that $\ph (\p \D_0) \equiv U_0$. Without loss of generality, we may assume that $\D_0$ is reduced. Note that a boundary path of $\D_0$ contains no $h$-edges. If $\D_0$ contains no face of type F3 whose boundary path has $h$-edges then, turning $h$-edges into 1-edges by relabeling, we may assume that $\D_0$ contains no $h$-edges. Hence, we may suppose that
$\D_0$ is a disk diagram over the presentation \er{e1}.
Then it follows from Lemmas \ref{lem1}, \ref{vk} that $U_0 = 1$ in $G$. Thus, if $U_0$ is not trivial in $G$,
then $\D_0$ must contain a face of type F3 with $h$-edges. Therefore, Lemma \ref{gr2} applies to $\D_0$ and yields the existence of a vertex $v_\Pi$, where $\Pi$ is a face of type F3
with $h$-edges, whose degree $d$ in the graph $\Psi_h$ is positive and is at most $\max\{ 12(1-k), 12 \} = 12$ as $k = \chi( \D_0 ) =1$. It follows from the definition of the graph $\Psi_h$ and Lemmas~\ref{gr1},~\ref{cntsd} that there are $d \le 12$ maximal \cntsd s $\Gamma_1, \dots, \Gamma_d$ between an $h$-section $q$ of $\Pi$ and some $h$-sections of $\D_0$ so that every edge of $q$ is contained in exactly one of the contiguity arcs $\Gamma_i \wedge q$, $i=1, \dots, d$.
Therefore, there is an index $i^*$ such that $| \Gamma_{i^*} \wedge q | \ge \tfrac 1{12}
|q|$. Since $\p \D_0$ contains no $h$-edges, it follows that $ \Gamma_{i^*}$ is a \cntsd\ between $q$ and
$q'$, where $q'$ is an $h$-section of a face $\Pi'$. Denote $q_\Pi :=
\Gamma_{i^*} \wedge q$ and $q_{\Pi'} := \Gamma_{i^*} \wedge q'$. Since
$\ph(q_\Pi ) \equiv \ph( q_{\Pi'} )^{-1}$ and $| q_{\Pi} | \ge \tfrac 1{12} |q| >
\tfrac 4{M} |q|$ as $n \ge 2$ and $M = 24n \ge 48$, it follows from Lemma~\ref{lem2} that $\ph(q) \equiv
\ph( q' )^{-1}$. Hence, by the definition of relations in \er{e3} and by the definition of a \cntsd , we have that
$\ph(\p \Pi) \equiv \ph( \p \Pi' )^{- 1}$ and the faces $\Pi$, $\Pi'$ form a reducible pair. This contradiction to the fact that $\D_0$ is reduced proves that $U_0 \overset G = 1$ and, therefore, $G$ naturally embeds in $\GG_2$, as claimed. Let $\nu_2 : G \to \GG_2$ denote this embedding.
\medskip
Consider a quadratic equation $W=1$ over $G$ of length $\ell \le n$. We need to prove that the equation $W=1$ has a solution in the group $G$ given by \er{e0} \ifff\ the equation $\nu_2(W)=1$ has a solution in the group $\GG_2$ given by \er{e3}.
First assume that $W=1$ has a solution in $G$. By Lemma~\ref{lem1}, the equation $\nu_1(W)=1$ has a solution in the group $\GG_1$ given by \er{e1}. Since $G$ naturally embeds in $\GG_2$, it follows from the definition of presentations \er{e1}, \er{e3} that there is a homomorphism $\GG_1 \to \GG_2$ which is identical on $G$. Hence, we may conclude
that the equation $\nu_2(W)=1$ has a solution in the group $\GG_2$, as desired.
Conversely, suppose that the equation $\nu_2(W)=1$ has a solution in the group $\GG_2$. Our goal is to show that
$W=1$ has a solution in $G$. Let
$$
W \equiv t_1^{\e_1} U_1 t_2^{\e_2} U_2 \dots t_\ell^{\e_\ell} U_\ell,
$$
where $t_1, \dots, t_\ell \in \cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i $, $\e_1, \dots, \e_\ell \in \{ \pm 1\}$, and $U_1, \dots, U_\ell$ are some reduced or empty words over $\A^{\pm 1}$. Since $\nu_2(W)=1$ has a solution in $\GG_2$, there are nonempty words
$T_1, \dots, T_\ell$ over the alphabet $\cup_{i=1}^\infty \X_i^{\pm 1} \cup \A^{\pm 1}\cup \{ h_1^{\pm 1}, h_2^{\pm 1}, 1 \}$ such that
$$
T_1^{\e_1} U_1 T_2^{\e_2} U_2 \dots T_\ell^{\e_\ell} U_\ell \overset {\GG_2} = 1 .
$$
Note that we would use the letter $1$ for the trivial element of $\GG_2$.
By Lemma~\ref{vk}, there is a disk diagram $\D$ over presentation \er{e3} such that
$$
\ph(\p \D) \equiv T_1^{\e_1} U_1 T_2^{\e_2} U_2 \dots T_\ell^{\e_\ell} U_\ell .
$$
Since $W=1$ is a quadratic equation, there is a permutation
$$
\tau : \{1, \dots, \ell \} \to \{1, \dots, \ell \}
$$
such that $\tau^2 =1$, $\tau(i) \ne i$ and $t_i = t_{\tau(i)}$ for every $i \in \{1, \dots, \ell \}$. Hence, we may assume that $T_i \equiv T_{\tau(i)}$ for every $i \in \{1, \dots, \ell \}$. Denote
$$
\p \D = r_1^{\e_1} u_1 r_2^{\e_2} u_2 \dots r_\ell^{\e_\ell} u_\ell ,
$$
where $r_i, u_i$ are paths of $\p \D^{\pm 1}$ such that $\ph(r_i) \equiv T_i$, $\ph(u_i) \equiv U_i$ for every $i =1, \dots, \ell$.
Now we construct a surface diagram $\wtl \D$ from $\D$ by attaching the path $r_i$ to $r_{\tau(i)}$ for every $i =1, \dots, \ell$. Note that $\chi(\wtl \D) = 1- \tfrac \ell 2$ and $\wtl \D $ has $k'$ \cncm s in its boundary $\p \wtl \D $, $1 \le k' \le \ell$. Thus, $\wtl \D$ is a surface diagram of type $(1- \tfrac \ell 2, k')$.
Let $c_1, \dots c_{k'}$ be \cncm s of $\p \wtl \D$. Note that each $c_j$ is a product of some paths in the set
$\{ u_1^{\delta_1}, \dots, u_\ell^{\delta_\ell} \}$, where $\delta_1, \dots, \delta_\ell \in \{ \pm 1 \}$, and each
$u_j^{\delta_j}$ occurs in one of $c_1, \dots c_{k'}$ exactly once. If $\wtl \D$ contains a reducible pair
of faces, then we remove this pair by the surgery described above and obtain a surface diagram $\wtl \D'$
with unchanged boundary paths and $| \wtl \D'_3(2) |= |\wtl \D_3(2) |-2$, where $|\wtl \D_3(2) |$ is the number of faces of type F3 in $\D$. It is not difficult to check that there exists a disk diagram $\D'$ such that
$$
\p \D' = (r'_1)^{\e_1} u'_1 ( r'_2)^{\e_2} u'_2 \dots (r'_\ell)^{\e_\ell} u'_\ell ,
$$
where $r'_i, u'_i$ are paths of $\p (\D')^{\pm 1}$ such that
$\ph(r'_i) \equiv \ph(r'_{\tau(i)}) \equiv T'_i$, $\ph(u'_i) \equiv \ph(u_i)$ for every $i =1, \dots, \ell$. Moreover, the diagram $\wtl \D'$ can be obtained from $\D'$ in the same manner as $\wtl \D$ was obtained from $\D$, in particular, $| \wtl \D'_3(2) |= |\D'_3(2) |$. Hence, by induction on the number $| \D_3(2) |$ of faces of type F3 in $\D$, we may assume that the surface diagram $\wtl \D$ is reduced.
Suppose that $\wtl \D$ contains no faces of type F3 with $h$-edges. Then $\D$ also has this property, hence we can turn $h$-edges of $\D$ into 1-edges by relabeling and obtain thereby a disk diagram $\bar \D$ from $\D$ with no $h$-edges. Such a diagram $\bar \D$ could be regarded as a diagram over presentation \er{e1}. The existence of
such $\bar \D$ over \er{e1} means that the equation $\nu_1(W)=1$ has a solution in the group $\GG_1$ given by \er{e1}.
By Lemma~\ref{lem1}, the equation $W=1$ has a solution in $G$, as required.
Hence, we may assume that $\D$ contains faces of type F3 with $h$-edges. Clearly, $\wtl \D$ also has this property and we may consider the graph $\Psi_h = \Psi_h(\wtl \D)$ on $\wtl \D$ as defined before. Since $\p \wtl \D$ contains no $h$-edges, Lemma~\ref{gr2} applies to the graph $\Psi_h$ on $\wtl \D$ and yields the existence of a vertex $v_\Pi$, where $\Pi$ is a face of $\wtl \D$, whose positive degree is at most
$$
\max\{ 12(1-k), 12 \}= \max\{ 6\ell, 12 \} =6\ell \le 6n
$$
as $\ell \ge 2$. As above, it follows from the definition of the graph $\Psi_h$ and Lemmas~\ref{gr1},~\ref{cntsd} that there are $d \le 6n$ maximal \cntsd s $\Gamma_1, \dots, \Gamma_d$ between an $h$-section $q$ of $\Pi$ and some $h$-sections of $\wtl \D$ so that every edge of $q$ is contained in exactly one of the contiguity arcs $\Gamma_i \wedge q$, $i=1, \dots, d$.
Therefore, there is an index $i^*$ such that $| \Gamma_{i^*} \wedge q | \ge \tfrac 1{6n}
|q|$. Let $ \Gamma_{i^*}$ be a \cntsd\ between $q$ and
$q'$, where $q'$ is an $h$-section of a face $\Pi'$. Denote $q_\Pi :=
\Gamma_{i^*} \wedge q$ and $q_{\Pi'} := \Gamma_{i^*} \wedge q'$. Since
$\ph(q_\Pi ) \equiv \ph( q_{\Pi'} )^{-1}$ and $ | q_{\Pi} | \ge \tfrac 1{6n} |q| =
\tfrac 4{M} |q|$ as $M = 24n$, it follows from Lemma~\ref{lem2} that $\ph(q) \equiv
\ph( q' )^{-1}$. Hence, by the definition of relations in \er{e3} and by the definition of a \cntsd , we have that
$\ph(\p \Pi) \equiv \ph( \p \Pi' )^{-1}$ and the faces $\Pi$, $\Pi'$ form a reducible pair in $\wtl \D$.
This contradiction to the fact that $\wtl \D$ is reduced proves that it is impossible that $\D$ contains faces of type F3 with $h$-edges.
Hence, the equation $W=1$ has a solution in $G$, as desired.
Thus, the group $\GG_2$ has all of the required properties of the group $H$ of the statement of Theorem~\ref{thm1} and the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm1} is complete.
\qed
\medskip
{\em Proof of Theorem \ref{thm2}.} (a) \ Let
$
W_1 =1 , W_2 =1, \dots
$
be the enumeration, fixed in \eqref{enum0}, of all quadratic equations over $G$ such that, for every $i \ge 1$, $| W_i|_\X \le n $ and $W_i =1$ has a solution in $G$. Recall that the enumeration $\cup_{i=1}^{\infty} \X_i= \{x_1,x_2,\dots\}$ has the property that if $x_j \in \X_k$, $x_{j'} \in \X_{k'}$ and $k <k'$ then $j <j'$. This property implies, for every $W_i=1$, that if $x_{k_1},\dots,x_{k_{\ell}}$ are the letters of $\cup_{i=1}^{\infty} \X_i$ that appear in $W_i(\X_i)^{\pm 1}$, then $k_1,\dots, k_{\ell}\leq ni$. Thus, in view of the relations $x_j^{-1} V_{2j} = 1$ of the
presentation \er{e3}, it follows that $(V_{2k_1}, \dots, V_{2k_\ell} )$ is a solution tuple to the equation $\nu_2(W_i)=1$ over $\GG_2$. Since $|V_k| \le (M(k+1) +1)M$ and $\ell \le n$, we further obtain that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{j'=1}^\ell | V_{2k_{j'}} | \le nM( M(2ni+1) +1 ) \le 3n^2M^2 i = C n^4 i ,
\end{equation*}
where $C = 3\cdot 24^2$ as $M = 24n$.
\smallskip
(b) Since the presentation \er{e0} of $G$ is recursively enumerable, it follows that the set of all words
$U$ over $\A^{\pm 1}$ such that $U \overset G = 1$ is also recursively enumerable. More generally, we can analogously obtain that all quadratic equations $W =1$ over $G$ of length $\le n$ that have solutions in $G$ can be
recursively enumerated. The last observation means that we can create a recursive enumeration \eqref{enum0}. Now we can use constructions of \er{e3}, \er{prh} and
see that defining relations of the presentation \er{prh} for $\GG_2$ can
be recursively enumerated as well.
\smallskip
(c) The existence of an algorithm that detects whether a quadratic equation $W=1$ over $G$ of length $\le n$ has a solution enables us to effectively write down all quadratic equations $W =1$ over $G$ of length $\le n$ that have solutions in $G$. Hence, we can effectively create an enumeration \eqref{enum0} and, using constructions of \er{e3}, \er{prh}, write down
all relations of the form $\wht W_1 =1, \wht W_2 =1, \dots$ in the presentation \er{prh}.
Since the presentation \er{e0} of $G$ is decidable, we can also effectively
write down all relations of the form $\wht R_1=1, \wht R_2=1, \dots$ in the presentation \er{prh}. Hence, the presentation \er{prh} is decidable. Since the map $a_i \to V_{2i+1}$, $i=1,2, \dots$, extends to the embedding $\mu_n : G \to H $ and the set of defining relations of presentation \er{prh} is recursive, we see that the embedding $\mu_n : G \to H$ can be effectively constructed.
Theorem~\ref{thm2} is proven. \qed
|
\section{Introduction}\label{introduction}
\subsection{Metastability in reaction-diffusion equations}
Reaction-diffusion equations are widely used to describe a variety of phenomena such as pattern formation
and front propagation in biological, chemical and physical systems.
When the model under study is characterized by the presence of competing equilibrium states, a crucial question is to
describe the interaction and the dynamics of space occupation by the equilibria.
A basic prototype is the \emph{Allen--Cahn equation}, which have the form
\begin{equation}\label{AllenCahnMulti}
u_t+\mathcal{L}(u)=0\qquad\textrm{where}\quad
\mathcal{L}(u):=-\varepsilon^2 \Delta u+f(u),
\end{equation}
and it has been originally proposed in \cite{Allen-Cahn} to describe the motion of antiphase boundaries in iron alloys.
Such equation has an associated energy functional
\begin{equation*}
\int \bigg\{\tfrac{1}{2} \varepsilon^2|\nabla u|^2+F(u)\bigg\}dx,
\end{equation*}
where the {\it potential} $F$ is a primitive of $f$ and integration in space is performed in the domain under consideration.
For the Allen--Cahn model, the function $F$ is assumed to be a double-well potential with wells of equal depth.
As a consequence, the reaction function $f$ has a cubic-type behavior with two stable and one unstable
equilibria, usually normalized as $\pm 1$ and $0$, respectively.
In the absence of diffusion, viz. $\varepsilon=0$, the space variable $x$ becomes an external parameter and
solutions generically converge pointwise to functions with values in $\{-1,+1\}$ with sharp transition layers
generated at points where the initial datum changes sign.
For small $\varepsilon>0$, if the initial datum is a small perturbation of a function with values in $\{-1,+1\}$
with well-separated transition regions, diffusion determines in a short time-scale a smoothed version of the original
configuration and, on a longer time-scale, layers interact giving rise to front motion.
When the space variable is one-dimensional, starting from \cite{Bron-Kohn,Carr-Pego,Fusco-Hale},
it has been shown that, as long as layers are well-separated the interaction force is very weak and the
consequent motion is very slow.
The meaning of weak/slow can be quantified more precisely, as discussed in what follows.
Postponing such details, in the regime $\varepsilon\to 0^+$, the original configuration is preserved for a long time
and thus such behavior has been classified as {\it metastability}.
Many papers have been devoted to slow motion analysis for the Allen--Cahn equation providing precise description
of the relation between the size of the diffusivity $\varepsilon$ and the time-scale of the dynamics.
A complete list of references would be prohibitive.
Here, we only quote the analysis on generation, persistence and
annihilation of metastable patterns performed in \cite{Chen}.
A large class of different evolution PDEs, concerning many different areas, exhibits the phenomenon of metastability.
Without claiming to be complete, we list some of the principal models that have been analyzed:
scalar conservation laws \cite{FLMS17, KreiKrei86, LafoOMal95, Mascia-Strani, ReynWard95},
the Cahn--Hilliard equation \cite{AlikBateFusc91, Bates-Xun1, Bates-Xun2, Bron-Hilh, Pego89},
Gierer--Meinhardt and Gray--Scott systems \cite{Sun-War-Rus},
Keller--Segel chemotaxis models \cite{Dol-Sch, Pop-Hillen},
general gradient flows \cite{Otto-Rez}, high-order systems \cite{Kal-VdV-Wan},
gradient systems with equal depth multiple-well potentials \cite{Be-Or-Sm,Be-Sm},
Cahn--Morral systems \cite{Grant}, the Jin--Xin system \cite{Strani}.
The aforementioned bibliography is confined to one-dimensional models;
however, there is a vast literature of works about motion of interfaces in several space dimensions,
where the effect of the curvature of the interfaces turns out to be relevant for the dynamics.
In particular, for the Allen--Cahn equation, we recall the works \cite{Bron-Kohn2,Chen2,demot-sch}, where it has been
shown that steep interfaces are generated in a short time with subsequent motion governed by mean curvature flow.
The present paper is devoted to the analysis of metastability in a hyperbolic framework.
Precisely, given $\varepsilon>0$, $\tau_0\in (0,+\infty]$, $f\,:\,\mathbb{R}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$
and $g\,:\,\mathbb{R}\times(0,\tau_0) \rightarrow\mathbb{R}$,
we consider here the \emph{hyperbolic Allen--Cahn equation}
\begin{equation}\label{hyp-al-caMulti}
\tau u_{tt}+g(u,\tau)u_t=\varepsilon^2 \Delta u-f(u).
\end{equation}
The function $f$ is required to be the derivative of a double well potential $F$ with non-degenerate minima
of same depth, and the function $g$ is assumed to be strictly positive, uniformly with respect to $u$;
namely, we assume
\begin{align}
&F(\pm1)=F'(\pm1)=0, \quad F''(\pm1)>0, \quad F(u)>0 \; \mbox{ for } u\neq\pm1, \label{hypf}\\
&g(u,\tau)\geq c_g>0\qquad\forall\, u, \label{hypg}
\end{align}
where the constant $c_g$ may depend on $\tau$.
The uniform positivity of $g$ in \eqref{hypg} is crucial, because it guarantees the dissipative nature of the model.
If, in addition, $g(u,\tau)\to 1$ as $\tau\rightarrow0$, we formally recover \eqref{AllenCahnMulti}
from \eqref{hyp-al-caMulti} in the (singular) limit.
In the case $g\equiv 1$, equation \eqref{hyp-al-caMulti} can be obtained by adding a nonlinear zero order
perturbation to the damped wave operator $\tau\partial_t^2 +\partial_t - \varepsilon^2\Delta$.
For such a choice, many studies have been devoted to the stability of fronts ---mainly in one space dimension--- for bistable
or monostable reaction term $f$ (see \cite{Gallay-Joly} and references therein).
Interface formation has been analyzed in \cite{Hil-Nara} in the singular limit $\varepsilon\to 0$ for space dimension
equal to $2$ or $3$, showing that motion is governed by mean curvature flow, as is the case for the corresponding
parabolic model.
The choice of the hyperbolic variation \eqref{hyp-al-caMulti} is motivated by the observation that there are
different ways for modeling transport mechanisms.
The one at the base of \eqref{AllenCahnMulti} is the classical Fourier law, originally proposed
for heat conduction and then extended to many other different fields, which prescribes
the instantaneous proportionality between the flux $v$ of a quantity with ``density'' $u$ and its gradient, $v = - \varepsilon^2\nabla u$.
Such choice has the advantage of providing a simple equation enjoying a number of useful properties (smoothing
effects, self-similarity, \dots), but, at the same time, it has a number of drawbacks, the best known being the presence
of infinite speed of propagation.
Still in the framework of heat conduction modeling, following some ideas developed by Maxwell in the context of kinetic theories,
Cattaneo proposed in \cite{Cat} a different law for the heat flux $v$, based on the assumption that the equilibrium between flux
and gradient of the unknown is asymptotical with a time-scale measured by the relaxation parameter $\tau>0$, that is
\begin{equation}\label{MClaw}
\tau v_t + v = - \varepsilon^2 \nabla u
\qquad \textrm{(Maxwell--Cattaneo law)}
\end{equation}
(an extensive discussion is reported in \cite{JP89a,JP89b}).
In the one-dimensional case, the diffusion equation given by the law \eqref{MClaw} has also a probabilistic interpretation,
appearing in the description of \emph{correlated random walks} (see \cite{Gol, Kac, Tay}) to be compared with the
standard \emph{random walk}, which gives raise to the standard parabolic diffusion equation.
Criticisms to the application of the use of Fourier-type law has been given also in modeling reaction-diffusion
phenomena (see \cite{Hade99, Holmes}).
In the presence of a reaction term described by the function $f$, application of the Maxwell--Cattaneo law gives
\begin{equation*}
\tau u_{tt}+\bigl\{u+\tau f(u)\bigr\}_t=\varepsilon^2 \Delta u-f(u),
\end{equation*}
to be considered as a modification of the standard Allen--Cahn equation when $f$ satisfies \eqref{hypf}
(see also \cite{DunbOthm86}, for different origins of the same equation).
This equation fits into \eqref{hyp-al-caMulti} with the choice $g(u,\tau):=1+\tau f'(u)$.
We refer to this specific model as the \emph{Allen--Cahn equation with relaxation}, reminiscent
of the relaxation-type law \eqref{MClaw}.
Existence and nonlinear stability of traveling wave solutions for this equation has been analyzed
in detail in \cite{LMPS} for general bistable reaction terms in one space dimension.
\subsection{Presentation of the main result}
This study is devoted to the one-dimensional case, so that the hyperbolic Allen--Cahn equation reads as
\begin{equation}\label{hyp-al-ca}
\tau u_{tt}+g(u,\tau)u_t+\mathcal{L}(u)=0,
\end{equation}
corresponding to the parabolic Allen--Cahn equation
\begin{equation}\label{AllenCahn}
u_t+\mathcal{L}(u)=0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}(u):=-\varepsilon^2 u_{xx}+f(u)$.
Specifically, we are interested in the limiting behavior of the solutions as $\varepsilon\rightarrow0$ with the aim of extending
the metastable dynamics for \eqref{AllenCahn} to the hyperbolic case \eqref{hyp-al-ca}
and focusing the attention on eventual differences.
In \cite{Folino}, adapting the \emph{energy approach} proposed by Bronsard and Kohn \cite{Bron-Kohn} for the parabolic
equation \eqref{AllenCahn}, the first author has shown that, if the initial profile $u_0$ has a transition layer structure and
the initial velocity $v_0$ is small, then the solution maintains the transition layer structure on a time scale of order $\varepsilon^{-k}$
with $k$ arbitrary.
The energy approach has also been applied to Cahn--Hilliard equation in \cite{Bron-Hilh}.
Grant \cite{Grant} improved this method to prove exponentially slow motion for Cahn--Morral systems.
A different procedure, proposed by Carr--Pego in \cite{Carr-Pego} and Fusco--Hale in \cite{Fusco-Hale}, permits to prove existence and persistence of metastable
states for the Allen--Cahn equation \eqref{AllenCahn} for a time proportional to $e^{C/\varepsilon}$.
This strategy provides also an explicit differential equation for the dynamics of the transition layer positions (far from collapses).
The method is based on the construction of an $N$-dimensional base manifold $\mathcal{M}$ consisting of functions which
approximate metastable states with $N$ transition layers.
The manifold is not invariant, but if the initial datum is in a small neighborhood of $\mathcal{M}$, then the solution remains
near the manifold for a time proportional to $e^{C/\varepsilon}$.
Based on these ideas, slow motion results have been proved for the Cahn--Hilliard equation
by Alikakos et al. \cite{AlikBateFusc91} and by Bates and Xun \cite{Bates-Xun1,Bates-Xun2}.
In particular, the last ones use the same manifold constructed in \cite{Carr-Pego}.
Here, we adapt the method of \cite{Carr-Pego} to the hyperbolic Allen--Cahn equation \eqref{hyp-al-ca} embedding
the base manifold $\mathcal{M}$ in an extended phase space determined by the presence of the additional unknown $v=u_t$
as suggested by the first-order form of equation \eqref{hyp-al-ca} given by
\begin{equation}\label{system-u-v}
\left\{\begin{aligned}
& u_t = v\\
& \tau v_t = -\mathcal{L}(u)-g(u,\tau)v.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
System \eqref{system-u-v}, considered here for $t>0$ and $x\in(0,1)$, is complemented with homogeneous Neumann
boundary conditions
\begin{equation}\label{Neumann}
u_x(0,t)=u_x(1,t)=0, \qquad \quad t>0,
\end{equation}
and initial conditions
\begin{equation}\label{initial}
u(x,0)=u_0(x), \quad v(x,0)=v_0(x), \qquad \quad x\in (0,1).
\end{equation}
The initial-boundary value problem \eqref{system-u-v}-\eqref{Neumann}-\eqref{initial}
is globally well-posed for positive times in $H^1\times L^2$.
In particular, if
\begin{equation*}
(u_0,v_0)\in\mathcal{D}=\left\{(u,v)\in H^2\times H^1: u_x(0)=u_x(1)=0\right\},
\end{equation*}
the solution $(u,v)$ is classical and belongs to $C\left([0,\infty),\mathcal{D}\right)\cap C^1\left([0,\infty),H^1\times L^2\right)$
(among others, see \cite[Appendix A]{Folino}).
Then, our aim is to describe the dynamics of such globally defined solution, at least for a class of
``well-prepared'' initial data.
Under assumptions \eqref{hypf}--\eqref{hypg}, the hyperbolic equation \eqref{hyp-al-ca} supports traveling wave
solutions connecting the equilibria $-1$ and $1$, i.e. solutions of the form $u(x,t)=\Phi(x-ct)$ such that $\Phi(\pm\infty)=\pm 1$,
if and only if $c=0$.
Indeed, substituting the traveling wave ansatz in the equation, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
(\varepsilon^2-c^2\tau)\Phi''+c\,g(\Phi,\tau)\Phi'-f(\Phi)=0,
\end{equation*}
and thus, multiplying by $\Phi'$ and integrating over $\mathbb{R}$, we get
\begin{equation*}
c\int_{\mathbb{R}} g(\Phi,\tau)(\Phi')^2\,d\xi=F(+1)-F(-1),
\end{equation*}
from which we deduce, under \eqref{hypf} and \eqref{hypg}, that the velocity $c$ is zero.
With such choice, it is well-known that, up to translation, there is a unique solution to the problem
\begin{equation}\label{Fi(x)}
\varepsilon^2\Phi''-f(\Phi)=0, \qquad
\Phi(x)\rightarrow\pm1 \quad \mbox{ as } \quad x\rightarrow\pm\infty.
\end{equation}
Normalizing $\Phi$ by adding the condition $\Phi(0)=0$, transitions layer from $-1$ to $+1$ (or viceversa)
are described by $\Phi(\pm(x-\bar x))$ for both equations \eqref{AllenCahn} and \eqref{hyp-al-ca}.
Steady states $\Phi$ are at the base of the construction of the base manifold $\mathcal{M}$
which we sketch here (for precise definitions, see Section \ref{preliminaries}).
Fix $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\varepsilon>0$.
Given a configuration $\bm{h}=(h_1,\dots,h_N)$ of $N$ layer positions (with $h_j<h_{j+1}$), we construct a function $u^{\bm{h}}$
which approximates a metastable state with transition points at $h_1,\dots,h_N$, by piecing together approximated versions of $\Phi$,
that is $u^{\bm h}(x)\approx \Phi(x-h_j)$ or $\Phi(h_j-x)$ for $x\approx h_j$ (see Figure \ref{u^h-fig}).
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\includegraphics[width=14cm]{8layers}
\caption{Example of a function $u^{\bm h}(x)$ with $N=8$.
}
\label{u^h-fig}
\end{figure}
Then, we consider the slow evolution of solutions when the transition points are well separated one from the other and bounded
away from the boundary points $0$ and $1$.
For fixed (small) $\rho>0$, the admissible layer positions lie in the set
\begin{equation*}
\Omega_\rho:=\bigl\{{\bm h}\in\mathbb{R}^N\, :\,0<h_1<\cdots<h_N<1,\;
h_{j+1}-h_{j}>\varepsilon/\rho\mbox{ for } j=0,\dots,N\bigr\},
\end{equation*}
where $h_0:=-h_1$, $h_{N+1}:=2-h_N$ and the {\it base manifold} is $\mathcal{M}:=\{u^{\bm h}\,:\,{\bm h}\in\Omega_\rho\}$.
In what follows, we fix a minimal distance $\delta>0$ with $\delta<1/N$ and we consider the parameters $\varepsilon$
and $\rho$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{triangle}
0<\varepsilon<\varepsilon_0\qquad\textrm{and}\qquad \delta<\frac{\varepsilon}{\rho}<\frac{1}{N},
\end{equation}
for some $\varepsilon_0>0$ to be chosen appropriately small.
In such a way, the parameters $\rho$ and $\varepsilon$ have the same order of magnitude.
All of the subsequent estimates depend on $N$ and $\delta$.
Denoted by $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ the inner product in $L^2(0,1)$,
to restrict the attention to a neighborhood of $\mathcal{M}$, we introduce the decomposition $u=u^{\bm h}+w$,
where $w$ are such that the following {\it orthogonality condition} holds
\begin{equation}\label{ortogonale}
\langle w, k^{\bm h}_j\rangle=0, \qquad \quad \mbox{for } \quad j=1,\dots,N,
\end{equation}
for some appropriate approximate tangent vectors $k^{\bm h}_j$.
Then, setting
\begin{equation*}
H^2_N:=\bigl\{w\in H^2(0,1)\, : \, w_x(0)=w_x(1)=0,\, \langle w,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle=0 \quad \mbox{ for } \; j=1,\dots,N\bigr\},
\end{equation*}
we consider triples $(\bm{h}, w, v)$ in the set $\Omega_\rho\times H^2_N\times L^2(0,1)$ and
the corresponding {\it extended base manifold}
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}_{{}_{0}}:=\mathcal{M}\times\{0\}=\left\{(u^{\bm h},0): u^{\bm h}\in{\mathcal{M}}\right\}.
\end{equation*}
Next, we choose a tubular neighborhood of $\mathcal{M}_{{}_{0}}$: given $\Gamma,\rho>0$, we set
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}:=\bigl\{(u,v)\,:\,u=u^{\bm h}+w,\,
({\bm h},w,v)\in\overline{\Omega}_\rho\times H^2_N\times L^2(0,1),\,
\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]\leq\Gamma \Psi({\bm h})\bigr\},
\end{equation*}
with the {\it energy functional} $\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}$ and the {\it barrier function} $\Psi$ defined by
\begin{align}
\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]&:=\tfrac12\int_0^1\bigl\{\varepsilon^2 w_x^2+f'(u^{\bm h})w^2\bigr\}dx
+\tfrac12\tau\|v\|^2+\varepsilon\tau\langle w,v\rangle,
\label{energy} \\
\Psi({\bm h})&:=\sum_{j=1}^N{\langle\mathcal{L}\bigl(u^{\bm h}\bigr),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle}^2,
\label{barrier}
\end{align}
where $\|\cdot\|$ is the $L^2-$norm.
Our main result states that the channel $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ is invariant for an exponentially long time
if the parameters $\Gamma$ and $\rho$ are appropriately chosen.
In other words, the manifold $\mathcal{M}_{{}_{0}}$ is approximately invariant for the hyperbolic system \eqref{system-u-v}.
\begin{thm}\label{main}
Let $f\in C^2$ and $g(\cdot,\tau)\in C^1$ with $\tau\in (0,\tau_0)$ be such that $f=F'$ and \eqref{hypf}-\eqref{hypg} hold.
Given $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\delta\in(0,1/N)$, there exist $\Gamma_2>\Gamma_1>0$
and $\varepsilon_0>0$ (possibly depending on $\tau$) such that, if $\varepsilon,\rho$ satisfy \eqref{triangle},
$\Gamma\in[\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2]$ and the initial datum satisfies
\begin{equation*}
(u_0,v_0)\in\,\stackrel{\circ}{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}=\bigl\{(u,v)\in\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}\, : \, {\bm h}\in\Omega_\rho
\;\;\textrm{and}\;\; \mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]<\Gamma\Psi({\bm h})\bigr\},
\end{equation*}
then the solution $(u,v)$ to the initial-boundary value problem \eqref{system-u-v}-\eqref{Neumann}-\eqref{initial}
remains in $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ for a time $T_\varepsilon>0$, and there exists $C>0$ (possibly depending on $\tau$) such that
for any $t\in[0,T_\varepsilon]$
\begin{align}
\varepsilon^{1/2}\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}+\|w\|+\tau^{1/2}\|v\|&\leq C\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/\varepsilon), \label{umenouh}\\
|{\bm h}'|_{{}_{\infty}} &\leq C(\varepsilon/\tau)^{1/2}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/\varepsilon), \label{|h'|<exp-intro}
\end{align}
where $A:=\sqrt{\min\{f'(-1),f'(1)\}}$, $\ell^{\bm h}:=\min\{h_j-h_{j-1}\}$ and $|\cdot|_{{}_{\infty}}$
denotes the maximum norm in $\mathbb{R}^N$.
Moreover,
\begin{equation*}
T_\varepsilon\geq C(\tau/\varepsilon)^{1/2}(\ell^{\bm h(0)}-\varepsilon/\rho)\exp(A\delta /\varepsilon).
\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:added}
It is worth to observe that in the above theorem, and in general in the whole paper, $\tau$ should be viewed as a \emph{fixed} parameter in $(0,\tau_0)$, and, as clearly stated, the constants may depend on it.
However, we prefer to make the ratio $\varepsilon/\tau$ appear in the estimates above because the constants may be chosen uniform with respect to $\tau$ in many cases, as for the relaxation limit $\tau\rightarrow0$ from
the hyperbolic equation \eqref{hyp-al-ca} to the parabolic Allen--Cahn equation \eqref{AllenCahn}, namely for $g(u,\tau)\rightarrow 1$ as $\tau\rightarrow0$; the main examples in this framework we have already introduced above are $g\equiv 1$ and
$g(u,\tau)=1+\tau f'(u)$.
More precisely,
if $g(u,\tau)\to 1$ as $\tau\rightarrow0$ in any reasonable way and $u$ is bounded,
then \eqref{hypg} implies $0<c_g\leq g(u,\tau)\leq C_g$ with $c_g$ and $C_g$ independent from $\tau$ in a (right) neighborhood of zero.
With this extra (uniform in $\tau$) control at our disposal, one can follow the proofs needed to obtain our main result and see that the only dependence in $\tau$ in the bounds for ${\bm h}'$ and $T_\varepsilon$ is through the aforementioned ratio $\varepsilon/\tau$,
which can be used to study the interplay between the two small parameters $\varepsilon$ and $\tau$ while performing this relaxation limit.
\end{remark}
The strategy to prove Theorem \ref{main} is the following.
Firstly, plugging the decomposition $u=u^{\bm h}+w$ into system \eqref{system-u-v} and using conditions \eqref{ortogonale},
we obtain an ODE-PDE coupled system describing the dynamics for $({\bm h},w,v)$, see system \eqref{system-w-v-h}.
Then, we show that, if the solution $(u,v)$ belongs to $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$, the estimates
\eqref{umenouh} and \eqref{|h'|<exp-intro} hold.
Next, we estimate the time $T_\varepsilon$ taken for the solution $(u,v)$ to leave the channel $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$.
The boundary of $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ is the union of two parts: the ``ends'' where ${\bm h}\in\partial\Omega_\rho$,
meaning $h_j-h_{j-1}=\varepsilon/\rho$ for some $j$ and ``sides'' where $\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]=\Gamma\Psi({\bm h})$.
Using an energy estimate, we infer that the solution can leave $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ only through the ends.
Since, for \eqref{|h'|<exp-intro}, the transition points move with exponentially small velocity, the solution $(u,v)$ stays
in the channel for an exponentially long time.
As long as the solution $(u,v)$ remains in the channel $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$, $u$ is a function with $N$ transition layers.
The estimate \eqref{|h'|<exp-intro} ensures the slow motion of solutions and gives a lower bound on the lifetime of the metastable states.
In order to give further information on the motion of the transition layers and an upper bound on such lifetime,
we study in detail an approximation of the equation for ${\bm h}$, determined formally by the requirement that
$u(x,t)=u^{\bm h(t)}(x)$ is an exact solution.
Such a requirement is expected to be appropriate in the limit $\varepsilon\to 0$.
In this way, we obtain a system of ordinary differential
equations for ${\bm h}$ which does not depend on $w$ and $v$ and has the form
\begin{equation}\label{h-eq-intro}
\tau {\bm h}''+\gamma_\tau {\bm h}'=\mathcal{P}^\ast({\bm h}),
\end{equation}
where $\gamma_\tau:=\overline{g}(\cdot,\tau)$ and
the (weighted) average $\overline{\mathtt{g}}$ of the continuous function $\mathtt{g}$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
\overline{\mathtt{g}}:=\frac{1}{\|\sqrt{F}\|_{{}_{L^1}}}\int_{-1}^{1} \sqrt{F(s)}\,\mathtt{g}(s)\,ds,
\end{equation*}
and $\mathcal{P}^*$ is a function, depending on $F$.
Equation \eqref{h-eq-intro} has to be compared with the corresponding one for the parabolic case \eqref{AllenCahn},
which is ${\bm h}'=\mathcal{P}^*({\bm h})$.
For the nonlinear damped wave equation $g\equiv 1$, we have $\gamma_\tau =1$, while for the Allen--Cahn equation
with relaxation we obtain $\gamma_\tau=1+\tau \overline{f'}$.
Since $\overline{f'}$ is negative, the (physical relevant) relaxation case exhibits smaller friction effects with respect
to the damped one (details in Section \ref{layer}).
System \eqref{h-eq-intro} has a unique equilibrium point $(\bm{h}^e,0)$ where $\bm{h}^e$ is the unique zero
of $\mathcal{P}^*$, that corresponds to the unique stationary solution $u^e$ of \eqref{hyp-al-ca} with $N$
transition layers, normalized by the condition $u(0)<0$, without loss of generality.
In the parabolic case, $\bm{h}^e$ is an unstable equilibrium point with $N$ positive eigenvalues;
whereas, for the hyperbolic model, $(\bm{h}^e,0)$ is an unstable equilibrium point for \eqref{h-eq-intro} with $N$
positive eigenvalues and $N$ negative eigenvalues.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
In Section \ref{preliminaries} we give all the definitions, preliminaries and the construction of the manifold $\mathcal{M}$.
Furthermore, we recall all the results of Carr and Pego \cite{Carr-Pego} needed to prove Theorem \ref{main}.
Section \ref{motion} is devoted to the derivation of the equation of motion for the triple $(\bm{h},w,v)$
and to the proof of Theorem \ref{main}.
In Section \ref{layer}, we deduce the approximating equation for ${\bm h}$, we prove that there is a unique equilibrium
point $(\bm{h}^e,0)$ and we study its stability.
Finally, using singular perturbation theory, we show that, for $\tau$ small, if $g$ is uniformly bounded and
$g(u,\tau)\to 1$ a.e.\ as $\tau\rightarrow0$, the behavior of the solution to \eqref{h-eq-intro} is the same
of the parabolic case (see Theorem \ref{thm:tau0}).
\section{Preliminaries}\label{preliminaries}
Following \cite{Carr-Pego}, we construct the base manifold and collect estimates
that we will use in the proof of our results.
For fixed $\rho>0$, we recall the definition
\begin{equation*}
\Omega_\rho:=\bigl\{{\bm h}\in\mathbb{R}^N\, :\,0<h_1<\cdots<h_N<1,\quad
h_j-h_{j-1}>\varepsilon/\rho\mbox{ for } j=1,\dots,N+1\bigr\},
\end{equation*}
where $h_0:=-h_1$ and $h_{N+1}:=2-h_N$.
By construction, if $\rho_1<\rho_2$, then $\Omega_{\rho_1}\subset \Omega_{\rho_2}$.
The idea is to associate to any $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$ a function $u^{\bm h}=u^{\bm h}(x)$ which approximates a metastable
state with $N$ transition points at $h_1,\dots,h_N$ by matching appropriate steady states of equation \eqref{AllenCahn}.
The collection of $u^{\bm h}$ determines a $N$-dimensional manifold.
In order to describe the dynamics in a neighborhood of such manifold, the framework has to be complemented with a
projection which permits to separate the solution into a component on the manifold and a corresponding remainder.
For the Allen--Cahn equation \eqref{AllenCahn}, two different constructions have been proposed in \cite{Carr-Pego}
and \cite{Fusco-Hale}.
In \cite{Fusco-Hale}, Fusco and Hale use functions $\Phi(\pm(x-\bar x))$ with $\Phi$ the solution of \eqref{Fi(x)}
previously defined, and set
\begin{equation*}
U^{\bm h}(x):=\Phi\left((x-h_j)(-1)^{j+1}\right), \quad x\in[h_{j-1/2},h_{j+1/2}], \quad j=1,\dots,N,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
h_{j+1/2}:=\tfrac12(h_j+h_{j+1})\qquad j=0,\dots,N,
\end{equation*}
(note that $h_{1/2}=0$, $h_{N+1/2}=1$).
Hence, they obtain a manifold $\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny FH}}$ composed by continuous functions
$U^{\bm h}$ with a piecewise continuous first order derivative that jumps at $h_{j+1/2}$, $j=1,\dots,N-1$.
In particular, the elements of the manifold belong to $H^1$ and not to $H^2$ (if $N>1)$.
In addition, they construct a tubular neighborhood of $\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny FH}}$ with coordinates $(\bm h,V)$
by setting
\begin{equation*}
u=U^{\bm h}+V\qquad\textrm{with}\quad \langle V,U^{\bm h}_j\rangle=0 \quad j=1,\dots, N,
\end{equation*}
where $U^{\bm h}_j$ are the derivatives of $U^{\bm h}$ with respect to $h_j$.
By construction, $U^{\bm h}_j$ have disjoint supports and $U^{\bm h}_j(x)=-U^{\bm h}_x(x)$ for all $x\in(h_{j-1/2},h_{j+1/2})$.
In \cite{Fusco-Hale}, it is also conjectured that equation \eqref{AllenCahn} has an invariant manifold
$\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny FH}}_\ast$ near $\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny FH}}$ and that this manifold
$\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny FH}}_\ast$ is a graph over $\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny FH}}$.
Fusco and Hale did not prove the existence of the invariant manifold, but assuming existence, they calculated a
first approximation for $\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny FH}}_\ast$ and for the differential equation for $\bm{h}$ describing
the reduced flow.
They also conjectured that metastable states with $N$ transitions are associated with the unstable manifold of
stationary solutions of \eqref{AllenCahn} having $N$ layers.
Both conjectures have been proved in \cite{Carr-Pego2} using a different base manifold,
previously constructed in \cite{Carr-Pego}.
The approach used by Carr and Pego is based on a different choice and matching of steady states, which provides
functions $u^{\bm h}$, composing the base manifold $\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny CP}}$, which are smooth in both
$x$ and $\bm{h}$.
The crucial difference with respect to the Fusco--Hale approach, resides in the fact that,
for $\mathcal{L}(u):=-\varepsilon^2 u_{xx}+f(u)$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
&\mathcal{L}(U^{\bm h})=0 &\quad\textrm{and}\quad &\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\neq 0
&\qquad &\textrm{for}\quad x\approx h_j,\\
&\mathcal{L}(U^{\bm h})\neq 0 &\quad\textrm{and}\quad &\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})=0
&\qquad &\textrm{for}\quad x\approx h_{j+1/2},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
with major consequences on the location of $\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})$ with respect to the tangent space to
$\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny CP}}$ at $u^{\bm h}$, as will be clear in the following presentation.
In this paper, we follow the framework established by Carr and Pego adapting it to the case of the hyperbolic
Allen--Cahn equation \eqref{hyp-al-ca}.
Since the equation we consider corresponds to the system \eqref{system-u-v}, the dynamics is determined by an additional unknown,
the time derivative $v=u_t$, and thus the base manifold $\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny CP}}$ has to be embedded in a extended
vector space.
Here, taking advantage of the fact that we are looking for a manifold that is only approximately invariant, we perform this extension
in a trivial way, considering the {\it extended base manifold}
$\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny CP}}_{{}_{0}}:=\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny CP}}\times\{0\}$.
From now on, we drop the letters $CP$ in the symbol used for the manifolds.
\subsection{Carr--Pego base manifold}
Given $L>0$, let $\varphi(\cdot,L,+1)$ be the solution to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:z}
-\varphi_{xx}+f(\varphi)=0, \qquad \quad
\varphi\bigl(-\tfrac12L\bigr)=\varphi\bigl(\tfrac12L\bigr)=0,
\end{equation}
with $\varphi>0$ in $(-\tfrac12L,\tfrac12L)$, and let $\varphi(\cdot,L,-1)$ be the solution to \eqref{eq:z} with $\varphi<0$ in $(-\tfrac12L,\tfrac12L)$.
Observe that if $\varphi$ satisfies \eqref{eq:z}, then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:varfi}
\varphi_x^2=2\{F(\varphi)-F(\varphi(0))\}.
\end{equation}
Using this formula, we can prove existence and uniqueness of the solutions $\varphi(\cdot,L,\pm1)$.
\begin{lem}
Let $f=F',$ with $F$ a smooth function satisfying \eqref{hypf}.
There exists $L_0>0$ such that, if $L>L_0$, then the functions $\varphi(\cdot,L,\pm1)$ are well-defined
and, denoting by
\begin{equation*}
M_\pm(L):=\max_x|\varphi(x,L,\pm1)|=|\varphi(0,L,\pm1)|,
\end{equation*}
we have that $M_\pm$ is an increasing function of $L$ and $M_\pm(+\infty)=1$.
\end{lem}
This lemma is consequence of the fact that $\pm1$ are absolute minima of $F$ and so,
there exist periodic solutions of \eqref{eq:varfi} oscillating around $0$.
Indeed, the existence of such solutions is guaranteed if there exist $M_\pm\in(0,1)$ such that
$F(M_+)=F(-M_-)$, $F'(M_\pm)\neq0$ and $F(s)>F(M_+)$ for all $s\in(-M_-,M_+)$.
This condition is certainly satisfied if $M_\pm$ are close to $+1$.
Let us consider the positive case $\varphi(\cdot,L,+1)$ and $M_+(L)=\varphi(0,L,+1)$.
By integrating \eqref{eq:varfi} in $(-\tfrac12L,0)$ and using the boundary conditions in \eqref{eq:z},
we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:L-per}
L=\sqrt2\int_0^{M_+}\frac{ds}{\sqrt{F(s)-F(M_+)}}.
\end{equation}
The integral in \eqref{eq:L-per} tends to infinity as $M_+\to1^-$
and it is an increasing function of $M_+$ for $M_+$ close to $+1$.
Hence, for $L$ sufficiently large, there exists a unique $M_+$ such that \eqref{eq:L-per} is satisfied
and so the function $\varphi(\cdot,L,+1)$ is well-defined.
The negative case $\varphi(\cdot,L,-1)$ and $M_-(L)=-\varphi(0,L,-1)$ is similar.
Now, given $\ell>0$, let us define $\phi(x,\ell,\pm1):=\varphi\bigl(\frac x\varepsilon,\frac \ell\varepsilon,\pm1\bigr)$.
By definition, it follows that $\phi(\cdot,\ell,+1)$ is the solution to
\begin{equation}\label{fi(x,l)}
\mathcal{L}(\phi):=-\varepsilon^2\phi_{xx}+f(\phi)=0, \qquad \quad
\phi\bigl(-\tfrac12\ell\bigr)=\phi\bigl(\tfrac12\ell\bigr)=0,
\end{equation}
with $\phi>0$ in $(-\tfrac12\ell,\tfrac12\ell)$,
and $\phi(\cdot,\ell,-1)$ is the solution to \eqref{fi(x,l)} with $\phi<0$ in $(-\tfrac12\ell,\tfrac12\ell)$.
Moreover, the functions $\phi(\cdot,\ell,\pm1)$ are well-defined if $\ell>\varepsilon L_0$, they depend on $\varepsilon$
and $\ell$ only through the ratio $\varepsilon/\ell$.
Finally,
\begin{equation*}
\max_x|\phi(\cdot,\ell,\pm1)|=M_\pm(\ell/\varepsilon)
\qquad \quad \textrm{and} \qquad \quad
\max_x|\phi_x(\cdot,\ell,\pm1)|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1},
\end{equation*}
where $C>0$ is a constant depending only on $F$.
In particular, $M_\pm$ tends to $+1$ as $\varepsilon/\ell\to 0$ (more details in Proposition \ref{prop:alfa,beta}).
For $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$ with $\rho<1/L_0$, we define the function $u^{\bm h}$ with $N$ transition points at $h_1,\dots,h_N$
by matching together steady states to \eqref{hyp-al-ca} with layer distance equal to $\ell$, using smooth cut-off functions.
Given $\chi:\mathbb{R}\rightarrow[0,1]$ a $C^\infty$ function with $\chi(x)=0$ for $x\leq-1$ and $\chi(x)=1$ for $x\geq1$,
set
\begin{equation*}
\chi^j(x):=\chi\left(\frac{x-h_j}\varepsilon\right) \qquad\textrm{and}\qquad
\phi^j(x):=\phi\left(x-h_{j-1/2},h_j-h_{j-1},(-1)^j\right).
\end{equation*}
Then the function $u^{\bm h}$ is given by the convex combination
\begin{equation}\label{u^h(x)}
u^{\bm h}:=\left(1-\chi^j\right)\phi^j+\chi^j\phi^{j+1} \qquad \textrm{in}\quad I_j:=[h_{j-1/2},h_{j+1/2}],
\end{equation}
and the base manifold for the equation \eqref{AllenCahn} is defined as
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}:=\{u^{\bm h} :\bm h\in\Omega_\rho\}.
\end{equation*}
If $\rho>0$ is sufficiently small and $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$, then $u^{\bm h}(x)\approx\Phi\left((x-h_j)(-1)^{j-1}\right)$
for $x$ near $h_j$ and $u^{\bm h}(x)\approx\pm1$ away from $h_j$ for $j=1,\dots,N$.
Therefore, states $u^{\bm h}$ on the base manifold are well approximated near transition layers by $U^{\bm h}$.
By definition, $u^{\bm h}$ is a smooth function of $x$ and $\bm h$ and enjoys the properties
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
u^{\bm h}(0)&=\phi(0,2h_1,-1)<0,
&\qquad u^{\bm h}(h_{j+1/2})&=\phi\left(0,h_{j+1}-h_j,(-1)^{j+1}\right)\\
u^{\bm h}(h_j)&=0,
&\qquad \mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}(x))&=0\quad \textrm{for }|x-h_j|\geq\varepsilon,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
for any $j=1,\dots,N$.
In what follows, we use the notation
\begin{equation*}
u^{\bm h}_j:=\partial_{h_j} u^{\bm h}, \qquad \quad
\nabla_{\bm h} u^{\bm h}:=\bigl(u^{\bm h}_1,\dots,u^{\bm h}_N\bigr),
\end{equation*}
and we denote the tangent space to $\mathcal{M}$ at $u^{\bm h}$ by $T\mathcal{M}(u^{\bm h})=\mbox{span}\{u^{\bm h}_j : j=1,\dots,N\}$.
At this point, the natural idea would be to construct a tubular neighborhood of $\mathcal{M}$,
with coordinates $(\bm h,w)$ where $w$ is orthogonal to $T\mathcal{M}(u^{\bm h})$.
Since $\mathcal{M}$ is not invariant, there is higher flexibility in the construction of its neighborhood
and tubular co-ordinates near $\mathcal{M}$ can be defined using approximate tangent vectors to $\mathcal{M}$.
For $j=1,\dots,N$, introduce the cutoff function $\gamma^j$ given by
\begin{equation*}
\gamma^j(x):=\chi\left(\frac{x-h_{j-1/2}-\varepsilon}\varepsilon\right)\left[1-\chi\left(\frac{x-h_{j+1/2}+\varepsilon}\varepsilon\right)\right].
\end{equation*}
Then, the {\it approximate tangent vectors} $k^{\bm h}_j$ are defined by
\begin{equation*}
k^{\bm h}_j(x):=-\gamma^j(x)u^{\bm h}_x(x).
\end{equation*}
By construction, $k^{\bm h}_j$ are smooth functions of $x$ and $\bm h$ and are such that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
k^{\bm h}_j(x)&=0 &\quad \textrm{for}\quad &x\notin[h_{j-1/2},h_{j+1/2}],\\
k^{\bm h}_j(x)&=-u^{\bm h}_x(x) &\quad \textrm{for}\quad &x\in[h_{j-1/2}+2\varepsilon,h_{j+1/2}-2\varepsilon].
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
As above, we use the notation
\begin{equation*}
k^{\bm h}_{ji}:=\partial_{h_i} k^{\bm h}_j, \qquad \quad
\nabla_{{}_{\bm{h}}} k^{\bm h}_j:=\bigl(k^{\bm h}_{j1},\dots,k^{\bm h}_{jN}\bigr).
\end{equation*}
The definition of the approximate tangent vectors is motivated by the relations
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
u_j^{\bm h} = \partial_{h_j} u^{\bm h} \approx \partial_{h_j}\Phi\left((x-h_j)(-1)^{j-1}\right )
= (-1)^{j} \Phi'\left((x-h_j)(-1)^{j-1}\right )\approx -u^{\bm h}_x
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
for $x\in[h_{j-1/2},h_{j+1/2}]$.
In addition, the multiplication by the cutoff term $\gamma^j$ is reminiscent of the fact that the tangent space
of $\mathcal{M}^{\textrm{\tiny FH}}$ is spanned by $U_j^{\bm h}$ that have disjoint supports.
The following estimates will be useful in the sequel.
\begin{prop}[Carr--Pego \cite{Carr-Pego}] \label{estimates-u^h_j}
Let $f=F'$ with $F$ satisfying \eqref{hypf}.
Given $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\delta\in(0,1/N)$, there exist $\varepsilon_0, C, A_0>0$,
and a function $\omega=\omega(s)$ with $\omega\to 0$ as $s\rightarrow 0^+$
such that if $\varepsilon$ and $\rho$ are chosen so that \eqref{triangle} holds and $\bm{h}\in\Omega_\rho$, then
\begin{equation*}
\|u^{\bm h}_j\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}+\varepsilon^{1/2}\|k^{\bm h}_{jj}\|+\|k^{\bm h}_{jj}\|_{{}_{L^1}}\leq C\varepsilon^{-1},
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
A_0-\omega(\rho)&\leq \varepsilon^{1/2}\|u_j^{\bm h}\|\leq A_0+\omega(\rho),\\
A_0-\omega(\rho)&\leq \varepsilon^{1/2}\|k_j^{\bm h}\|\leq A_0+\omega(\rho), \\
\bigl\{A_0-\omega(\rho)\bigr\}^2&\leq \varepsilon\langle u_j^{\bm h},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle \leq\bigl\{A_0+\omega(\rho)\bigr\}^2, \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
for $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$ and $j=1,\dots,N$. Moreover, if $j\neq i$, we have
\begin{equation*}
|\langle u^{\bm h}_j,k^{\bm h}_i\rangle|+\varepsilon^{1/2}\|k^{\bm h}_{ij}\|
+\|k^{\bm h}_{ij}\|_{{}_{L^1}}\leq \omega(\rho)\varepsilon^{-1}.
\end{equation*}
\end{prop}
\noindent
Heuristically, the exponent of $\varepsilon$ can be obtained by replacing
$u^{\bm h}_j$ and $k^{\bm h}_j$ with $-\Phi'(x-h_j)$.
A function $u$ near $\mathcal{M}$ may be written in terms of coordinates $(\bm h,w)$ as $u=u^{\bm h}+w$,
with $w$ satisfying the orthogonality condition \eqref{ortogonale}.
To state this result, let us set
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{B}_{\rho,\sigma}&:=\Bigl\{u\in L^\infty\, :\; \inf_{\bm h\in\Omega_\rho}\|u-u^{\bm h}\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}<\sigma\Bigr\},\\
\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{\rho,\sigma}&:=\left\{(\bm h,w)\in\Omega_\rho\times L^\infty\,:\; \|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}<\sigma,\,
\langle w,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle =0 \quad\mbox{ for }\; j=1,\dots,N\right\}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
\begin{prop}[Carr--Pego \cite{Carr-Pego}] \label{tub-co}
There exist $\rho_1, \rho_2, \sigma, C>0$ with $\rho_1<\rho_2$
and a smooth function $\mathcal{H}\,:\,\mathcal{B}_{\rho_1,\sigma}\rightarrow\Omega_{\rho_2}$
such that, whenever $\bm h=\mathcal{H}(u)$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\langle u-u^{\bm h}, k^{\bm h}_j\rangle=0 \qquad \mbox{ for } \quad j=1,\dots,N,
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\|u-u^{\bm h}\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}\leq C\inf\left\{\|u-u^{\bm l}\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}\,:\;\bm l\in\Omega_{\rho_1}\right\}<C\sigma.
\end{equation*}
Moreover, defining $\mathcal{U}\,:\,\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{\rho_1,\sigma}\to \mathcal{B}_{\rho_1,\sigma}$ by setting
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{U}(\bm h,w):=u^{\bm h}+w\quad\textrm{and}\quad
\mathcal{S}_{\rho_1,\sigma}:=\mathcal{U}(\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{\rho_1,\sigma}),
\end{equation*}
the function $\mathcal{U}$ is injective, $(\mathcal{H}\circ\mathcal{U})(\bm h,w)=\bm h$
for all $(\bm h,w)\in\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{\rho_1,\sigma}$
and the set $\mathcal{S}_{\rho_1,\sigma}$ is open in $L^\infty(0,1)$.
\end{prop}
In the last statement, constants $\rho_1, \rho_2, \sigma, C$ can be chosen independent on $\varepsilon$.
\subsection{Energy functional $\mathcal{E}^h$ and barrier function $\Psi$}
As stated in the Introduction, the neighborhood $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ of the extended base
manifold $\mathcal{M}_{{}_{0}}$ is defined in terms of the {\it energy functional} $\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}$
and the {\it barrier function} $\Psi$, see \eqref{energy} and \eqref{barrier}.
The positivity of the first term in $\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}$ holds for $\rho$ small and $w$ satisfying the
orthogonality condition \eqref{ortogonale}.
\begin{thm}[Carr--Pego \cite{Carr-Pego}] \label{L^hw-theo}
Let $f=F'$, with $F$ satisfying \eqref{hypf}.
Given $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\delta\in(0,1/N)$, there exist $\varepsilon_0, \Lambda>0$,
such that if $\varepsilon$ and $\rho$ are chosen so that \eqref{triangle} holds and $\bm{h}\in\Omega_\rho$, then
\begin{equation*}
\Lambda\int_0^1\bigl\{\varepsilon^2w^2_x+w^2\bigr\}dx
\leq\int_0^1\bigl\{\varepsilon^2w_x^2+f'(u^{\bm h})w^2\bigr\}dx,
\end{equation*}
for any $w\in H^1(0,1)$ satisfying $\langle w,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle=0$ for $j=1,\dots,N$.
\end{thm}
Given ${\bm h}\in\Omega_\rho$, we consider the operator $L^{\bm h}$, linearization of $\mathcal{L}(u)$ about $u^{\bm h}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{L^h}
L^{\bm h}w:=-\varepsilon^2w_{xx}+f'(u^{\bm h})w.
\end{equation}
If $w\in H^2$ and $w_x(0)=w_x(1)=0$, integrating by parts, we infer
\begin{equation*}
\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle=\int_0^1\bigl\{\varepsilon^2w^2_x+f'(u^{\bm h})w^2\bigr\}dx.
\end{equation*}
Hence, in this case, the energy functional can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{E(w,v)}
\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]=\tfrac12\langle w, L^{\bm h} w\rangle+\tfrac12\tau\|v\|^2+\varepsilon\tau\langle w,v\rangle,
\end{equation}
and from Theorem \ref{L^hw-theo} it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nuoval2}
\Lambda\|w\|^2 \leq \langle w, L^{\bm h}w\rangle.
\end{equation}
Moreover, let $x_2\in[0,1]$ be such that $|w(x_2)|=\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}$
and let $x_1\in[0,1]$ be such that $|w(x_1)|=\min\{|w(x)|:x\in[0,1]\}$.
Assume without loss of generality $x_2>x_1$ (otherwise replace $w(x)$ by $w(1-x)$).
We have
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon w(x_2)^2-\varepsilon w(x_1)^2= \int_{x_1}^{x_2} 2\varepsilon w(x)\,w_x(x)\,dx
\leq \int_0^1\bigl\{\varepsilon^2w^2_x+w^2\bigr\}dx,
\end{equation*}
and so,
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon \|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}^2\leq \varepsilon w(x_1)^2+\int_0^1\bigl\{\varepsilon^2w^2_x+w^2\bigr\}dx\leq (1+\varepsilon)\int_0^1\bigl\{\varepsilon^2w^2_x+w^2\bigr\}.
\end{equation*}
By applying Theorem \ref{L^hw-theo} and taking into account the latter bound with $\varepsilon\leq1$,
we deduce also the estimate
\begin{equation}\label{intelligente}
\tfrac12\Lambda\varepsilon\|w\|^2_{{}_{L^\infty}}\leq\int_0^1\bigl\{\varepsilon^2w_x^2+f'(u^{\bm h})w^2\bigr\}dx
=\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle.
\end{equation}
In order to provide representations of the barrier $\Psi$, defined in \eqref{barrier},
we introduce some auxiliary functions.
Since $\phi(0,\ell,\pm1)$ depends only on the ratio $r=\varepsilon/\ell$, we can define
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_\pm(r):=F(\phi(0,\ell,\pm1)), \qquad \quad \beta_\pm(r):=1\mp\phi(0,\ell,\pm1).
\end{equation*}
By definition, $\phi(0,\ell,\pm1)$ is close to $+1$ or $-1$ and so, $\alpha_\pm(r), \beta_\pm(r)$ are close to $0$.
The next result characterizes the leading terms in $\alpha_\pm$ and $\beta_\pm$ as $r\to 0$.
\begin{prop} [Carr--Pego \cite{Carr-Pego}] \label{prop:alfa,beta}
Let $F$ be such that \eqref{hypf} holds and set $A_\pm^2:=F''(\pm1)$.
There exists $r_0, K_\pm>0$ such that if $0<r<r_0$, then
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\alpha_\pm(r)&=\tfrac12K^2_\pm A^2_\pm\,\exp(-{A_\pm}/r\bigr)\bigl\{1+O\left(r^{-1} \exp(-{A_\pm}/2r)\right)\bigr\},\\
\beta_\pm(r)&=K_\pm\,\exp\bigl(-{A_\pm}/2r\bigr)\bigl\{1+O\left(r^{-1} \exp(-{A_\pm}/2r)\right)\bigr\},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
with corresponding asymptotic formulae for the derivatives of $\alpha_\pm$ and $\beta_\pm$.
\end{prop}
\noindent
Explicit expressions of $K_\pm$ in terms of $F$ can be found in \cite{Carr-Pego}.
For $j=0,\dots,N$, we set
\begin{equation*}
r_{j+1/2}:=\frac{\varepsilon}{h_{j+1}-h_{j}},
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\alpha^{j+1/2}:=\left\{\begin{aligned}
&\alpha_+(r_{j+1/2}) &j \textrm{ odd},\\
&\alpha_-(r_{j+1/2}) &j \textrm{ even},\\
\end{aligned}\right.
\qquad
\beta^{j+1/2}:=\left\{\begin{aligned}
&\beta_+(r_{j+1/2}) &j \textrm{ odd},\\
&\beta_-(r_{j+1/2}) &j \textrm{ even},\\
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation*}
For $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$, since
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
&\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}(x))=0 &\textrm{if}\; |x-h_j|\geq\varepsilon,\\
&k^{\bm h}_j(x)=-u^{\bm h}_x(x) &\textrm{if}\; |x-h_j|\leq\varepsilon,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
direct integration gives
\begin{equation*}
\bigl\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),k^{\bm h}_j\bigr\rangle
=\int_{h_j-\varepsilon}^{h_j+\varepsilon}\bigl\{\varepsilon^2u^{\bm h}_{xx}-f(u^{\bm h})\bigr\}u^{\bm h}_x\,dx
=\alpha^{j-1/2}-\alpha^{j+1/2}.
\end{equation*}
Thus, the barrier function $\Psi$, defined in \eqref{barrier}, can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{Psi(h)}
\Psi(\bm h)=\sum_{j=1}^N\bigl(\alpha^{j-1/2}-\alpha^{j+1/2}\bigr)^2.
\end{equation}
The next statement collects some estimates we will use later on.
\begin{prop}\label{prop-L(u^h)}
Let $f=F'$, with $F$ satisfying \eqref{hypf}.
Given $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\delta\in(0,1/N)$, there exist $\varepsilon_0, C>0$,
such that if $\varepsilon$ and $\rho$ are chosen so that \eqref{triangle} holds and $\bm{h}\in\Omega_\rho$, then
\begin{align}
\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|&\leq C\varepsilon^{1/2}\sum_{j=1}^N\bigl|\alpha^{j+1/2}-\alpha^{j-1/2}\bigr|
\leq C\varepsilon^{1/2}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/\varepsilon), \label{||L(u^h)||}\\
\|L^{\bm h}u^{\bm h}_j\|&\leq C\varepsilon^{-1/2}\max\{\alpha^{j-1/2},\alpha^{j+1/2}\}
\leq C\varepsilon^{-1/2}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/\varepsilon), \label{|dhL(u^h)|}
\end{align}
where $\ell^{\bm h}:=\min\{h_j-h_{j-1}\,:\,j=1,\dots,N+1\}$ and $A:=\min A_\pm$.
\end{prop}
Here, we give only an idea of the proofs, the complete ones can be found
in \cite{Carr-Pego} for \eqref{||L(u^h)||} and in \cite{Carr-Pego2} for \eqref{|dhL(u^h)|}.
Recalling the definition \eqref{u^h(x)}, for $x\in I_j$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{L(u^h)}
\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})=\varepsilon^2\chi^j_{xx}\left(\phi^{j}-\phi^{j+1}\right)
+2\varepsilon^2\chi^j_x\left(\phi^{j}_x-\phi^{j+1}_x \right)-G,
\end{equation}
where the remainder $G$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
G=\left(1-\chi^j\right)f(\phi^j)+\chi^jf(\phi^{j+1})-f\left((1-\chi^j)\phi^j+\chi^j\phi^{j+1}\right).
\end{equation*}
Using Lagrange interpolation formula,
\begin{equation*}
G=\left(\phi^{j+1}-\phi^j\right)^2\biggl\{(1-\chi^j)\int_0^{\chi^j}sf''(\theta)ds+\chi^j\int_{\chi^j}^1(1-s)f''(\theta)ds\biggr\},
\end{equation*}
with $\theta(s)=(1-s)\phi^j(x)+s\phi^{j+1}(x)$. It can be shown (see \cite[Lemma 8.2]{Carr-Pego}) that there exist $C>0$
such that for $x\in[h_j-\varepsilon,h_j+\varepsilon]$, $j\in\{1,\dots,N\}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{fi^j-fi^j+1}
\left|\phi^j(x)-\phi^{j+1}(x)\right|+\varepsilon\left|\phi^j_x(x)-\phi^{j+1}_x(x)\right|
<C\left|\alpha^{j-1/2}-\alpha^{j+1/2}\right|,
\end{equation}
provided $r_j, r_{j+1}<r_0$ and $r_0$ is sufficiently small.
Using these estimates, the fact that $\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}(x))=0$ if $|x-h_j|>\varepsilon$ and that
the $m$-th derivative of $\varepsilon^{m}\chi^{j}$ is uniformly bounded (independently on $\varepsilon$),
we obtain
\begin{equation*}
|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}(x))|\leq C\left|\alpha^{j+1/2}-\alpha^{j-1/2}\right| \quad \textrm{for }x\in I_j.
\end{equation*}
Then, the $L^2$-bound \eqref{||L(u^h)||} follows since $\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})$
has support of length $2\varepsilon$ in $I_j$.
The estimate \eqref{|dhL(u^h)|} is obtained in a similar way, by differentiating \eqref{L(u^h)} with respect to $\bm h$.
\section{Dynamics near the base manifold}\label{motion}
In this section we study the dynamics of \eqref{system-u-v}-\eqref{Neumann} in a neighborhood of $\mathcal{M}_{{}_{0}}$
using the decomposition $u=u^{\bm h}+w$ and deriving the system of equations for $(\bm h,w,v)$.
Such description will be used to prove Theorem \ref{main}.
\subsection{Equations for the motion}
Let $(u,v)$ be a classical solution of \eqref{system-u-v}-\eqref{Neumann},
with $u$ lying in the tubular neighborhood $\mathcal{S}_{\rho,\sigma}$ for $t\in[0,T]$ with $T>0$.
Let $\bm h(t)=\mathcal{H}(u(\cdot,t))$ and $w(x,t)=u(x,t)-u^{\bm h(t)}$, where $u^{\bm h}$ is defined by \eqref{u^h(x)}.
We recall that $u(\cdot,t)\in\mathcal{S}_{\rho,\sigma}$ for $t\in[0,T]$ means that $\bm h(t)\in\Omega_\rho$, $w(\cdot,t)\in H^2_N$
and $\|w(\cdot,t)\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}<\sigma$ for $t\in[0,T]$.
Moreover, $v(\cdot,t)\in L^2(0,1)$ for $t\in[0,T]$.
From \eqref{system-u-v} it follows that the pair $(w,v)$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{system-w-v}
\begin{cases}
w_t=v-\nabla_{\bm h} u^{\bm h}\cdot {\bm h}',\\
\tau v_t=-\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}+w)-g(u^{\bm h}+w,\tau)v,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\,\cdot\,$ denotes the inner product in $\mathbb{R}^N$.
Expanding, we get
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}+w)=\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})+L^{\bm h}w-f_2w^2,
\qquad\textrm{where}\quad
f_2:=\int_0^1(1-s)f''(u^{\bm h}+sw)\,ds,
\end{equation*}
and $L^{\bm h}$ is the differential operator defined in \eqref{L^h}.
Differentiating with respect to $t$ the orthogonality condition \eqref{ortogonale}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{h'}
\sum_{j=1}^N\bigl\{\langle u^{\bm h}_j,k^{\bm h}_i\rangle-\langle w,k^{\bm h}_{ij}\rangle\bigr\}{\bm h}'_j
=\langle v,k^{\bm h}_i\rangle, \qquad i=1,\dots,N.
\end{equation}
Using the notation
\begin{equation*}
D_{ij}(\bm h):=\langle u^{\bm h}_j,k^{\bm h}_i\rangle, \qquad
\hat{D}_{ij}(\bm h,w):=\langle w,k^{\bm h}_{ij}\rangle, \qquad
Y_i(\bm h,v):=\langle v,k^{\bm h}_i\rangle,
\end{equation*}
equation \eqref{h'} becomes
\begin{equation}\label{h'-compact}
\bigl\{D(\bm h)-\hat{D}(\bm h,w)\bigr\}\bm h'=Y(\bm h,v).
\end{equation}
From \eqref{system-w-v} and \eqref{h'-compact}, we obtain the ODE-PDE coupled system
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
w_t=v-\nabla_{\bm h} u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h',\\
\tau v_t=-\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})-L^{\bm h}w+f_2w^2-g(u^{\bm h}+w,\tau)v,\\
\bigl\{D(\bm h)-\hat{D}(\bm h,w)\bigr\}\bm h'=Y(\bm h,v).
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
The matrix $D(\bm h)$ is diagonally dominant, because, for any $\eta\in(0,1)$ there exists $\rho_0>0$ such that if
$\rho<\rho_0$, then
\begin{align}
D_{ii}(\bm h)-\sum_{j\neq i}|D_{ij}(\bm h)|&=\langle u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_i\rangle-\sum_{j\neq i}|\langle u^{\bm h}_j,k^{\bm h}_i\rangle| \notag\\
&\geq \bigl\{\bigl(A_0-\omega(\rho)\bigr)^2-(N-1)\omega(\rho)\bigr\}\varepsilon^{-1}>\eta A^2_0\,\varepsilon^{-1}, \label{eq:D}
\end{align}
thanks to Proposition \ref{estimates-u^h_j}.
Also, for a known property of inverses of diagonally dominant matrices (see \cite{Varah}),
$D(\bm h)$ is invertible and it holds
\begin{equation*}
\|D^{-1}(\bm h)\|_{{}_{\infty}}\leq \eta^{-1}A_0^{-2}\,\varepsilon,
\end{equation*}
where $\|\cdot\|_{{}_{\infty}}$ denotes the operator norm induced by the norm $|\cdot|_{{}_{\infty}}$.
In Section \ref{layer}, it is determined the explicit expression for the principal term in the expansion
of the inverse $D^{-1}(\bm h)$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$.
The invertibility of the matrix $D(\bm h)-\hat{D}(\bm h,w)$ descends from the smallness of $\hat{D}(\bm h,w)$ for $w\to 0$ and \eqref{eq:D}.
Indeed, for $(\bm h,w)\in\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{\rho,\sigma}$, applying Proposition \ref{estimates-u^h_j}, we infer
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\sum_j |\hat D_{ij}(\bm h,w)|
&\leq \|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}} \Bigl\{\|k^{\bm h}_{ii}\|_{{}_{L^1}}+\sum_{j\neq i} \|k^{\bm h}_{ij}\|_{{}_{L^1}}\Bigr\}\\
&\leq \sigma \bigl\{C+(N-1)\omega(\rho)\bigr\}\varepsilon^{-1},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
and thus
\begin{equation*}
D_{ii}(\bm h)-\hat D_{ii}(\bm h,w)-\sum_{j\neq i}|D_{ij}(\bm h)-\hat D_{ij}(\bm h,w)|
\geq\eta\,A^2_0\,\varepsilon^{-1}-\sigma \bigl\{C+(N-1)\omega(\rho)\bigr\}\varepsilon^{-1}.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, the matrix $D-\hat{D}$ is invertible for $\rho$ and $\sigma$ sufficiently small and
\begin{equation}\label{boundDinverse}
\|\bigl\{D(\bm h)-\hat{D}(\bm h,w)\bigr\}^{-1}\|_{{}_{\infty}}\leq 2\eta\,A_0^{-2}\,\varepsilon.
\end{equation}
Applying $\bigl\{D(\bm h)-\hat{D}(\bm h,w)\bigr\}^{-1}$ in the equation for $\bm{h}$,
we obtain the final form of the system
\begin{equation}\label{system-w-v-h}
\begin{cases}
w_t=v-\nabla_{\bm h} u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h',\\
\tau v_t=-\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})-L^{\bm h}w+f_2w^2-g(u^{\bm h}+w,\tau)v,\\
\bm h'=\bigl\{D(\bm h)-\hat{D}(\bm h,w)\bigr\}^{-1}Y(\bm h,v).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The proof of our main result consists in providing estimates for the solutions to \eqref{system-w-v-h}.
\subsection{Proof of the main result}
To start with, we observe that if $(\bm h,w)\in\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{\rho,\sigma}$ for $\rho,\sigma$ small
then there exists $C>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{|h'|<}
|\bm h'|_{{}_{\infty}}\leq 2\eta A_0^{-2}\varepsilon |Y(\bm h,v)|_{{}_{\infty}}\leq C\varepsilon^{1/2}\|v\|,
\end{equation}
using \eqref{boundDinverse} and the third estimate in Proposition \ref{estimates-u^h_j}.
In order to prove Theorem \ref{main}, we restrict the attention to the set
\begin{equation*}
\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}:=\bigl\{(\bm h,w,v)\in\overline{\Omega}_\rho\times H^2_N\times L^2(0,1)
\, : \, \mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]\leq\Gamma\Psi(\bm h)\bigr\}.
\end{equation*}
The aim of the next result is twofold.
Firstly, it states that if the triple $(\bm h,w,v)$ belongs to $\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ then
the bound on $(w,v)$ stated in Theorem \ref{main}, estimate \eqref{umenouh}, holds true.
Secondly, assuming in addition that $(\bm h,w,v)$ is a solution to \eqref{system-w-v-h},
then also the bound on $\bm{h}'$ in Theorem \ref{main}, estimate \eqref{|h'|<exp-intro}, is valid.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:E>}
Let $F\in C^3$ be such that \eqref{hypf} holds and $g(\cdot,\tau)\in C^1$.
Given $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\delta\in(0,1/N)$, there exist $\varepsilon_0, C>0$,
such that for $\varepsilon$ and $\rho$ satisfying \eqref{triangle},
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] if $(\bm h,w,v)\in\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$, then
\begin{equation}\label{E>}
\begin{aligned}
\tfrac18\Lambda\varepsilon\|w\|^2_{{}_{L^\infty}}+ \tfrac14\tau\|v\|^2\leq \mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]
\\
\tfrac14 \Lambda \|w\|^2 + \tfrac14\tau\|v\|^2\leq \mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]
\\
\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]\leq C\Gamma\exp(-2A\ell^{\bm h}/\varepsilon),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda$ is the positive constant introduced in Theorem \ref{L^hw-theo};
\item[(ii)] if $(\bm h,w,v)\in\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ is a solution of \eqref{system-w-v-h} for $t\in[0,T]$, then
\begin{equation}\label{|h'|<exp}
|\bm h'|_{{}_{\infty}}\leq C(\varepsilon/\tau)^{1/2}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/\varepsilon).
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let us prove the first inequality in \eqref{E>}.
Using Young inequality, we have
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon|\langle w,v\rangle|\leq\varepsilon^2\|w\|^2+\tfrac14\|v\|^2
\leq\varepsilon^2\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}^2+\tfrac14\|v\|^2,
\end{equation*}
and so, recalling the expression for the energy $\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}$ given in \eqref{E(w,v)},
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]\geq \tfrac12\langle w, L^{\bm h}w\rangle+\tfrac14\tau\|v\|^2
-\varepsilon^2\tau\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}^2.
\end{equation*}
Using \eqref{intelligente}, we obtain, for $\varepsilon<\Lambda/8\tau$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]\geq\bigl(\tfrac14\Lambda-\varepsilon\tau\bigr) \varepsilon\|w\|^2_{{}_{L^\infty}}
+\tfrac14\tau\|v\|^2\geq \tfrac18\Lambda\varepsilon\|w\|^2_{{}_{L^\infty}}+\tfrac14\tau\|v\|^2.
\end{equation*}
Moreover, from \eqref{eq:nuoval2}, for $\varepsilon^2<\Lambda/4\tau$ one has
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]\geq\bigl(\tfrac12\Lambda-\varepsilon^2\tau\bigr) \|w\|^2
+\tfrac14\tau\|v\|^2\geq \tfrac14\Lambda\|w\|^2+\tfrac14\tau\|v\|^2,
\end{equation*}
concluding the first two inequalities of \eqref{E>}.
The upper bound for $\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]$ follows from the definition of $\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$,
the expression of the barrier $\Psi$ given in \eqref{Psi(h)} and Proposition \ref{prop:alfa,beta}.
To prove part (ii), using \eqref{E>}, we deduce the estimate
\begin{equation*}
\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}\leq C\varepsilon^{-1/2}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/\varepsilon)
\leq C\varepsilon^{-1/2}\exp(-A\delta/\varepsilon)=:\sigma
\end{equation*}
since, by definition and \eqref{triangle}, $\ell^{\bm h}>\varepsilon/\rho>\delta$.
Hence, for $\varepsilon$ sufficiently small, both $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are small, and thus,
for $(\bm h,w)\in\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{\rho,\sigma}$, estimate \eqref{|h'|<} holds.
Therefore, if $(\bm h,w,v)\in\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$, then $(\bm h,w)\in\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{\rho,\sigma}$
and the estimate \eqref{|h'|<exp} is obtained by applying \eqref{E>} in \eqref{|h'|<}.
\end{proof}
Now, we estimate the time $T$ taken for the solution $(u,v)$ to leave $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$.
To do this, we study the system \eqref{system-w-v-h} in the set $\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$
by using energy estimates.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:d/dtE}
Let $F\in C^3$ and $g(\cdot,\tau)\in C^1$ be such that \eqref{hypf} and \eqref{hypg} hold.
Given $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\delta\in(0,1/N)$, there exist $\Gamma_2>\Gamma_1>0$ and $\varepsilon_0>0$
such that if $\Gamma\in[\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2]$, $\varepsilon,\rho$ satisfy \eqref{triangle}
and $(\bm h,w,v)\in\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ is a solution of \eqref{system-w-v-h} for $t\in[0,T]$, then
for some $\eta\in(0,1)$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{E-GPsi^2}
\frac{d}{dt}\bigl\{\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]-\Gamma\Psi(\bm h)\bigr\}
\leq-\eta\,\varepsilon\bigl\{\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]-\Gamma\Psi(\bm h)\bigr\}
\qquad\textrm{for}\quad t\in[0,T].
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
In all the proof, symbols $C, c, \eta$ denote generic positive constants, independent on $\varepsilon$,
and with $\eta\in(0,1)$.
Let us recall that, if $(\bm{h},w,v)$ is a solution to \eqref{system-w-v-h}, then
\begin{equation*}
w_t=v-\nabla_{\bm h} u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h',\qquad
\tau v_t=-\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})-L^{\bm h}w+f_2w^2-g(u^{\bm h}+w,\tau)v.
\end{equation*}
Direct differentiation and the self-adjointness of the operator $L^{\bm{h}}$ give
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt}\Bigl\{\tfrac12\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle\Bigr\}
& =\langle w_t,L^{\bm h}w\rangle+\tfrac12\langle w,f''(u^{\bm h})\bigl(\nabla_{\bm h}u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h'\bigr)w\rangle\\
& =\langle v,L^{\bm h}w\rangle-\langle \nabla_{\bm h} u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h',L^{\bm h}w\rangle
+\tfrac12\langle w,f''(u^{\bm h})\bigl(\nabla_{\bm h}u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h'\bigr)w\rangle\\
&= \langle v,L^{\bm h}w\rangle-\langle L^{\bm h} \nabla_{\bm h} u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h',w\rangle
+\tfrac12\langle w,f''(u^{\bm h})\bigl(\nabla_{\bm h}u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h'\bigr)w\rangle.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Using Cauchy--Schwarz inequality and the estimates in Proposition \ref{prop-L(u^h)} and \ref{estimates-u^h_j}, we infer
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt}\Bigl\{\tfrac12\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle\Bigr\}
&\leq \langle v,L^{\bm h}w\rangle+C\sum_j\Bigl(\|L^{\bm h} u^{\bm h}_j\|
+\|u^{\bm h}_j\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}\|w\|\Bigr)|\bm{h}'|_{{}_{\infty}}\|w\|\\
&\leq \langle v,L^{\bm h}w\rangle+C\varepsilon^{-1/2}\bigl(\exp(-A\delta/\varepsilon)
+\varepsilon^{-1/2}\|w\| \bigr)|\bm{h}'|_{{}_{\infty}}\|w\|.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
For $(\bm{h},w,v)\in\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$, applying \eqref{|h'|<}, \eqref{E>} and using Young inequality, we get
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt}\Bigl\{\tfrac12\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle\Bigr\}
&\leq \langle v,L^{\bm h}w\rangle+C\bigl(\exp(-A\delta/\varepsilon)
+\varepsilon^{-1/2}\|w\| \bigr)\|w\|\|v\|\\
&\leq \langle v,L^{\bm h}w\rangle+C\exp(-2A\delta/\varepsilon)\bigl( 1 + \varepsilon^{-1}\Gamma\bigr)\|w\|^2+\eta\|v\|^2.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
For what concerns the second term in the energy $\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}$, it holds
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt}\Bigl\{\tfrac12\tau\|v\|^2\Bigr\}& =\langle \tau v_t,v\rangle
=\langle -\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})-L^{\bm h}w+f_2w^2-g(u^{\bm h}+w,\tau)v,v\rangle\\
&\leq-\langle L^{\bm h}w,v\rangle+\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|\|v\|+C\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}\|w\|\|v\|-c_g\|v\|^2\\
&\leq -\langle L^{\bm h}w,v\rangle+C\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}}^2\|w\|^2-(c_g-\eta)\|v\|^2
+C\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|^2.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Finally, the time derivative of the scalar product $\langle w,\tau v\rangle$ can be bounded by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{dt}\langle w,\tau v\rangle
&=\langle v-\nabla_{\bm h} u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h',\tau v\rangle+\langle w,-\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})-L^{\bm h}w
+f_2w^2-g(u^{\bm h}+w,\tau)v\rangle\\
&\leq -\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle+C(\varepsilon+\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}})\|w\|^2
+(\tau+\eta\,\varepsilon^{-1})\|v\|^2+C\tau\varepsilon^{-1/2}|\bm h'|_{{}_{L^\infty}}\|v\|\\
&\hskip9cm +\varepsilon^{-1}\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|^2\\
&\leq -\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle+C(\varepsilon+\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}})\|w\|^2
+(C+\eta\,\varepsilon^{-1})\|v\|^2+\varepsilon^{-1}\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|^2,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where, in particular, the inequalities
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\langle w,\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\rangle&\leq \tfrac12\varepsilon\|w\|^2+\tfrac12\varepsilon^{-1}\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|^2,\\
\langle w,g(u^{\bm h}+w,\tau)v\rangle&\leq C\varepsilon\|w\|^2+\eta\,\varepsilon^{-1}\|v\|^2
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
have been used.
Collecting the estimates for the three terms composing $\mathcal{E}^{\bm h}$, we deduce
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d\mathcal{E}^{\bm h}}{dt} &\leq -\varepsilon\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle
-[c_g-C\varepsilon-3\eta]\|v\|^2\\
&\hskip1.0cm +C\bigl\{ \exp(-2A\delta/\varepsilon)\bigl( 1 + \varepsilon^{-1}\Gamma\bigr)
+\varepsilon (\varepsilon+\|w\|_{{}_{L^\infty}})\bigr\}\|w\|^2+(C+1)\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|^2\\
&\leq -\varepsilon\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle+C\varepsilon\bigl\{
\Gamma\exp(-c/\varepsilon)+\varepsilon\bigr\}\|w\|^2-\eta c_g\|v\|^2+C\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|^2,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
for $\varepsilon$ and $\eta$ small.
Thus, from \eqref{eq:nuoval2} and
\begin{equation}\label{L(u^h)<Psi}
\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|^2\leq C\varepsilon\,\Psi(\bm h)\leq C\varepsilon\exp(-2A\ell^{\bm h}/\varepsilon),
\end{equation}
it follows that
\begin{equation*}
\frac{d\mathcal{E}^{\bm h}}{dt} \leq -\varepsilon
\bigl\{1-C\bigl(\Gamma \exp(-c/\varepsilon)+\varepsilon\bigr)\bigr\}\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle
-\eta\,c_g\|v\|^2+C\varepsilon\Psi.
\end{equation*}
Hence, for $\varepsilon\in(0,\varepsilon_0)$, with $\varepsilon_0$ small (and dependent on $\Gamma$), we deduce the bound
\begin{equation*}
1- C\bigl(\Gamma\exp(-c/\varepsilon)+\varepsilon\bigr)
\geq \eta.
\end{equation*}
Substituting, we infer
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{d\mathcal{E}^{\bm h}}{dt} &\leq -\eta\,\varepsilon\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle
-\eta\,c_g\|v\|^2+C\varepsilon\Psi\\
&\leq -\eta\,\varepsilon\mathcal{E}^{\bm h}
-\tfrac12\eta\,\varepsilon\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle+\eta\,\varepsilon^2\tau\langle w,v\rangle
-\eta\bigl(c_g-\tfrac12\varepsilon\tau\bigr)\|v\|^2+C\varepsilon\Psi\\
&\leq -\eta\,\varepsilon\mathcal{E}^{\bm h}
-\tfrac12\eta\,\varepsilon\bigl(1-C\varepsilon\tau\bigr)\langle w,L^{\bm h}w\rangle
-\eta\bigl(c_g-C\varepsilon\tau\bigr)\|v\|^2+C\varepsilon\Psi,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
again from \eqref{eq:nuoval2}.
Finally, for $\varepsilon_0$ sufficiently small, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:E'}
\frac{d\mathcal{E}^{\bm h}}{dt} \leq -\eta\,\varepsilon\mathcal{E}^{\bm h}
-\eta\,c_g\|v\|^2+C\varepsilon\Psi.
\end{equation}
Direct differentiation gives
\begin{equation*}
\frac{d\Psi}{dt}=2\sum_{j=1}^N\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle
\Bigl\{\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),\nabla_{\bm h}k_j^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h'\rangle
-\langle L^{\bm h}\nabla_{{_{\bm h}}}u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h',k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\Bigr\}.
\end{equation*}
Using the estimates provided by Proposition \ref{estimates-u^h_j} and by \eqref{|dhL(u^h)|}, \eqref{|h'|<}, we deduce
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\bigl|\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),\nabla_{\bm h}k^{\bm h}_j\cdot\bm h'\rangle\bigr|
&\leq|\bm h'|_{{}_\infty}\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|\sum_{i=1}^N\|k^{\bm h}_{ji}\|
\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|\|v\|,\\
\bigl|\langle L^{\bm h}\nabla_{\bm h}u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h',k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bigr|
&\leq|\bm h'|_{{}_\infty}\|k^{\bm h}_j\|\sum_{i=1}^N\|L^{\bm h}u^{\bm h}_i\|
\leq C\exp(-c/\varepsilon)\|v\|,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
thus, observing that $|\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1/2} \|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|$,
we infer the bound
\begin{equation*}
\left|\frac{d\Psi}{dt}\right|
\leq C\varepsilon^{-1/2} \left\{\varepsilon^{-1}\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|+\exp(-c/\varepsilon)\right\}
\|\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h})\|\|v\|.
\end{equation*}
Using the inequality \eqref{L(u^h)<Psi}, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\left|\Gamma\frac{d\Psi}{dt}\right|
&\leq C\,\Gamma\,\varepsilon^{-1/2}\bigl\{\Psi^{1/2}+\exp(-c/\varepsilon)\bigr\}\|v\|\Psi^{1/2}\\
&\leq \eta\|v\|^2+C\,\Gamma^2\varepsilon^{-1}\bigl\{\Psi^{1/2}+\exp(-c/\varepsilon)\bigr\}^2\Psi.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Hence, observing that $\Psi\leq C\exp\bigl(-c/\varepsilon\bigr)$, we end up with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Psi'}
\left|\Gamma\frac{d\Psi}{dt}\right|\leq \eta\|v\|^2+C\,\Gamma^2\exp(-c/\varepsilon)\Psi.
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{eq:E'} and \eqref{eq:Psi'}, we obtain that if $(\bm h,w,v)\in\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ is a solution of \eqref{system-w-v-h}, then
\begin{equation*}
\frac d{dt}\bigl\{\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]-\Gamma\Psi(\bm h)\bigr\} \leq
-\eta\,\varepsilon\mathcal{E}^{\bm h}+C\bigl(\varepsilon+\Gamma^2\exp(-c/\varepsilon)\bigr)\Psi,
\end{equation*}
for some $\eta\in(0,1)$.
Therefore the estimate \eqref{E-GPsi^2} follows from
\begin{equation*}
C\exp(-c/\varepsilon)\Gamma^2-\eta\,\varepsilon\Gamma +C\varepsilon\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
and the latter is verified for $\Gamma\in [\Gamma_1,\Gamma_2]$, provided $\varepsilon\in(0,\varepsilon_0)$ with $\varepsilon_0$ sufficiently small so that $\eta^2\varepsilon - 4C^2\exp(-c/\varepsilon) > 0$.
\end{proof}
Now, we have all the tools needed to prove Theorem \ref{main}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{main}]
Let $(u_0,v_0)\in\,\stackrel{\circ}{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ and
let $(u,v)$ be the solution of \eqref{system-u-v}-\eqref{Neumann}-\eqref{initial}.
Assume that $(u,v)\in\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ for $t\in[0,T_\varepsilon]$, where $T_\varepsilon$ is maximal.
Then, $u=u^{\bm h}+w$ and $(\bm h,w,v)\in\hat{\mathcal{Z}}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ solves the system \eqref{system-w-v-h} for $t\in[0,T_\varepsilon]$.
Let us apply Proposition \ref{prop:d/dtE}; from \eqref{E-GPsi^2}, it follows that
\begin{equation*}
\frac d{dt}\Bigl\{\exp(\eta\,\varepsilon t)(\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]-\Gamma\Psi(\bm h))\Bigr\}\leq0,
\quad \qquad t\in[0,T_\varepsilon]
\end{equation*}
and so,
\begin{equation*}
\exp(\eta\,\varepsilon t)\{\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]-\Gamma\Psi(\bm h)\}(t)\leq\{\mathcal{E}^{\bm{h}}[w,v]-\Gamma\Psi(\bm h)\}(0)<0,
\qquad \quad t\in[0,T_\varepsilon].
\end{equation*}
Therefore, the solution $(u,v)$ remains in the channel $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ while $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$
and if $T_\varepsilon<+\infty$ is maximal, then $\bm h(T_\varepsilon)\in\partial\Omega_\rho$, that is
\begin{equation}\label{hfrontiera}
h_j(T_\varepsilon)-h_{j-1}(T_\varepsilon)=\varepsilon/\rho \qquad \textrm{for some } j.
\end{equation}
For Proposition \ref{prop:E>}, in the channel the solution satisfies \eqref{umenouh} and \eqref{|h'|<exp-intro}.
In particular, the transition points move with exponentially small velocity.
This implies that $(u,v)$ remains in the channel for an exponentially long time.
Indeed, from \eqref{|h'|<exp-intro} it follows that for all $t\in[0,T_\varepsilon]$, one has
\begin{equation}\label{dhmax}
|h_j(t)-h_j(0)|\leq C\left(\varepsilon/\tau\right)^{1/2}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h(t)}/\varepsilon)t \qquad \textrm{for any } j=1,\dots,N,
\end{equation}
where $\ell^{\bm h(t)}$ is the minimum distance between layers at the time $t$.
Combining \eqref{hfrontiera} and \eqref{dhmax}, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon/\rho\geq \ell^{\bm h(0)}-2C(\varepsilon/\tau)^{1/2}\exp(-A/\rho)T_\varepsilon.
\end{equation*}
Hence, using \eqref{triangle} we have
\begin{equation*}
T_\varepsilon\geq C\bigl(\ell^{\bm h(0)}-\varepsilon/\rho\bigr)(\varepsilon/\tau)^{-1/2}\exp(A/\rho)\geq
C\bigl(\ell^{\bm h(0)}-\varepsilon/\rho\bigr)(\varepsilon/\tau)^{-1/2}\exp(A\delta/\varepsilon),
\end{equation*}
and the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\section{Reduced dynamics on the base manifold}\label{layer}
In the previous section, we derived the equation \eqref{h'-compact} for the motion of the transition points and,
by studying the ODE-PDE coupled system \eqref{system-w-v-h}, we obtained the estimate \eqref{|h'|<exp}
for the velocity of the transitions.
In this section, we derive an ordinary differential equation approximating the equation for $\bm h$ to obtain further
information on the motion of the transition points
and analyze the differences with the parabolic case \eqref{AllenCahn}.
\subsection{Derivation of the reduced system}
Since $w$ is very small, we use the approximation $w=0$ in \eqref{h'} and then
\begin{equation}\label{h'-w=0}
\sum_{i=1}^N\langle u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bm h'_i=\langle v,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle, \qquad j=1,\dots,N.
\end{equation}
In order to eliminate $v$, let us differentiate and multiply by $\tau$ equation \eqref{h'-w=0}.
We have
\begin{align*}
\tau\sum_{i,l=1}^N & \bigl(\langle u^{\bm h}_{il},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle+\langle u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_{jl}\rangle\bigr)\bm h'_l\bm h'_i
+\tau\sum_{i=1}^N\langle u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bm h''_i=\\
& -\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle-\langle g(u^{\bm h},\tau)v,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle+
\tau\sum_{l=1}^N\langle v,k^{\bm h}_{jl}\rangle\bm h'_l, \qquad j=1,\dots,N.
\end{align*}
Using the approximation $v=\nabla_{\bm h}u^{\bm h}\cdot\bm h$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\tau \sum_{i,l=1}^N & \bigl(\langle u^{\bm h}_{il},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle+\langle u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_{jl}\rangle\bigr)\bm h'_l\bm h'_i
+\tau\sum_{i=1}^N\langle u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bm h''_i=\\
& -\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle-\sum_{i=1}^N\langle g(u^{\bm h},\tau)u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bm h'_i
+\tau\sum_{i,l=1}^N\langle u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_{jl}\rangle\bm h'_i\bm h'_l, \qquad j=1,\dots,N.
\end{align*}
Let us denote by $\nabla^2_{\bm h}u^{\bm h}$ the Hessian of $u^{\bm h}$ with respect to $\bm h$ and
by $q(\bm \xi):=\displaystyle\sum_{i,l=1}^N u^{\bm h}_{il}\bm \xi_l\bm \xi_i$ the quadratic form associated to $\nabla^2_{\bm h}u^{\bm h}$.
Simplifying, we get
\begin{equation}\label{h-eq}
\tau\sum_{i=1}^N\langle u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bm h''_i+\sum_{i=1}^N\langle g(u^{\bm h},\tau)u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bm h'_i
+\tau\langle q(\bm h'),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle = -\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle,
\end{equation}
for $ j=1,\dots,N$.
If $u^{\bm h(t)}(x)$ is a solution of the hyperbolic Allen--Cahn equation \eqref{hyp-al-ca}, $\bm h(t)$ satisfies \eqref{h-eq}.
Observe that with respect to the parabolic case, besides the coefficient $g(u^{\bm h},\tau)$ which is in general different from 1, there are two new terms: the term involving $\bm h''_i$ and the one involving the quadratic
form associated to the Hessian of $u^{\bm h}$.
By inverting the matrix $D_{ij}(\bm h)=\langle u^{\bm h}_j,k^{\bm h}_i\rangle$,
introduced in Section \ref{motion}, we rewrite \eqref{h-eq} as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vecth}
\tau\bm h''+\mathcal{G}(\bm h)\bm h' +\tau\mathcal{Q}(\bm h,\bm h')=\mathcal{P}(\bm h),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\bm h):=\sum_{l=1}^ND^{-1}_{il}(\bm h)\langle g(u^{\bm h},\tau)u^{\bm h}_j,k^{\bm h}_l\rangle, \qquad
\mathcal{Q}_i(\bm h,\bm h'):=\sum_{j=1}^ND^{-1}_{ij}(\bm h)\langle q(\bm h'),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle,
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{P}_i(\bm h):=-\sum_{j=1}^N D^{-1}_{ij}(\bm h)\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle.
\end{equation*}
Now we want to identify the leading terms in \eqref{eq:vecth}, having in mind the estimates for $k_j^{\bm h}$, $u^{\bm h}$ and their derivatives;
namely we shall rewrite $\mathcal{G}$, $\mathcal{Q}$ and $\mathcal{P}$ by neglecting the exponentially small remainders in the asymptotic expansion for $\varepsilon\to 0$.
As proven by Carr and Pego \cite[Corollary 3.6]{Carr-Pego},
defining
\begin{equation*}
D_\infty:=\int_{-1}^1\sqrt{2F(s)}\,ds \quad \textrm{and} \quad
\mathcal{P}^*_j(\bm h):=-\varepsilon D_\infty^{-1}\langle\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h}),k^{\bm h}_j\rangle=\varepsilon D_\infty^{-1}(\alpha^{j+1/2}-\alpha^{j-1/2}),
\end{equation*}
there exists $C>0$ such that if $\rho$ is sufficiently small and $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:P-P*}
|\mathcal{P}(\bm h)-\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h)|_{{}_{\infty}}\leq C|\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h)|_{{}_{\infty}}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/2\varepsilon),
\end{equation}
where $|\mathcal{P}(\bm h)|_{{}_{\infty}}=\max|\mathcal{P}_j(\bm h)|$.
Since $\alpha^{j-1/2}=F(\phi^j)-\frac12\varepsilon^2\bigl(\phi^j_x\bigr)^2=F(\phi^j(h_{j-1/2}))$,
it follows that $\mathcal{P}_j(\bm h)$ depends essentially on the differences between values of the potential $F(\phi)$.
Similar result holds for the matrix $\mathcal{G}(\bm h)$, namely for the scalar products
$\langle g(u^{\bm h},\tau)u^{\bm h}_i,k^{\bm h}_j\rangle$, thus generalizing the aforementioned result to the case $g\not\equiv 1$.
To this end, we recall the following result (see \cite[Lemmas 7.8-7.9-8.1]{Carr-Pego}).
\begin{lem}[Carr--Pego \cite{Carr-Pego}]\label{lem:u^h_j}
The interval $[h_{j-1}-\varepsilon,h_{j+1}+\varepsilon]$ contains the support of $u^{\bm h}_j$ and
\begin{equation*}
u^{\bm h}_j=
\begin{cases}
\chi^{j-1}\nu^j \qquad \quad & x\in I_{j-1},\\
(1-\chi^j)(-\phi^j_x+\nu^j)+\chi^j(-\phi^{j+1}_x-\nu^{j+1})\\
+\chi^j_x(\phi^j-\phi^{j+1}) & x\in I_j,\\
-(1-\chi^{j+1})\nu^{j+1} & x \in I_{j+1},
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
where $\nu^j(x):=\nu(x-h_{j-1/2},h_j-h_{j-1}, (-1)^j)$ for $x\in I_j$ and there exists $r_0>0$ such that, for $0<r<r_0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nu}
|\nu(x,\ell,\pm1)|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\beta_\pm(r), \qquad \textrm{for } x\in\left[-\tfrac\ell2-\varepsilon,\tfrac\ell2+\varepsilon\right].
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
In order to compute $u^{\bm h}_j = \partial_{h_j} u^{\bm h}$, one needs to obtain an expression for $\phi_\ell$.
Since $\phi$ solution of \eqref{fi(x,l)} depends on $\ell$ through its boundary value, the latter can be obtained by differentiating the integrated version of that equation with respect to $\ell$, that is, the $\varepsilon$--rescaled version of \eqref{eq:varfi}.
Finally, for $x\in[-\ell,\ell]$, we end up with
\begin{equation*}
\phi_\ell(x,\ell,\pm1)= \nu(x,\ell,\pm1) - \tfrac12(\textrm{sgn } x)\phi_x(x,\ell,\pm1),
\end{equation*}
and $\nu$ is an even function of $x$ satisfying
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon^2\nu_{xx}=f'(\phi)\nu, \qquad \quad \textrm{for } \, x\in[0,\ell];
\end{equation*}
see \cite[Lemma 7.8]{Carr-Pego} for details.
From \eqref{eq:nu}, it follows that
\begin{equation*}
|\nu^j(x)|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\beta^{j-1/2}, \qquad \textrm{for }x\in[h_{j-1}-\varepsilon,h_j+\varepsilon],
\end{equation*}
and so, for $x\in[h_{j-1}-\varepsilon,h_{j+1}+\varepsilon]$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nuj}
|(1-\chi^j)\nu^j|+|\chi^j\nu^{j+1}|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\} \leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/2\varepsilon).
\end{equation}
Note that, for $x\in I_j$, one has
\begin{equation}\label{eq:perujj}
u^{\bm h}_x=(1-\chi^j)\phi^j_x+\chi^j\phi^{j+1}_x+\chi^j_x(\phi^{j+1}-\phi^j)\ \hbox{and}\
u^{\bm h}_j=-u^{\bm h}_x+(1-\chi^j)\nu^j-\chi^j\nu^{j+1}.
\end{equation}
Thanks to Lemma \ref{lem:u^h_j}, we can prove the following proposition.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:scal-prod}
Let $F\in C^3$ be such that \eqref{hypf} holds and $g\in C^1(\mathbb R)$. Set
\begin{equation*}
C_{F,g}:=\int_{-1}^1\sqrt{2F(s)}g(s)ds.
\end{equation*}
If $\rho$ is sufficiently small and $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$, then there exists $C>0$ such that, for $j=1,\dots,N$,
\begin{align}
&\bigl|\langle g(u^{\bm h})u_j^{\bm h},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle-\varepsilon^{-1}C_{F,g}\bigr|
\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\}
\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/2\varepsilon), \label{g(u^h)u_j,k_j}\\
&\bigl|\langle g(u^{\bm h})u_j^{\bm h},k^{\bm h}_{j+1}\rangle\bigr|+\bigl|\langle g(u^{\bm h})u_{j+1}^{\bm h},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bigr|
\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\beta^{j+1/2}
\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/2\varepsilon),\label{g(u^h)u_j-j+1}\\
&\langle g(u^{\bm h})u_j^{\bm h},k^{\bm h}_i\rangle=0 \qquad\mbox{ if } |j-i|>1. \label{g(u^h)u_j,k_i}
\end{align}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Firstly, we recall that $k^{\bm h}_j$ is supported in $I_j$.
Since the support of $u^{\bm h}_j$ is contained in $[h_{j-1}-\varepsilon,h_{j+1}+\varepsilon]$, we have \eqref{g(u^h)u_j,k_i}.
From Lemma \ref{lem:u^h_j}, it follows that $|u^{\bm h}_{j+1}(x)|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\beta^{j+1/2}$, for $x\in I_j$
and $|u^{\bm h}_j(x)|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\beta^{j+1/2}$ for $x\in I_{j+1}$.
Then,
\begin{equation*}
\bigl|\langle g(u^{\bm h})u_j^{\bm h},k^{\bm h}_{j+1}\rangle\bigr|+\bigl|\langle g(u^{\bm h})u_{j+1}^{\bm h},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bigr|\leq
C\varepsilon^{-1}\beta^{j+1/2}\left(\int_{I_j}|k^{\bm h}_{j}|+\int_{I_{j+1}}|k_{j+1}^{\bm h}|\right).
\end{equation*}
However, $u^{\bm h}_x$ is of one sign in $I_j$, thus $\int_{I_j}|k^{\bm h}_{j}|\leq C$ and we obtain \eqref{g(u^h)u_j-j+1}.
It remains to prove \eqref{g(u^h)u_j,k_j}.
To do this, for $x\in I_j$, we write $u_j^{\bm h}=y_1+y_2$ and $k^{\bm h}_j=y_1+y_3$,
where
\begin{align*}
y_1&=-(1-\chi^j)\phi^j_x-\chi^j\phi^{j+1}_x,\\
y_2&=-\chi^j_x(\phi^{j+1}-\phi^j)+(1-\chi^j)\nu^j-\chi^j\nu^{j+1}, \\
y_3&=(1-\gamma^j)u^{\bm h}_x-\chi^j_x(\phi^{j+1}-\phi^j).
\end{align*}
Then,
\begin{equation*}
\langle g(u^{\bm h})u_j^{\bm h},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle=\int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_{j+1/2}}g(u^{\bm h}(x))\bigl\{y_1(x)^2+y_1(x)(y_2(x)+y_3(x))+y_2(x)y_3(x)\bigr\}dx.
\end{equation*}
From \eqref{u^h(x)} and the definition of $\chi$, it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cor1}
\int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_{j+1/2}}g(u^{\bm h})y_1^2 dx=\int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_j}g(\phi^j)\left(\phi^j_x\right)^2dx+\int_{h_j}^{h_{j+1/2}}g(\phi^{j+1})\left(\phi^{j+1}_x\right)^2dx+E,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
E=\int_{h_j-\varepsilon}^{h_j+\varepsilon}g(u^{\bm h})y_1^2dx-\int_{h_j-\varepsilon}^{h_j}g(\phi^j)(\phi^j_x)^2dx-\int_{h_j}^{h_j+\varepsilon}g(\phi^{j+1})(\phi_x^{j+1})^2dx.
\end{equation*}
By writing $y_1=\chi^j(\phi^j_x-\phi^{j+1}_x)-\phi^j_x=(1-\chi^j)(\phi^{j+1}_x-\phi^j_x)-\phi^{j+1}_x$, we get
\begin{equation*}
E=\int_{h_j-\varepsilon}^{h_j}\{g(u^{\bm h})-g(\phi^j)\}(\phi^j_x)^2dx+\int_{h_j}^{h_j+\varepsilon}\{g(u^{\bm h})-g(\phi^{j+1})\}(\phi^{j+1}_x)^2dx+R.
\end{equation*}
Using \eqref{fi^j-fi^j+1} and the estimate $|\phi^j_x|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}$, we deduce that $R$ satisfies
\begin{align*}
|R|\leq C\biggl(\int_{h_j-\varepsilon}^{h_j}g(u^{\bm h})|\phi^j_x||\phi^{j+1}_x-\phi^j_x|+\int_{h_j}^{h_j+\varepsilon}g(u^{\bm h})|\phi^{j+1}_x||\phi^{j+1}_x-\phi^j_x|\\
+\int_{h_j-\varepsilon}^{h_j+\varepsilon}g(u^{\bm h})|\phi^{j+1}_x-\phi^j_x|^2dx\biggr)\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\alpha^{j-1/2},\alpha^{j+1/2}\}.
\end{align*}
Moreover, for \eqref{fi^j-fi^j+1} we have
\begin{align*}
\biggl|\int_{h_j-\varepsilon}^{h_j}\{g(u^{\bm h})-g(\phi^j)\}(\phi^j_x)^2dx\biggr| & \leq C\int_{h_j-\varepsilon}^{h_j}|u^{\bm h}-\phi^j|(\phi^j_x)^2 dx \\
& \leq C\varepsilon^{-2}\int_{h_j-\varepsilon}^{h_j}\chi^j|\phi^{j+1}-\phi^j|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}|\alpha^{j-1/2}-\alpha^{j+1/2}|.
\end{align*}
Similarly, we can estimate the other term and obtain $|E|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\alpha^{j-1/2},\alpha^{j+1/2}\}$.
Let us now compute
\begin{equation*}
\int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_j}g(\phi^j)(\phi^j_x)^2dx\,;
\end{equation*}
the other remaining term in \eqref{eq:cor1} is evaluated similarly.
To do this, we observe that since $\phi^j(x)=\phi(x-h_{j-1/2},h_{j} - h_{j-1},(-1)^j)$
and $\phi(x,\ell,\pm1)$ is solution of \eqref{fi(x,l)}, positive or negative respectively, we have
\begin{equation}\label{fi_x^2-F}
\varepsilon^2(\phi^j_x)^2=2(F(\phi^j)-\alpha^{j-1/2}),
\end{equation}
where $\alpha^{j-1/2}=F(\phi^j(h_{j-1/2 }))$.
In what follows, we are considering the case $\phi^j(x)<0$ in $[h_{j-1/2},h_{j}]$ (i.e. $j$ odd);
treatment of $\phi(x-h_{j-1/2},h_{j} - h_{j-1},+1)$ is similar.
By using \eqref{fi_x^2-F} and changing variable, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\varepsilon\int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_j}g(\phi^j)(\phi^j_x)^2dx & =\int_{\phi^j(h_{j-1/2})}^{0}g(s)\sqrt{2(F(s)-\alpha^{j-1/2})}\,ds\\
& \qquad -\int_{\phi^j(h_{j-1/2})}^{0}g(s)\sqrt{2F(s)}\,ds+\int_{\phi^j(h_{j-1/2})}^{0}g(s)\sqrt{2F(s)}\,ds\\
&= \int_{-1}^{0}g(s)\sqrt{2F(s)}\,ds-\int_{-1}^{\phi^j(h_{j-1/2})}g(s)\sqrt{2F(s)}\,ds\\
& \qquad -\sqrt2\int_{\phi^j(h_{j-1/2})}^{0}\frac{\alpha^{j-1/2} g(s)}{\sqrt{F(s)-\alpha^{j-1/2}}+\sqrt{F(s)}}\,ds.
\end{align*}
Since $F(s)\geq\alpha^{j-1/2}$ for $\phi^j(h_{j-1/2})\leq s\leq0$ and $F(s)\leq\alpha^{j-1/2}$ for $-1\leq s\leq\phi^j(h_{j-1/2})$, we have
\begin{align*}
\int_{-1}^{\phi^j(h_{j-1/2})}g(s)\sqrt{2F(s)}\,ds+\sqrt2\int_{\phi^j(h_{j-1/2})}^{0}\frac{\alpha^{j-1/2} g(s)}{\sqrt{F(s)-\alpha^{j-1/2}}+\sqrt{F(s)}}\,ds\\
\leq C\sqrt{\alpha^{j-1/2}} \leq C \beta^{j-1/2}.
\end{align*}
Then, we can conclude that
\begin{equation*}
\left | \int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_{j+1/2}}g(u^{\bm h})y_1^2 dx- \varepsilon^{-1}C_{F,g} \right | \leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\left\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\right\}.
\end{equation*}
Moreover, from \eqref{fi^j-fi^j+1} and \eqref{eq:nuj}, it follows that for $x\in[h_{j-1/2},h_{j+1/2}]$ we have
\begin{equation*}
|y_2|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\}, \qquad |y_3|\leq|(1-\gamma^j)u^{\bm h}_x|+C\varepsilon^{-1}|\alpha^{j-1/2}-\alpha^{j+1/2}|.
\end{equation*}
We claim that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:y3}
|(1-\gamma^j)u^{\bm h}_x|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, $(1-\gamma^j)u^{\bm h}_x=0$ in $[h_{j-1/2}+2\varepsilon, h_{j+1/2}-2\varepsilon]$ and
\begin{equation*}
u^{\bm h}_x(x)=\left\{
\begin{aligned}
&\phi^j_x(x) \qquad \qquad & x\in[h_{j-1/2},h_{j-1/2}+2\varepsilon],\\
&\phi^{j+1}_x(x) \qquad \qquad & x\in[h_{j+1/2}-2\varepsilon,h_{j+1/2}].
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation*}
Using the fact that
\begin{equation*}
|\phi_x(x,\ell,\pm1)|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\sqrt{F(\phi(x,\ell,\pm1))}\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}(1\mp\phi(0,\ell,\pm1))=C\varepsilon^{-1}\beta_\pm(r),
\end{equation*}
for $|x|\leq2\varepsilon$, we obtain \eqref{eq:y3} and so, $|y_3|\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\}$.
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
\biggl|\int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_{j+1/2}}g(u^{\bm h})y_1(y_2+y_3)\biggr|&\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\}\int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_{j+1/2}}|y_1|\\
&\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\}.
\end{align*}
Also,
\begin{equation*}
\biggl|\int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_{j+1/2}}g(u^{\bm h})y_2y_3\biggr|\leq C\varepsilon^{-2}\max\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\}\varepsilon
\leq C\varepsilon^{-1}\max\{\beta^{j-1/2},\beta^{j+1/2}\},
\end{equation*}
because $y_3$ is supported on a set of measure proportional to $\varepsilon$.
\end{proof}
We are ready to analyze the term $\mathcal{G}(\bm h)$. To this aim, let us introduce the constant
\begin{equation*}
\gamma_\tau:=\frac{\sqrt{2}}{D_\infty}\int_{-1}^1\sqrt{F(s)}g(s,\tau)\,ds = \frac{C_{F,g}}{D_\infty}.
\end{equation*}
Then, in view of \eqref{g(u^h)u_j,k_j}--\eqref{g(u^h)u_j-j+1}--\eqref{g(u^h)u_j,k_i}, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
|\langle g(u^{\bm h},\tau)u_i^{\bm h},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle| \leq C\varepsilon^{-1}, \ \hbox{for any}\ i,j,
\end{equation*}
and, being
\begin{equation*}
D^{-1}(\bm h) = \varepsilon D_\infty^{-1} \Big \{\mathbb{I}_N - \big ( \mathbb{I}_N - \varepsilon D^{-1} _\infty D(\bm h)\big ) \Big\}^{-1}
= \varepsilon D_\infty^{-1}\sum_{k=0}^\infty\Big\{\varepsilon D_\infty^{-1}\big(\varepsilon ^{-1}D_\infty\mathbb{I}_N-D(\bm h)\big)\Big\}^k,
\end{equation*}
one has
\begin{equation*}
\|D^{-1}(\bm h)-\varepsilon D_\infty^{-1} \mathbb I_N \|_{{}_{\infty}}\leq\varepsilon C\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/2\varepsilon).
\end{equation*}
Hence, for $g=g(u^{\bm h},\tau)$,
\begin{align}
|\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\bm h)-\gamma_\tau\mathbb \delta_{ij} |& \leq \left |
\sum_{l=1}^N (D^{-1}_{il}(\bm h) - \varepsilon D^{-1}_\infty \delta_{il} ) \langle g\,u^{\bm h}_j,k^{\bm h}_l\rangle \right |
+ \left | \varepsilon D^{-1}_\infty \langle g\,u^{\bm h}_j,k^{\bm h}_i\rangle - \frac{C_{F,g}}{D_\infty} \delta_{ij} \right | \nonumber \\
& \leq C\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/2\varepsilon). \label{eq:G-G*}
\end{align}
Therefore, in \eqref{eq:vecth} we substitute the matrix $\mathcal{G}(\bm h)$ with $\gamma_\tau\mathbb I_N$.
Let us now focus our attention on the term $\tau\mathcal{Q}(\bm h,\bm h')$; analogously to the previous terms we have
\begin{equation*}
|\mathcal{Q}(\bm h,\bm h')-\mathcal{Q}^*(\bm h,\bm h')|_{{}_{\infty}}\leq C |\mathcal{Q}^*(\bm h,\bm h')|_{{}_{\infty}}\exp(-A\ell^{\bm h}/2\varepsilon),
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{Q}_j^*(\bm h,\bm h'):=\varepsilon D_\infty^{-1}\sum_{i,l=1}^N \langle u^{\bm h}_{il},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle\bm h'_l\bm h'_i.
\end{equation*}
Then, let us study the elements $\langle u^{\bm h}_{il},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle$,
which shall be treated in a similar way of Proposition \ref{prop:scal-prod}.
Since $k^{\bm h}_j$ is supported in $I_j$, it follows that $\langle u^{\bm h}_{il},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle=0$ if either $|i-j|>1$ or $|l-j|>1$.
For all the remaining terms, from the expression of $u^{\bm h}_j$ in Lemma \ref{lem:u^h_j},
and using the bounds in \cite{Carr-Pego, Carr-Pego2}, the only one which may not be exponentially small is for $i=l=j$.
Therefore, here we omit the tedious, but straightforward control of such terms and we discuss only $\langle u^{\bm h}_{jj},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle$.
To this end, observe that in the interval $I_j$, by differentiating \eqref{eq:perujj} with respect to $h_j$, we have
\begin{align*}
u^{\bm h}_{xj}&=\phi^j_{jx}+\chi^j(\phi^{j+1}_{jx}-\phi^j_{jx})+\chi^j_{xx}(\phi^j-\phi^{j+1})+
\chi^j_x[(\phi^{j+1}_j-\phi^j_j)-(\phi_x^{j+1}-\phi_x^j)],\\
u^{\bm h}_{jj}&=-u^{\bm h}_{xj}+\nu_j^j-\chi^j(\nu^j_j+\nu_j^{j+1})-\chi_j^j(\nu^j+\nu^{j+1}).
\end{align*}
Using
\begin{equation*}
\phi_j^j=-\phi^j_x+\nu^j, \quad \phi_j^{j+1}=-\phi_x^{j+1}-\nu^{j+1}, \quad \phi_{jx}^j=-\phi^j_{xx}+\nu^j_x,
\quad \phi_{jx}^{j+1}=-\phi_{xx}^{j+1}-\nu^{j+1}_x,
\end{equation*}
and from the expression of $u^{\bm h}_{xx}$ obtained again from \eqref{eq:perujj}, in $x\in I_j$ we infer
\begin{equation*}
u^{\bm h}_{xj}=-u^{\bm h}_{xx}+\nu^j_x-\chi^j(\nu_x^{j+1}+\nu^j_x)-\chi^j_x(\nu^{j+1}+\nu^j).
\end{equation*}
Hence, we can conclude that $u^{\bm h}_{jj}=u^{\bm h}_{xx}+R^j$,
and so
\begin{equation*}
\langle u^{\bm h}_{jj},k^{\bm h}_j\rangle=-\int_{I_j}u^{\bm h}_{xx}u^{\bm h}_x\,dx+
\int_{I_j}u^{\bm h}_{xx}(1-\gamma^j)u^{\bm h}_x\,dx+\int_{I_j}R^jk^{\bm h}_j\,dx.
\end{equation*}
Reasoning as in the proof of the Proposition \ref{prop:scal-prod}, and taking into account the needed bounds for the higher involved derivatives \cite{Carr-Pego, Carr-Pego2},
one can prove that the last two integrals are exponentially small, whereas for the first integral we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\int_{h_{j-1/2}}^{h_{j+1/2}}\bigl(-u^{\bm h}_{xx}(x)u^{\bm h}_x(x)\bigr)dx=
\frac12\bigl(u^{\bm h}_x(h_{j-1/2})^2-u^{\bm h}_x(h_{j+1/2})^2\bigr)=0,
\end{equation*}
because $u^{\bm h}_x(h_{j-1/2})=0$ for all $j=1,\dots,N$.
Therefore, we obtain that there exists $c>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Q*}
|\mathcal{Q}(\bm h,\bm h')|_{{}_{\infty}}\leq C\exp(-c/\varepsilon)|\bm h'|^2_{{}_{\infty}}.
\end{equation}
In conclusion, using the estimates \eqref{eq:P-P*}, \eqref{eq:G-G*} and \eqref{eq:Q*}, and neglecting all the exponentially small terms in \eqref{eq:vecth},
we end up with the reduced system
\begin{equation}\label{h-eq-approx}
\tau\bm h''+\gamma_\tau\bm h'=\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h).
\end{equation}
In the case of the damped wave equation with bistable nonlinearity, $g(u,\tau)\equiv 1$, and therefore $\gamma_\tau=1$.
Moreover, for the Allen--Cahn equation with relaxation, $g(u,\tau) = 1 + \tau f'(u)$ and
\begin{align*}
\gamma_\tau &
= 1 + \frac{\sqrt{2}\,\tau}{D_\infty} \int_{-1}^1\sqrt{F(s)}F''(s)\,ds
= 1 - \frac{\tau}{D_\infty}\int_{-1}^1\displaystyle{\frac{(F'(s))^2}{\sqrt{2F(s)}}}\,ds
< 1.
\end{align*}
Hence, in the latter case, the effect of the parameter $\tau>0$ is present also in the friction term $\gamma_\tau\bm h'$,
and in particular it speeds up the dynamics with respect to the simpler nonlinear damped wave equation, being the coefficient smaller.
This richer effect on the dynamics
in the present analysis confirms what has been already observed in the study of traveling waves in
\cite{LMPS}, where again the relaxation parameter $\tau$ in the case of the Allen--Cahn equation with relaxation
affects the speed of the wave also though a modification of the friction effects.
\subsection{Comparison with the parabolic case}
Now, if $\gamma_\tau\to1$ as $\tau\rightarrow0$, taking formally the limit in \eqref{h-eq-approx} we obtain the
system $\bm h'=\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h)$.
The structure of solutions of this system of ordinary differential equations is studied in \cite{Carr-Pego}
to describe the evolution of the layer positions in the parabolic case \eqref{AllenCahn}.
We can write
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h)=-\nabla W(\bm h),
\end{equation*}
where $W$ is defined in the following way.
For $s>\rho^{-1}$, define $W_\pm$ by $W'_\pm(s)=D^{-1}_\infty\alpha_\pm(s^{-1})$
and set $W_j=W_+$ for $j$ even, $W_j=W_-$ for $j$ odd.
For $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$ let
\begin{equation*}
W(\bm h):=\varepsilon^2\biggl[\tfrac12W_1((h_1-h_0)/\varepsilon) +\sum_{j=2}^NW_j((h_j-h_{j-1})/\varepsilon)
+\tfrac12W_{N+1}((h_{N+1}-h_N)/\varepsilon)\biggr].
\end{equation*}
Since $h_0=-h_1$ and $h_{N+1}=2-h_N$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial W(\bm h)}{\partial h_j} & = \varepsilon\bigl[W'_j((h_j-h_{j-1})/\varepsilon)-W'_{j+1}((h_{j+1}-h_j)/\varepsilon)\bigr]\\
& = -\varepsilon D_\infty^{-1}(\alpha^{j+1/2}-\alpha^{j-1/2}).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Then, we can write \eqref{h-eq-approx} as $\tau\bm h''+\bm h'=-\nabla W(\bm h)$.
For a solution $\bm h$ with values in $\Omega_\rho$, the energy $\mathsf{E}_\tau=\frac12\tau|\bm h'|^2+W(\bm h)$ is nonincreasing and
\begin{equation*}
\frac{d\mathsf{E}_\tau}{dt}=\tau\bm h'\cdot\bm h''+\nabla W(\bm h)\cdot\bm h'=-\gamma_\tau|\bm h'|^2\leq 0.
\end{equation*}
Note that $\gamma_\tau$ large implies a greater dissipation of energy.
\begin{prop}[Carr--Pego \cite{Carr-Pego}] \label{lem-W}
If $\rho$ is sufficiently small, then the function $W$ has a unique critical point $\bm h^e$, which is a strict local maximum.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
If $\bm h^e$ is a critical point of $W$, then $\alpha^{j-1/2}=\alpha^{j+1/2}$ for $j=1,\dots,N$.
Define $\ell_j:=h_j-h_{j-1}$.
From Proposition \ref{prop:alfa,beta}, it follows that for $r$ sufficiently small $\alpha_\pm(r)$ are monotone and so,
$\ell_j=\ell_{j+2}$ for $j=1,\dots,N-1$. Let $\ell_-=\ell_1$, $\ell_+=\ell_2$.
Since $\bm h\in\Omega_\rho$, we have that $\frac12\ell_1+\ell_2+\dots+\ell_N+\frac12\ell_{+1}=1$
and then $\ell_-+\ell_+=2/N$.
The condition $\alpha^{j-1/2}=\alpha^{j+1/2}$, also, gives $\alpha_+(\varepsilon/\ell_+)=\alpha_-(\varepsilon/\ell_-)$.
Using Proposition \ref{prop:alfa,beta}, we have that critical points correspond to zeros of
\begin{equation*}
\gamma=\varepsilon^{-1}(A_-\ell_--A_+\ell_+)+2\ln(K_+A_+/K_-A_-)+O\bigl(\rho^{-1} \exp(-A/2\rho)\bigr),
\end{equation*}
for $\ell_-\in[\varepsilon\rho^{-1}, 2N^{-1}-\varepsilon\rho^{-1}]$ with $\ell_+=2N^{-1}-\ell_-$.
For $\rho$ sufficiently small, $\gamma>0$ when $\ell_-=\varepsilon\rho^{-1}$ and $\gamma<0$ when $\ell_-=2N^{-1}-\varepsilon\rho^{-1}$;
hence a critical point must exist.
It is unique, because $\alpha_+$ and $\alpha_-$ are monotone.
To determine the nature of the critical point, consider the Hessian of $W$, $B_{ij}=\partial^2W(\bm h^e)/\partial h_i\partial h_j$.
The matrix $B$ is symmetric and tri-diagonal with
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
B_{11} & =2\omega_1+\omega_2, & \qquad B_{jj}&=\omega_j+\omega_{j+1}, \quad &\textrm{for}\, j=2,\dots,N-1,\\
B_{NN} & =\omega_N+2\omega_{N+1}, & \qquad B_{j,j+1}&=-\omega_{j+1}, \quad &\textrm{for}\, j=1,\dots,N-1,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where $\omega_j=W''_j((h_j^e-h^e_{j-1})/\varepsilon)$.
From Proposition \ref{prop:alfa,beta}, $w_j<0$ for $j=1,\dots,N$. Then, for $y\in\mathbb{R}^N$,
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i,j=1}^N B_{ij}y_iy_j=2\omega_1y_1^2+\sum_{j=2}^N\omega_j(y_{j-1}-y_j)^2+2\omega_{N+1}y_N^2,
\end{equation*}
so that $B$ is negative definite and $\bm h^e$ is a local maximum.
\end{proof}
If $f$ is odd, all the $\pm$ subscripts can be ignored, e.g. $\alpha_+=\alpha_-$, $\ell_+=\ell_-$ and
$h_j^e-h^e_{j-1}=1/N$ for $j=1,\dots,N$.
In general, the steady state domain lengths satisfy
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\ell_- & =2\left(A_+/N+\varepsilon\ln(K_-A_-/K_+A_+)\right)/(A_++A_-)+O\left(\rho^{-1}\exp(-A/2\rho)\right),\\
\ell_+ & =2\left(A_-/N+\varepsilon\ln(K_+A_+/K_-A_-)\right)/(A_++A_-)+O\left(\rho^{-1}\exp(-A/2\rho)\right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Thus, system \eqref{h-eq-approx} has a unique equilibrium point $(\bm h^e,0)$ with $\bm h^e\in\Omega_\rho$.
From Proposition \ref{prop-L(u^h)}, $\mathcal{L}(u^{\bm h^e})=0$ and so $u^{\bm h^e}$ is a stationary solution of \eqref{hyp-al-ca}.
In other words, there is a unique stationary solution $u^e$ of \eqref{hyp-al-ca} with $N$ transition layers and $u(0)<0$;
moreover, $u^e\in\mathcal{M}$ with $u^e=u^{\bm h^e}$ where $\bm h^e=\mathcal{H}(u^e)$.
Note, also, that by definition \eqref{Psi(h)}, $\Psi(\bm h)=0$ if and only if $\bm h=\bm h^e$ so that
the channel $\mathcal{Z}_{{}_{\Gamma,\rho}}$ is ``pinched'' at $u=u^e$.
\vskip.25cm
Now, let us study the stability of the equilibrium point $(\bm h^e,0)$ for system \eqref{h-eq-approx}.
To do this, rewrite it as the first order system
\begin{equation}\label{h-system}
\begin{cases}
\bm h'=\bm\eta, \\
\tau\bm\eta'=\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h)-\gamma_\tau\bm\eta.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{prop}
System \eqref{h-system} has a unique equilibrium point $(\bm h^e,0)$, which is unstable.
In particular, the Jacobian matrix evaluated at $(\bm h^e,0)$ has $N$ negative eigenvalues and $N$ positive eigenvalues.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
From Lemma \ref{lem-W}, it follows that the system \eqref{h-system} has a unique equilibrium point $(\bm h^e,0)$.
To determine the stability of this stationary point, we have to analyze the eigenvalues of the block matrix
\begin{equation*}
J=\left(\begin{matrix} 0_N & \mathbb{I}_N \\
-\frac1\tau B & -\frac{\gamma_\tau}\tau\mathbb{I}_N \end{matrix} \right),
\end{equation*}
where, as above, $B$ is the Hessian matrix of $W$ evaluated at $\bm h^e$.
To this end, we make use of the Schur complement, defined for a general block $n\times m$ matrix
\begin{equation*}
M =
\begin{pmatrix}
A _1 & A_2 \\
A_3 & A_4 \\
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
as follows: $ M/A_1 = A_4 - A_3A_1^{-1}A_2$, provided $A_1$ is an invertible square matrix.
In this case, $\det(M) = \det(A_1)\det(M/A_1)$.
For $M_\lambda=J-\lambda\mathbb I_{2N}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\det(M_\lambda)=\det\left(\begin{matrix} -\lambda\mathbb I_N & \mathbb{I}_N \\
-\frac1\tau B & -\left(\frac{\gamma_\tau}\tau+\lambda\right)\mathbb{I}_N \end{matrix} \right)
=\det(-\lambda\mathbb I_N)\det(M_\lambda/(-\lambda\mathbb I_N)),
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
M_\lambda/(-\lambda\mathbb I_N)=-\left(\frac{\gamma_\tau}\tau+\lambda\right)\mathbb{I}_N-\frac{1}{\tau\lambda} B.
\end{equation*}
Then,
\begin{equation*}
\det M_\lambda=(-\lambda)^N\det\left(-\frac{1}{\tau\lambda}B-\left(\frac{\gamma_\tau+\tau\lambda}\tau\right)\mathbb{I}_N\right)=
\frac1{\tau^N}\det\left(B+(\gamma_\tau\lambda+\tau\lambda^2)\mathbb I_N\right).
\end{equation*}
It follows that $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $J$ if and only if $-\tau\lambda^2-\gamma_\tau\lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $B$.
As previously shown in Lemma \ref{lem-W}, $B$ is symmetric and negative definite, so all the eigenvalues of $B$ are negative.
Denote them by $-\mu_i^2$ for $i=1,\dots,N$.
For each $-\mu_i^2$ there are two eigenvalues of $J$:
\begin{equation*}
\lambda_i^+(\tau)=\frac{-\gamma_\tau+\sqrt{\gamma_\tau^2+4\tau\mu_i^2}}{2\tau}>0, \qquad \quad
\lambda_i^-(\tau)=\frac{-\gamma_\tau-\sqrt{\gamma_\tau^2+4\tau\mu_i^2}}{2\tau}<0.
\end{equation*}
In conclusion, the Jacobian matrix evaluated at $(\bm h^e,0)$ has $N$ positive eigenvalues $\lambda_i^+(\tau)$
and $N$ negative eigenvalues $\lambda_i^-(\tau)$, and so $(\bm h^e,0)$ is unstable.
The eigenvalues satisfy
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\tau\rightarrow0^+}\lambda_i^+(\tau)=\frac{\mu_i^2}{\gamma_0},
\qquad \quad \lim_{\tau\rightarrow0^+}\lambda_i^-(\tau)=-\infty,
\end{equation*}
if $\displaystyle\lim_{\tau\to0^+}\gamma_\tau=:\gamma_0>0$. In particular, if $\gamma_0 = 1$, $\lambda_i^+(\tau)$ converge to the eigenvalues of the parabolic case, as expected.
\end{proof}
To conclude this section, we use singular perturbation theory to compare, for $\tau$ small,
the solutions of the system \eqref{h-system} and the ones of
\begin{equation}\label{h-par}
\begin{cases}
\bm h'=\bm\eta, \\
\bm\eta=\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h),
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
that is obtained by substituting $\tau=0$ in \eqref{h-system}, assuming that $\gamma_\tau\to1$ as $\tau\to0$.
Denote by $(\bm h_p,\bm\eta_p)$ the solutions of \eqref{h-par}; $\bm h_p$ is solution of the system $\bm h'=\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h)$,
that describes the evolution of layer positions in the parabolic case \eqref{AllenCahn}.
Set
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{E}_\tau(t):=\gamma_\tau|\bm h(t)-\bm h_p(t)|+\tau|\bm\eta(t)-\bm\eta_p(t)|.
\end{equation*}
A general theorem of Tihonov on singular perturbations could be applied to systems \eqref{h-system}-\eqref{h-par}.
Specifically for the system \eqref{h-system} we have the following result.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:tau0}
Let $(\bm h,\bm \eta)$ be a solution of \eqref{h-system} and $(\bm h_p,\bm\eta_p)$ a solution of \eqref{h-par},
with $ \bm h(t),\bm h_p(t)\in\Omega_\rho$ for any $t\in[0,T]$.
Then, there exists $C>0$ (independent of $\tau$) such that
\begin{equation}\label{E(t)<}
\mathrm{E}_\tau(t)\leq C(\mathrm{E}_\tau(0)+1-\gamma_\tau+\tau), \qquad \quad \mbox{ for } t\in[0,T].
\end{equation}
Moreover,
\begin{align}
\int_0^T|\bm\eta(t)-\bm\eta_p(t)|dt &\leq\frac C{\gamma_\tau}(\mathrm{E}_\tau(0)+1-\gamma_\tau+\tau), \label{eta-L1}\\
|\bm\eta(t)-\bm\eta_p(t)| &\leq\frac C{\gamma_\tau}(\mathrm{E}_\tau(0)+1-\gamma_\tau+\tau), \qquad \quad \mbox{ for } t\in[t_1,T],\label{eta-inf}
\end{align}
for all $t_1\in(0,T)$.
In particular, from \eqref{E(t)<}, \eqref{eta-L1} and \eqref{eta-inf}, it follows that, if $\gamma_\tau\to1$ and $\mathrm{E}_\tau(0)\rightarrow0$ as $\tau\rightarrow0$, then
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\tau\rightarrow0}\sup_{t\in[0,T]}|\bm h(t)-\bm h_p(t)|
=\lim_{\tau\rightarrow0} \int_0^T|\bm\eta(t)-\bm\eta_p(t)|dt
=\lim_{\tau\rightarrow0}\sup_{t\in[t_1,T]}|\bm\eta(t)-\bm\eta_p(t)|=0,
\end{equation*}
for any $t_1\in(0,T)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
For $t\in[0,T]$, define
\begin{equation*}
\bm\delta_{\bm h}(t):=\bm h(t)-\bm h_p(t), \qquad \quad
\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}(t):=\bm\eta(t)-\bm\eta_p(t).
\end{equation*}
By hypotheses, $\bm h(t),\bm h_p(t)\in\Omega_\rho$ for $t\in[0,T]$, so $|\bm h(t)|$ and $|\bm h_p(t)|$ are uniformly bounded in $[0,T]$.
Since $\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h)$ is a regular function of $\bm h$, there exists $C>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{P*-stime}
|\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h_p)|\leq C, \qquad |J\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h_p)|\leq C, \qquad |\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h_p+\bm\delta_{\bm h})-\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h_p)|\leq C|\bm\delta_{\bm h}|,
\end{equation}
for all $t\in[0,T]$.
Here and in what follows, $C$ is a positive constant independent of $\tau$ whose value may change from line to line.
We have
\begin{equation*}
\bm\delta_{\bm h}'=\bm\eta-\bm\eta_p, \qquad \quad
\tau\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}'=\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h_p+\bm\delta_p)-\gamma_\tau\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h_p)-\gamma_\tau\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}-\tau J\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h_p)\mathcal{P}^*(\bm h_p).
\end{equation*}
Since $\displaystyle\frac d{dt}|\bm\delta|=\frac{\bm\delta'\cdot\bm\delta}{|\bm\delta|}$ for any $\bm\delta(t)\in\mathbb{R}^N$,
using \eqref{P*-stime} and Cauchy--Schwarz inequality, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\frac d{dt}|\bm\delta_{\bm h}|\leq|\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}|, \qquad
\tau\frac d{dt}|\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}|\leq C\gamma_\tau|\bm\delta_{\bm h}|+(1-\gamma_\tau)C-\gamma_\tau|\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}|+\tau C.
\end{equation*}
Summing, one has
\begin{equation*}
\frac d{dt}\left(\gamma_\tau|\bm\delta_{\bm h}|+\tau|\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}|\right)\leq C\gamma_\tau|\bm\delta_{\bm h}|+C(1-\gamma_\tau+\tau),
\end{equation*}
and so
\begin{equation}\label{d/dt E<}
\frac d{dt}\mathrm{E}_\tau(t)\leq C\left(\mathrm{E}_\tau(t)+1-\gamma_\tau+\tau\right), \qquad \quad \mbox{ for } t\in[0,T].
\end{equation}
Integrating \eqref{d/dt E<} and applying Gr\"onwall's Lemma, we obtain \eqref{E(t)<}.
In particular, from \eqref{E(t)<}, it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{delta_h}
\gamma_\tau|\bm\delta_{\bm h}(t)|\leq C(\mathrm{E}_\tau(0)+1-\gamma_\tau+\tau), \qquad \quad\qquad \mbox{ for } t\in[0,T].
\end{equation}
Substituting \eqref{delta_h} in the equation for $\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{delta_eta}
\tau\frac{d}{dt}|\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}|\leq-\gamma_\tau|\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}|+C(\mathrm{E}_\tau(0)+1-\gamma_\tau+\tau).
\end{equation}
Integrating \eqref{delta_eta}, we obtain \eqref{eta-L1}.
Furthermore, for \eqref{delta_eta}, we have
\begin{equation*}
\frac{d}{dt}\left(\tau e^{\gamma_\tau t/\tau}|\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}(t)|\right)\leq C(\mathrm{E}_\tau(0)+1-\gamma_\tau+\tau)e^{\gamma_\tau t/\tau},
\end{equation*}
and so
\begin{align*}
|\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}(t)|&\leq\frac C{\gamma_\tau}(\mathrm{E}_\tau(0)+1-\gamma_\tau+\tau)\bigl(1-e^{-\gamma_\tau t/\tau}\bigr)+|\bm\delta_{\bm\eta}(0)|e^{-\gamma_\tau t/\tau} \\
& \leq\frac C{\gamma_\tau}(\mathrm{E}_\tau(0)+1-\gamma_\tau+\tau) + \mathrm{E}_\tau(0)\frac{e^{-\gamma_\tau t/\tau}}{\tau},
\end{align*}
for $t\in[0,T]$.
Therefore, for any fixed $t_1\in(0,T)$, we obtain \eqref{eta-inf}.
\end{proof}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank the anonymous Referees for the careful review and for the suggestions which help us to improve our paper.
|
\section{Introduction}
We assume familiarity with basic facts and notions from
combinatorial design theory and coding theory
(\cite{AK}, \cite{BJL}, \cite{BM}, \cite{Hall}, \cite{HP}, \cite{Ton-HCT},
\cite{Ton-CRC}, \cite{T88}).
A combinatorial {\it design} (or an {\it incidence structure}) is a pair
$\cal{D}$=$(X, \cal{B})$ of a finite set of {\it points} $X=\{ x_i \}_{i=1}^v$
and a collection $\cal{B}$=$\{ B_j \}_{j=1}^b$ of subsets $B_j \subseteq X$, called
{\it blocks}. The point-by-block incidence matrix $A=( a_{i,j})$ of $\cal{D}$=$(X, \cal{B})$
is a $v$ by $b$ $(0,1)$-matrix with
$a_{i,j}=1$ if $x_i \in B_j$, and $a_{i,j}=0$ otherwise.
An incidence structure is {\it simple} if $X$ is a proper set consisting of $v$ distinct points,
and all blocks are distinct subsets of points, or equivalently, its incidence matrix does not have
any identical rows or columns.
Given integers $v\ge k \ge t \ge 0$, $\lambda\ge 0$, a $t$-$(v,k,\lambda)$ design (or briefly, a $t$-design)
$\cal{D}$
is an incidence
structure with $v$ points and blocks of size $k$ such that every $t$-subset of points is contained
in exactly $\lambda$ blocks. It follows that a $t$-$(v,k,\lambda)$ is also an $s$-$(v,k,\lambda_s)$
design for any $0 \le s \le t$, where
\[ \lambda_s =\frac{ { v-s \choose t-s }}{{k-s \choose t-s}}. \]
In particular, the total number of blocks is given by
\[ b=\lambda_0 = \frac{ { v \choose t }}{{k \choose t}}. \]
The number $\lambda_1$ of blocks containing a given point is often called the {\it replication number},
and is denoted by $r$.
The number of blocks $b$ and the number of points $v$ of any 2-$(v,k,\lambda)$
design $D$ with $v>k>0$ satisfy the following
inequality, known as the Fisher inequality:
\begin{equation}
\label{Fish}
b \ge v, \end{equation}
where the equality $b=v$ holds if and only if every two distinct blocks of $D$
share exactly $\lambda$ points.
A 2-$(v,k,\lambda)$ design $D$ with $b=v$ is called {\it symmetric}.
If $A$ is the incidence matrix of a symmetric 2-$(v,k,\lambda)$ design $D$,
then $A^{T}$ is the incidence matrix of a symmetric design with the same parameters, called
the {\it dual} of $D$.
Let $\cal{D}$=$(X,\cal{B})$ be design, and let $B \in \cal{B}$ be a block of $\cal{D}$.
The incidence structure
\[ {\cal{D}}^B = (X',\cal{B'}), \]
where
\[ X'=B, \ {\cal{B'}}= \{ B\cap B_j \ | \ B_j \in {\cal{B}}, B_j \neq B \}, \]
is called the {\it derived} design of $\cal{D}$ with respect to block $B$.
Accordingly, the incidence structure
\[ {\cal{D}}_B=(X'', \cal{B''}), \]
where
\[ X'' = X\setminus B, \ {\cal{B''}}=\{ B_j \setminus (B_j\cap B) \ | \ B_j \in {\cal{B}}, B_j \neq B \}, \]
is called the {\it residual} design of $\cal{D}$ with respect to block $B$.
The main subject of this paper are incidence structures $\cal{D}$ with the property
that for some prime number $p$, the $p$-ranks of the incidence matrices of $\cal{D}$
and some of its residual designs, ${\cal{D}}_B$, differ by one.
We prove a sufficient condition, as well as some necessary conditions
for an incidence structure to admit this property. As an application, we give
an alternative construction of the 2-$(64,16,5)$ designs of 2-rank 16,
being the only known counter-examples of Hamada's conjecture
\cite{Ha}, \cite{Ha81} over a field
of non-prime order \cite{CJT}, \cite{HLT}, \cite{JT09}, \cite{T86}.
\section{Linearly embeddable residual designs}
\label{lin}
Suppose that $\cal{D}$=$(X,\cal{B})$ is a design,
and $B\in{\cal{B}}$ is a block containing
$k$ points, $k > 1$. For convenience of notation, we assume that the points and blocks
of $\cal{D}$ are labeled so that $B$ is the last block, and consists of
the first $k$ points of $X$.
Then the point-by-block $v \times b$ incidence matrix $A$ of $\cal{D}$
can be written as in eq. (\ref{eq1}), where $A'$ is the $k \times (b-1)$
incidence matrix of the derived
design ${\cal{D}}^B$, and
$A''$ is the incidence matrix of the residual design ${\cal{D}}_B$.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq1}
A=\left( \begin{array}{ll}
& 1 \\
& \cdot \\
A' & \cdot \\
& \cdot \\
& 1 \\
& 0\\
& \cdot \\
A'' & \cdot \\
& \cdot \\
& 0\\
\end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
It is obvious from (\ref{eq1}) that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq2}
rank_p A \ge rank_p A'' +1,
\end{equation}
where $rank_p$ denotes the $p$-rank of the corresponding matrix,
that is, its rank
over a finite field $GF(p)$ of prime order $p$.
\begin{Def}
{\rm
We say that a residual design ${\cal{D}}_B$ is {\it linearly embeddable}
over $GF(p)$ if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq3}
rank_p A = rank_p A'' +1.
\end{equation}
}
\end{Def}
The condition (\ref{eq3}) implies that all rows of $A$ belong to the
linear code of length $b$ over $GF(p)$, being the row span
of a $(v-k+1)\times b$ matrix, consisting of the $v-k$ rows of $A$
labeled by the points of ${\cal{D}}_B$, plus one extra row
$y=(y_1,\ldots, y_b)$ from
the row span of $A$ such that $y_b\neq 0$ (for example, $y$ can be
any of the $k$ rows of $A$ labeled by a point of ${\cal{D}}^B$).
Clearly, the condition (\ref{eq3}) is a strong requirement. For example,
this condition does not hold if $rank_p A = v$ and $k\ge 2$.
The next theorem gives a sufficient condition for a residual design
to be linearly embeddable.
\begin{Thm}
\label{t1}
Let $\cal{D}$=$(X,{\cal{B}})$ be a design with $v$ points, $b$ blocks,
and a $v \times b$ incidence matrix $A$, and let $C$ be the linear code
of length $v$ over $GF(p)$ spanned by the columns of $A$.
If the minimum Hamming weight of $C$ is $d$, then every residual design
${\cal{D}}_B$ with respect to a block of size $d$ is linearly
embeddable over $GF(p)$.
\end{Thm}
{\bf Proof}.
Let $y\in C$ be a codeword of minimum weight $d$, such that the support of $y$
(that is, the set of indices of its nonzero components)
is a block $B$ of $\cal{D}$. We consider the linear code $C_y$ of length $v-d$
obtained from $C$ by puncturing the $d$ coordinates labeled by the support
of $y$, or equivalently, by the points of $B$.
Clearly, the dimension of $C_y$ is equal to $rank_p A''$, where $A''$
is the incidence matrix of the residual design ${\cal{D}}_B$,
while the dimension of $C$ is equal to $rank_p A$.
In the terminology \cite{HS},
and the notation of \cite[Section 2.7., page 80]{HP}, $C_y$ is
the residual code $Res(C,y)$ with respect to $y$.
Since
\[ d < \frac{p}{p-1}d, \]
it follows from a result by Hill and Newton \cite[Lemma 2.13]{HN}
(see also \cite[Theorem 2.7.1, page 80]{HP}) that the dimension of $C_y$ is
smaller than the dimension of $C$ by one, hence
\[ rank_p A'' = rank_p A -1, \]
which completes the proof.
$\Box$
Next we give examples of 2-designs which satisfy the condition of
Theorem \ref{t1}, and consequently, have linearly embeddable residual designs.
A symmetric 2-design with parameters
\begin{equation}
\label{sSDP}
2-(2^{2m}, 2^{2m-1} - 2^{m-1}, 2^{2m-2} - 2^{m-1})
\end{equation}
has the {\it symmetric difference property}, and is called an SDP design
(Kantor \cite{K})
if the symmetric difference of any three blocks is either a block or a complement
of a block. The number of nonisomorphic SDP designs with
parameters (\ref{sSDP}) grows exponentially with $m$
\cite{K2}.
Dillon and Schatz \cite{DS} proved the following characterization of symmetric SDP designs:
a design with parameters (\ref{sSDP}) has the symmetric difference property if and only if
its blocks are the supports of minimum weight codewords in a binary linear code
of length $2^{2m}$ and dimension $2m+2$, spanned by a bent
function on $2m$ variables and the first order Reed-Muller code of length $2^{2m}$.
This result and Theorem \ref{t1} imply the following.
\begin{Thm}
\label{t2}
The residual designs of a symmetric SDP design are linearly embeddable over $GF(2)$.
\end{Thm}
A residual design of a symmetric SDP design $D$ with parameters (\ref{sSDP}) is a 2-design
with parameters
\begin{equation}
\label{sdp-r}
2-(2^{2m-1}+2^{m-1}, 2^{2m-2}, 2^{2m-2} - 2^{m-1}), \end{equation}
and derived design of $D$ has parameters
\begin{equation}
\label{sdp-d}
2-(2^{2m-1}-2^{m-1}, 2^{2m-2} - 2^{m-1}, 2^{2m-2} - 2^{m-1}-1).
\end{equation}
The residual and derived designs of a symmetric SDP design have the property that
the symmetric difference of any two blocks is either a block or a complement of block,
and are called quasi-symmetric SDP designs (the term "quasi-symmetric" refers to the property
that there are only two distinct block intersection numbers; see Shrikhande \cite{MSS} for an
introduction to quasi-symmetric designs).
It was shown by Jungnickel and the author in \cite{JT} that the number
of nonisomorphic quasi-symmetric SDP designs with parameters (\ref{sdp-r}) or (\ref{sdp-d})
grows exponentially with $m$.
\begin{Rem}
{\rm
It was proved by the author in \cite{Tongd} that any quasi-symmetric SDP design is
uniquely embeddable as a residual or derived design in a symmetric SDP design.
Combined with the result of Theorem \ref{t2}, this implies that a residual design
of a symmetric SDP design $D$ is linearly embeddable in a unique (up to isomorphism)
symmetric design, namely $D$. We will discuss some interesting linearly embeddable
residual designs later in this paper, which can be linearly embedded in
two nonisomorphic designs.
}
\end{Rem}
By the Dillon-Schatz theorem \cite{DS},
the 2-rank of a symmetric SDP design
with parameters (\ref{sSDP}) is $2m+2$, and consequently,
the 2-rank of its residual or derived designs is equal to $2m+1$.
The binary linear code $C'$ of length $2^{2m-1}-2^{m-1}$ spanned by the blocks of a quasi-symmetric
SDP design with parameters (\ref{sdp-d}) consists of the zero vector, the all-one vector,
the incidence vectors of the blocks (which are also the minimum weight codewords), and the
incidence vectors of the complements of the blocks.
Similarly, the binary linear code $C''$ of length $2^{2m-1}+2^{m-1}$ spanned by the blocks
of a quasi-symmetric
SDP design with parameters (\ref{sdp-r}) consists of the zero vector, the all-one vector,
the incidence vectors of the blocks (which are also the minimum weight codewords), and the
incidence vectors of the complements of the blocks.
Thus, the Dillon-Schatz theorem \cite{DS} and Theorem \ref{t1} imply the following.
\begin{Thm}
\label{t3}
The residual design with respect to any block of a given quasi-symmetric SDP design
is linearly embeddable over $GF(2)$.
\end{Thm}
Other infinite classes of linearly embeddable designs over $GF(2)$ are
the designs supported by the minimum weight codewords of Reed-Muller
codes, or punctured Reed-Muller codes.
The codewords of minimum weight $d=2^{m-r}$ of the Reed-Muller code of length $2^m$
and order $r$ ($1 \le r <m-1$), form the block by point incidence matrix of a 3-design $\cal{D}$,
which is linearly embeddable over $GF(2)$ by Theorem \ref{t1}.
In addition, puncturing one of the $2^m$ coordinates of the Reed-Muller code of length $2^m$
and order $r$ gives a punctured code $C'$ of length $2^m -1$ and minimum distance $2^{m-r} -1$.
The minimum weight codewords of $C'$ support a linearly embeddable 2-design by Theorem \ref{t1}.
The linearly embeddable designs supported by the binary Reed-Muller
codes and punctured Reed-Muller
codes are special classes of designs based on finite geometry.
Let $q=p^t$, $p$ - prime, $t\ge 1$.
The $d$-dimensional subspaces of the $n$-dimensional
projective geometry $PG(n,q)$ over $GF(q)$, are the blocks of a 2-design, denoted by $PG_{d}(n,q)$,
with parameters
\[2-\left(\frac{q^{n+1}-1}{q-1}, \frac{q^{d+1}-1}{q-1}, \frac{(q^{n+1}-q^{2})(q^{n+1}-q^{3})\cdots
(q^{n+1}-q^{d})}{(q^{d+1}-q^{2})(q^{d+1}-q^{3})\cdots(q^{d+1}-q^{d})} \right)\]
Similarly, the $d$-subspaces of the $n$-dimensional affine geometry $AG(n,q)$ over $GF(q)$
are the blocks of a 2-design, denoted by$AG_{d}(n,q)$, with parameters
\[2-\left(q^{n}, q^{d}, \frac{(q^{n}-q)(q^{n}-q^{2})\cdots(q^{n}-q^{d-1})}{(q^{d}-q)(q^{d}-q^{2})
\cdots(q^{d}-q^{d-1})} \right)\]
If $q=2$, $AG_{d}(n,2)$ is also a $3$-$(2^n, 2^d, \lambda_3)$ design with
\[ \lambda_3=\frac{(2^n -2^2)\cdots (2^n -2^{d-1})}{(2^d -2^2)\cdots (2^d -2^{d-1})}. \]
The incidence vectors of the blocks of $PG_{d}(n,q)$ are codewords of minimum
weight of the $GF(p)$-subfield subcode of a nonprimitive generalized Reed-Muller
code over $GF(q)$ \cite[5.7]{AK}, \cite[Chapter 2]{BM}.
Similarly, the blocks of $AG_{d}(n,q)$ are supported by minimum weight codewords
in the code over $GF(p)$ spanned by the incidence vectors of the
blocks \cite[Corollary 5.5.5, page 166]{AK}. Thus, by Theorem \ref{t1},
we have
\begin{Thm}
\label{t4}
The residual designs of $PG_{d}(n,p^t)$ and $AG_d(n,p^t)$ are linearly embeddable over $GF(p)$.
\end{Thm}
\section{Residual designs of affine resolvable designs}
The Fisher inequality (\ref{Fish}) for a 2-$(v,k,\lambda)$ design with $v>k>0$
can be strengthened when $v$ is a multiple of $k$, $v=qk$, as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{resol}
b \ge v+r -1, \end{equation}
where $r=(v-1)\lambda/(k-1)$ is the replication number.
Suppose that $\cal{D}$ is a 2-$(qk,k,\lambda)$ design with $q>1$ and $k>0$. Any set of $q$ pairwise
disjoint blocks is called a {\it parallel class}. A
{\it resolution} of $\cal{D}$ is a partition of the collection of blocks into
$r$ disjoint parallel classes. A design is {\it resolvable} if it admits at least one resolution.
The parameters of a resolvable 2-design satisfy the inequality (\ref{resol}).
In addition, a 2-$(qk,k,\lambda)$ design with $b=v+r-1$ is resolvable
if and only if the number
\[ \mu = \frac{k}{q} = \frac{k^2}{v} \]
is an integer, and every two blocks are either disjoint or share exactly $\mu$ points
(cf. Bose \cite[Theorem 1.6.1]{Bose}, or \cite[Theorem 2.3.3]{T88}).
A resolvable 2-$(qk,k,\lambda)$ design with $b=v+r-1$ blocks is called {\it affine resolvable}.
An affine resolvable design admits only one resolution, and its parameters can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{afres}
v=q^2\mu, \ k=q\mu, \ \lambda=\frac{q\mu -1}{q-1}.
\end{equation}
If $B$ is a block of an affine resolvable
2-$(q^2\mu, q\mu, \frac{q\mu -1}{q-1})$ design $\cal{D}$, the derived design ${\cal{D}}^B$
is a 2-$(q\mu, \mu, \frac{q\mu -1}{q-1} - 1)$ design (here we do not consider the empty intersections
of the $q-1$ blocks from the parallel class of $B$ as blocks of the derived design ${\cal{D}}^B$).
Any affine geometry design $AG_{d}(n,q)$, $1\le d \le n-1$, is resolvable:
one resolution has as parallel classes
the collections of cosets of the affine $d$-subspaces through the origin.
The number of nonisomorphic resolvable designs having the same
parameters as $A_d(n,q)$, $3\le d\le n-1$, grows exponentially
(Jungnickel \cite{J84}, Lam, Lam and Tonchev \cite{LLT}).
If $d=n-1\ge 1$,
$A_{n-1}(d,q)$ is an affine resolvable 2-$(q^n, q^{n-1}, \frac{q^{n-1}-1}{q-1})$ design.
If $B$ is a block of $\cal{D}$=$AG_{n-1}(n,q)$, there are $q-1$ blocks parallel to $B$,
and every other block intersects $B$ in a $(n-2)$-subspace of $AG(n,q)$. The non-empty
intersections of $B$ with other blocks
of $\cal{D}$ form a 2-design ${\cal{D}}'$ with point set $B$
and parameters
\[ v' = q^{n-1}, \ k' = q^{n-2}, \ \lambda' =\frac{q^{n-1}-1}{q-1}-1 =
\frac{q(q^{n-2}-1)}{q-1}, \ b'=\frac{q^{2}(q^{n-1}-1)}{q-1}. \]
The design ${\cal{D}}'$ is not simple: its collection of blocks
is a multi-set, where every block appears with multiplicity $q$.
A set $S$ of distinct representatives of the blocks of ${\cal{D}}'$
consists of all $(n-2)$-subspaces of $AG(n-1,q)$, where the points
of $AG(n-1,q)$ are identified with the points of $B$. Thus, $S$ is a simple
2-$(q^{n-1},q^{n-2},\frac{q^{n-2}-1}{q-1})$ design isomorphic to
$AG_{n-2}(n-1,q)$.
The residual design ${\cal{D}}_B$ has $q-1$ blocks of size $q^{n-1}$ (these are blocks
from the parallel class of $\cal{D}$ that contains $B$), while
the remaining
\[ \frac{q(q^n -1)}{(q-1)}-q \]
blocks of ${\cal{D}}_B$ are of size $q^{n-1} - q^{n-2}$.
Let ${\cal{D}}''$ be the substructure of ${\cal{D}}_B$
consisting of all blocks of size $q^{n-1} - q^{n-2}$.
Since every two non-parallel blocks of $\cal{D}$ meet in $\mu=q^{n-2}$ points,
each set of $q$ identical blocks of ${\cal{D}}'$ corresponds to a parallel class of $q$
pairwise disjoint blocks of ${\cal{D}}''$. In this way, we obtain a resolution $R$ of
${\cal{D}}''$, in which the parallel classes are labeled by the blocks of $S$.
This construction can be applied to residual designs of other affine resolvable
designs having the parameters of $AG_{n-1}(n,d)$, provided that there is a block
satisfying the condition of the following definition.
\begin{Def}
\label{good}
{\rm
A block $B$ of an affine resolvable 2-$(q^n, q^{n-1}, \frac{q^{n-1} -1}{q-1})$ design
$\cal{D}$ is called a {\it good} block if the nonempty intersections of $B$ with the
remaining blocks form
a 2-$(q^{n-1}, q^{n-2}, \frac{q(q^{n-2} -1)}{q-1})$ design ${\cal{D}}'$, whose
collection of blocks is a union of $q$ identical copies of the block set of a simple
2-$(q^{n-1}, q^{n-2}, \frac{q^{n-2} -1}{q-1})$ design $S$.
}
\end{Def}
\begin{Rem}
{\rm
The above definition of a good block concerns a special case of a more general concept
introduced by Kimberley \cite{Kim} and used by Kantor \cite{K69} (see Beth, Jungnickel
and Lenz \cite[XII.5]{BJL}) for further references).
}
\end{Rem}
We note that
by the inequality of Mann \cite{Mann},
\cite[Theorem 1.1.5, page 6]{T88},
every 2-$(q^{n-1},q^{n-2},\frac{q^{n-2}-1}{q-1})$ design is simple.
Clearly, any good block $B$ defines
a resolution of the subdesign ${\cal{D}}''$ of the residual design
${\cal{D}}_B$, consisting of the blocks of size $q^{n-1} - q^{n-2}$.
\begin{Thm}
\label{t5}
Let $\cal{D}$ be an affine resolvable 2-$(q^n, q^{n-1}, (q^{n-1}-1)/(q-1)$)
design, ($n \ge 2$), with a good block $B$, where $q=p^t$, $p$ is prime, and $q\ge 4$.
If the residual design ${\cal{D}}_B$ is linearly embeddable over $GF(p)$, then
the linear code over $GF(p)$ of length $q^{2}(q^{n-1}-1)/(q-1)$, spanned by the rows
of the incidence matrix $M''$
of the substructure ${\cal{D}}''$ of ${\cal{D}}_B$ consisting of all blocks of size
$q^{n-1} - q^{n-2}$,
contains at least $(p-1){ q^{n-1} \choose 2}$
codewords of weight $2q^{n-1}$, whose supports are unions of parallel classes
of the resolution $R$ of ${\cal{D}}''$ defined by $B$.
\end{Thm}
{\bf Proof.}
For convenience of notation, we assume that the
points and blocks of $\cal{D}$ are labeled so that $B$ is the last block and
consists of the first $q^{n-1}$ points. Then the point-by-block incidence
matrix $A$ of $\cal{D}$ is given by (\ref{eq1}), where $A'$ is the
incidence matrix of the derived design ${\cal{D}}^B$, and
$A''$ is the incidence matrix of the residual design ${\cal{D}}_B$.
Let
\begin{equation}
\label{a1a2}
A_1=\left( \begin{array}{ll}
& 1 \\
& \cdot \\
A' & \cdot \\
& \cdot \\
& 1 \\
\end{array}\right), \ A_2 = \left( \begin{array}{ll}
& 0\\
& \cdot \\
A'' & \cdot \\
& \cdot \\
& 0\\
\end{array}\right).
\end{equation}
The matrix $A'$ contains $q-1$ all-zero columns that correspond to
the blocks of $\cal{D}$ parallel to $B$.
We denote by $M'$ the submatrix of all nonzero columns of $A'$.
Since ${\cal{D}}_B$ is linearly embeddable over $GF(p)$, we have
\[ rank_{p}A_2 =rank_{p}A -1, \]
which implies that the vector space $L_2$ being the span of the rows of $A_2$
over $GF(p)$, coincides with the subspace of co-dimension 1 of the row span $L$ of $A$,
consisting of all vectors in $L$ having last coordinate equal to zero.
It follows that the difference of any two rows of $A_1$ belongs to $L_2$,
and consequently, the difference
of any two rows of $M'$ belongs to the rows space of $M''$.
The set of the
\[ r' =q\frac{q^{n-1}-1}{q-1} \]
nonzero positions of any row of $M'$ corresponds to a union of $(q^{n-1}-1)/(q-1)$ parallel classes
of the resolution $R$.
Every two distinct rows of $M'$ overlap in a set $T$ of
\[ \lambda' = q\frac{q^{n-2}-1}{q-1} \]
nonzero positions, where $T$ corresponds to a union of $(q^{n-2}-1)/(q-1)$ parallel classes of $R$.
Thus, the difference of every two distinct rows of $M'$ is a vector of Hamming weight
\[ 2(r' -\lambda')=2q^{n-1}, \]
belonging to the row space of $M''$, whose support is a union of $2q^{n-2}$ parallel classes of $R$.
We will show that the differences of different pairs of distinct rows of $A'$ are distinct vectors
of weight $2q^{n-2}$. Let ${\cal{P}}_1$ =$\{ r_1, r_2 \}$, ($r_1 \neq r_2$),
${\cal{P}}_2$ =$\{ r_3, r_4 \}$, ($r_3 \neq r_4$), be two distinct unordered pairs of rows.
Fist, suppose that ${\cal{P}}_1$ and ${\cal{P}}_2$ share one row. If $r_1 = r_3$ then
\begin{equation}
\label{dif}
r_1 - r_2 = r_3 - r_4
\end{equation}
implies $r_2 = r_4$ and ${\cal{P}}_1$=${\cal{P}}_2$, a contradiction.
If $r_1 = r_4$ then $r_2 \neq r_3$, and equation (\ref{dif}) implies $2r_1 =r_2 + r_3$,
which is impossible due to the Hamming weights of the rows and the size
of the overlap of their supports.
Hence, if the pairs ${\cal{P}}_1$, ${\cal{P}}_2$ comprise of three distinct rows of $A'$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{dif2}
r_1 - r_2 \neq r_3 - r_4.
\end{equation}
Suppose now that $r_1, r_2, r_3, r_4$ are four distinct rows of $A'$ which satisfy
the equation (\ref{dif}). Let $C$ be the linear code of length $q^{n-1}$ over $GF(p)$,
being the null space of the column space of $A'$. The equation (\ref{dif}) implies
that $C$ contains a codeword of weight 4 with support labeled by the four rows,
thus, the minimum weight of $C$ is at most 4.
We will show, however, that if $q\ge 4$, the minimum weight $d$ of $C$ is at least 5.
Let ${M'}_S$ be a submatrix of $M'$ consisting of $q(q^{n-1}-1)/(q-1)$ distinct
columns of $M'$, that is, ${M'}_S$ is an incidence matrix of the simple
2-$(q^{n-1}, q^{n-2}, \frac{q^{n-2}-1}{q-1})$ subdesign $S$ of ${\cal{D}}'$.
By Rudolph's theorem \cite{Rud},
\cite[Theorem 2.7.3]{T88},
the code $C$ can correct up to
\[ e=\lfloor \frac{r+\lambda -1}{2\lambda}\rfloor \]
errors by a majority-logic decoding algorithm using the columns of ${M'}_S$,
where
\[ r = \frac{q^{n-1} -1}{q-1} \]
is the replication number of $S$, and
\[ \lambda = \frac{q^{n-2}-1}{q-1} \]
is the number of blocks through a pair of points.
We have
\[ \frac{r+\lambda -1}{2\lambda} \ge \frac{r}{2\lambda} =\frac{q^{n-1} -1}{2(q^{n-2}-1)} \ge 2, \]
provided that $q\ge 4$ and $n\ge 2$.
Thus, the code $C$ can correct at least 2 errors, which implies that
the weight of any nonzero codeword of $C$ is greater than or equal to 5.
Hence, the differences of pairs of rows of $A'$ are all different
codewords from the row space
of $M''$, each of weight $2q^{n-1}$, and having a support being a union of parallel classes of $R$.
Taking into account the $p-1$ nonzero scalar multiples of each such codeword gives
a set of $(p-1){ q^{n-1} \choose 2}$ distinct codewords with the required property.
This completes the proof. {$\Box$}
\section{Residual designs of $AG_{2}(3,4)$}
\label{sec5}
The smallest parameters $n$, $q$ that satisfy the conditions of Theorem \ref{t5}
are $n=2$ and $q=4$. Any residual design of the 2-$(64,16,5)$ design
$\cal{D}$=$AG_{2}(3,4)$ is linearly embeddable
over $GF(2)$ by Theorem \ref{t4}. The 84 blocks of $\cal{D}$ are the planes
in $AG(3,4)$, and all blocks are in one orbit under the collineation group
of $AG_{2}(3,4)$, being of order
\[ 2\cdot 4^3(4^3-1)(4^3 -4)(4^3 -4^2) = 23,224,320 = 2^{13}\cdot 3^4 \cdot 5 \cdot 7. \]
Thus, all residual designs of $\cal{D}$ are isomorphic.
By Hamada's formula \cite{Ha}, the 2-rank of $AG_{2}(3,4)$
is 16.
Let $B$ be a block of $\cal{D}$.
Our goal is to determine if ${\cal{D}}_B$ =$(AG_{2}(3,4))_B$ can be embedded linearly
over $GF(2)$ as a residual design with respect to a good block into any other affine
resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$ design $\cal{E}$ which is not isomorphic to
$AG_{2}(3,4)$.
The weight distribution
of the binary linear code of length 80 and dimension 15
being the row space of the $48 \times 80$ incidence matrix
$M''$ of the substructure ${\cal{D}}''$ of the residual design
${\cal{D}}_B$ consisting of all
blocks of size 12, is given in Table \ref{tab1}.
\begin{tab}
\label{tab1}
\end{tab}
\begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|}
\hline
$i$ & 20 & 30 & 32 & 34 & 36 & 38 & 40 & \ldots & 48 & 50 & 52 & 64 \\
\hline
$A_i$ & 48 & 768 & 610 & 1280 & 6240 & 7680 & 2880 & \ldots & 600 & 256 & 240 & 5\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{5mm}
The design ${\cal{D}}''$ has 40 parallel classes and 32 resolutions.
The automorphism group of ${\cal{D}}''$ is of order $552,960$, and partitions the set of 32
resolutions in three orbits of lengths 2, 10, and 20, respectively.
The resolution $R$ whose parallel classes are labeled by the blocks of the
2-$(16,4,1)$ subdesign of ${\cal{D}}^B$ is one of the resolutions in the orbit of length 2,
the second one being the resolution induced by the unique resolution of $\cal{D}$.
It is easy to verify that among the 610 codewords of weight 32 (cf. Table \ref{tab1}),
there are 130 codewords
whose supports are unions of 8 parallel classes from a resolution
from the orbit of length 2, 34 such codewords with respect to a
resolution from the orbit of length 10, and 10 codewords with respect to a resolution
from the orbit of length 20. By Theorem \ref{t5}, this implies that one can have
a linear embedding only with respect to a resolution from the orbit of length 2.
Thus, it is sufficient to consider linear embeddings with respect to the resolution $R$.
To search for such linear embeddings, we extend the $48 \times 80$ incidence matrix of
${\cal{D}}''$ by four columns: three columns of weight 16, being the incidence vectors
of the three blocks of $\cal{D}$ parallel to $B$, plus one all-zero column.
Following the notation of Theorem \ref{t5}, we denote
the resulting $48 \times 84$ matrix by $A_2$ (as in (\ref{a1a2})).
The rows of the $64 \times 84$ incidence matrix of any affine resolvable
2-$(64,16,5)$ design $\cal{E}$ with a good block $B$ such that the residual design
${\cal{E}}_B$ coincides with ${\cal{D}}_B$=$(AG_{2}(3,4))_B$, are codewords of weight 21 in a binary
linear code spanned by the rows of $A_2$ and one additional
row $y=(y_1,\cdots,y_{84})$, where $y_{84}=1$ and the remaining 20 nonzero positions
of $y$ are labeled by the blocks of 5 parallel classes from the resolution $R$ of ${\cal{D}}''$.
In other words, $y$ is a row of the $16 \times 84$ matrix $A_1$ (cf. (\ref{a1a2})), labeled by
a point of $B$.
Without loss of generality, we can fix one of the five parallel
classes associated with the support of $y$. A computer check shows that among the
\[ { 19 \choose 4 }=3876 \]
choices for the remaining 4 parallel classes associated with the support of $y$,
only 16 lead to a code of length 84 and dimension 16 that contains sufficiently many
codewords of weight 21 to form the incidence matrix of a 2-$(64,16,5)$ design,
and each of these 16 codes does contain the incidence matrix of
an affine resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$ design. Further comparison shows that the set
of 16 designs obtained
from the 16 codes contain two isomorphism classes of designs: four designs
are isomorphic to $\cal{D}$=$AG_{2}(3,4)$ and 12 designs are isomorphic
to an affine resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$ design ${\cal{E}}_1$ having
full automorphism
group of order 92,160. The design ${\cal{E}}_1$ is isomorphic
to the affine resolvable design with these parameters
found by Harada, Lam, and the author as the design
supported by minimum weight codewords of symmetric net No. 20
in \cite{HLT}.
The automorphism group of ${\cal{E}}_1$ partitions its blocks into
three orbits, of length 1, 3, and 80 respectively.
The blocks from the orbit of length 80 are not good (in the sense of Definition
\ref{good}), while the blocks from the orbits of length one and three are good.
The residual design of ${\cal{E}}_1$ with respect to the fixed block (orbit of length 1),
is isomorphic to a residual design of $AG_{2}(3,4)$, hence it admits two nonisomorphic
linear embeddings:
one in $AG_{2}(3,4)$, and another in ${\cal{E}}_1$.
A residual design of ${\cal{E}}_1$ with respect to a good block $B'$ from the orbit
of length three is not isomorphic to a residual design of $AG_{2}(3,4)$.
Its subdesign ${{\cal{E}}_1}''$ consisting of all blocks of size 12
also has 32 resolutions, which split into three orbits of lengths 2, 10, and 20.
The weight distribution of the binary linear $[80,15]$ codes spanned by
the incidence matrix of
${{\cal{E}}_1}''$ is given in Table \ref{tab2}.
\begin{tab}
\label{tab2}
\end{tab}
\begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|}
\hline
$i$ & 20 & 30 & 32 & 36 & 38 & 40 & 44 & 46 & 48 & 52 & 64 \\
\hline
$A_i$ & 48 & 1024 & 610 & 6240 & 10240 & 2880 & 5760 & 5120 & 600 & 240 & 5\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{5mm}
We note that although the weight distribution in Table \ref{tab2} is different from that in Table \ref{tab1},
the number of codewords of weight 32 is again 610. Among these 610 codewords, there are 130 codewords
whose support is labeled by the blocks of a union of parallel classes of a resolution form the orbit of
length 2. The number of codewords of weight 32 whose support is labeled by a union of parallel classes
of a resolution from the orbit of length 10 or 20 is smaller than
\[ {16 \choose 2} = 120. \]
Following the procedure that we used for finding linear embeddings
of the residual design of $AG_{2}(3,4)$, an examination of the possible
choices for an additional row $y$ of weight 21 corresponding to a resolution of length 2,
establishes that in addition to ${\cal{E}}_1$, a residual design of ${\cal{E}}_1$ with respect
to a good block $B'$ from the orbit of length three can be embedded in an affine resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$
design ${\cal{E}}_2$ with full automorphism group of order 368,640, hence this design
is not isomorphic to $AG_{2}(3,4)$ or ${\cal{E}}_1$.
The design ${\cal{E}}_2$
is isomorphic to the design with the same parameters arising from net No. 36 in \cite{HLT},
as well as to the design arising from a special spread of lines in $PG(5,2)$
found by Mavron, McDonough and the author \cite{MMT}.
The automorphism group of ${\cal{E}}_2$ partitions its blocks into
two orbits, of length 80 and 4, respectively. The blocks from the long orbit are not good,
while the blocks from the orbit of length 4 are good.
A residual design of ${\cal{E}}_2$ with respect to a good block
is isomorphic to a residual design of ${\cal{E}}_1$ (with respect to a block
from the orbit of length three), hence it has two nonisomorphic linear embeddings, in
${\cal{E}}_1$ and ${\cal{E}}_2$.
The next theorem summarizes these results.
\begin{Thm}
\label{ag34}
(i) A residual design of $AG_{2}(3,4)$ admits exactly two
nonisomorphic linear embeddings over $GF(2)$: one in $AG_{2}(3,4)$, and
a second one in an affine resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$ design ${\cal{E}}_1$
of 2-rank 16 and having full automorphism group of order 92,160,
which is isomorphic to the affine resolvable design with
these parameters arising from net No. 20 in \cite{HLT}. \\
(ii) The design ${\cal{E}}_1$ has two types of good blocks.
A residual design of ${\cal{E}}_1$ with respect to a good block of the first type
is linearly embeddable over $GF(2)$ in either ${\cal{E}}_1$ or in $AG_{2}(3,4)$.
A residual design of ${\cal{E}}_1$ with respect to a good block of the second type
is linearly embeddable over $GF(2)$ in
either ${\cal{E}}_1$, or in an affine resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$ design ${\cal{E}}_2$
of 2-rank 16 and having
full automorphism group of order $368,640$, which is isomorphic to
the design with the same parameters arising from net No. 36 in \cite{HLT},
as well as to the design arising from a special spread in $PG(5,2)$
\cite{MMT}.\\
(iii) A residual design of ${\cal{E}}_2$ with respect to a good block
is linearly embeddable
over $GF(2)$ in either ${\cal{E}}_2$ or ${\cal{E}}_1$.
\end{Thm}
\begin{Rem}
{\rm
Hamada's conjecture \cite{Ha}, \cite{Ha81} states that the $p$-rank
of a design $\cal{D}$ having the same parameters as $PG_{d}(n,p^t)$ or
$AG_{d}(n,p^t)$, is greater than or equal to the $p$-rank of
$PG_{d}(n,p^t)$ or $AG_{d}(n,p^t)$ respectively, with equality if and
only if $\cal{D}$ is isomorphic to $PG_{d}(n,p^t)$ or
$AG_{d}(n,p^t)$. The $p$-ranks of $PG_{d}(n,p^t)$ and
$AG_{d}(n,p^t)$, where $p$ a prime, $t\ge 1$, and $n > d \ge 1$,
were computed by Hamada \cite{Ha}.
Two affine resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$ designs,
having the same parameters and the same 2-rank 16 as $AG_2(3,4)$,
isomorphic to
${\cal{E}}_1$ and ${\cal{E}}_2$ respectively,
were found originally by Harada, Lam and the author \cite{HLT}
as designs supported by minimum weight codewords
in binary linear codes of length 64 and dimension 16, spanned by the
$64 \times 64$ incidence matrices of resolvable 1-$(64,16,16)$ designs
whose dual designs are also resolvable, (or symmetric $(4,4)$-nets,
in the terminology of \cite{HLT} and \cite{BJL}). These two designs are the
only known
counter-examples to the "only-if" part of Hamada's conjecture
over a field of non-prime order \cite{CJT}, \cite{JT09}, \cite{T86}.
}
\end{Rem}
In view of Theorem \ref{ag34}, it will be interesting to know if
a residual design of $AG_{n-1}(n,4)$
admits more than one nonisomorphic linear embeddings over $GF(2)$
in affine resolvable designs having the parameters of $AG_{n-1}(n,4)$,
for any value of $n$ greater than 3.
If $n=4$,
the substructure ${\cal{D}}''$ of a
a residual design ${\cal{D}}_B$
with respect to a block $B$ of $AG_{3}(4,4)$
consisting of all blocks of size 48,
has 168 parallel classes and 2,097,152 resolutions.
By Hamada's formula \cite{Ha}, the 2-rank of $AG_{3}(4,4)$ is 25.
The binary linear code of length 336 and dimension 24 spanned by the rows
of the incidence matrix $M''$ of ${\cal{D}}''$
contains 10,290 codewords of weight 128, of which 2,226 codewords
have supports being a union of 32 parallel classes of the resolution of
${\cal{D}}''$ defined by the blocks of the derived design
${\cal{D}}^B$. Since
\[ 2,226 > { 64 \choose 2} = 2016, \]
a residual design of $AG_{3}(4,4)$ satisfies
the condition of Theorem \ref{t5} with strict inequality,
and may have more than one linear embedding
over $GF(2)$.
However, finding all such embeddings by using the procedure applied
to a residual design of $AG_{2}(3,4)$ seems to be computationally infeasible.
One possible way to reduce the computations and make the problem problem manageable
is by restricting the search to linear embeddings which are invariant under
a sufficiently large subgroup of the automorphism group of a residual design
of $AG_{3}(4,4)$.
\section{Affine resolvable designs as residual designs}
A 2-$(v,k,\lambda)$ design with replication number $r$
is called {\it quasi-residual} if it has the parameters of
a residual design of a symmetric 2-$(v',k',\lambda')$ design with
\[ v' =v+r, \ k' = r, \ \lambda' = \lambda, \]
or equivalently, if
\[ r=k+\lambda. \]
By this definition, every affine resolvable
2-$(q^2\mu, q\mu, \frac{q\mu -1}{q-1})$ design is quasi-residual,
and the parameters of a corresponding symmetric 2-design are
\begin{equation}
\label{ss}
v' =\frac{q^3\mu-1}{q-1}, \ k'=\frac{q^2\mu-1}{q-1}, \ \lambda'=
\frac{q\mu-1}{q-1}.
\end{equation}
An affine resolvable
2-$(q^2\mu, qm, \frac{q\mu -1}{q-1})$ design $\cal{D}$
is the residual design
of a symmetric 2-design ${\cal{D}}_1$ with parameters (\ref{ss})
if and only if
there exists a symmetric 2-$(\frac{q^2\mu-1}{q-1},\frac{q\mu-1}{q-1},
\frac{\mu-1}{q-1})$ design ${\cal{D}}_0$ (S. S. Shrikhande \cite{SSS},
\cite[Corollary 5.4.9, page 178]{IS}).
A symmetric design with parameters (\ref{ss}) having $\cal{D}$
as a residual design is obtained by adding a block $B$ consisting of
$(q^2\mu-1)/(q-1)$ new points, being the points of
${\cal{D}}_0$, choosing a bijection $\phi$ between the
parallel classes of $\cal{D}$ and the blocks
of ${\cal{D}}_0$,
and extending the $q$ blocks from any parallel class $P$
with the points of the block $\phi(P)$ of ${\cal{D}}_0$.
By this construction, the derived design of ${\cal{D}}_1$
with respect to the block $B$ is a
2-$(\frac{q^2\mu-1}{q-1},\frac{q\mu-1}{q-1}, q\frac{\mu-1}{q-1})$ design,
being a union of $q$ identical copies of
${\cal{D}}_0$. In the terminology of \cite{IS}, ${\cal{D}}_0$ is a
{\it normal} subdesign of ${\cal{D}}_1$.
\begin{Def}
\label{def3}
{\rm
We call a block $B$ of a symmetric 2-design ${\cal{D}}_1$
with parameters (\ref{ss}) {\it normal} (cf. \cite[XII.5]{BJL})
if the derived design of ${\cal{D}}_1$ with respect to $B$ is
a union of $q$ identical copies of a symmetric
2-$(\frac{q^2\mu-1}{q-1},\frac{q\mu-1}{q-1}, q\frac{\mu-1}{q-1})$ design.
}
\end{Def}
An example of a symmetric design with all blocks being normal
is $PG_{n-1}(n,q)$, $n\ge 3$. In this case, any derived design
is a union of $q$ identical copies of a design isomorphic to
$PG_{n-2}(n-1,q)$, and any residual design is isomorphic to $AG_{n-1}(n,q)$.
\begin{Lem}
\label{lem1}
Let $q=p^t$, where $p$ is a prime, and let
${\cal D}$ be an affine resolvable 2-$(q^n, q^{n-1}, (q^{n-1}-1)/(q-1))$
design with $n\ge 2$ and a point by block incidence matrix $A$.
The design ${\cal D}$ is linearly embeddable over $GF(p)$
as a residual design in a symmetric
2-$((q^{n+1}-1)/(q-1), (q^n -1)/(q-1), (q^{n-1}/(q-1))$ design
${\cal{D}}_1$ if and only if the rows of a point by block incidence matrix
$A_1$ of ${\cal{D}}_1$ are codewords in the linear code over $GF(p)$ being
the row space of the matrix (\ref{mat}).
\begin{equation}
\label{mat}
\left(\begin{array}{cccc} & & & 0\\
&&& \cdot \\
& A & & \cdot \\
&&& \cdot \\
1 & \ldots & 1 & 1
\end{array}
\right). \end{equation}
\end{Lem}
{\bf Proof}. Since every column of $A_1$ contains
\[ \frac{q^n -1}{q-1}=q^{n-1}+\ldots + q +1 \equiv 1 \ {\pmod p}, \]
the rows space of $A_1$ contains
the all-one vector $(1,1,\ldots 1)$, which is also the last row of (\ref{mat}).
$\Box$
We now apply Lemma \ref{lem1} to the affine resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$ designs
${\cal{E}}_1$ and ${\cal{E}}_2$ of 2-rank 16 discussed in Section \ref{sec5}.
If $A$ is the incidence matrix of ${\cal{E}}_1$ or ${\cal{E}}_2$,
then the row space of (\ref{mat}) over $GF(2)$ is a binary linear code of length 85
and dimension 17 which contains exactly 69 codewords (thus, less that 85)
of weight 21. This implies the following.
\begin{Thm}
\label{6-3}
The affine resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$ designs
${\cal{E}}_1$ and ${\cal{E}}_2$ do not admit any linear embedding
over $GF(2)$ in a symmetric 2-$(85,21,5)$ design.
Consequently, any symmetric 2-$(85,21,5)$ design having ${\cal{E}}_1$
or ${\cal{E}}_2$ as a residual design, must have 2-rank greater that 17,
which is the 2-rank of $PG_2(3,4)$.
\end{Thm}
\begin{Thm}
\label{t}
Let $q=p^t$, where $p$ is a prime. The classical affine resolvable design
$AG_{n-1}(n,2)$, $n\ge 2$, admits a unique linear embedding over $GF(p)$ in
$PG_{n-1}(n,q)$.
\end{Thm}
{\bf Proof}. The statement follows from Lemma \ref{lem1}, Theorem \ref{t4},
and the fact that the $p$-ary code spanned by an incidence matrix of
$PG_{n-1}(n,p^t)$ is of minimum weight $(q^n -1)/(q-1)$, and
by the restricted Johnson bound \cite[2.3.1]{HP}, \cite[2.4.2]{T88} , this code
cannot contain more than $(q^{n+1} -1)/(q-1)$ $(0,1)$-codewords of minimum
weight. $\Box$
The following statement is an analogue of Theorem \ref{t5}
and gives a necessary condition for linear embeddability of affine
resolvable designs.
\begin{Thm}
\label{t-af}
Let $\cal{D}$ be an affine resolvable 2-$(q^n, q^{n-1}, (q^{n-1}-1)/(q-1))$ design, $n\ge 2$,
where $q=p^t \ge 4$, and $p$ is a prime.
If $\cal{D}$ is linearly embeddable
over $GF(p)$ as a residual design in a symmetric 2-$((q^{n+1}-1)/(q-1), (q^{n}-1)/(q-1), (q^{n-1}-1)/(q-1))$
design with respect to a normal block, then the linear code over $GF(p)$ spanned by the rows
of the point-by-block incidence matrix of $\cal{D}$ contains at least
\[ (p-1){ \frac{q^n -1}{q-1} \choose 2} \]
codewords of weight $2q^{q-1}$ whose supports are unions of parallel classes of $\cal{D}$.
\end{Thm}
The proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{t5}, so we omit it.\\
A quick computer check shows that the binary code of length 84 and dimension 16
spanned by the incidence matrix of $AG_{2}(3,4)$
contains exactly
\[ 210 = { 21 \choose 2} \]
codewords of weight 32 whose supports are unions of parallel classes,
while the binary codes spanned by the incidence matrices of the affine resolvable 2-$(64,16,5)$ designs
${\cal{E}}_1$ and ${\cal{E}}_2$ contain only 130 such codewords. This provides another proof
of Theorem \ref{6-3}.
\section{ Acknowledgments}
The author thanks Dieter Jungnickel for reading a preliminary version
of this paper and making several useful remarks.
This research was supported by NSA Grant H98230-16-1-0011.
|
\section{Introduction}
Models of composite dynamics are often employed to extend the Standard Model (SM) in order to replace the Higgs sector, to describe dark matter or both.
While most of the phenomenological analyses of composite dynamics such as the ones for the composite Higgs are carried out by means of the effective Lagrangian approach, here we determine long sought spectral quantities from the most minimal ultraviolet template theory \cite{Cacciapaglia:2014uja}.
Depending on how the model is embedded into the SM, it interpolates between a technicolor model \cite{Weinberg:1975gm,Susskind:1978ms} and composite Goldstone boson Higgs \cite{Kaplan:1983fs,Kaplan:1983sm} one. The model can be further extended \cite{Cacciapaglia:2015yra}, without introducing elementary scalars, to generate four-fermion interactions able to give mass to the top quark. Partial compositeness \cite{Kaplan:1991dc} is yet another way to generate masses for SM fermions. Large anomalous dimensions of the composite technibaryons (if stemming from purely fermionic fields) are invoked. These are, however, hard to achieve ~\cite{Pica:2016rmv}. One also needs further model building to connect composite baryons to SM fermions. Following reference \cite{Sannino:2016sfx} one can bypass these hurdles by introducing besides technifermions also techniscalars. If one insists on more involved constructions, to generate SM fermion masses, featuring only technifermions then the techniscalars can be viewed as intermediate composite states. The theory template investigated here is again integral part of a key model investigated in \cite{Sannino:2016sfx}.
The physical Higgs boson is furthermore a mixture of one Goldstone boson and of the lightest scalar excitation, analogue to the $\sigma$ meson in QCD, of the underlying strongly coupled theory.
With the currently available constraints, such a model is compatible with experiments~\cite{Arbey:2015exa}.
We will now use numerical simulations of lattice gauge theories to study the non-perturbative dynamics of such strongly interacting models and provide first-principles predictions on the spectrum and low energy constants of the theory.
The main goal of the present work is to determine, using lattice calculations, bounds on the lightest (pseudo) scalar excitations of the $SU(2)$ gauge theory with $N_f=2$ flavors of Dirac fermions in the fundamental representation, in isolation from the SM.
Computing the lightest scalar state is notoriously difficult because of the large disconnected contributions to the relevant two point functions, which are extremely challenging to estimate accurately, and because such a state is expected to be a broad resonance decaying into two Goldstone bosons in the chiral limit.
It is worth noticing that the properties of the scalar resonance of the strong theory in isolation are not preserved in the full Beyond SM model, due to the many corrections from interactions with the SM gauge bosons and heavy fermions. The mass of the scalar resonance can, for example, become lighter due to the SM interactions \cite{Foadi:2012bb} and consequently narrower for kinematical reasons.
The scalar sector of strongly interacting theories have been studied in others gauge theories \cite{Aoki:2013zsa,Aoki:2014oha,Fodor:2015vwa}, but our preliminary results constitute a primer for the important theory investigated here.
We also provide results on the mass of the pseudoscalar singlet state, the $\eta'$ meson, which is not a Goldstone boson due to the axial anomaly.
{Such a state, once coupled to the SM fields, decays into two photons \cite{Molinaro:2015cwg,Molinaro:2016oix} allowing it to be tested at colliders \cite{Molinaro:2016oix}.}
The theory we consider has previously been studied on the lattice and, in particular, it has been shown that the expected pattern of spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking is realized~\cite{Lewis:2011zb}. An estimate of the masses of the vector and axial-vector mesons in unit of the pseudoscalar meson decay constant have been obtained in~\cite{Hietanen:2014xca}. The scattering properties of the Goldstone bosons of the theory have also been considered~\cite{Arthur:2014zda}, and the model has also been investigated in the context of possible DM candidates~\cite{Hietanen:2013fya,Drach:2015epq,Hochberg:2014kqa,Hansen:2015yaa}.
The paper is organized as follows. We describe in section \ref{sec:techniques} the techniques used in this work for the extraction of the scalar and pseudoscalar mass spectrum and present in section \ref{sec:results} our numerical results. We finally conclude in section \ref{sec:conclusions}.
\section{Lattice techniques}\label{sec:techniques}
We simulate the $SU(2)$ gauge theory with two Dirac fermions in the fundamental representation discretized using the Wilson action for two mass-degenerate fermions $u$, $d$ and the Wilson plaquette action for the gauge fields.
The numerical simulations have been performed using an improved version of the HiRep code first described in Ref.~\cite{DelDebbio:2008zf}.
We use the scale setting and the determination of renormalization constant obtained in \cite{Arthur:2016dir}. For convenience, we summarize the subset of ensembles used in this work in \tab{table:sim_params}. Even if the flavour symmetry group is $Sp(4)$, we will use the $SU(2)_V$ terminology and thus use the notion of isospin throughout this work. In this work we will focus on fermionic interpolating field operators.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
$\beta$ & Volume & $a m_0$ \\
\hline
\hline
1.8 & $16^3\times32$~~ & -1.00, -1.089, -1.12, -1.14,
-0.15 \\
1.8 & $32^3\times32$~~ & -1.155 -1.557\\
\hline
2.0 & $16^3\times32$~~ & -0.85, -0.9, -0.94,
-0.945 \\
2.0 & $32^4$ & -0.947, -0.949, -0.-952,-0.957,-0.958 \\
\hline
2.2 & $16^3\times32$ & -0.60, -0.65, -0.68
-0.70 \\
2.2 & $32^4$ & -0.72,-0.735, -0.75 \\
2.2 & $48^4$ & -0.76 \\
\hline
2.3 & $32^4$ & -0.575,-0.60,-0.625,-0.65,-0.675, -0.685 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of the bare parameters for the numerical simulations used in this work.\label{table:sim_params}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Two-point functions}
We define the following interpolating operators:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal O}_{\overline{q}q}^{(\Gamma,\pm)}(x) &=& \overline{u}(x)\Gamma u(x) \pm \overline{d}(x)\Gamma d(x) \,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Gamma$ denotes any product of Dirac matrices.
We extract the meson masses from zero-momentum two-point correlation functions:
\begin{align}
C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\pm}(t)
& = -\frac{1}{N_f L^3}\sum_{\vec x,\vec x_0} \left\langle {\cal O}_{\overline{q}q}^{(\Gamma,\pm)\dagger}(t,\vec x\,) {\cal O}_{\overline{q}q}^{(\Gamma,\pm)}(t_0,x_0) \right\rangle.
\end{align}
Denoting the quark propagator $S(x,y)$, the Wick contractions read
\begin{align}
C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,-}(t)& = \frac{1}{L^3} \sum_{\vec x,\vec x_0} \langle \tr{S(x,x_0) \Gamma S(x_0,x)\Gamma} \rangle\, ,
\end{align}
for the iso-vector channel and
\begin{align}
C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,+}(t)& = C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,-}(t) - \frac{N_f}{L^3} \sum_{\vec x,\vec x_0} \langle \tr{S(x,x) \Gamma}^\ast \tr{S(x_0,x_0)\Gamma} \rangle \, ,
\end{align}
for the iso-scalar channel.
Note that the overall sign has been chosen such that $C^{(t_0)}_{\gamma_5,-}(t) > 0$. For convenience, we also define the so-called disconnected contribution as:
\begin{align}\label{eq:Cdisc}
C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t) & =C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,+}(t) - C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,-}(t) = - \frac{N_f}{L^3} \sum_{\vec x,\vec x_0} \langle \tr{S(x,x) \Gamma}^\ast \tr{S(x_0,x_0)\Gamma} \rangle \, .
\end{align}
Next we define the vacuum subtracted disconnected contribution as:
\begin{align}
C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\rm disc, \rm sub}(t) = C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t) + \frac{N_f}{ L^3}\sum_{\vec x,\vec x_0} \left\langle {\cal O}_{\overline{q}q}^{(\Gamma,+)}(t,\vec x) \right\rangle^\dagger \left\langle {\cal O}_{\overline{q}q}^{(\Gamma,+)}(t_0,x_0) \right\rangle\, ,
\end{align}
and the time source averaged disconnected contribution as:
\begin{align}
C^{\rm av.}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t)= \frac{1}{T} \sum_{t_0} C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\rm disc,\rm sub}(t+t_0)\, .
\end{align}
The full correlator is defined as:
\begin{align}
C^{(t_0,\rm full)}_{\Gamma,+}(t) = C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,-}(t) + C^{\rm av.}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t)\, .
\end{align}
Finally we introduce one last function:
\begin{align}\label{eq:Copt}
C^{(t_0,\rm opt.)}_{\Gamma,+}(t) = A_{\Gamma,-}\cosh\left[m_{\Gamma,-} \left(\frac{T}{2} - t\right)\right] + C^{\rm av.}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t)\, ,
\end{align}
where $A_{\Gamma,-}$ and $m_{\Gamma,-}$ are obtained by fitting the connected correlator on a given range. This ``optimized'' connected part of the correlator, can be used to build an improved estimator of the full correlator. This can be help to remove excited states contributions if only the connected contribution receives a significant contribution from excited states. This idea has been introduced in \cite{Neff:2001zr}, and applied in the context of $\eta/\eta'$ mass determination in \cite{Jansen:2008wv,Michael:2013gka,Ottnad:2015hva}.
We use $Z_2\times Z_2$ single time slice stochastic sources~\cite{Boyle:2008rh} to estimate the connected part of meson 2-point correlators. We describe in section~\ref{subsec:disc} how the disconnected contribution is estimated.
\subsection{Effective masses}
We define an effective mass $m^{(\Gamma,\pm)}_{\rm{eff}}(t)$ as in~\cite{DelDebbio:2007pz,Bursa:2011ru} by the solution of the implicit equation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:meff}
\frac{C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\pm}(t-1)}{C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\pm}(t)} = \frac{e^{-m^{(\Gamma,\pm)}_{\rm{eff}}(t)(T-(t-1))} + e^{-m^{(\Gamma,\pm)}_{\rm{eff}}(t) (t-1)}}{e^{ -m^{(\Gamma,\pm)}_{\rm{eff}}(t)(T-t)} + e^{-m^{(\Gamma,\pm)}_{\rm{eff}}(t) t }}\, ,
\end{equation}
where $T$ is lattice temporal extent. At large euclidean time $t$, $m^{(\Gamma,\pm)}_{\rm{eff}}(t)$ approaches the value of the mass of the lightest state with the same quantum numbers as the operator ${\cal O}_{\overline{q}q}^{(\Gamma),\pm}$. In the follwowing we will use $ C^{(t_0,\rm full)}_{\Gamma,+}$ in \eq{eq:meff}. If instead $ C^{(t_0,\rm opt.)}_{\Gamma,+}$ is used we will denote the effective mass $m^{(\Gamma,\rm opt.)}_{\rm{eff}}(t)$.
If $m^{(-)} < m^{(+)}$ and $T$ large enough, it is clear from \eq{eq:Cdisc} that $-\log C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t) \underset{t\to\infty}{=} m^{(\Gamma,+)} $ and therefore
\begin{align}
m^{(\Gamma,\pm)}_{\rm eff,\rm disc}(t) \equiv -\log \frac{C^{\rm av.}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t)}{C^{\rm av.}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t-1)} \underset{t\to\infty}{=} m^{(\Gamma,+)} \, .
\end{align}
In the following we will be interested in the case $\Gamma=\mathds{1}$ and $\Gamma=\gamma_5$. We will denote $m^{(\mathds{1},+)}\equiv m_\sigma$, $m^{(\mathds{1},-)}\equiv m_{a_0}$, $m^{(\gamma_5,-)}\equiv m_{\rm{PS}}$ and $m^{(\gamma_5,+)}\equiv m_{\eta'}$.
\subsection{Estimate of disconnected contributions}\label{subsec:disc}
By introducing a set of stochastic volume sources $\xi(x)_{i=1,\dots,N_{\rm hits}}$ and defining $\phi_i = D^{-1} \xi_i$, it is straightforward to build a stochastic estimator of $L^{(\Gamma)}(t)=\sum_{\vec x}\tr{S(x,x) \Gamma}$ :
\begin{align}
L^{(\Gamma)}_i(t) = \sum_{\vec x}\tr{\xi^\dagger_i(x) \Gamma \phi_i(x)}.
\end{align}
As $N_{\rm hits}\rightarrow\infty$, we have:
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{N_{\rm hits}}\sum^{N_{\rm hits}}_{i=1} L^{(\Gamma)}_i(t) = L^{(\Gamma)}(t) + {\mathcal O}\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{N_{\rm hits}}}\right)\, .
\end{align}
We can then build an unbiased estimator of $C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t)$ as follows:
\begin{align}
C^{(t_0)}_{\Gamma,\rm disc}(t) & \underset{N_{\rm hits} \to \infty} {=} -\frac{N_f}{(N_{\rm hits}/2)^2L^3} \Bigg\langle \sum^{i=N_{\rm hits}/2}_{i=1}\sum^{j=N_{\rm hits}}_{j=N_{\rm hits}/2+1}L^{(\Gamma)\dagger}_i(t)L^{(\Gamma)}_j(t_0) \Bigg\rangle\, ,
\end{align}
from which it is straightforward to obtain an unbiased estimator of $C^{(t_0,\rm full)}_{\Gamma,+}(t)$.
The number $N_{\rm hits}$ of random sources, or ``hits'', necessary to reduce stochastic noise at the same level or below the gauge average noise depends on the volume, the fermion mass, the lattice spacing and of the number of configuration used.
In practice we find that $N_{\rm hits}=64$ works well for all our ensembles.
\section{Results}\label{sec:results}
\subsection{Effective masses}
We illustrate in \figs{fig:meff_s_b20_958},~\ref{fig:meff_s_b22_75},~\ref{fig:meff_g5_b20_958} and~\ref{fig:meff_g5_b22_76} a few examples representative of the quality of the signals we obtain on our most chiral ensembles for two values of the lattice spacing. We plot the effective masses $m^{(\Gamma,-)}_{\rm{eff}}(t)$, $m^{(\Gamma,+)}_{\rm{eff}}(t)$, $m^{(\Gamma,\rm opt.)}_{\rm{eff}}(t)$ for $\Gamma=\mathds{1}$ and $\gamma_5$. In the figures, the one and two pions mass thresholds are shown by dotted horizontal lines.
As for all our ensembles $m_{a_0} > m_\sigma$, we also show $m^{(\mathds{1},+)}_{\rm eff,\rm disc}(t)$ in the case of the scalar operator.
We observe short plateaux before the signal becomes dominated by noise.
For all our ensembles, the masses are always extracted by performing single exponential fits to the full correlators on a range $[t_1/a,t_2/a]$ where $t_2/a$ is set by the last timeslice where the effective mass is well-defined. We then choose by inspection the value of $t_1/a$ for each ensemble.
We show in the figures the mass, its error, and the fitting range obtained from this fit as horizontal lines.
Note that $m^{(\Gamma,\rm opt.)}_{\rm{eff}}(t)$ and $m^{(\mathds{1},+)}_{\rm eff,\rm disc}(t)$ are only shown for comparison and used as a consistency check.
The number of thermalized configurations used in each case are reported in the caption of the figures.
In the scalar channel, we observe that the signal is significantly better for the coarser lattice ($\beta=2.0$) and that the signal over noise ratio improves when $m_{\rm{PS}}$ is decreased.
Note that in the scalar channel we disregarded the $m_0=-0.76$ ensemble because the signal is too short with our current statistic.
In the case of the $\eta'$ meson, we find that at our lighter quark masses the signal clearly depart from the value of the pseudo-Goldstone boson mass $m_{\rm{PS}}$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./Figures/meff_scalar_b20_m958_L32_Nsrc64_stat_disc2200_stat_conn2199.eps}
\caption{Effective masses of the iso-vector and iso-scalar scalar operator ($\beta=2.0$, $m_0=0.958$, $L=32$). The disconnected part has been measured on 2200 configurations.}
\label{fig:meff_s_b20_958}
\end{minipage}%
\hspace*{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./Figures/meff_scalar_b22_m75_L32_Nsrc64_stat_disc1850_stat_conn1964.eps}
\caption{Effective masses of the iso-vector and iso-scalar scalar operator ($\beta=2.2$, $m_0=0.75$, $L=32$). The disconnected part has been measured on 1850 configurations.)}
\label{fig:meff_s_b22_75}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./Figures/meff_eta_b20_m958_L32_Nsrc64_stat_disc2200_stat_conn2199.eps}
\caption{Effective masses of the iso-vector and iso-scalar pseudoscalar operator ($\beta=2.0$, $m_0=0.958$, $L=32$). The disconnected part has been measured on 2200 configurations.}
\label{fig:meff_g5_b20_958}
\end{minipage}%
\hspace*{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./Figures/meff_eta_b22_m76_L48_Nsrc64_stat_disc1137_stat_conn909.eps}
\caption{Effective masses of the iso-vector and iso-scalar pseudoscalar operator ($\beta=2.2$, $m_0=0.76$,$L=48$). The disconnected part has been measured on 909 configurations.}
\label{fig:meff_g5_b22_76}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./Figures/w0ms_vs_w0mps2_all.ps}
\caption{ Combined chiral and continuum extrapolation of the
scalar iso-scalar meson mass $\sigma$. Two pion threshold is depicted by a blue dotted line}
\label{fig:xfit_sigma}
\end{minipage}%
\hspace*{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./Figures/w0meta_vs_w0mps2_all.ps}
\caption{Combined chiral and continuum extrapolation of the
pseudoscalar iso-scalar meson mass $\eta'$.}
\label{fig:xfit_eta}
\end{minipage}%
\hspace*{0.5cm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Chiral and continuum extrapolation}
In this section we present the chiral and continuum extrapolation of the $\sigma,\eta'$ and $a_0$ meson masses. All the masses are expressed in units of the scale $w_0^\chi$, as determined in \cite{Arthur:2016dir}, and expressed as functions of $(w^\chi_0 m_{\rm{PS}})^2$.
The chiral and continuum extrapolation are carried out by using the same strategy as in~\cite{Arthur:2016dir}. For each quantity we perform a global fit, including all the available data, to the following fit ans\"atz:
\begin{equation}
w_0^\chi m_X = w_0^\chi m_X^\chi + A (w_0^\chi m_{\rm{PS}})^2 + B (w_0^\chi
m_{\rm{PS}})^4 + C \frac{a}{w_0}\, .\label{eq:heavyans}
\end{equation}
The results of the fits for the $\sigma$, $\eta'$ and $a_0$ mesons are shown in \figs{fig:xfit_sigma}, \ref{fig:xfit_eta} and \ref{fig:xfit_a0} respectively and reported in \tab{tab:mX}. In the plots, the gray band indicate the $1\sigma$ confidence region for the continuum prediction, obtained by setting $a=0$ with our best fit parameters. To give an idea of the fit quality we also plot the best fit curves at finite lattice spacing using the same color code as for the data points.
The upper limit of the fitting range for each channel is shown by the vertical dashed-dotted line in the plots.
In the scalar channels, we draw the threshold of the decay into Goldstone bosons by a blue dashed line. In the case of the $\sigma$ meson we thus show that all our results lie below the two Goldstone boson mass threshold.
In the case of the $a_0$, we have checked that finite volume effects are not significant on three different volumes ($L/a=16,24,32$) at $\beta=2.2$ and $m_0=-0.75$. Since the estimate of the mass of the $a_0$ does not require the estimate of any disconnected loops contribution, we are able to obtain a signal on all data sets and thus include four lattice spacings in the extrapolation.
However in the case, we observe that some of our data points lie above the 3 Goldstone boson mass threshold. For this reason, we also consider a fit which excludes the data points above threshold, which is shown in \fig{fig:xfit_a0_restrict}.
For the $\sigma$ and $\eta'$ channels we also considered constrained fits with fixed $B=0$ in \eq{eq:heavyans}. The corresponding results are also reported in \tab{tab:mX} and are compatible with the results obtained assuming $B\neq 0$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./Figures/w0ma0_vs_w0mps2_all.ps}
\caption{Combined chiral and continuum extrapolation of the scalar iso-vector meson mass $a_0$ using data at for four lattice spacings. The grey band is our result for the continuum extrapolation and its 1-$\sigma$ confidence region. Data above three pion threshold are included.}
\label{fig:xfit_a0}
\end{minipage}%
\hspace*{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./Figures/w0ma0_vs_w0mps2_restrict_threshold.ps}
\caption{Combined chiral and continuum extrapolation of the scalar iso-vector meson mass $a_0$ using data at for four lattice spacings. The grey band is our result for the continuum extrapolation and its 1-$\sigma$ confidence region. Data above three pion threshold are excluded.}
\label{fig:xfit_a0_restrict}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
We observe that, within our statistical errors, only the $a_0$ suffers from significant discretization errors.
We take as our final estimates for the scalar meson masses, the results of the fit excluding data above threshold for the $a_0$ channel and the fits of \tab{tab:mX} for the $\sigma$ and $\eta'$.
We find $w^{\chi}_0m_{a_0}= 1.3(3)$, $w^{\chi}_0m_\sigma=1.5(6)$ and $w^{\chi}_0 m_{\eta'} = 1.0(3)$.
By using $w^{\chi}_0F_{\rm{PS}}=0.078(13)$ from \cite{Arthur:2016dir}, our results can be rewritten in units of $F_{\rm{PS}}$: $m_{a_0}/F_{\rm{PS}}= 16.7(4.9)$, $m_\sigma/F_{\rm{PS}}=19.2(10.8)$ and $m_{\eta'}/F_{\rm{PS}} = 12.8(4.7)$.
For comparison in \cite{Arthur:2016dir}, we found $ m_V/F_{\rm{PS}}=13.1(2.2)$ and $ m_A/F_{\rm{PS}}=14.5(3.6)$.
\begin{table}[h!]
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
\hline\hline
coef. & $a_0$ & $a_0$ & $\sigma$ & $\eta'$ & $\sigma$ & $\eta'$ \\
\hline
type & all & excluding data above threshold & all & all & all, $B=0$ & all, $B=0$\\
\hline
$w^{\chi}_0 m_X$ & 1.4(2) & 1.3(3) &1.5(6) & 1.0(3) & 1.4(6) & 1.0(3) \\
$A$ & 0.34(8) & 0.4(1) &0.34(7) & 0.2(1) & 0.22(4) & 0.32(3) \\
$B$ & -0.00(1) & -0.01(1) &-0.016(8) & 0.00(2) & - & - \\
$C$ & 3.3(4) & 2.8(6) &-2(1) & -0.4(8) & -1(1) & -0.5(8) \\
$\chi^2/$ndof & 32.06908 / 22 & 13.69283 / 11 &24.97117 / 5 & 12.59433 / 6& 29.69268 / 6 & 13.37 / 7 \\
cut & 8 &8 & 12 & 6 & 12 & 6 \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results of the polynomial fits. The cut is in unit of $(w^{\chi}_0 m_{\rm{PS}})^2$ an the upper limit of the fitting range
d. The two last columns show the polynomial fit results assuming $B=0$ \label{tab:mX}}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{./Figures/spectrum_comparison.ps}
\caption{ Comparison of spectrum of QCD ($N_f=2$) with our current
results. We use the notation $I(J^P)$ to label states. Note that our current results suffer from uncontrolled
systematic effects which could affect our predictions. Box sizes
show our error neglecting error on $F_{\rm{PS}}$. The QCD result are
taken from experiments (at the physical value of the pion mass)
except for the $\eta'$ where we took the central value of a
$N_f=2$ lattice calculation (denoted
$\eta_2$)\cite{Jansen:2008wv}. The error on the QCD sigma pole mass
is shown by a light blue band. Note that while in two flavour QCD
every $I=1$ state is triply degenerate, in our case $I=1$ states correspond to five degenerate states. }
\label{fig:spectrum}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusions}
We have presented a determination of the spectrum of the low lying scalar mesons (iso-triplet and iso-singlet) as well as of the $\eta'$ for the SU(2) gauge theory with $N_f=2$ fundamental Dirac fermions.
The results are obtained via numerical lattice simulations by using fermionic interpolating operators for the extraction of mass spectrum and include contributions from the disconnected diagrams.
As expected, the results for the $\sigma$ and $\eta'$ channels receive large contribution from the disconnected part, have an exponentially decreasing signal over noise ratio at large euclidean separations and we observe short plateaux.
Our calculation clearly shows that the $\sigma$ and $a_0$ are stable for most of our ensembles, which provides an {\textit a posteriori} justification of method used to extract the masses of these states in our current setup.
At lower quark mass, it will become necessary to consider the two pion scattering process.
While we observe large discretization effects by using four lattice spacings for the $a_0$, we do not observe any significant cut off effects for the $\sigma$ and $\eta'$ with two lattice spacings.
Note that in the range of quark masses explored by our simulations the measured $m_\sigma$ and $m_{\eta'}$ are stable resonances and in most cases this is also the case for the $a_0$.
Assuming that the behaviour of their mass as a function of the $m_{\rm{PS}}$ is not significantly modified below their respective thresholds, we predict the mass of these states by a polynomial extrapolation to the chiral limit.
We find $w^{\chi}_0m_{a_0}= 1.3(3)$, $w^{\chi}_0m_\sigma=1.5(6)$ and $w^{\chi}_0 m_{\eta'} = 1.0(3)$.
In units of $F_{\rm{PS}}$ the results then read: $m_{a_0}/F_{\rm{PS}}= 16.7(4.9)$, $m_\sigma/F_{\rm{PS}}=19.2(10.8)$ and
$m_{\eta'}/F_{\rm{PS}} = 12.8(4.7)$ using that $w^{\chi}_0F_{\rm{PS}}=0.078(13)$.
For comparison we find $ m_V/F_{\rm{PS}}=13.1(2.2)$ and $ m_A/F_{\rm{PS}}=14.5(3.6)$.
For illustrative purposes, we compare in \fig{fig:spectrum}, the low-lying spectrum for $SU(3)$ and $SU(2)$ gauge theories with two fundamental flavors in unit of $F_{\rm{PS}}$. Within our current accuracy, we find that the spectrum is significantly different.
More numerical simulations are required to better control all systematics and to improve the precision of our findings.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by the Danish National Research Foundation DNRF:90 grant and by a Lundbeck Foundation Fellowship grant. The computing facilities were provided by the Danish Centre for Scientific Computing and the DeIC national HPC center at SDU.
We acknowledge PRACE for awarding us access to resource MareNostrum based in Barcelona, Spain. We thank the Mainz Institute for Theoretical Physics (MITP) for its kind hospitality and support during the meeting \textit{Composite Dynamics: From Lattice to the LHC Run II}, 4-15 April 2016, where part of that work was finalized.
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction}
Decomposing a complicated system into its constituent parts---reductionism---is
one of science's most powerful strategies for analysis and understanding.
Large-scale systems with linearly coupled components give one paradigm of this
success. Each can be decomposed into an equivalent system of independent
elements using a similarity transformation calculated by the linear algebra of
the system's eigenvalues and eigenvectors. The physics of linear wave
phenomena, whether of classical light or quantum mechanical amplitudes, sets
the standard of complete reduction rather high. The dynamics is captured by an
``operator'' whose allowed or exhibited ``modes'' are the elementary behaviors
out of which composite behaviors are constructed by simply weighing each mode's
contribution and adding them up.
However, one should not reduce a composite system more than is necessary nor,
as is increasingly appreciated these days, more than one, in fact, can. Indeed,
we live in a complex, nonlinear world whose constituents are strongly
interacting. Often their key structures and memoryful behaviors emerge only
over space and time. These are the complex systems. Yet, perhaps surprisingly,
many complex systems with nonlinear dynamics correspond to linear operators in
abstract high-dimensional spaces~\cite{Koop31, Gasp95, Budi12}. And so, there
is a sense in which even these complex systems can be reduced to the study of
independent nonlocal collective modes.
Reductionism, however, faces its own challenges even within its paradigmatic
setting of linear systems: linear operators may have interdependent modes with
irreducibly entwined behaviors. These irreducible components correspond to
so-called nondiagonalizable subspaces. No similarity transformation can reduce
them.
In this view, reductionism can only ever be a guide. The actual goal is to
achieve a happy medium, as Einstein reminds us, of decomposing a system only to
that level at which the parts are irreducible.
To proceed, though, begs the
original question, What happens when reductionism fails? To answer this
requires revisiting one of its more successful implementations, spectral
decomposition of completely reducible operators.
\subsection{Spectral Decomposition}
\label{sec:SpecDecompReview}
Spectral decomposition---splitting a linear operator into independent modes of
simple behavior---has greatly accelerated progress in the physical sciences.
The impact stems from the fact that spectral decomposition is not only a
powerful mathematical tool for expressing the organization of large-scale
systems, but also yields predictive theories with directly observable physical
consequences~\cite{Tref11}. Quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics
identify the energy eigenvalues of Hamiltonians as the basic objects in
thermodynamics: transitions among the energy eigenstates yield heat and work.
The spectrum of eigenvalues reveals itself most directly in other kinds of
spectra, such as the frequency spectra of light emitted by the gases that
permeate the galactic filaments of our universe~\cite{Sand76}. Quantized
transitions, an initially mystifying feature of atomic-scale systems,
correspond to distinct eigenvectors and discrete spacing between eigenvalues.
The corresponding theory of spectral decomposition established the quantitative
foundation of quantum mechanics.
The applications and discoveries enabled by spectral decomposition and the
corresponding spectral theory fill a long list. In application, direct-bandgap
semiconducting materials can be turned into light-emitting diodes (LEDs) or
lasers by engineering the spatially-inhomogeneous distribution of energy
eigenvalues and the occupation of their corresponding states~\cite{Miln86}.
Before their experimental discovery, anti-particles were anticipated
as the nonoccupancy of negative-energy eigenstates of the Dirac
Hamiltonian~\cite{Dira33a}.
The spectral theory, though, extends far beyond physical science disciplines.
In large measure, this arises since the evolution of any object corresponds to
a linear dynamic in a sufficiently high-dimensional state space. Even nominally
nonlinear dynamics over several variables, the canonical mechanism of
deterministic chaos, appear as linear dynamics in appropriate
infinite-dimensional shift-spaces~\cite{Budi12}. A nondynamic version of
rendering nonlinearities into linearities in a higher-dimensional feature space
is exploited with much success today in machine learning by support vector
machines, for example~\cite{Cort95}. Spectral decomposition often allows a
problem to be simplified by approximations that use only the dominant
contributing modes. Indeed, human-face recognition can be efficiently
accomplished using a small basis of ``eigenfaces''~\cite{Siro87}.
Certainly, there are many applications that highlight the importance of
decomposition and the spectral theory of operators. However, a brief reflection
on the mathematical history will give better context to its precise results,
associated assumptions, and, more to the point, the generalizations we develop
here in hopes of advancing the analysis and understanding of complex systems.
Following on early developments of operator theory by Hilbert and
co-workers~\cite{Cour53}, the \emph{spectral theorem for normal operators}
reached maturity under von Neumann by the early 1930s~\cite{Neum30,Neum55}. It
became the mathematical backbone of much progress in physics since then, from
classical partial differential equations to quantum physics. Normal operators,
by definition, commute with their Hermitian conjugate: $A^\dagger A = A
A^\dagger$. Examples include symmetric and orthogonal matrices in classical
mechanics and Hermitian, skew-Hermitian, and unitary operators in quantum
mechanics.
The spectral theorem itself is often identified as a collection of
related results about normal operators; see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{Hass99a}. In the
case of finite-dimensional vector spaces \cite{Halm58a}, the spectral theorem
asserts that normal operators are diagonalizable and can always be diagonalized
by a unitary transformation; that left and right eigenvectors (or
eigenfunctions) are simply related by complex-conjugate transpose; that these
eigenvectors form a complete basis; and that functions of a normal operator
reduce to the action of the function on each eigenvalue. Most of these
qualities survive with only moderate provisos in the infinite-dimensional case.
In short, the spectral theorem makes physics governed by normal operators
tractable.
The spectral theorem, though, appears powerless when faced with nonnormal and
nondiagonalizable operators. What then are we to do when confronted, say, by
complex interconnected systems with nonunitary time evolution, by open systems,
by structures that emerge on space and time scales different from the equations
of motion, or by other frontiers of physics governed by nonnormal and
not-necessarily-diagonalizable operators? Where is the comparably constructive
framework for calculations beyond the standard spectral theorem? Fortunately,
portions of the necessary generalization have been made within pure
mathematics~\cite{Dunf54a}, some finding applications in engineering and
control~\cite{Meyer00,Ants07}. However, what is available is incomplete. And,
even that which is available is often not in a form adapted to perform
calculations that lead to quantitative predictions.
\subsection{Synopsis}
\label{sec:Synopsis}
Here, we build on previous work in functional analysis and operator theory to
provide both a rigorous and constructive foundation for physically relevant
calculations involving not-necessarily-diagonalizable operators. In effect, we
extend the spectral theorem for normal operators to a broader setting, allowing
generalized ``modes'' of nondiagonalizable systems to be identified and
manipulated. The meromorphic functional calculus we develop extends Taylor
series expansion and standard holomorphic functional calculus to analyze
arbitrary functions of not-necessarily-diagonalizable operators. It readily
handles singularities arising when poles (or zeros) of the function coincide
with poles of the operator's resolvent---poles that appear precisely at the
eigenvalues of the operator. Pole--pole and pole--zero interactions
substantially modify the complex-analytic residues within the functional
calculus. A key result is that the negative-one power of a singular operator
exists in the meromorphic functional calculus. It is the \emph{Drazin inverse},
a powerful tool that is receiving increased attention in stochastic
thermodynamics.
Taken altogether, the functional calculus, Drazin inverse, and methods to
manipulate particular eigenspaces, are key to a thorough-going analysis of many
complex systems, many now accessible for the first time. Indeed, the framework
has already been fruitfully employed by the authors in several specific
applications, including closed-form expressions for signal processing and
information measures of hidden Markov processes \cite{Crut13a,Riec14b,Riec14a}
and for compressing stochastic processes over a quantum channel
\cite{Riec16a}. However, the techniques are sufficiently general they will be
much more widely useful. We envision new opportunities for similar detailed
analyses, ranging from biophysics to quantum field theory, wherever
restrictions to normal operators and diagonalizability have been roadblocks.
With this broad scope in mind, we develop the mathematical theory first without
reference to specific applications and disciplinary terminology. We later give
pedagogical (yet, we hope, interesting) examples, exploring several niche, but
important applications to finite hidden Markov processes, basic stochastic
process theory, nonequilibrium thermodynamics, signal processing, and nonlinear
dynamical systems. At a minimum, the examples and their breadth serve to better
acquaint readers with the basic methods required to employ the theory.
We introduce the meromorphic functional calculus in \S
\ref{sec:FunctionalCalculi} through \S \ref{sec:EverythingDecomposed}, after
necessary preparation in \S \ref{sec:SpectralPrimer}. \S
\ref{sec:IndexOneProjOps} further explores eigenprojectors, which we refer to
here simply as \emph{projection operators}. \S
\ref{sec:ProjectorsAndEigenvectors} makes explicit their relationship
with eigenvectors and generalized eigenvectors. \S
\ref{sec:MFC_in_special_cases} then discusses simplifications of the functional
calculus for special cases, while \S \ref{sec:StochasticSpectra} takes up the
spectral properties of transition operators. The examples are discussed at
length in \S \ref{sec:Examples} before we close in \S \ref{sec:Conclusion}
with suggestions on future applications and research directions.
\section{Spectral Primer}
\label{sec:SpectralPrimer}
The following is relatively self-contained, assuming basic familiarity with
linear algebra at the level of Refs.~\cite{Halm58a,Meyer00}---including
eigen-decomposition and knowledge of the Jordan canonical form, partial
fraction expansion (see Ref.~\cite{Latni98}), and series expansion---and basic
knowledge of complex analysis---including the residue theorem and calculation
of residues at the level of Ref.~\cite{Boas66}. For those lacking a working
facility with these concepts, a quick review of \S \ref{sec:Examples}'s
applications may motivate reviewing them. In this section, we introduce our
notation and, in doing so, remind the reader of certain basic concepts in
linear algebra and complex analysis that will be used extensively in the following.
To begin, we restrict attention to operators with finite representations and
only sometimes do we take the limit of dimension going to infinity. That is, we
do not consider infinite-rank operators outright. While this runs counter to
previous presentations in mathematical physics that consider only
infinite-dimensional operators, the upshot is that they---as limiting
operators---can be fully treated with a countable point spectrum. We present
examples of this later on. Accordingly, we restrict our attention to operators
with at most a countably infinite spectrum. Such operators share many features
with finite-dimensional square matrices, and so we recall several elementary
but essential facts from matrix theory used extensively in the main development.
If $\opGen$ is a finite-dimensional square matrix, then its \emph{spectrum} is
simply the set $\Lambda_\opGen$ of its eigenvalues:
\begin{align*}
\Lambda_\opGen = \bigl\{ \lambda \in \mathbb{C}: \text{det}(\lambda I - \opGen) = 0 \bigr\}
~,
\end{align*}
where det$(\cdot)$ is the determinant of its argument and $I$ is the identity
matrix. The \emph{algebraic multiplicity} $a_\lambda$ of eigenvalue $\lambda$
is the power of the term $(z-\lambda)$ in the characteristic polynomial
det$(zI - \opGen)$. In contrast, the \emph{geometric multiplicity} $g_\lambda$
is the dimension of the kernel of the transformation $\opGen - \lambda I$ or,
equivalently, the number of linearly independent eigenvectors associated with
the eigenvalue. The algebraic and geometric multiplicities are all equal when
the matrix is diagonalizable.
Since there can be multiple subspaces associated with a single eigenvalue,
corresponding to different Jordan blocks in the Jordan canonical form, it is
structurally important to distinguish the \emph{index} of the eigenvalue
associated with the largest of these subspaces~\cite{Dunf43a}.
\begin{Def}
Eigenvalue $\lambda$'s \emph{index} $\nu_\lambda$ is the size of the largest
Jordan block associated with $\lambda$.
\end{Def}
If $z \notin \Lambda_A$, then $\nu_z = 0$. Note that the index of the operator
$A$ itself is sometimes discussed~\cite{Atiy73}. In such contexts, the index of
$A$ is $\nu_0$. Hence, $\nu_\lambda$ corresponds to the index of $A - \lambda
I$.
The index of an eigenvalue gives information beyond what the algebraic and
geometric multiplicities themselves yield. Nevertheless, for $\lambda \in
\Lambda_A$, it is always true that $\nu_\lambda - 1 \leq a_\lambda - g_\lambda
\leq a_\lambda - 1$. In the diagonalizable case, $a_\lambda = g_\lambda$ and
$\nu_\lambda = 1$ for all $\lambda \in \Lambda_A$.
The following employs basic features of complex analysis extensively in
conjunction with linear algebra. Let us therefore review several elementary
notions in complex analysis. Recall that a \emph{holomorphic function} is one
that is complex differentiable throughout the domain under consideration. A
\emph{pole} of order $n$ at $z_0$ is a singularity that behaves as $h(z)/
(z-z_0)^n$ as $z \to z_0$, where $h(z)$ is holomorphic within a neighborhood of
$z_0$ and $h(z_0) \neq 0$. We say that $h(z)$ has a \emph{zero} of order $m$
at $z_1$ if $1 / h(z)$ has a pole of order $m$ at $z_1$. A \emph{meromorphic
function} is one that is holomorphic except possibly at a set of isolated poles
within the domain under consideration.
Defined over the continuous complex variable $\z \in \mathbb{C}$, $A$'s
\emph{resolvent}:
\begin{align*}
\R(\z; \opGen) \equiv (z I - \opGen)^{-1} ~,
\end{align*}
captures all of $\opGen$'s spectral information through the poles of $\R(\z;
\opGen)$'s matrix elements. In fact, the resolvent contains more than just
$\opGen$'s spectrum: we later show that the order of each pole gives the index
$\nu$ of the corresponding eigenvalue.
The spectrum $\Lambda_\opGen$ can be expressed in terms of the resolvent.
Explicitly, the \emph{point spectrum} (i.e., the set of eigenvalues) is the set of
complex values $z$ at which $zI-\opGen$ is not a one-to-one mapping,
with the implication that the inverse of $zI-\opGen$ does not exist:
\begin{align*}
\Lambda_\opGen = \bigl\{ \lambda \in \mathbb{C}:
R(\lambda; \opGen) \neq \text{inv}(\lambda I - \opGen) \bigr\}
~,
\end{align*}
where $\text{inv}(\cdot)$ is the inverse of its argument. Later, via our
investigation of the Drazin inverse, it should become clear that the resolvent
operator can be self-consistently defined at the spectrum, despite the lack of
inverse.
For infinite-rank operators, the spectrum becomes more complicated. In that
case, the right point spectrum (the point spectrum of $A$) need not be the same
as the left point spectrum (the point spectrum of $A$'s dual $A^\top$).
Moreover, the spectrum may grow to include non-eigenvalues $z$ for which the
range of $zI - A$ is not dense in the vector space it transforms or for which
$zI - A$ has dense range but the inverse of $zI - A$ is not bounded. These two
settings give rise to the so-called residual spectrum and continuous spectrum,
respectively~\cite{Kubr12}. To mitigate confusion, it should be noted that the
point spectrum can be continuous, yet never coincides with the continuous
spectrum just described. Moreover, understanding only countable point spectra
is necessary to follow the developments here.
Each of $A$'s eigenvalues $\lambda$ has an associated \emph{projection operator}
$A_\lambda$, which is the \emph{residue} of the resolvent as $z \to \lambda$~\cite{Hass99a}.
Explicitly:
\begin{align*}
A_\lambda = \text{Res} \bigl( (zI - A)^{-1} , \, z \to \lambda \bigr) ~,
\end{align*}
where Res$( \, \cdot \, , z \to \lambda)$ is the element-wise residue of its first argument as $z \to \lambda$.
The projection operators are orthonormal:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ProjOpsAreOrthonormal}
\opGen_\lambda \opGen_\zeta = \delta_{\lambda, \zeta} \opGen_\lambda
~.
\end{align}
and sum to the identity:
\begin{align}
I & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \opGen_{\lambda}
~.
\label{eq:ProjOpsSumToIdentity}
\end{align}
The following discusses in detail and then derives several new properties
of projection operators.
\section{Functional Calculi}
\label{sec:FunctionalCalculi}
In the following, we develop an extended \emph{functional calculus} that makes
sense of arbitrary functions $f(\cdot)$ of a linear operator $A$. Within any
functional calculus, one considers how $A$'s eigenvalues map to the eigenvalues
of $f(A)$; which we call a \emph{spectral mapping}. For example, it is known
that holomorphic functions of bounded linear operators enjoy an especially
simple spectral mapping theorem~\cite{Haas05}:
\begin{align*}
\Lambda_{f(A)} = f(\Lambda_A) ~.
\end{align*}
To fully appreciate the meromorphic functional calculus, we first state and
compare the main features and limitations of alternative functional calculi.
\subsection{Taylor series}
Inspired by the Taylor expansion of scalar functions:
\begin{align*}
f(a) = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{f^{(n)}(\xi) }{n!} \, (a - \xi)^n
~,
\end{align*}
a calculus for functions of an operator $A$ can be based on the series:
\begin{align}
f(A) = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{f^{(n)}(\xi) }{n!} \, (A - \xi I)^n ~,
\label{eq:TaylorFnlCalc}
\end{align}
where $f^{(n)}(\xi)$ is the $n^\text{th}$ derivative of $f(z)$ evaluated at $z=\xi$.
This is often used, for example, to express the exponential of $A$ as:
\begin{align*}
e^A = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{A^{n} }{n!}
~.
\end{align*}
This particular series-expansion is convergent for any $A$ since $e^z$ is \emph{entire},
in the sense of complex analysis. Unfortunately, even if it exists there is a
limited domain of convergence for most functions. For example, suppose $f(z)$
has poles and choose a Maclaurin series; i.e., $\xi = 0$ in
Eq.~\eqref{eq:TaylorFnlCalc}. Then the series only converges when $A$'s
spectral radius is less than the radius of the innermost pole of $f(z)$.
Addressing this and related issues leads directly to alternative functional
calculi.
\subsection{Holomorphic functional calculus}
Holomorphic functions are well behaved, smooth functions that are complex
differentiable. Given a function $f(\cdot)$ that is holomorphic within a disk
enclosed by a counterclockwise contour $C$, its Cauchy integral formula is
given by:
\begin{align}
f(a) = \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_C f(z) \, (z-a)^{-1} \, dz
~,
\label{eq:CauchyIForm}
\end{align}
Taking this as inspiration, the holomorphic functional calculus performs
a contour integration of the resolvent to extend $f(\cdot)$ to operators:
\begin{align}
f(A) = \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_{\Lambda_A}} f(z) \, (zI - A)^{-1} \, dz
~,
\label{eq:HFCwResolvent}
\end{align}
where $C_{\Lambda_A}$ is a closed counterclockwise contour that encompasses
$\Lambda_A$. Assuming that $f(z)$ is holomorphic at $z = \lambda$ for all
$\lambda \in \Lambda_A$, a nontrivial calculation \cite{Dunf43a} shows that
Eq.~\eqref{eq:HFCwResolvent} is equivalent to the holomorphic calculus defined
by:
\begin{align}
f(A) &= \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A} \sum_{m=0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1} \frac{f^{(m)}(\lambda)}{m!} (A - \lambda I)^m A_\lambda
~.
\label{eq:HolomorphicFnlCalc}
\end{align}
After some necessary development, we will later derive Eq.~\eqref{eq:HolomorphicFnlCalc} as a special case of our meromorphic functional calculus, such that Eq.~\eqref{eq:HolomorphicFnlCalc} is valid whenever
$f(z)$ is holomorphic at $z = \lambda$ for all $\lambda \in \Lambda_A$.
The holomorphic functional calculus was first proposed in Ref. \cite{Dunf43a}
and is now in wide use; e.g., see Ref. \cite[p. 603]{Meyer00}. It agrees with
the Taylor-series approach whenever the infinite series converges, but gives an
functional calculus when the series approach fails. For example, using the
principal branch of the complex logarithm, the holomorphic functional calculus
admits $\log(A)$ for any nonsingular matrix, with the satisfying result that
$e^{\log(A)} = A$. Whereas, the Taylor series approach fails to converge for
the logarithm of most matrices even if the expansion for, say, $\log(1-z)$ is
used.
The major shortcoming of the holomorphic functional calculus is that it assumes
$f(z)$ is holomorphic at $\Lambda_A$. Clearly, if $f(z)$ has a pole at some $z
\in \Lambda_A$, then Eq.~\eqref{eq:HolomorphicFnlCalc} fails. An example of
such a failure is the negative-one power of a singular operator, which we take
up later on.
Several efforts have been made to extend the holomorphic functional calculus.
For example, Refs.~\cite{Gind66a} and~\cite{Nagy79a} define a functional
calculus that extends the standard holomorphic functional calculus to include a
certain class of meromorphic functions that are nevertheless still required to
be \emph{holomorphic on the point spectrum} (i.e., on the eigenvalues) of the
operator. However, we are not aware of any previous work that introduces and
develops the consequences of a functional calculus for functions that are
meromorphic on the point spectrum---which we take up in the next few sections.
\subsection{Meromorphic functional calculus}
\label{sec:MFC_introduced}
Meromorphic functions are holomorphic except at a set of isolated poles of the function. The resolvent of a finite-dimensional operator is meromorphic, since it is holomorphic everywhere except for poles at the eigenvalues of the operator.
We will now also allow our function $f(z)$ to be meromorphic with possible poles that coincide with the poles of the resolvent.
Inspired again by the Cauchy integral formula of Eq. (\ref{eq:CauchyIForm}),
but removing the restriction to holomorphic functions, our meromorphic
functional calculus instead employs a partitioned contour integration of the
resolvent:
\begin{align*}
f(\opGen) = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} f(z) R(z; \opGen) \, dz
~,
\end{align*}
where $C_\lambda$ is a small counterclockwise contour around the eigenvalue
$\lambda$. This and a spectral decomposition of the resolvent (to be derived
later) extends the holomorphic calculus to a much wider domain, defining:
\begin{align}
f(A) & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\opGen_\lambda \bigl( \opGen - \lambda I \bigr)^m
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} \frac{f(z)}{(z - \lambda)^{m+1}} \, dz ~.
\label{eq:MFC_introduced}
\end{align}
The contour is integrated using knowledge of $f(z)$ since meromorphic $f(z)$
can introduce poles and zeros at $\Lambda_\opGen$ that interact with the
resolvent's poles.
The meromorphic functional calculus agrees with the Taylor-series approach
whenever the series converges and agrees with the holomorphic functional
calculus whenever $f(z)$ is holomorphic at $\Lambda_A$. However, when both the
previous functional calculi fail, the meromorphic calculus extends the domain
of $f(A)$ to yield surprising, yet sensible answers. For example, we show that
within it, the negative-one power of a singular operator is the Drazin
inverse---an operator that effectively inverts everything that is invertible.
The major assumption of our meromorphic functional calculus is that the domain
of operators must have a spectrum that is at most countably infinite---e.g.,
$A$ can be any compact operator. A related limitation is that singularities of
$f(z)$ that coincide with $\Lambda_A$ must be isolated singularities.
Nevertheless, we expect that these restrictions can be lifted with proper
treatment, as discussed in fuller context later.
\section{Meromorphic Spectral Decomposition}
\label{sec:EverythingDecomposed}
The preceding gave an overview of the relationship between alternative functional
calculi and their trade-offs, highlighting the advantages of the meromorphic
functional calculus. This section leverages these advantages and employs a
partial fraction expansion of the resolvent to give a general spectral
decomposition of almost any function of any operator. Then, since it plays a
key role in applications, we apply the functional calculus to investigate the
negative-one power of singular operators---thus \emph{deriving}, what is
otherwise an operator defined axiomatically, the Drazin inverse from first
principles.
\subsection{Partial fraction expansion of the resolvent}
The elements of $\opGen$'s resolvent are proper rational functions that contain
all of $\opGen$'s spectral information. (Recall that a \emph{proper rational
function} $r(z)$ is a ratio of polynomials in $z$ whose numerator has degree
strictly less than the degree of the denominator.) In particular, the
resolvent's poles coincide with $\opGen$'s eigenvalues since, for $z \notin
\Lambda_\opGen$:
\begin{align}
\R(\z; \opGen)
& = (\z I - \opGen)^{-1} \nonumber \\
& = \frac{\Cmatrix^\top}{\text{det}(\z I - \opGen)} \nonumber \\
& = \frac{\Cmatrix^\top}
{\prod_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} ( \z - \lambda )^{a_\lambda}}
~,
\label{eq:Resolvent_as_CToverProduct}
\end{align}
where $a_\lambda$ is the algebraic multiplicity of eigenvalue $\lambda$ and
$\Cmatrix$ is the matrix of \emph{cofactors} of $\z I - \opGen$. That is,
$\Cmatrix$'s transpose $\Cmatrix^\top$ is the \emph{adjugate} of $\z I -
\opGen$:
\begin{align*}
\Cmatrix^\top = \text{adj}(\z I - \opGen)
~,
\end{align*}
whose elements will be polynomial functions of $z$ of degree less than $\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A} a_\lambda$.
Recall that the partial fraction expansion of a proper rational function $r(z)$
with poles in $\Lambda$ allows a unique decomposition into a sum of constant
numerators divided by monomials in $z - \lambda$ up to degree $a_\lambda$, when
$a_\lambda$ is the order of the pole of $r(z)$ at $\lambda \in
\Lambda$~\cite{Latni98}. Equation (\ref{eq:Resolvent_as_CToverProduct}) thus
makes it clear that the resolvent has the unique partial fraction expansion:
\begin{align}
\R(\z; \opGen)
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \sum_{m = 0}^{a_\lambda-1}
\frac{1}{(\z - \lambda)^{m+1}} A_{\lambda,m}
~,
\label{eq:PartialFractionsExpansion_of_Resolvent_1}
\end{align}
where $\{ A_{\lambda,m} \}$ is the set of matrices with constant entries
(\emph{not} functions of $\z$) uniquely determined elementwise by the partial fraction
expansion. However, $\R(\z; \opGen)$'s poles are \emph{not} necessarily of the
same order as the algebraic multiplicity of the corresponding eigenvalues since
the entries of $\Cmatrix$, and thus of $\Cmatrix^\top$, may have zeros at
$\opGen$'s eigenvalues. This has the potential to render $A_{\lambda,m}$ equal
to the zero matrix $\mathbf{0}$.
The Cauchy integral formula indicates that the constant matrices $\{
A_{\lambda,m} \}$ of Eq.~\eqref{eq:PartialFractionsExpansion_of_Resolvent_1}
can be obtained by the residues:
\begin{align}
A_{\lambda,m} =
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_{\lambda}} (\z - \lambda)^m \R(\z; \opGen) d \z
~,
\label{eq:Alm}
\end{align}
where the residues are calculated elementwise. The projection operators
$A_\lambda$ associated with each eigenvalue $\lambda$ were already referenced
in \S \ref{sec:SpectralPrimer}, but can now be properly introduced as the
$A_{\lambda, 0}$ matrices:
\begin{align}
A_{\lambda} & = A_{\lambda, 0} \\
& = \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_{\lambda}} \R(\z; \opGen) d \z
~.
\label{eq:ProjOpsViaRes}
\end{align}
Since $\R(\z; \opGen)$'s elements are rational functions, as we just showed, it
is analytic except at a finite number of isolated singularities---at $\opGen$'s
eigenvalues. In light of the residue theorem, this motivates the
Cauchy-integral-like formula that serves as the starting point for the
meromorphic functional calculus:
\begin{align}
f(\opGen) & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen}
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_{\lambda}} f(\z) \R(\z; \opGen) d \z
~.
\label{eq:PartlyDecomposedCauchyIntegralFormula}
\end{align}
Let's now consider several immediate consequences.
\subsection{Decomposing the identity}
Even the simplest applications of
Eq.~\eqref{eq:PartlyDecomposedCauchyIntegralFormula} yield insight. Consider
the identity as the operator function $f(A) = A^0 = I$ that corresponds to the
scalar function $f(z) = z^0 = 1$. Then,
Eq.~\eqref{eq:PartlyDecomposedCauchyIntegralFormula} implies:
\begin{align*}
I & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen}
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} \R(\z; \opGen) d \z \\
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \opGen_{\lambda}
~.
\end{align*}
This shows that the projection operators are, in fact, a decomposition of the
identity, as anticipated in Eq.~\eqref{eq:ProjOpsSumToIdentity}.
\subsection{Dunford decomposition, decomposed}
For $f(\opGen) = \opGen$, Eqs. \eqref{eq:PartlyDecomposedCauchyIntegralFormula}
and \eqref{eq:Alm} imply that:
\begin{align}
\opGen & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen}
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_{\lambda}} \z \R(\z; \opGen) d \z \nonumber \\
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \! \!
\left[ \lambda
\tfrac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_{\lambda}} \! \! \R(\z; \opGen) d \z +
\tfrac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_{\lambda}} \! (\z - \lambda) \R(\z; \opGen) d \z
\right] \nonumber \\
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen}
\left(\lambda A_{\lambda, 0} + A_{\lambda, 1} \right)
~.
\label{eq:DecompOfopGen}
\end{align}
We denote the important set of nilpotent matrices $A_{\lambda, 1}$ that project
onto the generalized eigenspaces by relabeling them:
\begin{align}
N_\lambda & \equiv \opGen_{\lambda, 1} \\
& = \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_{\lambda}} (\z - \lambda) \R(\z; \opGen) d \z
~.
\label{eq:NlambdaDef}
\end{align}
Equation~\eqref{eq:DecompOfopGen} is the unique \emph{Dunford
decomposition}~\cite{Dunf54a}: $\opGen = D + N$, where $D \equiv \sum_{\lambda
\in \Lambda_\opGen} \lambda \opGen_{\lambda}$ is diagonalizable, $N \equiv
\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} N_{\lambda}$ is nilpotent, and $D$ and $N$
commute: $[D, N] = \mathbf{0}$. This is also known as the
\emph{Jordan--Chevalley decomposition}.
The special case where $\opGen$ is diagonalizable implies that $N = \mathbf{0}$. And so, Eq.~\eqref{eq:DecompOfopGen} simplifies to:
\begin{align*}
\opGen = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} {\lambda} \opGen_{\lambda}
~.
\end{align*}
\subsection{The resolvent, resolved}
As shown in Ref.~\cite{Hass99a} and can be derived from Eqs.~\eqref{eq:ProjOpsViaRes}
and \eqref{eq:NlambdaDef}:
\begin{align*}
\opGen_\lambda \opGen_\zeta & = \delta_{\lambda, \zeta} \opGen_\lambda
\text{~and~} \\
\opGen_\lambda N_\zeta & = \delta_{\lambda, \zeta} N_\lambda
~.
\end{align*}
Due to these, our spectral decomposition of the Dunford decomposition implies
that:
\begin{align}
N_\lambda &
= \opGen_\lambda \Bigl( \opGen - \sum_{\zeta \in \Lambda_\opGen} \zeta \opGen_\zeta \Bigr) \nonumber \\
&
= \opGen_\lambda \bigl( \opGen - \lambda \opGen_\lambda \bigr) \nonumber \\
& = \opGen_\lambda \bigl( \opGen - \lambda I \bigr)
~.
\label{eq: Nilpotent operators in terms of projectors and W}
\end{align}
Moreover:
\begin{align}
\opGen_{\lambda, m}
& = \opGen_\lambda \bigl( \opGen - \lambda I \bigr)^m
~.
\label{eq:ProjOpExpression4ResidueMatrices}
\end{align}
It turns out that for $m > 0$: $\opGen_{\lambda, m} = N_\lambda^m$. (See also
Ref. \cite[p. 483]{Hass99a}.) This leads to a generalization of the projection
operator orthonormality relations of Eq.~\eqref{eq:ProjOpsAreOrthonormal}.
Most generally, the operators of $\{ A_{\lambda, m} \}$ are mutually related by:
\begin{align}
\opGen_{\lambda, m} \opGen_{\zeta, n} = \delta_{\lambda, \zeta} \opGen_{\lambda, m+n}
~.
\label{eq:GenMatrixOrthogonalityRelation}
\end{align}
Finally, if we recall that the index $\nu_\lambda$ is the dimension of the largest
associated subspace, we find that the index of $\lambda$ characterizes the
nilpotency of $N_\lambda$: $N_\lambda^m = \mathbf{0}$ for $m \geq \nu_\lambda$.
That is:
\begin{align}
\opGen_{\lambda, m} &= \mathbf{0} \qquad \text{for } m \geq \nu_\lambda
~.
\end{align}
Returning to Eq. \eqref{eq:PartialFractionsExpansion_of_Resolvent_1}, we see
that all $A_{\lambda, m}$ with $m \geq \nu_\lambda$ are zero-matrices and so do
not contribute to the sum. Thus, we can rewrite Eq.
\eqref{eq:PartialFractionsExpansion_of_Resolvent_1} as:
\begin{align}
\R(\z; \opGen) & =
\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\frac{1}{(\z - \lambda)^{m+1}} A_{\lambda,m}
\label{eq:PartialFractionsExpansion_of_Resolvent_2}
\\
\intertext{or:}
\R(\z; \opGen) & =
\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\frac{1}{(\z - \lambda)^{m+1}} \opGen_\lambda \bigl( \opGen - \lambda I \bigr)^m
~,
\label{eq:ResolventAsFnOfSpectrumAndOperators}
\end{align}
for $z \notin \Lambda_{\opGen}$.
The following sections sometimes use $\opGen_{\lambda, m}$ in place of
$\opGen_\lambda \bigl( \opGen - \lambda I \bigr)^m$. This is helpful both for
conciseness and when applying Eq.~\eqref{eq:GenMatrixOrthogonalityRelation}.
Nonetheless, the equality in Eq.~\eqref{eq:ProjOpExpression4ResidueMatrices} is
a useful one to keep in mind.
\subsection{Meromorphic functional calculus}
In light of Eq.~\eqref{eq:PartlyDecomposedCauchyIntegralFormula},
Eq.~\eqref{eq:PartialFractionsExpansion_of_Resolvent_2} together with
Eq.~\eqref{eq:ProjOpExpression4ResidueMatrices} allow us to express any
function of an operator simply and solely in terms of its spectrum (i.e., its
eigenvalues for the finite dimensional case), its projection operators, and itself:
\begin{align}
f(A) & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\opGen_{\lambda, m} \,
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} \frac{f(z)}{(z - \lambda)^{m+1}} \, dz ~.
\label{eq:MFC}
\end{align}
In obtaining Eq.~\eqref{eq:MFC} we finally derived
Eq.~\eqref{eq:MFC_introduced}, as promised earlier in
\S~\ref{sec:MFC_introduced}. Effectively, by modulating the modes associated
with the resolvent's singularities, the scalar function $f(\cdot)$ is mapped to
the operator domain, where its action is expressed in each of $A$'s independent
subspaces.
\subsection{Evaluating the residues}
Interpretation aside, how does one use this result? Equation \eqref{eq:MFC}
says that the spectral decomposition of $f(\opGen)$ reduces to the evaluation
of several residues, where:
\begin{align*}
\text{Res} \bigl( g(z) , \; z \to\lambda \bigr) = \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} g(z) \, dz
~.
\end{align*}
So, to make progress with Eq.\ \eqref{eq:MFC}, we must
evaluate function-dependent residues of the form:
\begin{align*}
\text{Res} \left( f(z) / (z - \lambda)^{m+1} , \, z \to \lambda \right)
~.
\end{align*}
If $f(z)$ were holomorphic at each $\lambda$, then the order of the pole would
simply be the power of the denominator. We could then use Cauchy's differential
formula for holomorphic functions:
\begin{align}
f^{(n)}(a) &= \frac{n!}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_a} \frac{f(z)}{(z-a)^{n+1}} dz
~,
\label{eq:CauchyDiffFormula}
\end{align}
for $f(z)$ holomorphic at $a$. And, the meromorphic calculus would reduce to
the holomorphic calculus. Often, $f(z)$ will be holomorphic at least at
\emph{some} of $A$'s eigenvalues. And so, Eq.~\eqref{eq:CauchyDiffFormula} is
still locally a useful simplification in those special cases.
In general, though, $f(z)$ introduces poles and zeros at $\lambda \in
\Lambda_A$ that change their orders. This is exactly the impetus for the
generalized functional calculus. The residue of a complex-valued function
$g(z)$ around its isolated pole $\lambda$ of order $n+1$ can be calculated from:
\begin{align*}
\text{Res} \bigl( g(z) , \; z \to\lambda \bigr)
& = \frac{1}{n!} \, \lim_{z \to \lambda} \, \frac{d^{n}}{{dz}^{n}}
\left[ (z - \lambda)^{n+1} g(z) \right]
~.
\end{align*}
\subsection{Decomposing $\opGen^L$}
Equation \eqref{eq:MFC} says that we can explicitly derive the spectral decomposition of powers of the operator $\opGen$.
Of course, we already did this for the special cases of $\opGen^0$ and
$\opGen^1$. The goal, though, is to do this in general.
For $f(\opGen) = \opGen^L \to f(z) = z^L$, $z=0$ can be either a zero or a pole
of $f(z)$, depending on the value of $L$. In either case, an eigenvalue of
$\lambda=0$ will distinguish itself in the residue calculation of $A^L$ via its
unique ability to change the order of the pole (or zero) at $z=0$. For example,
at this special value of $\lambda$ and for integer $L > 0$, $\lambda = 0$
induces poles that \emph{cancel} with the zeros of $f(z) = z^L$, since $z^L$
has a zero at $z=0$ of order $L$. For integer $L < 0$, an eigenvalue of
$\lambda = 0$ \emph{increases} the order of the $z=0$ pole of $f(z) = z^L$.
For all other eigenvalues, the residues will be as expected. Hence,
from Eq.~\eqref{eq:MFC} and inserting $f(z) = z^L$, for any $L
\in \mathbb{C}$:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\opGen^L
& = \Biggl[ \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \lambda \neq 0} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\opGen_\lambda \bigl( \opGen - \lambda I \bigr)^m \!\!\!
\overbrace{ \left( \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} \frac{z^L}{(z - \lambda)^{m+1}} \, dz \right)}^{
=\frac{1}{m!} \lim_{z \to \lambda} \, \frac{d^{m}}{{dz}^{m}} z^L =
\frac{ \lambda^{L-m}}{m!} \prod_{n=1}^m (L-n+1) } \Biggr]
+ \left[ 0 \in \Lambda_\opGen \right]
\sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_0 - 1}
\opGen_0 \opGen^m
\underbrace{ \left( \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_0} z^{L-m-1} \, dz \right)}_{= \delta_{L, m} } \nonumber \\
& = \Biggl[ \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \lambda \neq 0} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\binom{L}{m} \lambda^{L-m}
\opGen_\lambda \bigl( \opGen - \lambda I \bigr)^m \Biggr]
+ \left[ 0 \in \Lambda_\opGen \right]
\sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_0 - 1}
\delta_{L, m} \opGen_0 \opGen^m
~,
\label{eq: T^n generally}
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
where $\binom{L}{m}$ is the generalized binomial coefficient:
\begin{align}
\binom{L}{m} & = \frac{1}{m!} \prod_{n=1}^m (L-n+1) & \text{with } \binom{L}{0} = 1~,
\end{align}
and $[ 0 \in \Lambda_\opGen ]$ is the Iverson bracket which takes on value $1$
if zero is an eigenvalue of $\opGen$ and $0$ if not.
$A_{\lambda, m}$ was replaced by $A_\lambda (A - \lambda I)^m$
to suggest the more explicit calculations involved with evaluating any $A^L$.
Equation \eqref{eq: T^n generally} applies to any linear operator with only isolated singularities in
its resolvent.
If $L$ is a nonnegative integer such that $L \ge \nu_\lambda - 1$ for all
$\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen$, then:
\begin{align}
\opGen^L
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \lambda \neq 0}
\sum_{m=0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1} \binom{L}{m} \lambda^{L-m}
\opGen_{\lambda, m}
~,
\label{eq: W^L spectral decomp for positive integer L}
\end{align}
where $\binom{L}{m}$ is now reduced
to the traditional binomial coefficient $L! / (m! (L-m)!)$.
\subsection{Drazin inverse}
\label{subsec:DrazinI}
If $L$ is any negative integer, then $\binom{-|L|}{m}$ can be written as a
traditional binomial coefficient $(-1)^m \binom{\left| L \right| +m -1}{m}$, yielding:
\begin{align}
\opGen^{- \left| L \right|}
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \lambda \neq 0}
\sum_{m=0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
(-1)^m \tbinom{\left| L \right| +m -1}{m} \lambda^{- \left| L \right| - m}
\opGen_{\lambda, m}
~,
\label{eq: W^L spectral decomp for negative integer L}
\end{align}
for $- \left| L \right| \in \{ -1, -2, -3, \dots \}$.
Thus, negative powers of an operator can be consistently defined even for
noninvertible operators. In light of Eqs. \eqref{eq: T^n generally} and
\eqref{eq: W^L spectral decomp for negative integer L}, it appears that the
zero eigenvalue does not even contribute to the function. It is well known, in
contrast, that it wreaks havoc on the naive, oft-quoted definition of a
matrix's negative power:
\begin{align*}
\opGen^{-1} \overset{?}{=} \frac{\text{adj}(\opGen)}{\text{det}(\opGen)}
= \frac{\text{adj}(\opGen)}{\prod_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \lambda^{a_\lambda}} ~,
\end{align*}
since this would imply dividing by zero.
If we can accept large positive powers of singular matrices---for which the
zero eigenvalue does not contribute---it seems fair to also accept negative
powers that likewise involve no contribution from the zero eigenvalue.
Editorializing aside, we note that extending the definition of $\opGen^{-1}$ to the
domain including singular operators via Eqs.\ \eqref{eq: T^n generally} and
\eqref{eq: W^L spectral decomp for negative integer L} implies that:
\begin{align*}
\opGen^{\left| L \right|} \opGen^{-\left| \ell \right|}
& = \opGen^{-\left| \ell \right|} \opGen^{\left| L \right|} \\
& = \opGen^{\left| L \right| -\left| \ell \right|} & \text{for } \left| L \right| \geq \left| \ell \right| + \nu_0
~,
\end{align*}
which is a very sensible and desirable condition.
Moreover, we find that
$\opGen \opGen^{-1} = I - \opGen_0$.
Specifically, the negative-one power of any square matrix is in general
\emph{not} the same as the matrix inverse since inv$(\opGen)$ need not exist.
However, it is consistently defined via Eq.\ \eqref{eq: W^L spectral decomp for
negative integer L} to be:
\begin{align}
\opGen^{-1}
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen \setminus \{0\} }
\sum_{m=0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
(-1)^m \lambda^{- 1 - m} \opGen_{\lambda, m}
\label{eq:Neg1Power}
~.
\end{align}
This is the \emph{Drazin inverse} $A^\mathcal{D}$ of $\opGen$.
Note that it is \emph{not} the same as the Moore--Penrose pseudo-inverse
\cite{Moor20a,Penr55a}.
Although the Drazin inverse is usually defined axiomatically to satisfy certain
criteria~\cite{BenIs03}, it is naturally \emph{derived} as the negative one
power of a singular operator in the meromorphic functional calculus. We can
check that it indeed satisfies the axiomatic criteria for the Drazin inverse,
enumerated according to historical precedent:
\begin{align*}
&(1^{\nu_0}) & A^{\nu_0} A^\mathcal{D} A = A^{\nu_0} \\
&(2) & A^\mathcal{D} A A^\mathcal{D} = A^\mathcal{D} \\
&(5) & [A, A^\mathcal{D}] = 0 ~,
\end{align*}
which gives rise to the Drazin inverse's moniker as the $\{ 1^{\nu_0}, 2,
5\}$-inverse~\cite{BenIs03}.
While $\opGen^{-1}$ always exists, the resolvent is nonanalytic at $z=0$ for a
singular matrix. Effectively, the meromorphic functional calculus removes the
nonanalyticity of the resolvent in evaluating $\opGen^{-1}$. As a result,
as we can see from Eq.~\eqref{eq:Neg1Power}, the Drazin inverse
inverts what is invertible; the remainder is zeroed out.
Of course, whenever $\opGen$ \emph{is} invertible, $\opGen^{-1}$ is equal to
inv$(\opGen)$. However, we should not confuse this coincidence with
equivalence. Moreover, despite historic notation there is no reason that the
negative-one power should in general be equivalent to the inverse. Especially,
if an operator is not invertible! To avoid confusing $\opGen^{-1}$ with
inv$(\opGen)$, we use the notation $\opGen^{\mathcal{D}}$ for the Drazin
inverse of $\opGen$. Still, $\opGen^{\mathcal{D}} = \text{inv}(\opGen)$,
whenever $0 \notin \Lambda_{\opGen}$.
Amusingly, this extension of previous calculi lets us resolve an elementary but
fundamental question: What is $0^{-1}$? It is certainly not infinity. Indeed,
it is just as close to negative infinity! Rather: $0^{-1} = 0 \neq
\text{inv}(0)$.
Although Eq.~\eqref{eq:Neg1Power} is a constructive way to build the Drazin
inverse, it imposes more work than is actually necessary. Using the meromorphic
functional calculus, we can derive a new, simple construction of the Drazin
inverse that requires only the original operator and the eigenvalue-0
projector.
First, assume that $\lambda$ is an isolated singularity of $\R(\z; \opGen)$
with finite separation at least $\epsilon$ distance from the nearest
neighboring singularity. And, consider the operator-valued function
$f_\lambda^\epsilon$ defined via the RHS of:
\begin{align*}
A_\lambda & = f_\lambda^\epsilon(A) \\
& = \tfrac{1}{2 \pi i}
\oint_{\lambda + \epsilon e^{i \phi}} (\zeta I - A)^{-1} \, d \zeta
~,
\end{align*}
with $\lambda + \epsilon e^{i \phi}$ defining an $\epsilon$-radius circular
contour around $\lambda$. Then we see that:
\begin{align}
f_\lambda^\epsilon(z)
&= \tfrac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{\lambda + \epsilon e^{i \phi}} (\zeta - z)^{-1} \, d \zeta \nonumber \\
&= \bigl[ z \in \mathbb{C}: | z - \lambda | < \epsilon \bigr] ~,
\label{eq:ScalarProjectionFunction}
\end{align}
where $[ z \in \mathbb{C}: | z - \lambda | < \epsilon ]$ is the Iverson bracket
that takes on value 1 if $z$ is within $\epsilon$-distance of $\lambda$ and 0
if not.
Second, we use this to find that, for any $c \in \mathbb{C} \setminus \{ 0 \}$:
\begin{align}
(A + cA_0)^{-1}
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\opGen_{\lambda, m} \,
\tfrac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} \frac{\bigl( z + c f_0^\epsilon(z) \bigr)^{-1}}{(z - \lambda)^{m+1}} \, dz \nonumber \\
&= \opGen^\mathcal{D} + \sum_{m=0}^{\nu_0 - 1} \opGen_0 \opGen^m \tfrac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_0} \frac{(z+c)^{-1}}{z^{m+1}} \nonumber \\
&= \opGen^\mathcal{D} + \sum_{m=0}^{\nu_0 - 1} \opGen_0 \opGen^m (-1)^m / c^{m+1}
~,
\label{eq:Drazin_from_cA0}
\end{align}
where we asserted that the contour $C_0$ exists within the finite
$\epsilon$-ball about the origin.
Third, we note that $A+cA_0$ is invertible for all $c \neq 0$; this can be
proven by multiplying each side of Eq.~\eqref{eq:Drazin_from_cA0} by $A +
cA_0$. Hence, $(A + cA_0)^{-1} = \text{inv}(A + cA_0)$ for all $c \neq 0$.
Finally, multiplying each side of Eq.~\eqref{eq:Drazin_from_cA0} by $I - A_0$,
and recalling that $A_{0,0} A_{0,m} = A_{0,m}$, we find a useful expression for
calculating the Drazin inverse of any linear operator $A$, given only $A$ and
$A_0$. Specifically:
\begin{align}
A^{\mathcal{D}} &= (I - A_0) (A + cA_0)^{-1} ~.
\label{eq:Drazin_from_simple_product_w_cA0}
\end{align}
which is valid for any $c \in \mathbb{C} \setminus \{ 0 \}$.
Eq.~\eqref{eq:Drazin_from_simple_product_w_cA0} generalizes the result found
specifically for $c=-1$ in Ref.~\cite{Roth76}.
For the special case of $c = -1$, it is worthwhile to also consider the
alternative construction of the Drazin inverse implied by
Eq.~\eqref{eq:Drazin_from_cA0}:
\begin{align}
\opGen^\mathcal{D} = (\opGen - \opGen_0)^{-1} + \opGen_0 \Bigl( \sum_{m=0}^{\nu_0 - 1} \opGen^m \Bigr) ~.
\end{align}
By a spectral mapping ($\lambda \to 1 - \lambda$, for $\lambda \in \Lambda_T$),
the Perron--Frobenius theorem and Eq.~\eqref{eq:Drazin_from_cA0} yield an
important consequence for any stochastic matrix $T$. The Perron--Frobenius
theorem guarantees that $T$'s eigenvalues along the unit circle are associated
with a diagonalizable subspace. In particular, $\nu_1 = 1$. Spectral mapping
of this result means that $T$'s eigenvalue $1$ maps to the eigenvalue $0$ of
$I-T$ and $T_1 = (I-T)_0$. Moreover:
\begin{align*}
[(I-T) + T_1]^{-1} = (I-T)^\mathcal{D} + T_1
~,
\end{align*}
since $\nu_0 = 1$. This corollary of Eq.~\eqref{eq:Drazin_from_cA0} (with $c =
1$) corresponds to a number of important and well known results in the theory
of Markov processes. Indeed, $Z \equiv (I-T+T_1)^{-1} $ is called the
\emph{fundamental matrix} in that setting~\cite{Keme60}.
\subsection{Consequences and generalizations}
\label{sec:GenFunctionalCalc}
For an infinite-rank operator $A$ with a continuous spectrum, the meromorphic
functional calculus has the natural generalization:
\begin{align}
f(A) = \frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_{\Lambda_A}} f(z) (zI - A)^{-1} \, dz ~,
\label{eq:InfRankCalc}
\end{align}
where the contour $C_{\Lambda_A}$ encloses the (possibly continuous) spectrum
of $A$ without including any unbounded contributions from $f(z)$ outside of
$C_{\Lambda_A}$. The function $f(z)$ is expected to be meromorphic within
$C_{\Lambda_A}$. This again deviates from the holomorphic approach, since the
holomorphic functional calculus requires that $f(z)$ is analytic in a
neighborhood around the spectrum; see \S~VII of Ref.~\cite{Dunf67a}.
Moreover, Eq.~\eqref{eq:InfRankCalc} allows an extension of the functional
calculus of Refs.~\cite{Gind66a,Nagy79a,Berm99a}, since the function can be
meromorphic at the point spectrum in addition being meromorphic on the residual
and continuous spectra.
In either the finite- or infinite-rank case, whenever $f(z)$ \emph{is} analytic
in a neighborhood around the spectrum, the meromorphic functional calculus
agrees with the holomorphic. Whenever $f(z)$ is \emph{not} analytic in a
neighborhood around the spectrum, the function is undefined in the holomorphic
approach. In contrast, the meromorphic approach extends the function to the
operator-valued domain and does so with novel consequences.
In particular, when $f(z)$ is \emph{not analytic in a neighborhood around the
spectrum}---say $f(z)$ is nonanalytic within $A$'s spectrum at $\Xi_f \subset
\Lambda_A$---then we expect to lose both homomorphism and spectral mapping
properties:
\begin{itemize}
\setlength{\topsep}{0pt}
\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}
\setlength{\parsep}{0pt}
\item Loss of homomorphism: $f_1(A) f_2(A) \neq (f_1 \circ f_2)(A)$;
\item Loss of naive spectral mapping:
$f(\Lambda_A \setminus \Xi_f) \subset \Lambda_{f(A)}$.
\end{itemize}
A simple example of both losses arises with the Drazin inverse, above. There,
$f_1(z) = z^{-1}$. Taking this and $f_2(z) = z$ combined with singular operator
$A$ leads to the loss of homomorphism: $A^\mathcal{D} A \neq I$. As for the
second property, the spectral mapping can be altered for the candidate spectra
at $\Xi_f$ via pole--pole or pole--zero interactions in the complex contour
integral. For $f(A) = A^{-1}$, how does $A$'s eigenvalue of $0$ get mapped into
the new spectrum of $A^\mathcal{D}$? A naive application of the spectral
mapping theorem might seem to yield an undefined quantity. But, using the
meromorphic functional calculus self-consistently maps the eigenvalue as
$0^{-1} = 0$. It remains to be explored whether the full spectral mapping is
preserved for any function $f(A)$ under the meromorphic interpretation of
$f(\lambda)$.
It should now be apparent that extending functions via the meromorphic
functional calculus allows one to express novel mathematical properties, some
likely capable of describing new physical phenomena. At the same time, extra
care is necessary. The situation is reminiscent of the loss of commutativity in
non-Abelian operator algebra: not all of the old rules apply, but the gain in
nuance allows for mathematical description of important phenomena.
We chose to focus primarily on the finite-rank case here since it is
sufficient to demonstrate the utility of the general projection-operator
formalism. Indeed, there are ample nontrivial applications in the finite-rank
setting that deserve attention. To appreciate these, we now turn to address the
construction and properties of general eigenprojectors.
\section{Constructing Decompositions}
\label{sec:ConstructDecomp}
At this point, we see that projection operators are fundamental to functions of
an operator. This prompts the practical question of how to actually calculate
them. The next several sections address this by deriving expressions with both
theoretical and applied use. We first address the projection operators
associated with index-one eigenvalues. We then explicate the relationship
between eigenvectors, generalized eigenvectors, and projection operators for
normal, diagonalizable, and general matrices. Finally, we address how the
general results specialize in several common cases of interest. After these, we
turn to examples and applications.
\subsection{Projection operators of index-one eigenvalues}
\label{sec:IndexOneProjOps}
To obtain the projection operators associated with each index-one eigenvalue
$\lambda \in \{ \zeta \in \Lambda_\opGen: \nu_\zeta = 1 \}$, we apply the
meromorphic calculus to an appropriately chosen function of $\opGen$, finding:
\begin{align*}
\prod_{\zeta \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \zeta \neq \lambda}
(\opGen - \zeta I )^{\nu_\zeta}
&=
\sum_{\xi \in \Lambda_\opGen} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\xi - 1}
\frac{\opGen_{\xi,m}}{2 \pi i} \bigointssss_{C_\xi}
\frac{ \prod_{\zeta \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \zeta \neq \lambda} (z - \zeta )^{\nu_\zeta} }
{(\z - \xi)^{m+1}} \, d\z
\\
& = \opGen_\lambda
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \bigointssss_{C_\lambda}
\frac{ \prod_{\zeta \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \zeta \neq \lambda} (z - \zeta )^{\nu_\zeta} }
{z - \lambda} \, d\z
\\
& = \opGen_\lambda \prod_{\zeta \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \zeta \neq \lambda}
(\lambda - \zeta )^{\nu_\zeta}
~.
\end{align*}
Therefore, if $\nu_\lambda = 1$:
\begin{align}
\opGen_\lambda & =
\prod_{\zeta \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \zeta \neq \lambda}
\left( \frac{\opGen - \zeta I }{\lambda - \zeta} \right)^{\nu_\zeta}
~.
\label{eq: proj operators for index-one eigs}
\end{align}
As convenience dictates in our computations, we let $\nu_\zeta \to a_\zeta -
g_\zeta + 1$ or even $\nu_\zeta \to a_\zeta$ in Eq.\ \eqref{eq: proj operators
for index-one eigs}, since multiplying $\opGen_\lambda$ by $(\opGen - \zeta
I) / (\lambda - \zeta)$ has no effect for $\zeta \in \Lambda_\opGen \setminus
\{ \lambda \}$ if $\nu_\lambda = 1$.
Equation~\eqref{eq: proj operators for index-one eigs} generalizes a well known
result that applies when the index of \emph{all} eigenvalues is one. That
is, when the operator is diagonalizable, we have:
\begin{align*}
\opGen_\lambda = \prod_{\zeta \in \Lambda_\opGen \atop \zeta \neq \lambda}
\frac{\opGen - \zeta I }{\lambda - \zeta}
~.
\end{align*}
To the best of our knowledge, Eq.~\eqref{eq: proj operators for index-one
eigs} is original.
Since eigenvalues can have index larger than one, not all projection operators
of a nondiagonalizable operator can be found directly from Eq.~\eqref{eq: proj
operators for index-one eigs}. Even so, it serves three useful purposes.
First, it gives a practical reduction of the eigen-analysis by finding all
projection operators of index-one eigenvalues. Second, if there is only one
eigenvalue that has index larger than one---what we call the \emph{almost
diagonalizable case}---then Eq.~\eqref{eq: proj operators for index-one eigs},
together with the fact that the projection operators must sum to the identity,
\emph{does} give a full solution to the set of projection operators. Third,
Eq.~\eqref{eq: proj operators for index-one eigs} is a powerful theoretical
tool that we can use directly to spectrally decompose functions, for example,
of a stochastic matrix whose eigenvalues on the unit circle are guaranteed to
be index-one by the Perron--Frobenius theorem.
Although index-one expressions have some utility, we need a more general
procedure to obtain all projection operators of any linear operator. Recall
that, with full generality, projection operators can also be calculated
directly via residues, as in Eq.~\eqref{eq:ProjOpsViaRes}.
An alternative procedure---one that extends a method familiar at least in quantum mechanics---is to obtain the projection operators via eigenvectors. However, quantum mechanics always concerns itself with a subset of diagonalizable operators. What is the necessary generalization?
For one, left and right eigenvectors are no longer simply conjugate transposes
of each other. More severely, a full set of spanning eigenvectors is no longer
guaranteed and we must resort to \emph{generalized} eigenvectors. Since the
relationships among eigenvectors, generalized eigenvectors, and projection
operators are critical to the practical calculation of many physical
observables of complex systems, we collect these results in the next section.
\subsection{Eigenvectors, generalized eigenvectors, and projection operators}
\label{sec:ProjectorsAndEigenvectors}
Two common questions regarding projection operators are: Why not just use
eigenvectors? And, why not use the Jordan canonical form? First, the
eigenvectors of a defective matrix do not form a complete basis with which to
expand an arbitrary vector. One needs generalized eigenvectors for this.
Second, some functions of an operator require removing, or otherwise altering,
the contribution from select eigenspaces. This is most adroitly handled with
the projection operator formalism where different eigenspaces (correlates of
Jordan blocks) can effectively be treated separately. Moreover, even for simple
cases where eigenvectors suffice, the projection operator formalism simply can
be more calculationally or mathematically convenient.
That said, it is useful to understand the relationship between projection
operators and generalized eigenvectors. For example, it is often useful to
create projection operators from generalized eigenvectors. This section
clarifies their connection using the language of matrices. In the most general
case, we show that the projection operator formalism is usefully concise.
\subsubsection{Normal matrices}
Unitary, Hermitian, skew-Hermitian, orthogonal, symmetric, and skew-symmetric
matrices are all special cases of normal matrices. As noted, normal matrices
are those that commute with their Hermitian adjoint (complex-conjugate
transpose): $A A^{\dagger} = A^{\dagger} A$. Moreover, a matrix is normal if
and only if it can be diagonalized by a unitary transformation: $A = U \Lambda
U^{\dagger}$, where the columns of the unitary matrix $U$ are the orthonormal
right eigenvectors of $A$ corresponding to the eigenvalues ordered along the
diagonal matrix $\Lambda$. For an $M$-by-$M$ matrix $A$, the eigenvalues in
$\Lambda_A$ are ordered and enumerated according to the possibly degenerate
$M$-tuple $(\Lambda_A) = ( \lambda_1, \ldots, \lambda_M )$. Since an
eigenvalue $\lambda \in \Lambda_A$ has algebraic multiplicity $a_{\lambda} \ge
1$, $\lambda$ appears $a_{\lambda}$ times in the ordered tuple.
Assuming $\opGen$ is normal, each projection operator $A_{\lambda}$ can be
constructed as the sum of all ket--bra pairs of right-eigenvectors
corresponding to $\lambda$ composed with their conjugate transpose. We later
introduce bras and kets more generally via generalized eigenvectors of the
operator $A$ and its dual $A^\top$. However, since the complex-conjugate
transposition rule between dual spaces is only applicable to a ket basis
derived from a normal operator, we put off using the bra-ket notation for now
so as not to confuse the more familiar ``normal'' case with the general case.
To explicitly demonstrate this relationship between projection operators,
eigenvectors, and their Hermitian adjoints in the case of normality, observe
that:
\begin{align*}
A &= U \Lambda U^\dagger \\
& =
\begin{bmatrix}
\vec{u}_1 & \vec{u}_2 & \cdots & \vec{u}_M
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\lambda_1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
0 & \lambda_2 & \cdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & \cdots & \lambda_M
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\vec{u}_1^\dagger \\
\vec{u}_2^\dagger \\
\vdots \\
\vec{u}_M^\dagger
\end{bmatrix}
\\
& =
\begin{bmatrix}
\lambda_1 \vec{u}_1 & \lambda_2 \vec{u}_2 & \cdots & \lambda_M \vec{u}_M
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\vec{u}_1^\dagger \\
\vec{u}_2^\dagger \\
\vdots \\
\vec{u}_M^\dagger
\end{bmatrix}
\\
& =
\sum_{j=1}^{M}
\lambda_j \vec{u}_j \vec{u}_j^\dagger \\
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A} \lambda A_{\lambda} ~.
\end{align*}
Evidently, for normal matrices $A$:
\begin{align*}
A_{\lambda}
= \sum_{j=1}^M \delta_{\lambda, \lambda_j} \vec{u}_j \vec{u}_j^\dagger
~.
\end{align*}
And, since $\vec{u}_i^\dagger \vec{u}_j = \delta_{i,j}$, we have an orthogonal
set $ \{ A_{\lambda} \}_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A}$ with the property that:
\begin{align*}
A_{\zeta} A_{\lambda}
& = \sum_{i=1}^M \sum_{j=1}^M
\delta_{\zeta, \lambda_i} \delta_{\lambda, \lambda_j}
\vec{u}_i \vec{u}_i^\dagger \vec{u}_j \vec{u}_j^\dagger \\
& = \sum_{i=1}^M \sum_{j=1}^M
\delta_{\zeta, \lambda_i} \delta_{\lambda, \lambda_j}
\vec{u}_i \delta_{i,j} \vec{u}_j^\dagger \\
& = \sum_{i=1}^M
\delta_{\zeta, \lambda_i} \delta_{\lambda, \lambda_i}
\vec{u}_i \vec{u}_i^\dagger \\
& = \delta_{\zeta,\lambda} A_{\lambda}
~.
\end{align*}
Moreover:
\begin{align*}
\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A} A_{\lambda}
& = \sum_{j=1}^M \vec{u}_j \vec{u}_j^\dagger \\
& = U U^{\dagger} \\
& = I ~,
\end{align*}
and so on. All of the expected properties of projection operators can be
established again in this restricted setting.
The rows of $U^{-1} = U^{\dagger}$ are $\opGen$'s left-eigenvectors. In this
case, they are simply the conjugate transpose of the right-eigenvector. Note
that conjugate transposition is the familiar transformation rule between
ket and bra spaces in quantum mechanics (see e.g., Ref.~\cite{Saku11})---a consequence of the restriction to
normal operators, as we will show. Importantly, a more general formulation of
quantum mechanics would \emph{not} have this same restricted correspondence
between the dual ket and bra spaces.
To elaborate on this point, recall that vector spaces admit dual spaces and
dual bases. However, there is no sense of a dual correspondence of a single ket
or bra without reference to a full basis~\cite{Halm58a}. Implicitly in quantum
mechanics, the basis is taken to be the basis of eigenstates of any Hermitian
operator, nominally since observables are self-adjoint.
To allude to an alternative, we note that $\vec{u}_j^\dagger \vec{u}_j$ is not
only the Hermitian form of inner product $\braket{ \vec{u}_j , \, \vec{u}_j }$ (where $\braket{\cdot, \cdot}$ denotes the inner product) of
the right eigenvector $\vec{u}_j$ with itself, but importantly also the simple
dot-product of the left eigenvector $\vec{u}_j^\dagger$ and the right
eigenvector $\vec{u}_j$, where $\vec{u}_j^\dagger$ acts as a linear functional
on $\vec{u}_j$. Contrary to the substantial effort devoted to the
inner-product-centric theory of Hilbert spaces, this latter interpretation of
$\vec{u}_j^\dagger \vec{u}_j$---in terms of linear functionals and a
left-eigenvector basis for linear functionals---is what generalizes to a
consistent and constructive framework for the spectral theory beyond normal
operators, as we will see shortly.
\subsubsection{Diagonalizable matrices}
By definition, diagonalizable matrices can be diagonalized, but not necessarily
via a unitary transformation. All diagonalizable matrices can nevertheless be
diagonalized via the transformation: $A = P \Lambda P^{-1}$, where the columns
of the square matrix $P$ are the not-necessarily-orthogonal right eigenvectors
of $A$ corresponding to the eigenvalues ordered along the diagonal matrix
$\Lambda$ and where the rows of $P^{-1}$ are $\opGen$'s left eigenvectors.
Importantly, the left eigenvectors need not be the Hermitian adjoint of the
right eigenvectors. As a particular example, this more general setting is
required for almost any transition dynamic of a Markov chain. In other words,
the transition dynamic of any interesting complex network with irreversible
processes serves as an example of a nonnormal operator.
Given the $M$-tuple of possibly-degenerate eigenvalues $(\Lambda_A) =
(\lambda_1, \, \lambda_2, \, \dots \, , \, \lambda_M )$, there is a
corresponding $M$-tuple of linearly-independent right-eigenvectors
$(\ket{\lambda_1}, \, \ket{\lambda_2}, \, \dots \, , \, \ket{\lambda_M})$ and a
corresponding $M$-tuple of linearly-independent left-eigenvectors
$(\bra{\lambda_1}, \, \bra{\lambda_2}, \, \dots \, , \, \bra{\lambda_M})$ such
that:
\begin{align*}
A \ket{\lambda_j} = \lambda_j \ket{\lambda_j}
\end{align*}
and:
\begin{align*}
\bra{\lambda_j} A = \lambda_j \bra{\lambda_j}
\end{align*}
with the orthonormality condition that:
\begin{align*}
\braket{\lambda_i | \lambda_j} = \delta_{i, j} ~.
\end{align*}
To avoid misinterpretation, we stress that the bras and kets that
appear above are the left and right eigenvectors, respectively,
and typically do \emph{not} correspond to complex-conjugate transposition.
With these definitions in place, the projection operators for a diagonalizable matrix can be written:
\begin{align*}
A_{\lambda} = \sum_{j=1}^M \delta_{\lambda, \lambda_j} \ket{\lambda_j} \bra{\lambda_j} ~.
\end{align*}
Then:
\begin{align*}
A & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A} \lambda A_{\lambda} \\
& = \sum_{j=1}^{M}
\lambda_j \ket{\lambda_j} \bra{\lambda_j} \\
& =
\begin{bmatrix}
\lambda_1 \ket{\lambda_1} & \lambda_2 \ket{\lambda_2} & \cdots & \lambda_M \ket{\lambda_M}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\bra{\lambda_1} \\
\bra{\lambda_2} \\
\vdots \\
\bra{\lambda_M}
\end{bmatrix}
\\
& =
\begin{bmatrix}
\ket{\lambda_1} & \ket{\lambda_2} & \cdots & \ket{\lambda_M}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\lambda_1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
0 & \lambda_2 & \cdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & \cdots & \lambda_M
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\bra{\lambda_1} \\
\bra{\lambda_2} \\
\vdots \\
\bra{\lambda_M}
\end{bmatrix}
\\
& =
P \Lambda P^{-1} ~.
\end{align*}
So, we see that the projection operators introduced earlier in a coordinate-free manner have a concrete representation in terms of left and right eigenvectors when the operator is diagonalizable.
\subsubsection{Any matrix}
\label{sec:ProjOpsFromGenEigvects}
Not all matrices can be diagonalized, but all square matrices can be put into
\emph{Jordan canonical form} via the transformation: $A = Y J
Y^{-1}$~\cite{Meyer00}. Here, the columns of the square matrix $Y$ are the
linearly independent right eigenvectors and generalized right eigenvectors
corresponding to the Jordan blocks ordered along the diagonal of the
block-diagonal matrix $J$. And, the rows of $Y^{-1}$ are the corresponding left
eigenvectors and generalized left eigenvectors, but reverse-ordered within each
block, as we will show.
Let there be $n$ Jordan blocks forming the $n$-tuple $(J_1, \, J_2, \, \dots
\, , \, J_n)$, with $1 \le n \le M$. The $k^{\text{th}}$ Jordan block $J_k$ has
dimension $m_k$-by-$m_k$:
\begin{align*}
J_k &=
\underbrace{
\left. \,
\begin{bmatrix}
\lambda_k & 1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \lambda_k & 1 & & & 0 & 0 \\
& 0 & \lambda_k & & & & 0 \\
\vdots & & & \ddots & \ddots & & \vdots \\
0 & & & & \lambda_k & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & & & 0 & \lambda_k & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & & 0 & \lambda_k
\end{bmatrix}
\right\}
}_{m_k \text{ columns}}
& m_k \text{ rows}
\end{align*}
such that:
\begin{align*}
\sum_{k=1}^n m_k = M ~.
\end{align*}
Note that eigenvalue $\lambda \in \Lambda_A$ corresponds to $g_\lambda$
different Jordan blocks, where $g_\lambda$ is the geometric multiplicity of the
eigenvalue $\lambda$. Indeed:
\begin{align*}
n = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A} g_\lambda ~.
\end{align*}
Moreover, the index $\nu_\lambda$ of the eigenvalue $\lambda$ is defined as the
size of the largest Jordan block corresponding to $\lambda$. So, we write this
in the current notation as:
\begin{align*}
\nu_\lambda = \max \{ \delta_{\lambda, \lambda_k} m_k \}_{k=1}^n
~.
\end{align*}
If the index of any eigenvalue is greater than one, then the conventional
eigenvectors do not span the $M$-dimensional vector space. However, the set of
$M$ generalized eigenvectors does form a basis for the vector space~\cite{Axle97}.
Given the $n$-tuple of possibly-degenerate eigenvalues
$(\Lambda_A) = (\lambda_1, \, \lambda_2, \, \dots \, , \, \lambda_n )$,
there is a corresponding $n$-tuple of $m_k$-tuples of linearly-independent
generalized right-eigenvectors:
\begin{align*}
\left( ( \ket{\lambda_1^{(m)}} )_{m=1}^{m_1} , \, ( \ket{\lambda_2^{(m)}} )_{m=1}^{m_2}, \, \dots \, , \, ( \ket{\lambda_n^{(m)}} )_{m=1}^{m_n} \right)
~,
\end{align*}
where:
\begin{align*}
( \ket{\lambda_k^{(m)}} )_{m=1}^{m_k} \equiv \left( \ket{\lambda_k^{(1)}} , \, \ket{\lambda_k^{(2)}} , \, \dots \, , \,\ket{\lambda_k^{(m_k)}} \right)
\end{align*}
and a corresponding $n$-tuple of $m_k$-tuples of linearly-independent
generalized left-eigenvectors:
\begin{align*}
\left( ( \bra{\lambda_1^{(m)}} )_{m=1}^{m_1} , \, ( \bra{\lambda_2^{(m)}} )_{m=1}^{m_2}, \, \dots \, , \, ( \bra{\lambda_n^{(m)}} )_{m=1}^{m_n} \right)
~,
\end{align*}
where:
\begin{align*}
( \bra{\lambda_k^{(m)}} )_{m=1}^{m_k} \equiv \left( \bra{\lambda_k^{(1)}} , \, \bra{\lambda_k^{(2)}} , \, \dots \, , \,\bra{\lambda_k^{(m_k)}} \right)
\end{align*}
such that:
\begin{align}
(A - \lambda_k I ) \ket{\lambda_k^{(m+1)}} = \ket{\lambda_k^{(m)}}
\label{eq:RightGenRecursion}
\end{align}
and:
\begin{align}
\bra{\lambda_k^{(m+1)}} (A - \lambda_k I ) = \bra{\lambda_k^{(m)}}
~,
\label{eq:LeftGenRecursion}
\end{align}
for $0 \leq m \leq m_k - 1$,
where $\ket{\lambda_j^{(0)}} = \vec{0}$ and $\bra{\lambda_j^{(0)}} = \vec{0}$.
Specifically, $\ket{\lambda_k^{(1)}}$ and $\bra{\lambda_k^{(1)}}$ are
conventional right and left eigenvectors, respectively.
Most directly, the generalized right and left eigenvectors can be found as the
nontrivial solutions to:
\begin{align*}
(A - \lambda_k I )^m \ket{\lambda_k^{(m)}} = \vec{0}
\end{align*}
and:
\begin{align*}
\bra{\lambda_k^{(m)}} (A - \lambda_k I )^m = \vec{0}
~,
\end{align*}
respectively.
It should be clear from Eq.~\eqref{eq:RightGenRecursion} and
Eq.~\eqref{eq:LeftGenRecursion} that:
\begin{align*}
\braket{\lambda_k^{(m)} | (A - \lambda_k I )^\ell | \lambda_k^{(n)}}
& = \braket{\lambda_k^{(m - \ell)} | \lambda_k^{(n)}} \\
& = \braket{\lambda_k^{(m)} | \lambda_k^{(n-\ell)}}
~,
\end{align*}
for $m, n, \in \{ 0, 1, \dots, m_k \}$ and $\ell \geq 0$.
At the same time, it is then easy to show that:
\begin{align*}
\braket{\lambda_k^{(m)} | \lambda_k^{(n)}} &= \braket{\lambda_k^{(m+n)} |
\lambda_k^{(0)}} = 0, & \text{~if } m + n \leq m_k ~,
\end{align*}
where $m, n \in \{ 0, 1, \dots, m_k \}$.
Imposing appropriate normalization, we find that:
\begin{align}
\braket{\lambda_j^{(m)} | \lambda_k^{(n)}} = \delta_{j, k} \delta_{m + n, m_k + 1} ~.
\label{eq:GenEigenvectorOrthogonality}
\end{align}
Hence, we see that the left eigenvectors and generalized eigenvectors are a
dual basis to the right eigenvectors and generalized eigenvectors.
Interestingly though, within each Jordan subspace, \emph{the most generalized
left eigenvectors are dual to the least generalized right eigenvectors}, and
vice versa.
(To be clear, in this terminology ``least generalized'' eigenvectors are the
standard eigenvectors. For example, the $\bra{\lambda_k^{(1)}}$ satisfying the
standard eigenvector relation $\bra{\lambda_k^{(1)}} A = \lambda_k
\bra{\lambda_k^{(1)}}$ is the least generalized left eigenvector of subspace
$k$. By way of comparison, the ``most generalized''' right eigenvector of
subspace $k$ is $\ket{\lambda_k^{(m_k)}}$ satisfying the most generalized
eigenvector relation $(A - \lambda_k I ) \ket{\lambda_k^{(m_k)}} =
\ket{\lambda_k^{(m_k - 1)}}$ for subspace $k$. The orthonormality relation
shows that the two are dual correspondents: $\braket{\lambda_k^{(1)} |
\lambda_k^{(m_k)}} = 1$, while all other eigen-bra--eigen-ket closures
utilizing these objects are null.)
With these details worked out, we find that
the projection operators for a nondiagonalizable matrix can be written as:
\begin{align}
\opGen_{\lambda} = \sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{m = 1}^{m_k}
\delta_{\lambda, \lambda_k} \ket{\lambda_k^{(m)}} \bra{\lambda_k^{(m_k + 1 - m)}} ~.
\label{eq:ProjectorsViaGenEigenvectors}
\end{align}
And, we see that a projection operator includes all of its left and right
eigenvectors and all of its left and right generalized eigenvectors. This
implies that the identity operator must also have a decomposition in terms of
both eigenvectors and generalized eigenvectors:
\begin{align*}
I & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_{\opGen}} \opGen_{\lambda} \\
& = \sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{m = 1}^{m_k}
\ket{\lambda_k^{(m)}} \bra{\lambda_k^{(m_k + 1 - m)}}
~.
\end{align*}
Let $\bigl[ \ket{\lambda_k^{(m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_k}$ denote the column vector:
\begin{align*}
\bigl[ \ket{\lambda_k^{(m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_k} &=
\begin{bmatrix}
\ket{\lambda_k^{(1)}} \\
\vdots \\
\ket{\lambda_k^{(m_k)}}
\end{bmatrix} ~,
\end{align*}
and let $\bigl[ \bra{\lambda_k^{(m_k+1-m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_k}$ denote the column vector:
\begin{align*}
\bigl[ \bra{\lambda_k^{(m_k+1-m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_k} &=
\begin{bmatrix}
\bra{\lambda_k^{(m_k)}} \\
\vdots \\
\bra{\lambda_k^{(1)}}
\end{bmatrix} ~.
\end{align*}
Then, using the above results,
and the fact that Eq.~\eqref{eq:LeftGenRecursion} implies that $\bra{\lambda_k^{(m+1)}} A = \lambda_k \bra{\lambda_k^{(m+1)}} + \bra{\lambda_k^{(m)}}$,
we derive the explicit generalized-eigenvector decomposition of the nondiagonalizable operator $A$:
\begin{align*}
A & = \bigl( \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A} A_{\lambda} \bigr) A \\
& = \sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{m = 1}^{m_k}
\ket{\lambda_k^{(m)}} \bra{\lambda_k^{(m_k + 1 - m)}} A \\
& = \sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{m = 1}^{m_k}
\ket{\lambda_k^{(m)}} \left( \lambda_k \bra{\lambda_k^{(m_k + 1 - m)}} + \bra{\lambda_k^{(m_k - m)}} \right)
\\
\! \! & =
\begin{bmatrix}
\bigl[ \ket{\lambda_1^{(m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_1} \\
\bigl[ \ket{\lambda_2^{(m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_2} \\
\vdots \\
\bigl[ \ket{\lambda_n^{(m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_n}
\end{bmatrix}^{\mathbf{\top}} \! \!
\begin{bmatrix}
J_1 & 0 & \cdots & 0 \\
0 & J_2 & \cdots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & \cdots & J_n
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix}
\bigl[ \bra{\lambda_1^{(m_1+1-m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_1} \\
\bigl[ \bra{\lambda_2^{(m_2+1-m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_2} \\
\vdots \\
\bigl[ \bra{\lambda_n^{(m_n+1-m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_n}
\end{bmatrix} \\
& = Y J Y^{-1}
~,
\end{align*}
where, defining $Y$ as:
\begin{align*}
Y =
\begin{bmatrix}
\bigl[ \ket{\lambda_1^{(m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_1} \\
\bigl[ \ket{\lambda_2^{(m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_2} \\
\vdots \\
\bigl[ \ket{\lambda_n^{(m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_n}
\end{bmatrix}^{\mathbf{\top}}
~,
\end{align*}
we are forced by Eq.~\eqref{eq:GenEigenvectorOrthogonality} to recognize that:
\begin{align*}
Y^{-1} =
\begin{bmatrix}
\bigl[ \bra{\lambda_1^{(m_1+1-m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_1} \\
\bigl[ \bra{\lambda_2^{(m_2+1-m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_2} \\
\vdots \\
\bigl[ \bra{\lambda_n^{(m_n+1-m)}} \bigr]_{m=1}^{m_n}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{align*}
since then $Y^{-1} Y = I$, and we recall that the inverse is guaranteed to be unique.
The above demonstrates an explicit construction for the Jordan canonical form.
One advantage we learn from this explicit decomposition is that the complete
set of left eigenvectors and left generalized eigenvectors (encapsulated in
$Y^{-1}$) can be obtained from the inverse of the matrix of the complete set of
right eigenvectors and generalized right eigenvectors (encoded in $Y$) and vice
versa. One unexpected lesson, though, is that the generalized left eigenvectors
appear in reverse order within each Jordan block.
Using Eqs.~\eqref{eq:ProjectorsViaGenEigenvectors} and
\eqref{eq:ProjOpExpression4ResidueMatrices} with
Eq.~\eqref{eq:LeftGenRecursion}, we see that the nilpotent operators
$A_{\lambda, m}$ with $m > 0$ further link the various generalized eigenvectors
within each subspace $k$. Said more suggestively, generalized modes of a
nondiagonalizable subspace are necessarily cooperative.
It is worth noting that the left eigenvectors and generalized left eigenvectors
form a basis for all linear functionals of the vector space spanned by the
right eigenvectors and generalized right eigenvectors. Moreover, the left
eigenvectors and generalized left eigenvectors are exactly the dual basis to
the right eigenvectors and generalized right eigenvectors by their
orthonormality properties. However, neither the left nor right eigen-basis is a
priori more fundamental to the operator. Sympathetically, the right
eigenvectors and generalized eigenvectors form a (dual) basis for all linear
functionals of the vector space spanned by the left eigenvectors and
generalized eigenvectors.
\subsubsection{Simplified calculi for special cases}
\label{sec:MFC_in_special_cases}
In special cases, the meromorphic functional calculus reduces the general
expressions above to markedly simpler forms. And, this can greatly expedite
practical calculations and provide physical intuition. Here, we show which
reductions can be used under which assumptions.
For functions of operators with a countable spectrum, recall that the general form of the meromorphic functional calculus is:
\begin{align}
f(A) & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\opGen_{\lambda, m} \,
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} \frac{f(z)}{(z - \lambda)^{m+1}} \, dz ~.
\label{eq:MFC_again}
\end{align}
Equations~\eqref{eq:ProjOpExpression4ResidueMatrices} and
\eqref{eq:ProjectorsViaGenEigenvectors} gave the method to calculate
$A_{\lambda, m}$ in terms of eigenvectors and generalized eigenvectors.
When the operator is \emph{diagonalizable} (not necessarily normal), this
reduces to:
\begin{align}
f(A) & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_\opGen}
\opGen_{\lambda} \,
\frac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} \frac{f(z)}{(z - \lambda)} \, dz
~,
\label{eq:MFC_diagonable}
\end{align}
where $A_\lambda$ can now be constructed from conventional right and left
eigenvectors, although $\bra{\lambda_j}$ is \emph{not} necessarily the
conjugate transpose of $\ket{\lambda_j}$.
When the function is \emph{analytic} on the spectrum of the (not necessarily diagonalizable) operator, then our functional calculus reduces to the holomorphic functional calculus:
\begin{align}
f(A) & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A}
\sum_{m=0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1} \frac{f^{(m)}(\lambda)}{m!} A_{\lambda,m}
~.
\label{eq:HFC_again}
\end{align}
When the function is \emph{analytic} on the spectrum of a \emph{diagonalizable}
(not necessarily normal) operator this reduces yet again to:
\begin{align}
f(A) &= \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A} f(\lambda) A_\lambda
~.
\label{eq:HFC_diagonable}
\end{align}
When the function is \emph{analytic} on the spectrum of a \emph{diagonalizable}
(not necessarily normal) operator with \emph{no degeneracy} this reduces even
further to:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:HFC_diagonable_and_nondegenerate}
f(A) & = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_A} f(\lambda)
\frac{\ket{\lambda} \bra{\lambda} }{\braket{\lambda | \lambda}}
~.
\end{align}
Finally, recall that an operator is \emph{normal} when it commutes with its
conjugate transpose. If the function is \emph{analytic} on the spectrum of a
\emph{normal} operator, then we recover the simple form enabled by the spectral
theorem of normal operators familiar in physics. That is,
Eq.~\eqref{eq:HFC_diagonable} is applicable, but now we have the extra
simplification that $\bra{\lambda_j}$ is simply the conjugate transpose of
$\ket{\lambda_j}$: $\bra{\lambda_j} = \ket{\lambda_j}^\dagger$.
\section{Examples and Applications}
\label{sec:Examples}
To illustrate the use and power of the meromorphic functional calculus, we now
adapt it to analyze a suite of applications from quite distinct domains. First,
we point to a set of example calculations for finite-dimensional operators of
stochastic processes. Second, we show that the familiar Poisson process is
intrinsically nondiagonalizable, and hint that nondiagonalizability may be
common more generally in semi-Markov processes. Third, we illustrate how
commonly the Drazin inverse arises in nonequilibrium thermodynamics, giving a
roadmap to developing closed-from expressions for a number of key observables.
Fourth, we turn to signal analysis and comment on power spectra of processes
generated by nondiagonalizable operators. Finally, we round out the
applications with a general discussion of Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron and Koopman
operators for nonlinear dynamical systems.
\subsection{Spectra of stochastic transition operators}
\label{sec:StochasticSpectra}
The preceding employed the notation that $A$ represents a general linear
operator. In the following examples, we reserve the symbol $T$ for the operator
of a stochastic transition dynamic. If the state-space is finite and has a
stationary distribution, then $T$ has a representation that is a nonnegative
row-stochastic---all rows sum to unity---transition matrix.
The transition matrix's nonnegativity guarantees that for each $\lambda \in
\Lambda_T$ its complex conjugate $\overline{\lambda}$ is also in $\Lambda_T$.
Moreover, the projection operator associated with the complex conjugate of
$\lambda$ is the complex conjugate of $T_\lambda$:
$\matHMM_{\overline{\lambda}} = \overline{\matHMM_{\lambda}}$.
If the dynamic induced by $T$ has a stationary distribution over the state
space, then the spectral radius of $T$ is unity and all of $T$'s eigenvalues
lie on or within the unit circle in the complex plane. The maximal eigenvalues
have unity magnitude and $1 \in \Lambda_T$. Moreover, an extension of the
Perron--Frobenius theorem guarantees that eigenvalues on the unit circle have
algebraic multiplicity equal to their geometric multiplicity. And, so,
$\nu_\zeta = 1$ for all $\zeta \in \{ \lambda \in \Lambda_T: | \lambda | = 1
\}$.
$T$'s index-one eigenvalue of $\lambda=1$ is associated with stationarity of
the associated Markov process. $T$'s other eigenvalues on the unit circle are
roots of unity and correspond to deterministic periodicities within the process.
All of these results carry over from discrete to continuous time. In continuous
time, where $e^{t G} = T_{t_0 \to t_0 + t}$, $T$'s stationary eigenvalue of
unity maps to $G$'s stationary eigenvalue of zero. If the dynamic has a
stationary distribution over the state space, then the rate matrix $G$ is
row-sum zero rather than row-stochastic. $T$'s eigenvalues, on or within the
unit circle, map to $G$'s eigenvalues with nonpositive real part in the
left-hand side of the complex plane.
To reduce ambiguity in the presence of multiple operators, functions of
operators, and spectral mapping, we occasionally denote eigenvectors with
subscripted operators on the eigenvalues within the bra or ket. For example,
$\ket{0_G} = \ket{1_T} \neq \ket{0_\mathcal{G}} = \ket{1_\mathcal{T}} \neq
\ket{0_T}$ disambiguates the identification of $\ket{0}$ when we have operators
$G$, $T$, $\mathcal{G}$, and $\mathcal{T}$ with $T = e^{\tau G}$, $\mathcal{T}
= e^{\tau \mathcal{G}}$, and $0 \in \Lambda_G, \Lambda_{\mathcal{G}},
\Lambda_T$.
\subsection{Randomness and memory in correlated processes}
\label{sec:FiniteD}
The generalized spectral theory developed here has recently been applied to
give the first closed-form expressions for many measures of complexity for
stochastic processes that can be generated by probabilistic finite
automata~\cite{Crut13a}. Rather than belabor the Kolmogorov--Chaitin notion of
complexity which is inherently uncomputable~\cite{Vita93a}, the new analytic
framework infuses \emph{computational mechanics}~\cite{Crut12a} with a means to
compute very practical answers about an observed system's organization and to
address the challenges of prediction.
For example, we can now answer the obvious questions regarding prediction: How
random is a process? How much information is shared between the past and the
future? How \emph{far} into the past must we look to predict what is
predictable about the future? How \emph{much} about the observed history must
be remembered to predict what is predictable about the future? And so on. The
Supplementary Materials of Ref.~\cite{Crut13a} exploit the meromorphic
functional calculus to answer these (and more) questions for the symbolic
dynamics of a chaotic map, the spacetime domain for an elementary cellular
automata, and the chaotic crystallographic structure of a close-packed
polytypic material as determined from experimental X-ray diffractograms.
In the context of the current exposition, the most notable feature of the
analyses across these many domains is that our imposed questions, which entail
tracking an observer's state of knowledge about a process, necessarily
\emph{induce} a nondiagonalizable metadynamic that becomes the central object
of analysis in each case. (This metadynamic is the so-called \emph{mixed-state
presentation} of Refs. \cite{Crut08a,Crut08b}.)
This theme, and the inherent nondiagonalizability of prediction, is explored in
greater depth elsewhere~\cite{Riec_forthcoming2}. We also found that another
nondiagonalizable dynamic is induced even in the context of quantum
communication when determining how much memory reduction can be achieved if we
generate a classical stochastic process using quantum mechanics~\cite{Riec16a}.
We mention the above nondiagonalizable metadynamics primarily as a pointer to
concrete worked-out examples where the meromorphic functional calculus has been
employed to analyze finitary hidden Markov processes via explicitly calculated,
generalized eigenvectors and projection operators. We now return to a more
self-contained discussion, where we show that nondiagonalizability can be
induced by the simple act of counting. Moreover, the theory developed is then
applied to deliver quick and powerful results.
\subsection{Poisson point processes}
\label{sec:Poisson}
The meromorphic functional calculus leads naturally to a novel perspective on
the familiar Poisson counting process---a familiar stochastic process class
used widely across physics and other quantitative sciences to describe
``completely random'' event durations that occur over a continuous domain
\cite{Barb91a,Smit58a,Gers02a,Beic06a}. The calculus shows that the basic
Poisson distribution arises as the signature of a simple nondiagonalizable
dynamic. More to the point, we derive the Poisson distribution directly,
without requiring the limit of the discrete-time binomial distribution, as
conventionally done~\cite{Boas66}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{img/PoissonCountingAutomata.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Explicit Markov-chain representation of the continuous-time
truncated Poisson dynamic, giving interstate transition rates $r$ among the
first $N+1$ counter-states. (State self-transition rates $-r$ are not
depicted.) Taking the limit of $N \to \infty$ recovers the full Poisson
counting distribution. It can either be time-homogeneous (transition-rate
parameter $r$ is time-independent) or time-inhomogeneous (parameter $r$ is
time-dependent).
}
\label{fig:PoissonCountingAutomata}
\end{figure}
Consider all possible counts, up to some arbitrarily large integer $N$. The
dynamics among these first $N+1$ counter states constitute what can be called
the \emph{truncated Poisson dynamic}. We recover the full Poisson distribution
as $N \to \infty$. A Markov chain for the truncated Poisson dynamic is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:PoissonCountingAutomata}. The corresponding rate matrix $G$, for
any arbitrarily large truncation $N$ of the possible count, is:
\begin{align*}
G =
\begin{bmatrix}
-r & r & & & \\
& -r & r & & \\
& & \ddots & \ddots & \\
& & & -r & r \\
& & & & -r \\
\end{bmatrix}
~,
\end{align*}
where $G_{ij}$ is the rate of transitioning to state (count) $j$ given that the
system is in state (count) $i$. Elements not on either the main diagonal or
first superdiagonal are zero. This can be rewritten succinctly as:
\begin{align*}
G =
-r I + r D_1 ~,
\end{align*}
where $I$ is the identity operator in $N$-dimensions and $D_1$ is the
upshift-by-1 matrix in $N$-dimensions, with zeros everywhere, except $1$s along
the first superdiagonal. Let us also define the upshift-by-$m$ matrix $D_m$
with zeros everywhere except $1$s along the $m^\text{th}$ superdiagonal, such
that $D_m = D_1^m$ and $D_m^n = D_{m \cdot n}$, with $D_0 = I$. Operationally,
if $\bra{\delta_\ell}$ is the probability distribution over counter states that
is peaked solely at state $\ell$, then $\bra{\delta_\ell} D_m =
\bra{\delta_{\ell+m}}$.
For any arbitrarily large $N$, $G$'s eigenvalues are given by $\det (G- \lambda
I) = (-r-\lambda)^{N+1} = 0$, from which we see that its spectrum is the
singleton: $\Lambda_G = \{ -r \}$. Moreover, since it has algebraic
multiplicity $a_{-r} = N+1$ and geometric multiplicity $g_{-r} = 1$, the index
of the $-r$ eigenvalue is $\nu_{-r} = N+1$. Since $-r$ is the only eigenvalue,
and all projection operators must sum to the identity, we must have the
eigenprojection: $G_{-r} = I$. The lesson is that the Poisson point process is
highly nondiagonalizable.
\subsubsection{Homogeneous Poisson processes}
When the transition rate $r$ between counter states is constant in time, the net counter state-to-state transition operator from initial time $0$ to later time $t$ is given simply by:
\begin{align*}
T(t) = e^{t G} ~.
\end{align*}
The functional calculus allows us to directly evaluate $e^{t G}$ for the
Poisson nondiagonalizable transition-rate operator $G$; we find:
\begin{align*}
T(t) & = e^{t G} \\
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_G} \sum_{m=0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
G_\lambda (G - \lambda I)^m
\Bigl( \tfrac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda} \frac{e^{tz}}{(z - \lambda)^m} \, dz \Bigr) \\
& = \lim_{N \to \infty} \sum_{m=0}^{N}
I (G + rI)^m \frac{1}{m!} \underbrace{\lim_{z \to -r} \frac{d^m}{dz^m} e^{tz}}_{t^m e^{-rt}} \\
& = \sum_{m=0}^\infty (r D_1)^m \frac{t^m e^{-rt}}{m!} \\
& = \sum_{m=0}^\infty D_m \frac{(rt)^m e^{-rt}}{m!}
~.
\end{align*}
Consider the orthonormality relation $\braket{\delta_i | \delta_j} =
\delta_{i,j}$ between counter states, where $\ket{\delta_j}$ is represented by
$0$s everywhere except for a $1$ at counter-state $j$. It effectively measures
the occupation probability of counter-state $j$. Employing the result for
$T(t)$, we find the simple consequence that:
\begin{align*}
\bra{\delta_0} T(t) \ket{\delta_{n}}
& = \frac{(rt)^n e^{-rt}}{n!} \\
& = \bra{\delta_m} T(t) \ket{\delta_{m+n}}
~.
\end{align*}
That is, the probability that the counter is incremented by $n$ in a time interval $t$ is independent of the initial count and given by:
$(rt)^n e^{-rt} / n!$.
Let us emphasize that these steps derived the Poisson distribution directly,
rather than as the typical limit of the binomial distribution. Our derivation
depended critically on spectral manipulations of a highly nondiagonalizable
operator. Moreover, our result for the transition dynamic $T(t)$ allows a
direct analysis of how \emph{distributions} over counts evolve in time, as
would be necessary, say, in a Bayesian setting with unknown prior count. This
type of calculus can immediately be applied to the analysis of more
sophisticated processes, for which we can generally expect nondiagonalizability
to play an important functional role.
\subsubsection{Inhomogeneous Poisson processes}
Let us now generalize to time-inhomogeneous Poisson processes, where the
transition rate $r$ between count events is instantaneously uniform, but varies in time as $r(t)$.
Conveniently, the associated rate matrices at different times commute with each
other. Specifically,
with $G_a = -aI + aD_1$ and $G_b = -bI + bD_1$, we see that:
\begin{align*}
[G_a, \, G_b] = 0
~.
\end{align*}
Therefore, the net counter state-to-state transition operator from time $t_0$ to time $t_f$ is given by:
\begin{align}
T_{t_0, t_f} & = e^{\int_{t_0}^{t_f} G(t) \, dt}
\nonumber \\
& = e^{\left( \int_{t_0}^{t_f} r(t) \, dt \right) (-I + D_1)}
\nonumber \\
& = e^{\braket{r} (\Delta t) (-I + D_1)}
\nonumber \\
& = e^{ (\Delta t) G_{\braket{r}}}
~,
\label{eq:etG_w_average_r}
\end{align}
where $\Delta t = t_f - t_0$ is the time elapsed and:
\begin{align*}
\braket{r} = \tfrac{1}{\Delta t} \int_{t_0}^{t_f} r(t) \, dt
\end{align*}
is the average rate during that time. Given Eq.~\eqref{eq:etG_w_average_r}, the
functional calculus proceeds just as in the time-homogeneous case to give the
analogous net transition dynamic:
\begin{align*}
T_{t_0, t_f}
& = \sum_{m=0}^\infty D_m
\frac{\bigl( \braket{r} \Delta t \bigr)^m e^{- \braket{r} \Delta t}}{m!}
~.
\end{align*}
The probability that the count is incremented by $n$ during the time interval
$\Delta t$ follows directly:
\begin{align*}
\bra{\delta_m} T_{t_0, t_f} \ket{\delta_{m+n}}
& = \frac{\bigl( \braket{r} \Delta t \bigr)^n e^{- \braket{r} \Delta t}}{n!}
~.
\end{align*}
With relative ease, our calculus allowed us to derive an important result for
stochastic process theory that is nontrivial to derive by other means. Perhaps
surprisingly, we see that the probability distribution over final counts
induced by any rate trajectory $r(t)$ is the same as if the transition rate
were held fixed at mean $\braket{r}$ throughout the duration. Moreover, we can
directly analyze the net evolution of distributions over counts using the
derived transition operator $T_{t_0, t_f}$.
Note that the nondiagonalizability of the Poisson dynamic is robust in a
physical sense. That is, even varying the rate parameter in time in an erratic
way, the inherent structure of counting imposes a fundamental nondiagonalizable
nature. That nondiagonalizability can be robust in a physical sense is
significant, since one might otherwise be tempted to argue that
nondiagonalizability is extremely fragile due to numerical perturbations
within any matrix representation of the operator. This is simply not the case
since such perturbations are physically forbidden. Rather,
this simple example challenges us with the fact that some processes, even those
familiar and widely used, are intrinsically nondiagonalizable. On the positive
side, it appears that spectral methods can now be applied to analyze them. And,
this will be particularly important in more complex, memoryful processes
\cite{Marz14b,Marz14e,Marz15a}, including the hidden semi-Markov processes
\cite{Barb91a} that are, roughly speaking, the cross-product of hidden
finite-state Markov chains and renewal processes.
\subsection{Stochastic thermodynamics}
\label{sec:NoneqThermo}
The previous simple examples started to demonstrate the methods of the
meromorphic functional calculus. Next, we show a novel application of the
meromorphic functional calculus to environmentally driven mesoscopic dynamical
systems, selected to give a new set of results within nonequilibrium
thermodynamics. In particular, we analyze functions of singular transition-rate
operators. Notably, we show that the Drazin inverse arises naturally in the general solution
of Green--Kubo relations. We mention that it also arises when analyzing moments of the excess
heat produced in the driven transitions atop either equilibrium steady states
or nonequilibrium steady states~\cite{Riec_forthcoming}.
\subsubsection{Dynamics in independent eigenspaces}
An important feature of the functional calculus is its ability to address
particular eigenspaces independently when necessary. This feature is often
taken for granted in the case of normal operators; say, in physical dynamical
systems when analyzing stationary distributions or dominant decay modes.
Consider a singular operator $\mathcal{L}$ that is not necessarily normal and
not necessarily diagonalizable and evaluate the simple yet ubiquitous integral
$\int_0^\tau e^{t \mathcal{L}} \, dt$. Via the meromorphic functional calculus
we find:
\begin{align}
\int_0^\tau e^{t \mathcal{L}} \, dt
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_{\mathcal{L}} }
\sum_{m=0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1} \mathcal{L}_{\lambda, m}
\tfrac{1}{2 \pi i} \oint_{C_\lambda}
\frac{ \int_{0}^\tau e^{t z} \, dt}{(z - \lambda)^{m+1}} \, dz
\nonumber \\
& = \Bigl( \sum_{m=0}^{\nu_0 - 1} \mathcal{L}_{0,m} \tfrac{1}{2 \pi i}
\oint_{C_0} \frac{z^{-1} (e^{\tau z} - 1)}{z^{m+1}} \, dz \Bigr)
\nonumber \\
& \quad + \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_{\mathcal{L}} \setminus 0}
\sum_{m=0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\mathcal{L}_{\lambda, m} \tfrac{1}{2 \pi i}
\oint_{C_\lambda} \frac{z^{-1} (e^{\tau z} - 1)}{(z - \lambda)^{m+1}} \, dz
\nonumber \\
& = \Bigl( \sum_{m=0}^{\nu_0 - 1}
\tfrac{\tau^{m+1}}{(m+1)!} \mathcal{L}_{0,m} \Bigr)
+ \mathcal{L}^\mathcal{D} \left( e^{\tau \mathcal{L} } - I \right)
~,
\label{eq:IntOfExp}
\end{align}
where $\mathcal{L}^\mathcal{D}$ is the Drazin inverse of $\mathcal{L}$, discussed earlier.
The pole--pole interaction ($z^{-1}$ with $z^{-m-1}$) at $z=0$
distinguished the $0$-eigenspace in the calculations
and required the meromorphic functional calculus for direct analysis.
The given solution to this integral will be useful in the following.
Next, we consider the case where $\mathcal{L}$ is the transition-rate operator
among the states of a structured stochastic dynamical system. This leads to
several novel consequence within stochastic thermodynamics.
\subsubsection{Green--Kubo relations}
Let us reconsider the above integral in the case when the singular operator
$\mathcal{L}$---let us call it $G$---is a transition-rate operator that
exhibits a single stationary distribution. By the spectral mapping $\ln \Lambda_{e^{G}}$ of the
eigenvalue $1 \in \Lambda_{e^{G}}$ addressed in the Perron--Frobenius theorem,
$G$'s zero eigenmode is diagonalizable.
And, by assuming a single attracting stationary distribution, the zero eigenvalue has algebraic multiplicity $a_0 = 1$.
Equation~\eqref{eq:IntOfExp} then simplifies to:
\begin{align}
\int_0^\tau e^{t G} \, dt
& = \tau \ket{0_{G}} \bra{0_{G}}
+ G^\mathcal{D} \left( e^{\tau G } - I \right)
~.
\label{eq:IntOfExpRate}
\end{align}
Since $G$ is a transition-rate operator, the above integral corresponds to
integrated time evolution. The Drazin inverse $G^\mathcal{D}$ concentrates on
the transient contribution beyond the persistent stationary background. In
Eq.~\eqref{eq:IntOfExpRate}, the subscript within the left and right
eigenvectors explicitly links the eigenvectors to the operator $G$, to reduce
ambiguity. Specifically, the projector $\ket{0_G} \bra{0_G}$ maps any
distribution to the stationary distribution.
Green--Kubo-type relations~\cite{Green54, Zwan65} connect the
out-of-steady-state transport coefficients to the time integral of steady-state
autocorrelation functions. They are thus very useful for understanding
out-of-steady-state dissipation due to steady-state fluctuations. (Steady state
here refers to either equilibrium or nonequilibrium steady state.)
Specifically, the Green--Kubo relation for a transport coefficient, $\kappa$
say, is typically of the form:
\begin{align*}
\kappa = \int_{0}^\infty \bigl( \Braket{ A(0) A(t)}_{\text{s.s.}} - \braket{A}_{\text{s.s.}}^2 \bigr) \, dt
~,
\end{align*}
where $A(0)$ and $A(t)$ are some observable of the stationary stochastic
dynamical system at time $0$ and time $t$, respectively, and the subscript
$\braket{ \cdot }_{\text{s.s.}} $ emphasizes that the expectation value is to
be taken according to the steady-state distribution.
Using:
\begin{align*}
\Braket{ A(0) A(t)}_{\text{s.s.}}
& = \text{tr} \bigl( \ket{0_G} \bra{0_G} A \, e^{t G} A \bigr) \\
& = \bra{0_G} A \, e^{t G} A \ket{0_G}
~,
\end{align*}
the transport coefficient $\kappa$ can be written more explicitly in terms of
the relevant transition-rate operator $G$ for the stochastic dynamics:
\begin{align}
\kappa & = \lim_{\tau \to \infty}
\int_{0}^\tau \bra{0_G} A \, e^{t G} A \ket{0_G} \, dt
- \tau \bra{0_G} A \ket{0_G}^2 \nonumber \\
& = \lim_{\tau \to \infty} \bra{0_G} A
\Bigl( \int_{0}^\tau e^{t G} \, dt \Bigr) A \ket{0_G}
- \tau \bra{0_G} A \ket{0_G}^2 \nonumber \\
& = \lim_{\tau \to \infty} \bra{0_G} A \, G^\mathcal{D}
\bigl( e^{\tau G} - I \bigr) A \ket{0_G} \nonumber \\
& = - \braket{A \, G^\mathcal{D} A}_{\text{s.s.}}
~.
\label{eq:GCDrazin}
\end{align}
Thus, we learn that relations of Green--Kubo form are direct signatures of
the Drazin inverse of the transition-rate operator for the stochastic dynamic.
The result of Eq.~\eqref{eq:GCDrazin} holds quite generally. For example, if
the steady state has some number of periodic flows, the result of
Eq.~\eqref{eq:GCDrazin} remains valid. Alternatively, in the case of
nonperiodic chaotic flows---where $G$ will be the logarithm of the
Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron operator, as described later in
\S~\ref{sec:Ruelle_and_Koopman_operators}---$\ket{0_G} \bra{0_G}$ still induces
the average over the steady-state trajectories.
In the special case where the transition-rate operator is diagonalizable,
$- \braket{A \, G^\mathcal{D} A}_{\text{s.s.}}$ is simply the integrated
contribution from a weighted sum of decaying exponentials. Transport
coefficients then have a solution of the simple form:
\begin{align}
\kappa & = - \! \! \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_G \setminus 0}
\frac{1}{\lambda} \bra{0_G} A \, G_\lambda A \ket{0_G}
~.
\label{eq:GCDrazinSimpleEigenExpansion}
\end{align}
Note that the minus sign keeps $\kappa$ positive since Re$(\lambda) < 0$ for
$\lambda \in \Lambda_G \setminus \{ 0 \}$. Also, recall that $G$'s eigenvalues
with nonzero imaginary part occur in complex-conjugate pairs and
$G_{\overline{\lambda}} = \overline{G_\lambda}$. Moreover, if $G_{i,j}$ is the
classical transition-rate from state $i$ to state $j$ (to disambiguate from the
transposed possibility), then $\bra{0_G}$ is the stationary distribution. (The
latter is sometimes denoted $\bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}}$ in the Markov process
literature.) And, $\ket{0_G}$ is a column vector of all ones (sometimes denoted
$\ket{\mathbf{1}}$) which acts to integrate contributions throughout the state space.
A relationship of the form of Eq.~\eqref{eq:GCDrazin}, between the Drazin
inverse of a classical transition-rate operator and a particular Green--Kubo
relation was recently found in Ref.~\cite{Mandal15} for the friction tensor for
smoothly-driven transitions atop nonequilibrium steady states. Subsequently, a
truncation of the eigen-expansion of the form of
Eq.~\eqref{eq:GCDrazinSimpleEigenExpansion} was recently used in a similar
context to bound a universal tradeoff between power, precision, and
speed~\cite{Lahi16}. Equation~\eqref{eq:GCDrazin} shows that a fundamental
relationship between a physical property and a Drazin inverse is to be
expected more generally whenever the property can be related to integrated
correlation.
Notably, if a Green--Kubo-like relation integrates a cross-correlation,
say between
$A(t)$ and $B(t)$ rather than an autocorrelation,
then we have only the slight modification:
\begin{align}
\int_{0}^\infty \bigl( \Braket{ A(0) B(t)}_{\text{s.s.}} \! - \braket{A}_{\text{s.s.}} \!\! \braket{B}_{\text{s.s.}} \bigr) \, dt
= - \braket{A \, G^\mathcal{D} B}_{\text{s.s.}}
~.
\label{eq:genGKsoln}
\end{align}
The foregoing analysis bears on both classical and quantum dynamics.
$G$ may be a so-called linear \emph{superoperator} in the quantum
regime~\cite{Lowd82}; for example, the \emph{Lindblad
superoperator}~\cite{Lind76,Barn00} that operates on density operators. A
Liouville-space representation~\cite{Petr97} of the superoperator, though,
exposes the superficiality of the distinction between superoperator and
operator. At an abstract level, time evolution can be discussed uniformly
across subfields and reinterpretations of Eq.~\eqref{eq:genGKsoln} will be found
in each associated physical theory.
Reference~\cite{Riec_forthcoming} presents additional constructive results that
emphasize the ubiquity of integrated correlation and Drazin inverses in the
transitions between steady states~\cite{Oono98}, relevant to the fluctuations
within any physical dynamic. Overall, these results support the broader notion
that dissipation depends on the structure of correlation.
Frequency-dependent generalizations of integrated correlation have a
corresponding general solution. To be slightly less abstract, later on we give
novel representative formulae for a particular application: the general
solution to power spectra of a process generated by any countable-state hidden
Markov chain.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.375\textwidth]{img/HMM_BayesNet.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Bayes network for a state-emitting hidden Markov model graphically
depicts the structure of conditional independence among random variables
for the latent state $\{ \CausalState_n \}_{n \in \mathbb{Z}}$ at each time $n$ and
the random variables $\{ X_n \}_{n \in \mathbb{Z}}$ for the observation at
each time $n$.
}
\label{fig:HMM_BayesNet}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Power spectra}
\label{sec:PSD}
A signal's power spectrum quantifies how its power is distributed across
frequency~\cite{Stoi05}. For a discrete-domain process it is:
\begin{align}
P(\omega) = \lim_{N \to \infty} \tfrac{1}{N} \Braket{ \Bigl| \sum_{n=1}^{N} X_n e^{-i \omega n} \Bigr|^2 } ~,
\label{eq:PSDdef}
\end{align}
where $\omega$ is the angular frequency and $X_n$ is the random variable for
the observation at time $n$. For a wide-sense stationary stochastic process, the power
spectrum is also determined from the signal's autocorrelation function
$\gamma(\tau)$:
\begin{align}
P(\omega) = \lim_{N \to \infty} \tfrac{1}{N} \sum_{\tau=-N}^{N} \bigl( N - \left| \tau \right| \bigr) \gamma(\tau) e^{-i \omega \tau}
~,
\label{eq:PSDfromACF}
\end{align}
where the autocorrelation function for a wide-sense stationary stochastic process is
defined:
\begin{align*}
\gamma(\tau) = \Braket{ \, \overline{X_n} X_{n + \tau}}_n
~.
\end{align*}
The windowing function $N - \left| \tau \right|$ appearing in
Eq.~\eqref{eq:PSDfromACF} is a direct consequence of Eq.~\eqref{eq:PSDdef}. It
is not imposed externally, as is common practice in signal analysis. This is
important to subsequent derivations.
The question we address is how to calculate the correlation function and power
spectrum given a model of the signal's generator. To this end, we briefly
introduce hidden Markov models as signal generators and then use the
meromorphic calculus to calculate their autocorrelation and power spectra in
closed-form. This leads to several lessons. First, we see that the power
spectrum is a direct fingerprint of the resolvent of the generator's
time-evolution operator, analyzed along the unit circle. Second, spectrally
decomposing the not-necessarily-diagonalizable time evolution operator, we
derive the most general qualitative behavior of the autocorrelation function
and power spectra. Third, contributions from eigenvalues on the unit circle
must be extracted and dealt with separately. Contributions from eigenvalues on
the unit circle correspond to Dirac delta functions---the analog of Bragg peaks
in diffraction. Whereas, eigen-contributions from inside the unit circle
correspond to diffuse peaks, which become sharper for eigenvalues closer to the
unit circle. Finally, nondiagonalizable eigenmodes yield qualitatively
different line profiles than their diagonalizable counterparts. In short, when
applied to signal analysis our generalized spectral decomposition has directly
measurable consequences. This has been key to analyzing low-dimensional
disordered materials, for example, when adapted to X-ray diffraction spectra
\cite{Star69,Riec14a,Riec14b}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{overpic}[width=.375\textwidth,unit=1mm]
{img/SimpleMarkovModel.pdf}
\put(45,38){\includegraphics[width=0.105\textwidth]{img/f2pdf_cropped.pdf}}
\put(3.5,38){\includegraphics[width=0.105\textwidth]{img/Gamma_pdf_cropped.pdf}}
\put(24,7.5){\includegraphics[width=0.105\textwidth]{img/Normal_pdf.pdf}}
\end{overpic}
\end{center}
\caption{Simple $3$-state state-emitting HMM that generates a stochastic process
according to the state-to-state transition dynamic $T$ and the probability
density functions (pdfs) $\{ \text{p}(x | s) \}_{s \in \CausalStateSet}$ associated with
each state. Theorem 1 asserts that its power spectrum will be the same
(with only constant offset) as the power spectrum generated from the
alternative process where the pdfs in each state are solely concentrated at
the Platonic average value $\langle x \rangle_{\text{p}_s (x)}$ of the former
pdf associated with the state.
}
\label{fig:CC_HMM}
\end{figure}
Let the 4-tuple $\mathcal{M} = \bigl( \CausalStateSet , \ProcessAlphabet , \mathcal{P}, T \bigr)$
be some discrete-time \emph{state-emitting hidden Markov model} (HMM) that
generates the stationary stochastic process $\dots X_{-2} X_{-1} X_0 X_1 X_2
\dots$ according to the following. $\CausalStateSet$ is the (finite) set of latent states
of the hidden Markov chain and $\ProcessAlphabet \subseteq \mathbb{C}$ is the observable
alphabet. $\CausalState_t$ is the random variable for the hidden state at time $t$ that
takes on values $s \in \CausalStateSet$. $X_t$ is the random variable for the observation
at time $t$ that takes on values $x \in \ProcessAlphabet$. Given the latent state at time
$t$, the possible observations are distributed according to the conditional
probability density functions: $\mathcal{P} = \bigl\{ \text{p}(X_t = x | \CausalState_t = s)
\bigr\}_{s \in \CausalStateSet}$. For each $s \in \CausalStateSet$, $\text{p}(X_t = x | \CausalState_t = s)$ may
be abbreviated as $\text{p}(x|s)$ since the probability density function in each
state is assumed not to change over $t$. Finally, the latent-state-to-state
stochastic transition matrix $T$ has elements $T_{i,j} = \Pr(\CausalState_{t+1} = s_j |
\CausalState_t = s_i)$, which give the probability of transitioning from latent state
$s_i$ to $s_j$ given that the system is in state $s_i$, where $s_i, s_j \in
\CausalStateSet$. It is important for the subsequent derivation that we use $\Pr(\cdot)$
to denote a probability in contrast to $\text{p}(\cdot)$ which denotes a
probability \emph{density}. The Bayes network diagram of
Fig.~\ref{fig:HMM_BayesNet} depicts the structure of conditional independence
among the random variables.
\subsubsection{Continuous-value, discrete-state and -time processes}
Figure~\ref{fig:CC_HMM} gives a particular HMM with continuous observable
alphabet $\ProcessAlphabet = \mathbb{R}$ distributed according to the probability
density function shown within each latent state. Processes generated as the
observation of a function of a Markov chain can be of either finite or infinite
Markov order. (They are, in fact, \emph{typically} infinite Markov order in the
space of processes~\cite{Jame10a}.)
\begin{widetext}
Directly calculating, one finds that the autocorrelation function, for $\tau >
0$, for any such HMM is:
\begin{align*}
\gamma(\tau)
&= \Braket{ \, \overline{X_n} X_{n + \tau}}_n \nonumber \\
&= \int_{x \in \ProcessAlphabet} \int_{x' \in \ProcessAlphabet} \overline{x} x' \text{p}(X_0 = x, X_\tau = x') \, dx \, dx' \\
&= \sum_{s \in \CausalStateSet} \sum_{s' \in \CausalStateSet} \int_{x \in \ProcessAlphabet} \int_{x' \in
\ProcessAlphabet} \overline{x} x' \text{p}(X_0 = x, X_\tau = x', \CausalState_0 = s, \CausalState_\tau = s') \, dx \, dx' \\
&= \sum_{s \in \CausalStateSet} \sum_{s' \in \CausalStateSet} \int_{x \in \ProcessAlphabet} \int_{x' \in \ProcessAlphabet} \overline{x} x'
\Pr(\CausalState_0 = s, \CausalState_\tau = s') \, \text{p}(X_0 = x | \CausalState_0 = s ) \, \text{p}( X_\tau = x' | \CausalState_\tau = s') \, dx \, dx' \\
&= \sum_{s \in \CausalStateSet} \sum_{s' \in \CausalStateSet}
\braket{\boldsymbol{\pi} | \delta_s} \bra{\delta_s} T^{\tau} \ket{\delta_{s'}} \braket{\delta_{s'} | \mathbf{1}} \,
\Bigl( \int_{x \in \ProcessAlphabet} \overline{x} \, \text{p}( x | s ) \, dx \Bigr)
\, \Bigl( \int_{x' \in \ProcessAlphabet} x' \, \text{p}( x' | s' ) \, dx' \Bigr) \\
&=
\bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} \Bigl( \sum_{s \in \CausalStateSet} \braket{\overline{x}}_{\text{p}( x | s )} \ket{ \delta_s} \bra{\delta_s} \Bigr) T^{\tau}
\Bigl( \sum_{s' \in \CausalStateSet} \braket{x}_{\text{p}( x | s' )} \ket{ \delta_{s'}} \bra{\delta_{s'}} \Bigr) \ket{\mathbf{1}}
~,
\end{align*}
where:
\begin{align*}
\text{p} (X_0 = x, X_\tau = x', \CausalState_0 = s, \CausalState_\tau = s')
= \Pr(\CausalState_0 = s, \CausalState_\tau = s')
\text{p}(X_0 = x, X_\tau = x' | \CausalState_0 = s, \CausalState_\tau = s')
\end{align*}
holds by definition of conditional probability. The decomposition of:
\begin{align*}
\text{p}(X_0 = x, X_\tau = x' | \CausalState_0 = s, \CausalState_\tau = s')
= \text{p}(X_0 = x | \CausalState_0 = s ) \text{p}( X_\tau = x' | \CausalState_\tau = s')
\end{align*}
for $\tau \neq 0$ follows from the conditional independence in the
relevant Bayesian network shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HMM_BayesNet}.
Moreover, the equality:
\begin{align*}
\Pr(\CausalState_0 = s, \CausalState_\tau = s')
= \braket{\boldsymbol{\pi} | \delta_s}
\bra{\delta_s} T^{\tau} \ket{\delta_{s'}} \braket{\delta_{s'} | \mathbf{1}}
\end{align*}
can be derived by marginalizing over all possible intervening state sequences.
Note that $\ket{\delta_s}$ is the column vector of all $0$s except for a $1$ at
the index corresponding to state $s$ and $\bra{\delta_s}$ is simply its
transpose. Recall that $\bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} = \bra{1_T}$ is the stationary
distribution induced by $T$ over latent states and $\ket{\mathbf{1}} =
\ket{1_T}$ is a column vector of all ones.
Note also that $\braket{\boldsymbol{\pi} | \delta_s} = \Pr(s)$ and
$\braket{\delta_{s'} | \mathbf{1}} = 1$.
\end{widetext}
Since the autocorrelation function is symmetric in $\tau$ and:
\begin{align*}
\gamma(0) & = \bigl\langle \left| x \right|^2 \bigr\rangle_{\text{p}(x)} \\
& = \bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}}
\sum_{s \in \CausalStateSet} \bigl\langle \left| x \right|^2
\bigr\rangle_{\text{p}(x|s)} \ket{\delta_s}
~,
\end{align*}
we find the full autocorrelation function is given by:
\begin{align*}
\gamma(\tau) & =
\begin{cases}
\bigl\langle \left| x \right|^2 \bigr\rangle & \text{if } \tau = 0 \\
\bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} \overline{\Omega} \, T^{|\tau| - 1} \Omega \ket{\mathbf{1}} & \text{if } |\tau| \geq 1
\end{cases}
~,
\end{align*}
where
$\Omega$ is the $|\CausalStateSet|$-by-$|\CausalStateSet|$ matrix defined by:
\begin{align}
\Omega
= \sum_{s \in \CausalStateSet} \braket{x}_{\text{p}( x | s )} \ket{ \delta_s} \bra{\delta_s} T ~.
\end{align}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.25\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{img/HMM4PSD_v2.pdf}
\caption{A $b$-parametrized HMM with mean values of each state's pdf
$\braket{x}_{\text{p}(x|s)}$ indicated as the number inside each state.
}
\label{fig:HMM4PSD}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.25\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{img/6_2_3_TEig_evolution.pdf}
\caption{Eigenvalue evolution for all $\lambda \in \Lambda_T$ sweeping
transition parameter $b$ from $1$ to $0$.
}
\label{fig:HMMeigEvol}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.25\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{img/6_2_3_PowerSpectrum_at_0dot75p.pdf}
\caption{Power spectrum and eigenvalues at $b = 3/4$.}
\label{fig:PSDfromSpectra1}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.25\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{img/6_2_3_PowerSpectrum_at_0dot25p.pdf}
\caption{Power spectrum and eigenvalues at $b = 1/4$.}
\label{fig:PSDfromSpectra2}
\end{subfigure
\caption{Parametrized HMM generator of a stochastic process, its eigenvalue
evolution, and two coronal spectrograms showing power spectra emanating
from eigen-spectra.
}
\label{fig:CC_DP}
\end{figure*}
The power spectrum is then calculated via Eq.~\eqref{eq:PSDfromACF} using the
meromorphic calculus. In particular, the power spectrum decomposes naturally
into a discrete part and a continuous part. Full details will be given
elsewhere, but the derivation is similar to that given in Ref.~\cite{Riec14b}
for the special case of diffraction patterns from HMMs. We note that it is
important to treat individual eigenspaces separately, as our generalized
calculus naturally accommodates. The end result, for the continuous part of the
power spectrum, is:
\begin{align}
P_\text{c}(\omega)
= \bigl\langle \left| x \right|^2 \bigr\rangle
+ 2 \, \text{Re} \bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} \overline{\Omega} \, \bigl( e^{i \omega} I - T \bigr)^{-1} \Omega \ket{\mathbf{1}} ~.
\label{eq:PcwFromResolvent}
\end{align}
All of the $\omega$-dependence is in the resolvent. Using the spectral
expansion of the resolvent given by
Eq.~\eqref{eq:PartialFractionsExpansion_of_Resolvent_2} allows us to better
understand the qualitative possibilities for the shape of the power spectrum:
\begin{align}
P_\text{c}(\omega) = \bigl\langle \left| x \right|^2 \bigr\rangle
+ \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_T} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
2 \, \text{Re}
\frac{\bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} \overline{\Omega} \, T_{\lambda, m} \Omega \ket{\mathbf{1}}}{(e^{i \omega} - \lambda)^{m+1}} ~.
\label{eq:PcwFromDecomposedResolvent}
\end{align}
Note that $\bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} \overline{\Omega} \, T_{\lambda, m} \Omega
\ket{\mathbf{1}}$ is a complex-valued scalar and all of the frequency dependence now
handily resides in the denominator.
The discrete portion (delta functions) of the power spectrum is:
\begin{align}
P_\text{d}(\omega) &= \sum_{k = -\infty}^{\infty}
\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_T \atop |\lambda| = 1}
2 \pi \, \delta( \omega - \omega_\lambda + 2 \pi k)
\nonumber \\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \times
\text{Re} \bigl( \lambda^{-1} \bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} \overline{\Omega} \, T_\lambda \Omega \ket{\mathbf{1}} \bigr)
~,
\label{eq:PdwFromResolvent}
\end{align}
where $\omega_\lambda$ is related to $\lambda$ by $\lambda = e^{i
\omega_\lambda}$. An extension of the Perron--Frobenius theorem guarantees that
the eigenvalues of $T$ on the unit circle have index $\nu_\lambda = 1$.
When plotted as a function of the angular frequency $\omega$ around the unit
circle, the power spectrum suggestively appears to emanate from the
eigenvalues $\lambda \in \Lambda_T$ of the hidden linear dynamic. See
Fig.~\ref{fig:CC_DP} for the analysis of an example parametrized process and
the last two panels for this display mode for the power spectra.
Eigenvalues of $T$ \emph{on} the unit circle yield Dirac delta functions in the
power spectrum. Eigenvalues of $T$ \emph{within} the unit circle yield more
diffuse line profiles, increasingly diffuse as the magnitude of the eigenvalues
retreats toward the origin. Moreover, the integrated magnitude of each
contribution is determined by projecting pairwise observation operators onto
the eigenspace emanating the contribution. Finally, we note that
nondiagonalizable eigen-modes yield qualitatively different line profiles.
Remarkably, the power spectrum generated by such process is the same as the
that generated by a potentially much simpler one---a process that is a function
of the same underlying Markov chain but instead emits the state-dependent
\emph{expectation value} of the observable within each state:
{\The \label{thm:PSDequivalence}
Let $\mathcal{P} = \bigl\{ p_s(x) \bigr\}_{s \in \CausalStateSet}$ be any set of
probability distribution functions over the domain $\ProcessAlphabet \subseteq
\mathbb{C}$. Let $\mathcal{B} = \bigl\{ \braket{x}_{p_s(x)} \bigr\}_{s \in
\CausalStateSet}$ and let $\mathcal{Q} = \bigl\{ \delta(x - \braket{x}_{p_s(x)} )
\bigr\}_{s \in \CausalStateSet}$. Then, the power spectrum generated by any hidden Markov
model $\mathcal{M} = \bigl( \CausalStateSet , \ProcessAlphabet , \mathcal{P}, T \bigr)$ differs at
most by a constant offset from the power spectrum generated by the hidden
Markov model $\mathcal{M}' = \bigl( \CausalStateSet , \mathcal{B} , \mathcal{Q}, T
\bigr)$ that has the same latent Markov chain but in any state $s \in \CausalStateSet$
emits, with probability one, the average value $\braket{x}_{p_s(x)}$ of the
state-conditioned probability density function $p_s(x) \in \mathcal{P}$ of
$\mathcal{M}$.
}
{\ProThe
From Eqs. \eqref{eq:PcwFromResolvent} and \eqref{eq:PdwFromResolvent}, we see
that $P_\text{c}(\omega) + P_\text{d}(\omega) - \bigl\langle \left| x \right|^2
\bigr\rangle$ depends only on $T$ and $\bigl\{ \braket{x}_{\text{p}(x|s)} \}_{s \in
\CausalStateSet}$. This shows that all HMMs that share the same $T$ and $\bigl\{
\braket{x}_{\text{p}(x|s)} \}_{s \in \CausalStateSet}$ have the same power spectrum $P(\omega)
= P_\text{c}(\omega) + P_\text{d}(\omega)$ besides a constant offset determined
by differences in $\bigl\langle \left| x \right|^2 \bigr\rangle$.
}
One immediate consequence is that \emph{any hidden Markov chain with any
arbitrary set of zero-mean distributions attached to each state}, i.e.:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{P} \in \bigl\{ \{ \text{p}(x | s) \}_{s \in \CausalStateSet} : \braket{x}_{\text{p}(x|s)} = 0 \text{ for all } s \in \CausalStateSet \bigr\}
~,
\end{align*}
\emph{generates a flat power spectrum with the appearance of white noise}. On
the one hand, this strongly suggests to data analysts to look beyond power
spectra when attempting to extract a process' full architecture. On the other,
whenever a process's power spectrum \emph{is} structured, it is a direct
fingerprint of the resolvent of the hidden linear dynamic. In short, the power
spectrum is a filtered image of the resolvent along the unit circle.
The power spectrum of a particular stochastic process is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:CC_DP} and using \emph{coronal spectrograms}, introduced in Ref.
\cite{Riec14b}, it illustrates how the observed spectrum can be thought of as
emanating from the spectrum of the hidden linear dynamic, as all power spectra
must. Figure~\ref{fig:HMM4PSD} shows the state-emitting HMM with
state-to-state transition probabilities parametrized by $b$; the mean values
$\braket{x}_{\text{p}(x|s)}$ of each state's pdf $\text{p}(x|s)$ are indicated as the
blue number inside each state. The process generated depends on the actual pdfs
and the transition parameter $b$ although, and this is our point, the power
spectrum is ignorant to the details of the pdfs.
The evolution of the eigenvalues $\Lambda_T$ of the transition dynamic among
latent states is shown from thick blue to thin red markers in
Fig.~\ref{fig:HMMeigEvol}, as we sweep the transition parameter $b$ from 1 to
0. A subset of the eigenvalues pass continuously but very quickly through the
origin of the complex plane as $b$ passes through $1/2$. The continuity of this
is not immediately apparent numerically, but can be revealed with a finer
increment of $b$ near $b \approx 1/2$. Notice the persistent eigenvalue of
$\lambda_T = 1$, which is guaranteed by the Perron--Frobenius theorem.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:PSDfromSpectra1} and again, at another parameter setting, in
Fig.~\ref{fig:PSDfromSpectra2}, we show the continuous part of the \emph{power}
spectrum $P_\text{c}(\omega)$ (plotted around the unit circle in solid blue)
and the \emph{eigen}-spectrum (plotted as red dots on and within the unit
circle) of the state-to-state transition matrix for the $11$-state hidden
Markov chain (leftmost panel) that generates it. There is also a
$\delta$-function contribution to the power spectrum at $\omega = 0$
(corresponding to $\lambda_T = 1$). This is not shown. These coronal
spectrograms illustrate how the power spectrum emanates from the HMM's
eigen-spectrum, with sharper peaks when the eigenvalues are closer to the unit
circle. This observation is fully explained by
Eq.~\eqref{eq:PcwFromDecomposedResolvent}. The integrated magnitude of each
peak depends on $\bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} \overline{\Omega} \ket{\lambda} \bra{\lambda} \Omega \ket{\mathbf{1}}$.
Interestingly, the apparent continuous spectrum component is the shadow of the
discrete spectrum of nonunitary dynamics. This suggests that resonances in
various physics domains concerned with a continuous spectrum can be modeled as
simple consequences of nonunitary dynamics. Indeed, hints of this appear in the
literature~\cite{Nare03,Soko06,Most09}.
\subsubsection{Continuous-time processes}
We close this exploration of conventional signal analysis methods using
the meromorphic calculus by commenting on continuous-time processes.
Analogous formulae can be derived with similar methods for
continuous-time
hidden Markov jump processes and continuous-time deterministic (possibly chaotic)
dynamics in terms of the generator $G$ of time evolution.
For example,
the continuous part $P_\text{c}(\omega)$ of the power spectrum from a continuous-time deterministic dynamic has the form:
\begin{align*}
P_\text{c}(\omega) =
2 \, \text{Re} \bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}}
\overline{\Omega} \, \bigl( i \omega I - G \bigr)^{-1} \Omega \ket{\mathbf{1}}
~.
\end{align*}
Appealing to the resolvent's spectral expansion again allows us to better
understand the possible shapes of their power spectrum:
\begin{align}
P_\text{c}(\omega) =
\sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_G} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
2 \, \text{Re} \frac{
\bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} \overline{\Omega} \, G_{\lambda, m} \Omega \ket{\mathbf{1}}}{(i \omega - \lambda)^{m+1}}
\label{eq:ContTimePSD}
~.
\end{align}
Since all of the frequency-dependence has been isolated in the denominator and
$ \bra{\boldsymbol{\pi}} \overline{\Omega} \, G_{\lambda, m} \Omega \ket{\mathbf{1}}$ is a
frequency-independent complex-valued constant, peaks in $P_\text{c}(\omega)$
can only arise via contributions of the form Re$\frac{c}{(i \omega -
\lambda)^n}$ for $c \in \mathbb{C}$, $\omega \in \mathbb{R}$, $\lambda \in
\Lambda_G$, and $n \in \mathbb{Z}_+$. This provides a rich starting point for
application and further theoretical investigation. For example,
Eq.~\eqref{eq:ContTimePSD} helps explain the shapes of power spectra of
nonlinear dynamical systems, as have appeared, e.g., in Ref.~\cite{Farm80}.
Furthermore, it suggests an approach to the inverse problem of inferring the
spectrum of the hidden linear dynamic via power spectra. In the next section,
however, we develop a more general proposal for inferring eigenvalues from a
time series. Further developments will appear elsewhere.
\subsection{Operators for chaotic dynamics}
Since trajectories in state-space can be generated independently of each other,
any nonlinear dynamic corresponds to a linear operation on an
infinite-dimensional vector-space of complex-valued distributions
(in the sense of generalized functions) over the original state-space.
For example, the
well known Lorenz ordinary differential equations~\cite{Lore63a} are nonlinear
over its three given state-space variables---$x$, $y$, and $z$. Nevertheless,
the dynamic is linear in the infinite-dimensional vector space
$D(\mathbb{R}^3)$ of distributions over $\mathbb{R}^3$. Although
$D(\mathbb{R}^3)$ is an unwieldy state-space, the dynamics there might be well
approximated by a finite truncation of its modes.
\subsubsection{Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron and Koopman operators}
\label{sec:Ruelle_and_Koopman_operators}
The preceding operator formalism applies, in principle at least. The question,
of course, is, Is it practical and does it lead to constructive consequences?
Let's see. The right eigenvector is either $\ket{0_G}$ or $\ket{1_T}$ with $T
= e^{\tau G}$ as the Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron transition
operator~\cite{Ruel71,Mack92a}. Equivalently, it is also $\boldsymbol{\pi}$,
the stationary distribution, with support on attracting subsets of
$\mathbb{R}^3$ in the case of the Lorenz dynamic. The corresponding
left-eigenvector $\mathbf{1}$, either $\bra{0_G}$ or $\bra{1_T}$, is uniform over the
space. Other modes of the operator's action, according to the eigenvalues and
left and right eigenvectors and generalized eigenvectors, capture the decay of
arbitrary distributions on $\mathbb{R}^3$.
The meromorphic spectral methods developed above give a view of the Koopman
operator and Koopman modes of nominally nonlinear dynamical
systems~\cite{Budi12} that is complementary to the Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron
operator. The Koopman operator $K$ is the adjoint---in the sense of vector
spaces, not inner product spaces---of the Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron operator
$T$: effectively the transpose $K = T^\top$. Moreover, it has the same spectrum
with only right and left swapping of the eigenvectors and generalized
eigenvectors.
The Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron operator $T$ is usually associated with the
evolution of probability density, while the Koopman operator $K$ is usually
associated with the evolution of linear functionals of probability density. The
duality of perspectives is associative in nature: $\bra{f} \bigl( T^n
\ket{\rho_0} \bigr)$ corresponds to the Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron perspective
with $T$ acting on the density $\rho$ and $\bigl( \bra{f} T^n \bigr)
\ket{\rho_0}$ corresponds to the Koopman operator $T^\top = K$ acting on the
observation function $f$. Allowing an observation vector $\vec{f} = [f_1, f_2 ,
\dots f_m]$ of linear functionals, and inspecting the most general form of
$K^n$ given by Eq.~\eqref{eq: T^n generally} together with the generalized
eigenvector decomposition of the projection operators of
Eq.~\eqref{eq:ProjectorsViaGenEigenvectors}, yields the most general form of
the dynamics in terms of Koopman modes. Each Koopman mode is a length-$m$
vector-valued functional of a Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron right eigenvector or
generalized eigenvector.
Both approaches suffer when their operators are defective. Given the
meromorphic calculus' ability to work around a wide class of such defects,
adapting it the Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron and Koopman operators suggests that
it may lift their decades-long restriction to only analyzing highly idealized
(e.g., hyperbolic) chaotic systems.
\subsubsection{Eigenvalues from a time series}
Let's explore an additional benefit of this view of the
Ruelle--Frobenius--Perron and Koopman operators, by proposing a novel method to
extract the eigenvalues of a nominally nonlinear dynamic. Let $O_N(f,z)$ be
($z^{-1}$ times) the $z$-transform \cite[pp. 257--262]{Brac99a} of a length-$N$
sequence of $\tau$-spaced type-$f$ observations of a dynamical system:
\begin{align*}
O_N(f,z) &\equiv z^{-1} \sum_{n=0}^N z^{-n} \braket{f |T^n| \rho_0} \\
& \to_{N \to \infty} \braket{f | (zI - T)^{-1} | \rho_0} \\
& = \sum_{\lambda \in \Lambda_T} \sum_{m = 0}^{\nu_\lambda - 1}
\frac{
\bra{f} T_{\lambda, m} \ket{\rho_0}}{(r e^{i \omega} - \lambda)^{m+1}}
~,
\end{align*}
as $N \to \infty$ for $ |z| = r > 1 $. Note that $\braket{f |T^n| \rho_0} $ is
simply the $f$-observation of the system at time $n \tau$, when the system
started in state $\rho_0$. We see that this $z$-transform of observations
automatically induces the resolvent of the hidden linear dynamic. If the
process is continuous-time, then $T = e^{\tau G}$ implies $\lambda_T = e^{ \tau
\lambda_G}$, so that the eigenvalues should shift along the unit circle if
$\tau$ changes; but the eigenvalues should be invariant to $\tau$ in the
appropriate $\tau$-dependent conformal mapping of the inside of the unit circle
of the complex plane to the left half complex plane. Specifically, for any
experimentally accessible choice of inter-measurement temporal spacing $\tau$,
the fundamental set of continuous time eigenvalues $\Lambda_G$ can be obtained
from $\lambda_G = \tfrac{1}{\tau} \ln \lambda_T$, where each $\lambda_T \in
\Lambda_T$ is extrapolated from $c / (re^{i \omega} - \lambda_T)^n$ curves fit
to $O_N(f,re^{i \omega})$ for $c \in \mathbb{C}$, large $N$, and fixed $r$.
The square magnitude of $O_N(f,z)$ is related to the power spectrum generated
by $f$-type observations of the system. Indeed, the power spectrum generated by
any type of observation of a nominally nonlinear system is a direct fingerprint
of the eigenspectrum and resolvent of the hidden linear dynamic. This suggests
many opportunities for inferring eigenvalues and projection operators from
frequency-domain transformations of a time series.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:Conclusion}
The original, abstract spectral theory of normal operators rose to central
importance when, in the early development of quantum mechanics, the eigenvalues
of Hermitian operators were detected experimentally in the optical spectra of
energetic transitions of excited electrons. We extended this powerful theory by
introducing the meromorphic functional calculus, providing the spectral theory
of \emph{nonnormal} operators. Our straightforward examples suggest that the
spectral properties of these general operators should also be experimentally
accessible in the behavior of complex---open, strongly interacting---systems.
We see a direct parallel with the success of the original spectral theory of
normal operators as it made accessible the phenomena of the quantum mechanics
of closed systems. This turns on nondiagonalizability and appreciating how
ubiquitous it is.
Nondiagonalizability has consequences for settings as simple as counting, as
shown in \S~\ref{sec:Poisson}. Moreover, there we found that
nondiagonalizability can be robust. The Drazin inverse, the negative-one power
in the meromorphic functional calculus, is quite common in the nonequilibrium
thermodynamics of open systems, as we showed in \S~\ref{sec:NoneqThermo}.
Finally, we showed that the spectral character of nonnormal and
nondiagonalizable operators manifests itself physically, as illustrated by
Figs.~\ref{fig:PSDfromSpectra1} and~\ref{fig:PSDfromSpectra2} of
\S~\ref{sec:PSD}.
From the perspective of functional calculus, nonunitary time evolution, open
systems, and non-Hermitian generators are closely related concepts since they
all rely on the manipulation of nonnormal operators. Moreover, each domain is
gaining traction. Nonnormal operators have recently drawn attention, from the
nonequilibrium thermodynamics of nanoscale systems~\cite{Gard16} to large-scale
cosmological evolution~\cite{Berk04}. In another arena entirely, complex
directed networks \cite{Newm10} correspond to nonnormal and
not-necessarily-diagonalizable weighted digraphs. There are even hints that
nondiagonalizable network structures can be optimal for implementing certain
dynamical functionality~\cite{Nishi06}. The opportunity here should be
contrasted with the well established field of spectral graph
theory~\cite{Chun97} that typically considers consequences of the spectral
theorem for normal operators applied to the symmetric (and thus normal)
adjacency matrices and Laplacian matrices. It seems that the meromorphic
calculus and its generalized spectral theory will enable a \emph{spectral
weighted digraph theory} beyond the purview of current spectral graph theory.
Even if the underlying dynamic is diagonalizable, particular questions or
particular choices of observable often \emph{induce} a nondiagonalizable hidden
linear dynamic. The examples already showed this arising from the simple
imposition of counting or assuming a Poissonian dynamic. In more sophisticated
examples, we recently found nondiagonalizable dynamic structures in quantum
memory reduction~\cite{Riec16a} and classical complexity measures
\cite{Crut13a}.
Our goal has been to develop tractable, exact analytical techniques for
nondiagonalizable systems. We did not discuss numerical implementation of
algorithms that naturally accompany its practical application. Nevertheless,
the theory does suggest new algorithms---for the Drazin inverse, projection
operators, power spectra, and more. Guided by the meromorphic calculus, such
algorithms can be made robust despite the common knowledge that numerics with
nondiagonalizable matrices is sensitive in certain ways.
The meromorphic calculus complements attempts to address nondiagonalizability,
e.g., via pseudospectra~\cite{Tref97, Tref05}. It also extends and simplifies
previously known results, especially as developed by Dunford~\cite{Dunf54a}.
Just as the spectral theorem for normal operators enabled much theoretical
progress in physics, we hope that our generalized and tractable analytic
framework yields rigorous understanding for much broader classes of complex
system. Importantly, the analytic framework should enable new \emph{theory} of
complex systems beyond the limited purview of numerical investigations.
While the infinite-dimensional theory is in principle readily adaptable from
the present framework, special care must be taken to guarantee a similar level
of tractability and generality. Nevertheless, even the finite-dimensional
theory enables a new level of tractability for analyzing
not-necessarily-diagonalizable systems, including nonnormal dynamics. Future
work will take full advantage of the operator theory, with more emphasis on
infinite-dimensional systems and continuous spectra.
Another direction forward is to develop creation
and annihilation operators within nondiagonalizable dynamics. In the study of
complex stochastic information processing, for example, this would allow
analytic study of infinite-memory processes generated by, say, stochastic
pushdown and counter automata \cite{Crut89e,Trav11b,Marz15a,Crut15a}. In a
physical context, such operators may aid in the study of open quantum field
theories. One might finally speculate that the Drazin inverse will help to tame
the divergences that arise there.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
JPC thanks the Santa Fe Institute for its hospitality. The authors thank John
Mahoney, Sarah Marzen, Gregory Wimsatt, and Alec Boyd for helpful discussions. We especially thank Gregory Wimsatt for his assistance with \S~\ref{sec:ProjOpsFromGenEigvects}. This material is
based upon work supported by, or in part by, the U. S. Army Research Laboratory
and the U. S. Army Research Office under contracts W911NF-12-1-0234,
W911NF-13-1-0390, and W911NF-13-1-0340.
|
\section{Introduction}
In the present paper we deal with the Dirichlet problem for
equations involving the $1$--Laplacian and a total variation term:
\begin{equation}\label{prob-prin}
\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,}\Big(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\Big)+g(u)|Du|=f(x)&\hbox{in
}\Omega\,,\\[3mm]
u=0 &\hbox{on }\partial\Omega\,,
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
where $\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^N$ is a bounded open set with Lipschitz
boundary $\partial\Omega$, $g$ stands for a continuous real
function and $f$ is a nonnegative function belonging to the
Marcinkiewicz space $L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$.
A related class of elliptic problems involving the $p$--Laplacian
operator (defined in $W^{1,p}(\Omega)$ by
$\displaystyle \Delta_p u=\hbox{\rm div\,}\big(|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla
u\big)$, where $p>1$) with a gradient term has been widely
studied. We recall the seminal paper \cite{LL} for a gradient term
of exponent $p-1$ and the systematic study of equations having a
gradient term with natural growth initiated by Boccardo, Murat and
Puel (see \cite{BMP1, BMP2, BMP3}). The variational approach
searches for solutions in the Sobolev space $W_0^{1,p}(\Omega)$ and
considers data belonging to its dual $W^{-1,p'}(\Omega)$. (In the
setting of Lebesgue spaces, data are naturally taken in
$L^{\frac{Np}{Np-N+p}}(\Omega)$ as a consequence of the Sobolev
embedding.)
We point out that the natural space to look for a solution to
problem \eqref{prob-prin} should be the Sobolev space
$W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)$ and the space of data, from a variational point
of view, should be its dual $W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)$. The Sobolev
embedding Theorem and duality arguments lead to consider as {\it
the right} function space of data the space $L^N(\Omega)$ (among
the Lebesgue spaces) and $L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$ (among the Lorentz
spaces). Evidences that the norm of $L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$ is
suitable enough to deal with this kind of problems can be found in
\cite{CT, MST1}. As far as the energy space is concerned, we
cannot search for solutions in $W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)$, which is not
reflexive, and we have to extend our setting to the larger space
$BV(\Omega)$, the space of all functions of bounded variation.
Therefore, our framework is the following: given a nonnegative
$f\in L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$, find $u\in BV(\Omega)$ that solves
problem \eqref{prob-prin} in an appropriate sense which will be introduced
below (see Definition \ref{def1}).
Two important cases of problem \eqref{prob-prin} have already been
studied. When $g(s)\equiv 0$ we obtain just the $1$--Laplacian
operator: $ \displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,}\Big(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\Big)$. There is
a big amount of literature on this equation in recent years,
starting in \cite{K}. Other papers dealing with this equation are
\cite{ABCM, BCN, CT, D, KF, MST1}. The interest in studying such a
case came from an optimal design problem in the theory of torsion
and related geometrical problems (see \cite{K}) and from the
variational approach to image restoration (see \cite{ABCM} and
also \cite{ACM} for a review on the development of variational
models in image processing). The suitable concept of solution to
handle the Dirichlet problem for this kind of equations was
introduced in \cite{ABCM}. In this paper, a meaning for the
quotient $\displaystyle \frac{Du}{|Du|}$ (involving Radon
measures) is given through a vector field $\z\in
L^\infty(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^N)$ satisfying $\|\z\|_\infty\le1$ and $(\z,
Du)=|Du|$ as measures. This vector field also gives sense to the
boundary condition in a weak sense. The meaning of all expressions
in which appear vector fields relies on the theory of
$L^\infty$--divergence--measure fields (see \cite{An} and \cite{CF}).
On the other hand, when $g(s)\equiv 1$, we get $\displaystyle
-\hbox{\rm div\,}\Big(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\Big)+|Du|$, which occurs in the level
set formulation of the inverse mean curvature flow (see
\cite{Huisken}, related developments can be found in
\cite{Huisken2, Moser, Moser2}).
The framework of these papers,
however, is different since $\Omega$ is unbounded. Furthermore,
the concept of solution is based on the minimization of certain
functional and does not coincide with which has been considered in the
previous case. This operator has also been studied in a bounded
domain in \cite{MS}, where it is proved the existence and
uniqueness of a bounded solution for a datum regular enough.
It is worth noting that, contrary to what happens in the
$p$--Laplacian setting with $p> 1$, features of solutions to
problem \eqref{prob-prin} with $g(s)\equiv 0$ are very different
to those with $g(s)\equiv 1$. Indeed, the presence of the gradient
term has a strong regularizing effect because in the first case the
following facts hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] Existence of $BV$--solutions is only guaranteed for data
small enough, for large data solutions become infinity in a set of
positive measure.
\item[(ii)] There is no uniqueness at all: given a solution $u$,
we also obtain that $h(u)$ is a solution, for every smooth increasing function $h$.
\end{enumerate}
Whereas, in the second case, the properties are:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] There is always a solution, even in the case where the datum is large.
\item[(ii)] An uniqueness result holds.
\end{itemize}
Regarding regularity of solutions, even an equation related to the case $g(s)\equiv 0$ like $u-\hbox{\rm div\,}\Big(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\Big)=f(x)$ (for which existence and uniqueness hold) has solutions with jump part. On the contrary, solutions to problem \eqref{prob-prin} with $g(s)\equiv 1$ have no jump part.
Moreover, solutions to $u-\hbox{\rm div\,}\Big(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\Big)=f(x)$ satisfy
the boundary condition only in a weak sense (and in
general, $u|_{\partial\Omega}\ne 0$), while if $g(s)\equiv 1$,
then the boundary condition holds in the trace sense, that is,
the value is attained pointwise on the boundary.
We point out that the situation concerning existence is rather
similar to that shown in studying problem
\begin{equation}\label{hardy}
\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle -\Delta u+|\nabla u|^2=\lambda \frac{u}{|x|^2}&\hbox{in
}\Omega\,,\\[3mm]
u=0 &\hbox{on }\partial\Omega\,,
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
in domains satisfying $0\in\Omega$, since the presence of the
quadratic gradient term induces a regularizing effect (see
\cite{APP} and \cite{ABPP}, see also Remark \ref{nota} below). Indeed, existence of a positive
solution to \eqref{hardy} can be proved for all $\lambda>0$, while
if the gradient term does not appear, solutions can be
expected only for $\lambda$ small enough, due to Hardy's
inequality.
Our purpose is to study the role of the function $g$ on the above
features satisfied by the solutions. Roughly speaking, we see that
the bigger $g$, the better the properties of the solution. The
standard case occurs when $g(s)\ge m>0$ for all $s\ge0$ and the
situation degenerates as soon as $g(s)$ touch the $s$--axis.
We begin by considering the case $g(s)=1$ for all $s\ge0$. To get an
idea of the difficulties one finds, let us recall previous works
on this subject. As mentioned, this problem was already handled in
\cite{MS} for data $f\in L^q(\Omega)$, with $q>N$. This condition
is somewhat artificial and was taken in this way due to the
necessity of obtaining bounded solutions. This necessity derives
from the use of the theory of $L^\infty$--divergence--measure
fields. It was initiated in \cite{An}, where a sense is provided
with the dot product $(\z, Du)$, where $\z\in L^\infty(\Omega; \mathbb{R}^N)$
satisfies that $\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$ is a Radon measure and $u\in
BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$ is a continuous function. In a
different way, it was later developed in \cite{CF} for a -possibly
discontinuous- function $u\in BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$ (see also
\cite{C, MST2} for a point of view closest to that of \cite{An}).
Since we must expect unbounded solutions starting from the most
natural space of data $L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$, the first result we
need is to give sense to the dot product $(\z, Du)$ when $u \in
BV(\Omega)$ can be unbounded. This was achieved in \cite{ADS}, but we
include it for the sake of completeness.
Endowed with this tool, in the first part of this paper, we prove an existence and
uniqueness result for problem \eqref{prob-prin} in the particular
case $g(s)\equiv 1$. The second part is fully devoted to our main
concern, that is, to search for the properties that solutions to
problem \eqref{prob-prin} satisfy for different functions $g$. For
better understanding, we summarize the results we will see in the
table below.
\vskip7mm
\centerline{\fpe
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|}
\hline
&&&\\[-0.05cm]
Function $g(s)$ & Existence & Uniqueness & Regularity \\[0.4cm]
\hline
\hline
&&&\\[-0.1cm]
\multirow{2}*{$0<m\le g(s)$} & \multirow{2}*{For every datum$^{(1)}$} & \multirow{2}*{Yes$^{(1)}$} & No jump part$^{(1)}$\\
&&& Better summability$^{(2)}$ \\[0.2cm]
\hline
&&&\\[-0.1cm]
$g$ vanishes at some points & \multirow{2}*{For every datum$^{(3)}$} & \multirow{2}*{Yes$^{(3)}$} & \multirow{2}*{No jump part$^{(3)}$} \\
$g\notin L^1([0,\infty[)$ & & & \\[0.25cm]
\hline
&&&\\[-0.1cm]
$g$ vanishes at infinity & For every datum$^{(4)}$, with & \multirow{2}*{Yes$^{(4)}$} & \multirow{2}*{No jump part$^{(4)}$}\\
$g\notin L^1([0,\infty[)$ & another concept of solution$^{(5)}$ & & \\[0.2cm]
\hline
&&&\\[-0.1cm]
$g\in L^1([0,\infty[)$ & For data small enough$^{(6,7)}$ & Yes$^{(7)}$ & No jump part$^{(7)}$ \\[0.25cm]
\hline
&&&\\[-0.1cm]
\multirow{2}*{$g$ vanishes on an interval} & \multirow{2}*{For data small enough$^{(8)}$} & \multirow{2}*{No$^{(9)}$} & With jump part$^{(10)}$\\
&&& No boundary condition$^{(11)}$\\[0.2cm]
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\smallskip
{\fpe{ (1) Theorem \ref{teounicidad} and Theorem \ref{teoalpha} \qquad (2) Proposition \ref{propq} \qquad (3) Theorem \ref{teo-finitos-ceros}\qquad (4) Theorem \ref{teoproblemag}
(5) Definition \ref{nueva} and Example \ref{toca-infin}\qquad(6) Example \ref{no-sol-radial}
\qquad (7) Theorem \ref{raro1} \qquad (8) Remark \ref{no-unicidad1}
(9) Remark \ref{no-unicidad1} and Remark \ref{no-unicidad2} \qquad (10) Example \ref{ejemplo-disc} \qquad (11) Example \ref{ejemplo-no-frontera} }}
\vskip7mm
The plan of this paper is the following. Section 2 is dedicated to
preliminaries, we introduce our notation and some properties of
the spaces $BV(\Omega)$ and $L^{N, \infty}(\Omega)$. In Section 3
we generalize the theory of $L^\infty$--divergence--measure fields
to take pairings $(\z, Du)$ of a certain vector field $\z$ and any
$u\in BV(\Omega)$. This theory is applied in Section 4 to extend
the result of existence and uniqueness of \cite{MS} to $L^{N,
\infty}(\Omega)$--data. In Section 5 we show explicit radial
examples of solutions. Section 6 is devoted to study the standard
cases of problem \eqref{prob-prin}, those where $g(s)$ is bounded
from below by a positive constant. A non standard case is shown in
Section 7 with $g(s)$ touching the $s$--axis; in this case we need
to change our definition of solution since solutions no longer
belong to $BV(\Omega)$. Finally, in Section 8 we deal with really
odd cases for which the considered properties are not necessarily
satisfied.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This research has been partially supported by the Spanish Mi\-nis\-te\-rio de Econom\'{\i}a y Competitividad and
FEDER, under project MTM2015--70227--P.
The first author was also supported by Ministerio de Econom\'{\i}a y
Competitividad under grant BES--2013--066655.
The authors would like to thank Salvador Moll for bringing paper \cite{GMP} to our attention.
\section{Preliminaries}
In this Section we will introduce some notation and auxiliary results which will be used
throughout this paper. In what follows, we will consider $N\ge2$,
and $\mathcal H^{N-1}(E)$ will denote the $(N - 1)$--dimensional
Hausdorff measure of a set $E$ and $|E|$ its
Lebesgue measure.
In this paper, $\Omega$ will always denote an open subset of
$\mathbb{R}^N$ with Lipschitz boundary. Thus, an outward normal unit
vector $\nu(x)$ is defined for $\mathcal H^{N-1}$--almost every
$x\in\partial\Omega$.
We will make use of the usual Lebesgue and Sobolev
spaces, denoted by $L^q(\Omega)$ and $W_0^{1,p}(\Omega)$,
respectively.
We recall that for a Radon measure $\mu$ in $\Omega$ and a Borel set
$A\subseteq\Omega$ the measure $\mu\res A$ is defined by $(\mu\res A)(B)=\mu(A\cap B)$
for any Borel set $B\subseteq\Omega$. If a measure $\mu$ is such that $\mu
= \mu \res A$ for a certain Borel set $A$, the measure $\mu$ is
said to be concentrated on $A$.
The truncation function will be use throughout this paper. Given
$k>0$, it is defined by
\begin{equation}\label{trun}
T_k(s)=\min\{|s|, k\}{\rm \; sign \;} (s)\,,
\end{equation} for all $s\in\mathbb{R}$. Moreover, we define another auxiliary real function by
\begin{equation}\label{G-k-fun}
G_k(s)=\big(s-T_k (s)\big){\rm \; sign \;} (s)\,.
\end{equation}
\subsection{The energy space}
The space of all functions of finite variation, that is the space
of those $u\in L^1(\Omega)$ whose distributional gradient is a Radon
measure with finite total variation, is denoted by $BV(\Omega)$.
This is the natural energy space to study the problems we are interested
in. It
is endowed with the norm defined by
$$ \|u\|=\int_\Omega |u|\, dx+ \int_\Omega|Du|\,,$$
for any $u\in BV(\Omega)$. An equivalent norm, which we will use in the sequel, is given by
$$\displaystyle \|u\|_{BV(\Omega)}=\int_{\partial\Omega}
|u|\, d\mathcal H^{N-1}+ \int_\Omega|Du|\,.$$
For every
$u \in BV(\Omega)$, the Radon measure $Du$ is decomposed into its
absolutely continuous and singular parts with respect to the
Lebesgue measure: $Du = D^a u + D^s u$.
We denote by $S_u$ the set of all $x\in\Omega$ such that $x$ is
not a Lebesgue point of $u$, that is, $x\in\Omega\backslash S_u$ if there exists $\tilde{u}(x)$ such that
$$\lim_{\rho \downarrow 0} \frac{1}{|B_{\rho}(x)|}
\int_{B_{\rho}(x)} \vert u(y) - \tilde{u}(x) \vert \, dy = 0\,.$$
We say that $x \in \Omega$ is an {\it
approximate jump point of } $u$ if there exist two real numbers $u^+(x)
>u^-(x) $ and $\nu_u(x) \in S^{N-1}$ such that
$$\lim_{\rho \downarrow 0} \frac{1}{|B_{\rho}^+(x,\nu_u(x))|}
\int_{B_{\rho}^+(x,\nu_u(x))} \vert u(y) - u^+(x) \vert \, dy = 0\,,$$
$$\lim_{\rho \downarrow 0} \frac{1}{|B_{\rho}^-(x,\nu_u(x))|}
\int_{B_{\rho}^-(x,\nu_u(x))} \vert u(y) - u^-(x) \vert \, dy = 0\,,$$ where
$$B_{\rho}^+(x,\nu_u(x)) = \{ y \in B_{\rho}(x) \ : \ \langle y - x, \nu_u(x) \rangle >
0 \} $$ and
$$B_{\rho}^-(x,\nu_u(x)) = \{ y \in B_{\rho}(x) \ : \ \langle y - x, \nu_u(x) \rangle <
0 \}\,.$$
We denote by $J_u$ the set of all approximate jump points of
$u$. By the Federer--Vol'pert Theorem \cite[Theorem 3.78]{AFP}, we know that $S_u$ is countably $\mathcal H^{N-1}$--rectifiable and $\mathcal H^{N-1}(S_u \backslash J_u) = 0$. Moreover, $Du \res J_u = (u^+ - u^-) \nu_u \mathcal H^{N-1} \res J_u$. Using
$S_u$ and $J_u$, we may split $D^su$ in two parts: the {\it jump}
part $D^j u$ and the {\it Cantor} part $D^c u$ defined by
$$D^ju = D^su \res J_u \ \ \ {\rm and} \ \ D^c u = D^su \res (\Omega \backslash S_u)\,.$$
Then, we have
$$D^j u = (u^+ - u^-) \nu_u \mathcal H^{N-1} \res J_u\,.$$
Moreover, if $x \in J_u$, then $\nu_u(x) = \frac{Du}{| D u |}(x)$ and
$\frac{Du}{| D u |}$ is the Radon--Nikod\'ym derivative of $Du$
with respect to its total variation $| D u |$.
The precise representative
$u^* : \Omega \backslash(S_u \backslash J_u) \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ of
$u$ is defined as equal to $\tilde{u}$ on $\Omega \backslash S_u$
and equal to $\frac{u^- + u^+}{2}$ on $J_u$. It is well known (see
for instance \cite[Corollary 3.80]{AFP}) that if $\rho$ is a
symmetric mollifier, then the mollified functions $u \star
\rho_{\epsilon}$ pointwise converges to $u^*$ in its domain.
A compactness result in $BV(\Omega)$ will be used several times in what follows.
It states that every sequence that is bounded in $BV(\Omega)$ has a
subsequence which strongly converges in $L^1(\Omega)$ to a certain
$u\in BV(\Omega)$ and the subsequence of gradients $*$--weakly
converges to $Du$ in the sense of measures.
To pass to the limit we will often apply that some functionals defined on $BV(\Omega)$ are
lower semicontinuous with respect to the convergence in $L^1(\Omega)$.
The most important are
the functionals
defined by
\begin{equation}\label{semc}
u\mapsto\int_{\Omega}|Du|
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{semcon}
u\mapsto\int_\Omega|Du|+\int_{\partial\Omega}|u|\,d\mathcal
H^{N-1}\,.
\end{equation}
In the same way,
it yields that each $\varphi\in C_0^1(\Omega)$ with
$\varphi\ge0$ defines a functional
$$
u\mapsto\int_{\Omega}\varphi\,|Du|\,,
$$
which is lower semicontinuous in $L^1(\Omega)$.
Finally, we recall that the notion of trace can be extended to any $u\in BV(\Omega)$ and this fact allows us to interpret it as the boundary values of $u$ and to write $u\big|_{\partial \Omega}$. Moreover, it holds that the trace is a linear bounded operator $BV(\Omega)\to L^1(\partial\Omega)$ which is onto.
For further information on functions of bounded variation, we refer to \cite{AFP, EG, Zi}.
\subsection{The data space}
Given a measurable function $u:\Omega\to\mathbb{R}$, we denote by $\mu_u$
the distribution function of $u$: the function $\mu_u: [0,
+\infty[\rightarrow [0, +\infty[$ defined by
$$\mu_u(t)=|\{x\in\Omega :|u(x)|>t\}|\,,\quad t\ge0\,.$$
For $1< q<\infty$, the space $L^{q,\infty}(\Omega)$, known as
Marcinkiewicz or weak-Lebesgue space, is the space of Lebesgue
measurable functions $u:\Omega\to\mathbb{R}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{quasi-norm}
[u]_q=\sup_{~t>0}t\,\mu_u(t)^{1/q}<+\infty\,.
\end{equation}
The relationship with Lebesgue spaces is
given by the following inclusions
$$L^q(\Omega) \hookrightarrow L^{q,\infty}(\Omega) \hookrightarrow
L^{q-\varepsilon}(\Omega)\,,$$
for suitable $\varepsilon >0$.
We point out that expression \eqref{quasi-norm} defines a quasi--norm which is not a norm in
$L^{q,\infty}(\Omega)$. (For a suitable norm in this space see \eqref{m1-norm}, \eqref{m2-norm} and \eqref{m3-norm} below).
Some properties of Lorentz spaces $L^{q,1}(\Omega)$
(with $1<q<\infty$) must be applied throughout this paper. To
begin with, we define the decreasing rearrangement of $u$ as the
function $u^\star:\,]0,|\Omega|]\to\mathbb{R}^+$ given by
$$u^\star(s)=\sup\{t>0:\mu_u(t)>s\}\,, \qquad s\in \, ]0,|\Omega|]\,,$$
(the main properties of rearrangements can be found in \cite{BS, H, Zi}).
In terms of $u^\star$, the quasi-norm \eqref{quasi-norm} becomes
\begin{equation}\label{m-norm}
[u]_q=\sup_{s>0}\,\{s^{1/q}u^\star(s)\}\,.
\end{equation}
We say that a measurable function $u\>:\>\Omega\to\mathbb{R}$
belongs to $L^{q,1}(\Omega)$ if
\begin{equation}\label{l-norm}
\|u\|_{L^{q,1}(\Omega)}=\frac1q\int_0^\infty s^{1/q}u^\star(s)\frac{ds}s
\end{equation}
is finite. This expression defines a norm (see \cite[Theorem
5.13]{BS}). The classical paper where these spaces are
systematically studied is \cite{H} (see also \cite{BS, Zi}). Some
important properties of Lorentz spaces are:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $L^{q,1}(\Omega)$ is a Banach space endowed with the norm defined by \eqref{l-norm}.
\item Simple functions are dense in $L^{q,1}(\Omega)$.
\item The norm \eqref{l-norm} is absolutely continuous.
\end{enumerate}
Concerning duality, the
Marcinkiewicz space $L^{q^\prime,\infty}(\Omega)$ is the dual space of $L^{q,1}(\Omega)$.
Indeed, it follows from a Hardy--Littlewood inequality that if $f\in L^{q^\prime,\infty}(\Omega)$ and $u\in L^{q,1}(\Omega)$, then $fu\in L^1(\Omega)$ and a H\"older type inequality holds:
\begin{multline*}
\Big|\int_\Omega fu\, dx\Big|\le \int_0^\infty f^\star(s) u^\star(s)\, ds=\int_0^\infty s^{1/q^\prime}f^\star(s) s^{1/q}u^\star(s)\, \frac{ds}s \\
\le
q [f]_{q^\prime}\|u\|_{L^{q,1}(\Omega)}\,.
\end{multline*}
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{m1-norm}
\|f\|_{L^{q^\prime,\infty}(\Omega)}=\sup \left \{ \frac{\Big|\int_\Omega fu\, dx\Big|}{\|u\|_{L^{q,1}(\Omega)}}\> : \>
u\in L^{q,1}(\Omega)\backslash \{0\} \right \}
\end{equation}
defines a norm in the Marcinkiewicz space and $\|f\|_{L^{q^\prime,\infty}(\Omega)}\le q\, [f]_{q^\prime}$ holds.
Taking into account that if $E\subset \Omega$ is a measurable set of positive measure and $u=|E|^{-\frac1q}\chi_E$,
then $\|u\|_{L^{q,1}(\Omega)}=1$ and also applying the density of simple functions, we deduce that
\begin{multline}\label{m2-norm}
\|f\|_{L^{q^\prime,\infty}(\Omega)}=\sup\left\{\Big|\int_\Omega fu\, dx\Big|\>:\> u=|E|^{-\frac1q}\chi_E\,, \hbox{ with } |E|>0\right\}\\
=\sup\left\{|E|^{-1/q}\int_E |f|\, dx\>:\> |E|>0\right\}\,.
\end{multline}
This implies $[f]_{q^\prime}\le \|f\|_{L^{q^\prime,\infty}(\Omega)}$, so that, the quasi--norm $[\, \cdot\, ]_{q^\prime}$ is equivalent to the norm
$\|\cdot\|_{L^{q^\prime,\infty}(\Omega)}$.
It also yields
\begin{equation}\label{m3-norm}
\|f\|_{L^{q^\prime,\infty}(\Omega)}=\sup_{s>0}\,\{s^{1/q^\prime}f^{\star\star}(s)\}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\displaystyle f^{\star\star}(s)=\frac1s\int_0^sf^\star(\sigma)\, d\sigma\,.$
On the other hand, we recall that Sobolev's inequality can be
improved in the context of Lorentz spaces (see \cite{Al}): the
continuous embedding
\begin{equation}\label{inclusion1}
W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)\hookrightarrow L^{\frac N{N-1},1}(\Omega)
\end{equation}
holds.
The best constant in this embedding will be denoted as
\begin{equation}\label{s-cons}
S_N=\sup\bigg\{\frac{\|u\|_{L^{\frac{N}{N-1},1}(\Omega)}}{\int_\Omega|\nabla u|\, dx}\>:\>
u\in W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)\backslash\{0\}\bigg\}\,.
\end{equation}
Its value is known:
\begin{equation}\label{s-value}
S_N=\frac{\Gamma\big(\frac N2+1\big)^{1/N}}{N\sqrt \pi}=\frac1{NC_N^{1/N}}\,,
\end{equation}
where $C_N$ denotes the
measure of the unit ball in $\mathbb{R}^N$.
(We explicitly point out that this is the value for the best constant having in mind the norm in the Lorentz space as defined in \eqref{l-norm}.)
Furthermore, by an approximation argument, this inclusion may be
extended to BV--functions with the same best constant $S_N$ (see, for instance, \cite{Zi}):
\begin{equation}\label{inclusion2}
BV(\Omega)\hookrightarrow L^{\frac N{N-1},1}(\Omega)\,.
\end{equation}
It is worth remarking that the supremum in \eqref{s-cons} is attained in $BV(\Omega)$.
As a consequence of this embedding, given $f\in L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$
and $u\in BV(\Omega)$, it yields $fu\in L^1(\Omega)$.
This fact will be essential in what follows.
Another fact concerning Lorentz spaces and duality is in order.
We will denote by $W^{-1, q^\prime}(\Omega)$ the dual space of
$W^{1,q}_0(\Omega)$, $1\le q<\infty$.
Here we recall just that the norm in $W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)$
is given by
\begin{equation}\label{novnorm}
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}=\sup \left \{ \big|< \mu, u>_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega),W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)}\big|\> : \>
\int_{\Omega} |\nabla u| \, dx \le 1 \right \}\,.
\end{equation}
Since the norm in $L^{\frac N{N-1},1}(\Omega)$ is absolutely continuous, it follows that $C_0^\infty(\Omega)$ is dense in $L^{\frac N{N-1},1}(\Omega)$.
A duality argument shows that $L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)\hookrightarrow W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)$ and, having in mind \eqref{m1-norm} and \eqref{s-cons}, we obtain: if $f\in L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$, then
\begin{multline*}
\|f\|_{L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)}=\sup \left \{ \frac{\Big|\int_\Omega
fu\, dx\Big|}{\|u\|_{L^{\frac N{N-1},1}(\Omega)}}\> : \>
u\in W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)\backslash \{0\} \right \}\\
=\sup \left \{ \frac{\Big|\int_\Omega fu\, dx\Big|}{\int_\Omega |\nabla
u|\,dx}\cdot \frac{\int_\Omega |\nabla u|\, dx}{\|u\|_{L^{\frac
N{N-1},1}(\Omega)}}\> : \>
u\in W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)\backslash \{0\} \right \}\ge S_N^{-1} \|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\,.
\end{multline*}
Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{rel-norm}
\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\le \frac1{N
C_N^{1/N}}\|f\|_{L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)}\,,
\end{equation}
for every $f\in L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$.
(For a related equality in a ball, see \cite[Remark 3.3]{MST1}).
\section{Extending Anzellotti's theory}
In this section we will study some properties involving
divergence--measure vector fields and functions of bounded
variation. Our aim is to extend the Anzellotti theory.
Following \cite{CF} we define $\DM(\Omega)$ as the space of all
vector fields $\z\in L^\infty(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^N)$ whose divergence
in the sense of distributions is a Radon measure with finite total variation, i.e., $\z\in \DM(\Omega)$ if and only if
$\hbox{div\,} \z$ is a Radon measure belonging to $W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)$.
The theory of $L^\infty$--divergence--measure vector fields is due
to G. Anzellotti \cite{An} and, independently, to G.--Q. Chen and
H. Frid \cite{CF}. In spite of their different points of view,
both approaches introduce the normal trace of a vector field
through the boundary and establish the same generalized
Gauss--Green formula. Both two also define the pairing $(\z,Du)$ as a
Radon measure
where $\z\in\DM(\Omega)$ and $u$ is a certain $BV$--function. However, they differ in handling this concept.
While in \cite{An} it is only considered continuous functions belonging to
$BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$ and the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{cruc}
|(\z,Du)|\le \|\z\|_\infty|Du|
\end{equation}
is proved for those functions; in \cite{CF}, general $u\in BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$ are
considered but it is only shown that the Radon measure $(\z,Du)$ is
absolutely continuous with respect to $|Du|$. In the present
paper we need that the inequality \eqref{cruc} holds for
every $u\in BV(\Omega)$ and every $\z\in\DM(\Omega)$ satisfying a certain condition (see
Corollary \ref{clave} below). That is why the way by which the pairings $(\z,Du)$
are obtained will be essential in our work. This is the reason for extending
the Anzellotti approach in this Section.
We finally point out that the theory
of divergence--measure fields has been extended later (see \cite{CTZ} and \cite{Zi2}).
We begin by recalling a result proved in \cite{CF}.
\begin{Proposition}\label{absolcont}
For every $\z\in\DM(\Omega)$,
the measure $\mu=\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$ is absolutely continuous with respect to
$\mathcal H^{N-1}$, that is, $|\mu|\ll\mathcal H^{N-1}$.
\end{Proposition}
Consider now $\mu=\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$ with $\z\in\DM(\Omega)$ and let $u\in
BV(\Omega)$; then the precise representative $u^*$ of $u$ is
equal $\mathcal H^{N-1}$--a.e. to a Borel function; that is, to
$\lim_{\varepsilon\to0}\rho_\varepsilon\star u$, where $(\rho_\varepsilon)$
is a symmetric mollifier. Then, it is deduced from the previous
Proposition that $u^*$ is equal $\mu$--a.e. to a Borel function.
So, given $u\in BV(\Omega)$, its precise representative $u^*$ is always $\mu$--measurable.
Moreover, $u\in BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$ implies
$u\in L^\infty (\Omega,\mu)\subset L^1 (\Omega,\mu)$.
\subsection{Preservation of the norm}
We point out that every $\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$,
with $\z\in \DM(\Omega)$, defines a functional on
$W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)$ by
\begin{equation}\label{def:1}
\langle\hbox{\rm div\,}\z, u
\rangle_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega),W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)}=-\int_\Omega\z\cdot\nabla
u\,dx\,.
\end{equation}
To express this functional in terms of an integral with respect to the measure $\mu=\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$,
we need the following Meyers--Serrin type theorem (see \cite[Theorem 3.9]{AFP} for its extension to $BV$--functions).
\begin{Proposition}\label{M-S}
Let $\mu = \hbox{\rm div\,} \z$, with $\z\in\DM(\Omega)$.
For every $u \in BV (\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$ there exists a sequence
$(u_n)_n$ in $W^{1,1}(\Omega) \cap C^\infty(\Omega) \cap L^\infty(\Omega)$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\hbox{\rm (1) } u_n\to u^*\quad\hbox{ in } L^1(\Omega,\mu)\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (2) } \int_\Omega|\nabla u_n|\,dx\to|Du|(\Omega)\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (3) } u_n|_{\partial\Omega}=u|_{\partial\Omega}\hbox{ for all }
n\in\mathbb{N}\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (4) }
|u_n(x)|\le\|u\|_\infty\ \ |\mu|\hbox{--a.e. for all }
n\in\mathbb{N}\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation*}
Moreover, if $u \in W^{1,1}(\Omega) \cap L^\infty(\Omega)$,
then one may find $u_n$ satisfying, instead of (2), the condition
$$\hbox{\rm (2') } u_n\to u \hbox{ in } W^{1,1}(\Omega)\,.$$
\end{Proposition}
Since $$
-\int_\Omega\z\cdot\nabla
\varphi\,dx=\int_\Omega \varphi\, d\mu
$$
holds for every $\varphi\in C_0^\infty(\Omega)$, it is easy to
obtain this equality for every $W_0^{1,1}(\Omega) \cap
C^\infty(\Omega)$.
Given $u\in W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$ and applying Proposition \ref{M-S}, we may find a sequence $(u_n)_n$ in $W_0^{1,1}(\Omega) \cap C^\infty(\Omega)$ satisfying (1) and (2').
Letting $n$ go to infinity, it follows from
$$
-\int_\Omega\z\cdot\nabla
u_n\,dx=\int_\Omega u_n\, d\mu
$$
for every $n\in \mathbb{N}$, that
$$
-\int_\Omega\z\cdot\nabla
u\,dx=\int_\Omega u^*\, d\mu
$$
and so
$$
\langle\hbox{\rm div\,}\z, u
\rangle_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega),W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)}=\int_\Omega u^*\,
d\mu
$$
holds for every $u\in W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$. Then the
norm of this functional is given by
$$
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}=\sup\left\{\Big|\int_\Omega u^*\, d\mu\Big|\>:\, u\in W^{1,1}_0(\Omega)\cap L^{\infty}(\Omega) ,\>\text{ with }\>\|u\|_{W^{1,1}_0(\Omega)}\le
1\right\}\,.
$$
where $\|u\|_{W^{1,1}_0}=\int_\Omega|\nabla u|\, dx$.
We have seen that $\mu=\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$ can be extended from
$W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)$ to $BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$.
Next, we will prove that this extension can be given as an integral with respect to $\mu$ and it preserves the
norm. To this end, the following Lemma, stated in \cite{An},
will be applied.
\begin{Lemma}
For every $u\in BV(\Omega)$
--so that $u\big|_{\partial\Omega}\in L^1(\partial\Omega)$--,
there exists a sequence $(w_n)_n$ in
$W^{1, 1}(\Omega)\cap C(\Omega)$ such that
\begin{equation*}\begin{array}{ll}
\hbox{\rm (1) }
w_n|_{\partial\Omega}=u|_{\partial\Omega}\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (2) } \displaystyle\int_\Omega|\nabla
w_n|\,dx\le\displaystyle\int_{\partial\Omega}|u|\,d\mathcal H^{N-1}+\frac1n\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (3) } \displaystyle\int_\Omega| w_n|\,dx\le\frac1n\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (4) } w_n(x)=0 \quad\hbox{ if }\quad\hbox{\rm dist}(x,
\partial\Omega)>\frac1n\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (5) } w_n(x)\to0 \quad\hbox{ for all }\quad x
\in\Omega\,.\hskip5cm
\end{array}\end{equation*}
Moreover, if $u\in BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$, then
$w_n\in L^\infty(\Omega)$ and $\|w_n\|_\infty\le\|u{\big|_{\partial\Omega}}\|_\infty$ for
all $n\in\mathbb{N}$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{Theorem}\label{ext}
Let $\z\in \DM(\Omega)$ and denote $\mu=\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$. Then, the functional given by \eqref{def:1} can be extended to $BV(\Omega) \cap L^{\infty}(\Omega)$ as an integral with respect to $\mu$ and its norm satisfies
\[
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)} = \sup\left\{\Big|\int_{\Omega} u^*\,d\mu\Big| \; : \; u\in BV(\Omega)\cap L^{\infty}(\Omega) ,\> \text{ with } \> \|u\|_{BV(\Omega)}\le 1 \right\}\,,
\]
where $\displaystyle \|u\|_{BV(\Omega)} = \int_{\partial\Omega}|u|\,d\mathcal H^{N-1} +\int_\Omega|Du|$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{pf} Since we already know that
$BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$ is a subset of $L^1(\Omega,\mu)$, all we
have to prove is
\begin{equation}\label{for}
\Big|\int_\Omega u^*\,d\mu\Big|\le
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\Big(|Du|(\Omega)+\int_{\partial\Omega}|u|\,d\mathcal H^{N-1}\Big)\,.
\end{equation}
for all $u\in BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$. This inequality
will be proved in two steps.
Step 1: Assume first that $u\in W^{1,1}(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$.
Consider the sequence $(w_n)_n$ in
$W^{1, 1}(\Omega)\cap C(\Omega)$ of the above Lemma. Hence,
$w_n\in L^\infty(\Omega)$ and $\|w_n\|_\infty\le\|u{\big|_{\partial\Omega}}\|_\infty$
for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$. Then it yields
\begin{multline*}
\Big|\int_\Omega (u^*-w_n^*)\,d\mu\Big|=\big|\langle\mu,
(u-w_n)\rangle_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega),W_0^{1,1}(\Omega)}\big|\le
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\int_\Omega|\nabla u-\nabla w_n|\,dx\\
\\
\le \|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\Big(\int_\Omega|\nabla
u|\,dx+\int_{\partial\Omega}|u|\,d\mathcal
H^{N-1}+\frac1n\Big)\,.
\end{multline*}
It follows that
\begin{multline}\label{uno}
\Big|\int_\Omega u^*\,d\mu\Big|\le \Big|\int_\Omega
(u^*-w_n^*)\,d\mu\Big|+\Big|\int_\Omega w_n^*\,d\mu\Big|\\
\\
\le\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\Big(\int_\Omega|\nabla
u|\,dx+\int_{\partial\Omega}|u|\,d\mathcal
H^{N-1}+\frac1n\Big)+\Big|\int_\Omega w_n^*\,d\mu\Big|\,.
\end{multline}
Since the sequence $(w_n)_n$ tends pointwise to $0$ and it is uniformly bounded
in $L^\infty(\Omega)$, by Lebesgue's Theorem,
$$
\lim_{n\to\infty}\int_\Omega w_n^*\,d\mu=0\,.
$$
Now, taking the limit in \eqref{uno} we obtain \eqref{for}.
Step 2: In the general case, we apply Proposition \ref{M-S} and
find a sequence
$u_n$ in $W^{1 ,1}(\Omega)\cap C^\infty(\Omega)\cap L^\infty (\Omega)$
such that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
\hbox{\rm (1) } u_n^*\to u^*\quad\hbox{ in } L^1(\Omega,\mu)\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (2) } \int_\Omega|\nabla u_n|\,dx\to|Du|(\Omega)\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (3) } u_n|_{\partial\Omega}=u|_{\partial\Omega}\hbox{ for all }
n\in\mathbb{N}\,.\\
\\
\hbox{\rm (4) }
|u_n(x)|\le\|u\|_\infty\ \ |\mu|\hbox{--a.e. for all }
n\in\mathbb{N}\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation*}
Then, it follows from
$$
\Big|\int_\Omega u_n^*\,d\mu\Big|\le
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\Big(\int_\Omega|\nabla u_n|\,dx+\int_{\partial\Omega}|u|\,d\mathcal
H^{N-1}\Big)\quad\hbox{for all }n\in\mathbb{N}
$$
that \eqref{for} holds.
\end{pf}
\begin{Corollary}\label{clave}
Let $\z\in\DM(\Omega)$ satisfy $\hbox{\rm div\,}\z=\nu+f$ for a certain Radon measure $\nu$ and a certain $f\in L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$. If either $\nu\ge 0$ or $\nu\le 0$,
then $\mu=\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$ can be extended to $BV(\Omega)$ and
$$
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}=
\sup\left\{\Big|\int_\Omega u^*\,d\mu\Big|\,:\, u\in BV(\Omega),
\,|Du|(\Omega)+\int_{\partial\Omega}|u|\,d\mathcal H^{N-1}\le1\right\}\,.
$$
Moreover, $BV(\Omega)\hookrightarrow L^1(\Omega,\mu)$.
\end{Corollary}
\begin{pf}
Consider $u\in BV(\Omega)$, denote $u_+=\max\{u,0\}$ and, for every $k>0$, apply the previous result to $T_k(u_+)$ (recall \eqref{trun}).
Then
\begin{multline}\label{trunc}
\Big|\int_\Omega T_k(u_+)^*\,d\mu\Big|\le
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\Big(|DT_k(u_+)|(\Omega)+\int_{\partial\Omega}T_k(u_+)\,d\mathcal
H^{N-1}\Big)\\
\\\le
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\Big(|Du_+|(\Omega)+\int_{\partial\Omega}u_+\,d\mathcal
H^{N-1}\Big)\,.
\end{multline}
On the other hand, observe that $u^*$ is a $\nu$--measurable
function, so that we obtain
$$
\int_\Omega T_k(u_+)^*\,d\mu=\int_\Omega T_k(u_+)^*\,d\nu+\int_\Omega
T_k(u_+(x))f(x)\,dx
$$
for every $k>0$. We may apply Levi's Theorem and Lebesgue's
Theorem to deduce
\begin{gather*}
\lim_{k\to+\infty}\int_\Omega T_k(u_+)^*\,d\nu=\int_\Omega
(u_+)^*\,d\nu
\end{gather*}
and
\begin{gather*}
\lim_{k\to+\infty}\int_\Omega T_k(u_+(x))f(x)\,dx=\int_\Omega
u_+(x)f(x)\,dx\,.
\end{gather*}
Thus,
$$
\lim_{k\to+\infty}\int_\Omega T_k(u_+)^*\,d\mu=\int_\Omega
(u_+)^*\,d\mu\,.
$$
Now, taking the limit when $k$ goes to $\infty$ in \eqref{trunc}, it yields
\begin{equation}\label{ec:1}
\Big|\int_\Omega (u_+)^*\,d\mu\Big|\le
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\Big(|Du_+|(\Omega)+\int_{\partial\Omega}u_+\,d\mathcal
H^{N-1}\Big)\,.
\end{equation}
Assume, in order to be concrete, that $\nu\ge0$.
Since $\int_\Omega (u_+)^*\,d\mu^-=\int_\Omega
u_+(x)f_-(x)\,dx$, we already have that $(u_+)^*$ is $\mu^-$--integrable.
Hence, as a consequence of \eqref{ec:1}, we deduce that $(u_+)^*$ is $\mu^+$--integrable as well and then, $(u_+)^*$ $\mu$--integrable too.
Since we may prove a similar inequality to $u_-=\max\{-u,0\}$, adding both inequalities we deduce that
$u^*$ is $\mu$--integrable and that
$$
\Big|\int_\Omega u^*\,d\mu\Big|\le
\|\mu\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\Big(|Du|(\Omega)+\int_{\partial\Omega}|u|\,d\mathcal
H^{N-1}\Big)
$$
holds true.
\end{pf}
\subsection{A Green's formula}
Let $\z\in \DM(\Omega)$ and let $u\in BV(\Omega)$.
Assume that $\hbox{\rm div\,}\z=\nu+f$, with $\nu$ a Radon measure satisfying either $\nu\ge0$ or $\nu\le0$, and $f\in L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$.
In the spirit of \cite{An}, we define the following
distribution on $\Omega$. For every $\varphi\in
C_0^\infty(\Omega)$, we write
\begin{equation}
\label{dist1} \langle(\z, Du),\varphi\rangle=
-\int_\Omega u^*\,\varphi\,d\mu-\int_\Omega u\, \z\cdot\nabla
\varphi\, dx\,,
\end{equation}
where $\mu=\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$.
Note that the previous subsection implies that every term in the
above definition has sense. We next prove that this distribution
is actually a Radon measure having finite total variation.
\begin{Proposition}\label{prop}
Let $\z$ and $u$ be as above.
The distribution $(\z, Du)$ defined previously satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{ec:2}
|\langle (\z, Du), \varphi\rangle| \le \|\varphi\|_\infty \| \z
\|_{L^{\infty}(U)} \int_{U} |Du|
\end{equation}
for all open set $U \subset \Omega$ and for all $\varphi\in
C_0^\infty(U)$.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{pf}
If $U\subset \Omega$ is an open set and $\varphi\in
C_0^\infty(U)$, then it was proved in \cite{MST2} that
\begin{equation}\label{ec:3}
|\langle(\z, DT_k(u)),\varphi\rangle|\le\|\varphi\|_\infty
\|\z \|_{L^\infty(U)}\int_U|DT_k(u)|\le\|\varphi\|_\infty
\|\z \|_{L^\infty(U)}\int_U|Du|
\end{equation}
holds for every $k>0$.
On the other hand,
$$
\langle(\z, DT_k(u)),\varphi\rangle=-\int_\Omega T_k(u)^*\varphi
\, d\mu-\int_\Omega T_k(u)\z\cdot\nabla\varphi\, dx\,.
$$
We may let $k\to\infty$ in each term on the right hand side, due
to $u^*\in L^1(\Omega, \mu)$ and $u\in L^1(\Omega)$.
Therefore,
$$
\lim_{k\to\infty}\langle(\z, DT_k(u)),\varphi\rangle=\langle(\z,
Du),\varphi\rangle\,,
$$
and so \eqref{ec:3} implies \eqref{ec:2}.
\end{pf}
\begin{Corollary}
The distribution $(\z, Du)$ is a Radon measure. It and its total variation $\vert (\z, Du) \vert$ are absolutely
continuous with respect to the measure $\vert Du \vert$ and
$$\left\vert \int_{B} (\z, Du) \right\vert \leq \int_{B} \vert (\z, Du) \vert \leq \Vert \z
\Vert_{L^{\infty}(U)} \int_{B} \vert Du \vert
$$
holds for all Borel sets $B$ and for all open sets $U$ such that
$B \subset U \subset \Omega$.
\end{Corollary}
On the other hand, for every $\z \in \mathcal{DM}^{\infty}(\Omega)$,
a weak trace on $\partial \Omega$ of the
normal component of $\z$ is defined in \cite{An} and denoted by
$[\z, \nu]$.
\begin{Proposition}
Let $\z$ and $u$ be as above.
With the above definitions, the
following Green formula holds
\begin{equation}\label{GreenI}
\int_{\Omega} u^* \, d\mu + \int_{\Omega} (\z, Du) =
\int_{\partial \Omega} [\z, \nu] u \ d\mathcal H^{N-1}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\mu=\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{pf}
Applying the Green formula proved in \cite{MST2}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{ec:4}
\int_{\Omega} T_k(u)^* \, d\mu + \int_{\Omega} (\z, DT_k(u)) =
\int_{\partial \Omega} [\z, \nu] T_k(u) \ d\mathcal H^{N-1}\,,
\end{equation}
for every $k>0$. Note that the same argument appearing in the proof of the previous Proposition leads to
$$
\lim_{k\to\infty}\int_{\Omega} (\z, DT_k(u)) =\int_{\Omega} (\z,
Du)\,.
$$
We may take limits in the other terms since $u^*\in L^1(\Omega,
\mu)$ and $u\in L^1(\partial\Omega)$. Hence, letting $k$ go to
$\infty$ in \eqref{ec:4}, we get \eqref{GreenI}.
\end{pf}
\begin{Proposition}
Let $\z \in \DM(\Omega)$ with $\|\z\|_\infty \le 1$ and let $u\in BV(\Omega)$. Then $(\z,Du)=|Du|$ as measures if and only if $(\z,DT_k(u)) = |DT_k(u)|$ as measures for all $k>0$.
\label{prop1}
\end{Proposition}
\begin{pf}
We first assume $(\z,Du)=|Du|$ and so (recall \eqref{G-k-fun})
\[
\begin{array}{rl}
|Du| =& (\z, Du) = (\z , DT_k(u)) + (\z, DG_k(u))\\[0.2cm]
\le & |DT_k(u)| + |DG_k(u)| = |Du|\,.\\
\end{array}
\]
Then, the inequality becomes equality and so $(\z , DT_k(u))=|DT_k(u)|$ as measures.
\\
Conversely, we assume $(\z,DT_k(u)) = |DT_k(u)|$ for all $k>0$. For each $\varphi \in C^\infty_0 (\Omega)$, we use the same argument which appears in Proposition \ref{prop} to obtain:
\[
\lim_{k \to \infty} \langle (\z, DT_k(u)), \varphi \rangle = \langle (\z, Du), \varphi \rangle
\]
and
\[
\lim_{k \to \infty} \int_\Omega \varphi \, |DT_k(u)| = \int_\Omega \varphi \, |Du|\,.
\]
So, using the hypothesis, we conclude $\langle (\z, Du), \varphi \rangle=\int_\Omega \varphi \, |Du|$ for every $\varphi \in C^\infty_0 (\Omega)$, that is, $(\z, Du)=|Du|$ as measures.
\end{pf}
\subsection{The chain rule}
We point out that there is a chain rule for $BV$--functions, the more general formula is due to L. Ambrosio and G. Dal Maso (see \cite[Theorem 3.101]{AFP}, see also \cite[Theorem 3.96]{AFP}). In our framework, it states that if $v\in BV(\Omega)$ satisfies $D^jv=0$ and $u=G(v)$, where $G$ is a Lipschitz--continuous real function, then $u\in BV(\Omega)$ and
\[
Du=G^\prime(v)|Dv|\,.
\]
We cannot directly apply this result in our context since $G^\prime$ need not be bounded. Hence, the following slight generalization is needed.
\begin{Theorem}\label{regla-cadena}
Let $v \in BV(\Omega)$ such that $D^jv=0$ and let $g$ be a continuous and unbounded real function with $g(s) > m>0$ for all $s \in \mathbb{R}$. We define
\[
G(s) =\int_0^s g(\sigma)\, d\sigma\,.
\]
Assuming that $u=G(v) \in L^1(\Omega)$, it holds that $u\in BV(\Omega)$ if and only if $g(v)^*|Dv|$ is a finite measure and in that case $|Du| =g(v)^*|Dv|$ as measures.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{pf}
Let $\varphi \in C^\infty_0 (\Omega)$ with $\varphi \ge 0$.
We apply the chain rule to get the next equality:
\[
\int_{\{ v < k\}} \varphi \, |Du| = \int_{\{ v < k\}} \varphi \, g(T_k(v))^*\,|Dv| = \int_{\{ v < k\}}\varphi \, g(v)^* \, |Dv|\,.
\]
Now, using the monotone convergence theorem, we take limits when $k \to \infty$ and it holds
\[
\int_\Omega \varphi \, |Du| =\int_\Omega \varphi\, g(v)^*\,|Dv|\,,
\]
and if one integral is finite, the other is finite too. Finally, we generalize this equality to every $\varphi \in C^\infty_0 (\Omega)$ and the result is proved.
\end{pf}
\section{Solutions for $L^{N,\infty }$--data}
This section is devoted to solve problem
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Du}{|Du|}\right) +|D u| = f(x) & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\label{problema1}
\end{equation}
for nonnegative data $f\in L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$. We begin by introducing the notion of solution to this problem.
\begin{Definition}\label{def1}
Let $f\in L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$ with $f\ge0$. We say that $u\in BV(\Omega)$ satisfying $D^ju=0$ is a \textbf{weak solution} of problem \eqref{problema1}
if there exists $\z\in\DM(\Omega)$ with $\|\z\|_{\infty} \le 1$ such that
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z + |Du| =f \,\text{ in }\, \dis (\Omega)\,,
\]
\[
(\z, Du)=|Du| \,\text{ as measures in }\, \Omega\,,
\]
and
\[
u\big|_{\partial \Omega} = 0\,.
\]
\end{Definition}
\begin{remark}\label{exp}\rm
We explicitly remark that any solution to problem \eqref{problema1} satisfies
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,}\big(e^{-u} \z\big) =e^{-u}f
\]
in the sense of distributions (see \cite[Remark 3.4]{MS}).
\end{remark}
\begin{Theorem}
There is a unique weak solution of problem \eqref{problema1}.
\label{teoexist}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{pf}
The proof will be divided in several steps.
\bigskip{\sl Step 1: Approximating problems.}
The function $f$ is in $ L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)$ so, there exists a sequence $\{f_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ in $L^{\infty}(\Omega)$ such that $f_n$ converges to $f$ in $L^1(\Omega)$.
\\
In \cite{MS} it is proved that there exists $u_n \in
BV(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$, with $D^ju_n=0$ and $u_n\ge 0$, which is a solution to
problem
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Du_n}{|Du_n|}\right) +|D u_n| = f_n(x) & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
u_n=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,.
\end{array}
\right .
\label{probleman}
\end{equation}
That is, there exists a vector field $\z_n$ in $\DM (\Omega)$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{condn1}
-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z_n + |Du_n| =f_n \,\text{ in }\, \dis (\Omega)\,,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{condn2}
(\z_n, Du_n)=|Du_n| \,\text{ as measures in }\, \Omega\,,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{condn3}
u_n\big|_{\partial \Omega} = 0\,.
\end{equation}
On account of Remark \ref{exp}, it also holds
\begin{equation}\label{condn4}
-\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-u_n}\z_n) =e^{-u_n}f_n \,\text{ in }\, \dis (\Omega)\,.
\end{equation}
\bigskip{\sl Step 2: $BV$--estimate.}
Taking the function test $\frac{T_k(u_n)}{k}$ in problem
\eqref{probleman}, we get
\[
\frac{1}{k}\int_\Omega (\z_n,DT_k(u_n)) + \frac{1}{k}\int_\Omega T_k(u_n)^*|Du_n| = \int_\Omega f_n \frac{T_k(u_n)}{k}\, dx \le \int_\Omega f_n\, dx \le C\,,
\]
where $C$ does not depend on $n$. Since $(\z_n,Du_n) =|Du_n|$, it
follows from Proposition \ref{prop1} that $(\z_n,DT_k(u_n))=|DT_k(u_n)|$, which is nonnegative. Thus
\[
\frac{1}{k}\int_\Omega T_k(u_n)^*|Du_n| \le C\,.
\]
Then, letting $k \to 0$ in the inequality above we arrive at
\[
\int_\Omega |Du_n| \le C\,.
\]
Therefore, $u_n$ is bounded in $BV(\Omega)$ and, up to a
subsequence, $u_n \to u$ in $L^1(\Omega)$ and $D u_n$ converges to
$Du$ $*$--weakly as measures when $n \to \infty$.
\bigskip{\sl Step 3: Vector field.}
Now, we want to find a vector field $\z\in \DM(\Omega)$ with $\|\z\|_{\infty} \le 1$ such that
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z + |Du| \le f \,\text{ in }\, \dis (\Omega)\,.
\]
\\
The sequence $\{\z_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ is bounded in
$L^\infty(\Omega; \mathbb{R}^N)$ then, there exists $\z\in L^\infty
(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^N)$ such that $\z_n \rightharpoonup \z$ $*$--weakly in
$L^\infty(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^N)$. In addition, since $ \|\z_n\|_\infty \le
1$ we get $\|\z\|_\infty\le 1$.
\\
Using $\varphi \in C^\infty_0 (\Omega)$ with $\varphi \ge 0$ as a function test in \eqref{probleman}, we arrive at
\[
\int_\Omega \z_n \cdot \nabla \varphi\, dx +\int_\Omega \varphi\, |Du_n| = \int_\Omega f_n\, \varphi\, dx\,,
\]
and when we take $n \to \infty$, using \eqref{semc} it becomes
\[
\int_\Omega \z \cdot \nabla\varphi\, dx +\int_\Omega \varphi\, |Du| \le \int_\Omega f \,\varphi\, dx\,.
\]
Therefore,
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z + |Du| \le f \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \dis (\Omega)
\]
and $-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z$ is a Radon measure. In addition, since $-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z _n= f_n -|Du_n|$ holds for every $n \in \mathbb{N}$, the sequence $-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z_n$ is bounded in
the space of measures and, due to $-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z_n$ converges to $-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z$, we
deduce that $-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z$ is a Radon measure with finite total
variation.
\\
On the other hand, multiply \eqref{condn4} by $e^{-u_n}\varphi$, with $\varphi \in
C^\infty_0 (\Omega)$, then Green's formula provides us
\[
\int_\Omega e^{-u_n} \z_n\cdot\nabla\varphi\, dx = \int_\Omega f_n e^{-u_n}\varphi\, dx\,,
\]
and letting $n$ go to $\infty$ we get
\[
\int_\Omega e^{-u} \z\cdot\nabla\varphi\, dx = \int_\Omega f e^{-u}\varphi\, dx\,.
\]
Namely,
\begin{equation}\label{ecu0}
-\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-u}\z ) = fe^{-u}\,,\quad\hbox{in }\mathcal D'(\Omega)\,.
\end{equation}
\bigskip{\sl Step 4: $D^ju=0$.}
In this step, we are adapting an argument used in \cite{GMP}, which relies on \cite[Proposition 3.4]{AmCM} and \cite[Lemma 5.6]{C} (see also \cite[Proposition 2]{ADS}).
A previous result is needed, namely, inequality \eqref{desig} bellow. To prove \eqref{desig}, we begin by recalling
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-u_n} \z_n)=e^{-u_n}f_n \quad\hbox{in }\mathcal D'(\Omega)\,,
\]
since $u_n$ is the solution to problem \eqref{probleman}. Using that $u_n = G_k(u_n)+T_k(u_n)$, we can write
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-u_n} \z_n)=-e^{-G_k(u_n)}\hbox{\rm div\,}(e^{-T_k(u_n)}\z_n) + (e^{-u_n})^*|DG_k(u_n)|\,,
\]
and so
\begin{equation}\label{ecu1}
\begin{array}{rcl}
e^{-T_k(u_n)}f_n &=& -\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-T_k(u_n)} \z_n) + (e^{-T_k(u_n)})^*|DG_k(u_n)| \\[0.2cm]
&=& -\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-T_k(u_n)}\z_n)+e^{-k}|DG_k(u_n)|\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Applying first the chain rule and then \cite[Proposition 2.3]{MS}, we have
\begin{multline}\label{ecu2}
|De^{-T_k(u_n)}| = ( e^{-T_k(u_n)})^* |DT_k(u_n)|\\
= ( e^{-T_k(u_n)})^* (\z_n,DT_k(u_n))
= ( e^{-T_k(u_n)}\z_n,DT_k(u_n))\,.
\end{multline}
\medskip
Let $\varphi \in C^\infty_0(\Omega)$ with $\varphi \ge 0$, due to \eqref{ecu2} and \eqref{ecu1}, we get
\begin{multline*}
\int_\Omega \varphi \, |D e^{-T_k(u_n)}| = \langle( e^{-T_k(u_n)}\z_n,DT_k(u_n)),\varphi\rangle\\
=-\int_\Omega T_k(u_n)\, \varphi\, \hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-T_k(u_n)}\z_n) - \int_\Omega T_k(u_n)\, e^{-T_k(u_n)}\,\z_n \cdot \nabla \varphi\, dx\\
= \int_\Omega T_k(u_n)\, \varphi \, e^{-T_k(u_n)}f_n\, dx - \int_\Omega k\, e^{-k} \varphi \, |DG_k(u_n)| -\int_\Omega T_k(u_n)\, e^{-T_k(u_n)}\, \z_n \cdot \nabla \varphi\, dx\,.
\end{multline*}
That is,
\begin{multline*}
\int_\Omega \varphi \, |De^{-T_k(u_n)}| +\frac{k}{e^k} \int_\Omega \varphi \, |DG_k(u_n)|\\
= \int_\Omega T_k(u_n) \, \varphi \, e^{-T_k(u_n)} \, f_n \, dx- \int_\Omega T_k(u_n) \, e^{-T_k(u_n)}\,\z_n \cdot \nabla \varphi\, dx\,.
\end{multline*}
Now, we can take limits when $n$ goes to $\infty$, and applying the lower semicontinuity of the total variation, we arrive to the next inequality:
\begin{multline*}
\int_\Omega \varphi \, |De^{-T_k(u)}| +\frac{k}{e^k} \int_\Omega \varphi \, |DG_k(u)|\\
\le \int_\Omega T_k(u) \,\varphi \, e^{-T_k(u)} \, f\, dx - \int_\Omega T_k(u) \, e^{-T_k(u)}\, \z \cdot \nabla \varphi\, dx\,.
\end{multline*}
Finally, letting $k\to \infty$ it holds that
\[
\int_\Omega \varphi \, |De^{-u}| \le \int_\Omega u \, \varphi \, e^{-u} \, f\, dx - \int_\Omega u \, e^{-u}\, \z \cdot \nabla \varphi\, dx
= \langle (e^{-u}\z, Du), \varphi \rangle\,.
\]
Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{desig}
|De^{-u}| \le (e^{-u}\z, Du)
\end{equation}
as measures in $\Omega$.
\\
On the other hand, we already know that
\[
\hbox{\rm div\,} (u\,e^{-u} \z) = (e^{-u} \z, Du) + u \,\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-u}\z)\,,
\]
as measures and now we are considering the restriction on the set $J_u$. Since, by \eqref{ecu0} we have
\[
u \,\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-u}\z)=-u\, e^{-u}f\in L^1(\Omega)
\]
and $|J_u|=0$,
it follows that the measure $u\,\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-u}\z)$ vanishes on $J_u$, so that
\[
\hbox{\rm div\,} (u\,e^{-u}\z)\res J_u = (e^{-u} \z, Du) \res J_u \ge |De^{-u}|\res J_u\,.
\]
Applying \cite[Lemma 2.3 and Lemma 2.4]{GMP}, the following manipulations can be performed on $J_u$:
\begin{equation}\label{salv}
\begin{array}{rcl}
\hbox{\rm div\,} (u\,e^{-u}\z)&=& [ue^{-u}\z, \nu_u]^+ - [ue^{-u}\z, \nu_u]^-\\[0.2cm]
&=& u^+[e^{-u}\z,\nu_u]^+- u^-[e^{-u}\z,\nu_u]^-\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Moreover, we also deduce that, on $J_u$,
\[
\hbox{\rm div\,}\big(e^{-u}\z\big)=[e^{-u}\z,\nu_u]^+-[e^{-u}\z,\nu_u]^-
\]
and, due to
\[
\hbox{\rm div\,}\big(e^{-u}\z\big)\in L^1(\Omega)\quad \hbox{and}\quad |J_u|=0,
\]
it follows that $[e^{-u}\z,\nu_u]^+=[e^{-u}\z,\nu_u]^-$. We will write this common value as $[e^{-u}\z,\nu_u]$. With this notation, \eqref{salv} becomes
\[
\begin{array}{rcl}
\hbox{\rm div\,} (u\,e^{-u}\z)&=& (u^+-u^-)[e^{-u}\z,\nu_u] \\[0.2cm]
&=& (u^+-u^-) e^{-u^+} [\z,\nu_u]\\[0.2cm]
&\le&(u^+-u^-)e^{-u^+}
\end{array}
\]
Thus, we have seen that
\[
(u^+-u^-)e^{-u^+}\mathcal H^{N-1}\res J_u\ge |De^{-u}|\res J_u =\big(e^{-u^-}-e^{-u^+}\big)\mathcal H^{N-1}\res J_u\,.
\]
Hence, for $\mathcal H^{N-1}$--almost all $x\in J_u$, we may use the Mean Value Theorem to get
\[
(u(x)^+-u(x)^-)e^{-u(x)^+} \ge e^{-u(x)^-}-e^{-u(x)^+} = (u(x)^+-u(x)^-)e^{-w(x)}
\]
with $u(x)^-<w(x)< u(x)^+$. Therefore, it yields $u(x)^+=u(x)^-$. Since this argument holds for $\mathcal H^{N-1}$--almost every point $x\in J_u$, we get
\[
D^ju=0\,.
\]
\bigskip{\sl Step 5: $u$ is a solution to problem \eqref{problema1}.}
To finish the proof, it remains to check that $u$ satisfies the three conditions of the definition of solution. The previous step will be essential in this checking. Indeed, it allows us to perform the following calculations:
\[
\begin{array}{rl}
fe^{-u} =& -\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-u}\z ) = -(\z, D(e^{-u})^*) -(e^{-u})^*\hbox{\rm div\,} \z \\[0.2cm]
\le & |De^{-u}|+fe^{-u} -(e^{-u})^*|Du|\\[0.2cm]
=&fe^{-u}\,.
\end{array}
\]
Therefore, the inequality becomes equality and so
\begin{equation}
-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z + |Du| = f \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \dis (\Omega)\,.
\label{distribuciones}
\end{equation}
To prove that $(\z,Du) = |Du|$ as measures in $\Omega$, we just take into account \eqref{desig}, \cite[Proposition 2.3]{MS} and the chain rule to get
\begin{equation*}
|D(e^{-u})|\le (e^{-u}\z , Du)=(e^{-u})^*(\z, Du)\le (e^{-u})^*|Du|=|D(e^{-u})|\,,
\end{equation*}
from where the equality $(e^{-u})^*(\z, Du)= (e^{-u})^*|Du|$ as measures follows. We conclude that
$(\z,Du) = |Du|$ as measures.
\\
Now, we will prove that $u(x) = 0$ for $\mathcal H^{N-1}$--almost
all $x \in \partial \Omega$. To do that, we use the test function
$T_k(u_n)$ in problem \eqref{probleman}, so that
\[
\int_\Omega (\z_n, DT_k(u_n)) + \int_\Omega (T_k(u_n))^*|Du_n| = \int_\Omega f \, T_k(u_n)\, dx\,.
\]
Defining the auxiliary function $J_k$ by
\[
J_k (s) = \int_0^s T_k(\sigma)\, d\sigma =
\left\{
\begin{array}{lcl}
\frac{s^2}{2}&\hbox{if}& 0\le s\le k\,,\\
ks-\frac{k^2}{2}&\hbox{if}&k> s\,,\\
\end{array}
\right .
\]
we obtain
\begin{multline*}
\int_\Omega |DT_k(u_n)| + \int_{\partial \Omega} |T_k(u_n)|\, d\mathcal H^{N-1}+ \int_\Omega |DJ_k(u_n)| +\int_{\partial \Omega} |J_k(u_n)|\, d\mathcal H^{N-1}\\
= \int_\Omega f \,T_k(u_n)\, dx\,.
\end{multline*}
Taking into account that $J_k(u_n) \to J_k(u)$ in $L^1(\Omega)$, we let $n \to
\infty$ and applying the lower semicontinuity of functional
\eqref{semcon} we arrive at
\begin{multline*}
\int_\Omega |DT_k(u)| + \int_{\partial \Omega} |T_k(u)|\, d\mathcal H^{N-1}+ \int_\Omega |DJ_k(u)| +\int_{\partial \Omega} |J_k(u)|\, d\mathcal H^{N-1}\\
\le \int_\Omega f\, T_k(u)\, dx\le \int_\Omega f u\, dx\,.
\end{multline*}
Letting now $k\to \infty$ we obtain
\[
\int_\Omega |Du| + \int_{\partial \Omega} |u|\, d\mathcal H^{N-1}+ \int_\Omega \Big|D\Big(\frac{u^2}{2}\Big)\Big| +\int_{\partial \Omega} \frac{u^2}{2}\, d\mathcal H^{N-1}\le \int_\Omega f u\, dx\,.
\]
On the other hand, Green's formula implies
\[
\int_\Omega f u\, dx = -\int_\Omega u^*\hbox{\rm div\,} \z +\int_\Omega u^*|Du| = \int_\Omega |Du| -\int_{\partial \Omega} u\, [\z,\nu]\,d\mathcal H^{N-1}+\int_\Omega u^*|Du| \,.
\]
Then
\[
\int_{\partial \Omega} (|u| +u[\z,\nu])\,d\mathcal H^{N-1} +\int_{\partial \Omega}\frac{u^2}{2} \,d\mathcal H^{N-1} \le 0
\]
and for that, $u = 0$ in $\partial \Omega$.
\\
Now, using the same argument which is used in \cite{MS} we prove that there is a unique solution to our problem.
\end{pf}
\begin{Proposition}\label{triv}
The solution $u$ to problem \eqref{problema1} is trivial if and only if the function $f$ is such that $\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)} \le1$.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{pf}
Assume first that $\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\le 1 $ and let $u \in BV(\Omega)$ be the solution to problem \eqref{problema1}. Using the test function $T_k (u)$ in that problem we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq}
\int_\Omega (\z,DT_k (u)) + \int_\Omega T_k (u)^*|Du| = \int_\Omega f\,T_k(u)\, dx \le \int_\Omega fu\, dx\,.
\end{equation}
Now, taking into account that $\int_\Omega T_k (u)^*|Du| \ge0$, it yields
\[
\int_\Omega (\z,DT_k (u)) = \int_\Omega |DT_k (u)| \le \int_\Omega fu\, dx\,.
\]
Finally, letting $k \to \infty$ in \eqref{eq} and using H\"older and Sobolev's inequalities we arrive at
\[
\int_\Omega |D u| +\int_\Omega u^*|Du| \le \int_\Omega fu\, dx \le \|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}} \int_\Omega |Du|\le \int_\Omega |Du| \,.
\]
Then, $\int_\Omega u^*|Du| =0$ and thus, $u^*=0$ in $\Omega$ and we conclude $u(x)=0$ for almost every $x\in \Omega$.
\\
Now, we suppose that
\[
\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)} = \sup \left\{ \int_\Omega \varphi f\, dx \; : \; \int_\Omega |\nabla \varphi|\, dx =1 , \; \varphi \in W^{1,1}_0 (\Omega) \right\}>1\,,
\]
that is, there exists $\psi \in W^{1,1}_0 (\Omega)$ such that
\[
\int_\Omega |\nabla \psi|\, dx =1 \quad \text{ and } \quad \int_\Omega \psi f\, dx > 1\,.
\]
Finally, we use $\psi$ as a test function in \eqref{problema1}, so we get
\[
\int_\Omega \psi \,|Du| = \int_\Omega \psi \, f\, dx - \int_\Omega \z \cdot \nabla \psi\, dx > \int_\Omega |\nabla \psi|\, dx - \int_\Omega \z \cdot \nabla \psi\, dx \ge 0\,.
\]
Therefore, $|Du| \not= 0$ and so $u\not=0$ in $\Omega$.
\end{pf}
\begin{remark}\rm
This phenomenon of trivial solutions for non--trivial data is usual in problems involving the $1$--Laplacian.
It is worth comparing the above result with \cite[Theorem 4.1]{MST1} (see also \cite[Theorem 4.2]{MST2}), where the Dirichlet problem for the equation
$-\hbox{\rm div\,}\Big(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\Big)=f(x)$ is studied. Indeed, for such a problem it is seen that a datum satisfying $\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)} <1$ implies a trivial solution, while no $BV$--solution can exist for $\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)} >1$. Obviously, the most interesting case is when $\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)} =1$; then non--trivial solutions can be found for some data but the trivial solution always exists.
In our case, this dichotomy does not hold: for $\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)} =1$, only trivial solutions exist.
\end{remark}
To study the summability of the solution to problem \eqref{problema1}, we need the following technical result which will also be useful in Sections 6 and 7.
\begin{Lemma}
Let $u \in BV(\Omega)$ with $D^j u =0$ and let $\z$ be a vector field with $\|\z\|_\infty \le 1$ and $\hbox{\rm div\,} \z = \mu + f$, where $\mu$ is a positive measure. If $G$ is an increasing and $C^1$ function and $\lim\limits_{s\to \infty} G(s)=\infty$, then, $(\z,Du)=|Du|$ implies $(\z, DG(u))=|DG(u)|$.
\label{lema}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{pf}
Since $(\z,Du)=|Du|$, we have $ (\z,DT_k(u))=|DT_k(u)|$ for all positive $k$. Using \cite[Proposition 2.2]{MS} we get $ (\z,DG(T_k(u)))=|DG(T_k(u))|$ for all $k>0$. Now, since $G(T_k(u))=T_{G(k)}G(u)$ and $\lim\limits_{s\to \infty} G(s) =\infty$ we apply Proposition \ref{prop1} to arrive at $ (\z,DG(u))=|DG(u)|$.
\end{pf}
\begin{Proposition} \label{prop-s}
If $u$ is the solution to problem \eqref{problema1}, then $u^n \in BV(\Omega)$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N}$. Consequently, $u\in L^q (\Omega)$ for all $1\le q<\infty$.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{pf}
We will prove the result by induction. If $u$ is the solution of problem \eqref{problema1}, then choosing the solution itself as test function in problem \eqref{problema1}, we get
\[
\int_\Omega|Du| + \int_\Omega u^*\,|Du| =\int_\Omega f\,u\, dx\,.
\]
Since the first integral is positive, we have
that $u^*\,|Du|$ is a finite measure. Thus, by Theorem \ref{regla-cadena} we know that $u^2 \in BV(\Omega)$ and $2\,u^* \,|Du|=|Du^2|$.
\\
Now, set $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and assume that $u^n \in BV(\Omega)$. Taking the test function $u^n$ in \eqref{problema1}, it yields
\[
\int_\Omega (\z,Du^n) + \int_\Omega \big(u^n\big)^* |Du| = \int_\Omega fu^n\, dx\,.
\]
By Lemma \ref{lema} we have $(\z,Du^n)=|Du^n|\ge 0$, then the integral $\int_\Omega \big(u^n\big)^*|Du|$ is bounded and consequently $u^{n+1}\in BV(\Omega)$ by Theorem \eqref{regla-cadena}.
\end{pf}
\begin{remark}
If $f \in L^m(\Omega)$ for $m>N$, then the solution to problem
\eqref{problema1} belongs to $L^\infty (\Omega)$ (see \cite{MS}).
\end{remark}
\section{Radial solutions}
In this section we will show some radial solutions in $\Omega =
B_R(0)$ with $R>0$ for particular data in $L^{N, \infty}(\Omega)$.
In \cite[Section 4]{MS}, some examples of bounded solutions for
data $f \in L^q(\Omega)$, with $q>N$, can be found. In Example
\ref{boun} we show bounded solutions for $f \in
L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)\backslash L^N(\Omega)$, while in Example
\ref{ejemplo-bola} we show unbounded solutions. Therefore, unbounded solutions really occur.
Throughout this section, we will take $u(x)=h(|x|)$ with $h(r) \ge 0$, $h(R)=0$ and $h'(r)
\le 0$. To deal with the examples, we will consider two zones. If
$h'(r) < 0$, we know that $\z(x)=\frac{Du}{|Du|} = -\frac{x}{|x|}$, so that
$-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z(x)=\frac{N-1}{|x|}$.
In the other case, $h'(r) = 0$ and then, the solution is constant
and we only have to determine the radial vector field $\z
(x)=\xi(|x|)\,x$, so that $\hbox{\rm div\,} \z (x)=\xi'(|x|)|x|+N\xi(|x|)$. The
continuity of the vector field is always searched, otherwise it would has a jump and as a consequence, the measure $\hbox{\rm div\,}\z$ would have a singular part concentrated on a surface of the form $|x|=\varrho$, and measure $|Du|$ would also have that singular part. Hence, it
would induce jumps on the solution.
\begin{Example}\label{boun}
\[
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,} \left(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\right) + |Du| = \frac{N-1}{|x|} + \frac{\lambda}{|x|^q} & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad B_R(0)\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial B_R(0)\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\]
with $0<q<1$ and $\lambda > 0$.
\end{Example}
First, we assume that $u$ is constant in a ring: $h'(r)=0$ for all $\rho_1<r<\rho_2$, and we
consider the vector field $\z(x)=x\,\xi(|x|)$. Then, denoting
$r=|x|$, the equation yields
\[
-(r\xi'(r)+N\xi(r))= \frac{N-1}{r}+\frac{\lambda}{r^q} \,,
\]
which is equivalent to
\[
-(r^{N}\,\xi (r))' = (N-1)\,r^{N-2}+\lambda \,r^{N-1-q}\,.
\]
Therefore, solving the equation we get the vector field
\begin{equation}\label{vect1}
\z(x)=-x\,|x|^{-1}-\frac{\lambda}{N-q}x\,|x|^{-q}+Cx\,|x|^{-N}\,,\quad \rho_1<|x|<\rho_2\,,
\end{equation}
for some constant $C$.
We next see under what conditions we can find a value for this constant satisfying $\|\z\|_{\infty} \le 1$. To this end, we will distinguished three cases.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Assuming that $0<\rho_1<\rho_2<R$ (and that $\z$ is continuous), if $|x|=\rho_1$, then
\[
-x\,|x|^{-1}=-x\,|x|^{-1}-\frac{\lambda}{N-q}x\,|x|^{-q}+Cx\,|x|^{-N}\,,
\]
and it implies $\frac{\lambda}{N-q}x\,|x|^{-q}=Cx\,|x|^{-N}$. Thus, we deduce that $C=\frac{\lambda}{N-q}\rho_1^{N-q}$.
The same argument leads to $C=\frac{\lambda}{N-q}\rho_2^{N-q}$ when $|x|=\rho_2$. Therefore, $\rho_1=\rho_2$ and we have got a contradiction.
\item If we assume $0<\rho_1<\rho_2=R$, then we may argue as above and find $C=\frac{\lambda}{N-q}\rho_1^{N-q}$. Substituting in \eqref{vect1}, we get
\[
\z(x)=-x\,|x|^{-1}-\frac{\lambda}{N-q}x\,|x|^{-q}+\frac{\lambda}{N-q}\rho_1^{N-q}x\,|x|^{-N}\,.
\]
Thus, condition $\|\z\|_\infty\le1$ yields
\[
\Big|1+\frac\lambda {N-q}\,|x|^{1-q}-\frac{\lambda}{N-q}\rho_1^{N-q}\,|x|^{1-N}\Big|\le 1\,.
\]
Nevertheless, this fact does not hold since $1+\frac\lambda {N-q}\,r^{1-q}-\frac{\lambda}{N-q}\rho_1^{N-q}\,r^{1-N}>1$ for $r>\rho_1$.
\item If we assume $0=\rho_1<\rho_2<R$, then $\z\in L^\infty(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^N)$ implies $C=0$. So \eqref{vect1} becomes
\[
\z(x)=-x\,|x|^{-1}-\frac{\lambda}{N-q}x\,|x|^{-q}
\]
and it follows from $\|\z\|_\infty\le1$ that $\frac{\lambda}{N-q}x\,|x|^{-q}$ vanishes. Hence, $\lambda=0$ and a contradiction is obtained.
\end{enumerate}
In any case we get a contradiction, so that $h'(r)=0$ cannot hold on $]\rho_1,\rho_2[$. Hence, we take $\z(x)=-\frac{x}{|x|}$. Then, the equation becomes
\[
-h'(r) = \frac{\lambda}{r^q}\,,
\]
and the solution satisfying the boundary condition is given by
\[
u(x)= \frac{\lambda}{1-q}(R^{1-q}-|x|^{1-q})\,.
\]
\begin{remark}\rm
We may perform similar computations to those of the previous example to study problem
\[
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,} \left(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\right) + |Du| = \frac{N-1}{|x|} + \lambda & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad B_R(0)\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial B_R(0)\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\]
with $\lambda > 0$. Then the solution is given by
$u(x)= \lambda(R-r)$,
with associated vector field
$\z(x)=-\frac x{|x|}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{Example}\label{ejemplo-bola}
Consider $0<\rho\le R$.
\[
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,} \left(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\right) + |Du| = \frac{\lambda}{|x|}{\raise4pt\hbox{$\chi$}}_{B_{\rho}(0)}(x) & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad B_R(0)\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial B_R(0)\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\]
with $\lambda > 0$.
\end{Example}
Two cases according to the value of $\lambda$ will be
distinguished:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{Case $0<\lambda \le N-1$.}
\end{itemize}
Assuming $h'(r) <0$ for any $0\le r<R$, the vector field is given by $\z(x)=-\frac{x}{|x|}$ and the equation becomes
\[
\frac{N-1}{r} - h'(r)=\frac{\lambda}{r}{\raise4pt\hbox{$\chi$}}_{]0,\rho[}(r)\,.
\]
When $\rho<R$, we have to distinguish two zones: where $\rho \le r\le R$ in which we get $h'(r)=(N-1)/r $, and where $0\le r < \rho$ in which we arrive at $h'(r)=(N-1-\lambda)/r$. Both expressions are nonnegative and so they are in contradiction with our hypothesis. We arrive at the same contradiction when $\rho=R$. Therefore, $h'(r)=0$ holds for all $0\le r<R$ and it follows $h(r)=0$ for all $0\le r<R$ due to the boundary condition. To obtain the field $\z(x)=\xi(|x|)\,x$ we have to consider the equation
\[
-(r^N\xi(r))' =\lambda \,r^{N-2}{\raise4pt\hbox{$\chi$}}_{]0,\rho[}(r)\,.
\]
If $0\le r<\rho$ we get the field $\xi(r)=-\lambda/(N-1)\,r^{-1}+Cr^{-N}$ but since we ask $\|\z\|_\infty\le1$, then $C=0$. On the other hand, if $\rho\le r < R$ we arrive at $\xi(r)=-Cr^{-N}$. In order to determine the value of $C$, we demand the continuity of $\xi$ and then the field becomes
\[
\z(x)=\left\{
\begin{array}{lcc}
-\displaystyle\frac{\lambda}{N-1}\displaystyle\frac{x}{|x|}&if& 0\le r<\rho\,,\\
- \displaystyle\frac{\lambda \rho^{N-1}}{N-1}\displaystyle\frac{x}{|x|^N} &if& \rho\le r < R\,.
\end{array}
\right .
\]
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{Case $\lambda > N-1$.}
\end{itemize}
In the region $0\le r <\rho$, we may argue as in the above example and have a contradiction when $h'(r)=0$. So $h'(r)<0$ and the solution is given, up to constants, by \[u(x)=(N-1-\lambda) \log \Big(\frac{|x|}\rho\Big) \]
with the vector field $\z(x)=-x/|x|$.
On the other hand, if $\rho < r<R$, we have a contradiction when $h'(r)<0$, wherewith the solution is $u(x)=0$ and the vector field is given by $\xi (r)=-C r^{-N}$. Since we have $\|\z\|_\infty = 1$ when $0\le r <\rho$, in order to preserve the continuity we require
\[
1=\left| \z \left(\rho\right) \right| = C\rho^{-N} \rho\,.
\]
Therefore, the vector field becomes $\z(x)=-\rho^{N-1}\frac{x}{|x|^N}$ and the solution is given by
$$
u(x)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
(N-1-\lambda)\log\big(\frac{|x|}\rho\big) &\hbox{if }0\le r\le\rho\,,\\
0 &\hbox{if } \rho<r<R\,.\\
\end{array}\right.
$$
\begin{remark}\label{nota}\rm
An important particular case of the previous example is the
problem
\begin{equation}\label{ejm-imp}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,} \left(\frac{Du}{|Du|}\right) + |Du| = \lambda \frac{1}{|x|} & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad B_R(0)\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial B_R(0)\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\end{equation}
with $\lambda > 0$. We have seen that the solution is given by
$$
u(x)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
0 &\hbox{when }0<\lambda \le N-1\,,\\
(N-1-\lambda)\log\big(\frac{|x|}R\big) &\hbox{when }\lambda >N-1\,.
\end{array}\right.
$$
Problem \eqref{ejm-imp} can be seen as the limit case of
problems with a Hardy--type potential, namely,
$$ \left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,} \left(|\nabla u|^{p-2}\nabla u\right) + |\nabla u|^p = \lambda\frac{u^{p-1}}{|x|^p} & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad B_R(0)\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial B_R(0)\,,
\end{array}
\right .
$$
Problems with Hardy--type potential received much attention in recent years. We point out that in
\cite{APP} has been studied problem \eqref{ejm-imp} with $p=2$
showing the regularizing effect produced by the gradient term as absorption.
\end{remark}
\section{Changing the unknown: More general gradient terms}
From now on, we will generalize problem \eqref{problema1} adding a continuous function $g : [0,\infty[ \to \mathbb{R}$ in the gradient term:
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Dv}{|Dv|}\right) +g(v)\,|D v| = f(x) & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
v=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,.
\end{array}
\right .
\label{problemag}
\end{equation}
In this section, this problem will be studied for a function $g$ that will result in standard cases.
The existence and uniqueness of solutions to problem \eqref{problemag} depend on the properties of the function $g$, and the definition of solution to a problem may depend of the case we are studying. In any case, we have to give a sense to $g(v)|Dv|$, since the meaning of that term depends on the representative of $g(v)$ we are actually considering.
First of all, we will assume that a solution satisfies $D^jv=0$ and then we will take $g(v)$ as the precise representative $g(v)^*=g(v^*)$, which is integrable with respect to the measure $|Dv|$.
\subsection{Bounded $g$}
In this subsection, let $g$ be a continuous and bounded function such that there exists $m>0$ with $g(s)\ge m$ for all $s\ge0$. We define the function
\[
G(s)=\int_0^s g(\sigma)\,d\sigma\,.
\]
With this notation, the term $g(v)|Dv|$ in the equation means $|DG(v)|$.
\begin{Definition}\label{def-g}
We say that a function $v$ is a \textbf{weak solution} to problem \eqref{problemag} with $g$ defined as above, if $v \in BV (\Omega)$ with $D^jv=0$ and there exists a field $\z\in \DM (\Omega)$ with $\|\z\|_\infty \le 1$ such that
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,}\z + g(v)^*|Dv| = f \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \dis (\Omega)\,,
\]
\[
(\z, Dv)=|Dv| \quad \text{ as measures in }\quad \Omega\,,
\]
and
\[
v\big|_{\partial \Omega} = 0\,.
\]
\end{Definition}
\begin{Theorem}
Let $u$ be the solution to problem \eqref{problema1}. Assume that $g$ is a continuous real function such that $0<m\le g(s)$ for all $s\ge0$ and let $u=G(v)$. Then, $v$ is a solution to problem \eqref{problemag}.
\label{teosolg}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{pf}
Since the function $u$ is the solution of problem \eqref{problema1}, there exists a vector field $\z\in \DM (\Omega)$ such that
\begin{equation}
-\hbox{\rm div\,}\z + |Du| = f \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \dis (\Omega)\,,
\label{cond1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation*}
(\z, Du)=|Du| \quad \text{ as measures in }\quad \Omega\,,
\label{cond2}
\end{equation*}
and
\[
u\big|_{\partial \Omega} = 0\,.
\]
By the properties of $g$, the function $G$ is increasing and the derivative of $G^{-1}$ is bounded. Then, we apply the chain rule to get $v=G^{-1}(u)\in BV(\Omega)$. We also deduce $D^jv=0$ and
\[
v\big|_{\partial \Omega} = G^{-1}(u)\big|_{\partial \Omega} = 0\,.
\]
Moreover, it holds by Lemma \ref{lema}:
\[
(\z,Dv)=|Dv| \quad \text{ as measures in }\quad \Omega\,.
\]
Finally, making the substitution $u=G(v)$ in \eqref{cond1} and applying the chain rule we get
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,}\z + g(v)^*|Dv| = f \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \dis (\Omega)\,.
\]
\end{pf}
\begin{Corollary}
If $v$ is a solution to problem \eqref{problemag} with $g$ continuous, bounded and such that $g(s)\ge m>0$ for all $s\ge0$, then, $u=G(v)$ is the solution to problem \eqref{problema1}.
\label{corsolg}
\end{Corollary}
\begin{pf}
Applying the same argument which is used in Theorem \ref{teosolg} and keeping it in mind that $g$ is bounded and $G$ is increasing, the result is proved.
\end{pf}
\begin{Theorem}
There exists a unique solution to problem \eqref{problemag} with $g$ continuous, bounded and such that $g(s)\ge m>0$ for all $s\ge0$.
\label{teounicidad}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{pf}
Assuming there are two solutions $v_1$ and $v_2$ of problem \eqref{problemag}, by the Corollary \ref{corsolg}, $G(v_1)$ and $G(v_2)$ are solutions to problem \eqref{problema1}. Thus, $G(v_1)=G(v_2)$ and since $G$ is injective we get $v_1=v_2$.
\end{pf}
\subsection{Unbounded $g$}
In this subsection we will prove an existence and uniqueness result to problem \eqref{problemag} assuming $g(s)\ge m>0$ be an unbounded function.
\begin{Theorem}\label{teoalpha}
There is a unique solution to problem \eqref{problemag} with $g$ continuous and such that $g(s)\ge m>0$ for all $s\ge0$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{pf}
First of all, we consider the approximate problem
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Dv_k}{|Dv_k|}\right) +T_k(g(v_k))|D v_k| = f(x) & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
v_k=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,.
\end{array}
\right .
\label{problalphak}
\end{equation}
By Theorem \ref{teounicidad}, it has a unique solution. Then, there exists $v_k \in BV(\Omega)$ with $D^jv_k =0$ and also a vector field $\z_k \in \DM(\Omega)$ such that $\|\z_k\|_\infty\le 1$ and
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z_k +T_k(g(v_k))^*|Dv_k| = f \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \dis (\Omega)\,,
\]
\[
(\z_k,Dv_k)=|Dv_k| \quad \text{as measures}\,,
\]
and
\[
v_k\big| =0 \quad \mathcal H^{N-1}\text{--a.e. in } \partial \Omega\,.
\]
First, we take the test function $\frac{T_h (v_k)}{h}$ in problem \eqref{problalphak} and we get
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{h}\int_\Omega (\z_k, D T_h(v_k)) + \int_\Omega T_k(g(v_k))^* \frac{T_h(v_k)^*}{h} |Dv_k| = \int_\Omega f \,\frac{T_h(v_k)}{h}\, dx \le \int_ \Omega f\, dx\,.
\end{equation*}
Keeping in mind that the first integral is positive (by Lemma \ref{lema}), we can take limits in the second integral when $h \to 0$ and so we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq1}
\int_\Omega T_k(g(v_k))^* |Dv_k| \le \int_ \Omega f\, dx\,.
\end{equation}
Since $T_k(g(v_k))$ is bigger than $m$, it yields
\[
m\,\int_\Omega |Dv_k| \le \int_\Omega f\, dx\,.
\]
Therefore, $v_k$ is bounded in $BV(\Omega)$ and there exists $v\in BV(\Omega)$ such that, up to subsequences, $v_k \to v$ in $L^1(\Omega)$ and a.e.. Moreover, $Dv_k \to Dv$ $*$--weak as measures when $k \to \infty$.
\\
To prove $D^j v =0$ we use the same argument which appears in Theorem \ref{teoexist}, so we get $D^j G(v) =0$ and then we deduce that $D^j v =0$. On the other hand, we define the function
\[
F_k(s):=\int_0^s T_k (g(\sigma))\, d\sigma\,.
\]
Using \eqref{eq1} and the chain rule we have the next inequality:
\[
\int_\Omega |DF_k(v_k)| \le \int_\Omega f\, dx\,.
\]
which implies that the sequence $F_k(v_k)$ is bounded in $BV(\Omega) $ and converges in $L^1(\Omega)$ to $G(v)$. Now, denoting $u_k=F_k(v_k)$ and $u=G(v)$ we get that $u_k$ converges to $u$ in $L^1(\Omega)$ and
\[
\int_\Omega|Du_k| \le \int_\Omega f\, dx \,.
\]
Therefore, it is true that $u\in BV(\Omega)$. Moreover, keeping in mind Theorem \ref{regla-cadena}, we get $|Du|=g(v)^*|Dv|$ as well.
\\
By Corollary \ref{corsolg}, $u_k$ is the solution to
\[
\left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Du_k}{|Du_k|}\right) +|D u_k| = f(x) & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
u_k=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,.
\end{array}
\right .
\]
The same argument used in the proof of Theorem \ref{teoexist} works for determining that $u$ is the solution to
\[
\left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Du}{|Du|}\right) +|D u| = f(x) & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,.
\end{array}
\right .
\]
Finally, since $g(s)\ge m>0$ for all $s\ge0$ and applying Theorem \ref{teosolg}, we deduce that $v$ is the solution to problem \eqref{problemag}.
\end{pf}
\begin{Proposition} \label{propq}
The solution $v$ to problem \eqref{problemag} satisfies $v\in L^q (\Omega)$ for all $1\le q<\infty$.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{pf}
The proof follows the argument of the proof of Proposition \ref{prop-s}, on account of $g(s)\ge m>0$ for all $s\ge0$.
\end{pf}
\section{A non standard case: $g$ touches the axis}
In this section we assume that $g$ is a continuous, bounded and non integrable function with $g(s) >0$ for almost every $s\ge0$. In this case, $G$ is increasing but $(G^{-1})'$ may be unbounded.
First, we analyze the case when there exist $m, \, \sigma>0$ such
that $g(s)\ge m>0$ for all $s\ge \sigma $. Observe that this
condition resembles Condition (1.7) in \cite{ABPP}.
\begin{Theorem}\label{teo-finitos-ceros}
Let $g$ be as above. Then, there exists a solution to problem \eqref{problemag}.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{pf}
Let $v_n$ be the solution to the approximating problem
\[
\left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle -\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Dv_n}{|Dv_n|}\right) +\left(g(v_n)+\frac{1}{n}\right)|D v_n| = f & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
v_n=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\]
with the associated vector field $\z_n$. Using the test function
$\frac{T_k(v_n-T_{\sigma}(v_n))}{k}$ in that problem we get
\[
\int_{\{ v_n>\sigma \}} g(v_n)^* \frac{T_k(v_n-T_{\sigma}(v_n))^*}{k}
|Dv_n| \le \int_{\{v_n>\sigma\}} f\, dx\,;
\]
and taking limits when $k\to 0^+$ it yields
\[
\int_{\{ v_n>\sigma\}} g(v_n)^* |Dv_n| \le \int_{\{v_n>\sigma\}} f\, dx\,.
\]
Since there exist $m>0$ such that $g(s)\ge m$ for all $s\ge \sigma$, then, the previous inequality becomes:
\begin{equation}\label{parte1}
\int_{\{v_n>\sigma\}} |Dv_n| \le \frac{1}{m} \int_\Omega f\, dx\,.
\end{equation}
Now, we use the test function $T_{\sigma}(v_n)$ in the same problem, so we get
\begin{equation}\label{parte2}
\int_{\{v_n \le \sigma\}} |Dv_n| \le \int_\Omega f \, T_{\sigma}(u_n)\, dx \le \sigma \int_\Omega f\, dx\,.
\end{equation}
Finally, with \eqref{parte1} and \eqref{parte2} we have
\[
\int_\Omega |Dv_n| \le \left( \sigma +\frac{1}{m}\right) \int_\Omega f\, dx \quad \mbox{ for all } n\in \mathbb{N}\,,
\]
that is, the sequence $(v_n)_n$ is bounded in $BV(\Omega)$ and this implies that, up to subsequences, there exists $v\in BV(\Omega)$ with $v_n \to v$ in $L^1(\Omega)$ and a.e. as well as $Dv_n \to Dv$ $*$--weak in the sense of measures. We conclude the proof using arguments of Theorem \ref{teoexist}.
\end{pf}
For a general function $g$ we have to change the definition of solution. We will show in Example \ref{toca-infin} that Definition \ref{def-g} does not really work.
\begin{Definition}\label{nueva}
Let $g$ be a continuous, bounded and non integrable function with $g(s)>0$ for almost every $s\ge0$. We say that a function $v$ is a \textbf{weak solution} to problem \eqref{problemag} if $v(x)<\infty$ a.e. in $\Omega$, $G(v) \in BV (\Omega)$ with $D^jG(v)=0$ and there exists a field $\z\in \DM (\Omega)$ with $\|\z\|_\infty \le 1$ such that
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,}\z + g(v)^*|Dv| = f \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \dis (\Omega)\,,
\]
\[
(\z, DG(v))=|DG(v)| \quad \text{ as measures in }\quad \Omega\,,
\]
and
\[
v\big|_{\partial \Omega} = 0\,,
\]
where the function $G$ is defined by
\[
G(s)=\int_0^s g(\sigma) \, d\sigma\,.
\]
\end{Definition}
\begin{Theorem}\label{teoproblemag}
Assume that the function $g$ is continuous, bounded and non integrable with $g(s) >0$ for almost every $s\in \mathbb{R}$. Then, there exists a unique solution to problem \eqref{problemag} in the sense of Definition \ref{nueva}.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{pf}
The approximating problem
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Dv_n}{|Dv_n|}\right) +\left(g(v_n)+\frac{1}{n}\right)|D v_n| = f(x) & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
v_n=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\label{problemagn}
\end{equation}
has a unique solution for every $n\in \mathbb{N}$ because of Theorem \ref{teounicidad}. That is, there exists a vector field $\z_n\in \DM (\Omega)$ with $\|\z_n\|_\infty\le 1$ and a function $v_n \in BV(\Omega)$ with $D^j v_n = 0$ and such that
\begin{equation}
-\hbox{\rm div\,}\z_n + \left( g(v_n)+\frac{1}{n}\right)^*|Dv_n| = f \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \dis (\Omega)\,,
\label{condgn}
\end{equation}
\[
(\z_n, DG_n(v_n))=|DG_n(v_n)| \quad \text{ as measures in }\quad \Omega\,,
\]
and
\[
v_n\big|_{\partial \Omega} = 0\,,
\]
where we denote
\[
G_n(s)=\int_0^s \left( g(\sigma) +\frac{1}{n}\right) \, d\sigma\,.
\]
We will show that the limit of the sequence $(v_n)_n$ is the solution to problem \eqref{problemag}. First of all, we take the test function $\frac{T_k(v_n)}{k}$ in problem \eqref{problemagn} and we arrive at
\[
\frac{1}{k}\int_\Omega T_k(v_n)^*|DG_n(v_n)| \le \int_\Omega f\, dx
\]
for every $k$. Now, letting $k \to 0$ and using Fatou's Theorem we get
\[
\int_{\{v_n \not =0 \}} |DG_n(v_n)|\le \int_\Omega f\, dx\,.
\]
In addition, since $D^jv_n = 0$ it follows that $Dv_n=0$ almost everywhere in $\{ v_n=0\}$. Thus,
\[
\int_\Omega |DG_n(v_n)|\le \int_\Omega f\, dx\,,
\]
and so $G_n(v_n)$ is bounded in $BV(\Omega)$. This implies that, up to subsequences, there exist $w$ such that $G_n(v_n) \to w$ in $L^1(\Omega)$ and a.e., and also $DG_n(v_n) \to Dw$ $*$--weak in the sense of measures.
We denote $v=G^{-1}(w)$, which is finite a.e..
\\
In what follows, we apply the same argument used in Theorem \ref{teoexist} with minor modifications, hence we just sketch it. We get $\z_n \rightharpoonup \z$ $*$--weakly in $L^\infty (\Omega)$ with $\|\z\|_\infty \le 1$ and $-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z$ is a Radon measure with finite total variation. Moreover, using the test function $e^{-G_n(v_n)}\varphi$ with $\varphi \in C^\infty_0 (\Omega)$ in problem \eqref{problemagn} and letting $n$ go to $\infty$, it leads $-\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-G(v)}\z) = e^{-G(v)}f$ in the sense of distributions. The next step is to show, with the same argument used in Theorem \ref{teoexist}, that $D^jG(v)=0$ and deduce $D^jv=0$.
Then is easy to obtain
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z + |DG(v)| = f \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \dis (\Omega)
\]
in the sense of distributions and
\[
(\z,DG(v))=|DG(v)|
\] as measures. Moreover, we take $T_k(G_n(v_n))$ in \eqref{problemagn} to arrive at $G(v)\big|_{\partial \Omega}=0$ and then, we also get
\[
v\big|_{\partial \Omega} = 0\,.
\]
The uniqueness can be proved as in \cite{MS}.
\end{pf}
To remark the necessity to have a new definition to the concept of solution, we show in the next example that the solution to \eqref{problemag} when $g$ is such that $\lim\limits_{s\to \infty}g(s)=0$ is not in $BV(\Omega)$.
\begin{Example}\label{toca-infin}
The solution to problem
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Dv}{|Dv|}\right) +\frac{1}{1+v}|D v| = \frac{\lambda}{|x|} & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
v=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\label{probl-toca-infin}
\end{equation}
is not in $BV(\Omega)$ for $\lambda$ big enough.
\end{Example}
First, we will solve the related problem
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Du}{|Du|}\right) +|D u| = \frac{\lambda}{|x|} & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\label{probl-relacionado}
\end{equation}
and then, using the inverse function of
\[
G(s)=\int_0^s \frac{1}{1+\sigma}\, d\sigma = \log (1+s)
\]
we will get the solution $v$.
\\
Due to Example \ref{ejemplo-bola} we know that, for $\lambda>N-1$, the solution to problem \eqref{probl-relacionado} is given by $u(x)=(N-1-\lambda)\log (|x|/R)$ with the associated field $\z(x)=-x/|x|$. Moreover, the inverse of function $G$ is given by $G^{-1}(s)= e^s-1$. Therefore, the solution to \eqref{probl-toca-infin} is given by
\[
v(x)=G^{-1}(u(x))=\left(\frac{|x|}{R}\right)^{N-1-\lambda}-1
\]
when $\lambda >N-1$. Nevertheless, $v$ is not in $BV(\Omega)$ when $N<\lambda/2 +1$ because in that case, $\displaystyle |Du| = \frac{\lambda-N+1}{R^{N-1-\lambda}}|x|^{N-2-\lambda}$ is not integrable.
\section{Odd cases}
In this last section we will show some cases where the properties of the function $g$ does not provide uniqueness, existence or regularity of solutions to problem \eqref{problemag}.
\subsection{First case}
First of all, we suppose the function $g$ is integrable. With that condition about $g$, it is the function $f$ who determines the existence or absence of solution.
\begin{Theorem}\label{raro1}
Let $f\in L^{N, \infty}(\Omega)$ with $f\ge0$ and we consider problem \eqref{problemag} with $g\in L^1([0,\infty[)$. Then,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] if $\|f\|_{W^{1,-\infty}(\Omega)} \le 1$, the trivial solution holds;
\item[(ii)] if $\|f\|_{W^{1,-\infty}(\Omega)} > e^{G(\infty)}$, does not exist any solution;
\end{itemize}
with $G(\infty)=\sup\, \{ G(t) \, :\, s\in ]0, \infty [\} $.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{pf}
The first point is deduced following the proof of Proposition \ref{triv}.
\\
On the other hand, let $\varphi \in W^{1,1}_0(\Omega)$, we use $-\hbox{\rm div\,} (e^{-G(v)}\z) = e^{-G(v)}f$ to get
\[
e^{-G(\infty)} \int_\Omega f\, |\varphi|\, dx \le \int_\Omega e^{-G(u)}f\,|\varphi|\, dx = \int_\Omega e^{-G(u)} \z \cdot \nabla |\varphi| \, dx \le \int_\Omega |\nabla \varphi|\, dx\,.
\]
Then, if $\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)} > e^{G(\infty)}$, cannot exist any solution to problem \eqref{problemag}.
\end{pf}
\begin{remark}\rm
Since we have shown in \eqref{rel-norm} that
\[
\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)} \le S_N \|f\|_{L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)}\,,
\]
Theorem \ref{raro1} implies the following fact:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] If $\|f\|_{L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)} \le S_N^{-1}$, the trivial solution holds.
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\rm
One may wonder what happens when $1<\|f\|_{W^{-1,\infty}(\Omega)}\le e^{G(\infty)}$. Consider the approximate solutions
$v_n$ to problem \eqref{problemagn} and let $w$ satisfy $G(v_n) \to w$. Then $w \in [0, G(\infty)]$. In particular, if $w\in [0, G(\infty)[$, the function $v = G^{-1}(w)$ is finite a.e. in $\Omega$ and is the solution to problem \eqref{problemag}. However, $w$ can be equal to $G(\infty)$ in a set of positive measure and so $v$ is infinite in the same set. We conclude that $v$, in this case, is not solution.
\end{remark}
\begin{Example}\label{no-sol-radial}
Problem
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Dv}{|Dv|}\right) +\frac{1}{1+v^2}\,|D v| = \frac{N-1}{|x|}+\lambda & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad B_R(0)\,,\\
v=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial B_R(0)\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\label{nosolradial}
\end{equation}
has not radial solutions when $\lambda$ is large enough.
\end{Example}
Assuming there exists a radial solution $u(x)=h(|x|)$ with $h:[0,R] \to \mathbb{R}$ is such that $h(r)\ge 0$, $h(R)=0$ and $h'(r)\le 0$, we will get a contradiction.
First, we suppose that $h'(r)=0$ for $\rho_1<r<\rho_2$ and, reasoning as in Example \ref{boun}, we get a contradiction. Therefore, we only can have $h'(r)<0$ for all $0\le r<R$. In this case, we know that the vector field is given by $\z(x)=-x/|x|$ and the equation becomes
\[
-g(h(r))h'(r)=\lambda\,,
\]
which is equivalent to $(G(h(r))' = -\lambda$. Then, the solution is given by $G(h(r))=\lambda (R-r)$.
\\
On the other hand, we know that $G(s)\in [0,\frac{\pi}{2}[$ because
\[
G(s) = \int_0^s g(\sigma)\,d\sigma =\int_0^s \frac{1}{1+\sigma^2}\,d\sigma = \arctan s\,.
\]
Thus, we have a radial solution if $\displaystyle\lambda < \frac{\pi}{2R}$. When $\displaystyle\lambda = \frac{\pi}{2R}$, we also obtain a radial solution, which is given by
\[
u(x)=\tan\big(\lambda(R-r)\big)\,.
\]
\subsection{Second case}
Now, we will take the function $g :[0,\infty[ \to \mathbb{R}$ such that
$g(s)=0$ when $s \in [0,\ell]$ and $g(s) > 0$ for all $s>\ell$. We assume $g\not\in L^1([0,\infty[)$ as well.
\begin{remark}\label{no-unicidad1}\rm
With $g$ defined as above, there is not uniqueness of solutions.
On the one hand, if $\|f\|_{L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)} \le S_N^{-1}$ and $u \in BV(\Omega)$ satisfies $u\big|_{\partial \Omega} =0$, then the function $T_\ell (u)$ is a solution to problem \eqref{problemag}. Thus, there is not uniqueness in any way.
On the other hand, if $\|f\|_{L^{N,\infty}(\Omega)} >S_N^{-1}$ we define
\[
h(s)=g(s+\ell)
\]
and let $w$ be a solution to problem
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Dw}{|Dw|}\right) +h(w)\,|D w| = f & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
w=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\label{problemah}
\end{equation}
with associated field $\z$. Therefore, $v(x)=w(x)+\ell$ is a solution to problem \eqref{problemag} with the same vector field $\z$.
Moreover, let $\psi : [0,\ell+1] \to [\ell,\ell+1]$ be an increasing and bijective $C^1$--function such that $\psi'(\ell+1)=1$. Then we consider
\[
h(s)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{lcc}
\psi'(s)g(\psi (s)) &if& 0 \le s\le \ell+1\,,\\
g(s) &if& \ell+1<s\,,\\
\end{array}
\right .
\]
and let $w$ be a solution to problem \eqref{problemah} with $h$ defined as above. Therefore, the function
\[
v(x)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{lcc}
\psi (w(x)) &if& 0\le w(x)\le \ell+1\,,\\
w(x) &if& \ell+1<w(x)\,,\\
\end{array}
\right .
\]
is a solution to \eqref{problemag}, as we can see as follows.
It is straightforward that the equation holds in $\dis(\Omega)$ and $v\big|_{\partial \Omega} =0$. We only have to see that $(\z,DG(v))=|DG(v)|$ as measures in $\Omega$.
If $0\le s\le \ell+1$ we get
\[
H(s)=\int_0^s h(\sigma) \,d\sigma = \int_0^s \psi'(\sigma)g(\psi (\sigma))\,d\sigma = \int_0^{\psi(s)} g(\sigma) \, d\sigma = G(\psi (s))\,,
\]
\[
H(\ell+1)=G(\psi (\ell+1)) = G(\ell+1)\,,
\]
and for $s>\ell+1$ we have
\[
H(s) = H(\ell+1)+\int_{\ell+1}^s h(\sigma)\,d\sigma = G(\ell+1)+\int_{\ell+1}^s g(\sigma)\,d\sigma = G(s)\,.
\]
Therefore, $DG(v(x))=DH(w(x))$ and we conclude $(\z,DG(v))=|DG(v)|$ as measures in $\Omega$.
\end{remark}
\begin{Example} \label{ejemplo-no-frontera}
The solution to problem
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Du}{|Du|}\right) + g(u) |Du| = \frac{N}{|x|} & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\label{ejemplog}
\end{equation}
with
\[
g(s)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{lcc}
0 &if& s\le a\,,\\
s-a &if& a<s\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\]
for $a>0$ does not vanish on $\partial \Omega$.
\end{Example}
We define
\[
G(s) = \int_0^s g(\sigma)\,d\sigma = \left\{
\begin{array}{lcl}
0 & \mbox{ if } & 0\le s\le a\,,\\
\displaystyle \frac{a}{2} + \frac{s^2}{2}-a\,s & \mbox{ if } & a<s\,.
\end{array}
\right .
\]
It is easy to prove that
\[
u(x) = h(|x|)=h(r)=G^{-1} \left(-\log \left( \frac{r}{R}\right)\right)
\]
with $\z = \frac{x}{|x|}$ is such that $(\z,Du) = |Du|$ as measures in $\Omega$ and $-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z +g(u)^*|Du| = \frac{N}{r}$ in $\dis (\Omega)$. However,
\[
h(R)=G^{-1} (0) = 1\,.
\]
Although the boundary condition is not true, the solution achieves the boundary weakly (see \cite{ABCM}), that is
\[
[\z,\nu] = -\frac{x}{|x|}\frac{x}{|x|} = -1 = -{\rm \; sign \;} (u)\,.
\]
\subsection{Third case}
Finally, let $0<a<b$, we will take $g$ a function with $g(s)=0$ when $s \in [a, b]$ and $g(s) > 0$ for all $s<a$ and $s>b$. Moreover we assume that $g\not\in L^1([0,\infty[)$.
\begin{remark}\label{no-unicidad2}\rm
We will use a similar argument to the previous one to show that there is not uniqueness of solution to problem \eqref{problemag} with function $g$ defined as above.
Let $\psi : [0,b] \to [0,a]$ be an increasing and bijective $C^1$--function. Now, we define
\[
h(s)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{lcc}
\psi'(s)g(\psi (s)) &if& 0 \le s\le b\,,\\
g(s) &if& b<s\,.\\
\end{array}
\right .
\]
If $w$ is a solution to problem \eqref{problemah}, then, we have that
\[
v(x)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{lcc}
\psi(w (x)) &if& 0\le w(x)\le b\,,\\
w(x) &if& b<w(x)\,,\\
\end{array}
\right .
\]
is a solution to the original problem \eqref{problemag} because the equation holds in $\dis(\Omega)$ and also $w\big|_{\partial \Omega} = 0$. In addition, for $0\le s\le b$ we have
\[
H(s)=\int_0^s h(\sigma) \,d\sigma = \int_0^s \psi'(\sigma)g(\psi (\sigma))\,d\sigma = \int_0^{\psi(s)} g(\sigma) \, d\sigma = G(\psi (s))\,,
\]
\[
H(b)=G(\psi (b))= G(a) = G(b)
\]
and for $s>b$ we get
\[
H(s) = H(b)+\int_b^s h(\sigma)\,d\sigma = G(b)+\int_b^s g(\sigma) \, d\sigma = G(s)\,.
\]
Therefore, we have proved the remaining condition: $(\z, DG(v))=|DG(v)|$ as measures in $\Omega$.
\end{remark}
\begin{Example}
\label{ejemplo-disc}
Problem
\begin{equation}
\left \{
\begin{array}{cl}
\displaystyle-\hbox{\rm div\,} \left( \frac{Du}{|Du|}\right) + g(u) |Du| = \frac{N}{|x|} & \qquad\mbox{ in }\quad \Omega\,,\\
u=0 & \qquad\mbox{ on }\quad \partial \Omega\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\label{ejemplog}
\end{equation}
with
\[
g(s)=
\left\{
\begin{array}{lcc}
a-s&if&s<a\,,\\
0 &if&a\le s\le b\,,\\
s-b &if& b<s\,,
\end{array}
\right .
\]
where $0<a<b$, has a discontinuous solution.
\end{Example}
We define
\[
G(s) = \int_0^s g(\sigma)\,d\sigma =\left\{
\begin{array}{lcl}
\displaystyle \frac{-s^2}{2}+a\,s & \mbox{ if } & 0\le s\le a\,,\\[0.2cm]
\displaystyle \frac{a^2}{2} & \mbox{ if } & a\le s\le b\,,\\[0.2cm]
\displaystyle \frac{a^2+b^2}{2} +\frac{s^2}{2}-b\,s & \mbox{ if } & b<s\,.
\end{array}
\right .
\]
We will prove that the radial function
\[
u(x) = h(|x|)= G^{-1} \left(-\log \left( \frac{|x|}{R}\right)\right)
\]
is a solution to problem \eqref{ejemplog} pointing out that, since $G^{-1}$ is discontinuous, the solution $u$ is discontinuous too.
\\
We get the radial solution
\[
h'(r)=\frac{-1}{g\left(G^{-1}\left(-\log \left(\frac{r}{R}\right)\right)r\right)}\,,
\]
and since we take
\[
\z(x)= \frac{-x}{|x|}\,,
\]
it is easy to prove
\[
(\z,Du)= |Du|\,\text{ in }\, \dis (\Omega)\,,
\]
\[
-\hbox{\rm div\,} \z +g(u)^*|Du| =\frac{N}{|x|}\,\text{ as measures in }\, \Omega\,,
\]
and also
\[
h(R) = G^{-1} (0)=0\,.
\]
|
\section{Introduction}
Intensity mapping of the cumulative CO and other millimeter and
submillimeter line emission from early galaxies has been proposed as a
new means to probe very large-scale structures in the distant Universe
(Carilli 2011; Gong et al. 2011; Gong et al. 2012; Yue et al. 2015).
Intensity mapping entails low spatial and spectral resolution imaging
of the sky to obtain the mean brightness due to the cumulative
emission from myriad discrete cosmic sources. While interferometric
arrays like ALMA, the JVLA, and NOEMA, can detect CO and [CII]
158$\mu$m (and in cases of high luminosity sources, other lines), from
individual galaxies at high redshift, the fields of view are very
small, and the integration times are long. These telescopes are
inadequate for measuring the galaxy distribution on the very large
scales relevant to cosmological questions, such as the Baryon Acoustic
Oscillations at intermediate redshifts, or the large-scale
distribution of galaxies that reionize the Universe. The latter is of
particular interest for cross correlation studies with very wide
field, low-resolution HI 21cm images of the intergalactic medium
during cosmic reionization (Lidz et al. 2011).
The integrated millimeter and submillimieter line emission from early
galaxies has also been recognized as a possible significant
contaminant of measurements of the spectral and spatial fluctuations
of the cosmic microwave background (CMB; Righi et al. 2008a,b; Chluba
\& Sunyaev, 2012; de Zotti et al. 2015; Mashian et al. 2016). For
example, modeling suggests (Mashian et al. 2016) that the integrated
CO line emission could be significantly higher than the primordial
spectral distortions due to other cosmological effects (e.g., Chluba
\& Sunyaev, 2012; Sunyaev \& Khatri, 2013; Tashiro 2014), and may be
measurable with next generation instruments like the Primordial
Inflation Explorer (PIXIE; Kogut et al. 2014).\footnote{PIXIE is a
space observatory concept to map the CMB over the frequency range
30GHz to 6THz, one goal of which is to constrain the average CMB
energy spectrum with much greater accuracy than FIRAS.}
Numerous calculations have been done to predict the mean sky brightness due
to emission lines from CO at intermediate and high redshift, and [CII]
158$\mu$m emission at very high redshift (see section 2). These
predictions are based on either empirical estimates using proxies for
the line emission, such as the cosmic star formation rate density, or
large scale cosmological simulations of galaxy formation, with recipes
to relate proxy measurements or simulated properties to line
luminosities.
In this paper, we present direct measurements of the summed line
luminosity from individual sources in bands around 99 GHz and 242 GHz.
These measurements are based on the ASPECS program, corresponding to a
broad band spectral line deep field of the UDF at 1.25mm and 3mm
(Decarli et al. 2016; Aravena et al. 2016a; Walter et al. 2016). From
these measurement, we derive the mean brightness temperature at a
given observing frequency due to high redshift galaxies. As a pilot
study with ALMA, the fields are necessarily small, and the number of
galaxies few. However, the measured quantity is direct: line emission
from early galaxies. Hence, no modeling or conversion factors are
required.
\section{Model predictions for the line brightness}
The dominant contribution to the integrated line brightness from high
redshift galaxies in the 99GHz band is due to rotational transitions
of CO from galaxies at intermediate to high redshift. Other molecular
tracers, such as the high dipole moment molecules like HCN and HCO$^+$,
are typically 10 times, or more, fainter than CO, while the atomic
fine structure lines would be from galaxies at improbable redshifts
($z \sim 20$; see Carilli \& Walter 2013). At 242GHz, the integrated
line brightness will be some combination of higher order CO lines from
intermediate and high redshift galaxies, plus a possible contribution
from [CII] 158$\mu$m line emission from galaxies at $z \sim 6$ to 7,
and other fine structure lines at lower redshift. We consider each in
turn.
Considering CO in the 99GHz band, predictions of the mean CO sky
brightness from early galaxies have taken two approaches. First is an
empirical use of the measured evolution of the cosmic star formation
rate density, and/or the cosmic FIR background, converted to CO
luminosity by adopting a CO-to-FIR or star formation rate conversion
factor (Lidz et al. 2011; Righi et al. 2008; de Zotti et al. 2015). A
related calculation is to consider the star formation rate density
required to reionize the neutral intergalactic medium at high
redshift, subsequently converted to CO luminosity using said
conversion factors (Carilli et al. 2011; Gong et al. 2011). While
based on celestial measurements, these methods involve significant
uncertainties inherent in both the determination of the cosmic star
formation rate density, and more importantly, the assumed 'star
formation law' relating CO luminosity to FIR luminosity, or to star
formation rate (Kennicutt \& Evans 2012; Carilli \& Walter 2013). The
latter may entail a dual conversion of star formation rate to total
gas mass, then total gas mass to CO luminosity. There is the
additional uncertainty in the assumed gas excitation when modeling the
contribution to the mean brightess at a given observing frequency from
different CO transitions from galaxies at different redshifts.
The second method for predicting the mean CO sky brightness is through
cosmological numerical simulations (Mashian et al. 2016; Gong et
al. 2011; Li et al. 2016). Such simulations can be normalized to
eg. an observed galaxy luminosity function at a given redshift,
although ultimately, even the most detailed simulations rely on
recipes to convert from simulated to observable quantities. This is
particularly difficult in the case of tracer molecules, such as CO,
while also including their excitation state.
In summary, the predictions at around 100GHz for the mean brightness
from CO lines from intermediate and high redshift galaxies range from
1.5$\mu$K (Righi et al. 2008) to about 10$\mu$K (Marshian \& Loeb
2016).
Two recent observations have set upper limits to the CO brightness
from distant galaxies using CO intensity mapping. The first entailed a
cross correlation of WMAP images with maps of very large-scale
structures from the SDSS, namely the photometric quasar sample and the
luminous red galaxy sample (Pullen et al. 2013). The cross correlation
technique removes numerous systematic errors. Pullen et al. estimate
upper limits to the mean brightness temperature of CO 1-0 or 2-1 of
about $10\mu$K in the 30 GHz to 90 GHz range. The second was an
interferometric measurement of the brightness fluctuations at 30GHz
using the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich Array (Keating et al. 2015). Keating et
al. quote an upper limit to the CO 1-0 mean brightness of $\sim 5\mu$K
from $z \sim 3$ galaxies. Since both these measurements rely on
modeling of the spatial structure in the signal, they depend on
the assumed under-lying structural parameters.
Considering the 242GHz band, predictions also vary considerably. The
most detailed modeling to date, including analysis of lines from CO,
[CII], and [CI], is presented in Yue et al. (2015). They use large
scale cosmological simulations, plus physically motivated conversion
factors (Vallini et al. 2015; Pallottini et al. 2015), to derive the
line luminosities from early galaxies. They predict a [CII] 158$\mu$m
brightness of $\sim 0.05\mu$K around 242GHz from $z \sim 6.5$
galaxies. At this frequency, they obtain a similar contribution from
the [CI] lines at rest frame frequencies of 492GHz and 809GHz, from
lower redshift galaxies. The dominant line contribution to the mean
brightness at 242GHz in their models comes from CO emission from
galaxies at intermediate to high redshift, for which they derive a
mean brightness of $\sim 0.45\mu$K. Note that, in their models, the
[CII] contribution increases rapidly with increasing observing
frequency, to $\sim 0.4\mu$K at 316GHz (comparable to CO), due to
galaxies at $z \sim 5$. Conversely, Gong et al. (2012) perform an
analytic calculation of the expected [CII] surface brightness based on
ISM physics and halo statistics, and predict a substantially larger
contribution of [CII] at 242 GHz of $\sim 0.3\mu$K.
\section{ASPECS: a blind search for millimeter line emission from high
redshift galaxies}
The ALMA spectral deep field observations (ASPECS) and results are
described in Walter et al. (2016); Aravena et al. (2016a); Decarli et
al. (2016). In brief, we surveyed a $\sim 1$ arcmin$^2$ field in the
UDF to a 3-$\sigma$ depth of $\sim 0.05$ Jy km s$^{-1}$ (assuming line
widths of 200 km s$^{-1}$) over the frequency range 84--115 GHz (3
mm), and of $\sim 0.13$ Jy km s$^{-1}$ over the frequency range
212--272 GHz. In the analysis below, we adopt the mean frequencies
for each band, which are 99GHz and 242GHz.
The observations are sensitive to galaxies over a wide range in
redshift, depending on CO transition. The typical CO luminosity
limits are $\sim 2\times10^9$ K km s$^{-1}$ pc$^2$ at 3mm and $6\times
10^8$ K km s$^{-1}$ pc$^2$ at 1mm at $1<z<3$. The implied gas mass
limits will depend on which CO transition is being considered, at
which redshift, and depend critically on assumed CO excitation, in
particular for the high order transitions, since the total gas mass is
derived by extrapolation to low order. For reference, at the typical
redshifts and transitions of the detected galaxies, these limits imply
galaxies with gas masses of 3 to 10$\times 10^{9}$ M$_\odot$, for
a Galactic conversion factor of CO 1-0 luminosity to total molecular
gas mass. We discuss this point further in Section 4.1.
For [CII] at very high redshift ($z \sim 6.5$), our observations are
sensitive to galaxies with star formation rates $\ge 10$ M$_\odot$ year$^{-1}$,
using the de Looze et al. (2011) conversion.
Line emitting galaxies were identified using multiple three
dimensional search algorithms, and a series of tests were made for
completeness and fidelity (Walter et al.2016). Once a line
candidate was identified, a search was made for an optical or near-IR
counterpart. Decarli et al. (2016a) discuss how a given line is
identified as a specific CO transition. In some cases, the detection
(or the lack of detection) of multiple CO transitions over the broad
frequency range constrains the redshift determination. If an
optical/NIR counterpart is present, literature information on the
redshift of the source (via spectroscopy or SED fitting of the
photometry) was also used. The lack of an optical counterpart is used
to rule out low redshift interpretations in some cases. Ultimately,
for some sources there can be ambiguity as to the transition in
question, and therefore the redshift. This is dealt with via a
bootstrapping approach (see Decarli et al. 2016a). However, in the
context of the analysis below, this is not an issue, since we
simply sum all the lines detected in the blind survey in a give
observing band, independent of what transition and redshift the line
happens to be.
For completeness, Figure 1 shows a compilation of all the candidate
line detections in the survey, as presented in Walter et
al. (2016). There are a total of 21 candidate lines above
5$\sigma$. In 6 cases, line identifications are unequivocally
confirmed, through detection of other CO transitions, and/or an
optical galaxy with a spectroscopic redshift. For the rest of the
lines, extensive quantitative tests are made, and we only include
lines with a $> 60\%$ 'fidelity' rating. See Decarli et al. (2016a)
for more details on the statistical analysis, and Walter et al. (2016)
for total intensity CO images, and optical images, of all the
candidates. At this fidelilty level, we
expect to have roughly as many spurious detections as sources missing
from the survey due to noise fluctuations (Decarli et al. 2016a).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig_coim_spectra.pdf}
\caption{Montage of all the $> 5\sigma$ line candidates from ASPECS
blind survey (Walter et al.
2016). The red regions show the spectral region over which the signal-to-noise
was calculated (see Decarli et al. 2016).}
\label{fig:one}
\end{figure}
\section{Mean Brightness Temperatures}
The mean line brightness temperatures are calculated using an
empirical approach of summing the lines detected in the blind
survey. The process is simple: Table 2 in Walter et al. (2016) lists
the lines detected according to the blind search criteria outlined in
Section 3. We sum the total flux from all the lines detected in a
given band, in Jy km s$^{-1}$, which is equivalent dimensionally to Jy
Hz or ergs s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$. We then divide by the total band width
covered in the blind survey, which results in a mean flux density over
the full band and over the full field, $S_\nu$, in Jy. The mean
brightness temperature at the observed wavelength, $\lambda_{obs}$, is
then derived using the angular area of the field employed in the blind
search, $\Omega_f$, under the Rayleigh-Jeans appoximation: $T_B \sim
1360 ~ S_\nu ~ \lambda_{obs}^2 ~ \Omega_f^{-1} ~~ \rm K$, ~where
$\lambda_{obs}$ is in centimeters and $\Omega_f$ is in arcseconds$^2$.
For the 99GHz band, the total flux for the 10 lines detected in the
band is $2.53\pm 0.25$ Jy km s$^{-1} = (8.3\pm 0.08) \times 10^{5}$
Jy Hz. The total bandwidth is 31GHz, so the mean flux density across
the band is: $S_\nu = (2.7 \pm 0.27) \times 10^{-5}$ Jy. The field
covered by the survey was 3600 arcsecond$^2$. Hence, the mean
brightness temperature, $T_B = 0.94\pm 0.09\mu$K.
For the 242GHz band, the total flux for the 11 lines detected in the
band is $6.93\pm 0.42$ Jy km s$^{-1} = (5.6 \pm 0.34) \times 10^6$
Jy Hz. The total bandwidth is 60GHz, so the mean flux density across
the band is: $S_\nu = (9.3 \pm 0.6) \times 10^{-5}$ Jy. The field
covered by the survey was also 3600 arcsecond$^2$. Hence, the mean
brightness temperature, $T_B = 0.55\pm 0.033\mu$K.
\section{Discussion}
\subsection{Limits}
As a pilot ALMA study, we reemphasize that the volumes in question are
small, as are the number of detections. Hence, our conclusions and
uncertainties are dominated by cosmic variance and simple shot noise
(Poisson statistics). Aravena et al. (2016b) consider the issue of
cosmic variance in the context of our particular field. Based on the
drop-out galaxy counts, and the bright submm source counts, this bias
might be as large as a factor two (low). On the other hand,
consideration of the contribution of faint submm continuum sources to
the cosmic infrared background, based on our deeper ASPECS ALMA data,
suggests a factor closer to unity (Aravena et al. 2016b). Regardless,
since this is a direct survey of the observable in question, namely,
mean brightness due to line emission from distant galaxies at a given
observing frequency, the results remain of interest in general
progress toward millimeter line intensity mapping, and a factor two
uncertainty is inconsequential for our analysis in section 4.2.
Our measurements are also lower limits, since we only sum lines
detected. We do not extrapolate to, e.g., lower or higher luminosity
galaxies using an assumed luminosity function. Considering CO (the
dominant contributor at 99GHz, certainly, and likely at 242 as well),
our detection threshold was set in order to reach what may be the
'knee' in the CO luminosity function at the primary redshifts to which
our survey is most sensitive ($z \sim 1$ to 3). This estimation was
based on both numerical simulations and extrapolations of CO emission
properties of high redshift galaxies from, e.g., measures of dust
luminosities or star formation rates (see Decarli et al. 2016a for
more details). If the CO luminosity function is relatively flat at low
luminosities, and steep at high luminosities, then galaxies around the
knee of the curve dominate the overall luminosity. For example, using
the Popping et al. (2016) and Lagos et al. (2012) CO luminosity
functions and our limits at 99GHz, we estimate that we should be
detecting between 40\% and 70\% of the total CO luminosity (Decarli et
al. 2016) in this dominant redshift range.
\subsection{Comparison to predictions and CMB spectral distortions}
As stated in Section 1, millimeter line intensity mapping experiments
will have broad impact, from studies of galaxy formation to the Baryon
Acoustic Oscillations. In this section we consider in some detail our
results in the context of one topical area that has seen considerable
attention recently, namely, the spectral distortions of the CMB.
In section 2, we reviewed the predictions for the line brightness at
99GHz and 242 GHZ based on phenomenological calculations using on
proxies for the line luminosity (such as the cosmic star formation
density), or numerical simulations of galaxy formation. Predictions
vary significantly, but range from $\sim 1\mu$K to $10\mu$K, in the
frequency ranges being considered. To within the
uncertainties inherent in small volume surveys, our direct
measurements of $T_B = 0.94\pm 0.09\mu$K at 99GHz and $T_B = 0.55\pm
0.033\mu$K at 242GHz, argue for the faint end of these predictions,
although we again emphasize that these should be treated as lower
limits.
How do our measurements then compare to, for instance, the expected
distortions in the CMB spectrum due to early energy release, and to
the expected sensitivity of planned CMB spectral distortion
experiments? As a benchmark for experimental sensitivity, we adopt the
current parameters being considered for PIXIE (Kogut et al. 2014;
2011), using the 15 GHz spectral resolution for the proposed
experiment. Considering the expected sky brightness contributions, we
focus on the more cosmologically relevant predictions, relating to
recombination and reionization.
We note that there are other potentially significant foregrounds, in
particular, Galactic and extragalactic thermal emission from warm
dust, and synchrotron emission. Kogut et al. (2014) review the
relative magnitude of these contributions. The thermal emission from
warm dust, in particular, is calculated to be an order of magnitude,
or more, stronger than the summed millimeter line emission considered
herein. However, the spectral behavior of the dust emission is
considered to be well understood, and should be well modelled, and
removed, using spectral fitting algorithms over a broad frequency
range. Herein, we focus on the millimeter and sub-millimeter line
emission, given that this is our measured quantity, and compare it to
the predicted cosmological signals. Additional discussion of
foregrounds can be found in, e.g., de Zotti et al. (2015).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./DT_spec.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of different CMB distortion signals (negative
branches of the signals are marked) with the millimeter line limits reported
in this paper. The low-redshift distortion created by reionization and
structure formation is close to a $y$-distortion with $y\simeq
2\times 10^{-6}$. Contributions from the hot gas in low mass halos
give rise to a noticeable relativistic temperature correction. For
the damping signal, we plot a $\mu$-distortion with $\mu=2\times
10^{-8}$. The cosmological recombination radiation was computed using
{\tt CosmoSpec}. The estimated effective sensitivity
($\Delta I_\nu \approx 5\, {\rm Jy~ sr^{-1}}$)
of PIXIE is shown for
comparison (dotted line).}
\label{fig:one}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~3, we show a comparison of various distortion signals, along
with the line limits derived herein. We focus on {\it guaranteed}
distortions within $\Lambda$CDM (see Chluba, 2016, for most recent
overview), some of which should be detectable with future experiments,
at least in terms of raw sensitivity (Kogut et al. 2011). A wider
range of range of energy release processes (e.g., decaying particle
scenarios) is discussed in Chluba 2013 and Chluba \& Jeong, 2014.
The largest CMB expected spectral distortion is created at
low-redshift by the reionization and structure formation process
(Sunyaev \& Zeldovich, 1972; Hu et al., 1994a). This signal is close
to a pure Compton-$y$ distortion (Zeldovich \& Sunyaev, 1969) caused
through partial up-scattering of CMB blackbody photons by hot
electrons yielding a $y$-parameter $y\simeq 2\times 10^{-6}$ (e.g.,
Refregier et al. 2000; Hill et al., 2015). Contributions from the hot
gas ($\simeq 1{\rm keV}$) residing in low mass halos also give rise to
a noticeable relativistic temperature correction, which could be used
to constrain the average temperature of baryons at low redshifts (Hill
et al., 2015). While the relativistic correction signal requires a
removal of the integrated CO emission, the non-relativistic
$y$-distortion contribution should be less affected and already
separable using multi-frequency capabilities of future experiments.
Another inevitable distortion is created by the dissipation of
small-scale fluctuations in the primordial photon-baryon plasma
(Sunyaev \& Zeldovich, 1970; Daly, 1991; Hu et al., 1994b; Chluba,
Khatri, \& Sunyaev 2012) due to Silk damping. We illustrate the
$\mu$-distortion (Sunyaev \& Zeldovich, 1970) contribution of this
signal using $\mu=2\times 10^{-8}$, which is close to the value
expected for the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology (Chluba, 2016). A
$\mu$-distortion can only be created in dense and hot environments
present in the early Universe at $z\gtrsim 5\times 10^4$ (Burigana et
al., 1991; Hu \& Silk, 1993). By detecting this signal one can probe
the amplitude of perturbations at scales far smaller than those seen
in the CMB anisotropies, delivering another independent way to test
different inflation models (e.g., Chluba, Khatri, \& Sunyaev 2012;
Chluba, Erickcek \& Ben-Dayan, 2012; Dent et al., 2012; Clesse et al.,
2014).
Finally, we show the cosmological hydrogen and helium recombination
radiation emitted at $z\simeq 10^3$ (Zeldovich et al., 1968; Peebles,
1968; Dubrovich, 1975; Kholupenko et al., 2005;
Rubi{\~n}o-Mart{\'{\i}}n et al., 2006; Chluba \& Sunyaev 2006), which
was computed using {\tt CosmoSpec} (Chluba \& Ali-Ha{\"i}moud,
2016). This signal could provide an independent way to constrain
cosmological parameters and directly map the recombination history
(Sunyaev \& Chluba, 2009). It is unpolarized and its unique spectral
variability is very hard to mimic by other foregrounds or instrumental
effects.\footnote{The expected distortions due to annihilating dark
matter (McDonald et al., 2001; Chluba 2010; Chluba \& Sunyaev, 2012;
Chluba 2013) and the differences in the cooling of baryons relative
to CMB photons during cosmic expansion (Chluba, 2005; Chluba \&
Sunyaev, 2012) were not illustrated here.}
The latter two effects cause fractional spectral distortions in the
range of 10$^{-9}$ to 10$^{-8}$, implying observed brightness
temperature perturbations $\Delta T_{\rm B}\simeq 3{\rm nK}-30{\rm
nK}$, well below the contribution of the mean line brightness measured
herein. Thus, beyond doubt, an extraction of these primordial
distortions will be very challenging, requiring sophisticated
foreground removal techniques, unprecedented control of systematics,
broad spectral coverage and high sensitivity multi-frequency
capabilities. To successfully remove the integrated millimeter and
submillimeter line emission, it will be advantageous to exploit the
synergies between future CMB distortion measurements and observations
similar to those presented here. Given the importance of the
primordial distortion signals to studies of early-universe physics,
this direction is highly relevant.
As ALMA attains full capability, spectral deep fields will become more
efficient and effective, eventually encompassing areas of tens of
square arcminutes. Our pilot studies have already shown the impact of
such measurements over a broad range of problems in modern
astrophysics and cosmology. In parallel, the Jansky Very Large Array
is exploring similar deep spectral searches at 30GHz (eg. Lentati et
al. 2015; Riechers et al. in prep.), while the advent of high
frequency spectral cameras on the Green Bank Telescope provide a
sensitive platform for wide field spectral searches (Sieth et
al. 2016). In the long term, a 'Next Generation Very Large Array,'
operating between 20GHz and 115GHz with octave, or broader, bandwidth
receivers and ten times the collecting area of ALMA and the JVLA, has
the potential to revolutionize blind searches for molecular gas in the
early Universe (Carilli et al. 2015; Casey et al. 2015).
\acknowledgements We thank the referee for useful comments that
improved the paper. FW acknowledges support through ERC grant
COSMIC--DAWN. MA acknowledges partial support from FONDECYT through
grant 1140099. Support for RD was provided by the DFG priority program
1573 `The physics of the interstellar medium'. DR acknowledges
support from the National Science Foundation under grant number
AST-\#1614213 to Cornell University. FB acknowledges support by the
Collaborative Research Council 956, sub-project A1, funded by the
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). This paper makes use of the
following ALMA data: ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2013.1.00146.S and
ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2013.1.00718.S. ALMA is a partnership of ESO
(representing its member states), NSF (USA) and NINS (Japan), together
with NRC (Canada), NSC and ASIAA (Taiwan), and KASI (Republic of
Korea), in cooperation with the Republic of Chile. The Joint ALMA
Observatory is operated by ESO, AUI/NRAO and NAOJ. The National Radio
Astronomy Observatory is a facility of the National Science Foundation
operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc.
|
\section{Introduction}
\SetKwData{Okeys}{OutKeys}
\SetKwData{Oelems}{OutElements}
We consider data presented as elements $e = (\text{\em{e.key}},\text{\em{e.value}})$ where
each element has a {\em key} and
a positive numeric {\em value} $ > 0$.
This data model is very common in streaming or distributed
aggregation problems.
A well-studied special case is where $\text{\em{e.value}} \equiv 1$ for all
elements.
One of the most fundamental statistics over such data is the number
of distinct keys: $\dCount(E) = \{\text{\em{e.key}}\mid e\in E\}$. Exact computation of the statistics requires
maintaining a structure of size that is linear in the number of distinct keys.
A pioneering design of Flajolet and Martin \cite{FlajoletMartin85}
showed that an approximate count can be obtained in a streaming model
using structures (``sketches'') of logarithmic size.
Since then, a rich research strand
proposed and analysed a diverse set of approximate counting
sketches and deployed them
for a wide range of applications \cite{hyperloglogpractice:EDBT2013}.
Distinct counting sketches can be mostly classified as based on
sampling (MinHash sketches) or on random
projections (linear sketches).
Both types of structures are mergeable/composable:
This means that when the elements are partitioned, we can compute a
sketch for each part separately and then obtain a corresponding sketch
for the union from the sketches of each part.
This property is critical for making the sketches
suitable for parallel or distributed aggregation.
The original design of \cite{FlajoletMartin85} and the leading
ones used in practice use sample-based sketches. In particular,
the popular Hyperloglog sketch \cite{hyperloglog:2007}
has double logarithmic size $O(\epsilon^{-2}+\log\log n)$, where $n$ is the
number of distinct keys and $\epsilon$ is the target
normalized root mean squared error (NRMSE).
Since this size is necessary to represent the approximate
count, Hyperloglog is asymptotically optimal.
We note that the Hyperloglog sketch contains
$\epsilon^{-2}$ registers which store exponents of the estimated
count. Thus, explicit representation of the sketch has
size $O(\epsilon^{-2}\log\log n)$, but one can theoretically use instead a single exponent
and $\epsilon^{-2}$ constant-size offsets
(e.g. \cite{KNW:PODS2010,ECohenADS:TKDE2015}) to bring the sketch
size down to $O(\epsilon^{-2}+\log\log n)$, albeit by
somewhat increasing updates complexity.
Another point is that Hyperloglog uses random hash
functions which have logarithmic-size representations. Some
theoretical lower bounds consider the hash representation
to be part of the sketch \cite{ams99,KNW:PODS2010}), implying a
logarithmic lower bound on size.
We follow \cite{FlajoletMartin85,hyperloglog:2007} and consider the hash
representation to be provided by the platform, which is consistent with practice where hash functions are
reused and shared by multiple sketches.
We now consider other common statistics over elements. In particular,
statistics expressed over a set of (key, weight) pairs, where the weight
$w_x$ of a key $x$, is defined to be the sum of the values of data
elements with key $x$: $$w_x = \sum_{e \mid \text{\em{e.key}}=x} \text{\em{e.value}}\
.$$ Keys that are not active (no elements with this key) are
defined to have $w_x = 0$. Note that if all elements have value
equal to $1$, then
$w_x$ is the number of occurrences of key $x$.
For a nonnegative function $f(w) \geq 0$ such that $f(0)\equiv 0$, we define the
{\em $f$-statistics} of the data as $\sum_x f(w_x)$. We will find
it convenient to work with the notation $W(w)$ for the number of
keys with $w_x = w$. Equivalently, we can treat
$W$ as a distribution over weights $w_x$ that is scaled by the number of
distinct keys. We can then express the $f$-statistics (with a slight notation abuse) as
\begin{equation}f(W) = \int_0^\infty W(w)f(w) dw\ .\end{equation}
The design og sketches that approximate $f$-statistics over streams of elements was
formalized and popularized in a seminal paper by Alon, Matias, and Szegedy
\cite{ams99}. The aim was to understand the necessary sketch size
for approximating different statistics and in particular understand
which statistics can be sketched in size that is polylogarithmic in the number of keys.
We focus here on functions $f$ that are
concave with (sub)linear nonnegative
growth-rate. Equivalently, these are all
nonnegative linear combinations (the nonnegative
{\em span}) of {\em capping} functions
$$\textsf{cap}_T(x) = \min\{T,x\}\ \text{parameterized by}\ T>0\ ,$$
and we therefore use the notation $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$.
Members of $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ that parametrize a spectrum
between distinct count ($f(x)=1$) and sum ($f(x)=x$) include
{\em frequency moments} $f(x) =
x^p$ in the range $p=[0,1]$ (sum is $p=1$ and distinct count is $p=0$), capping functions (sum is realized by $\textsf{cap}_\infty$ and distinct count by $\textsf{cap}_1$ when element
values are integral and by $f(x)=\textsf{cap}_T/T$ as $T\rightarrow 0$
generally), and the {\em soft capping}
functions
\begin{equation} \label{softcapdef:eq} \widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T = T(1-\exp(-x/T))\ .\end{equation}
Soft
capping is a smooth approximation of ``hard'' capping functions: For
$x\ll T$ we have $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(x) \approx x = \textsf{cap}_T(x)$, for
$x \gg T$ we have $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(x) \approx T = \textsf{cap}_T(x)$, and it always
holds that
\begin{equation}\label{softcap:eq}
\forall x,\, (1-1/e) \textsf{cap}_T(x) \leq \widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(x)
\leq \textsf{cap}_T(x)\ .
\end{equation}
Other important $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ members are $\log(1+x)$ and capped moments.
Statistics in
$\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ are used in applications to decrease the impact of very
frequent keys and increase the impact of rare keys.
It is a common practice to weigh frequencies, say degree of
nodes in a graph \cite{NandanwarM:kdd2016} or frequency of a term in a document~\cite{SaltonBuckley1988}, by a sublinear
function such as $w^p$ for $p\in (0,1)$ or $\log(1+w)$.
In many applications, the ability to approximate the statistics over the raw data, without the cost
of aggregation, can be very useful.
One such application is to online advertising
\cite{GoogleFreqCap,facebookFreqCap}, data elements are
interpreted as opportunities to show ads to users (keys) that are interacting with various apps on different
platforms.
An advertisement campaign specifies a maximum number of
times $T$ an ad can be displayed to the same user, so the number of
qualifying impressions corresponds to $\textsf{cap}_T$ statistics of the data.
Statistics are computed over past data in order to estimate the number
of qualifying impressions when designing a campaign.
Another application is the computation of
word embeddings. The objective is to have the focus and
context embeddings of words captures the respective co-occurrence
frequencies. Glove~\cite{PenningtonSM14:EMNLP2014} achieved
significant improvements by using
$f(w) = \min\{1,w/T\}^\alpha$ for $\alpha<1$ (instead of $f(w)=w$). Typically,
the text corpus is presented as complete text documents, and elements in arbitrary order are extracted in a pass over
this data.
There is a very large body of work on the topic of approximating
statistics over streamed or distributed data and it is not
possible to mention it all here. Most of the prior work uses linear sketches (random linear projections). A sketch for the second moment, inspired by the JL transform \cite{JLlemma:1984}, was presented by \cite{ams99}.
Indyk \cite{indyk:stable} followed with
a beautiful construction based on stable distributions
of sketches of size $O(\epsilon^{-2}\log^2 n)$ for
moments in $p\in [0,2]$.
Braverman and Ostrovsky \cite{BravermanOstro:STOC2010} presented a
characterization and an
umbrella construction of sketch structures, based on $L_2$ heavy
hitter sketches, for all monotone $f$-statistics. The structure size
is polylogarithmic but is
practically too large (degree of the
polylog and constant factors).
Sample-based sketches for $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ functions were presented
by the author~\cite{freqCap:KDD2015}.
The sketch is a weighted sample of keys that supports
approximate $\textsf{cap}$-statistics on domain queries (subsets
of the keys). The framework generalizes both distinct reservoir
sampling \cite{Knuth2f,Vit85} and the sample and hold stream sampling
\cite{GM:sigmod98,EV:ATAP02,flowsketch:JCSS2014}. The size and
quality tradeoffs of the sample
are very close (within a small constant) to those of an optimal sample that can be efficiently
computed over aggregated data (set of key and weight pairs). Roughly,
a sample of $O(\epsilon^{-2})$ keys suffices to approximate
$\textsf{cap}_T(W)$ unbiasedly with coefficient of variation (CV) $\epsilon$.
Moreover, a {\em multi-objective} (universal) sample (see \cite{multiw:VLDB2009,multiobjective:2015}) of
$O(\epsilon^{-2} \log n)$ keys can approximate with
CV $\epsilon$ {\em any} $f$-statistics for $f\in \overline{\textsf{cap}}$.
When this method is applied to sketching statistics of the full data, we can hash
key identifiers to size $O(\log n)$ (to obtain uniqueness with very
high probability) and obtain sketches of size $O(\epsilon^{-2} \log
n)$ and a multi-objective sketches of size $O(\epsilon^{-2} \log^2
n)$. One weakness of the design is that these sketches
are not fully composable: They apply on streamed elements (single
pass) or take two passes over distributed data elements.
A remaining fundamental challenge is to
design composable sketches of size $O(\epsilon^{-2}
\log n)$ for each $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ statistics and a
composable multi-objective sketch of size $O(\epsilon^{-2}
\log^2 n)$. Given the practical significance of the problem, we seek
simple and highly efficient designs. A further theoretical challenge
is to design sketches that meet or approach the double-logarithmic representation-size
lower bound of $O(\epsilon^{-2}+ \log \log n)$.
\ignore{
\begin{quote}
{\bf Q1: }
Can we approximate all statistics in $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ using
structures of size $O(\epsilon^{-2} + \log \log n)$ ?
\end{quote}
\begin{quote}
{\bf Q2: }
Can we design composable structures for estimating $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$
statistics of size that is logarithmic in $n$ ?
\end{quote}
Linear sketches are fully composable but current structures have
larger sizes.
The sampling-based framework of \cite{freqCap:KDD2015} included a streaming
scheme and a two-pass composable scheme (the first pass
determines the keys in the sample and another computes their exact
weights). But we seek a one-pass composable scheme.
}
\subsection*{Contributions overview and organization}
We address these challenges and make the following contributions.
We show that
{\em any} statistics in the {\em soft capping span}
$\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ can be approximated with the essential
effectiveness and estimation quality of Hyperloglog.
That is, we present composable sketches of size
$O(\epsilon^{-2}+\log\log n)$ that estimate the statistics with
RNMSE $\epsilon$ with good concentration.
The soft capping span $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}} \subset \overline{\textsf{cap}}$
is the set of functions that can be expressed as
\begin{equation} \label{softspanf:eq}
f(w) = \int_0^\infty a(t)
(1-e^{-wt}) dt \ , \text{ where } a(t)\geq 0\ .
\end{equation}
In particular, the span includes
all soft capping functions, low
frequency moments ($f(w)=w^p$ with $p\in (0,1)$), and $\log(1+w)$.
We also present a composable {\em multi-objective} sketch for
$\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$. This is a single structure that is
larger by a logarithmic factor than
a single distinct counter and supports the approximations of
{\em all} $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ statistics.
Finally, we consider statistics in
$\overline{{\textsf{cap}}}$ that are not in $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ and show how
to approximate them within small relative errors (12\%) using
differences of approximate
$\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ statistics.
Our main technical tool is a novel
framework, illustrated in Figure~\ref{framework:fig},
that reduces the approximation of the more general
statistics to distinct-count statistics. At the core we
specify randomized functions $M$ that
map data elements of the form $e=(\text{\em{e.key}},\text{\em{e.value}})$ to
sets of {\em output elements}. Each output element $e'\in M(e)$
contains an
{\em output key} ({\em outkey}) $e'.key$ (which generally is from a
different domain than the input keys) and an optional value $e'.value
\geq 0$. For a set of data elements $W$, we obtain a
corresponding multiset of output elements $$E=M(W)= \bigcup_{e\in W} M(e)\ .$$
The mapping functions are crafted so that
the approximate statistics of
the set of data elements $W$ can be obtained from
approximations of other statistics of the output
elements $E$. In particular, if we have a composable sketch for
the output statistics, we obtain a composable sketch for the target
statistics.
Note that our mapping functions are randomized, therefore the set $E$
is a random variable and so is any (exact) statistics on $E$. We will
use approximate statistics on $E$.
The output statistics we use are the distinct count
$\dCount(E)$, which allows us to leverage
approximate distinct counters as black boxes, and the
more general
{\em max-distinct} statistics $\MdCount(E)$, defined as
the sum over distinct keys of the maximum value of an element with the
key:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{mxdistinct:eq}
\lefteqn{\MdCount(E) = \sum_x m_x\ ,} \label{mxdistinct:eq}\\
&& \text{ where } m_x\equiv\max_{e\in E \mid \text{\em{e.key}}=x}
\text{\em{e.value}}\ ,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which also can be sketched in double logarithmic size.
Note that when all elements have value $1$, $\MdCount(E) = \dCount(E)$.
For multi-objective approximations we use {\em all-threshold}
sketches that allows us to recover, for any threshold $t>0$, an
approximation of
\begin{equation} \label{tdistinct:def}
\TdCount_t (E)=\dCount \{e\in E \mid \text{\em{e.value}} \leq t \} ,
\end{equation}
which is the number of distinct keys that appear in at least one
element $e\in E$ with value $\text{\em{e.value}} \leq t$.
The size of the all-threshold sketch is
larger by only a logarithmic factor than the basic distinct count
sketch.
We refer to the value of the output statistics on the output elements
as a {\em measurement} of $W$. When a sketch is applied to approximate the value of output statistics, we refer to the result as
an {\em approximate measurement} of $W$.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{sketch.pdf}
\caption{{\small Element processing framework}}
\label{framework:fig}
\end{figure}
\ignore{
\begin{algorithm}[h]\caption{Base framework\label{framework:alg}}
{\small
\KwIn{Data elements $W$, function $f \in \overline{\textsf{cap}} $}
\KwOut{Estimate of $f(W)$}
Specify (tailored to $f$):
\begin{itemize}
\item
Mapping functions $\{M_i\}$ of data elements to sets of output elements
\item
An estimator $\hat{f}:R^{|\{M_i\}|}$
\end{itemize}
\ForEach{$i$}{$\hat{C}_i \gets$ approximate (max-)distinct count of $M_i(W)$}\;
\Return $\hat{f}(\{\hat{C}_i\})$
}
\end{algorithm}
}
The paper is organized as follows.
In Section~\ref{cLaplace:sec} we define the {\em complement Laplace transform}
$\LapM[W](t)$ of the frequency
distribution $W$, which is its distinct count minus its Laplace
transform at $t$. We have the relation
$$T \LapM[W](1/T) = \widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(W)\ ,$$ that
is, the transform at $1/T$ multiplied by $T$ is the $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T$ statistics of
the data.
In Section~\ref{approxcL:sec} we define a mapping function for any
$t>0$, so that $\LapM[W](t)$, and hence $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_{1/t}$-statistics, is
approximated by the respective $\dCount$ measurement.
We refer to this as a
measurement of $\LapM[W]$ at point $t$.
In Section~\ref{softspan:sec} we
consider the span $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ of soft capping statistics,
that is, all $f$ of the form \eqref{softspanf:eq}.
Equivalently, $a(t)$ is the inverse $\LapM$ transform of $f$.
We derive the explicit form of the inverse transform of
all frequency moments with $p\in(0,1)$ and logarithms.
%
The statistics $f(W)$ for $f\in \overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ can thus be expressed as
$$f(W) = \LapM[W][a] \equiv \int_0^\infty a(t) \LapM[W](t) dt\ .$$
This suggests that we can approximate $f(W)$ using multiple approximate point ($\dCount$)
measurements. In section~\ref{weightedDC:sec} we show
that a single
$\MdCount$ measurement suffices:
We present
element mapping functions (tailored to $f$) such that the
$\MdCount$ statistics on output elements approximates $f(W)= \LapM[W][a]$.
We refer to this statistics as a {\em combination} measurement
of $\LapM[W]$ using $a$. A $\MdCount$ sketch of the output element gives us
an approximation of combination measurement which approximates $f(W)$.
Finally, we will review the design of HyperLoglog-like $\MdCount$ sketches.
In Section~\ref{allt:sec} we consider the multi-objective setting, that is, a single sketch from which we can approximate all $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ statistics.
We define a mapping function such that for all $t>0$, $\TdCount_t (E)$ is equivalent to a point measurement of $\LapM[W]$ at $t$.
\ignore{
{\em full-range $\LapM[W]$
measurement,} which encodes point measurements of
$\LapM[W](t)$ at all points $t$. This measurement provides us with
simultaneous approximations for all functions in $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$.
We show how to compute and represent an approximate full-range measurement
within a logarithmic overhead over that of a single approximate point
measurement using an all-threshold sketch.
To do so, we define
the {\em all-threshold} count of a set of data elements $E$ that
are key and value pairs. The count $\TdCount_t (E)$
for $t > 0$ is the number of distinct keys that appear in at least one
element $e$ with value $\text{\em{e.value}} \leq t$.
The full-range measurement is defined using our framework where
output elements have values and are processed by an all-threshold
distinct counter.
}
The output elements are processed by an
{\em all-threshold distinct count} sketches, which
can be interpreted as all-distance sketches
\cite{ECohen6f,ECohenADS:TKDE2015} and inherit their properties -- In
particular, the total structure size has logarithmic overhead over a
single distinct counter. The all-threshold sketch
allows us to obtain approximate point measurements for any $t$ and combination measurement for any $a$.
In Section~\ref{hardcappingtransform:sec} we consider statistics in
$\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ that may not be in $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$.
We characterize $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ as the set of all concave sublinear
functions and derive expressions for the {\em capping
transform} which transforms $f\in \overline{\textsf{cap}}$ to the
coefficients of the corresponding nonnegative linear combination of
capping functions.
We then consider sketching these statistics $f(W)$ using
approximate {\em signed} inverse $\LapM$
transform of the function $f$. We use
separate combinations
measurements of the positive and negative components for the
approximation. We show that $\textsf{cap}_1$ is the ``hardest''
function in that class in the sense that
any approximate inverse transform for
the function $\textsf{cap}_1(x) = \min\{1,x\}$ can be extended (while
retaining sketchability and approximation quality) to
any statistics $f\in \overline{\textsf{cap}}$, using
the capping transform of $f$. We then derive some approximate
transforms for $\textsf{cap}_1(x)$, and hence for any $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$
statistics that achieve maximum relative error of $12\%$.
\ignore{
In Section~\ref{useLapM:sec} we consider
statistics that are not in $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ using
approximate $\LapM$
measurements (point, full-range, or combination).
We identify conditions under
which we can obtain good approximations using signed approximate inverse
transforms.
In Section~\ref{hardcap:sec} we derive concrete approximations for statistics
in $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ that are not in $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ using approximate
$\LapM[W]$ measurements.
We recall (see Equation \ref{softcap:eq}) that for all $t$ and $w$,
$\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_t$ itself is an approximation of $\textsf{cap}_t$ that has relative error
that is at most $1/e$.
We obtain better approximations by searching for appropriate signed approximate
inverse transforms. We identify signed coefficients $a(t)$ that
achieve maximum error of 12\%
and preserves the desirable property that the error vanishes for $w$ that is
much small or much larger than $1/t$. The approximation of $\textsf{cap}_t$
functions uses three
point or two combination measurements. Using the capping transform,
we can extend the same approximation guarantees to any $f\in
\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ using two combination measurements.
Finally, our formulation can be used to search for tighter approximations.
}
\ignore{
We also propose a methodology for searching for tighter approximations
using more points or combination measurements.
We note that any improvement on the relative error we can obtain for
``hard'' capping functions carries over to
all statistics $f\in \overline{\textsf{cap}}$: Roughly, we
compute the capping
transform of $f$, apply the approximation to obtain a combination of soft capping
functions, and approximate the
latter using a full-range or a combination measurement.
}
\notinproc{
Section~\ref{experiments:sec} shows some experiments that
mainly aimed at demonstrating the ease and effectiveness of our sketches.
Appendix sections \ref{bintrans:sec}--\ref{weighted:sec} briefly present some
extensions.
In Section~\ref{bintrans:sec} we define a related
discrete transform which we call the {\em Bin transform}. A variant of the
Bin transform was proposed in \cite{freqCap:KDD2015}. We show how it
can be approximated using our framework.
Sections~\ref{decay:sec} and~\ref{weighted:sec} discuss extensions to
time-decayed statistics and weighted keys.
We conclude in Section~\ref{conclu:sec} with future directions and
open problems.
}
\onlyinproc{
We conclude in Section \ref{conclu:sec}. Due to page limitations,
many proofs and details and also some experimental results are omitted from this submission. A full
version can be found in \url{https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.06517}.
}
\section{The Laplace$^C$ transform} \label{cLaplace:sec}
The {\em complement Laplace (Laplace$^c$) transform} $\LapM[W](t)$ is parametrized by $t>0$ and
defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\LapM[W](t) \equiv \int_0^\infty W(w) (1-\exp(-wt))dw } \nonumber\\
&=& \int_0^\infty W(w)dw-\Laplace[W(w)](t) \label{termsL:eq}\ .
\end{eqnarray}
See Figure~\ref{example:fig} for an illustration of $LapM[W](t)$ for a toy
distribution $W$.
The transform has the following relation to
soft capping statistics:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{laplacecap:eq}
\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(W) &=& T \LapM[W](1/T)
\end{eqnarray}
The first term in \eqref{termsL:eq}, $\int_0^\infty W(w)dw \equiv \dCount(W)$, is the ``distinct count'' and the
second term $\Laplace[W(w)]$ is the Laplace transform of our (scaled) frequency
distribution $W$. Hence the name {\em complement Laplace} transform.
Note that $\LapM[W](t)$ is non-decreasing with
$t$. At the limit when $t$ increases, the second term
vanishes and
\begin{equation} \label{hight:eq}
\lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} \LapM[W](+\infty) =
\int_0^\infty W(w)dw = \dCount(W)
\end{equation}
is the number of
distinct keys in $W$. At the limit as $t$ decreases
\begin{equation} \label{lowt:eq}
\lim_{ t \rightarrow 0^+} \frac{1}{t}\LapM[W](t)
= \int_0^\infty W(w) w dt = t \SUM(W)\ ,
\end{equation}
where $\SUM(W) = \sum_{e\in W} \text{\em{e.value}} = \sum_x w_x$ is the sum of the
weights of keys. More precisely:
\begin{lemma} \label{relevantrange:lemma}
For $t\leq \frac{\sqrt{\epsilon}}{\max_x w_x}$ and for
$t\geq \frac{-\ln \epsilon}{\min_x w_x}$, the transform is approximated
within a relative error of at most $\epsilon$ by the respective limits
\eqref{lowt:eq} and~\eqref{hight:eq}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For the first claim, note that $wt\leq \sqrt{\epsilon}$.
Hence, using the Maclaurin expansion, $|1-e^{-wt}-wt| \approx
(wt)^2/2 \leq \epsilon$.
For the second claim, the relative error is $\exp(-wt) \leq \epsilon$.
\end{proof}
The Lemma implies that the fine structure of $W$ is captured by a
restricted ``relevant'' range of $t$ values and is well approximated
outside this range by the basic (and composably sketchable) $\dCount$ and $\SUM$ statistics.
The statistics $\dCount(W)$ is approximated by an
off-the-shelf approximate distinct counter applied to data elements.
The exact $\SUM(W)$ is straightforward to compute
composably with a single counter of size $O(\log \SUM(W))$ (assuming integral values).
A classic algorithm
by Morris~\cite{Morris77} (see~\cite{ECohenADS:TKDE2015} for a
composable version that can handle varying weights) uses
sketches of size $O(\epsilon^{-2}
+ \log\log (\SUM(W))$.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{example.pdf}
\caption{Data $W$ with 10 keys with $w_x=1$, 2 keys with $w_x=5$, and one
key with $w_x=10$. The distinct count (number of keys) is
$\dCount(W) =13$ and
the sum is $\SUM(W) = 30$.
We have $W(w) = 10\delta(w-1)+2\delta(w-5)+
\delta(w-10)$, where $\delta$ is Dirac Delta function. The transform (plotted) is
$\LapM[W](t)=10(1-e^{-t})+2(1-e^{-5t})+ (1-e^{-10t}) = 13-10e^{-t}-2e^{-5t}-e^{-10t}$. The plot
shows the asymptotes $t \SUM(W)$ for small $t$ and $\dCount(W)$ for large $t$.
\label{example:fig}}
\end{figure}
\section{Laplace$^c$ point measurements} \label{approxcL:sec}
We define a mapping function of elements such that
the expectation of the (scaled) distinct count of output elements is equal to
the Laplace$^c$ transform $\LapM[W](t)$ of $W$
at $t$. We also establish concentration around the expectation.
The basic element mapping is provided
as Algorithm~\ref{elemmap1:alg}. A more efficient variant that
performs computation proportional to the number of generated output
elements is provided in
\notinproc{Appendix~\ref{efficientpoint:sec}.}\onlyinproc{the full version.}
The mapping is
parametrized by $t$ and by an integer $r\geq 1$ and uses a set of
functions $H_i$ for $i\in [r]$.
All we need to assume here is that
for all $i$ and keys $x$, $H_i(x)$ are
(nearly) unique. This can be achieved by concatenating $x$ to a
string representation of $i$: $H_i(x)
\equiv x \cdot \text{str}(i))$.
To obtain output key representation that is logarithmic in $r
\dCount(W)$, we can apply a random hash function to the concatenated string.
An element $e$ is processed by drawing a set of $r$ independent
exponential random variables $y_i \sim \textsf{Exp}[\text{\em{e.value}}]$ with parameter $\text{\em{e.value}}$. For each $i$
such that $y_i<t$, the output key $H_i(\text{\em{e.key}})$ is created. Note that the
number of output keys returned is between 0 and $r$.
\begin{algorithm2e}[h]\caption{$\protect\Okeys_{t,H}(e)$:
Map input
element to outkeys \label{elemmap1:alg}}
\DontPrintSemicolon
{\small
\KwIn{Element $e=(\text{\em{e.key}},\text{\em{e.value}})$, $t>0 $, integer $r \geq 1$, hash
functions $H_i$ $i\in[r]$}
\KwOut{A set \Okeys of at most $r$ outkeys}
$\Okeys \gets []$ \tcp*[f]{initialize}\;
\ForEach{$i\in [r]$}{$y_i \sim
\textsf{Exp}[\text{\em{e.value}}]$ \tcp*[f]{independent exponentially distributed with parameter $\text{\em{e.value}}$}\;
\If{$y_i \leq t$}{$\Okeys.append(H_i(\text{\em{e.key}}))$ \tcp*[f]{Append $H_i(\text{\em{e.key}})$
to list of output keys}\;
}
}
\Return $\Okeys$
}
\end{algorithm2e}
Our point measurement is
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\LapM}[W](t) = \frac{1}{r} \dCount\left( \bigcup_e
\text{\sc{OutKeys}}_{t,H}(e) \right)\ ,
\end{equation} which is number of distinct output keys generated for all
data elements,
divided by $r$.
We now show that for any choice of $r\geq 1$, $t$, and input data
$W$, the expectation of the measurement $\widehat{\LapM}[W](t)$
is equal to the value of the Laplace$^c$ transform of $W$ at $t$.
\begin{lemma} \label{unbiasedpoint:lemma}
$$\E[\widehat{\LapM}[W](t)] = \LapM[W](t)$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The distinct count of outkeys $r\widehat{\LapM}[W](t)$
can be expressed as the sum of $r n$ Poisson trials. Each Poisson trial corresponds
to ``appearance at least once''
of the potential outkey $H_i(x)$ over the $n=\dCount(W)$ active input keys and $i\in [r]$.
For each $i\in [r]$ and key $a$, the outkey $H_i(a)$ appears
if the minimum $\textsf{Exp}[\text{\em{e.value}}]$ draw over
elements $e$ with key $a$ is at most $t$. The minimum of these
exponential random variables is
exponentially distributed with parameter equal to their sum $w_a = \sum_{e \mid \text{\em{e.key}}=a}
\text{\em{e.value}}$.
This distribution has density
function $w \exp(-w x)$. Therefore, the probability of the event is
\begin{equation}
p(w_a,t) = \int_0^t w_a \exp(-w_a y) dy = 1-\exp(-w_a t)\ .
\end{equation}
It follows that the expected contribution of a key $a$ with weight $w_a$ to the sum
measurement is $rp(w_a,t)$. Therefore
the expected value of the measurement is
$$\E[\widehat{\LapM}[w](t)] = \frac{1}{r} \int_0^\infty W(w)r p(w,t) dw \equiv \LapM[W](t) \ .$$
\end{proof}
Note that for $t = +\infty$, which corresponds to distinct counting, $p(w,t) = 1$, and the measurement is always equal to
its expectation $n$.
More generally, $p(w,t)<1$ and we can bound the relative error
by a straightforward
application of Chernoff bound:
\begin{lemma} \label{chernoff:lemma}
For $\delta<1$,
$$\Pr[\frac{|\widehat{\LapM}[W](t) - \LapM[W](t)|}{\LapM[W](t)} \geq
\delta] \leq 2 \exp(-r \delta^2 \LapM[W](t)/3)\ .$$
\end{lemma}
\notinproc{
\begin{proof}
We apply Chernoff bounds to bound the deviation of the sum $r
\widehat{\LapM}[W](t)$ of our $rn$ independent Poisson
random variables from its expectation $r \LapM[W](t)$.
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\Pr[\frac{|\widehat{\LapM}[W](t) - \LapM[w](t)|}{\LapM[W](t)} \geq
\delta] }\\
&=&\Pr[|r\widehat{\LapM}[W](t) - r\LapM[W](t)| \geq \delta r\LapM[W](t)]\ .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
}
The outkeys $E$ are processed by an {\em
approximate} distinct counter and our final approximate
measurement
\begin{equation} \label{approxpointm:eq}
\widehat{\widehat{\LapM}}[W](t) = \frac{1}{r}\widehat{\dCount}(E)
\end{equation}
is equal to the
approximate count of distinct output keys divided by $r$.
Since there are at most $r\dCount(W)$ distinct output keys, the
sketch size needed for CV $\epsilon$ is
$O(\epsilon^{-2}+\log\log(r \dCount(W))) = O(\epsilon^{-2}+ \log\log
\dCount(W))$.
Note that even a very large choice of $r$ will not significantly
increase the sketch size. A large $r$, however, can affect the
element mapping computation when there are many generated output
elements.
We now consider the choice of $r$ that suffices for our
quality guarantees.
From Lemma~\ref{chernoff:lemma},
when
\begin{equation} \label{rcond:eq}
r \LapM[W](t) \geq 3\epsilon^{-2}
\end{equation}
we have
CV $\epsilon$ with tight concentration for
$\widehat{\LapM}[W](t)$ as an approximation of $\LapM[W](t)$.
Note that $r \LapM[W](t)$ is the expected number of distinct output
elements.
We can combine the contributions to the error due to the measurement
and its approximation, noting that the two are independent,
and obtain that when \eqref{rcond:eq} holds,
the error of
$\widehat{\widehat{\LapM}}[W](t)$ as an approximation of $\LapM[W](t)$ has
CV $\sqrt{2}\epsilon$ and tight concentration.
We now provide a lower bound on $\LapM[W](t)$ as a function of $t$.
\begin{lemma} \label{oversqrt:lemma}
$$\LapM[W](t) \geq \frac{e-1}{e}\SUM(W) \min\{\frac{1}{\MAX(W)},t\}\ ,$$
where $\MAX(W) \equiv \max_x w_x$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From definition,
{\small
\begin{equation} \label{trivbound:eq}
\LapM[W](t) \geq (1-\frac{1}{e}) \sum_x \min\{1,t w_x\}
\end{equation}
}
When $t\leq 1/\MAX(W)$ we have $\sum_x \min\{1,t w_x\}= t \SUM(W)$.
When $t\geq 1/\MAX(W)$ we have $\sum_x \min\{1,t w_x\}\geq \SUM(W)$.
\end{proof}
The lemma
implies that when $t\geq \sqrt{\epsilon}/\MAX(W)$,
\begin{equation} \label{rseamless:eq}
r=\frac{e}{e-1}\epsilon^{-2.5}\frac{\MAX(W)}{\SUM(W)}\leq \frac{e}{e-1}\epsilon^{-2.5}
\end{equation}
always suffices to ensure that
\eqref{rcond:eq} holds.
Since we do not know $\MAX(W)$ or $\SUM(W)$ in advance, we
use the following strategy.
Our approximate point measurement algorithm
computes both an approximate sum $\widehat{\SUM}(W)$ and approximate
count of output elements $\widehat{\dCount(E)}$ generated by
Algorithm~\ref{elemmap1:alg} with $r$ as in \eqref{rseamless:eq}.
If $\widehat{\dCount(E)} < 3\epsilon^{-2}$, we return
$t \widehat{\SUM}(W)$ and otherwise return \eqref{approxpointm:eq}.
We comment here that the choice of $r$ in \eqref{rseamless:eq}
provides seamless worst-case quality guarantees for any
$t$ and distribution $W$. In particular, having $t$ as small as
$\sqrt{\epsilon}/\MAX(W)$ and at the same time having $\SUM(W) = O(\MAX(W))$.
In practice, we may want to use a smaller value of $r$:
While $r$
does not affect sketch size, it does affect element processing computation. The basic algorithm is linear in $r$.
In \onlyinproc{the full version}\notinproc{Appendix~\ref{efficientpoint:sec}} we provide a more efficient algorithm with
computation that is linear in the
number of generated output keys $O(r (1-\exp(-t \text{\em{e.value}} ))$.
We note that when $\SUM(W) \geq \epsilon^{-2.5} \MAX(W)$ then $r=1$ suffices.
\ignore{
The ``right'' choice of $r$ for a given
$t$ is the smallest one that ensures that \eqref{rcond:eq} holds.
That is, $r=3\epsilon^{-2}/\LapM[W](t)$. In this case the
number of generated distinct output elements is at most
$r\LapM[w](t)= 3\epsilon^{-2}$ and therefore the number of output
elements generated for each element processing is at most $3\epsilon^{-2}$.
With that value, the maximum expected
number of output elements generated per input element is
$O(\epsilon^{-2})$ and can generally be much smaller.
Note that the purpose of choosing $r=\epsilon^{-2.5}$
is to provide quality guarantees that {\em seamlessly} hold for small
$t$, for very small data sets, and for
highly skewed weight distributions that are dominated by very few
keys. If we forego making special provisions in the algorithm for
such cases, and assume that the statistics is not dominated by very few
keys and the data set is not tiny, then $\LapM[W](t) \gg
3\epsilon^{-2}$ when $t> \sqrt{\epsilon}/\max_x w_x$ and
\eqref{rcond:eq} holds even with $r=1$.
}
\ignore{
\subsection{The relevant range of the transform} \label{rchoice:sec}
When the number of output elements exceeds that, it implies that we can
use $r=\epsilon^{-2}$.
\begin{lemma} \label{smallr:lemma}
For $t\geq \frac{1}{\max_x w_x}$, $r \geq c \epsilon^{-2}\ ,$ and
$\delta<1$,
$$\Pr[\frac{|\widehat{\LapM}[W](t) - \LapM[W](t)|}{\LapM[W](t)} \geq
\epsilon] \leq 2 \exp(-c /5)\ .$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From definition,
{\small
\begin{equation} \label{trivbound:eq}
\LapM[W](t) \geq (1-1/e) \sum_x \min\{1,t w_x\}
\geq (1-1/e) \min\{1, t \max_x w_x\}\ .
\end{equation}
}
When $t\geq \frac{1}{\max_x w_x}$,
we have
$$\LapM[W](t) \geq 1-1/e\ .$$
The proof follows using
Lemma~\ref{chernoff:lemma} and $r \geq c \epsilon^{-2}/\LapM[W](t))
\geq c \epsilon^{-2} (1-1/e)$.
\end{proof}
To apply this seamlessly for point measurements, we make the following
small modification: We compute the (exact or approximate) sum
$\SUM(W)$ over data elements (see discussion in Section~\ref{cLaplace:sec}.
We then apply our framework with
$r=O(\epsilon^{-2})$ (regardless of $t$) but
when the distinct count of output elements is smaller than
$c\epsilon^{-2}$, we return instead the approximation $t \SUM(W)$.
}
\section{The soft capping span} \label{softspan:sec}
The {\em soft capping span} $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ contains all
functions $f$ that can be expressed as nonnegative linear combinations
of $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T$ functions.
Equivalently, for some $a(t)\geq 0$,
\begin{equation} \label{idealinverse:eq}
f(w) = \LapM[a](w) = \int_0^\infty a(t) (1-e^{-wt})dt \ .
\end{equation}
Note that $a(t)$ is
the inverse Laplace$^c$ transform of $f(w)$:
\begin{equation} \label{invtransform}
a(t) = (\LapM)^{-1}[f(w)](t)\ .
\end{equation}
The following is immediate from the definition \eqref{idealinverse:eq}
\begin{lemma} \label{invtranscond:lemma}
For any well defined $f(w)$, $\int_{0}^1 a(t) t dt<\infty$ and
$\int_1^\infty a(t) dt < \infty$.
\end{lemma}
The soft capping span includes basic functions such as
$\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(w)$ for all $T>0$, $w^p$ for all $p\in (0,1)$, and
$\ln(1+w)$. Explicit expressions for the inverse $\LapM$ transforms of these
functions are provided in Table~\ref{softtran:table}. The table also
lists other expressions that we will use for sketching the
statistics.
\notinproc{The derivations
are established in Appendix~\ref{invlapc:sec}.}
\begin{table*}\caption{Inverse $\LapM$ transform of basic functions\label{softtran:table}}
\center
\begin{tabular}{l|l||l|l}
\hline
$f(w)$ & $a(t)=(\LapM)^{-1}[f(w)](t)$ & $\int_\tau^\infty a(t) dt$ & $\int_0^\tau a(t) t dt$ \\
\hline
$\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(w)$ & $T \delta_{1/T}(t)$ & $T$, when $y\leq 1/T$; $0$
otherwise & $0$ when $\tau<1/T$\\
$w^p$ ($p\in (0,1)$) & $\frac{p}{\Gamma(1-p)} t^{-(1+p)}$ &
$\frac{1}{\tau^p \Gamma(1-p)}$ &$ \frac{p}{(1-p)\Gamma(1-p)}\tau^{1-p}$ \\
$\sqrt{w}$ & $\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi}} t^{-1.5}$ & $\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi \tau}}$ & $\frac{\tau^{0.5}}{\sqrt{\pi}}$ \\
$\log(1+w)$ & $\frac{e^{-t}}{t}$ & $\int_\tau^\infty \frac{e^{-t}}{t} dt
= -\tau\text{Ei}(-\tau)$ & $1-e^{-\tau}$
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
We can express $f(W)$ in terms of the inverse $\LapM$ transform $a(t)$ of
$f(w)$ and the transform $\LapM[W]$ of the frequencies:
\begin{eqnarray}
f(W) &=& \int_0^\infty f(w) W(w) dw \nonumber \\
&=& \int_0^\infty W(w) \LapM[a](w) dw \nonumber\\
&=& \int_0^\infty a(t) \int_0^\infty W(w) (1-e^{-wt}) dw dt \nonumber \\
&=& \int_0^\infty a(t) \LapM[W](t) dt \label{fromL:eq}\ .
\end{eqnarray}
Alternatively, when the inverse transform has a discrete form, that is,
when we can express $f$ using
$\{a_t\}$ for $t\in Y$ as
\begin{equation} \label{discrete:eq}
f(w) = \sum_{t\in Y} a_t (1-e^{-wt}) \ ,
\end{equation}
(Equivalently, $a(t)$ is a
linear combination of Dirac delta functions at $t\in Y$).
We can express $f(W)$ in terms of corresponding
points of $\LapM[W]$:
$$f(W) = \sum_{t\in Y} a_t \LapM[W](t)\ .$$
We will find it convenient to work with the notation:
\begin{equation} \label{comb:eq}
\LapM[W][a]_\tau^b \equiv \int_\tau^b a(t) \LapM[W](t)
dt\ .
\end{equation}
When the subscript or superscript are omitted, we use the defaults $\tau=0$ and $b=\infty$.
With approximate $\LapM$ measurements we have
\begin{equation} \label{approxLapest:eq}
\widehat{\widehat{\LapM}}[W][a]_\tau^b = \int_\tau^b a(t) \widehat{\widehat{\LapM}}[W](t) dt\ .
\end{equation}
When $f(w)$ is such that the inverse $\LapM$ transform $a(t)$ is a
sum of Dirac delta functions, we can approximate $f(W)$ using
corresponding point measurements of $\LapM[W]$. In the next section we introduce combination $\LapM$
measurements which allow us to approximate $\LapM[W][a]$ for any
nonnegative continuous $a(t) \geq 0$.
\section{Combination $\LapM$ measurements} \label{weightedDC:sec}
In this section we show how to sketch $\LapM[W][a]_0^\infty$ for any
$a(t) \geq 0$ that satisfies the conditions in Lemma~\ref{invtranscond:lemma}.
Recall that his allows us to sketch any $f(W)\in \overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ (see Section~\ref{softspan:sec}).
We define randomized mapping functions of elements, tailored to some
$a(t) \geq 0$ and $\tau>0$, such that the expectation of the (scaled) max-distinct
statistics of output elements is equal to
$\LapM[W][a]_\tau^\infty$ (see notation \eqref{comb:eq}) we also
establish concentration around the expectation. We then estimate the component
$\LapM[W][a]_0^\tau$ separately through $\widehat{\SUM}(W)$.
\subsection{Element mapping}
Consider $a(t) \geq 0$.
Our element processing is a simple modification of the element processing
Algorithm~\ref{elemmap1:alg}. The algorithm inputs the function
$a()$ (instead of $t$) and returns output elements (outkey
and value pairs) instead of only returning outkeys.
Pseudocode is provided as Algorithm~\ref{mxdistinct:algo}.
\begin{algorithm2e}\caption{\protect\Oelems$_{a,H}(e)$: Map of element
$e$ to a set of output elements for a $\LapM[W][a]_\tau^\infty$ measurement \label{mxdistinct:algo}}
\KwIn{Element $e=(\text{\em{e.key}},\text{\em{e.value}})$, $a(t)\geq 0$,
integer $r \geq 1$, hash
functions $H_i$ $i\in[r]$, $\tau>0$}
\KwOut{$\Oelems$: A set of at most $r$ output elements}
\DontPrintSemicolon
$\Oelems \gets []$\;
\ForEach{$i\in [r]$}{$y_i \sim
\textsf{Exp}[\text{\em{e.value}}]$ \tcp*[f]{independent exponentially distributed with parameter $\text{\em{e.value}}$}\;
$v \gets \int_{\max\{\tau,y_i\}}^\infty a(t) dt$\;
\If{$v>0$}{$\Oelems.append((H_i(\text{\em{e.key}}),v))$ \tcp*[f]{New output element}\;
}
}
\Return{$\Oelems$}
\end{algorithm2e}
We show that the max-distinct statistics of the output elements divided by $r$
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\LapM[W][a]}_\tau^\infty = \frac{1}{r} \MdCount\left(\bigcup_{e\in W}
\Oelems_{a}(e) \right)\
\end{equation}
has expectation equal to $\LapM[W][a]_\tau^\infty$ with good concentration:
\begin{lemma} \label{comboquality:lemma}
\begin{equation*}
\E[\widehat{\LapM[W][a]}_\tau^\infty] = \LapM[W][a]_\tau^\infty
\end{equation*}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\forall \delta<1, \,
\Pr[\frac{|\widehat{\LapM[W][a]}_\tau^\infty - \LapM[W][a]_\tau^\infty}{\LapM[W][a]_\tau^\infty} \geq
\delta]}\\
&\leq& 2 \exp(-r \delta^2 \LapM[W][\tau]/3)\ .
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The claim on the expectation follows from linearity of expectation and
the claim for point
measurements for each $t$ in Lemma~\ref{unbiasedpoint:lemma}.
The concentration follows from Lemma~\ref{chernoff:lemma} which
establishes
point-wise concentration at each $t$, combined with the
relation
$$\min_{t\in [\tau,\infty)} \LapM[W](t) = \LapM[W](\tau)\ $$
which follows from monotonicity of $\LapM[W](t)$.
\end{proof}
Note that the assumption $a(t) \geq 0$ is necessary for correctness.
It ensures monotonicity of $\int_{y}^\infty a(t) dt$ in $y$ which implies that
the maximum indeed corresponds to minimum $y$.
We now address quality of approximation. From the lemma, quality
is bounded by a function of $\LapM[W](\tau)$.
Using our treatment of point measurements, we know that it suffices to
ensure that $\tau$ and $r$ are large enough so
that \eqref{rcond:eq} holds. As with point
measurements, we can use $\tau =
\sqrt{\epsilon}/\MAX(W))$ and $r$ as in \eqref{rseamless:eq}
to obtain a concentrated measurement of
$\LapM[W][a]_\tau^\infty$.
To obtain an estimate of $\LapM[W][a]_0^\infty$, we need to
separately estimate $\LapM[W][a]_0^\tau$. From
Lemma~\ref{relevantrange:lemma}, when $\tau \leq
\sqrt{\epsilon}/\MAX(W)$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{headest:eq}
\LapM[W][a]_0^\tau \approx \int_0^\tau a(t) t \SUM(W) dt \approx
\widehat{\SUM(W)} \int_0^\tau a(t) t dt\ .
\end{equation}
Closed expressions for $\int_0^\tau a(t)tdt$ (used in \eqref{headest:eq} and for $\int_\tau^\infty
a(t)dt$ (used in Algorithm~\ref{mxdistinct:algo}) for inverse transforms of basic functions are provided in
Table~\ref{softtran:table}. Note that these expressions are bounded and well defined
for all $a$ that are inverse $\LapM$ transform of a $\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$
function (see \onlyinproc{full version}\notinproc{Lemma~\ref{cumbounds:lemma}}).
\ignore{
Note that $\sum_x w_x$ is trivial to compute exactly using a
composable structure that stores its magnitude. It can also be
approximated unbiasedly with good concentration and NRMSE $\epsilon$
by a structure of size $O(\epsilon^{-2}+ |\log\log \sum_x
w_x|)$ using composable weighted Morris
counters~\cite{Morris77,ECohenADS:TKDE2015}. Therefore, we can obtain
tight estimates of $\LapM[W][a]_0^\tau$ using composable structures of
double logarithmic state.
}
Our sketch consists of a $\widehat{\SUM}$ sketch applied to data
elements $W$ and a $\widehat{\MdCount}$ sketch applied to output
element $E$
produced by applying the element mapping
Algorithm~\ref{mxdistinct:algo} to $W$.
The final estimate we return is
\begin{equation} \label{fest:eq}
\widehat{\widehat{\LapM}}[W][a]_0^\infty =
\frac{1}{r}\widehat{\MdCount}(E) + \widehat{\SUM}(W) \int_0^\tau
a(t)tdt\ .
\end{equation}
There is one subtlety here that was deferred for the sake of exposition: We do not know $\MAX(W)$ and
therefore can not simply set $\tau$ prior to running the algorithm.
To obtain the worst-case bound we set $r$ as in \eqref{rseamless:eq} and
set $\tau$ adaptively to be the
$\ell=3\epsilon^{-2}$ smallest $y$ value generated for a distinct
output key. To do so, we extend our sketch to include another
component, a ``sidelined'' set, which is the $\ell$ distinct output keys
with smallest $y$ values processed so far. Note that this sketch
component is also composable.
The sidelined elements are
not immediately processed by the $\MdCount$ sketch: The
processing is delayed to when they are not sidelined, that is, to the point that due to
merges or new arrivals, there are $\ell$ other distinct output keys with lower
$y$ values. Finally, when the sketches are used to extract an
estimate of the statistics, we set
$\tau$ as the largest $y$ in the sidelined set, feed all the sidelined keys to the
$\MdCount$ sketch with value $\int_\tau^\infty a(t)dt$, and apply the estimator~\eqref{fest:eq}.
Note that explicitly maintaining the sidelined output keys and $y$ value pairs
requires $\epsilon^{-2}\log n$ storage. Details on doing so in double logarithmic size are outlined in
\notinproc{Section~\ref{sidelined:sec}}\onlyinproc{the full version}.
\subsection{Max-distinct sketches} \label{maxdistinctcount:sec}
Popular composable weighted sampling schemes such as
the with-replacement $k$-mins samples and the
without-replacement bottom-$k$ samples
\cite{Rosen1972:successive,Rosen1997a,bottomk07:ds,bottomk:VLDB2008}
naturally extend to data elements with non-unique keys where the weight $m_x$ of the key $x$ is
interpreted as the maximum value of an element with key $x$.
A bottom-$k$ sample over elements with unique keys is
\cite{Rosen1972:successive}
computed by
drawing for each element an independent random rank value that is
exponentially distributed with parameter $\text{\em{e.value}}$
$r_e \sim \textsf{Exp}[\text{\em{e.value}}]$.
The sample includes the $k$ distinct keys with minimum $r_e$ and the
corresponding $m_x$. It is easy to
see that this sampling scheme can be carried out using composable sketches that stores $k=\epsilon^{-2}$
key value pairs. For max-distinct statistics we instead use the ranks
$r_e = -\ln u_{\text{\em{e.key}}}/\text{\em{e.value}}$, where $u_{\text{\em{e.key}}} \sim U[0,1]$ is a
hash function that maps keys to independent uniform random
numbers. These ranks are exponentially distributed, but consistent for
the same key so that the minimum rank of a key is exponentially
distributed with parameter equal to $m_x$.
We can apply an estimator to this sample
to obtain an estimate of the max-distinct statistics of the data with CV
$1/\sqrt{k-2}\approx \epsilon$.
Through technical use of offsets and randomized rounding and using
with-replacement sampling we can design
max-distinct sketches of size $O(\log\log n +
\epsilon^{-2}\log\epsilon^{-1})$ (assuming $1\leq m_x = O(\text{poly}(n))$.)
The design relates to MinHash sketches with base-$b$ ranks
\cite{ECohenADS:TKDE2015}\notinproc{ and is detailed in Section~\ref{mxdistinctcompact:sec}}.
\ignore{
\subsection{Subtleties}
We now note the technicality that we do not know $\max_x w_x$ in
advance and thus can not work with a fixed $\tau$. We explain how
to get around this issue while still retaining our worst-case
statistical guarantees on quality and bound on the composable structure
size. We first note that it suffices to work with $\tau$ large enough
so that $\LapM[W](\tau) \geq 1$ and small enough so that it is $O(\tau)$. The measurement is well concentrated,
so we expect very few keys with minimum $y$ value below $\tau$. We
can therefore
take $\tau$ to be the $\ell$ smallest $y$
value of a distinct output key, for a small $\ell$.
To do so on the go, we
separately store the $\ell$
output keys with largest values (smallest $y$ values), updating the
$y$ value as needed when additional elements are processed.
To do so, it suffices to store hashed
keys to a small $O(\ell)$ set and their (approximate) minimum $y$
value. The contribution of keys that leave the set is added to the
counter at that point with their full value. The contribution of the remaining keys is
factored in the final estimate when $\tau$ is determined. At that
point we also add an estimate of $\LapM[W][a]_0^\tau$.
}
\section{Full range $\LapM$ measurements} \label{allt:sec}
We consider now computing approximations of the transform $\LapM[W](t)$ for all
$t$, which we refer to as a
{\em full range measurement}. This is
a representation of a function that returns ``coordinated'' $\LapM[W](t)$
measurements for any $t$ value.
Our motivation is that an approximate full-range measurement of
$W$ provides us with estimates of the statistics $f(W)$ for {\em any} $f\in \overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$.
Concretely, consider the set of output keys
$\Okeys_{t,H}(e)$
generated by Algorithm~\ref{elemmap1:alg} for input element $e$
when fixing the parameter $r$, the set of hash functions $\{H_i\}$,
and the randomization $\{y_i\}$, but varying $t$.
It is easy to see that the set $\Okeys_{t}(e)$ monotonically increases with
$t$ until it reaches size $r$.
We can now consider all outkeys generated for input $W$ as a function
of $t$
$$\Okeys_{t}(W) \equiv \bigcup_{e\in W} \Okeys_{t}(e) \ .$$
The number of distinct outkeys
increases with $t$ until it reaches size $rn$, where $n$ is the number
of distinct input keys.
Our full-range measurement is accordingly defined as the function
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\LapM}[W](t) = \frac{1}{r} \bigg|\Okeys_{t}(W) \bigg| \ .
\end{equation}
Equivalently, this can be expressed through the
element mapping provided as Algorithm~\ref{atdistinct:algo}. For
each input element $e$, the algorithm generates $r$ output elements
$\Oelems_{H}(e)$ that are
outkey and value pairs. We denote the set
of output elements generated for all input elements by $\Oelems(W)$. We then have
\begin{equation} \label{allrange}
\widehat{\LapM}[W](t) = \frac{1}{r} \dCount\{e\in \Oelems(W) \mid \text{\em{e.value}}\leq t \}\ .
\end{equation}
The number of distinct keys in output elements that have value at most $t$.
Note that as with point measurements, for the regime of $t$ values where $|\Okeys_t(W)|\leq
3\epsilon^{-2}$, we use instead $\widehat{\LapM}[W](t) \approx t\SUM(W)$.
We can also define a combination measurement obtained from a full
range measurement as $$\widehat{\LapM}[W][a] = \int_0^\infty a(t)
\widehat{\LapM}[W](t) dt\ .$$
We show that this formulation is equivalent to directly obtaining a
combination measurement:
\begin{corollary} \label{fullrangequality:coro}
Lemma~\ref{comboquality:lemma} also applies to
$\widehat{\LapM[W][a]}$ computed from a full-range measurement
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Consider element mappings for
full-range and combination measurements that are performed using the same
randomization (hash functions $H$ and draws $y$).
Consider
the combination measurement computed from $|\Okeys_t(W)|$.
It is easy to verify that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widehat{\LapM[W][a]} &=& \frac{1}{r} \MdCount\left(\bigcup_{e\in W}
\Oelems_{a}(e) \right) \\ &=& \frac{1}{r} \int_0^\infty a(t)
|\Okeys_t(W)| dt\ .
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
We next discuss composable {\em all-threshold}
distinct counting sketch that when applied to $\Oelems(W)$ allow us
to obtain an approximate
point measurement of
$\widehat{\widehat{\LapM}}[W](t)$ for any $t$ or compute an approximate combination measurement $\widehat{\widehat{\LapM}}[W][a]$ for any $a \in \LapM^{-1}(\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}})$.
\begin{algorithm2e}\caption{\protect\Oelems$_{\{H_i\}}(e)$: Map of
element $e$ to a set of output elements for full range measurement \label{atdistinct:algo}}
\KwIn{Element $e=(\text{\em{e.key}},\text{\em{e.value}})$, integer $r \geq 1$, hash
functions $\{H_i\}$ $i\in[r]$}
\KwOut{$\Oelems$: A set of $r$ output elements}
\DontPrintSemicolon
$\Oelems \gets []$\\
\ForEach{$i\in [r]$}{$y_i \sim
\textsf{Exp}[\text{\em{e.value}}]$ \tcp*[f]{independent exponentially distributed with parameter $\text{\em{e.value}}$}\;
$\Oelems.append((H_i(\text{\em{e.key}}),y_i))$ \tcp*[f]{New output element}\;
}
\Return{$\Oelems$}
\end{algorithm2e}
An all-threshold sketch of a set $E$ of key value pairs is a
composable summary structure which allows us to
obtain an approximation $\widehat{\TdCount}_t(E)$ for any
$t$ (see \eqref{tdistinct:def}.
The design mimics the extension of MinHash sketches
to All-Distance Sketches \cite{ECohen6f,ECohenADS:TKDE2015}, noting that
Hyperloglog sketches can be viewed as a degenerate form of MinHash sketches.
\notinproc{Details are provided in Section~\ref{ATsketch:sec}.}
\section{The ``hard'' Capping span} \label{hardcappingtransform:sec}
\notinproc{
The capping transform expresses functions as
nonnegative combinations of capping functions. The transform
is interesting to us here because it allows us to
extend approximations of capping statistics to the rich family of
functions with a capping transform.
}
We define the {\em capping transform} of a function $f$ as a function
$a(t) \geq 0$ and $A_\infty \geq 0$ such that
$\int_0^\infty
a(t) dt < \infty$ and $$f(x) = A_\infty x + \int_0^\infty a(t) \textsf{cap}_t(x) dt\ .$$
\notinproc{It is useful to allow the transform to include a discrete and
continuous components, that is,
have continuous $a(t)$ and a discrete set $\{A_t\}> 0$ for $t\in Y$
such that
$$f(x) = A_\infty x + \sum_{t\in Y} A_t \textsf{cap}_t(x) + \int_0^\infty a(t) \textsf{cap}_t(x)
dx\ ,$$
and require that $A_\infty+ \sum_{t\in Y} A_t + \int_0^\infty
a(t) dt < \infty$. For convenience, however we will use a single
continuous transform $a()$ but allow it to include a linear
combination of Dirac
delta functions at points $Y$. The one exception is the coefficient
$A_\infty < \infty$ of
$\textsf{cap}_\infty(x) = x$ which is separate.
}
We denote by $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ the set of functions with a capping
transform.
We can characterize this set of functions as follows:
\begin{theorem} \label{hardcaptransform:thm}
Let $f:[0,\infty]$ be a nonnegative, continuous, concave, and monotone
non-decreasing function such that $f(0)=0$ and
$\partial_+ f(0) < \infty$. Then $f\in \overline{\textsf{cap}}$ with the
capping transform:
\begin{eqnarray}
a(x) &=& \left\{
\begin{array}{ll} - \partial^2 f(x) & \text{ when }\, \partial^2_- f(x) = \partial^2_+
f(x) \\ (\partial_- f(x) - \partial_+
f(x))\delta_x & \text{otherwise} \end{array}
\right.\\
A_\infty &=& \partial f(\infty)
\end{eqnarray}
where $\delta$ is the Dirac delta function and
$\partial f(\infty) \equiv \lim_{t\rightarrow \infty} \partial f(t)$.
\end{theorem}
\notinproc{
\begin{proof}
From monotonicity, $f$ is differentiable almost
everywhere and the left and right derivatives $\partial_+ f(x)$ and
$\partial_- f(x)$ are well defined.
Because $f$ is continuous and monotone, we have
\begin{equation} \label{diffrel:eq}
f(w) = \int_0^w \partial_+f(t) dt = \int_0^w \partial_- f(t) \equiv
\int_0^w \partial f(t) dt\ .
\end{equation}
From concavity, for all $x\leq y$, $\partial_+f(y)
\leq \partial_-f(x)$.
In particular the slope of $\partial f(x)$ is initially
(sub)linear and can only decrease as $x$ decreases.
In particular the limit $\partial f(\infty) \geq 0$ is well defined.
Since $\partial f(x)$ is monotone, it is differentiable and equality
holds almost
everywhere:
$$\partial^2_+f(x)=\partial^2_-f(x)
\equiv \partial^2f(x)\ .$$
From concavity, we have $\partial^2_+f(x), \partial^2_-f(x) \leq
0$.
Note that at all $w$ with well defined $\partial f(w)$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{arelation}
\partial f(w) = \partial_+f(0) - \int_0^w a(t) dt\ .
\end{equation}
In particular, when taking the limit as $w\rightarrow \infty$ we get
\begin{equation} \label{totA:eq}
A_\infty + \int_0^\infty a(t) dt = \partial_+f(0)\ .
\end{equation}
{\small
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\int_0^\infty a(t) \textsf{cap}_t(w) dt}\\
&=& \int_0^\infty a(t) \min\{t,w\} dt
\nonumber \\
&=& \int_0^w t a(t) dt + w \int_w ^\infty a(t) dt \label{ct1} \\
&=& w \int_0^w a(t)dt - \int_0^w (\partial_+f(0) - \partial f(t))dt +
w \int_w^\infty a(t)dt \label{ct2} \\
&=& w \int_0^\infty a(t) dt + f(w) - w \partial_+f(0) \label{ct3}\\
&=& f(w) - A_\infty w \label{ct4}
\end{eqnarray}}
Derivation \eqref{ct1} uses the definition of $\textsf{cap}_t$,
\eqref{ct2} uses integration by parts and \eqref{arelation},
\eqref{ct3} uses \eqref{diffrel:eq}, and finally
\eqref{ct4} uses \eqref{totA:eq}.
\end{proof}
}
\notinproc{
The capping transforms of some example functions are derived below
and summarized in Table~\ref{captran:table}.
Note that the transform is a linear operator, so the
transform of a linear combination is a corresponding linear
combination of the transforms.
\begin{itemize}
\item
$f(w) = \textsf{cap}_T(w)$ has the transform $A_\infty=0$ and $a(x) =
\delta_T(x)$.
\item
$f(w) = w = \textsf{cap}_\infty(w)$ has the transform $A_\infty=1$, $a(x)=0$
for all $x$.
\item
Moments $f(w) = w^p$ for $p\in (0,1)$.
Here we assume that $w \geq 1$ and for convenient replace the function
with a linear segment $f(w) = \min\{w, w^p\}$ at the interval $w\in
[0,1]$. Note that the modified moment function satisfies the
requirements of Theorem~\eqref{hardcaptransform:thm}.
We have $\partial f(w) =1$, $\partial^2 f(w) = 0$ for $w < 1$ and
$\partial f(w) = p w^{p-1}$ and $\partial^2 f(w) = p(p-1) w^{p-2}$
when $w \geq 1$. Note that $\partial f(\infty) = 0$ and $\partial_+ f(0)=1$.
We obtain $A_\infty = 0$, $a(x) = p(1-p)x^{p-2}$ for $x>1$ and $a(1) =
(1-p)\delta_1$.
\item
Soft capping $f(w)=\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(w)= T(1-e^{-w/T})$. We have $\partial f(w) =
e^{-w/T}$ and $\partial^2 f(w) = -\frac{1}{T}e^{-w/T}$. Note that
$\partial f(\infty) = 0$ and $\partial_+ f(0)=1$.
We obtain $A_\infty = 0$ and $a(x) = \frac{1}{T}e^{-x/T}$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}\caption{Example capping transforms\label{captran:table}}
\center
\begin{tabular}{l|l}
\hline
$f(w)$ & capping transform \\
\hline
$\textsf{cap}_T(w)$ & $A_\infty=0$, $a(x) =
\delta_T(x)$ \\
$w$ & $A_\infty=1$, $a(x)=0$ \\
$\min\{w, w^p\}$ & $A_\infty = 0$, $a(x) = p(1-p)x^{p-2}$ for $x>1$,\\
& $a(x)=0$ for $x<1$, $a(1) = (1-p)\delta_1$\\
$\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(w)$ & $A_\infty = 0$, $a(x) = \frac{1}{T}e^{-x/T}$ \\
$\log(1+w)$ & $A_\infty = 0$, $a(x) = \frac{1}{(1+x)^2}$
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
}
\subsection{Sketching with signed inverse transforms} \label{useLapM:sec}\label{qualitycomb:sec}
We now consider sketching
$f$-statistics that are not in
$\overline{\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}}$ but where $f$ has a
{\em signed} inverse transform
$a(t) = \LapM^{-1}[f(w)](t)$ \eqref{idealinverse:eq}.
We use the notation $a(t) = a_+(t) -
a_-(t)$ where
\begin{equation} \label{pm:def}
a_+(t) = \max\{a(t),0\}\, \text{ and }\, a_-(t) = \max\{-a(t),0\}
\ .
\end{equation}
We define
$f_+(w) = \LapM[a_+](w)$ and
$f_-(w) = \LapM[a_-](w)$.
Note that for all $w$, $f(w) = f_+(w) -f_-(w)$ and in particular
$f(W) = f_+(W)-f_-(W)$.
Since $a_+, a_- \geq 0$, we can obtain a good
approximations $\hat{f}_+(W)$ and $\hat{f}_-(W)$ for each of $f_+(W) = \LapM[W][a_+]$ and
$f_-(W) = \LapM[W][a_-]$ using
approximate full-range, two combination, or several point measurements when $a$ is discrete
and small. We approximate $f(W)$ using the difference $\hat{f}(W) = \hat{f}_+(W)-\hat{f}_-(W)$.
The quality of this estimate depends on a
parameter $\rho$:
\begin{equation}\label{stability:eq}
\rho(a) \equiv \max_w \max \frac{\LapM[a_+](w)}{\LapM[a](w)}, \frac{\LapM[a_-](w)}{\LapM[a](w)}
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}
For all $W$, $f(w) = \LapM[a](w)$,
{\small
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\frac{|f(W)-\hat{f}(W)|}{f(W)} \leq }\\ &&\rho(a)
\left(\frac{|\LapM[W][a_+]-\widehat{\LapM}[W][a_+]|}{\LapM[W][a_+]} \ +
\frac{|\LapM[W][a_-]-\widehat{\LapM}[W][a_-]|}{\LapM[W][a_-]} \
\right)
\end{eqnarray*}
}
\end{lemma}
\notinproc{
\begin{proof}
We use
$\hat{f}(W) = \widehat{\LapM}[W][a_+] - \widehat{\LapM}[W][a_-]$ and
$f(W) = \LapM[W][a_+] - \LapM[W][a_-]$.
Also note that using the definition of $\rho$, for all $W$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
f(W) &=& \int_0^\infty W(w) \LapM[a](w) dw \\
&\geq& \int_0^\infty W(w) \frac{\LapM[a]_+(w)}{\rho(a)} dw \\
&=& \frac{1}{\rho(a)} \int_0^\infty W(w)
\LapM[a]_+(w) dw = f_+(W)\ .
\end{eqnarray*}
Symmetrically,
for all $W$, $\rho f(W) \geq f_-(W)$.
Combining it all we obtain
{\small
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\frac{|\hat{f}(W) - f(W)|}{f(W)} =}\\
&& \frac{\widehat{\LapM}[W][a_+]-\LapM[W][a_+]}{f(W)}+
\frac{\widehat{\LapM}[W][a_-]-\LapM[W][a_-]}{f(W)} \\
&\leq&
\rho(a)
\frac{|\widehat{\LapM}[W][a_+]-\LapM[W][a_+]|}{\LapM[W][a_+]}+
\rho(a) \frac{|\widehat{\LapM}[W][a_-]-\LapM[W][a_-]|}{\LapM[W][a_-]}
\end{eqnarray*}
}
\end{proof}}
That is, when the components $f_+(W)$ and $f_-(W)$ are estimated
within relative error $\epsilon$, then our estimate of $f(W)$ has
relative error at most $\epsilon \rho$. In particular,
the concentration bound in
Lemma~\ref{comboquality:lemma} holds with
$\rho\delta$ replacing $\delta$ and the
sketch size has $\epsilon \rho$ replacing $\epsilon$.
When the exact inverse
transform $a$ of $f$ is not defined or has a large $\rho(a)$, we
look for an {\em approximate} inverse
transform $a$ such that $\rho(a)$ is small and $f(w) \approx \LapM[a](w)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \textsf{relerr}(f, \LapM[a]) = \max_{w>0} \frac{|f(w)-\LapM[a](w)|}{f(w)}
\leq \epsilon \label{inverse1:eq}
\end{eqnarray}
\notinproc{
We will apply this approach to approximate hard capping functions.
In general, fitting data or functions to sums of exponentials is
a well-studied problem in applied
math and numerical analysis. Methods often have stability issues.
A method of choice
is the Varpro (Variable projection) algorithm of Golub and Pereyra
\cite{varpro_Golub:SiNumAs1973} and improvements \cite{varpro2013}
which has Matlab and SciPy implementation.
}
\subsection{From $\textsf{cap}_1$ to $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$}
We show that from an approximate signed inverse transform of $\textsf{cap}_1$ we
can obtain one with the same quality for any $f\in \overline{\textsf{cap}}$.
\notinproc{
We first consider the special case of $\textsf{cap}_T$ functions:
\begin{lemma} \label{1toT:lemma}
Let $\alpha$ be such that $\LapM[\alpha]$ is
an approximation of
$\textsf{cap}_1$. Then for all $T$, $\LapM[\alpha_T]$, where $\alpha_T(x) \equiv \alpha(x/T)$
is a corresponding approximation of $\textsf{cap}_T$. That is,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\textsf{relerr}(\textsf{cap}_T,\LapM[\alpha_T]) &=& \textsf{relerr}(\textsf{cap}_1,\LapM[\alpha]) \\
\rho(\alpha_T) &=& \rho(\alpha)\ .
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The claim on $\textsf{relerr}$ and $\rho$ follows from the pointwise equality
\begin{equation}
\frac{|\textsf{cap}_T(w) - \LapM[\alpha_T](w)|}{\textsf{cap}_T(w)} =
\frac{|\textsf{cap}_1(w/T) -\LapM[\alpha](w/T)|}{\textsf{cap}_1(w/T)}\ .
\end{equation}
For $\rho$ observe the correspondence
\begin{equation}
\frac{\LapM[\alpha_{T+}](w/T)}{\LapM[\alpha_T](w/T)} =
\frac{\LapM[\alpha_+](w)}{\LapM[\alpha](w)}
\end{equation}
and similarly for $\alpha_-$. The maximum over $w$ of both sides is
therefore the same.
\end{proof}
}
\begin{theorem}
Let $f\in \overline{\textsf{cap}}$ and let $a(t)$ be the capping transform of
$f$.
Let $\alpha(x)$ be such that $\LapM[\alpha](w)$ is an
approximation of $\textsf{cap}_1$.
Then
\begin{equation}
c(x) = \int_0^\infty a(T) \alpha(x/T) dT\ ,
\end{equation}
is an approximate inverse transform of $f$ that satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho(c) &\leq & \rho(\alpha) \\
\textsf{relerr}(f,\LapM[c]) &\leq& \textsf{relerr}(\textsf{cap}_1,\LapM[\alpha])
\end{eqnarray}
\end{theorem}
\notinproc{
\begin{proof}
Recall from Lemma~\ref{1toT:lemma}, that for all $T$,
$\textsf{cap}_T$ is approximated by $\LapM[\alpha_T]$, where
$\alpha_T(x)=\alpha(x/T)$). We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
f(w) &=& \int_0^\infty a(T) \textsf{cap}_T(w) dT\\
\hat{f}(w) &=& \int_0^\infty a(T) \LapM[\alpha_T](w) dT
\end{eqnarray*}
The approximation $\hat{f}$ is obtained by substituting respective
approximations for the capping functions.
For all $W$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\textsf{relerr}(f(W),\hat{f}(W)) &\leq& \max_w \textsf{relerr}(\textsf{cap}_T,\LapM[\alpha_T])\\
&=& \textsf{relerr}(\textsf{cap}_1,\LapM[\alpha])\ .
\end{eqnarray*}
The inequality follows from $a\geq 0$.
The last equality follows from Lemma~\ref{1toT:lemma}.
We now show that $\hat{f}(W) = \LapM[c]$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\hat{f}(w)
&=&
\int_0^\infty a(T) \LapM[\alpha_T](w) dT \\
&=& \int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty a(T) \alpha_T(x) (1-e^{-wx})dxdT \\
&=& \int_0^\infty \int_0^\infty a(T) \alpha(x/T) dT (1-e^{-wx})dx\\
&=& \int_0^\infty c(x) (1-e^{-wx})dx = \LapM[c]\ ,
\end{eqnarray*}
where
$$c(x) = \int_0^\infty a(T)
\alpha_T(x) dT = \int_0^\infty a(T)
\alpha(x/T) dT\ .$$
We will now show that
$\forall w,\ \LapM[c_+](w) \leq \rho(\alpha) \LapM[c](w) $. The claim for $c_-$ is
symmetric and together using the definition of $\rho$ they imply that $\rho(c) \leq \rho(\alpha)$.
We first observe that
\begin{eqnarray*}
c_+(x) &=& \max\{0,\int_0^\infty a(T) (\alpha_{T+}(x)-\alpha_{T-}(x)
dT\} \\
&=& \max\{0,\int_0^\infty a(T) (\alpha_{T+}(x)dT-\int_0^\infty a(T)\alpha_{T-}(x) dT\}\\
&\leq& \int_0^\infty a(T) \alpha_{T+}(x) dT\ .
\end{eqnarray*}
The last equality follows from the two integrals being nonnegative.
Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\LapM[c_+](w) &\leq& \int_0^\infty a(T) \LapM[\alpha_{T+}](w) dT\\
&\leq& \int_0^\infty a(T) \rho(\alpha_T) \LapM[\alpha_{T}](w) dT\\
&=& \rho(\alpha) \int_0^\infty a(T) \LapM[\alpha_{T}](w) dT\\
&=& \rho(\alpha) \LapM[c](w) \ .
\end{eqnarray*}
Using Lemma~\ref{1toT:lemma} that established $\rho(\alpha) = \rho(\alpha_T)$.
\end{proof}
}
It follows that to approximate $f(W)$ we do as follows. We compute the capping
transform of $f$ and use an approximate inverse transform of
$\textsf{cap}_1$, from which we obtain an approximate inverse transform $c$
of $f$. We then perform
two combination measurements (with respect to the negative and
positive components $c_+$ and $c_-$). Alternatively, we can use one
full-range measurement to estimate both.
\ignore{
{\em Generalized Laplace measurements} $\LapM[W](\tau)$, specified by a monotone
non-increasing function $\tau(y) \geq 0$ of our choice:
$$\LapM[W](\tau) \equiv \int_0^\infty \tau(y) \int_0^\infty W(w) w
\exp(-wy) dw dy\ .$$
For $\alpha() \geq 0$ of our choice, by defining
(roughly...) $\tau(x) = \alpha'(x)$ we have
$$\LapM[W](\tau) = \int_0^\infty \alpha(t)dt - \int_{0}^{\infty} \alpha(t) \Laplace[W](t) dt\ .$$
\end{itemize}
Laplace measurements with threshold $t$ can be expressed as
generalized Laplace measurements with a
step function $\tau$, where
$\tau(y) =1$ for $y\leq t$ and $\tau(y)=0$ otherwise:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\LapM[W](\tau) &=&
\int_0^t \int_0^\infty W(w) w \exp(-wy) dw dy \\
&=& \int_0^\infty W(w) \int_0^t w \exp(-wy) dy dw \\
&=& \int_0^\infty W(w) (1-\exp(-wt)) dw \\
&=& 1 - \int_0^\infty W(w) \exp(-wt) = 1-\Laplace[W(w)](t)\ .
\end{eqnarray*}
\subsection{Sketching $\textsf{cap}_1$} \label{hardcap:sec}
We consider approximate inverse transforms of $\textsf{cap}_1$.
\ignore{
We consider now approximation of $\textsf{cap}_T$ statistics from $\LapM$
measurements. To do so, as discussed in
Section~\ref{qualitycomb:sec}, we fit $\textsf{cap}_T$
to a linear combination
$\alpha(t)$ of
functions of the form $1-\exp(- w t)$. That is,
$$\LapM[\alpha](w) = \int_0^\infty \alpha(t) (1-\exp(- t
w)) dt\ .$$
We would like the relative error of the approximation
$$\textsf{relerr}(\textsf{cap}_T, \LapM[\alpha]) = \max_w \frac{|\textsf{cap}_T(w) - \LapM[\alpha](w)|}{\textsf{cap}_T(w)}$$
to be small, and also to have well behaved coefficients, that is, have
a small $\rho(\alpha)$ \eqref{stability:eq}.
}
The simplest approximation (see \eqref{softcap:eq}) is to
approximate $\textsf{cap}_T$ statistics by
$\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T$. The worst-case error of this approximation is
$\textsf{relerr}(\textsf{cap}_T,\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T) = 1/e \approx 0.37$. Note, however,
that the
relative error is maximized at $w = T$, but vanishes when $w \ll T$ and $w \gg T$. This
means that only distributions that are heavy with keys of weight
approximately $T$ would have significant error.
Noting that $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T$ is an underestimate of $\textsf{cap}_T$, we can
decrease the worst-case relative error using the approximation
\begin{equation} \label{scaledsoft:eq}
\frac{2e}{2e-1} \widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(w)\
\end{equation}
and obtain
$\textsf{relerr}(\textsf{cap}_T, \frac{2e}{2e-1} \widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T) = \frac{1}{2e-1} \approx
0.23\ .$
This improvement, however, comes at the cost of spreading the error,
that otherwise dissipated for very large and very small frequencies $w$,
across all frequencies\notinproc{ (see Figure~\ref{capapproxplot:fig})}.
We derive tighter approximations of $\textsf{cap}_1$ using a signed
approximate inverse transform $\alpha()$.
We first specify properties of $\alpha()$ so that
$\LapM[\alpha]$ has desirable properties as an approximation of $\textsf{cap}_1$.
To have the error vanish for $w \gg 1$, that is, have $\LapM[\alpha](w)
\rightarrow 1$ when $w\rightarrow +\infty$, we must have
\begin{equation} \label{largecond:eq}
\int_0^\infty \alpha(t) dt = 1\ .
\end{equation}
To have the error vanish for $w \ll 1$, that is, have $\LapM[\alpha](w)/w
\rightarrow 1$ when $w\rightarrow 0$, we must have
\begin{equation} \label{smallcond:eq}
\int_0^\infty t \alpha(t) dt = 1\ .
\end{equation}
\onlyinproc{
We show (see full version) that using $\alpha$ of the form
$$\alpha(t) =
(A+1)\delta_1(t) - \alpha_1 \delta_{\beta_1}(t) - \alpha_2
\delta_{\beta_2}(t)\ ,$$ where $\delta$ is the Dirac delta function,
we obtain the following:
{\center
\begin{tabular}{rrr || l | r}
$A$ & $\beta_1$ & $\beta_2$ & $\textsf{relerr}\approx$ & $\rho(\alpha)<$ \\
\hline
$10.0$ & $0.9$ & $3.75$ & $0.115$ & $12.4$ \\
$1.5$ & $0.6$ & $7.97$ & $0.14$ & $2.9$
\end{tabular}\\
}
}
\notinproc{
We can relate the approximation quality obtained by
$\alpha()$ to its ``approximability'':
\begin{theorem} \label{boundrho:thm}
Let $\alpha()$ be such that \eqref{largecond:eq} and
\eqref{smallcond:eq} hold. Let $\alpha_+()$ and $\alpha_-()$ be
defined as in \eqref{pm:def}.
Then
\begin{equation}
\rho(\alpha) \leq \frac{\int_0^\infty \alpha_+(t)
dt}{1-\textsf{relerr}(\LapM[\alpha],\textsf{cap}_1)}\ .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
From conditions \eqref{largecond:eq} and \eqref{smallcond:eq} we
obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_0^\infty \alpha_+(t)dt &=& 1+ \int_0^\infty \alpha_-(t)dt \\
\int_0^\infty t\alpha_+(t)dt &=& 1+ \int_0^\infty t \alpha_-(t)dt
\end{eqnarray*}
We also have
\begin{eqnarray}
\LapM[\alpha_+](w) &\leq& \int_0^\infty \alpha_+(t)dt \min\{1,w\} \\
\LapM[\alpha_-](w) &\leq& \int_0^\infty \alpha_-(t)dt \min\{1,w\} \\
\LapM[\alpha](w) &\geq& (1-\textsf{relerr}(\LapM[\alpha],\textsf{cap}_1)) \min\{1,w\}
\end{eqnarray}
The last inequality follows from the definition of $\textsf{relerr}$.
Combining, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\max_w \frac{\LapM[\alpha_+](w)}{\LapM[\alpha](w)} &\leq&
\frac{\int_0^\infty \alpha_+(t)dt}{1-\textsf{relerr}(\LapM[\alpha],\textsf{cap}_1)}\\
\max_w \frac{\LapM[\alpha_-](w)}{\LapM[\alpha](w)} &\leq&
\frac{\int_0^\infty \alpha_-(t)dt}{1-\textsf{relerr}(\LapM[\alpha],\textsf{cap}_1)} \\
&=& \frac{\int_0^\infty
\alpha_+(t)dt - 1}{1-\textsf{relerr}(\LapM[\alpha],\textsf{cap}_1)} \\
&<& \frac{\int_0^\infty
\alpha_+(t)dt}{1-\textsf{relerr}(\LapM[\alpha],\textsf{cap}_1)}
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
We now consider using simple combinations of three functions of the
particular form:
$$(A+1) (1-\exp(-w))- \alpha_1 (1-\exp(-\beta_1 w)) -
\alpha_2 (1-\exp(-\beta_2 w))\ $$
where $\beta_1< 1< \beta_2$.
Equivalently, we estimate $\textsf{cap}_1(w)=\min\{1,w\}$ using $\LapM[\alpha]$ where $$\alpha(t) =
(A+1)\delta_1(t) - \alpha_1 \delta_{\beta_1}(t) - \alpha_2
\delta_{\beta_2}(t)\ ,$$ where $\delta$ is the Dirac delta function.
From conditions \eqref{largecond:eq} and \eqref{smallcond:eq} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
A - \alpha_1 - \alpha_2 &=& 0 \\
A - \alpha_1\beta_1 - \alpha_2\beta_2 & =& 0\ .
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\alpha_1 = A\frac{(\beta_2-1)}{\beta_2-\beta_1} \\
\alpha_2 = A\frac{(1-\beta_1)}{\beta_2-\beta_1}\ .
\end{eqnarray*}
We did a simple grid search with local optimization over the free parameters
$A,\beta_1,\beta_2$ focusing on small values of $A$.
Note that $\int_0^\infty \alpha_+(t)dt = A+1$. Applying
Theorem~\ref{boundrho:thm}
we obtain that $\rho(\alpha)\leq (A+1)/(1-\textsf{relerr})$, which is a small
constant when $A$ and $\textsf{relerr}$ are small.
Two choices and their tradeoffs are listed in the table below. Note
the small error (less than $12\%$). In both cases the error vanishes for
small and large $w$.
We obtain that
three point measurements with a small relative
error for the points $\LapM[W](t)$, $\LapM[W](\beta_1 t)$,
$\LapM[W](\beta_2 t)$ yield an approximation of the linear combination
with quality the same order.\\
{\center
\begin{tabular}{rrr || l | r}
$A$ & $\beta_1$ & $\beta_2$ & $\textsf{relerr}\approx$ & $\rho(\alpha)<$ \\
\hline
$10.0$ & $0.9$ & $3.75$ & $0.115$ & $12.4$ \\
$1.5$ & $0.6$ & $7.97$ & $0.14$ & $2.9$
\end{tabular}\\
}
}
Figure~\ref{capapproxplot:fig}
shows $\textsf{cap}_1(w)$ and various
approximations. The single point measurement approximations: $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_1$
and scaled $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_1$ and the two 3-point approximations from the
table. One plot shows the functions and the other shows their ratio to $\textsf{cap}_1$ which
corresponds to the relative error as a function of $w$. The graphs
show that the error vanishes for small and large values of $w$ for all but the
scaled $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_1$ \eqref{scaledsoft:eq}. We can also see the
smaller error for the 3-point approximations.
\begin{figure*}
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{approx.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{approxerr.pdf}
\caption{Left: $\textsf{cap}_1(w)$ function and different approximations:
With a single $\LapM$ point measurement we can use
the soft capping function
$\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_1(w)$ or scaling it $\frac{2e}{2e-1} \widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_1(w)$ to minimize
the worst-case relative error. We also show two 3 point measurements
approximations with different parameters. Right: The corresponding ratio
to $\textsf{cap}_1$ which shows the relative error of the different approximations.\label{capapproxplot:fig}}
\end{figure*}
\section{Experiments} \label{experiments:sec}
We performed experiments aimed at demonstrating the
ease of implementing our schemes and explaining the use of
the parameters that control the approximation quality. We implemented the
element mapping functions in Python. We also use Python implementations of
approximate $\MxDCount$ and $\dCount$ sketches.
We generated synthetic data using a Zipf distribution of keys. We set
the values of all elements to $1$.
Zipf distributions are parametrized by $\alpha$ that controls
the skew: The distribution is more skewed (has
more higherer frequency keys) with higher $\alpha$. Typically
values in the range $\alpha\in [1,2]$ model real-world
distributions. We used $\alpha=\{1.1,1.2,1.5,2.0\}$ in our experiments.
\subsection{Point measurements}
In this set of experiments we generated data sets with $10^5$
elements and performed point measurements, which
approximate the statistics $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(W)$. We used
$T=\{1,5,20,100,500\}$. We applied element
mapping Algorithm~\ref{elemmap1:alg} with parameter $r\in\{1,10,100\}$ to generate output elements $E$. The output
elements were processed by an approximate distinct counter with
parameter $k=100$ to obtain an estimate of $\dCount(E)$. The final
estimate \eqref{approxpointm:eq} is the approximate count divided by
$r$. In our evaluation we also computed the exact count
$\dCount(E)$, to obtain the exact point measurement, and also the
exact value of the statistics $\widetilde{\textsf{cap}}_T(W)$.
Recall that there are two sources of error in the approximate measurement. The first is the error
of the measurement $\widehat{\LapM}[W](t)$ ($\dCount(E)/r$) as an estimate of $\LapM[W](t)$.
This error is controlled by the parameter $r$ in
the element mapping Algorithm~\ref{elemmap1:alg}. We showed that
$r>\epsilon^{-2.5}$ always suffices in the worst-case but generally on
larger data set that are not dominated by few keys we have
$\LapM[W](t) > \epsilon^{-2}$ and $r=1$ suffices.
The second source of error is the approximate counter which returns an
approximation $\widehat{\widehat{\LapM}}[W](t)$ of the measurement $\widehat{\LapM}[W](t)$. An
approximate counter with $k=\epsilon^{-2}$ has NRMSE $\epsilon$.
In the experiments we used a fixed $k=100$ which has $\epsilon=0.1$.
We performed 200 repetitions of each experiment and computed the
average errors. Results are
illustrated in Figure~\ref{pointexperiments:fig}: The left plot in
the figure shows the average number of distinct output elements
generated for different Zipf parameters $\alpha$ and $T$ value for
$r=1$. The expectation of $\dCount(E)$ is equal to
$r \widehat{\LapM}[W](1/T)$.
The middle plot shows the
normalized root mean squared (NRMSE) error of the measurement
$\frac{T}{r}\dCount(E)$ that uses the exact distinct count of output keys. We can see
that the error rapidly decreases with the parameter $r$ and that it
is very small. The right plot shows the error of the approximate
measurement as a function of $r$, obtained by applying an approximate
counter to $E$. The additional error component is an
error with NRMSE $10\%$ with respect to the measurement, and
is independent of the measurement error. We can see that the
approximation error dominates the total error which is about $10\%$.
\begin{figure*}
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{ZipfSoftCap.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{measurementAcc.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{ApproxmeasurementAcc.pdf}
\caption{Point measurements experiments on $10^5$ elements with Zipf
keys (averaged over 200 repetitions). Left: $\LapM[W](1/T)$,
Middle: NRMSE of exact measurement $\widehat{\LapM}[W](1/T)$. Right:
NRMSE of approximate measurement $\widehat{\widehat{\LapM}}[W](1/T)$.\label{pointexperiments:fig}}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Combination measurements}
In this set of experiments we estimate the statistics $f(W)$ for $f(w) =\sqrt{w}$ using approximate combinations measurements.
We used the element mapping Algorithm~\ref{mxdistinct:algo} with
$\tau=0$.
Note that the estimates we get are unbiased but the NRMSE error can be larger due to the contributions of the $t$ regime with a very small number of output keys.
Figure~\ref{combexperiments:fig} shows the NRMSE of the measurement $\frac{1}{r}\MdCount(E)$
for different values of $r$. The application of an approximate
$\MdCount$ counter of size $\epsilon^{-2}$ introduces NRMSE of at most $\epsilon$ to this measurement.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{combmeasurementAcc.pdf}
\caption{Combination measurement NRMSE for $f(w)=\sqrt{w}$ as a
function of $r$ on $10^5$ elements with Zipf distributed keys, averaged over 200 repetitions.\label{combexperiments:fig}}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion} \label{conclu:sec}
We presented a novel elegant framework for composable
sketching of concave sublinear statistics. We obtain
state-of-the-art asymptotic bounds on sketch size together with highly
efficient practical solution.
We leave open the intriguing question of fully understanding the limits of
our approach and in particular, understand if the scope of
sample-based sketching is limited to (sub)linear statistics (we suspect it does).
Another question is to precisely quantify the approximation tradeoff for $\textsf{cap}_1$ (and
hence for any $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ function)
\ignore{
On the applied end, we expect our simple and practical algorithms to be used in multiple domains. On the theory end, several intriguing fundamental questions are left for
future work:
\begin{itemize}
\ignore{
\item
In principle, {\em if} we had the {\em exact} $\LapM[W](t)$ transform,
we could compute the $f$-statistics for any $f$ using an inverse
transform \eqref{invtransform}
$a(t)$ and \eqref{fromL:eq}.
\ignore{
we could recover $W(w)$ using the relation
$$W(w) = D \Laplace^{-1}[1-\LapM[W](t)](w)\ ,$$ where $D = \int_0^\infty W(w)
dw = \lim_{t\rightarrow \infty} \LapM[W](t)$ is the distinct count, and using the (essential)
invertibility of the Laplace transform.
We could then estimate any $f$-statistics using the relation
$$f(W) = D \int_0^\infty f(w) \Laplace^{-1}[1-\LapM[W](t)](w) dw\ .$$
}
Clearly, only having access to the approximate transform
$\widehat{\widehat{\LapM[W]}}(t)$ considerably weakens what we can
hope to approximate. In particular, we know that we can not approximate
statistics that are hard for streaming such as moments with $p>2$
\cite{ams99}.
Can we precisely quantify the tradeoff
between the approximation quality of the transform and the
approximation quality we can obtain for $f(W)$, for different $f$ ?
}
\item
We proposed a general framework that performs approximate ``measurements''
of the frequency distribution. We then introduce $\LapM$
measurements (and the related Bin measurements) as an instance of
that. Do $\LapM$ measurements capture the full power of this
framework or are there other types of measurements that extend
the family of statistics we can approximate within small relative errors ?
\item
We {\em conjecture} here that $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ statistics
can be approximated within any specified error using the difference of
two combination
$\LapM$ measurements.
Recall that better approximation for $\textsf{cap}_1$ carries
over to all statistics in the span $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$, so
it suffices to consider $\textsf{cap}_1$.
We showed an approximation with relative error that is
at most $12\%$ using three point (or two combination) measurements. More generally, we seek to
better understand the tradeoff between the relative error and the parameter $\rho$ that
determines the overhead for a given approximation quality.
\item
Finally, it seems that sampling-based sketches are not effective
beyond the (sub)linear growth regime. Linear sketches (random linear
projections) \cite{JLlemma:1984,ams99,BravermanOstro:STOC2010} are
effective up to quadratic growth, beyond which the statistics become
hard for streaming, requiring polynomial state size \cite{ams99}. It
would be interesting to formalize this observation.
\ignore{
If this holds then all statistics
in the span $\overline{\textsf{cap}}$ can be approximated using the approximate
$\LapM$ transform. If this is true, can we quantify the tradeoff between
the number and quality of measurements and the approximation quality
of the statistics ?
}
\end{itemize}
}
\small
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
The most difficult problem for all quantum gravity approaches using discrete and quantum pregeometric structures is the recovery of continuum spacetime, its geometry, diffeomorphism invariance and General Relativity as an effective description for the dynamics of the geometry in an appropriate limit. It has been suggested, a possible way of how continuum spacetime and geometry could emerge from a quantum gravity substratum in such theories is by means of at least one phase transition from a discrete pregeometric to a continuum geometric phase. One refers to such a process as "geometrogenesis" \cite{Geometrogenesis}. A particular representative in this class of approaches where such a scenario has been proposed is Group Field Theory (GFT) \cite{GFT} where one tries to identify the continuum geometric phase to a condensate phase of the underlying quantum gravity system \cite{GFTGeometrogenesis} with a tentative cosmological interpretation \cite{GFC,GFCExample,GFCOthers,GFCEmergentFriedmann,GFCEmergentFriedmann2,GFClowspin, GFCEmergentFriedmann3,GFCReview}.
GFTs are Quantum Field Theories (QFT) defined over group manifolds and are characterized by their combinatorially nonlocal interaction terms. In the perturbative expansion it becomes apparent that the Feynman diagrams of the theory are dual to cellular complexes because of this particular nonlocality. Depending on the details of the Feynman amplitudes, the sum over the cellular complexes can be interpreted as a possible discrete definition of the covariant path integral for $4d$ quantum gravity. The reason for this is that beyond the combinatorial details, GFT Feynman graphs can be dressed by group theoretic data of which the function is to encode geometric information corresponding exactly to the elementary variables of Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG) \cite{LQG}. Using this, it can be shown that GFTs provide a formal and complete definition of spin foam models which give a path integral formulation for LQG \cite{SF,GFTSF}. In case the GFTs possess a discrete geometric interpretation, it is also possible to manifestly relate their partition functions to (noncommutative) simplicial quantum gravity path integrals \cite{GFTSG}.
In order to understand the nonperturbative properties of particular GFT models, the application of Functional Renormalization Group (FRG) techniques is needed \cite{FRG}. In general, these techniques provide the most powerful theoretical description of thermodynamic phases by means of a coarse graining operation that progressively eliminates short scale fluctuations. Their successful application to matrix models of $2d$ quantum gravity \cite{MMs,MMFRG} serves as an example for the adaption to GFT models which has recently been very actively pursued \cite{TGFTFRG,GFTRGReview}. In this way, the FRG methods enable one to study the consistency of GFT models, analyze their continuum limit, chart their phase structure and investigate the possible occurrence of phase transitions.
More precisely, standard FRG methodology has been applied to a couple of models from a class of group field theories called tensorial GFTs, for which one requires the fields to possess tensorial properties under a change of basis. The common features of the models analyzed so far are a nontrivial kinetic term of Laplacian type and a quartic combinatorially nonlocal interaction. However, they differ firstly in the size of the rank, secondly in whether gauge invariance is imposed or not, and thirdly in the compactness or noncompactness of the used group manifold. Remarkably, all these models are shown to be asymptotically free in the UV limit which is deeply rooted in the combinatorial nonlocality of the interaction \cite{TMRG}. Furthermore, signs for a phase transition separating a symmetric from a broken/condensate phase were found as the mass parameter $\mu$ tends to negative values in the IR limit analogous to a Wilson-Fisher fixed point in the corresponding local QFT. To corroborate the existence of such a phase transition, among others, the theory has to be studied around the newly assumed ground state by means of a mean field analysis as noticed in Refs. \cite{TGFTFRG,GFTRGReview}. One way to check this would amount to finding solutions to the classical equation of motion in a saddle point approximation of the path integral.
The possible occurrence of a phase transition in such systems is highly interesting, since it has been suggested that phase transitions from a symmetric to a condensate phase in GFT models for $4d$ quantum gravity could be a realization of the above-mentioned geometrogenesis scenario. In such a setting, a pregeometric discrete phase, given by an appropriate microscopic GFT model, passes through a phase transition into a continuum geometric phase, the dynamics of which is in turn described by a corresponding effective action. The phase transition would then correspond to a RG flow fixed point and could be interpreted as the condensation of discrete spacetime building blocks \cite{Geometrogenesis,GFTGeometrogenesis}.
So far, however, the mentioned FRG results for tensorial GFTs can only lend indirect support to the geometrogenesis hypothesis, since a full geometric interpretation of such models is currently lacking. To realize such a hypothesis in this context, one would have to proceed toward a GFT model enriched with additional geometric data and an available simplicial quantum gravity interpretation that is closely linked to LQG. The application of FRG methods to such a model with a combinatorially nonlocal simplicial interaction term would be needed to give an accurate account of the phase structure of the system. The hope is that studying its renormalization group flow will reveal an IR fixed point which marks the phase transition into a condensate phase ideally corresponding to a continuum geometric phase. Hence, the aim is to gradually increase the sophistication of the studied toy models to rigorously underpin the GFT condensate assumption and connect it to the geometrogenesis hypothesis \cite{GFTGeometrogenesis}.
In this context, the basic aim of GFT Condensate Cosmology (GFTCC) is to derive an effective dynamics for the GFT condensate states directly from the microscopic GFT quantum dynamics using mean field theoretic considerations, and consequently to extract a cosmological interpretation from them \cite{GFC,GFCExample,GFCOthers,GFCEmergentFriedmann,GFCEmergentFriedmann2,GFClowspin,GFCEmergentFriedmann3,GFCReview}. The central assumption of GFTCC is that the possible continuum geometric phase of a particular GFT model is ideally approximated by a condensate state which is suitable to describe spatially homogeneous universes. The mean field theoretic considerations used so far in Refs. \cite{GFC,GFCExample,GFCOthers,GFCEmergentFriedmann,GFCEmergentFriedmann2,GFClowspin,GFCEmergentFriedmann3,GFCReview} to give an effective description of the condensate phase and its dynamics use techniques which are strongly reminiscent of those employed to study the Gross-Pitaevskii equation for, at most, weakly interacting Bose-Einstein condensates \cite{BECs,BogoliubovAnsatz}.
In this article, we will go beyond the analysis of free GFTCC models and investigate the effect of combinatorially local interaction terms (pseudopotentials) for a gauge invariant model with Laplacian kinetic term, the mean field analysis of which was started for the free case in an isotropic restriction\footnote{The isotropic restriction employed in this article differs from the one used in Ref. \cite{GFCEmergentFriedmann} which renders the interaction term local in the spin label.} \cite{GFCExample}. We will further elaborate the results of the free model in this restriction studying the expectation values of certain geometric operators. We note that no additional massless scalar field is added to study the evolution of the system in relational terms as in Refs. \cite{GFCEmergentFriedmann,GFCEmergentFriedmann2,GFClowspin,GFCEmergentFriedmann3}. We choose local interactions for pure practical reasons: in this way the equations of motion take a particularly simple nonlinear form and to solve them, we employ numerical methods. Despite the fact that from a physics viewpoint these models appear as somewhat artificial because such interactions lack a proper discrete geometric interpretation, they have nevertheless a practical utility as simplified versions of more complicated ones, and bring us nearer to the physics which we want to probe. One might also speculate that the local effective interactions between the condensate constituents could only be valid on length scales where the true microscopic details of the interaction, namely the combinatorial nonlocality, are irrelevant. Ultimately, rigorous RG arguments will have the last word on how such terms can or cannot be derived from the fundamental theory; however by adopting a phenomenological point of view, the analysis of the effect of such pseudopotentials might prove useful to clarify the map between the microscopic and effective macroscopic regimes of the theory.
For a particular choice of the signs of the free parameters in the GFT action, we find in the isotropic restriction solutions which (i) are consistent with the condensate ansatz, (ii) are normalizable with respect to the Fock space measure in the weakly nonlinear regime, and (iii) obey a specific condition of which the fulfillment is required for the interpretation in terms of continuous smooth manifolds. For such solutions we study the effect of the interactions onto the expectation values of certain operators needed for their further geometric interpretation. We repeat this analysis for solutions to the equations of motion around the nontrivial minima of the used effective potentials and find that the expectation values of the geometric operators are clearly dominated by low spin modes. In this sense, such solutions can be interpreted as giving rise to an effectively continuous geometry. Moreover, we discuss the consequences of the interactions in the strongly nonlinear regime, where solutions generally lose their normalizability with respect to the Fock space measure and thus can be interpreted as corresponding to non-Fock representations of the canonical commutation relations.
To this aim, the article is organized as follows. In the first part of the second section \ref{GFT} we review the GFT approach to quantum gravity from the classical and quantum perspective. We then motivate its quantum cosmology spinoff called GFTCC in subsection \ref{GFC}. The presentation is kept rather short to motivate the essential concepts needed to follow the analysis presented later on. We invite the reader familiar with these concepts to proceed directly to the third section \ref{GFCInteractions} where we analyze in detail the properties of the free and interacting solutions in subsections \ref{subsectionfree}, \ref{subsectioninteractionssetup},\ref{subsectioninteractionsperturbation} and \ref{subsectioninteractionslocalminima}, respectively. In the fourth section \ref{Discussion} we summarize our results, discuss limitations of our analysis and propose further studies.
In the appendices \ref{AppendixA}, \ref{AppendixB} and \ref{AppendixC} we supplement the main sections of this article by discussing the notions of noncommutative Fourier transform, non-Fock representations and non-Fock coherent states, respectively, needed to allow for a better understanding of the obtained results.
\section{Group Field Theory and Group Field Theory Condensate Cosmology}\label{GFTGFC}
\subsection{Group Field Theory}\label{GFT}
GFTs represent a particular class of QFTs which aim at generalizing matrix models for $2d$ quantum gravity to higher dimensions. The fields of GFT live on group manifolds $G$ or dually on their associated Lie algebras $\mathfrak{g}$. For quantum gravity intended models, $G$ is interpreted as the local gauge group of gravity.\footnote{Typically, one chooses $G=\textrm{Spin}(4)$, $\textrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ or $G=\textrm{SU}(2)$. The last is the gauge group of Ashtekar-Barbero gravity lying at the heart of canonical LQG.} The essential idea is that all data encoded in the fields are solely of combinatorial and algebraic nature thus rendering GFT into a manifestly background independent and generally covariant field theoretic framework \cite{GFT}.
In the following, we introduce aspects of this approach in a shortened manner which are needed for its application to GFT condensate cosmology in the remainder of this article.
\subsubsection{Classical theory}
The classical field theory is specified by choosing a type of field and an action dictating its dynamics. Most generally, we consider the complex-valued scalar field $\varphi$ living on $d$ copies of the Lie group $G$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\varphi(g_{I}):G^d\to\mathbb{C}
\end{equation}
with $I=1,...,d$. The group elements $g_I$ are parallel transports $\mathcal{P}e^{i\int_{e_{I}}A}$ associated to $d$ links $e_I$ and $A$ denotes a gravitational connection $1$-form.
Importantly, one demands the invariance under the right diagonal action of $G$ on $G^d$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{gaugeinvariance}
\varphi(g_1h...,,g_dh)=\varphi(g_1,...,g_d),~~~\forall h\in G
\end{equation}
which is a way to guarantee that the parallel transports, emanating from a vertex and terminating at the end point of their respective links $e_I$, only encode gauge invariant data.
For compact $G$ the action is given by
\begin{equation}\label{classicalaction}
S[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]=\int_G (dg)^d \int_G (dg')^d \bar{\varphi}(g_I)\mathcal{K}(g_I,g_{I}')\varphi(g_I')+\mathcal{V},
\end{equation}
where $dg$ stands for the normalized Haar measure on $G$. The symbol $\mathcal{K}$ denotes the kinetic kernel and $\mathcal{V}=\mathcal{V}[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]$ is a nonlinear and in general nonlocal interaction potential. Choices of $\mathcal{K}$, $\mathcal{V}$, $d$ and $G$ define a specific model. The classical equation of motion is then given by
\begin{equation}
\int (dg')^d~\mathcal{K}(g_I,g'_I)\varphi(g'_I)+\frac{\delta \mathcal{V}}{\delta \bar{\varphi}(g_I)}=0.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Quantum theory: path integral}
The quantum theory is defined by the partition function $Z_{GFT}$. If we write a more general interaction term as a sum of polynomials of degree $n$, i.e. $\mathcal{V}=\sum_n\lambda_n \mathcal{V}_n$, the path integral becomes
\begin{equation}\label{pathintegral}
Z_{GFT}=\int[\mathcal{D}\varphi][\mathcal{D}\bar{\varphi}]e^{-S[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]}=\sum_{\Gamma}\frac{\prod_n\lambda_n^{N_n(\Gamma)}}{\textrm{Aut}(\Gamma)}\mathcal{A}_{\Gamma}
\end{equation}
in the perturbative expansion in terms of the coupling constants $\lambda_n$. The Feynman diagrams are denoted by $\Gamma$, $\textrm{Aut}(\Gamma)$ is the order of their automorphism group, $N_n(\Gamma)$ denotes the number of interaction vertices of type $n$, and $\mathcal{A}_{\Gamma}$ is the Feynman amplitude. Crucially, field arguments in $\mathcal{V}$ are related to each other in a specific combinatorially nonlocal pattern which correlates fields among each other just through some of their arguments. This model-specific combinatorial nonlocality implies that the GFT Feynman diagrams are dual to cellular complexes of arbitrary topology \cite{GFT}.
In view of constructing a partition function for $4d$ quantum gravity, one starts with the GFT quantization of the Ooguri model \cite{Ooguri}, a topological BF-theory, which is based on a real field with $G=\textrm{Spin}(4)$ or $\textrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ and its Feynman diagrams are dual to simplicial complexes. If $d$ is chosen to equal the dimension of the spacetime under construction, the fields are interpreted as $(d-1)$-simplices. The $d$ arguments of the fields are then associated to their $(d-2)$-faces. In this case, a particular type of interaction $\mathcal{V}$ describes how $d+1$ of these simplices are glued together across their faces to constitute the boundary of a $d$-simplex. Finally, the kinetic operator $\mathcal{K}$ dictates how to glue together two such $d$-simplices across a shared $(d-1)$-simplex.
In particular, for the case we are aiming at, the (right-invariant) field is defined over $d=4$ copies of $G$ and corresponds to a quantum tetrahedron or equally a $3$-simplex, a choice we further motivate in appendix \ref{AppendixA}. For the construction of the corresponding simplicial path integral, the interaction term has five copies of the field. Their arguments are paired in a particular way to form a $4$-simplex, given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{V}=\frac{\lambda}{5!}\int (dg)^{10}~\varphi_{1234}\varphi_{4567}\varphi_{7389}\varphi_{96210}\varphi_{10851
\end{equation}
with $\varphi(g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4)\equiv \varphi_{1234}$ etc. The kinetic term of the action with kernel $\mathcal{K}(g_I,g'_I)=\delta(g'_Ig_{I}^{-1})$ is specified by
\begin{equation}
K=\frac{1}{2}\int (dg)^{4}~\varphi_{1234}^2.
\end{equation}
The data given so far does not yet permit the reconstruction of a unique geometry for the simplicial complex. In a second step, one has to impose restrictions which reduce the nongeometric quantum theory to the gravitational sector.
This can be substantiated by invoking the correspondence between GFT and spin foam models. Indeed, any GFT model defines in its perturbative expansion a spin foam model \cite{GFT,GFTSF}. One can then show, that GFTs based on the Ooguri model, may provide a covariant QFT formulation of the dynamics of LQG. In the latter, boundary spin network states correspond to discrete quantum $3$-geometries \cite{LQG} and transition amplitudes in between two such boundary states are given by appropriate spin foam amplitudes \cite{SF}. A concrete strategy to construct gravitational spin foam models is to start with a spin foam quantization of the topological BF-theory which is equivalent to setting up its discrete path integral. Importantly, it is then turned into a gravitational theory by imposing so-called \textit{simplicity constraints}. These restrict the data dressing the spin foam model such that it becomes equivalent to a discrete path integral for Plebanski gravity. Moreover, the constraints allow one to establish the link to LQG by restricting the group $G$ to $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ \cite{SFSC}.
It is precisely in this way, that each so-constructed spin foam amplitude corresponds to a discrete spacetime history interpolating in between the boundary configurations and is thus identical to a restricted GFT Feynman amplitude. Therefore, the sum over Feynman diagrams given by Eq. (\ref{pathintegral}) can be rewritten as a sum over diagrams dual to simplicial complexes decorated with quantum geometric data which clarifies how the GFT partition function can be intuitively understood to encode the sum-over-histories for $4d$ quantum gravity.\footnote{This reasoning could be generalized in different ways. Firstly, the discussion of the case with noncompact group $G$ can be found in Ref. \cite{GFC}. Secondly, when remaining faithful to simplicial building blocks, one could e.g. consider higher interaction terms which also allow for an interpretation in terms of regular simplicial $4$-polytopes. Finally, it is in principle possible to go beyond the choice of simplicial building blocks and define GFTs which are fully compatible with the combinatorics of LQG. Within this theory, quantum states of the $3$-geometry are defined on boundary graphs with vertices of arbitrary valence. These correspond to general polyhedra and not merely to $3$-simplices \cite{GFT4All}.}
\subsubsection{Quantum theory: 2nd quantized framework}
Motivated by the roots of GFT in LQG, it is possible to construct a $2$nd quantized Fock space reformulation of the kinematical Hilbert space of LQG of which the states describe discrete quantum $3$-geometries.
The construction is closely analogous to the one known from ordinary nonrelativistic QFTs \cite{GFTLQG,GFTReview}. In a nutshell, the construction leads to the reinterpretation of spin network vertices as fundamental quanta which are created or annihilated by the field operators of GFT. Pictorially seen, exciting a GFT quantum creates an atom of space or a \textit{choron} and thus GFTs are not QFTs on space but of space itself.
To start with, the GFT Fock space constitutes itself from a fundamental single-particle Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}_v=L^2(G^d)$
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{F}(\mathcal{H}_v)=\bigoplus_{N=0}^{\infty}\textrm{sym}\bigl(\otimes_{i=1}^N\mathcal{H}_v^{(i)}\bigr).
\end{equation}
The symmetrization with respect to the permutation group $S_N$ is chosen to account for the choice of bosonic statistics of the field operators and pivotal for the idea of reinterpreting spacetime as a Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC).
$\mathcal{H}_v$ is the space of states of a GFT quantum. For $G=\textrm{SU}(2)$ and the imposition of gauge invariance as in Eq. (\ref{gaugeinvariance}), a state represents an open LQG spin network vertex or its dual quantum polyhedron.\footnote{This also holds true for $G=\textrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ and $G=\textrm{Spin}(4)$ when gauge invariance and simplicity constraints are properly imposed.} In the simplicial context, when $d=4$, a GFT quantum corresponds to a quantum tetrahedron, the Hilbert space of which is
\begin{equation}\label{HilbertspaceTetrahedron}
\mathcal{H}_v=L^2(G^4/G)\cong\bigoplus_{J_{i}\in\frac{\mathbb{N}}{2}}\textrm{Inv}\bigl(\otimes_{i=1}^4\mathcal{H}^{J_{i}}\bigr),
\end{equation}
with $\mathcal{H}^{J_{i}}$ denoting the Hilbert space of an irreducible unitary representation of $G=\textrm{SU}(2)$.
In this picture, the no-space state in $\mathcal{F}(\mathcal{H}_v)$ is devoid of any topological and quantum geometric information. It corresponds to the Fock vacuum $|\emptyset\rangle$ defined by
\begin{equation}
\hat{\varphi}(g_I)|\emptyset\rangle=0.
\end{equation}
By convention, it holds that $\langle\emptyset|\emptyset\rangle=1$. Exciting a one-particle GFT state over the Fock vacuum is expressed by
\begin{equation}
|g_I\rangle=\hat{\varphi}^{\dagger}(g_I)|\emptyset\rangle
\end{equation}
and understood as the creation of a single open $4$-valent LQG spin network vertex or of its dual tetrahedron.
The GFT field operators obey the Canonical Commutation Relations (CCR)
\begin{equation}
\bigl[\hat{\varphi}(g),\hat{\varphi}^{\dagger}(g')\bigr]=\mathbb{1}_G(g,g')~\textrm{and}~\bigl[\hat{\varphi}^{(\dagger)}(g),\hat{\varphi}^{(\dagger)}(g')\bigr]=0.
\end{equation}
The delta distribution $\mathbb{1}_G(g,g')=\int_G dh\prod_{I}\delta(g_I h g'^{-1}_{I})$ on the space $G^d/G$ is compatible with the imposition of gauge invariance at the level of the fields as in Eq. (\ref{gaugeinvariance}).\footnote{The case of noncompact group $G$ is discussed in Ref. \cite{GFC}.}
Using this, properly symmetrized many particle states can be constructed over the Fock space by
\begin{equation}\label{manyparticlestate}
|\psi\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N!}}\sum_{P\in S_{N}}P\int(dg)^{d N} \psi(g_I^1,...,g_I^N)\prod_{i=1}^N\hat{\varphi}^{\dagger}(g^i_I)|\emptyset\rangle,
\end{equation}
with the wave functions $\psi(g_I^1,...,g_I^N)=\langle g_I^1,...,g_I^N|\psi\rangle$. Such states correspond to the excitation of $N$ open disconnected spin network vertices. The contruction of such multiparticle states is needed for the description of extended quantum $3$-geometries.
Using this language, one can set up second-quantized Hermitian operators to encode quantum geometric observable data. In particular, an arbitrary one-body operator assumes the form
\begin{equation}\label{observable}
\hat{\mathcal{O}}=\int (dg)^d\int (dg')^d~\hat{\varphi}^{\dagger}(g_I)\mathcal{O}(g_I,g_{I}')\hat{\varphi}(g_{I}'),
\end{equation}
with $O(g_I,g_{I}')=\langle g_I|\hat{o}|g_{I}'\rangle$ given in terms of the matrix elements of the first-quantized operators $\hat{o}$. For Hermitian operators, these have to suffice of course $\mathcal{O}(g_I,g_{I}')=(\mathcal{O}(g_I',g_{I}))^{*}$. For example, the number operator is given by
\begin{equation}
\hat{N}=\int (dg)^d \hat{\varphi}^{\dagger}(g_I)\hat{\varphi}(g_{I}).
\end{equation}
Strictly speaking, $N$ exists only in the zero-interaction representation which is when all representations of the CCRs are equivalent to the Fock representation, as is well known within the context local QFTs \cite{FocknonFock}. Another relevant operator encoding geometric information is the vertex volume operator
\begin{equation}
\hat{V}=\int (dg)^d \int (dg')^d~\hat{\varphi}^{\dagger}(g_I)V(g_I,g_I')\hat{\varphi}(g_{I}'),
\end{equation}
wherein $V(g_I,g_I')$ is given in terms of the LQG volume operator between two single-vertex spin networks and an analogous expression holds for the LQG area operator \cite{GFC,GFCReview,GFTOperators}.
\subsection{Group Field Theory Condensate Cosmology}\label{GFC}
The cosmology of the very early universe provides a natural setting in
which quantum gravity effects can be expected to have played a decisive role. The GFTCC research program attempts to describe cosmologically relevant geometries by applying the previously summarized techniques.
In this context, the goal is to model homogeneous continuum $3$-geometries and their cosmological evolution by means of particular multiparticle GFT states, i.e. condensate states, and their effective dynamics. A possible mechanism which could lead to such condensate states, is suggested by the concept of phase transitions in GFT. As explained in the Introduction, the FRG analysis of specific GFT models has found IR fixed points in all cases investigated so far, suggesting a phase transition from a symmetric to a broken/condensate phase \cite{TGFTFRG,GFTRGReview}. The condensate corresponds to a nonperturbative vacuum of a GFT model described by a large sample of bosonic GFT quanta which all settle into a common ground state away from the Fock vacuum. To confirm the occurrence of such a transition a mean field analysis of the broken phase has to be undertaken. Ideally, the effective dynamics of the resulting effective geometry should admit a description in terms of the one given by General Relativity for the corresponding classical geometry, perhaps up to modifications \cite{GFC, GFCReview}.
\subsubsection{Condensate states}
In the following, we briefly recapitulate the motivation for why GFT condensate states serve as a good ansatz to effectively capture the physics of homogeneous continuum spacetimes following Refs. \cite{GFC,GFCReview} and review important aspects of their construction. We turn then to the extraction of the effective dynamics from the microscopic GFT action.
In the case of spatial homogeneity, which is relevant to us, it is possible to reconstruct the geometry from any point as the metric is the same everywhere.\footnote{The procedure to reconstruct the spatial metric by means of the information encoded in the quantum state is briefly adumbrated in appendix \ref{AppendixA}.} This \textit{homogeneity criterion} translates on the level of GFT states to the requirement that all quanta occupy the same quantum geometric state. This is the reason for choosing GFT condensate states as the main ingredient for GFTCC in close analogy to the theory of real Bose condensates \cite{BECs}. Furthermore, for a state to encode in some adequate limit information allowing for the description of a smooth metric $3$-geometry, one assumes that a large constituent number $N$ will lead to a good \textit{approximation of the continuum}. Moreover, the simplicial building blocks are required to be almost fla
. This \textit{near flatness condition} translates on the level of the states to the requirement that the probability density is concentrated around small values of the curvature. Finally, for a classical cosmological spacetime to emerge from a given quantum state, it should exhibit \textit{semiclassical properties}. Crucially, condensate states automatically fulfill such a desirable feature because they are coherent states and as such exhibit, in a certain sense, ultraclassical behavior by saturating the number-phase uncertainty relation and are thus the quantum states which are the closest to classical waves. We will discuss the construction of such states and their properties in the following.
Using the Fock representation of GFT as recapitulated in appendix \ref{AppendixB}, we decompose the field operator $\hat{\varphi}(g_I)$ in terms of annihilation operators $\{\hat{c}_i\}$ of single-particle quantum geometry states $\{|i\rangle\}$ yielding
\begin{equation}\label{fieldoperatorFockdecomposition}
\hat{\varphi}(g_I)=\sum_i \psi_i(g_I)\hat{c}_i.
\end{equation}
Following the logic of the Bogoliubov approximation valid for ultracold, non- to weakly interacting and dilute Bose condensates \cite{BogoliubovAnsatz, BECs}, if the ground state $i=0$ has a macroscopic occupation, one separates this expression into a condensate term and one for all the remaining noncondensate components. This yields
\begin{equation}
\hat{\varphi}(g_I)=\psi_0(g_I)c_0+\sum_{i\neq 0}\psi_i\hat{c}_i,
\end{equation}
where one replaces the operator $\hat{c}_0$ by the c-number $c_0$ so that the average occupation number of the ground state is given by $N=\langle \hat{c}_0^{\dagger}\hat{c}_0\rangle$. In the next step one redefines $\sigma\equiv\sqrt{N}\psi_0$ as well as $\delta\hat{\varphi}\equiv\sum_{i\neq 0}\psi_i\hat{c}_i$ giving rise to
\begin{equation}\label{BogoliubovAnsatz}
\hat{\varphi}(g_I)=\sigma(g_I)+\delta\hat{\varphi}(g_I),
\end{equation}
where $\psi_0$ is normalized to $1$. This ansatz is only justified if the ground state is macroscopically occupied, i.e., $N\gg 1$ and the fluctuations $\delta\hat{\varphi}$ are regarded as small. One calls the classical field $\sigma(g_I)$ the mean field of the condensate which assumes the role of an order parameter. Making use of the particle density $n(g_I)=|\sigma(g_I)|^2$ and a phase characterizing the coherence properties of the condensate, we write the mean field in polar form as
\begin{equation}
\sigma(g_I)=\sqrt{n}~e^{i\theta(g_I)}.
\end{equation}
This illustrates that the order parameter can always be multiplied by an arbitrary phase factor without affecting the physical measurement. This behavior is identified as a global $\mathrm{U}(1)$-symmetry of the system which is associated with the conservation of the total particle number. Upon BEC phase transition a particular phase is chosen which amounts to the spontaneous breaking of this symmetry.
By construction, the Bogoliubov ansatz (\ref{BogoliubovAnsatz}) gives rise to a nonzero expectation value of the field operator, i.e., $\langle\hat{\varphi}(g_I)\rangle\neq 0$, indicating that the condensate state is in, or rather close to, a coherent state.
Concretely, the simplest choice for the order parameter is provided by a condensate state
\begin{equation}
|\sigma\rangle=A~e^{\hat{\sigma}}|\emptyset\rangle,~~~\hat{\sigma}=\int (dg)^4~\sigma(g_I)\hat{\varphi}^{\dagger}(g_I),
\end{equation}
which is constructed from quantum tetrahedra all encoding the same discrete geometric data.\footnote{In principle, more complicated types of composite states can be considered as in Ref. \cite{GFC}.} It defines a nonpeturbative vacuum over the Fock space. The normalization factor is given by
\begin{equation}
A=e^{-\frac{1}{2}\int(dg)^4~|\sigma(g)|^2}.
\end{equation}
We require in addition to the right invariance as in Eq. (\ref{gaugeinvariance}) invariance under the left diagonal action of $G$, i.e., $\sigma(k g_I)=\sigma(g_I)$ for all $k\in G$. The latter encodes the invariance under local frame rotations
Such states are coherent because they are eigenstates of the field operator,
\begin{equation}
\hat{\varphi}(g_I)|\sigma\rangle=\sigma(g_I)|\sigma\rangle,
\end{equation}
such that indeed $\langle\hat{\varphi}(g_I)\rangle=\sigma(g_I)\neq 0$ holds (as long as $|\sigma\rangle$ is not the Fock vacuum). Due to this property the expectation value of the number operator immediately yields the average particle number
\begin{equation}
N=\int(dg)^4~|\sigma(g_I)|^2<\infty.
\end{equation}
It is of course only possible to use such a condensate state for the description of a macroscopic homogeneous universe, if the number of quanta is $N\gg 1$ but finite. If the number operator is well defined and its expectation value is finite, the states used here are Fock coherent states (cf. appendices \ref{AppendixB} and \ref{AppendixC}). By construction, such a description is only valid for noninteracting or weakly interacting condensates. Toward the strongly interacting regime, it has to be replaced by one given in terms of non-Fock coherent states, as the appendices \ref{AppendixB} and \ref{AppendixC} suggest.
\subsubsection{Effective dynamics}
After having discussed the construction of suitable states, let us briefly summarize how the effective condensate dynamics can be obtained from the underlying GFT dynamics as in Refs. \cite{GFC,GFCReview}.
This is done by using the infinite tower of Schwinger-Dyson equations
\begin{equation}
0=\delta_{\bar{\varphi}}\langle \mathcal{O}[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]\rangle=\biggl\langle \frac{\delta\mathcal{O}[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]}{\delta\bar{\varphi}(g_I)}-\mathcal{O}[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]\frac{\delta S[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]}{\delta\bar{\varphi}(g_I)}\biggr\rangle,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{O}$ is a functional of the fields. One extracts an expression for the effective dynamics by setting $\mathcal{O}$ equal to the identity. This leads to
\begin{equation}
\biggl\langle \frac{\delta S[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]}{\delta\bar{\varphi}(g_I)}\biggr\rangle=0
\end{equation}
with the action $S[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]$ as in Eq. (\ref{classicalaction}). When the expectation value is taken with respect to the condensate state $|\sigma\rangle$, one obtains the analog of the Gross-Pitaevskii (GP) equation for real Bose condensates
\begin{equation}\label{GPGFC}
\int (dg')^4\mathcal{K}(g_I,g'_I)\sigma(g'_I)+\frac{\delta
V}{\delta\bar{\sigma}(g_I)}=0.
\end{equation}
This is in general a nonlinear and nonlocal equation for the dynamics of the mean field $\sigma$ and is interpreted as a quantum cosmology equation. In analogy to the GP equation, it has no direct probabilistic interpretation. These features might appear as a problem when trying to relate the GFTCC framework to LQC \cite{LQC} or Wheeler-DeWitt (WdW) quantum cosmology \cite{WdWQC}. However, they do not pose a problem for the direct extraction of cosmological predictions from the full theory. We refer to Refs. \cite{GFC,GFCExample,GFCEmergentFriedmann,GFCEmergentFriedmann2,GFCEmergentFriedmann3}, where it has been demonstrated how a Friedmann-like evolution equation can be derived from such an effective dynamics of specific GFT condensates.
\section{Toward the mean field analysis of an interacting GFTCC model}\label{GFCInteractions}
In the following, we proceed with analyzing the quantum dynamics of a particular GFT/GFTCC model in the free and interacting cases. The larger scope of such an analysis is to see whether one can construct particular condensate solutions which admit e.g. an interpretation in terms of smooth continuous $3$-geometries and are in line with the geometrogenesis picture.
We first review a free model and discuss how the general solution for an isotropic condensate is obtained from the equation of motion of the mean field $\sigma$ in subsection \ref{subsectionfree}. By doing so, we follow closely Ref. \cite{GFCExample} and further elaborate special solutions. We extensively discuss the geometric interpretation of such solutions by analyzing their curvature properties and by computing the expectation values of the volume and area operators imported from LQG. In subsection \ref{subsectioninteractions} we then introduce two types of combinatorially local interaction terms in subsection \ref{subsectioninteractionssetup} and firstly treat them in subsection \ref{subsectioninteractionsperturbation} as perturbations of the aforementioned free solutions. We study solutions around the nontrivial minima of the resulting effective potentials in subsection \ref{subsectioninteractionslocalminima} and discuss the expectation values of the LQG volume and area operators in this case. Finally, we conclude the analysis by interpreting the obtained results.
In order to study the quantum dynamics of the mean field $\sigma$ as in Eq. (\ref{GPGFC}), at first we have to specify the details of the action
\begin{equation}
S[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]=\int(dg)^4(dg')^4\bar{\varphi}(g_I)\mathcal{K}(g_I,g'_I)\varphi(g'_I)+\mathcal{V}[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}].
\end{equation}
Most generally, one could study the evolution in relational terms by adding a free massless scalar field $\phi$ into the action. For the GFT field one would then have $\varphi=\varphi(g_I,\phi)$ where $\phi\in\mathbb{R}$ accounts for the relational clock as discussed in Ref. \cite{GFCEmergentFriedmann}. In these terms, the local kinetic operator is given by
\begin{equation}\label{kineticoperatorgeneral}
\mathcal{K}=\delta(g'_{I}g^{-1}_{I})\delta(\phi'-\phi)\biggl[-(\tau\partial_{\phi}^2+\sum_{I=1}^4\Delta_{g_I})+m^2\biggr].
\end{equation}
The signs of the terms appearing in $\mathcal{K}$ are chosen such that the functional $S$ in the partition function $Z$ is bounded from below. For $\tau>0$, the operator $-(\tau\partial_{\phi}^2+\sum_{I=1}^4\Delta_{g_I})$ is positive and also this choice accounts for the correct coupling of matter to gravity as noticed in Ref. \cite{GFC}. The Laplacian on the group manifold is motivated by the renormalization group analysis of GFT models where one can show that it is generated by radiative corrections (cf. \cite{GFTRGReview}). The "mass term" is related to the GFT/spin foam correspondence, as it corresponds to the spin foam edge weights.\footnote{Freezing the kinetic operator to the identity, would then lead to the ultralocal truncation of the model and establish the above-discussed correspondence between certain GFT and spin foam models \cite{GFTSF} for an appropriate choice of interaction term.} Throughout the remainder of this article, we will focus on "static" mean fields, i.e. $\sigma(g_I,\phi)=\sigma(g_I)$. The choice of action is then finalized by selecting the interaction term $\mathcal{V}$.
\subsection{A static free model}\label{subsectionfree}
In a first approximation, we neglect all interactions and set $\mathcal{V}=0$. Using Eqs. (\ref{GPGFC}) and (\ref{kineticoperatorgeneral}), this yields
\begin{equation}\label{FreeGP}
\biggl[-\sum_{I=1}^4\Delta_{g_I}+m^2\biggr]\sigma(g_I)=0.
\end{equation}
To find solutions to this dynamical equation, we introduce coordinates on the $\textrm{SU}(2)$ group manifold, use invariance properties of $\sigma(g_I)$ and apply symmetry reductions, where we closely follow the results of Ref. \cite{GFCExample} and elaborate them where needed.
To this aim, assume that the connection in the holonomy $g=\mathcal{P}e^{i\int_e A}$ remains approximately constant along the link $e$ with length $\ell_0$ in the $x$-direction, which yields $g\approx e^{i\ell_0 A_x}$. In the polar decomposition, this gives
\begin{equation}
g=\cos(\ell_0||\vec{A}_x||)\mathbbm{1}+i\vec{\sigma}\frac{\vec{A}_x}{||\vec{A}_x||}\sin(\ell_0||\vec{A}_x||),
\end{equation}
with the $\mathfrak{su(2)}$-connection $A_x=\vec{A}_x\cdot\vec{\sigma}$ and the Pauli matrices $\{\sigma_i\}_{i=1...3}$. In the next step, we introduce the coordinates $(\pi_0,...,\pi_3)$ together with $\pi_0^2+...+\pi_3^2=1$ which specifies an embedding of $\mathrm{SU}(2)\cong S^3$ into $\mathbb{R}^4$. Due to the isomorphism $\textrm{SO}(3)\cong \textrm{SU}(2)/\mathbb{Z}_2$, the choice of sign in $\pi_0=\pm\sqrt{1-\vec{\pi}^2}$ corresponds to working on one hemisphere of $S^3$. With the identification
\begin{equation}\label{coordinatesongroup}
\vec{\pi}=\frac{\vec{A}_x}{||\vec{A}_x||}\sin(\ell_0||\vec{A}_x||),
\end{equation}
we can parametrize the holonomies as
\begin{equation}
g(\vec{\pi})=\sqrt{1-\vec{\pi}^2}\mathbbm{1}+i\vec{\sigma}\cdot\vec{\pi},~~||\vec{\pi}||\leq 1,
\end{equation}
where $||\vec{\pi}||=0$ corresponds to the pole of the hemisphere and $||\vec{\pi}||=1$ marks the equator. In these coordinates the Haar measure becomes
\begin{equation}
dg=\frac{d\vec{\pi}}{\sqrt{1-\vec{\pi}^2}}.
\end{equation}
Using the Lie derivative on the group manifold acting on a function $f$, one has for the Lie algebra elements
\begin{equation}
\vec{B}f(g)\equiv i\frac{d}{dt}f(e^{\frac{i}{2}\vec{\sigma}t}g)|_{t=0}.
\end{equation}
With this the Laplace-Beltrami operator $\vec{B}^2=-\Delta_{g}$ in terms of the coordinates $\vec{\pi}$ on $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
-\Delta_gf(g)=-[(\delta^{ij}-\pi^i\pi^j)\partial_i\partial_j-3\pi^i\partial_i]f(\vec{\pi}).
\end{equation}
This applies to all group elements $g_I$, $I=1,...,4$ dressing the spin network vertex dual to the quantum tetrahedron.
In the most general case, the left and right invariance implies that $\sigma(g_I)$ lives on the six-dimensional domain space $\textrm{SU}(2)\backslash\textrm{SU}(2)^4/\textrm{SU}(2)$. It is thus parametrized by six invariant coordinates $\pi_{IJ}=\vec{\pi}_{I}\cdot\vec{\pi}_J$, with $I,J=1,2,3$ and $0\leq|\pi_{IJ}|\leq 1$.
Using the above, Eq. (\ref{FreeGP}) gives rise to a rather complicated partial differential equation. To find solutions, one imposes a symmetry reduction by considering functions $\sigma$ which only depend on the diagonal components $\pi_{II}$ and, furthermore, are assumed to be all equal. Together with Eq. (\ref{coordinatesongroup}), this yields
\begin{equation}
p\equiv\pi_{II}=\sin^2(\ell_0||\vec{A}_x||).
\end{equation}
Using this, one can rewrite Eq. (\ref{FreeGP}) as
\begin{equation}\label{masterequation}
-\biggl[2p(1-p)\frac{d^2}{dp^2}+(3-4p)\frac{d}{dp}\biggr]\sigma(p)+\mu\sigma(p)=0,
\end{equation}
with $\mu\equiv\frac{m^2}{12}$ and $p\in[0,1]$ for which analytic solutions can be found \cite{GFCExample}.\footnote{Observe that this symmetry reduction should not be confused with those performed in WdW quantum cosmology or LQC, since it is applied after quantization onto the quantum state and not before.}
Indeed, it makes sense to refer to this symmetry reduction (to just one variable $p$) as an isotropization. Retrospectively, this can be seen when rewriting Eq. (\ref{masterequation}) using $p\equiv \sin^2(\psi)$. With this we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{masterequationangle}
-[\frac{d^2}{d\psi^2}+2\cot(\psi)\frac{d}{d\psi}]\sigma(\psi)+2\mu\sigma(\psi)=0,~~~\psi\in[0,\pi/2],
\end{equation}
which can be compared to the Laplacian on a hemisphere of $S^3$ acting on a function $\sigma(\phi,\theta,\psi)$, given by
\begin{equation}\label{LaplacianHemisphere}
-\Delta \sigma(\phi,\theta,\psi)=-\frac{1}{\sin^2(\psi)}\biggl[\frac{\partial}{\partial\psi}(\sin^2(\psi)\frac{\partial}{\partial\psi}\sigma)+\Delta_{S^2}\sigma\biggr],
\end{equation}
with $\phi\in[0,2\pi]$, $\theta\in[0,\pi]$ and $\psi\in[0,\pi/2]$. The function $\sigma$ is called isotropic or zonal if it is independent of $\phi$ and $\theta$ \cite{AnalysisonLieGroups}. These are spherically symmetric eigenfunctions of $-\Delta_{S^2}$ for which Eq. (\ref{masterequationangle}) is equal to Eq. (\ref{LaplacianHemisphere}). Hence, the symmetry reduction can be seen as explicitly restricting the rather general class of condensates to a representative with a clearer geometric interpretation.\newline
The general solution to Eq. (\ref{masterequation}) is given by
\begin{multline}\label{generalsolution}
\sigma(p)=\sqrt[4]{\frac{1-p}{p}}[a~P^{\frac{1}{2}}_{\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{1-2\mu}-1}(2p-1)~+~\\ b~Q^{\frac{1}{2}}_{\frac{1}{2}(\sqrt{1-2\mu}-1)}(2p-1)],
\end{multline}
with $a,b\in\mathbb{C}$ and $P,Q$ are associated Legendre functions of the first and second kinds, respectively. With respect to the measure induced from the full Fock space, one yields for the average particle number
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
N&=\int (dg)^3 |\sigma(g_1,g_2,g_3)|^2\\ &= 2\pi\int dp \sqrt{\frac{p}{1-p}}|\sigma(p)|^2<\infty.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In the following, we want to specify the possible values of $\mu$ in the symmetry reduced case by means of discussing the spectrum of the operator $-\sum_I\Delta_{g_I}$. Its self-adjointness and positivity imply that its eigenvalues $\{m^2\}$ lie in $\mathbb{R}_0^{+}$. The compactness of the domain space $\textrm{SU}(2)\backslash\textrm{SU}(2)^4/\textrm{SU}(2)$ entails that the spectrum is discrete and the respective eigenspaces are finite-dimensional. This also holds for the symmetry reduced case.
To finally concretize the spectrum, we have to introduce boundary conditions, which we infer from physical assumptions. For this we can exploit that we are looking for solutions to the equation of motion which admit an interpretation in terms of smooth metric $3$-geometries and thus obey the above-mentioned near flatness condition. In the group representation, this condition concretely translates into demanding that the character of the group elements decorating the quantum tetrahedra are close to $\chi(\mathds{1}_{J_{i}})=2J_i+1$ according to Refs. \cite{GFC, GFCReview}. On the level of the mean field this leads to the requirement that the probability density is concentrated around small values of the connection or its curvature. In the symmetry reduced case this condition holds for $\sigma(p)$ if the probability density $|\sigma(p)|^2$ is concentrated around small values of the variable $p$ and tends to zero at the equator traced out at $p=1$. The latter translates into a Dirichlet boundary condition on the equator,
\begin{equation}
\sigma(p)|_{p=1}=0,
\end{equation}
which is only obeyed by the $Q$-branch of the general solution Eq. (\ref{generalsolution}). Using this, the spectrum of the Dirichlet Laplacian is given by $\mu=-2n(n+1)$ with $n\in(2\mathbb{N}_0 + 1)/2$.\footnote{The only eigenfunction of the Dirichlet Laplacian to the eigenvalue $\mu=0$ is the trivial function. In the mean field analysis of phase transitions the mean field is supposed to vanish if the driving parameter $\mu$ turns to $0$. Here, consistency with the flatness condition implies the vanishing of the mean field $\sigma$ for $\mu=0$.}\footnote{Due to the linear character of the free problem, the solutions have a rescaling invariance with respect to the chosen boundary conditions. This means that two solutions for different boundary conditions $\sigma'(1)$ can be rescaled into one another according to
\begin{equation}\label{rescalinginvariance}
\frac{N[\sigma_1'(1)]}{N[\sigma_2'(1)]}=\frac{|\sigma_1'(1)|^2}{|\sigma_2'(1)|^2},
\end{equation}
which obscures the interpretation of the quantity $N$ and other observables in the free case. This rescaling property is lost once (strong) nonlinear interactions are considered as in the next subsection.}
Equivalently, these solutions correspond to the eigensolutions of Eq. (\ref{masterequationangle}) obeying the boundary condition $\sigma(\frac{\pi}{2})=0$. They are given by
\begin{equation}\label{solutionsangle}
\sigma_j(\psi)=\frac{\sin((2j+1)\psi)}{\sin(\psi)},~~~\psi\in[0,\frac{\pi}{2}]
\end{equation}
with $j\in \frac{2\mathbb{N}_0+1}{2}$ corresponding to the eigenvalues $\mu=-2j(j+1)$. On the interval $[0,\frac{\pi}{2}]$ these solutions are exactly equal to those hyperspherically symmetric eigenfunctions of the Laplacian on $S^3$ which vanish on the equator. Furthermore, observe that these are just the characters $\chi_j(\psi)$ of the respective representation for $j$.\newline
In view of the geometric interpretation of these solutions, we want to illustrate and then discuss the behavior of the first few eigensolutions by plotting their probability density $|\sigma(p)|^2$ in Fig. \ref{fig1} or $|\sigma(\psi)|^2$ in Fig. \ref{fig2}, respectively. The plot illustrates that the probability density is concentrated around small values of the variable $p$ or $\psi$, respectively. In general, eigensolutions remain finitely peaked around $p=0$ or $\psi=0$. Solutions for slightly perturbed eigenvalues $\mu$ are infinitely peaked as $\lim_{p\to 0}|\sigma(p)|^2\sim 1/p$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{probabilitydensityfree.pdf}
\caption{Probability density of the free mean field over $p$.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{probabilitydensityfreepsi.pdf}
\caption{Probability density of the free mean field over $\psi$.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
A concentration of the probability density around small $p$ corresponds to a concentration around small curvature values. This is because small $p$, itself directly proportional to the gravitational connection $A$, implies small field strength via $F=D_A A$. Naively, in turn this leads to a small $3$-curvature $R$, as is known from the first-order formalism for gravity. This is important for consistency matters, meaning that the building blocks of the geometry are indeed almost flat which is needed to approximate a smooth continuum $3$-space. Around $p=1$ or $\psi=\frac{\pi}{2}$, tracing out the equator of $S^3$, the solutions vanish. The occurrence of the finite number of oscillatory maxima does not a priori pose a problem to the fulfillment of the near flatness condition since the eigensolutions are indeed concentrated around small values of $p$ or angles $\psi$, far away from the equator. For the characters of the corresponding representations, the near flatness condition means that they should be close to $\chi(\mathds{1}_{j})=2j+1$ \cite{GFC,GFCReview}. Our solutions obey this requirement since in Eq. (\ref{solutionsangle}) $\lim_{\psi\to 0}\sigma_j(\psi)$ exactly yields $2j+1$. In this light, using the solutions $\sigma_j(\psi)$, we can compute the average of the field strength\footnote{Relating $p$ to the field strength is justified when considering a plaquette $\Box$ in a face of a tetrahedron so that we can make use of the well known expression
\begin{equation}\nonumber
F^k_{ab}(A)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{Tr}(\tau^k\tau^k)}\lim_{\textrm{Area}_{\Box}\to 0}\mathrm{Tr}_j\biggl(\tau^k\frac{\mathrm{hol}_{\Box_{ij}}(A)-1}{\textrm{Area}_{\Box}}\biggr)\delta_a^i\delta^j_b,
\end{equation}
where $a,b\in\{1,2\}$ and for the $\mathfrak{su}(2)$-algebra elements $\tau_k=-\frac{i}{2}\sigma_k$ the relation $\mathrm{Tr}(\tau^k\tau^k)=-\frac{1}{3}j(j+1)(2j+1)$ holds \cite{LQC}. This yields $F^k\sim \sin^2(\psi)=p$.} $F^i\sim p$ given by
\begin{equation}
\frac{\langle \hat{F}^i\rangle}{N}\sim\int_{0}^{\pi/2}d\psi\sin^2(\psi)~|\sigma_j(\psi)|^2~\hat{F}^i~/~N>0,
\end{equation}
which is illustrated in Fig. \ref{fieldstrengthfigure}. The dots indicate the discrete contributions to the field strength for a particular $j$-mean field and show a dominance of the $1/2$-eigensolution over the others on which we comment below.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fieldstrength.pdf}
\caption{Un-normalized spectrum of the field strength with respect to the eigensolutions $\sigma_j(\psi)$ in arbitrary units.}
\label{fieldstrengthfigure}
\end{figure}
In light of the previous discussion, it may seem a bit surprising that the expectation value of the field strength is nonzero despite the fact that $p=0$ is the most probable value of the corresponding mean field. However, the extended tail of the probability density with the finite oscillatory maxima accounts for the average being bigger than the most probable value. The finite value indicates that the space described by the condensate is of finite size. We will come back to this point at the end of this section.\footnote{The last word on the flatness behavior of such solutions also in the interacting case, however, lies with the analysis (of the expectation value) of a currently lacking GFT-curvature operator, as already noticed in Ref. \cite{GFCReview}.}
In the last step, we want to transform our nearly flat solutions to the spin-representation which facilitates most directly the extraction of information about the LQG volume and area operators and is crucial for the geometric interpretation of the solutions. To this aim, notice that due to the left- and right-invariance of $\sigma(g_I)$, the mean field is in particular a central function on the domain space, i.e., $\sigma(h g_I h^{-1})=\sigma(g_I)$ for all $h\in \mathrm{SU}(2)$. This holds for the isotropic function $\sigma(p)$ or $\sigma(\psi)$, analogously. In this case isotropy coincides with the notion of centrality. Using the Fourier series of a central function on $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ \cite{AnalysisonLieGroups}, the Fourier series for the mean field in the angle parametrization is given by
\begin{equation}
\sigma_j(\psi)=\sum_{m\in\mathbb{N}_0/2}(2m+1)~\chi_m(\psi)~\sigma_{j;m},
\end{equation}
with the "plane waves" given by the characters $\chi_m(\psi)=\frac{\sin((2m+1)\psi)}{\sin(\psi)}$. The Fourier coefficients are then obtained via
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{j;m}=\frac{2}{\pi}\frac{1}{2m+1}\int_{0}^{\pi/2}d\psi \sin^2(\psi)~\chi_m(\psi)~\sigma_j(\psi),
\end{equation}
and $m\in\frac{\mathbb{N}_0}{2}$. Using this, the Fourier coefficients of the solutions $\sigma_j(\psi)$ (cf. Eq. (\ref{solutionsangle})) yield
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{j;m}=\frac{2}{\pi}\frac{1}{2m+1}\frac{(-1)^{\frac{2j-1}{2}}~(2j+1)~\cos\bigl(\frac{2m\pi}{2}\bigr)}{(2m-2j)~(2m+2j+2)},
\end{equation}
with $j\in \frac{2\mathbb{N}_0+1}{2}$. In the spin-representation, the expectation value of the volume operator with respect to the mean field is decomposed as
\begin{equation}
\langle \hat{V}\rangle\equiv V=V_0\sum_{m\in\mathbb{N}_0/2} |\sigma_{j;m}|^2 V_m~~\textrm{with}~~V_m\sim m^{3/2}
\end{equation}
and $V_0\sim\ell_p^3$.\footnote{As a side remark, notice that if $\mu>0$, naively $j$ would be complex and thus also the spectra of the geometric operators such as the volume $\hat{V}$.} The normalized volume $V/V_0$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig4} for different values of $j$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{spectrumvolume.pdf}
\caption{Normalized spectrum of the volume operator with respect to the eigensolutions $\sigma_j(\psi)$ in arbitrary units.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
The dots indicate the discrete contributions to the volume for a particular $j$. Eigensolutions for smaller $j$ or $|\mu|$ have a bigger volume in comparison to those with larger $j$, especially the $j=3/2$ eigensolution has the relatively biggest volume. Importantly, the volume is finite for all $j$ indicating that the space which the condensate approximates must be of finite size. Hence, a general solution which can be decomposed in terms of eigensolutions, describes a finitely sized space of which the largest contributions arise from low spin modes. Finally, Fig. \ref{fig5} illustrates the uncertainty of the volume operator, which is monotonously increasing in $j$ and indicates that its expectation value assumes a sharper value if the condensate resides in lower $j$-modes.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{standarddeviationvolume.pdf}
\caption{Standard deviation of the volume operator over $j$.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
Analogously, the expectation value of the area operator for an individual face of a quantum tetrahedron in the condensate is given as
\begin{equation}
\langle \hat{A}\rangle\equiv A=A_0\sum_{m\in\mathbb{N}_0/2} |\sigma_{j;m}|^2 A_m
\end{equation}
with $A_m\sim (m(m+1))^{1/2}$ and $A_0\sim\ell_p^2$. Depending on the solution $\sigma_j$, the spectrum of the normalized area $A/A_0$ is illustrated in Fig. \ref{spectrumarea} showing a dominance of the $1/2$-representation and otherwise with a similar interpretation as in the case of the volume operator.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{spectrumarea.pdf}
\caption{Normalized spectrum of the area operator with respect to the eigensolutions $\sigma_j(\psi)$ in arbitrary units.}
\label{spectrumarea}
\end{figure}
From the above, it is not clear whether a certain eigensolution could be dynamically preferred over others. The near flatness condition seems to be better fulfilled by lower eigenmodes, that means for those solutions with a lower number of oscillatory maxima. These are the solutions which are mostly concentrated around small connection or curvature values. This might be connected to the recent findings of a dynamically reached low spin phase in a similar GFT condensate cosmology model \cite{GFClowspin}. In this light, it is striking that the computation of the expectation values of the volume, area and the field strength operators all display the dominance of low $j$-modes. This can be seen to be in favor of the condensate picture where the field quanta tend to condense into the same simple quantum geometric state. Below we explore the case of interacting models which is pivotal for the geometric interpretation of the solutions and the extraction of phenomenology.
We want to make a final remark about restricting our attention solely to the those solutions obeying the near flatness condition. Of course one could consider more general solutions to Eq. (\ref{masterequation}) which are not necessarily peaked around $p=0$ as in Ref. \cite{GFCExample}. Despite the fact, that such solutions cannot be interpreted in terms of smooth continuous $3$-geometries according to the near flatness condition proposed in Ref. \cite{GFC}, their properties could nevertheless be studied in a similar manner which will be done elsewhere.
\subsection{Static interacting models}\label{subsectioninteractions}
In this subsection we add to the above considered free model two different combinatorially local interaction terms, i.e. pseudopotentials, and analyze their effect on the behavior of the solutions and the expectation values of releavant operators. This enables us to study aspects of the resulting effective quantum geometries.
One might speculate that such simplified interactions between the condensate constituents are only relevant in a continuum and large scale limit, where the true combinatorial nonlocality of the fundamental theory could be effectively hidden. This idea can perhaps be motivated by speculating that while the occurrence of UV fixed points in tensorial GFTs is deeply rooted in their combinatorial nonlocality (cf. \cite{TGFTFRG, TMRG}), the occurrence of IR fixed points, akin to Wilson-Fisher fixed points in the corresponding local QFTs, seems to be unaffected by this feature. Ultimately, rigorous RG arguments will have the decisive word whether combinatorially local interaction terms may be derived from the fundamental theory. In this way, studying the effect of pseudopotentials and trying to extract physics from the solutions can be useful to clarify the map between the microscopic and effective macroscopic dynamics of the theory and is instructive to gain experience for the treatment of the corresponding nonlocal terms which have a clearer discrete geometric interpretation. In this light, we will consider two classes of local interactions, mimicking the so-called tensorial and the above-introduced simplicial interactions.
\subsubsection{General setup of the interacting GFTCC models}\label{subsectioninteractionssetup}
The models on which we built our analysis assume an action of the form
\begin{equation}\label{actionrealfieldgeneral}
S[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}]=\int(dg)^4(dg')^4\bar{\varphi}(g_I)\mathcal{K}(g_I,g'_I)\varphi(g'_I)+\mathcal{V}[\varphi,\bar{\varphi}],
\end{equation}
with the kinetic operator
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{K}=\delta(g'_{I}g^{-1}_{I})\biggl[-\sum_{I=1}^4\Delta_{g_I}+m^2\biggr]
\end{equation}
and the general pseudopotential mimicking so-called tensorial interactions
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{V}_T[\varphi]=\sum_{n\geq 2}\frac{\kappa_{n}}{n}\int (dg)^4(|\varphi(g_I)|^2)^n
\end{equation}
which is even powered in the modulus of the field. One obtains for the equation of motion of the mean field
\begin{equation}
\biggl[-\sum_{I=1}^4\Delta_{g_I}+m^2\biggr]\sigma(g_I)+\sigma(g_I)\sum_{n=2}\kappa_{n}(|\sigma(g_I)|^2)^{n-1}=0.
\end{equation}
Observe that the combinatorial locality implies that we do not make use of any nontrivial pairing pattern for the fields and when applying the same symmetry assumptions as above one has $\sigma(g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4)=\sigma(g,g,g,g)=\sigma(p)$. Considering only one summand for the interaction, we yield
\begin{multline}
-[2p(1-p)\frac{d^2}{dp^2}+(3-4p)\frac{d}{dp}]\sigma(p)+\mu\sigma(p)~+~\\ \kappa\sigma(p)(|\sigma(p)|^2)^{n-1}=0,
\end{multline}
with $n=2,~3,~4,...$.
In the following, we focus on the case of real-valued GFT fields and set $n=2$, for which the equation of motion reads
\begin{equation}\label{odesigma4}
-[2p(1-p)\frac{d^2}{dp^2}+(3-4p)\frac{d}{dp}]\sigma(p)+\mu\sigma(p)+\kappa\sigma(p)^{3}=0,
\end{equation}
with the effective potential
\begin{equation}\label{phi4potential}
V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{4}\sigma^4.
\end{equation}
The signs of the coupling constants determine the structure of the ground state of the theory. For appropriately chosen signs of $\mu$ and $\kappa$ the potential, and thus the spectrum of the theory, is bounded from below. However, only for $\mu<0$ and $\kappa>0$ one can have a nontrivial (nonperturbative) vacuum with
\begin{equation}
\langle \sigma\rangle \neq 0,
\end{equation}
which is needed to be in agreement with the condensate state ansatz. The two distinct minima of the potential are located at $\langle\sigma_0\rangle=\pm\sqrt{-\mu/\kappa}$ where the potential has strength $V_0=-\mu^2/4\kappa$, which is lower than the value for the excited configuration $\sigma=0$. The system would thus settle into one of the minima as its equilibrium configuration and could be used to describe a condensate.\footnote{A sign change of the driving parameter $\mu$ from positive to negative values induces a spontaneous symmetry breaking of the global $\mathbb{Z}_2$-symmetry of the action specified in Eq. (\ref{actionrealfieldgeneral}). This symmetry would have guaranteed the conservation of oddness or evenness of the number of GFT quanta as it corresponds to the conserved discrete quantity $(-1)^N$. For complex-valued GFT fields the analoguous situation would correspond to the spontaneous breaking of the global $\mathrm{U}(1)$-symmetry of the action which would have guaranteed the conservation of the particle number $N$.} This potential is illustrated in Fig. \ref{reellesfeldfi4} and contrasted to the case where $\mu>0$ for which the potential is a convex function of $\sigma$ with minimum at $\langle \sigma\rangle=0$. The latter setting cannot be used to describe a condensate with $N\neq 0$. For other choices of signs, the equilibrium configuration $\langle\sigma\rangle=0$ is unstable or metastable and should be dismissed. The upshot of this discussion is that if the effective action is to represent a stable system and a condensate of GFT quanta, one must choose the signs of the coupling constants accordingly.\footnote{For real BECs, $\kappa<0$ gives an attractive interaction and only a large enough kinetic term can prevent the condensate from collapsing. In the opposite case where $\kappa>0$, the interaction is repulsive and if it dominates over the kinetic term the condensate is well described in terms of the so-called Thomas-Fermi approximation \cite{BECs}.}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{reellesfeldfi4.pdf}
\caption{Plot of the effective potential $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{4}\sigma^4$.}
\label{reellesfeldfi4}
\end{figure}
Similarly, when considering the local pseudopotential mimicking the above-introduced simplicial interaction for real-valued GFT fields
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{V}_S[\varphi]=\frac{\kappa}{5}\int (dg)^4\varphi(g_I)^{5},
\end{equation}
one has
\begin{equation}\label{odesigma5}
-[2p(1-p)\frac{d^2}{dp^2}+(3-4p)\frac{d}{dp}]\sigma(p)+\mu\sigma(p)+\kappa\sigma(p)^{4}=0.
\end{equation}
For such a model the effective potential reads
\begin{equation}\label{phi5potential}
V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{5}\sigma^5.
\end{equation}
We will ignore here that this potential is unbounded from below to one side.\footnote{Notice that when using four arguments in the group field $\varphi$, higher simplicial interaction terms known to be e.g. of power $16$ or $500$ would lead in the local point of view, adopted here, to bounded effective potentials $V_{eff}$ like (\ref{phi4potential}) and the discussion of their effects would be rather analogous.} Only for $(\mu<0,\kappa>0)$ or $(\mu<0,\kappa<0)$ one can have a nontrivial (nonperturbative) vacuum in agreement with the condensate state ansatz and the discussion of the choice of signs is similar to the firstly considered potential. Classically, the corresponding minima of the potential are then located at $\sigma_0=\pm\sqrt[3]{\mp\mu/\kappa}$ where the potential has strength $V_0=(\mp\mu/\kappa)^{2/3}(3\mu/10)$. This is illustrated in Fig. \ref{reellesfeldfi5} for one case and contrasted to the situation where $\mu>0$ which would lead to $\langle \sigma\rangle=0$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{reellesfeldfi5.pdf}
\caption{Plot of the effective potential $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{5}\sigma^5$.}
\label{reellesfeldfi5}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Perturbation of the free case}\label{subsectioninteractionsperturbation}
In a first step, we consider the interaction term as a perturbation of the free case discussed in subsection \ref{subsectionfree} using the same boundary conditions $\sigma(1)=0$ and different $\sigma'(1)$ to solve numerically the nonlinear differential equations (\ref{odesigma4}) and (\ref{odesigma5}), respectively. By following closely the procedure adopted in the free case, we compute the effect of perturbations onto the probability densities and the spectra of geometric operators. In this way we obtain a clear qualitative picture of the effect of interactions by comparing the results to the ones obtained for the free case.
In the following, we discuss the behavior of solutions for the pseudotensorial potential (\ref{phi4potential}) with $\mu<0$ and $\kappa>0$ and where the qualitative results differ also for the pseudosimplicial potential (\ref{phi5potential}) with $\mu<0$ and $\kappa>0$ (or $\kappa<0$) so that the potentials would possess nontrivial minima. The effect of weak nonlinearities in the equation of motion onto the solutions is illustrated respectively in Fig. \ref{probdensityinteractingpsi} and Fig. \ref{probdensityinteractingpvergleich} in the $p$- and $\psi$-parametrizations and is contrasted to the behavior of the free solutions of subsection \ref{subsectionfree}. In general, the finiteness of the free solutions at the origin is lost due to the interactions. Crucially, the concentration of the probability densities around the origin can still be maintained giving rise to nearly flat solutions, as long as $|\kappa|$ does not become too big. For larger $j$, i.e. larger $|\mu|$, one sees that the departure from the free solutions is less pronounced because the $\mu$-term of the potential dominates longer over the $\kappa$-term.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{probabilitydensityinteractingpsi1.pdf}
\caption{Probability density of the interacting mean field over $\psi$ for $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{4}\sigma^4$.}
\label{probdensityinteractingpsi}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{probabilitydensityinteracting3.pdf}
\caption{Probability density of the interacting mean field over $p$ for $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{4}\sigma^4$.}
\label{probdensityinteractingpvergleich}
\end{figure}
When $|\kappa|$ and $|\sigma'(1)|$ are small, solutions will remain normalizable with respect to the Fock space measure, i.e.
\begin{equation}
N=\int (dg)^3 |\sigma(g_1,g_2,g_3)|^2<\infty.
\end{equation}
However, when gearing up toward the strongly nonlinear regime, i.e. $\kappa\gtrsim\mathcal{O}(1)$, this feature is lost as $N$ grows and eventually one finds $N\to\infty$.\footnote{It should be noted that the precise values of $\kappa$ and/or $\sigma'(1)$ for which $N\to\infty$ depend on the numerical accuracy of the used solver. In this sense the observation of such behavior is a qualitative result.} The loss of normalizability of $\sigma$ with respect to the Fock space measure in the strongly nonlinear regime goes in hand with the breaking of the rescaling invariance expressed by Eq. (\ref{rescalinginvariance}) and signals the breakdown of the ansatz used here. Such behavior is not surprising, as it is well known within the context of local QFTs that the proper treatment of interactions necessitates the use of non-Fock representations for which $N$ is infinite (cf. appendix \ref{AppendixB} and \cite{FocknonFock}). We will get back to this point below.
With regard to the average of the field strength, one observes that $\kappa>0$ increases $\langle \hat{F}^i\rangle/N$ for some $j$ in comparison to the free case, whereas for negative $\kappa$ the expectation value decreases. This behavior is reminiscent of the effect of similar interactions onto the effective curvature of the space described by the condensate in Ref. \cite{GFCEmergentFriedmann3}, where it was shown that a bounded interaction potential generically leads to recollapsing condensate solutions.
By means of the numerically computed solutions, one can obtain their corresponding Fourier components and with these one yields in close analogy to the free case the modified spectra of the volume and area operators, illustrated in Fig. \ref{spectrumvolumeperturbed} and Fig. \ref{spectrumareaperturbed}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{spectrumvolumeperturbed.pdf}
\caption{Normalized spectrum of the volume operator with respect to the interacting mean field $\sigma_j(\psi)$ for $\kappa=0.22$ (triangles) compared to the respective free solutions (dots).}
\label{spectrumvolumeperturbed}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{spectrumareaperturbed.pdf}
\caption{
Normalized spectrum of the area operator with respect to the interacting mean field $\sigma_j(\psi)$ for $\kappa=0.22$ (triangles) compared to the respective free solutions (dots).}
\label{spectrumareaperturbed}
\end{figure}
The plots clearly indicate that perturbations for $\kappa>0$ increase both the volume and the area, however, in the weakly nonlinear regime they remain finite. More specifically, one observes that the effect of the perturbations upon the spectra of the volume and area are more pronounced for small $j$, i.e. small $|\mu|$, since for these the nonlinearity dominates quickly over the $\mu$-term of the potential. Moreover, one notices that when pushing $\kappa$ to larger values as a consequence $V$ and $A$ quickly blow up in the same way as $N$ does, whereas $\langle \hat{F}^i\rangle/N$ remains finite.
For the pseudosimplicial potential one obtains qualitatively analogous results with the differences to the free solutions being more emphasized since the nonlinearity is stronger.
\subsubsection{Solutions around the nontrivial minima}\label{subsectioninteractionslocalminima}
To chart the condensate phase and understand its properties, it is necessary to study numerically the solutions to the nonlinear differential equation (\ref{odesigma4}) around the nontrivial minima. To this aim, we choose for the coupling constants in Eq. (\ref{phi4potential}) in such a manner that the potential forms a Mexican hat, as in Fig. \ref{reellesfeldfi4}, and select the position of the minimum $\sigma_0$ as well as $\sigma'(1)$ as the boundary condition in order to find solutions numerically.
Without any loss of generality, we will use the same values for $\mu$ as in the previous subsections. Apart from the requirement that they assume negative values they could be completely arbitrary since here we do not study eigensolutions to the Dirichlet Laplacian as in subsection \ref{subsectionfree}.
Figure \ref{mexicanhatminimumsolutions} and Fig. \ref{mexicanhatminimumsolutionsloglog} show the resulting probability density and the potential over $p$ and $\psi$ computed for an exemplary choice for the values of the free parameters. Depending on the sign of $\sigma'(1)$ or $\sigma'(\pi/2)$ the solution either climbs over the local maximum at $\sigma=0$, then reaches the other minimum after which it ascends the left branch of the potential or directly climbs up the right branch shown in Fig. \ref{reellesfeldfi4}. For the choice of parameters leading to Fig. \ref{mexicanhatminimumsolutions} and \ref{mexicanhatminimumsolutionsloglog}, the solutions are normalizable. In general, for small $\sigma'(1)$ the solutions crawl slowly out of the minima and if $\sigma'(1)$ is almost zero, the solutions remain almost constant up to $p=0$, where the regular singularity of the differential equation finally kicks in. The contribution of the Laplacian term is less pronounced for smaller $\mu$ than for larger ones, as Fig. \ref{mexicanhatminimumsolutionsloglog} in the $\psi$-parametrization illustrates. Similar results are obtained when one keeps $\mu$ fixed while decreasing $|\sigma'(\pi/2)|$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\hspace*{-0.85cm}\includegraphics[width=0.59\textwidth,height=3.5in]{solutionmexhatstartminimum.pdf}
\caption{Semilog plot of the probability density and potential for solutions $\sigma(p)$ with $\mu=-1.5$, $\kappa=0.01$, $\sigma(1)=12.2474$ and $\sigma'(1)=\pm 100$ for the potential $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{4}\sigma^4$. Solutions were computed by means of MATLAB's ODE45 solver which is based on an explicit Runge-Kutta $(4,5)$ formula. Output was generated for $10^5$ points on the interval $[0,1]$ while making use of highly stringent error tolerances.}
\label{mexicanhatminimumsolutions}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{solutionmexhatstartminimumloglog.pdf}
\caption{Double-log plot of the probability density for solutions $\sigma(\psi)$ for different $\mu$, with the same $\kappa=0.01$, and the same $|\sigma'(\pi/2)|$ at the respective minima $\sigma(\pi/2)$ for the potential $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{4}\sigma^4$.}
\label{mexicanhatminimumsolutionsloglog}
\end{figure}
It is clear that as long as for the boundary condition $\sigma'\approx 0$ holds, this is equivalent to neglecting the Laplacian part of the kinetic term $\mathcal{K}$ in the equation of motion. The solutions, exemplified by Figs. \ref{mexicanhatminimumsolutions} and \ref{mexicanhatminimumsolutionsloglog}, show that the properties of the nontrivial ground state are then defined by the ultralocal action. Solving the equation of motion starting at the minima of the effective potentials gives rise to almost constant, i.e. homogeneous, functions on the domain.\footnote{Completely neglecting the Laplacian from the onset, is only justified when the interaction is dominant which corresponds to
the regime of large ground state condensate "density", i.e. $\kappa N \gg 1$. In the context of real BECs this is known as the Thomas-Fermi approximation \cite{BECs}.}
The geometric interpretation of such solutions which "sit" in the equilibrium position is slightly obstructed. This is due to the fact that the above-used near flatness condition cannot be straightforwardly applied to such solutions. Despite the fact that the probability density can be tuned to be concentrated around low curvature values, it is finite close to the equator at $p=1$, while in other cases it simply remains constant on the whole interval, as Fig. \ref{mexicanhatminimumsolutions} and Fig. \ref{mexicanhatminimumsolutionsloglog} show. This calls for a more differentiated formulation of this condition, perhaps by means of a well defined GFT-operator capturing the average curvature of the $3$-space described by means of the condensate state.
In spite of the current lack of such an operator to determine the curvature information stored in the mean field, it is possible to obtain from exemplary numerical solutions the spectrum of the volume and area operators as illustrated in Figs. \ref{spectrumvolumeperturbednontrivialminimum}, \ref{spectrumvolumeperturbednontrivialminimum2} and \ref{spectrumareaperturbednontrivialminimum}. Solutions which are computed around the nontrivial minima give rise to a different qualitative form of the spectrum of the volume and area as compared to the ones obtained in subsections \ref{subsectionfree} and \ref{subsectioninteractionsperturbation}; nevertheless we emphasize again the relevance of low spin modes. In general, for different $\mu$ the dominant contribution to the volume $V$ and area $A$ comes from the Fourier coefficients with $m=1/2$, whereas in the case discussed in the previous subsections the predominant contribution comes from the Fourier coefficients with $m=j$. This is due to the fact that $\sigma$ remains mostly constant and is thus best approximated by the simplest nontrivial mode for $m=1/2$. In particular, one can check that the contributions to $V$ and $A$ coming from the other modes, are exponentially suppressed when $\sigma'(1)\approx 0$.
Moreover, the volume and area remain finite in the weakly nonlinear case and when the boundary condition $\sigma'(1)$ is relatively small. The use of weak interactions is thus instructive in order to understand the qualitative behavior of the solutions in particular with regard to the expectation values of the geometric operators. Since the size of $\kappa$ has only a quantitative impact on the spectrum, as Fig. \ref{spectrumvolumeperturbednontrivialminimum2} suggests, an analogous form of the spectra can be expected also in the strongly nonlinear regime. Furthermore, for bigger values of $|\sigma'(1)|$ and/or strongly nonlinear interaction terms, the volume and area, as well as the expectation value of the number operator $\hat{N}$ blow up quickly. As noticed above, this signals the breakdown of the simple condensate state ansatz used here and suggests the need for non-Fock coherent states once the strongly correlated regime is explored (cf. appendix \ref{AppendixC}).\footnote{Figure \ref{spectrumvolumeperturbednontrivialminimum2} also seems to suggest that $V$ is ever increasing for $\kappa\to 0$. However, in such a limit, it is more appropriate to treat the system as in the free case, which we discussed in subsection \ref{subsectionfree}.}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{spectrumvolumepertntmin.pdf}
\caption{Normalized discrete spectrum of the volume operator (in arbitrary units) with respect to the interacting mean field $\sigma_{\mu}(\psi)$: Solutions $\sigma_{\mu}(\psi)$ were obtained with $\kappa=0.01$ but boundary conditions differ for each $\mu$ to solve around a nontrivial minimum of the respective potential $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{4}\sigma^4$.}
\label{spectrumvolumeperturbednontrivialminimum}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{spectrumvolumepertntmin2.pdf}
\caption{Normalized discrete spectrum of the volume operator (in arbitrary units) with respect to the interacting mean field $\sigma_{\mu}(\psi)$: Solutions $\sigma_{\mu}(\psi)$ were obtained for $\mu=-1.5$, different $\kappa$ and the same boundary conditions $\sigma'(\frac{\pi}{2})$ to solve around the respective nontrivial minima of the potential $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{4}\sigma^4$.}
\label{spectrumvolumeperturbednontrivialminimum2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{spectrumareapertntmin.pdf}
\caption{Normalized discrete spectrum of the area operator (in arbitrary units) with respect to the interacting mean field $\sigma_{\mu}(\psi)$: Solutions $\sigma_{\mu}(\psi)$ were obtained with $\kappa=0.01$ but boundary conditions differ for each $\mu$ to solve around a nontrivial minimum of the respective potential $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{4}\sigma^4$.}
\label{spectrumareaperturbednontrivialminimum}
\end{figure}
Such solutions yield for all choices of $\mu<0$ and $\kappa>0$ for the averaged observables
\begin{equation}
\frac{\langle\hat{\mathcal{O}}\rangle}{N}\approx \textit{const.},
\end{equation}
since $\sigma$ is approximately constant. This naturally applies to the averaged field strength $\frac{\langle{\hat{F}^i\rangle}}{N}$ which is larger than in the corresponding free case. This indicates that the chosen effective GFT interactions have the effect of positively curving the effective geometry described by the condensate state. This is again reminiscent of similar findings in Ref. \cite{GFCEmergentFriedmann3} where it was shown that relationally evolving and effectively interacting GFTCC models display recollapsing solutions when the interaction potential is bounded from below as here.
Analogously, such a discussion can be repeated for the pseudosimplicial potential, where the solutions to the nonlinear equation of motion are illustrated in Fig. \ref{pseudosimplicialminimumsolutions}. The resulting behavior of the relevant operators is similar and will not be repeated here, though it should be kept in mind that only such interaction terms can be more closely related to models with a simplicial quantum gravity interpretation.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\hspace*{-0.85cm}\includegraphics[width=0.59\textwidth,height=3.5in]{solutionpseudosimplicialstartminimum.pdf}
\caption{Semilog plot of the probability density and potential for solutions $\sigma(p)$ with $\mu=-1.5$, $\kappa=0.01$, $\sigma(1)=5.3132$ and $\sigma'(1)=\pm 100$ for the potential $V_{eff}[\sigma]=\frac{\mu}{2}\sigma^2+\frac{\kappa}{5}\sigma^5$. Solutions were computed by means of MATLAB's ODE113 procedure which is a variable order 'Adams-Bashforth-Moulton predictor-corrector' solver. Output was generated for $10^5$ points on the interval $[0,1]$ while making use of highly stringent error tolerances.}
\label{pseudosimplicialminimumsolutions}
\end{figure}
To summarize the main points of this subsection, we note that we have computed static condensate solutions around the nontrivial minima of the interaction potentials of which the essential features can be defined by means of the ultralocal action. We found that the condensate consists of many GFT quanta residing in the low spin mode $m=1/2$. This is indicated by the analysis of the discrete spectra of the geometric operators. Such low spins actually correspond to the IR regime of the theory. Hence, these results fit well into the picture suggested by the above- mentioned FRG analyses which find IR fixed points in all GFT models considered so far marking the formation of a condensate phase of which main features are supposed to be captured by means of the employed condensate state. In this sense, one can understand the condensate phase as to describe an effectively continuous homogeneous and isotropic $3$-space built from many small building blocks of the quantum geometry.
\section{Discussion and conclusion}\label{Discussion}
The purpose of this article was to investigate and interpret the impact of simplified interactions onto static GFT quantum gravity condensate systems describing effective $3$-geometries with a tentative cosmological interpretation. To this aim, we extensively examined the geometric properties of a free system in an isotropic restriction by studying the spectra of the volume and area operators imported from LQG and comparing the results to the perturbed case. In a last step, we studied the features of the GFT condensate when the system sits in the nontrivial minima of the effective interaction potentials. The main result of this study is then that the condensate consists of many discrete building blocks predominantly of the smallest nontrivial size encoded by the quantum number $m=1/2$ -- which supports the idea that an effectively continuous geometry can emerge from the collective behavior of a discrete pregeometric GFT substratum \cite{GFTGeometrogenesis}. In this sense, our results also strengthen the connection with LQC where the typically used quantum states are constructed from the assumption that the quanta of the geometry all reside in the same lowest nontrivial configuration \cite{LQC}. Together with the recently obtained results which show how free GFT condensate models dynamically reach a low spin phase \cite{GFClowspin}, this lends strong support to the idea that condensate states are appropriate for studying the cosmological sector of LQG.
The results of this article can also be seen as a support of the idea proposed in Ref. \cite{Carrozza}: The Laplacian in the kinetic operator $\mathcal{K}$, originally motivated by field theoretic arguments to guarantee the consistent implementation of a renormalization scheme, might only be a property of the UV completed GFT without a significant physical effect in the effectively continuous region which is expected to correspond to the small spin (IR) regime together with many building blocks of the quantum geometry. In this regime, the kinetic term is then suggested to become ultralocal, thus allowing for a straightforward interpretation of the GFT amplitudes in terms of spin foam amplitudes for quantum gravity. The numerical analysis done here indeed suggests that from the ultralocal action alone one can find that the condensate consists of many GFT quanta residing in the low spin configuration.
In the following we want to comment on the limitations of our discussion. We implicitly assumed that the condensate ansatz is trustworthy for any $\mu\leq 0$, where $\mu=0$ marks the critical value at which the phase transition from the unbroken into the condensate phase is supposed to take place \cite{TGFTFRG,GFTRGReview}. With respect to these findings, our analysis should be complemented by investigating whether indications for a phase transition into a condensate phase can be observed with the mean field techniques employed here, e.g., by means of the analyticity properties of the partition function, and whether their possible absence might be related to the expectation that true phase transitions are only realized for GFTs on noncompact manifolds, like Lorentzian quantum gravity models, as noticed in Ref. \cite{TGFTFRG}.
In this light, it is worth noting that in the context of weakly interacting, diluted and ultracold nonrelativistic BECs \cite{BECs} it is well understood that Bogoliubov's mean field and perturbation theory \cite{BogoliubovAnsatz} becomes invalid and breaks down in the vicinity of the critical point of the phase transition because quantum fluctuations become important. Of course, as is generally known today, mean field approaches work only accurately as effective descriptions of thermodynamic phases well away from critical points. A satisfactory description for such systems which systematically extends Bogoliubov theory and cures its infrared problems has been given in terms of FRG techniques \cite{WetterichFRGBEC}. The example of real BECs suggests that the analog of the Bogoliubov ansatz for quantum gravity condensates should be similarly extended by means of FRG methods at the critical point. This could be relevant for better understanding the nature of the phase transition which is possibly related to the "geometrogenesis" scenario.
It is also well understood that Bogoliubov theory for real BECs breaks down, when considering condensates with rather strongly interacting constituents. Likewise, FRG techniques can systematically implement nonperturbative extensions to Bogoliubov's approximation. These suggest that for Bose condensates with approximately pointlike interactions like in superfluid ${}^4\textrm{He}$, it is only possible to realize a strongly interacting regime for a very dense condensate \cite{WetterichFRGBEC}. This example could indicate a similar failure of the quantum gravity condensate ansatz when considering the strongly interacting regime. Indeed, when increasing the coupling constant $\kappa$ in this sector, the average particle number $N$ grows. If $\kappa$ is too large, we find that solutions are generally not normalizable with respect to the Fock space measure. The regime of large number of quanta $N$ and the eventual failure of $|\sigma\rangle$ to be normalizable in this sector certainly mark the breakdown of the Gross-Pitaevskii approximation to the dynamics (\ref{GPGFC}) for the simple condensate state constructed with Bogoliubov's ansatz (\ref{BogoliubovAnsatz}). In this regime, quantum fluctuations and correlations among the condensate quanta become relevant and only solutions to the full quantum dynamics together with FRG techniques would be capable of capturing adequately their impact. This entails that the approximation used here should only be trusted in a mesoscopic regime where $N$ is not too large, as already noticed in Ref. \cite{GFCEmergentFriedmann}. Nevertheless, the finding of solutions corresponding to non-Fock representations gives a forecast on what should be found when considering nonperturbative extensions of the techniques used here.
In fact, the loss of normalizability is not too surprising because it is a generic feature of massless or interacting (local) QFTs according to Haag's theorem which require the use of non-Fock representations \cite{FocknonFock}. However, finding such solutions is first of all intriguing as a matter of consistency because non-Fock representations are also required in order to describe many particle systems in the thermodynamic limit. It is only in this limit that inequivalent irreducible representations of the CCRs become available which is a prerequisite for the occurrence of nonunique equilibrium states, in turn essential to consistently describing phase transitions \cite{FocknonFock}. It is also interesting for a second reason, since in the context of quantum optics it was understood that such non-Fock coherent states with an infinite number of (soft) photons can be described in terms of a classical radiation field \cite{nonFockCS}. Hence, the occurrence of non-Fock coherent state solutions in our context might also play a role in the classicalization of the system and could be important to consistently capture continuum macroscopic information of the GFT system. This would intuitively make sense, because one would expect to look for the physics of continuum spacetimes in the regime far from the perturbative Fock vacuum corresponding to the no-space state.
To fully extract the geometric information encoded by such solutions, it would then also be necessary to go beyond the use of the simplified local interactions and explore the effect of the proper combinatorially nonlocal interactions encountered in the GFT literature (e.g. on the expectation values of the geometric operators) in order to compare it to the results obtained here. Additionally, it is worth mentioning that only for proper simplicial interaction terms the quantum geometric interpretation is rather straightforward while for the others a full geometric interpretation is currently lacking.
In a next step, the time evolution of the condensate with respect to a relational clock could be studied. This would be in the spirit of \cite{GFCEmergentFriedmann}, where for an isotropic and free condensate configuration a Friedmann-like evolution was found. It would allow for the comparison between the two settings and the extraction of further phenomenological consequences from our model.
Another, perhaps more consistent way to properly relate the quantum geometric information stored in the condensate to a classical counterpart, could be to reconstruct the metric from the mean field as reviewed in appendix \ref{AppendixA} and investigate its isometries. Should the condensate approximate a continuous homogeneous geometry, one would expect that diffeomorphism invariance be restored as highlighted in a related context in Ref. \cite{Dittrich}. This could be helpful when comparing the isotropic restriction employed in Ref. \cite{GFCEmergentFriedmann} to the one used here and also when anisotropic condensates are studied.
Finally, we remarked in our analysis that the notion of near flatness used in the previous subsections should be reconsidered for the condensate solutions around the nontrivial minima since it cannot be straightforwardly applied then. Statements regarding the flatness property of such solutions can only be satisfactorily made if the spectrum of the currently unavailable GFT curvature operator is studied. Such possible extensions will be explored elsewhere.
{\bf Acknowledgements.} AP is grateful to L. Sindoni, S. Gielen, D. Oriti, J. Th\"urigen, S. Carrozza, M. De Cesare and M. Schwoerer for helpful remarks.
\begin{appendix}
\section{Noncommutative Fourier transform and reconstruction of the metric}\label{AppendixA}
The following discussion reviews how GFT states can be understood to encode quantum geometric information dressing $3d$ simplicial complexes and thus express how spatial slices can be triangulated. For a detailed discussion we refer to Refs. \cite{GFC,GFCReview}.
As is well known, in the Hamiltonian formulation of Ashtekar-Barbero gravity, where $G=\textrm{SU}(2)$, the canonically conjugate variable to the gravitational connection is given by the densitized inverse triad. From these momentum space variables the spatial metric can be derived, making the geometric interpretation perhaps more transparent. Motivated by this, we want to reformulate the GFT formalism in terms of these variables by means of a noncommutative Fourier transform (ncFT) which allows us to shift in between configuration and momentum space \cite{NCFT}.
To this aim, let $G^d$ with $d=4$ be the configuration space of the GFT field, then the phase space is given by the cotangent bundle $T^{*}G^4\cong G^4\times\mathfrak{g}^4$. The ncFT of a square integrable GFT field is then given by
\begin{equation}\label{ncFT}
\hat{\tilde{\varphi}}(B_I)=\int (dg)^4\prod_{I=1}^4 e_{g_{I}}(B_I)\hat{\varphi}(g_I),
\end{equation}
wherein the fluxes $B_I$ with $I=1,...,4$ parametrize the noncommutative momentum space $\mathfrak{g}^4$ and $e_{g_{I}}(B_I)$ is a choice of plane waves on $G^4$. Their product is noncommutative, i.e., $e_{g}(B)\star e_{g'}(B)=e_{gg'}(B)$, signified by the star product. By means of the noncommutative Dirac delta distribution in the momentum space representation
\begin{equation}
\delta_{\star}(B)=\int dg~ e_{g}(B),
\end{equation}
it can be shown that the invariance of the GFT fields under the right diagonal action of $G$ yields a closure condition for the fluxes, i.e., $\sum_I B_I=0$. It guarantees the closure of $I$ faces dual to the links $e_I$ to form a tetrahedron. It also allows us to eliminate one of the $B_I$s when reexpressing the fluxes in terms of discrete triads. This is done by $B_i^{ab}=\int_{\triangle_i}e^a \wedge e^b$ with the cotriad field $e^a\in\mathbb{R}^3$ encoding the simplicial geometry and $i=1,2,3$ associated to the faces $\triangle_i$ of the tetrahedron. From this, the metric at a given fixed point in the tetrahedron can be reconstructed leading to
\begin{equation}\label{reconstructedmetric}
g_{ij}=e^a_i e^b_j\delta_{ab}=\frac{1}{4 \mathrm{tr}(B_1 B_2 B_3)}\epsilon_i^{kl}\epsilon_{j}^{mn}\tilde{B}_{km}\tilde{B}_{ln},
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{B}_{ij}\equiv \mathrm{tr}(B_iB_j)$ \cite{GFC}. In this way, $\hat{\tilde{{\varphi}}}^{\dagger}(B_i)|\emptyset\rangle=|B_i\rangle$ determines the metric of a quantum tetrahedron. Notice that for the condensate mean field $\sigma(g_I)$ the ncFT can be straightforwardly computed by means of (\ref{ncFT}) and the reconstruction of the metric (\ref{reconstructedmetric}) holds then for all constituents of the condensate.
\section{Fock and non-Fock representations}\label{AppendixB}
Following Ref. \cite{GFTLQG}, for the Fock representation of GFT one defines a set of fundamental operators $\hat{c}_i$ and $\hat{c}^{\dagger}_i$, with the algebraic relations
\begin{equation}\nonumber
[\hat{c}_i,\hat{c}^{\dagger}_{i'}]=\delta_{ii'}~~\textrm{and}~~[\hat{c}^{(\dagger)}_i,\hat{c}^{(\dagger)}_{i'}]=0
\end{equation}
satisfying
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\hat{c}_i |N_i\rangle=\sqrt{N_i} |N_i-1\rangle~~\textrm{and}~~\hat{c}^{\dagger}_i |N_i\rangle=\sqrt{N_i+1} |N_i+1\rangle.
\end{equation}
The operators $\hat{c}_i$ and $\hat{c}_i^{\dagger}$ annihilate and create single spin network vertices acting on the Fock vacuum state given by
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\hat{c}_i|\emptyset\rangle=0,~~\forall i,
\end{equation}
with the single-vertex label $i$ characterizing the quantum geometric properties of the state. The occupation number operators are then expressed by
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\hat{N}_i|N_i\rangle=\hat{c}_i^{\dagger}\hat{c}_i|N_i\rangle=N_i|N_i\rangle
\end{equation}
with the total number operator $\hat{N}=\sum_i \hat{N}_i$.
Within the context of local QFT \cite{FocknonFock} it is well known, that in the finite dimensional and noninteracting infinite dimensional cases all irreducible Fock representations are unitarily equivalent and hence there is just one phase associated to the quantum system. However, this is different for interacting fields, models with nonvanishing ground state expectation value and many body systems in the thermodynamic limit, where the Fock representation is not allowed and $N$ is not a good quantum number for the characterization of the system since $\hat{N}$ is unbounded from above. In these situations the systems are described by means of non-Fock representations corresponding to inequivalent representations of the commutation relations and thus allow for the occurrence of different phases associated to the considered quantum system. Though these statements currently lack an axiomatic underpinning from within the GFT context, we believe that their basic intuition also holds there.
\section{Non-Fock coherent states}\label{AppendixC}
In the following we clarify the notion of a non-Fock coherent state following largely the established literature on optical coherence in Refs. \cite{FocknonFock,nonFockCS} and try to link it to the GFT formalism. To this aim, we introduce some axiomatic terminology.
From an algebraic point of view, it is known that a quantum system is defined by its algebra of observables $\mathcal{A}$ being a unital $C^{*}$-algebra. A state is a linear functional $\omega:\mathcal{A}\to \mathbb{C}$ which is positive (i.e. $\omega(a^{\dagger}a)\geq 0~\forall a\in\mathcal{A}$) and normalized (i.e. $\omega(\mathbb{1})=1$) with $\omega(A)=\langle A\rangle$. Without proof let us assume that for each such $\omega$ there is a GNS triple (determined up to unitary transformations), $(\mathcal{F}_{\omega},\pi_{\omega},\psi_{\omega})$, where $\mathcal{F}_{\omega}$ is the bosonic Fock space, $\pi_{\omega}$ is a unit-preserving representation of $\mathcal{A}$ in terms of linear operators over $\mathcal{F}_{\omega}$ and $\psi_{\omega}\in\mathcal{F}_{\omega}$ is cyclic, that means $\pi_{\omega}(\mathcal{A})\psi_{\omega}$ is dense in $\mathcal{F}_{\omega}$. Using the scalar product in $\mathcal{F}_{\omega}$, $\langle \psi_{\omega}|\pi_{\omega}(a)\psi_{\omega}\rangle=\omega(a)$ holds for all $a\in \mathcal{A}$. Using this language, in relation to appendix \ref{AppendixB} one can write for example $\langle N_i\rangle=\omega(\hat{c}^{\dagger}_i \hat{c}_j)=N_i$.
In the following, let the domain $\mathcal{C}=\mathrm{SU}(2)\backslash \mathrm{SU}(2)^4/\mathrm{SU}(2)$ and $dh$ denotes the measure on $\mathcal{C}$ with $g_I\in\mathcal{C}$. Using the distributional character of the field operators, we smear the creation and annihilation operators with the real functions $f_i\in C_0^{\infty}(\mathcal{C})$ which form an orthonormal set $\{f_i\}$, giving e.g. $\hat{c}(f_i)=\hat{\psi}(f_i)=\int_{\mathcal{C}} dh~\hat{\psi}(g_I)f_i(g_I)$.
Using the above, a state $\omega$ is called (fully) coherent if it possesses a factorization property of the correlation functions in the sense that with a linear form, the coherence function, $L:C_0^{\infty}(\mathcal{C})\to\mathbb{C}$ one has
\begin{multline}\nonumber
\omega(\hat{c}^{\dagger}(f_1)\cdots\hat{c}^{\dagger}(f_k)\hat{c}(g_1)\cdots\hat{c}(g_k))=~\\L(f_1)\cdots L(f_k)\bar{L}(g_1)\cdots\bar{L}(g_l)
\end{multline}
for all $k,~l\in\mathbb{N}_0$ with $k=l$ and for all $\{f_k\}$ and $\{g_l\}\in C_0^{\infty}(\mathcal{C})$. In particular, $\omega(\hat{c}^{\dagger}(f_i)\hat{c}(f_i))=|L(f_i)|^2\stackrel{!}{=}N_i$ holds. One calls the coherence function $L$ bounded, if there exists a constant $c_L\geq 0$ with $|L(f)|\leq c_L ||f||$. Otherwise $L$ is unbounded. In our context, $f$ is strictly related to the mean field $\sigma$.
With this one can make the following statements. A coherent state $\omega$ is normal to the Fock representation, if and only if $L$ is bounded, that means the state is given by a unique density operator in Fock space. For unbounded $L$ the state $\omega$ is not representable by a density operator in Fock space, i.e., $\omega$ is disjoint from the Fock sector. This implies that the set of all occupation numbers is unbounded.
Suppose now, that $\omega$ is a coherent state in the above sense. For bounded $L$ one calls $\omega$ a Fock coherent or a microscopic coherent state. In contradistinction to that one calls $\omega$ a non-Fock coherent or a macroscopic coherent state if the coherence function $L$ is unbounded. One can show that $L$ exhibits then specific classical features, such as a collective phase and amplitude which means that it acquires the status of a classical field due to the ordering effect of the present phase correlations. Furthermore, one can show that the unboundedness of $L$ leads to a finite particle density in the infinite volume in contrast to a vanishing particle density for bounded $L$ in the same limit \cite{nonFockCS}. Despite the fact, that these statements currently lack a rigorous underpinning from within the GFT context, again, we believe that their intuition could be directly transferred.
\end{appendix}
|
\section{#1}\setcounter{equation}{0}}
\newcommand{\subsectiono}[1]{\subsection{#1}\setcounter{equation}{0}}
\newcommand{\zeta}{\zeta}
\newcommand{\stackrel{>}{\sim}}{\stackrel{>}{\sim}}
\newcommand{\stackrel{<}{\sim}}{\stackrel{<}{\sim}}
\newcommand{\Lambda}{\Lambda}
\def{\hbox{ 1\kern-.8mm l}}{{\hbox{ 1\kern-.8mm l}}}
\def{\hbox{ 0\kern-1.5mm 0}}{{\hbox{ 0\kern-1.5mm 0}}}
\def{\wh a}{{\widehat a}}
\def{\wh b}{{\widehat b}}
\def\check{{\widehat c}}
\def\check{\check}
\def{\wh d}{{\widehat d}}
\newcommand{{\bf i}}{{\bf i}}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}
\newcommand{\bea}[1]{\begin{eqnarray}\label{#1} }
\newcommand{\end{eqnarray}}{\end{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\wt J}{\widetilde J}
\newcommand{{\bf N}}{{\bf N}}
\newcommand{b}{b}
\newcommand{\refb}{\refb}
\newcommand{{\rm u}}{{\rm u}}
\newcommand{{\dot{\alpha}}}{{\dot{\alpha}}}
\newcommand{{\dot{\beta}}}{{\dot{\beta}}}
\newcommand{{\dot{\gamma}}}{{\dot{\gamma}}}
\newcommand{\beta}{\beta}
\newcommand{V}{V}
\newcommand{G}{G}
\newcommand{e}{e}
\newcommand{{\cal P}}{{\cal P}}
\newcommand{\VV_{\rm G}}{{\cal V}_{\rm G}}
\newcommand{\VV^c_{\rm G}}{{\cal V}^c_{\rm G}}
\usepackage{bm}
\usepackage[table]{xcolor}
\def\rpnote#1{{\color{magenta} #1}}
\def\arnote#1{{\color{blue} #1}}
\def\asnote#1{{\color{red} #1}}
\newcommand{\scalar}{{\cal V}_{\rm S}}
\newcommand{\wscalar}{\widetilde{\cal V}_{\rm B}}
\newcommand{\fermion}{{\cal V}_{\rm F}}
\newcommand{\wfermion}{\widetilde{\cal V}_{\rm F}}
\newcommand{\wt\Sigma}{\widetilde\Sigma}
\newcommand{\wt\Sigma^c}{\widetilde\Sigma^c}
\newcommand{(4)}{(4)}
\newcommand{\cL} {\{\hskip -4pt\{}
\newcommand{\cR} {\}\hskip -4pt\}}
\newcommand{\sL} {[\hskip -1.5pt[}
\newcommand{\sR} {]\hskip -1.5pt]}
\newcommand{{\overline{\RR}}}{{\overline{{\cal R}}}}
\def\figeps{
\def0.5{0.8}
\ifx0.5\undefined\def0.5{1}\fi
\unitlength 0.5 mm
\begin{picture}(150,90)(0,0)
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\multiput(70,0)(0,1.98){46}{\line(0,1){0.99}}
\linethickness{0.35mm}
\multiput(10,50.5)(1.98,0){66}{\line(1,0){0.99}}
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\put(40,0){\line(0,1){45}}
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\multiput(40,45)(0.66,0.12){167}{\line(1,0){0.66}}
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\put(150,65){\line(0,1){25}}
\put(50,55){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\bf Q_2$}}
\put(50,50.5){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\times$}}
\put(90,45){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\bf Q_1$}}
\put(90,50.5){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\times$}}
\put(100,65){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\bf Q_4$}}
\put(100,59.5){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\times$}}
\put(120,65){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\bf p^0$}}
\put(120,59.5){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\times$}}
\put(140,55){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\bf Q_3$}}
\put(140,59.5){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$\times$}}
\end{picture}
}
\def\figqft{
\def0.5{0.8}
\ifx0.5\undefined\def0.5{1}\fi
\unitlength 0.5 mm
\begin{picture}(135,80)(0,0)
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\put(100.35,48.61){\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(100.1,52.12)(0.07,-0.5){1}{\line(0,-1){0.5}}
\multiput(100.02,52.62)(0.08,-0.5){1}{\line(0,-1){0.5}}
\multiput(99.92,53.11)(0.1,-0.49){1}{\line(0,-1){0.49}}
\multiput(99.82,53.61)(0.11,-0.49){1}{\line(0,-1){0.49}}
\multiput(99.7,54.09)(0.12,-0.49){1}{\line(0,-1){0.49}}
\multiput(98.93,56.49)(0.18,-0.47){1}{\line(0,-1){0.47}}
\multiput(98.75,56.96)(0.09,-0.23){2}{\line(0,-1){0.23}}
\multiput(98.55,57.42)(0.1,-0.23){2}{\line(0,-1){0.23}}
\multiput(98.34,57.88)(0.1,-0.23){2}{\line(0,-1){0.23}}
\multiput(97.13,60.09)(0.13,-0.21){2}{\line(0,-1){0.21}}
\multiput(96.86,60.51)(0.14,-0.21){2}{\line(0,-1){0.21}}
\multiput(96.58,60.93)(0.14,-0.21){2}{\line(0,-1){0.21}}
\multiput(96.29,61.34)(0.15,-0.21){2}{\line(0,-1){0.21}}
\multiput(94.69,63.28)(0.11,-0.12){3}{\line(0,-1){0.12}}
\multiput(94.34,63.64)(0.12,-0.12){3}{\line(0,-1){0.12}}
\multiput(93.98,64)(0.12,-0.12){3}{\line(0,-1){0.12}}
\multiput(93.62,64.34)(0.12,-0.12){3}{\line(1,0){0.12}}
\multiput(91.68,65.95)(0.13,-0.1){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(91.27,66.24)(0.21,-0.15){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(90.85,66.52)(0.21,-0.14){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(90.43,66.79)(0.21,-0.14){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(88.22,68)(0.23,-0.11){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(87.76,68.21)(0.23,-0.1){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(87.3,68.4)(0.23,-0.1){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(86.83,68.59)(0.23,-0.09){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(84.44,69.36)(0.49,-0.13){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(83.95,69.48)(0.49,-0.12){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(83.45,69.58)(0.49,-0.11){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(82.96,69.68)(0.49,-0.1){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(80.46,69.98)(0.5,-0.04){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(79.96,70)(0.5,-0.02){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(79.46,70.01)(0.5,-0.01){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\put(78.95,70.01){\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(76.44,69.83)(0.5,0.06){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(75.95,69.76)(0.5,0.07){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(75.45,69.68)(0.5,0.08){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(74.95,69.58)(0.49,0.1){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(72.52,68.93)(0.48,0.15){1}{\line(1,0){0.48}}
\multiput(72.05,68.77)(0.48,0.16){1}{\line(1,0){0.48}}
\multiput(71.58,68.59)(0.47,0.18){1}{\line(1,0){0.47}}
\multiput(71.11,68.4)(0.23,0.09){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(68.85,67.31)(0.22,0.12){2}{\line(1,0){0.22}}
\multiput(68.41,67.05)(0.22,0.13){2}{\line(1,0){0.22}}
\multiput(67.98,66.79)(0.21,0.13){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(67.56,66.52)(0.21,0.14){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(65.54,65.01)(0.13,0.11){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(65.16,64.68)(0.13,0.11){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(64.79,64.34)(0.12,0.11){3}{\line(1,0){0.12}}
\multiput(64.43,64)(0.12,0.12){3}{\line(1,0){0.12}}
\multiput(62.74,62.14)(0.11,0.13){3}{\line(0,1){0.13}}
\multiput(62.42,61.74)(0.1,0.13){3}{\line(0,1){0.13}}
\multiput(62.12,61.34)(0.1,0.13){3}{\line(0,1){0.13}}
\multiput(61.83,60.93)(0.15,0.21){2}{\line(0,1){0.21}}
\multiput(60.52,58.78)(0.12,0.22){2}{\line(0,1){0.22}}
\multiput(60.29,58.33)(0.12,0.22){2}{\line(0,1){0.22}}
\multiput(60.07,57.88)(0.11,0.23){2}{\line(0,1){0.23}}
\multiput(59.86,57.42)(0.1,0.23){2}{\line(0,1){0.23}}
\multiput(58.98,55.06)(0.15,0.48){1}{\line(0,1){0.48}}
\multiput(58.84,54.58)(0.14,0.48){1}{\line(0,1){0.48}}
\multiput(58.71,54.09)(0.13,0.49){1}{\line(0,1){0.49}}
\multiput(58.59,53.61)(0.12,0.49){1}{\line(0,1){0.49}}
\multiput(58.17,51.12)(0.06,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.13,50.62)(0.05,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.09,50.12)(0.04,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.07,49.62)(0.02,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.05,49.12)(0.01,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\put(58.05,48.61){\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.05,48.61)(0.01,-0.5){1}{\line(0,-1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.07,48.11)(0.02,-0.5){1}{\line(0,-1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.09,47.61)(0.04,-0.5){1}{\line(0,-1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.13,47.1)(0.05,-0.5){1}{\line(0,-1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.17,46.6)(0.06,-0.5){1}{\line(0,-1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.23,46.1)(0.07,-0.5){1}{\line(0,-1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.31,45.6)(0.08,-0.5){1}{\line(0,-1){0.5}}
\multiput(58.39,45.11)(0.1,-0.49){1}{\line(0,-1){0.49}}
\multiput(58.48,44.61)(0.11,-0.49){1}{\line(0,-1){0.49}}
\multiput(58.59,44.12)(0.12,-0.49){1}{\line(0,-1){0.49}}
\multiput(58.71,43.63)(0.13,-0.49){1}{\line(0,-1){0.49}}
\multiput(58.84,43.15)(0.14,-0.48){1}{\line(0,-1){0.48}}
\multiput(58.98,42.66)(0.15,-0.48){1}{\line(0,-1){0.48}}
\multiput(59.14,42.18)(0.16,-0.48){1}{\line(0,-1){0.48}}
\multiput(59.3,41.71)(0.18,-0.47){1}{\line(0,-1){0.47}}
\multiput(59.48,41.24)(0.09,-0.23){2}{\line(0,-1){0.23}}
\multiput(59.66,40.77)(0.1,-0.23){2}{\line(0,-1){0.23}}
\multiput(59.86,40.31)(0.1,-0.23){2}{\line(0,-1){0.23}}
\multiput(60.07,39.85)(0.11,-0.23){2}{\line(0,-1){0.23}}
\multiput(60.29,39.4)(0.12,-0.22){2}{\line(0,-1){0.22}}
\multiput(60.52,38.95)(0.12,-0.22){2}{\line(0,-1){0.22}}
\multiput(60.76,38.51)(0.13,-0.22){2}{\line(0,-1){0.22}}
\multiput(61.01,38.07)(0.13,-0.21){2}{\line(0,-1){0.21}}
\multiput(61.28,37.64)(0.14,-0.21){2}{\line(0,-1){0.21}}
\multiput(61.55,37.22)(0.14,-0.21){2}{\line(0,-1){0.21}}
\multiput(61.83,36.8)(0.15,-0.21){2}{\line(0,-1){0.21}}
\multiput(62.12,36.39)(0.1,-0.13){3}{\line(0,-1){0.13}}
\multiput(62.42,35.99)(0.1,-0.13){3}{\line(0,-1){0.13}}
\multiput(62.74,35.59)(0.11,-0.13){3}{\line(0,-1){0.13}}
\multiput(63.06,35.2)(0.11,-0.13){3}{\line(0,-1){0.13}}
\multiput(63.39,34.82)(0.11,-0.12){3}{\line(0,-1){0.12}}
\multiput(63.72,34.45)(0.12,-0.12){3}{\line(0,-1){0.12}}
\multiput(64.07,34.09)(0.12,-0.12){3}{\line(0,-1){0.12}}
\multiput(64.43,33.73)(0.12,-0.12){3}{\line(1,0){0.12}}
\multiput(64.79,33.38)(0.12,-0.11){3}{\line(1,0){0.12}}
\multiput(65.16,33.04)(0.13,-0.11){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(65.54,32.71)(0.13,-0.11){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(65.93,32.39)(0.13,-0.1){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(66.33,32.08)(0.13,-0.1){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(66.73,31.78)(0.21,-0.15){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(67.14,31.49)(0.21,-0.14){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(67.56,31.21)(0.21,-0.14){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(67.98,30.94)(0.21,-0.13){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(68.41,30.67)(0.22,-0.13){2}{\line(1,0){0.22}}
\multiput(68.85,30.42)(0.22,-0.12){2}{\line(1,0){0.22}}
\multiput(69.29,30.18)(0.22,-0.12){2}{\line(1,0){0.22}}
\multiput(69.74,29.95)(0.23,-0.11){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(70.19,29.73)(0.23,-0.1){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(70.65,29.52)(0.23,-0.1){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(71.11,29.32)(0.23,-0.09){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(71.58,29.14)(0.47,-0.18){1}{\line(1,0){0.47}}
\multiput(72.05,28.96)(0.48,-0.16){1}{\line(1,0){0.48}}
\multiput(72.52,28.79)(0.48,-0.15){1}{\line(1,0){0.48}}
\multiput(73,28.64)(0.48,-0.14){1}{\line(1,0){0.48}}
\multiput(73.49,28.5)(0.49,-0.13){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(73.97,28.37)(0.49,-0.12){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(74.46,28.25)(0.49,-0.11){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(74.95,28.14)(0.49,-0.1){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(75.45,28.05)(0.5,-0.08){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(75.95,27.96)(0.5,-0.07){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(76.44,27.89)(0.5,-0.06){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(76.94,27.83)(0.5,-0.05){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(77.44,27.79)(0.5,-0.04){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(77.95,27.75)(0.5,-0.02){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(78.45,27.73)(0.5,-0.01){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\put(78.95,27.71){\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(79.46,27.71)(0.5,0.01){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(79.96,27.73)(0.5,0.02){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(80.46,27.75)(0.5,0.04){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(80.96,27.79)(0.5,0.05){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(81.47,27.83)(0.5,0.06){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(81.97,27.89)(0.5,0.07){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(82.46,27.96)(0.5,0.08){1}{\line(1,0){0.5}}
\multiput(82.96,28.05)(0.49,0.1){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(83.45,28.14)(0.49,0.11){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(83.95,28.25)(0.49,0.12){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(84.44,28.37)(0.49,0.13){1}{\line(1,0){0.49}}
\multiput(84.92,28.5)(0.48,0.14){1}{\line(1,0){0.48}}
\multiput(85.4,28.64)(0.48,0.15){1}{\line(1,0){0.48}}
\multiput(85.88,28.79)(0.48,0.16){1}{\line(1,0){0.48}}
\multiput(86.36,28.96)(0.47,0.18){1}{\line(1,0){0.47}}
\multiput(86.83,29.14)(0.23,0.09){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(87.3,29.32)(0.23,0.1){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(87.76,29.52)(0.23,0.1){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(88.22,29.73)(0.23,0.11){2}{\line(1,0){0.23}}
\multiput(88.67,29.95)(0.22,0.12){2}{\line(1,0){0.22}}
\multiput(89.12,30.18)(0.22,0.12){2}{\line(1,0){0.22}}
\multiput(89.56,30.42)(0.22,0.13){2}{\line(1,0){0.22}}
\multiput(90,30.67)(0.21,0.13){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(90.43,30.94)(0.21,0.14){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(90.85,31.21)(0.21,0.14){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(91.27,31.49)(0.21,0.15){2}{\line(1,0){0.21}}
\multiput(91.68,31.78)(0.13,0.1){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(92.08,32.08)(0.13,0.1){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(92.48,32.39)(0.13,0.11){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(92.86,32.71)(0.13,0.11){3}{\line(1,0){0.13}}
\multiput(93.24,33.04)(0.12,0.11){3}{\line(1,0){0.12}}
\multiput(93.62,33.38)(0.12,0.12){3}{\line(1,0){0.12}}
\multiput(93.98,33.73)(0.12,0.12){3}{\line(1,0){0.12}}
\multiput(94.34,34.09)(0.12,0.12){3}{\line(0,1){0.12}}
\multiput(94.69,34.45)(0.11,0.12){3}{\line(0,1){0.12}}
\multiput(95.02,34.82)(0.11,0.13){3}{\line(0,1){0.13}}
\multiput(95.35,35.2)(0.11,0.13){3}{\line(0,1){0.13}}
\multiput(95.67,35.59)(0.1,0.13){3}{\line(0,1){0.13}}
\multiput(95.99,35.99)(0.1,0.13){3}{\line(0,1){0.13}}
\multiput(96.29,36.39)(0.15,0.21){2}{\line(0,1){0.21}}
\multiput(96.58,36.8)(0.14,0.21){2}{\line(0,1){0.21}}
\multiput(96.86,37.22)(0.14,0.21){2}{\line(0,1){0.21}}
\multiput(97.13,37.64)(0.13,0.21){2}{\line(0,1){0.21}}
\multiput(97.39,38.07)(0.13,0.22){2}{\line(0,1){0.22}}
\multiput(97.65,38.51)(0.12,0.22){2}{\line(0,1){0.22}}
\multiput(97.89,38.95)(0.12,0.22){2}{\line(0,1){0.22}}
\multiput(98.12,39.4)(0.11,0.23){2}{\line(0,1){0.23}}
\multiput(98.34,39.85)(0.1,0.23){2}{\line(0,1){0.23}}
\multiput(98.55,40.31)(0.1,0.23){2}{\line(0,1){0.23}}
\multiput(98.75,40.77)(0.09,0.23){2}{\line(0,1){0.23}}
\multiput(98.93,41.24)(0.18,0.47){1}{\line(0,1){0.47}}
\multiput(99.11,41.71)(0.16,0.48){1}{\line(0,1){0.48}}
\multiput(99.27,42.18)(0.15,0.48){1}{\line(0,1){0.48}}
\multiput(99.43,42.66)(0.14,0.48){1}{\line(0,1){0.48}}
\multiput(99.57,43.15)(0.13,0.49){1}{\line(0,1){0.49}}
\multiput(99.7,43.63)(0.12,0.49){1}{\line(0,1){0.49}}
\multiput(99.82,44.12)(0.11,0.49){1}{\line(0,1){0.49}}
\multiput(99.92,44.61)(0.1,0.49){1}{\line(0,1){0.49}}
\multiput(100.02,45.11)(0.08,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(100.1,45.6)(0.07,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(100.17,46.1)(0.06,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(100.23,46.6)(0.05,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(100.28,47.1)(0.04,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(100.32,47.61)(0.02,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\multiput(100.34,48.11)(0.01,0.5){1}{\line(0,1){0.5}}
\linethickness{0.9mm}
\put(30,50){\line(1,0){28}}
\linethickness{0.9mm}
\put(100,50){\line(1,0){28}}
\put(40,55){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$p$}}
\put(115,55){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$p$}}
\put(78,77){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$k$}}
\put(79,21){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$p-k$}}
\end{picture}
}
\def\figtwo{
\def0.5{0.5}
\ifx0.5\undefined\def0.5{1}\fi
\unitlength 0.5 mm
\begin{picture}(155,90)(0,0)
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\put(80,0){\line(0,1){40}}
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\put(80,40){\line(1,0){40}}
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\put(120,40){\line(0,1){20}}
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\put(80,60){\line(1,0){40}}
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\put(80,60){\line(0,1){30}}
\put(140,50){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{x}}
\put(155,50){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{x}}
\put(20,50){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{x}}
\put(100,50){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{x}}
\put(15,45){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$Q_2$}}
\put(140,45){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$Q_1$}}
\put(100,45){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$Q_4$}}
\put(155,45){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$Q_3$}}
\put(80,-10){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{(a)}}
\end{picture}
}
\def\figfour{
\def0.5{0.5}
\ifx0.5\undefined\def0.5{1}\fi
\unitlength 0.5 mm
\begin{picture}(150,90)(0,0)
\put(30,50){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{x}}
\put(90,50){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{x}}
\put(110,50){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{x}}
\put(150,50){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{x}}
\put(25,45){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$Q_2$}}
\put(85,45){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$Q_1$}}
\put(115,45){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$Q_4$}}
\put(150,45){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{$Q_3$}}
\put(80,-10){\makebox(0,0)[cc]{(b)}}
\linethickness{0.3mm}
\qbezier(60,90)(60,84.8)(60,81.19)
\qbezier(60,81.19)(60,77.58)(60,75)
\qbezier(60,75)(60,72.41)(60,70)
\qbezier(60,70)(60,67.59)(60,65)
\qbezier(60,65)(59.98,62.4)(61.19,60.59)
\qbezier(61.19,60.59)(62.39,58.79)(65,57.5)
\qbezier(65,57.5)(67.59,56.16)(70.59,58.56)
\qbezier(70.59,58.56)(73.6,60.97)(77.5,67.5)
\qbezier(77.5,67.5)(81.38,74.02)(85.59,77.62)
\qbezier(85.59,77.62)(89.8,81.23)(95,82.5)
\qbezier(95,82.5)(100.2,83.83)(104.41,82.62)
\qbezier(104.41,82.62)(108.62,81.42)(112.5,77.5)
\qbezier(112.5,77.5)(116.41,73.66)(118.22,66.44)
\qbezier(118.22,66.44)(120.02,59.22)(120,47.5)
\qbezier(120,47.5)(120.04,35.69)(117.03,35.69)
\qbezier(117.03,35.69)(114.02,35.69)(107.5,47.5)
\qbezier(107.5,47.5)(101.03,59.29)(93.81,61.09)
\qbezier(93.81,61.09)(86.59,62.9)(77.5,55)
\qbezier(77.5,55)(68.37,47.22)(64.16,40)
\qbezier(64.16,40)(59.95,32.78)(60,25)
\qbezier(60,25)(60,17.19)(60,12.38)
\qbezier(60,12.38)(60,7.56)(60,5)
\qbezier(60,5)(60,2.41)(60,0)
\qbezier(60,0)(60,-2.41)(60,-5)
\end{picture}
}
\begin{document}
\vskip 12pt
\baselineskip 24pt
\begin{center}
{\Large \bf One Loop Mass Renormalization of Unstable Particles in Superstring Theory}
\end{center}
\vspace*{2.0ex}
\baselineskip=18pt
\centerline{\large \rm Ashoke Sen}
\vspace*{4.0ex}
\centerline{\large \it Harish-Chandra Research Institute}
\centerline{\large \it Chhatnag Road, Jhusi,
Allahabad 211019, India}
\centerline{and}
\centerline{\large \it Homi Bhabha National Institute}
\centerline{\large \it Training School Complex, Anushakti Nagar,
Mumbai 400085, India}
\vspace*{1.0ex}
\centerline{\small E-mail: <EMAIL>}
\vspace*{5.0ex}
\centerline{\bf Abstract} \bigskip
Most of the massive states in superstring theory are expected to undergo mass
renormalization at one loop order. Typically these corrections should contain
imaginary parts, indicating that the states are unstable against decay into
lighter particles. However in such cases,
direct computation of the renormalized mass using superstring
perturbation theory yields divergent result.
Previous approaches to this problem involve various analytic
continuation techniques, or
deforming the integral
over the moduli space of the torus with two punctures
into the complexified moduli
space near the boundary.
In this paper we use insights from string field theory to
describe a different approach that gives manifestly finite result
for the mass shift satisfying unitarity relations.
The procedure is applicable to all states of (compactified)
type II and heterotic string theories.
We illustrate this by computing the
one loop correction to the
mass of the first massive state on
the leading Regge trajectory in SO(32) heterotic string theory.
\vfill \eject
\baselineskip 18pt
\tableofcontents
\section{Introduction and Summary} \label{sintro}
The world-sheet formulation of superstring perturbation theory gives an elegant
expression for scattering amplitudes, expressing the amplitude at any given
order in perturbation theory as a single integral over the moduli space of a Riemann
surface with punctures. This expression is manifestly free
from ultraviolet divergences. However superstring perturbation theory shares all
the usual infrared divergence problems in quantum field theory, but unlike in the
case of quantum field theories, there is no systematic way of dealing with these
divergences within the frame-work of the world-sheet formalism.
Superstring field theory provides a solution to this problem. By construction, the
Feynman rules of superstring field theory reproduce the amplitude given by the
world-sheet description when the latter gives finite result,
but the existence of the underlying quantum field theory
allows us to deal with the infrared divergence problems when they arise.
In this paper we shall use the insight from superstring field theory to address a
related problem that arises in the world-sheet description of superstring perturbation
theory. String theory has many massive states in its spectrum, but most of them
are unstable against decay to lighter states. Therefore one expects that when
quantum corrections to the masses are taken into account, the mass$^2$ of an unstable
particle should
receive correction that contains an imaginary part (and also possibly a real part).
Now while higher loop mass renormalization requires full use of string field theory
-- because one needs to subtract the one particle reducible (1PR) contributions
from the two point function --
one would expect that the one loop contribution to the shift in mass$^2$ should be
given by the on-shell two point function on the torus, and hence should be
straightforward to compute using the usual world-sheet formalism.
However when one tries to repeat this
computation for an unstable state, one finds a divergent
answer\cite{sundborg,amano,sundborg1}.
Intuitively the reason for this divergence is
as
follows\cite{sundborg,amano,sundborg1,9302003,9404128,9410152,berera2,1307.5124}.
In quantum field theory,
while computing the mass renormalization of a particle that can decay into two
or more particles, one finds that there are Feynman diagrams for which one
or more internal propagators have negative denominator $(k^2+m^2)$ for
some region of internal loop momentum integration, and there is no way to deform
the integration contours of loop
momenta that can make all denominators have positive real parts
everywhere along the contour. This means that the Schwinger parameter
representation of this propagator breaks down, -- if we try to replace
$(k^2+m^2)^{-1}$ by $\int_0^\infty ds \, e^{-s (k^2+m^2)}$ then the integration
over $s$ encounters a divergence from infinity. On the other hand, integration over
the moduli space of Riemann surfaces directly gives the result in the Schwinger
parameter representation. Therefore the issue shows up as a divergence in the
integration over the moduli space of Riemann surfaces.
It is also possible to argue that a finite result would necessarily
have led to a contradiction.
The loop correction to
mass$^2$ of an unstable particle
is expected to have an imaginary part, but straightforward world-sheet
computation in string theory gives real results for all amplitudes. Therefore
the only way an imaginary part can arise is if the naive world-sheet description
gives divergent answer. In that case one might hope that by defining
the amplitude for unphysical external
momenta where the result is finite and then analytically continuing the result to
on-shell external momenta, we may get an imaginary part. Early attempts to
implement this achieved only partial
success\cite{sundborg,amano}.
A systematic method of dealing with this was suggested in
\cite{9302003,9404128,9410152} (see also \cite{amano2,montag}).
This was achieved by considering
a four point amplitude with external momenta chosen in appropriate range
where the integrals are well defined, then
analytically continuing the result to the physical region where we expect a pole
due to the massive particle of interest, and finally finding the shift in mass$^2$ from
the location of the pole. Alternative approaches to analytic continuation, working
directly with two point function, can be found in \cite{marcus,0008060,0210245}.
The imaginary part of the shift, which is related to the decay rate, is
relatively easier to compute, and various other methods for computing this can
be found in \cite{chiu,miransky,green,turok,marcus,dai,okada,
mitchell,9901092,0008060,0109196,0210245}.\footnote{In
a quantum field theory the imaginary part
is determined by unitarity relation. On the other hand the real part
is ultraviolet divergent. This has to be removed by a counterterm and hence
has to be taken as an input parameter of the theory. In string
theory both parts are finite and computable.}
One disadvantage of the analytic continuation procedure is that it has to be done on
a case by case basis, and may not provide a systematic procedure to deal with all
cases. For example not every massive state may appear as an
intermediate state in the four point amplitude of massless external states.
Also at higher mass levels there will be mixing between different states, leading
to a renormalized mass$^2$ matrix with both real and imaginary parts, and it
may not be easy to extract this matrx from the four point function of massless states.
Finally, lack of a general procedure makes it difficult to prove general properties
like unitarity that relates the imaginary part of the mass shift to the decay rate -- except by
explicit computation in each case.
For these reasons,
it will clearly be useful to develop a systematic procedure for computing
string theory amplitudes that directly gives a finite result instead of having to define
the amplitudes via analytic continuation. This will be
the analog of the $i\epsilon$ prescription in quantum field theory, -- instead of defining the
amplitudes as the analytic continuations of Euclidean Green's functions, one can write
down the expression for the Green's functions with Lorentzian external momenta as
integrals over loop momenta, but one needs the
$i\epsilon$ prescription for regulating the poles of the
propagator.
Proposals for generalizing this to string theory
was given in \cite{berera2,1307.5124}.
These approaches involve
deforming the integration over the moduli space
of Riemann surfaces -- that appear in the expression for the loop amplitudes --
into the complexified moduli space.
In terms of the Schwinger parameter representation of the
propagators, this corresponds to taking the upper limit of $s$ integration to be
$i\infty$ instead of $\infty$, and at the same time supplying a small
damping factor that represent the effect of replacing $m^2$ by $m^2-i\epsilon$
as in a conventional quantum field theory.
In this paper we suggest a different approach to
this problem by directly drawing insight from string field
theory. In any quantum field theory, writing down the expression for a loop amplitude
is quite straightforward if the Feynman rules are known,
but typically it suffers from ultraviolet
divergence. In string field theory there are no ultraviolet divergences since the
vertices fall off exponentially for large space-like external momenta.
However in the conventional formulation of string field theory,
the vertices grow exponentially for large time-like momenta. Due to this
property, while computing Feynman amplitudes by integrating over internal
momenta, we cannot take the integral over internal energies along the real
axis -- the ends of the integration contour have to be tied to
$\pm i\infty$\cite{1604.01783}. However in the interior of the complex plane the
contour has to be deformed appropriately away from the imaginary axis following the
algorithm described in \cite{1604.01783}. With this
prescription we get
finite results for all loop corrections except where there are physical infrared divergences
involving one or more divergent propagators --
{\it e.g.} mass renormalization diagrams if we fail to take into account the shift of mass
due to quantum corrections, or tadpole divergences if the original perturbative vacuum
is destabilized by quantum corrections. In the absence of such divergences, we should get
finite results. This includes the one loop two point function that is needed for computing
the renormalized mass -- both its real
and the imaginary parts.
One could wonder how the results in string field theory are related to those of other
approaches -- {\it e.g.} analytic continuation. To this end we note that the string field
theory amplitudes, constructed using the procedure mentioned above, are automatically
analytic functions of external momenta. Therefore by the uniqueness of analytic
continuation, string field theory results must agree with those computed using analytic
continuation. However what string field theory achieves is that it expresses the result
as a (contour) integral over momenta that is manifestly finite without any need for
analytic continuation. Therefore this automatically gives the analytically continued
result that we would have gotten from the usual world-sheet approach. Another bonus
of this approach is that the amplitudes defined this way automatically satisfies
the Cutkosky cutting rules\cite{1604.01783}.
While for general amplitudes one still needs few
more steps to prove unitarity from the cutting rules by showing that the contribution
to the cut diagrams from unphysical intermediate states cancel, for diagrams involving
one loop mass renormalization this can be shown explicitly. Therefore the imaginary
parts of the mass shifts computed using this approach are automatically consistent
with unitarity.\footnote{Since the approach of \cite{berera2} was motivated from light-cone
string field theory\cite{mandelstam1,mandelstam2},
one could ask if we can directly work with the light-cone string
field theory and impose the $i\epsilon$ prescription there. This would make the
proof of unitarity more straightforward.
However light-cone superstring field theory suffers from contact term divergences
which have not yet been understood fully\cite{gr1,gr2,gr3,greenseiberg}.
A way to circumvent this has been suggested in \cite{1605.04666}.}
While string field theory is essential for
carrying out this computation to higher loop order, for one loop correction
to the masses one does not require the full power of string field theory. The reason
has already been mentioned earlier:
one loop mass renormalization can be computed from one loop two point
function of external states that satisfy tree level on-shell condition.
No subtraction is necessary, unlike in the case of higher loop two point functions from
which the contribution from 1PR graphs have to be subtracted.
Nevertheless since this one loop two point function diverges due to the reasons
mentioned above, we need a way to deal with this divergence.
The strategy we follow is to isolate the divergent part
and
reinterpret this as coming from a specific Feynman diagram of string field
theory. If we try to express this as integration over Schwinger parameters, we get
back the expression that we have in the world-sheet description, and it is
divergent. But we can
directly evaluate this Feynman diagram by performing integration
over loop momenta following the prescription of \cite{1604.01783}
and this yields a finite answer.
The difference between the two can be traced to the fact that the Schwinger parameter
representation of the internal propagators breaks down for certain range of momentum
integration. Since from the point of view of string field theory, the Feynman diagrams
are more fundamental, the procedure of evaluating the Feynman diagrams directly
is the correct one, even when its Schwinger parameter representation fails.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In \S\ref{stoy} we
introduce a toy quantum field theory that shares some essential properties
of string theory. We compute one loop mass renormalization of an unstable particle
in this theory and show that we get a finite answer. On the other hand if we try to
evaluate the same expression by using Schwinger parameter representation of the
propagators, we get a divergent result. The divergence can be traced to the
breakdown of the Schwinger parameter representation of the propagator. In
\S\ref{sstring} we compute one loop mass renormalization of the lowest massive
string state of ten dimensional heterotic string theory on the leading Regge
trajectory. The answer, expressed as an integral over the moduli space of a
torus with two punctures, has certain divergences from the boundary of the
moduli space. We isolate the divergent piece, and by comparing it with the
result of \S\ref{stoy} in the Schwinger parameter representation of the propagator,
identify the divergent piece as the contribution from a specific Feynman diagram
of string field theory. This Feynman diagram is then evaluated using direct momentum
space integration, leading to finite answer. Our final result is expressed as a sum
of three terms, given in \refb{edefJ1}, \refb{ei1spa} and
\refb{ei2spa}, each of which is
manifestly finite.
We discuss extension of this analysis to general external states in
\S\ref{sgen} where we also give a justification of the procedure from string field
theory and show that the results for the renormalized mass obtained this way
agree for different versions of string field theory.
We also describe how our analysis can be easily extended to
compactified string theories. In \S\ref{sunitarity} we show
that the imaginary part of the mass$^2$ computed using our approach is
manifestly consistent with unitarity. In appendix \ref{sb} we show the equivalence between the
$i\epsilon$ prescription of \cite{berera2,1307.5124} and our prescription of \S\ref{stoy} in the context of one
loop two point functions. In appendix \ref{sa} we analyze in detail
the `stringy
contribution' to mass renormalization given by \refb{edefJ1}
and show explicitly that this gives a finite contribution.
\sectiono{Toy model} \label{stoy}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\figqft
\vskip -25pt
\caption{One loop mass renormalization diagram of a heavy state, labelled by a thick
line, due to a loop of light particles, labelled by thin lines. The dashed line
corresponds to a light particle of mass $m_1$
carrying momentum $k$ and the continuous thin line corresponds to a
light particle of mass $m_2$ carrying momentum
$(p-k)$. All momenta flow from left
to right. \label{fqft}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Let us consider a quantum field theory in $D$ space-time dimensions
with three particles of masses $M$, $m_1$ and $m_2$ respectively,
with $M>m_1+m_2$, in which there is a three point vertex that couples the three
particles. Our goal will be to analyze the one loop mass
renormalization diagram shown in Fig.~\ref{fqft}. Inspired by string field
theory, we shall assume that the vertex
contains a factor of $\exp[- {1\over 2} A \{k^2+m_1^2\} - {1\over 2}
A \{(p-k)^2 + m_2^2\}]$ for some positive constant $A$ that makes the diagram
ultraviolet (UV) finite\cite{1604.01783}.
In that case the contribution of this diagram to mass$^2$ of the
heavy particle can be expressed as
\begin{equation} \label{e1}
\delta M^2 = i\, B \, \int{d^D k \over (2\pi)^D} \, \exp[-A \{k^2+m_1^2\} -
A \{(p-k)^2 + m_2^2\}]\, \{k^2+m_1^2\}^{-1} \{(p-k)^2 + m_2^2\}^{-1}\, ,
\end{equation}
where $B$ is another positive constant that includes multiplicative constant
contributions to the vertices, and $p$ is an on-shell external momentum
satisfying $p^2=-M^2$.
In general we could include factors involving
polynomials in the momenta in the vertices without affecting the UV finiteness, but
we have not included them to keep the analysis simple.
Later we shall consider the effect of including such interactions.
\subsection{Direct evaluation} \label{sdirect}
Using $k^2 = -(k^0)^2 + \vec k^2$ where $\vec k$ denotes $(D-1)$-dimensional
spatial momenta, we see that the exponential factor falls off exponentially as
$|\vec k|\to\infty$ but grows exponentially as $k^0\to \pm\infty$. This shows that
we cannot take the $k^0$ integral to run along the real axis. This issue was discussed
in detail in \cite{1604.01783}
where we proposed that the ends of the $k^0$ integral must always
be at $\pm i\infty$ to ensure convergence of the integral, but the
integration contour may take
complicated form in the interior of the complex
$k^0$ plane to avoid poles of the propagator. This is done as follows:
begin with imaginary $p^0$ for which the $k^0$ contour is taken along the
imaginary axis and then deform $p^0$ to the physical real value staying in the first
quadrant of the complex $p^0$ plane, simultaneously deforming
the $k^0$ contour appropriately to
always stay away from the poles.
In particular \refb{e1} was analyzed in detail in \cite{1604.01783}
using this prescription. Here
we shall review some of the important details of that analysis.
The integrand of \refb{e1} has poles in the $k^0$
plane at
\begin{equation} \label{e2}
Q_1 \equiv \sqrt {\vec k^2 + m_1^2}, \quad Q_2 \equiv -\sqrt{\vec k^2 + m_1^2}, \quad
Q_3 \equiv p^0 + \sqrt{(\vec p - \vec k)^2 + m_2^2} , \quad Q_4 \equiv
p^0 - \sqrt{(\vec p - \vec k)^2 + m_2^2}\, .
\end{equation}
For imaginary $p^0$, and $k^0$ contour running along the imaginary axis from
$-i\infty$ to $i\infty$,
the poles $Q_1$ and $Q_3$ are to the right of the integration
contour whereas the poles $Q_2$ and $Q_4$ are to the left of the integration
contour. When $p^0$ is continued to the real axis along the first quadrant, the contour
needs to be deformed appropriately so that $Q_1$ and $Q_3$ continue to lie
on the right and $Q_2$ and $Q_4$ continue to lie on the left. There
are different possible configurations depending on the value of $\vec k$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\hbox{\figtwo \hfill \figfour}
\vskip 25pt
\caption{The integrations contours in the $k^0$ plane.
\label{f2}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As long as $p^0< \sqrt{\vec k^2+m_1^2} +
\sqrt{(\vec p-\vec k)^2+m_2^2}$,
$Q_4$ lies to the left of $Q_1$ and the contour can be taken
as shown in Fig.~\ref{f2}(a).
On the other hand for $p^0 > \sqrt{\vec k^2+m_1^2} +
\sqrt{(\vec p-\vec k)^2+m_2^2}$, $Q_4$ is to the right of $Q_1$ and the
deformed contour takes the form shown in Fig.~\ref{f2}(b). In drawing this
we have used the fact that when $p^0$ lies in the first quadrant,
$Q_4$ remains above $Q_1$ as it
passes $Q_1$ and that during this process the contour needs to be
deformed continuously without passing through a pole. At the
boundary between these two regions $Q_4$ approaches
$Q_1$. In this case we have to use a limiting procedure to determine the contour, and the
correct procedure will be to take $p^0$ in the first quadrant, evaluate the integral
and then take the limit of real $p^0$. This in particular means that $Q_4$ approaches
$Q_1$ from above in this limit.
In order to evaluate the integral, in both cases we deform the $k^0$ contour to be a
sum of a contour along the imaginary axis and an anti-clockwise contour around the
pole at $Q_4$.
We shall choose, for convenience,
\begin{equation} \label{eonshell}
p=(M, \vec 0)\, .
\end{equation}
In this case the contribution from the first contour, after relabeling $k^0$ as $i\, u$,
takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{ei1}
I_1&=&-B \int{d^{D-1}k\over (2\pi)^{D-1} }\, \int_{-\infty}^\infty {du\over 2\pi} \,
\exp\left[- A\left\{u^2 +\vec k^2+m_1^2\right\} - A\left\{(u+iM)^2
+ \vec k^2+m_2^2\right\}\right] \nonumber \\
&& \left(u^2 + \vec k^2 + m_1^2\right)^{-1}
\left\{(u+iM)^2 + \vec k^2+m_2^2\right\}^{-1}\, .
\end{eqnarray}
On the other hand the
contribution from the residue at $Q_4$ gives
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{ei2-}
I_2 &=& -B \int{d^{D-1}k\over (2\pi)^{D-1} }
\exp\left[A \left(M - \sqrt{\vec k^2+m_2^2}\right)^2 - A (\vec k^2 + m_1^2)
\right] \Theta \left(M - \sqrt{\vec k^2+m_2^2}\right)
\nonumber \\ &&
\left(2 \sqrt{\vec k^2 + m_2^2} \right)^{-1}
\left\{ M+\sqrt{\vec k^2 +m_1^2} - \sqrt{\vec k^2+m_2^2}\right\}^{-1}
\nonumber \\
&& \left\{ \sqrt{\vec k^2 + m_1^2} + \sqrt{\vec k^2+m_2^2} - M-i\epsilon\right\}^{-1}\, .
\end{eqnarray}
In this expression $\Theta$ denotes the Heaviside function and reflects that this
contribution is present only when $Q_4$ is to the right of the imaginary axis.
The $i\epsilon$ in the arguments of the last term represents that we need to take the
limit $p^0\to M$ from the first quadrant, i.e. set $p^0$ to $M+i\epsilon$ and then take the
$\epsilon\to 0^+$ limit. Defining $v=|\vec k|$ and doing the angular integration, $I_1$ and
$I_2$ may
be rewritten as
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{ei1fin}
I_1&=&-B \, (2\pi)^{-D} \Omega_{D-2}
\, \int_0^\infty dv\, \, \int_{-\infty}^\infty {du} \, v^{D-2}\,
\exp\bigg[- A\left\{u^2 +v^2+m_1^2\right\} \nonumber \\
&& - A\left\{(u+iM)^2
+ v^2+m_2^2\right\}\bigg] \left(u^2 + v^2 + m_1^2\right)^{-1}
\left\{(u+iM)^2 + v^2+m_2^2\right\}^{-1}\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{ei2fin}
I_2 &=& -B \, (2\pi)^{-(D-1)} \Omega_{D-2} \int_0^{\sqrt{M^2-m_2^2}} \, dv\, v^{D-2}\,
\exp\left[A \left(M - \sqrt{v^2+m_2^2}\right)^2 - A (v^2 + m_1^2)
\right]\nonumber \\
&& \left(2\sqrt{v^2 + m_2^2}\right)^{-1}
\left\{ M + \sqrt{v^2+m_1^2} - \sqrt{v^2+m_2^2}\right\}^{-1} \nonumber \\ &&
\left\{ \sqrt{v^2 + m_1^2} + \sqrt{v^2 + m_2^2} - M-i\epsilon\right\}^{-1}\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Omega_{D-2}$ is the volume of the unit $(D-2)$ sphere.
Due to the exponential suppression factors and/or limits of integration,
neither $I_1$ nor $I_2$ has any divergence from the large $u$ or large $v$ region.
Even though as $\epsilon\to 0$
the integrand of $I_2$
has a pole on the real $v$ axis from the last term,
the contour is not pinched there. Hence we can define the integral by deforming the
$v$ integration contour below the real axis, getting a finite result. Therefore
both $I_1$
and $I_2$ are manifestly finite (and in particular can be evaluated using numerical
integration).
The analysis given above can be easily generalized to the case where the
integrand in \refb{e1} is multiplied by an additional polynomial
in momenta
coming from the vertices and/or the propagators.
Using rotational invariance we can always replace this by a polynomial $Q$
in $k^0$ and $\vec k^2$.
The result will still be given
by the sum of two terms like \refb{ei1fin} and \refb{ei2fin}. The integrand
in \refb{ei1fin} will now be multiplied by the polynomial $Q$ with $k^0$ replaced by
$i\, u$ and $\vec k^2$ replaced by $v^2$. On the other hand the integrand in
\refb{ei2fin} will be multiplied by the polynomial $Q$ with $k^0$ replaced by
$M-\sqrt{v^2+m_2^2}$ and $\vec k^2$ replaced by $v^2$.
\subsection{Schwinger parameter representation} \label{ssch}
We shall now try to
evaluate \refb{e1} by representing the propagators as integrals
over Schwinger parameters. For this we write
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{esp1}
(k^2 + m_1^2)^{-1} &=& \int_0^\infty ds_1 \, \exp\left[-s_1(k^2+m_1^2)\right],
\nonumber \\
\{(p-k)^2 + m_2^2\}^{-1} &=& \int_0^\infty ds_2 \, \exp\left[-s_2\{(p-k)^2+m_2^2\}\right],
\end{eqnarray}
and substitute into \refb{e1}. This give
\begin{equation} \label{eddm}
\delta M^2
= i\, B \,\int_0^\infty ds_1 \int_0^\infty ds_2 \, \int{d^D k \over (2\pi)^D} \,
\exp\left[ -(A+s_1) \{k^2+m_1^2\} -
(A+s_2) \{(p-k)^2 + m_2^2\}\right]\, .
\end{equation}
After performing integral over $k$, pretending that the $k^0$ integral runs along the
imaginary axis and is convergent, and defining new variables
\begin{equation}
t_1 = s_1+A, \quad t_2 = s_2+A\, ,
\end{equation}
we get
\begin{equation} \label{efinint}
\delta M^2 = - B \, (4\pi)^{-D/2} \, \int_A^\infty dt_1 \int_A^\infty dt_2 \,
(t_1+t_2)^{-D/2} \,
\exp\left[ {t_1 t_2\over t_1+t_2}\, M^2 - (t_1 m_1^2+t_2 m_2^2)\right]\, .
\end{equation}
This expression has no UV divergence, i.e. divergence from the small $t_i$
region, since the lower limits of $t_i$ integrals are shifted to positive values $A$.
However it is easy to see that this integral diverges from the region $t_1,t_2\to\infty$
if
\begin{equation}
M>m_1+m_2\, .
\end{equation}
This divergence can be traced to the fact that for $M>m_1+m_2$, it is not possible to choose
the $k^0$ integration contour in a way that keeps the real parts of
both $k^2+m_1^2$ and
$(p-k)^2 + m_2^2$ positive. As a result the Schwinger parameter representation
\refb{esp1} breaks down. However note that we can get finite results by
taking the
upper limits of the $t_i$ integrals to be $i\infty$
instead of $\infty$\cite{berera2,1307.5124}.
We have shown in appendix \ref{sb} that this gives the same result as what we would obtain by
following the
prescription of \S\ref{sdirect} for evaluating \refb{e1}.
Since string world-sheet description of the S-matrix elements naturally gives the
amplitudes in the Schwinger parameter representation, we shall see that the world-sheet
description of one loop mass renormalization in string theory encounters similar
divergences. Our strategy will be to
use the insight gain from our analysis above to convert this
to a momentum space integral of the form given in \refb{e1}
and extract finite answers.
For this we shall need a generalization of the analysis given above,
where the integrand in \refb{e1} has an additional multiplicative factor given by
some polynomial in the momenta $\{k^\mu\}$. We shall first discuss a few
examples. The first example we consider is when the integrand in \refb{e1}
has an additional factor of
$(k^0)^2$. In this case it is easy to see that the integrand in \refb{efinint} will be
multiplied by an additional factor of
\begin{equation}
-{1\over 2(t_1+t_2)} + {t_2^2 \over (t_1+t_2)^2} M^2 \, .
\end{equation}
Next we consider the case where the integrand in \refb{e1}
has a multiplicative factor of
$k^0$. In this case the integrand in \refb{efinint} is multiplied by an additional
factor of
\begin{equation}
{t_2\over t_1+t_2} M\, .
\end{equation}
If we consider the case where the integrand in \refb{e1} has an additional
multiplicative factor of $k^i k^j$ with $1\le i,j\le (D-1)$, then we get an
additional multiplicative factor of
\begin{equation}\label{eaddmu0}
\delta_{ij}\, {1\over 2(t_1+t_2)}
\end{equation}
in \refb{efinint}.
Finally if the integrand has an additional factor of $k^i k^j k^m k^n$ then we
get an additional multiplicative factor of
\begin{equation} \label{eaddmul}
{1\over 4 (t_1+t_2)^2} \left(\delta_{ij} \delta_{mn} + \delta_{im} \delta_{jn}
+ \delta_{in} \delta_{jm}\right)\, .
\end{equation}
It is clear that given any polynomial in $\{k^\mu\}$ inserted into \refb{eddm},
we can find the corresponding
insertion in the integrand of the Schwinger parameter representation
\refb{efinint} by formally
carrying out the integration over momenta using the rules of gaussian integration,
pretending that the integral is convergent. An interesting question is whether the
reverse is true: given any polynomial $P$ in $1/(t_1+t_2)$ and $t_2/(t_1+t_2)$, can
we find a function $Q$ of momenta such that the following holds?
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{exyx}
&& i \int{d^D k \over (2\pi)^D} \,
\exp\left[ - t_1 \{k^2+m_1^2\} -
t_2 \{(p-k)^2 + m_2^2\}\right] Q(k) \nonumber \\
&=& - (4\pi)^{-D/2}
\exp\left[ {t_1 t_2\over t_1+t_2}\, M^2 - (t_1 m_1^2+t_2 m_2^2)\right] P
\left({1\over t_1+t_2}, {t_2\over t_1+t_2}\right)\, .
\end{eqnarray}
It is clear that due to rotational invariance of the
problem $Q$ cannot be unique -- {\it e.g.} $(k^1)^2$, $(k^2)^2$ and
$\vec k^2 / (D-1)$ will all generate the same expression after momentum integration.
However they will also give the same result if we insert $Q(k)$ into the integrand
in \refb{e1} and carry out the momentum integration
directly using the procedure described in \S\ref{sdirect}.
Therefore
we can easily resolve this ambiguity in the form of $Q$
by restricting $Q$ to be a polynomial in
$k^0$ and $\vec k^2$. In that case we can construct a unique $Q$ from a given $P$
as follows.
We can start from the terms in $P$
with the highest power of $t_2/(t_1+t_2)$, and among these
the term with highest power of $1/(t_1+t_2)$. If this has the form
$\{t_2/ (t_1+t_2)\}^n \{1/(t_1+t_2)\}^m$, then we need a term $Q_1$
in $Q$ proportional to
$(k^0)^n (\vec k^2)^m$ to generate this. Let $P_1$ be the polynomial in $1/(t_1+t_2)$
and $t_2/(t_1+t_2)$
obtained by replacing $Q,P$ by $Q_1,P_1$ in \refb{exyx}.
Besides containing the term proportional to
$\{t_2/ (t_1+t_2)\}^n \{1/(t_1+t_2)\}^m$ appearing in $P$,
$P_1$ will generically also contain terms
with lower powers of $t_2/ (t_1+t_2)$.
We now repeat the analysis for $P-P_1$, by identifying the terms in $P-P_1$ with
highest power of $t_2/(t_1+t_2)$, and among them the term with highest power
of $1/(t_1+t_2)$. Proceeding this
way till we have exhausted all the terms in $P$,
we can find the polynomial $Q=Q_1+Q_2+\cdots$ that, when inserted into
the left hand side of \refb{exyx}, will produce the desired $P$ on the right hand side.
The effect of inserting $P$ in the integrand of \refb{efinint} can now be represented by
insertion of $Q(k)$ in the integrand of \refb{eddm} and hence of \refb{e1}.
Since $Q$ is a polynomial in $\{k^\mu\}$, there will be
no difficulty in carrying out the momentum integration in \refb{e1}
directly following
the procedure described in \S\ref{sdirect} to get a finite result.
This way any integral of the form \refb{efinint}, with arbitrary polynomial
of $1/(t_1+t_2)$ and $t_2/(t_1+t_2)$ inserted in the integrand, can be
interpreted as a finite momentum space integral.
\sectiono{One loop mass renormalization of an unstable state in string theory}
\label{sstring}
We shall now use the insight gained from the analysis of \S\ref{stoy} to compute
one loop mass renormalization in string theory.
In this section we shall consider a specific example, leaving the general analysis to
\S\ref{sgen}.
We consider the lowest massive state on the leading Regge
trajectory
in the SO(32) heterotic string
theory.\footnote{The advantage of working with states
on the leading Regge trajectory
is that they do not mix with any other
state at the same mass level. This simplifies our analysis, but the method that we
shall describe is valid for arbitrary states.}
The one loop correction to the mass$^2$ of this state
can be computed from the on-shell two point function of the corresponding vertex
operators on the torus.
If we define
\begin{equation}
X^\pm = (X^1 \pm i X^2), \quad \psi^\pm = (\psi^1 \pm i \psi^2)\, ,
\end{equation}
where $X^\mu$ are the world-sheet scalars and $\psi^\mu$ are the right-moving
world-sheet fermions, then the $-1$ picture unintegrated
vertex operators of the states whose
two point function on the torus we need to compute are:
\begin{equation}
\bar c\, c\, e^{-\phi} \psi^+ \partial X^+ (\bar \partial X^+)^2 e^{i k^0 X^0}\quad \hbox{and} \quad
\bar c\, c\, e^{-\phi} \psi^- \partial X^- (\bar \partial X^-)^2 e^{-i k^0 X^0}\, ,
\end{equation}
up to overall normalization constants. Here $\phi$ is the world-sheet scalar that
originates from bosonizing the $\beta$-$\gamma$ ghost system, and $c$, $\bar c$ are
the usual ghost fields associated with diffeomorphism invariance on the world-sheet.
Now it was argued in \cite{1304.0458} that all the states
at the first massive level which differ from each other by
different right-moving excitations are related by space-time supersymmetry and hence
will have the same mass renormalization. Using this we can instead consider the
vertex operators
\begin{equation} \label{enewv}
\bar c\, c\, e^{-\phi} \psi^1 \psi^2 \psi^3 (\bar \partial X^+)^2 e^{i k^0 X^0}\quad \hbox{and} \quad
\bar c\, c\, e^{-\phi} \psi^1 \psi^2 \psi^3 (\bar \partial X^-)^2 e^{-i k^0 X^0}\, .
\end{equation}
The reason for doing this is that with this choice the right-moving parts of the
vertex operators become identical to those used in \cite{1304.0458} and we can make use
of the results of \cite{1304.0458}.\footnote{In
\cite{1304.0458} we converted both vertex operators to
zero picture vertex operators for carrying out the computation. This does not satisfy
the correct factorization condition when two vertex operators approach each other,
and in some cases, can give erroneous results\cite{1209.5461,1408.0571}.
However for flat space-time
background, including toroidal compactification, the difference between the correct
result and the one obtained using zero picture vertex operators can be computed
using the analysis given in \cite{1408.0571} and can be shown to vanish.}
In this case the only difference between the vertex operators used in \cite{1304.0458} and
those used here is that the left-moving part of the vertex operators used in
\cite{1304.0458} were $\bar S_\alpha$ -- the spin fields of the left-moving world-sheet
fermions responsible for the SO(32) gauge group --
instead of $(\bar\partial X^\pm)^2$. Therefore if we want to compute
the two point correlation function of the vertex operators \refb{enewv} inserted at
0 and $z$ on a torus with modular parameter $\tau$, all we need to do is to replace,
in the result of \cite{1304.0458}, the normalized two point function
$\langle \bar S_\alpha(\bar z) \bar S_\beta(0)\rangle$ by the normalized two point
function $\langle (\bar \partial X^+(\bar z))^2 (\bar \partial X^-(0))^2\rangle$. Normalizing both
correlators so that as $\bar z\to 0$ they go as $1/\bar z^4$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{eone}
\langle \bar S_\alpha(\bar z) \bar S_\beta(0)\rangle
=\delta_{\alpha\beta} \left(\sum_\nu \overline{{\vartheta_\nu(z/2)}}^{16}\right)
\left( \sum_\nu \overline{\vartheta_\nu(0)}^{16}\right)^{-1} \left(\overline{\vartheta_1'(0)}\right)^{4}
\left(\overline{\vartheta_1(z)}\right)^{-4}\, ,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{etwo}
\langle (\bar \partial X^+(\bar z))^2 (\bar \partial X^-(0))^2\rangle
= \left[\left( {\overline{\vartheta_1'(z)}\over \overline{\vartheta_1(z)}}\right)^2
- {\overline{\vartheta_1''(z)}\over \overline{\vartheta_1(z)}} - {\pi\over \tau_2}\right]^2\, ,
\end{equation}
where
$\vartheta_\nu$ for $1\le\nu\le 4$
denotes Jacobi theta function of spin structure $\nu$, with $\vartheta_1$
being the Jacobi theta function with odd spin structure, and
$\tau_1,\tau_2,z_1,z_2$ are defined via
\begin{equation}
\tau=\tau_1+i\tau_2, \qquad z=z_1+i z_2\, .
\end{equation}
Therefore, to compute $\delta M^2$ we have to multiply the integrand obtained in
\cite{1304.0458} by the ratio of \refb{etwo} and \refb{eone}. This gives, from
eq.(4.16), (4.17) of \cite{1304.0458}:
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{edelM}
\delta M^2 &=& -{1\over 32 \, \pi} \, M^2 \, g^2\,
\int d^2 \tau \int d^2 z\, F(z,\bar z, \tau, \bar\tau) \, , \nonumber \\
F(z,\bar z, \tau, \bar\tau) &\equiv & \left\{\sum_{\nu} \overline{\vartheta_{\nu}(0)^{16}}\right\}
(\overline{\eta(\tau)})^{-18} (\eta(\tau))^{-6} (\overline{\vartheta_1'(0)})^{-4}
\left( {\vartheta_{1}(z)\overline{\vartheta_{1}(z)}}\right)^2 \nonumber \\ &&
\left[\left( {\overline{\vartheta_1'(z)}\over \overline{\vartheta_1(z)}}\right)^2
- {\overline{\vartheta_1''(z)}\over \overline{\vartheta_1(z)}} - {\pi\over \tau_2}\right]^2
\exp[-{4\pi \, z_2^2 / \tau_2}] \, (\tau_2)^{-5}\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $g$ is the string coupling constant, normalized as in \cite{1304.0458}.
The integration over $\tau$ runs over the fundamental region and that over $z$
runs over the whole torus. The sum over $\nu$ in \refb{edelM} comes from the sum over
spin structures in the left-moving sector of the world-sheet -- the sum over spin structures
in the right-moving sector have already been performed\cite{1304.0458} in arriving
at \refb{edelM}. Analogous expression for arbitrary state
on the leading Regge trajectory in type II string theory can be found in
\cite{sundborg,0210245}.
We shall now try to analyze possible divergences in this integral. It is easy to
see that the integral has no divergence from the $z\to 0$ region, and is in fact finite for all
finite values of $\tau$ and $z$. Since $z_1$ and $\tau_1$ integrals are
restricted to the range (0,1) and the $z_2$ integral is restricted to the range
$0\le z_2<\tau_2$, possible
divergences come from the region of large $\tau_2$ and possibly large $z_2$.
In particular we can remove the $\tau_2<1$ region from our consideration,
since this is a finite region with
bounded integrand.
For $\tau_2\ge 1$ the $\tau_1$ and $z_1$
integrals
run over the entire range between 0 and 1.
While evaluating these integrals
we need to first
integrate over $z_1$ and $\tau_1$ for fixed $z_2$ and $\tau_2$, and then
integrate over $z_2$ and $\tau_2$. A justification for this from string
field theory will be
given in \S\ref{sgen}.
Therefore if we expand the integrand in this region
in powers of $e^{2\pi i \tau}$,
$e^{-2\pi i \bar\tau}$, $e^{2\pi i z}$
and $e^{-2\pi i \bar z}$, all terms with non-zero powers of $e^{2\pi i \tau_1}$
or $e^{2\pi i z_1}$ will integrate to zero, and only the $\tau_1$ and $z_1$
independent terms will survive.
We shall first consider the
large $\tau_2$ but finite $z_2$ region. For this we define finite $z_2$ region
to be the region $z_2< \Lambda$ for some fixed positive number $\Lambda\le\tau_2$.
In this region
$F(z,\bar z, \tau, \bar\tau) $
has the form
\begin{equation} \label{efflimit}
F(z,\bar z, \tau, \bar\tau)=
\exp[-{4\pi \, z_2^2 / \tau_2}] \, (\tau_2)^{-5} \left[
2\, \pi^{-4} \, e^{2\pi i \bar\tau}|\sin(\pi z)|^4 \left( \pi^2 \cot^2(\pi
\bar z) + \pi^2 -{\pi\over \tau_2}\right)^2
+{\cal O}(1)\right]\, ,
\end{equation}
where
the ${\cal O}(1)$ term is finite for any finite $z,\tau$ and
approaches a fixed finite function of $z$ for $\tau_2\to\infty$ and finite
$z$.\footnote{For $z=0$ the ${\cal O}(1)$ term has a phase ambiguity since both the
function $F$ and the first term inside the square bracket in \refb{efflimit}
is proportional to $(z/\bar z)^2$ for small $z$.
But the integral of this term over any finite neighbourhood of $z=0$
is unambiguous
and finite for all $\tau$ inside the fundamental domain, as well as
in the $\tau\to i\infty$
limit.
The analogous expression in type II string theory will not have any such
phase ambiguity.}
Therefore
for $z_2<\Lambda$, the ${\cal O}(1)$ term inside the square bracket
can be bounded from above by a positive number $\Delta$, and
after integration
over $z$ and $\tau$ restricted to the region $z_2<\Lambda\le\tau_2$, $\tau_2\ge 1$,
its contribution to $\int d^2\tau d^2 z\, F$ will be bounded from above by
\begin{equation}
\Lambda\, \Delta\, \int_1^\infty d\tau_2 \, \tau_2^{-5} =\Lambda \, \Delta / 4\, .
\end{equation}
On the other hand
the term proportional to $e^{2\pi i\bar\tau}$ inside the square bracket
in \refb{efflimit} gives
vanishing contribution after the $\tau_1$ integration.
This shows that the integral does not receive any divergent contribution from the
$z_2<\Lambda$ and large $\tau_2$ region.
Next we examine the region of integration where both $\tau_2$ and $z_2$ are large.
Note that due to the reflection symmetry $z\to \tau-z$ of the integrand, there is
also no divergence from the region where $\tau_2$ and $z_2$ are large with
$\tau_2-z_2$ finite; so we focus on the region where $z_2$ and $\tau_2-z_2$ are
both large.
Expanding the integrand in powers of $e^{2\pi i \tau}$, $e^{2\pi i z}$ and their complex
conjugates, and throwing away all terms which have non-zero
powers of $e^{2\pi i z_1}$ and/or $e^{2\pi i \tau_1}$ since they vanish after
integration over $z_1$ and $\tau_1$, we find that the part of
$F(z,\bar z)$ that can give divergent contribution to \refb{edelM} takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{ediv}
2\, (2\pi)^{-4} \, \left( 32 \pi^4 - 32 {\pi^3\over \tau_2} +
512 \, {\pi^2\over \tau_2^2} \right) \,
\exp[4\pi z_2 - 4\pi z_2^2/\tau_2]\, \tau_2^{-5}\, .
\end{equation}
Based on the above understanding of the possible sources of divergence, we shall now
give a systematic procedure for isolating and dealing with the potentially divergent
part.
Using \refb{edelM} we can write
\begin{equation} \label{efindelM}
\delta M^2 = J_1+J_2\, ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{edefJ1}
J_1 &=& -{1\over 32 \, \pi} \, M^2 \, g^2
\int d^2 \tau \int d^2 z\, \bigg[F(z,\bar z, \tau, \bar\tau) \\
&&
- \Theta(\tau_2 - z_2 - \Lambda) \Theta(z_2-\Lambda) \,
2\, (2\pi)^{-4} \, \left( 32 \pi^4 -32 {\pi^3 \over \tau_2} +
512 \, {\pi^2\over\tau_2^2}\right) \,
\exp[4\pi z_2 - 4\pi z_2^2/\tau_2] \, \tau_2^{-5}
\bigg] \, ,
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{edefJ2}
J_2 &=& -{1\over 32 \, \pi} \, M^2 \, g^2
\int d^2 \tau \int d^2 z\,
2\, (2\pi)^{-4} \, \left( 32 \pi^4 -32 {\pi^3 \over \tau_2} +
512 \, {\pi^2\over\tau_2^2}\right) \,
\exp[4\pi z_2 - 4\pi z_2^2/\tau_2] \, \tau_2^{-5}
\nonumber \\
&& \hskip 2in \Theta(\tau_2 - z_2 - \Lambda) \, \Theta(z_2-\Lambda)\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Lambda$ is an arbitrary positive constant larger than 1,
and $\Theta$ denotes
Heaviside step function.
First let us analyze $J_1$. For this it will be convenient to
define the variable
\begin{equation}
w = \tau-z=w_1+i w_2\, ,
\end{equation}
and
divide the integration region into four parts.
The region $z_2< \Lambda$, $w_2< \Lambda$ has finite size, and the integrand
$F$ is bounded. Hence there is no divergence from this region. In the region
$z_2 < \Lambda$, $w_2\ge \Lambda$ the integrand is $F$ and by our previous
argument that there is no divergence from the finite $z_2$, large $\tau_2$ region,
this integral is also finite. The region $z_2\ge\Lambda$, $w_2<\Lambda$ is related
to the one just described by the $z\leftrightarrow w$, or equivalently $z\to\tau-z$ symmetry,
and gives finite result. This leaves us with the region
$z_2\ge\Lambda$, $w_2\ge \Lambda$. In this region the term proportional to the
Heaviside functions
in \refb{edefJ1} subtracts the leading divergent piece.
A careful analysis (see appendix \ref{sa}) shows that
after throwing away all
terms carrying non-zero powers of $e^{2\pi i z_1}$ and $e^{2\pi i w_1}$, we get
finite result for $J_1$ from the $z_2\ge\Lambda$, $w_2\ge \Lambda$ region.
Therefore there are no divergences in $J_1$ from any part of the region of
integration.
Next we turn to the analysis of $J_2$ which only receives contribution from the
$z_2\ge\Lambda$, $w_2\ge\Lambda$ region.
We can bring $J_2$ to a more recognizable form by performing integrations over
$z_1$ and $\tau_1$ and defining the variables
\begin{equation}
t_1 = \pi \, z_2, \qquad t_2 = \pi w_2 = \pi (\tau_2-z_2)\, .
\end{equation}
In terms of these variables $J_2$ takes the form
\begin{equation} \label{enewJ2}
J_2 = - 2^{-3} \pi^{2} \, M^2\, g^2 \int_{\pi\Lambda}^\infty dt_1 \int_{\pi\Lambda}^\infty dt_2\,
(t_1+t_2)^{-5} \, \exp\left[4 {t_1 t_2\over t_1+t_2}\right] \,
\left\{ 1 - {1 \over (t_1+t_2)} +
16 \, {1\over (t_1+t_2)^2}\right\}\, .
\end{equation}
The integral has apparent divergence from the large $t_1,t_2$ region. However we
shall now try to
interpret it as a finite momentum space integral by
comparing this with \refb{efinint} for $D=10$.
Comparing the overall normalization and the argument of the exponential
we get\footnote{The peculiar factor of $(2\pi)^7$ in the expression for $B$ can be
traced to the fact that the heterotic string coupling $g_H$ is related to the
coupling $g$ used here by the relation $g_H = (2\pi)^{7/2} g $\cite{1304.0458}.}
\begin{equation}\label{epar}
B = (2\pi)^{7} M^2 g^2, \quad A=\pi\Lambda, \quad M=2, \quad m_1=0, \quad m_2=0\, .
\end{equation}
Matching the rest of the integrand in \refb{enewJ2} with
what appears in
\refb{efinint} for $D=10$, we see that we have an extra insertion of a factor of
\begin{equation}
\left( 1 - {1 \over (t_1+t_2)} +
16 \, {1\over (t_1+t_2)^2}\right)\, .
\end{equation}
Using \refb{eaddmu0}, \refb{eaddmul} this can be identified as the
effect of inserting
a factor of
\begin{equation} \label{emom}
(1 -2 \, (k^1)^2 + 64 \, (k^1)^2 (k^2)^2)\, .
\end{equation}
in the integrand in the momentum
space.\footnote{Note that knowing the integrand in the Schwinger parameter
representation does not fix the form in momentum space completely, {\it e.g.}
the multiplicative factor could also have been $(1 - (k^2)^2 +
64 (k^3)^2 (k^4)^2)$, or averages
of various factors of this form. If we had started from string field theory, then
Feynman diagrams would lead to a specific form. However for evaluation of the
integral the detailed form is not necessary since due to rotation symmetry
all of them lead to the same
value of the integral.}
Combining this with \refb{e1}, we can express $J_2$ as a momentum space
integral
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{e1aa}
J_2 &=& i\, (2\pi)^{7} M^2 g^2 \, \int{d^{10} k \over (2\pi)^{10}} \,
\exp[-\pi\Lambda k^2 -
\pi\Lambda (p-k)^2 ]\, (k^2)^{-1} \{(p-k)^2\}^{-1} \nonumber \\ && \hskip 2in
\{1 -2 \, (k^1)^2 + 64 \, (k^1)^2 (k^2)^2\} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
This of course gives a finite contribution and can be evaluated using the method
described in \S\ref{sdirect}.
Therefore we see that $J_2$ can be identified as the contribution from the Feynman
diagram of the form shown in Fig.~\ref{fqft} with the parameters given in
\refb{epar}, and extra momentum dependent insertion in the integrand given in
\refb{emom}.
In the $\alpha'=1$ unit that we have been working in, $M=2$ is the correct mass
of the external state.
The result
$m_1=m_2=0$ in \refb{epar} indicates that for this state the only source of divergence
comes from the graphs where the intermediate states are massless.
$J_1$ can be regarded as the contribution from the Feynman
diagrams of Fig.~\ref{fqft} with other massive string states propagating in the
loop and from other
Feynman diagrams, including the elementary two point vertex. Note the dependence
of $J_1$ and $J_2$ on the arbitrary parameter
$\Lambda$; this represents the freedom of
changing the interaction vertices of string field theory by `adding stubs', and
can be compensated for by a redefinition of the string fields\cite{9301097}. We shall
show later that $J_1+J_2$ is independent of $\Lambda$.
Manipulating \refb{e1aa} as in \S\ref{sdirect} with $m_1=m_2=0$,
we can express this as
\begin{equation} \label{ej3i1i2}
J_2 = I_1 + I_2\, ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{ei1sp}
I_1&=&- (2\pi)^{7} M^2 g^2 \int{d^{9}k\over (2\pi)^{9} }\, \int_{-\infty}^\infty {du\over 2\pi} \,
\exp\bigg[- \pi\Lambda\left\{u^2 +\vec k^2\right\}
- \pi\Lambda\left\{(u+iM)^2
+ \vec k^2\right\}\bigg] \nonumber \\
&& \times \, \{1 -2 \, (k^1)^2 + 64 \, (k^1)^2 (k^2)^2\}
\,\left(u^2 + \vec k^2\right)^{-1}
\left\{(u+iM)^2 + \vec k^2\right\}^{-1}\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{ei2sp}
I_2 &=& -(2\pi)^{7}M^2 g^2 \int{d^{9}k\over (2\pi)^{9} }
\exp\left[ \pi\Lambda \left(M - |\vec k|\right)^2
- \pi\Lambda \, \vec k^2
\right] \, \Theta \left(M - |\vec k|\right) \nonumber \\
&&\times \,
\{1 -2 \, (k^1)^2 + 64 \, (k^1)^2 (k^2)^2\} \,
\left(2 M |\vec k|\right)^{-1}
\left\{ 2 |\vec k|- M-i\epsilon\right\}^{-1}\, .
\end{eqnarray}
We can simplify both expressions by noting that due to rotational invariance
the insertions of $k^i k^j$ and
$k^i k^j k^m k^n$ must give contributions proportional to
\begin{equation}
\delta_{ij} \quad \hbox{and} \quad \delta_{ij} \delta_{mn} + \delta_{im} \delta_{jn}
+ \delta_{in} \delta_{jm}\, ,
\end{equation}
respectively.
This allows us to replace the insertion of $(k^1)^2$ by $\vec k^2/9$ and
$(k^1)^2 (k^2)^2$ by
$(\vec k^2)^2/99$. Defining $v=|\vec k|$ we can write
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{ei1spa}
I_1&=&-
(2\pi)^{-3} M^2 g^2 \, {\Omega_8}\,
\int_0^\infty dv \, \int_{-\infty}^\infty {du} \, v^8\,
\exp\left[- \pi\Lambda\left\{u^2 +v^2\right\}
- \pi\Lambda\left\{(u+iM)^2
+ v^2\right\}\right] \nonumber \\ &&
\hskip .5in \left(1 - {2\over 9} \, v^2 + {64\over 99} \, v^4\right) \,
\left(u^2 + v^2\right)^{-1}
\left\{(u+iM)^2 + v^2\right\}^{-1}\, .
\end{eqnarray}
On the other hand
$I_2$ takes the form:
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{ei2spa}
I_2 &=& -(2 \pi)^{-2}M^2 g^2 \, {\Omega_8} \,
\int_0^M dv
\, v^8 \,
\exp\left[ \pi\Lambda \left(M - v\right)^2
- \pi\Lambda \, v^2
\right] \nonumber \\&&
\hskip 1in \left(1 - {2\over 9} \, v^2 + {64\over 99} \, v^4\right) \,
\left(2 M v\right)^{-1}
\left\{ 2 v - M-i\epsilon\right\}^{-1}\, .
\end{eqnarray}
$I_1$ is manifestly finite. $I_2$ is also manifestly finite if we deform the integration
contour to avoid the pole at $v=(M+i\epsilon)/2$
by taking it to lie below the real axis. This gives a
completely finite result for $\delta M^2$, given by the sum of $J_1$,
$I_1$ and $I_2$.
It is easy to see that $I_1$ is real. We can also see the reality of $J_1$
given in \refb{edefJ1} by
observing that
\begin{equation}
( F(z,\bar z, \tau, \bar\tau))^*= F(-\bar z,- z, -\bar\tau, -\tau)\, ,
\end{equation}
and that the integration domain and the integration measure are invariant
under $(z\leftrightarrow -\bar z, \tau\leftrightarrow -\bar\tau)$.
Therefore the imaginary part of the amplitude comes only from
$I_2$. This
can be isolated by replacing the last factor in \refb{ei2spa} by a
sum of the principal value and a delta function
and noting that the imaginary part comes from the delta function. This gives
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle
{\rm Im} \, \left(\delta M^2\right) &=&
- {1\over 4\pi} M^2 g^2 {\Omega_8}
\int_0^M dv
\, v^8 \,
\exp\left[ \pi\Lambda \left(M - v\right)^2
- \pi\Lambda \, v^2
\right] \nonumber \\&&
\hskip 1in \left(1 - {2\over 9} \, v^2 + {64\over 99} \, v^4\right) \,
\left(2 M v\right)^{-1}
\delta(2 v - M) \nonumber \\
&=& -{1\over 8\pi} {\Omega_8} \, g^2\, \left({M\over 2}\right)^8\,
\left( 1 - {1\over 18} M^2 + {4\over 99} M^4\right)=
- {47\over 264 \, \pi}\, \Omega_8\, g^2\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where in the last step we have used $M=2$. In \S\ref{sunitarity} we shall
argue that this result is consistent with unitarity.
We shall now show that although
each of the quantities $J_1$, $I_1$ and $I_2$ depends on the
arbitrary parameter $\Lambda$, their sum does not
depend on $\Lambda$.
For this, note that from \refb{edefJ1} we get
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{eL1}
{d\over d\Lambda}J_1
&=&
-{1\over 16 \, \pi} \, M^2 \, g^2
\int d^2 \tau \int d^2 z\,
2\, (2\pi)^{-4} \, \left( 32 \pi^4 -32 {\pi^3 \over \tau_2} +
512 \, {\pi^2\over\tau_2^2}\right) \nonumber \\ &&
\hskip 2in \exp[4\pi z_2 - 4\pi z_2^2/\tau_2] \, \tau_2^{-5}
\, \Theta(\tau_2 - z_2 - \Lambda) \delta(z_2-\Lambda)\, ,
\nonumber \\
&=& - 2^{-7} \pi^{-5} \, M^2 \, g^2
\int_{2\Lambda}^\infty d\tau_2 \,
\exp[4\pi \Lambda - 4\pi \Lambda^2/\tau_2] \, \tau_2^{-5}\,
\left( 32 \pi^4 -32 {\pi^3 \over \tau_2} +
512 \, {\pi^2\over\tau_2^2}\right) \, , \nonumber \\
\end{eqnarray}
where in the first step we have used the $z\to \tau-z$ symmetry to
combine two terms into a single term.
On the other hand from \refb{e1aa}, \refb{ej3i1i2} we get
\begin{equation}
{d\over d\Lambda} (I_1+I_2)
= -i\, 2^8\, \pi^8 \, M^2 \,g^2 \, \int{d^{10} k \over (2\pi)^{10}} \,
\exp[-\pi\Lambda k^2 -
\pi\Lambda (p-k)^2 ]\, (k^2)^{-1}
(1 - 2 \, k_1^2 + 64 \, k_1^2 k_2^2) \,
\end{equation}
where again we have exploited the $k\to (p-k)$ symmetry to combine two terms
into a single term.
Once the pole associated with $\{(p-k)^2\}^{-1}$ has been removed, there is
no obstruction to taking the $k^0$ integration contour to lie along the imaginary
axis, and
representing $(k^2)^{-1}$ as $\int_0^\infty ds e^{-s k^2}$. Carrying out the
integration over $k^\mu$ using the rules of gaussian integration, and defining
$\tau_2= (s+2\pi\Lambda)/\pi$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eL2}
{d\over d\Lambda} (I_1+I_2)
=2^{-2} \pi^{-1} \, M^2 \, g^2
\int_{2\Lambda}^\infty d\tau_2 \,
\exp[4\pi \Lambda - 4\pi \Lambda^2/\tau_2] \, \tau_2^{-5}\,
\left( 1 - {1 \over \pi\tau_2} +
{16 \over\pi^2 \tau_2^2}\right)\, .
\end{equation}
Using \refb{eL1} and \refb{eL2} we get
\begin{equation}
{d\over d\Lambda} (J_1+I_1+I_2)=0\, .
\end{equation}
\sectiono{Generalizations and justification using string field theory} \label{sgen}
The procedure described in the previous section can be used to compute the renormalized
mass of any massive state in heterotic or type II string theory.
For general physical states, at one loop order
one has to consider the
possibility of mixing with other physical states at the same mass
level, but not with pure gauge or
unphysical states\cite{1401.7014}, or with states at different mass level.
If we denote by $\delta M^2$ the one loop
two point function of physical states -- typically a matrix with
both real and imaginary parts -- then the one loop propagator will be proportional
to $(k^2+M^2 + \delta M^2)^{-1}$, and its poles will be at places where
$\det(k^2+M^2 + \delta M^2)$ vanishes.
The general strategy for computing the matrix $\delta M^2$
will be as follows. The two point function of general on-shell external states
of mass $M$ can be brought to the form
\begin{equation} \label{efullint}
\delta M^2 = \int d^2\tau \, d^2 z \, F
\end{equation}
where $F$ is some function of $z,\bar z,\tau,\bar\tau$ describing the two point
function of the corresponding vertex operators on the torus. Let us define
$z_1,z_2, w_1, w_2$ via
\begin{equation}
z=z_1+ i z_2, \quad w = \tau - z \equiv w_1 + i w_2\, .
\end{equation}
The potential divergence in \refb{efullint} comes from the region of large $z_2$ and
$w_2$. If we denote by $F_0$ the part of $F$ that can give divergent contribution, then
$F_0$ has the general form
\begin{equation} \label{ef0}
F_0 = \tau_2^{-5} \,
\exp[ \pi M^2 z_2 w_2 / \tau_2] \sum_{m,n} e^{ 2\pi i m z_1
+ 2\pi i n w_1} e^{2\pi z_2 + 2\pi w_2}\, A_{m,n}(z_2, w_2)\, ,
\end{equation}
where the sum over $m,n$ runs over a finite set of integers, and $A_{m,n}$ is
a function of $z_2,w_2$ that involves a finite
sum of products of non-negative powers of $e^{-2\pi z_2}$, $e^{-2\pi w_2}$,
and polynomial of $1/\tau_2$ and $z_2/\tau_2$. In defining $F_0$ we shall
include in $e^{2\pi z_2+2\pi w_2}A_{m,n}$ a term proportional to
$e^{-2\pi p z_2 - 2\pi q w_2}$ if and only if either $p$ or $q$ is negative,
or $\sqrt{2p}+\sqrt{2q}<M$, since these
are the terms that can cause potential divergence in \refb{efullint} from the large
$z_2$ and large $w_2$ region.
In \refb{ef0} the $\tau_2^{-5} \exp[ \pi w_2 z_2 M^2 / \tau_2]$
factor comes from the
non-holomorphically factorized part of the correlation function
of $e^{\pm i k.X}$ factors in the vertex operators -- expressed in
$z\to \tau-z$ invariant form. The factors of
$e^{2\pi i m z_1
+2\pi i n w_1}$, $e^{2\pi z_2 + 2\pi w_2}$,
and the powers of $e^{-2\pi z_2}$, $e^{-2\pi w_2}$ hidden in the definition
of $A_{m,n}$ come from the expansion of the holomorphically factorized pieces
in the correlation function for large $z_2$ and $w_2$. Finally
the polynomials of $1/\tau_2$ and $z_2/\tau_2$ in the
expansion of $A_{m,n}$ come from the derivatives of the term proportional to
$(z_2-w_2)^2/\tau_2$ in the Green's function $\langle X^\mu(z,\bar z) X^\nu(w,
\bar w)\rangle$.
The presence of
the explicit factor of $e^{2\pi z_2}$ and $e^{2\pi w_2}$
is a reflection of the presence of the
tachyon in the left-moving sector before level matching.\footnote{These factors will
be absent in type II string theories.}
However a term proportional to $e^{2\pi z_2}$
(resp. $e^{2\pi w_2}$) in the expression for $F_0$
appears only when accompanied by a factor of $e^{2\pi i z_1}$ (resp.
$e^{2\pi i w_1}$), {i.e.} $A_{p,q}$ will have its expansion beginning with
the power of $e^{-2\pi z_2}$ (resp. $e^{-2\pi w_2}$) except for $p=1$
(resp. $q=1$).
Therefore for $\tau_2\ge 1$, the contribution from
terms proportional to $e^{2\pi z_2}$ (resp. $e^{2\pi w_2}$)
disappears after integration over $z_1$ (resp. $w_1$).
More generally, for $\tau_2\ge 1$ integration over $z_1$
and $w_1$ will make the integral \refb{ef0}
vanish unless $m=n=0$, but we shall continue to display them for
reasons that will become clear later.
Using \refb{efullint}, \refb{ef0} we can write
\begin{equation}
\delta M^2 =J_1+J_2\, ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
J_1= \int d^2w \, d^2 z \, \left[F
- F_0 \, \Theta(w_2 - \Lambda) \, \Theta(z_2-\Lambda)
\right]\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle
&& J_2 = \int d^2w\, d^2 z \, F_0(z_1, z_2, w_1, w_2)\, \Theta(w_2 - \Lambda) \,
\Theta(z_2-\Lambda)
\nonumber \\
&=& \int d^2w \, d^2 z \, \Theta(w_2 - \Lambda) \Theta(z_2-\Lambda)\, \tau_2^{-5}\,
\, e^{\pi M^2 z_2 w_2 / \tau_2} e^{2\pi z_2+2\pi w_2}
\sum_{m,n} e^{ 2\pi i m z_1
+2\pi i n w_1} \, A_{m,n}(z_2, w_2)
\, , \nonumber \\
\end{eqnarray}
and $\Lambda$ is an arbitrary constant, which we shall take to be larger than 1.
$J_1$ can be shown to be finite following the strategy used in appendix
\ref{sa}. Our strategy for evaluation of $J_2$ will be to drop all
terms with non zero $m,n$ since they vanish by integration over $z_1$ and
$w_1$, and for the $m=n=0$ term,
expand $e^{2\pi z_2 + 2\pi w_2}A_{0,0}$ in a power series
\begin{equation} \label{eAexp}
e^{2\pi z_2 + 2\pi w_2}A_{0,0}(z_2,w_2)
= \sum_{p,q\ge 0\atop 2\sqrt p + 2\sqrt q<M}
e^{-4\pi p z_2 - 4\pi q w_2} P_{p,q}(z_2, w_2)\, ,
\end{equation}
where $P_{p,q}$ is a polynomial in $1/(z_2+w_2)$ and $z_2/(z_2+w_2)$.
Note that once we have focussed on terms independent of $z_1$ and $w_1$,
the series expansion is in powers of $e^{2\pi i (z-\bar z)} = e^{-4\pi z_2}$ and
$e^{2\pi i (w-\bar w)}=e^{-4\pi w_2}$.
By making the substitution\footnote{The scale factor $\pi$ is fixed
as follows. The Schwinger parameters $t_1$ and $t_2$
introduced in \S\ref{ssch} appears in the
exponent multiplied by a factor of $k^2+m^2$. On the other hand $z_2$ and $w_2$
appear in the exponent multiplied by a factor of $2\pi (L_0+\bar L_0)=\pi
(k^2+m^2)$.
}
\begin{equation}
\pi \, z_2 = t_1, \quad \pi\, w_2 = t_2, \quad \pi\tau_2 = t_1+t_2\, ,
\end{equation}
and using \refb{eAexp},
we can now express $J_2$ as
\begin{equation}
J_2 =\pi^3 \int_{\pi\Lambda}^\infty dt_1 \int_{\pi\Lambda}^\infty dt_2 \, (t_1+t_2)^{-5}
\sum_{p,q\ge 0\atop 2\sqrt p + 2\sqrt q<M}
\exp\left[ M^2 t_1 t_2/(t_1+t_2) - 4\, p \, t_1 - 4\, q \, t_2\right] P_{p,q}\, .
\end{equation}
This integral diverges for $t_1,t_2\to\infty$, but we can replace this by a momentum
space integral by
comparing with the results of \S\ref{ssch}.
Once we have made the replacement, the integration over $k^0$ has to be
interpreted as a contour integral following the procedure described in
\S\ref{sdirect}, while integration over $\vec k$ can be regarded as
ordinary integrals running along the real axes.
This gives
finite result due to
exponential suppression factor in the integrand for large space-like momenta.
Note that this method is
applicable for all massive states, including the ones that
do not appear as intermediate states in the scattering of massless external
states, {\it e.g.} massive states in SO(32) heterotic string theory carrying
SO(32) spinor representation. For such states the method
of \cite{9302003,9404128} based on factorization of four point function of
massless states is not directly applicable.
Furthermore, since this method allows us to
directly compute the one loop two point function of two arbitrary physical states
at the same mass level, we do not have to make the effort of disentangling the
contributions from different intermediate states to the four point function.
There is however a possible subtlety with this procedure arising out of the
following consideration. If we compute the
one loop two point amplitude in string field
theory, then, for sufficiently large $\Lambda$, the contribution $J_2$ comes from the sum of
Feynman diagrams of the type shown in Fig.~\ref{fqft} with different states propagating
in the loop. If we represent the Siegel gauge propagator as
\begin{equation} \label{esiegel}
b_0\, \bar b_0\, (L_0+\bar L_0)^{-1}\delta_{L_0,\bar L_0}
=2\pi \, b_0\, \bar b_0\,
\int_0^\infty d\xi_2 \int_0^{1} d \xi_1\, e^{-2\pi \xi_2(L_0+\bar L_0)}
e^{2\pi i \xi_1
(L_0-\bar L_0)}\, ,
\end{equation}
then for the two internal propagators of Fig.~\ref{fqft} we have two complex
variables $\xi$ and $\zeta$ -- the analog of the variable $\xi_1+i\xi_2$
in \refb{esiegel}. Now if $\xi$ and $\zeta$ could be identified
as the moduli parameters $z$ and $w$,
then replacing the right hand side of \refb{esiegel} by the left
hand side is equivalent to
the prescription for doing the integration in the way we
have suggested -- i.e.\ first integrate over $z_1$ and $w_1$ at fixed
$z_2$ and $w_2$, and then replace the integration over $z_2$ and $w_2$
by momentum space integrals.
However the parameters $z$
and $w$ are not directly the variables $\xi$ and $\zeta$
of the string field theory -- they are given by some functions of $\xi$ and $\zeta$.
Therefore it is not {\it a priori} guaranteed that first performing the
integration over the real parts of $z$ and $w$, and then
treating the imaginary parts of $z$ and $w$ as Schwinger parameters
to translate the
amplitude to a momentum space integral is a valid procedure.
The correct procedure will be to first express the
amplitude as integrals over the variables $\xi$ and $\zeta$, carry out the integrations over
the real parts of $\xi$ and $\eta$, and then
interpret the expression as coming from momentum space integrals treating
the imaginary parts of $\xi$ and $\zeta$
as Schwinger parameters. We shall now
argue that this does not change the result.
Since different string field theories (related by field redefinition) lead to different
plumbing fixture variables,
instead of focussing on any particular string field theory we shall consider the effect
of a general parameter redefinition of the form
\begin{equation}
z = f(\xi, \zeta), \quad w = g(\xi,\zeta)\, .
\end{equation}
In order to get some insight into the form of the functions $f$ and $g$,
it will be useful to recall the geometric interpretation of the parameters
$\xi$ and $\zeta$.
In string field theory the Feynman diagram of Fig.~\ref{fqft} will represent the
effect of sewing two three punctured spheres. If the first one has punctures
$P_1$, $P_2$, $P_3$ with local coordinates $y_1$, $y_2$ and $y_3$, and the
second one has punctures $\widetilde P_1$, $\widetilde P_2$, $\widetilde P_3$ with local coordinates
$\widetilde y_1$, $\widetilde y_2$ and $\widetilde y_3$, then the sewing is done via the relations
\begin{equation}
y_2 \, \widetilde y_2 = e^{2\pi i\xi}, \quad y_3 \, \widetilde y_3 = e^{2\pi i\zeta}\, .
\end{equation}
The external states are inserted at the punctures $P_1$ and $\widetilde P_1$.
Using this geometric interpretation of the parameters $\xi$ and $\zeta$ it is
easy to see that
for large $\xi_2$ and $\zeta_2$, we have $z\simeq \xi$ and $w\simeq \zeta$.
Using this and the fact that $z$, $w$, $\xi$ and $\zeta$ are
periodic variables with period 1, we see that $z-\xi$ and $w-\zeta$ will
have expansions in non-negative powers of $e^{2\pi i \xi}$ and $e^{2\pi i\zeta}$.
Since such a redefinition of parameters can be built from successive infinitesimal
deformations, we shall now focus on infinitesimal deformations of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eredef}
z = \xi + a(\xi,\zeta), \quad w = \zeta + b(\xi,\zeta)\, ,
\end{equation}
where $a$ and $b$ are infinitesimal functions admitting expansion in non-negative
powers of $e^{2\pi i \xi}$ and $e^{2\pi i\zeta}$.
If we can show that for general infinitesimal $a$ and $b$, first expressing
$J_2$ in the $\xi,\zeta$ variables
and then mapping it to momentum space representation regarding $\xi_2$
and $\zeta_2$ as Schwinger parameters, gives the same result as what we
get by directly converting the original
expression for $J_2$
to momentum space integral treating $z_2$ and $w_2$ as Schwinger parameters,
then we would have proven a similar result for finite redefinitions relating
$z$ and $w$ to $\xi$ and $\zeta$.
This is what we shall now show.
Taking real and imaginary parts
of \refb{eredef} we write
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle
&& z_1 = \xi_1 + a_1(\xi_1,\xi_2,\zeta_1, \zeta_2),
\quad z_2 = \xi_2 + a_2(\xi_1,\xi_2,\zeta_1, \zeta_2), \nonumber \\
&& w_1 = \zeta_1 + b_1(\xi_1,\xi_2,\zeta_1, \zeta_2),
\quad w_2 = \zeta_2 + b_2(\xi_1,\xi_2,\zeta_1, \zeta_2)\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $a_i$ and $b_i$ are periodic functions of $\xi_1$ and $\zeta_1$ with
period 1.
Under this change of variables, we get
\begin{equation}
J_2 = \widetilde J_2 + \delta J_2
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\widetilde J_2 = \int d^2\xi \, d^2 \zeta \, F_0(\xi_1, \xi_2, \zeta_1,\zeta_2) \,
\Theta(\xi_2-\Lambda) \, \Theta(\zeta_2 - \Lambda)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{emani}
\delta J_2 &=& \int d^2 \xi \, d^2 \zeta \,
\Theta(\xi_2-\Lambda)\Theta(\zeta_2 - \Lambda)
\sum_{i=1}^2 \left[ {\partial\over \partial \xi_i} \left\{
a_i \, \,
F_0\right\} + {\partial \over \partial \zeta_i} \left\{b_i \, \,
F_0\right\}
\right] \nonumber \\ &&
+ \int d^2 \xi \, d^2 \zeta \,
\left[\delta(\xi_2-\Lambda)\Theta(\zeta_2 - \Lambda) \, a_2
+
\Theta(\xi_2-\Lambda)\delta(\zeta_2 - \Lambda) \, b_2 \right]
F_0
\, .
\end{eqnarray}
The arguments of $a_i$, $b_i$ and $F_0$ in \refb{emani} are
$\xi_1,\xi_2,\zeta_1,\zeta_2$.
Now $J_2$ evaluated by regarding $z_2$ and $w_2$ as Schwinger
parameters is identical to $\widetilde J_2$ evaluated by regarding $\xi_2$ and $\zeta_2$
as Schwinger parameters. Therefore we need to show that $\delta J_2$ evaluated
by regarding $\xi_2$ and $\zeta_2$
as Schwinger parameters vanish.
Since the integration rules involve carrying out
integration over $\xi_1$ and $\zeta_1$ first at fixed $\xi_2$ and $\zeta_2$ and then
integrating over $\xi_2$ and $\zeta_2$, the derivatives with respect to
$\xi_1$ and $\zeta_1$ vanish after integration
due to the periodicity of the functions $a_i$,
$b_i$ and $F_0$ in the $\xi_1$
and $\zeta_1$ variables. Since the rest of the terms admit expansion in powers
of $e^{2\pi i \xi_1}$ and $e^{2\pi i \zeta_1}$,
only the $\xi_1$ and $\zeta_1$ independent terms can
contribute, -- the other terms will vanish after
integration over $\xi_1$ and $\zeta_1$.
Therefore we can write
\begin{equation} \label{exx0}
\delta J_2 = \int_\Lambda^\infty d\xi_2 \int_\Lambda^\infty d\zeta_2\,
\left[ {\partial \widetilde a(\xi_2,\zeta_2)\over \partial\xi_2} + {\partial \widetilde b(\xi_2,\zeta_2)\over \partial\zeta_2}
\right] + \int_\Lambda^\infty d\zeta_2 \, \widetilde a(\Lambda, \zeta_2)
+ \int_\Lambda^\infty d\xi_2 \, \widetilde b(\xi_2, \Lambda)\, ,
\end{equation}
where\footnote{Note that part of the contribution comes from
the terms carrying powers of $e^{2\pi i z_1}$ and $e^{2\pi i w_1}$ in the
original expression for $F_0(z_1, z_2, w_1, w_2)$, since such terms, after
combining with the $\xi_1$ and $\zeta_1$ dependent terms in $a_2$ and $b_2$,
can give rise to $\xi_1$ and $\zeta_1$ independent terms in $a_2 F_0$ and
$b_2 F_0$. This is the reason we had kept such terms in the expression for
$F_0$.
}
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{exx1}
\widetilde a(\xi_2, \zeta_2) &\equiv& \int_0^1 d\xi_1 \int_0^1 d\zeta_1 \,
a_2(\xi_1, \xi_2,
\zeta_1, \zeta_2) \, F_0(\xi_1, \xi_2,
\zeta_1, \zeta_2), \nonumber \\
\widetilde b(\xi_2, \zeta_2) &\equiv& \int_0^1 d\xi_1 \int_0^1 d\zeta_1 \,
b_2(\xi_1, \xi_2,
\zeta_1, \zeta_2)\, F_0(\xi_1, \xi_2,
\zeta_1, \zeta_2)\, .
\end{eqnarray}
{}From the form of $F_0$ given in \refb{ef0} we see that
$\widetilde a$ and $\widetilde b$ will have expansions of the form
\begin{equation} \label{eab}
\pmatrix{\widetilde a\cr \widetilde b} =
(\xi_2+\zeta_2)^{-5}\exp[\pi M^2 \xi_2 \zeta_2/(\xi_2+\zeta_2)]
\sum_{m,n\ge 0} e^{-4\pi m \xi_2 - 4\pi n \zeta_2} \pmatrix{
C^a_{m,n}\cr C^b_{m.n}}\, ,
\end{equation}
where $C^a_{m,n}$ and $C^b_{m,n}$ are
polynomials in $1/(\xi_2+\zeta_2)$ and $\xi_2/(\xi_2+\zeta_2)$.
Formally the right hand side of \refb{exx0} vanishes by integration by parts.
However we have to remember that these are divergent integrals and in
order to make sense of them we have to replace them by momentum
space integrals following the dictionary given in \S\ref{stoy}. Therefore
we shall now replace each of the
terms in the expression \refb{exx0}
by momentum space integrals,
and then ask if the total contribution vanishes.
We proceed as follows. Using the algorithm described in
\S\ref{ssch} we first express
$\widetilde a(\xi_2,\zeta_2)$ and $\widetilde b(\xi_2,\zeta_2)$ given in
\refb{eab} in the form
\begin{equation}
\pmatrix{\widetilde a (\xi_2,\zeta_2)\cr \widetilde b (\xi_2,\zeta_2)}
= \sum_{m,n\ge 0} \int{d^{10}k\over (2\pi)^{10}}
e^{-\pi \xi_2 (k^2+4m) -\pi \zeta_2 ((p-k)^2 + 4n)} \pmatrix{f_{a,m,n}(k)\cr
f_{b,m,n}(k)}\, ,
\end{equation}
where $f_{a,m,n}(k)$ and $f_{b,m,n}(k)$ is some polynomial in $k^0$ and
$\vec k^2$, and we have $p^2=-M^2$.
In that case $\partial \widetilde a/\partial \xi_2$ will have the expression of the form
\begin{equation} \label{epr1}
{\partial\widetilde a\over \partial \xi_2} = -\pi\sum_{m,n\ge 0} \int{d^{10}k\over (2\pi)^{10}}
e^{-\pi \xi_2 (k^2+4m) -\pi \zeta_2 ((p-k)^2 + 4n)}
(k^2+4m) f_{a,m,n}(k)\, .
\end{equation}
Now
the replacement rule says that after substituting the expressions given
above into the integrals appearing in \refb{exx0}, we make the replacements
\begin{equation} \label{err1}
\int_\Lambda^\infty d\xi_2 e^{-\pi \xi_2 (k^2+4m)} \to {1\over \pi}
\exp\left[-\pi \Lambda (k^2 + 4m)\right]\,
(k^2+4m)^{-1} \, ,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{err2}
\int_\Lambda^\infty d\zeta_2 e^{-\pi \zeta_2 ((p-k)^2+4n)} \to {1\over \pi}
\exp\left[-\pi \Lambda \{(p-k)^2 + 4n\}\right]\,
\{(p-k)^2+4n\}^{-1} \, ,
\end{equation}
and then interpret the integration over $k^0$
as a contour integration of the kind described in \S\ref{sdirect}, and the integration
over $\vec k$ as ordinary $(D-1)$ dimensional integral along
real axis. This makes the replacement rules \refb{err1} and \refb{err2} only formal, since
the integration over $k^0$ can run over domains in which $k^2 +4m$ or
$(p-k)^2 + 4n$ may turn negative making the left hand sides diverge.
Using these rules, we get
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{efc1}
\int_\Lambda^\infty d\xi_2 \int_\Lambda^\infty d\zeta_2\,
{\partial \widetilde a(\xi_2,\zeta_2)\over \partial\xi_2}
&\to& -{1\over \pi} \sum_{m,n\ge 0} \int{d^{10}k\over (2\pi)^{10}}
\exp\left[-\pi \Lambda (k^2 + 4m)-
\pi \Lambda \{(p-k)^2 + 4n\}\right]
\nonumber \\ && \hskip 1in \times
\{(p-k)^2+4n\}^{-1} f_{a,m,n}(k)\, .
\end{eqnarray}
Note that the $(k^2+4m)^{-1}$ factor of \refb{err1}
has been cancelled by the explicit
$(k^2+4m)$ factor produced in \refb{epr1}
by the $\partial/\partial\xi_2$ operation. The right hand side of this expression is
finite, while the individual terms contributing to the left hand side can be infinite for
$M> \sqrt{4m}+\sqrt{4n}$. The rules we have proposed uses the right hand side as the
definition of the left hand side.
On the
other hand we have
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{efc2}
\int_\Lambda^\infty d\zeta_2 \, \widetilde a(\Lambda, \zeta_2)
&=& {1\over \pi}\sum_{m,n\ge 0} \int{d^{10}k\over (2\pi)^{10}}
\exp\left[-\pi \Lambda (k^2 + 4m)-
\pi \Lambda \{(p-k)^2 + 4n\}\right]\nonumber \\ && \hskip 1in \times
\{(p-k)^2+4n\}^{-1} f_{a,m,n}(k)\, .
\end{eqnarray}
Note that this is an equality -- both the left and the right hand sides are finite since the
integral of an expression of the form given in \refb{eab} is finite if either
$\xi_2$ or $\zeta_2$ is fixed.
Therefore we
can use either description to evaluate this contribution. We now see that the right hand sides of
\refb{efc1} and \refb{efc2} cancel. A similar analysis shows that the other two terms in
\refb{exx0} also cancel.
This shows that $\delta J_2$ vanishes. Therefore $J_2$ takes the same
value irrespective of whether we use its expression in the $w,z$ coordinate and
express it as momentum space integral by regarding $z_2$ and $w_2$ as Schwinger
parameters, or whether we take its expression in the
$\xi,\zeta$ coordinate and express it as momentum space integral by regarding
$\xi_2$ and $\zeta_2$ as Schwinger parameters. Integrating this
result to generate finite deformations, we see that the result remains the same
irrespective of whether we use the $z,w$ variables or the sewing parameters of
a string field theory to generate the momentum space representation. Besides
justifying the use of $z,w$ variables to generate momentum space representation, this
analysis also shows that the result is independent of which string field theory we use
to generate the momentum space representation.
The analysis has a straightforward generalization to compactified heterotic and
type II string theories described
by general superconformal world-sheet theories.
If we consider a vacuum with $D$ non-compact space-time dimensions, then
the overall multiplicative factor of $\tau_2^{-5}$ in \refb{ef0} will be replaced by
$\tau_2^{-D/2}$. The other difference will be that the coefficients
$A_{m,n}$ will not only have integer powers of $e^{-2\pi z_2}$, $e^{-2\pi w_2}$,
$e^{2\pi i z_1}$, $e^{2\pi i w_1}$, but
also fractional powers of $e^{-2\pi z_2}$ and $e^{-2\pi w_2}$.
For example
for compactification on a circle of radius $R$, $A_{p,q}$ will
contain factors of
\begin{equation}
\textrm{exp}\left[-\frac{\pi i \overline{z}}{2}
\left(\frac{n}{R}+mR\right)^2+\frac{\pi i z}{2}\left(\frac{n}{R}-mR
\right)^2\right]\,,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\textrm{exp}\left[-\frac{\pi i \overline{w}}{2}
\left(\frac{n}{R}+mR\right)^2+\frac{\pi i w}{2}\left(\frac{n}{R}-mR
\right)^2\right]\,.
\end{equation}
Here $n,m$ are integers labelling the momentum and winding numbers
along the circle. The rest of the analysis can be carried out as before by
converting each term into momentum space integrals.
\sectiono{Unitarity} \label{sunitarity}
In this section we shall show that the result for one loop contribution
to mass$^2$ computed using our method is consistent with unitarity. The
general analysis of \cite{1604.01783} already shows that the result
satisfies Cutkosky rules. This would prove unitarity if in the Siegel
gauge all states with $L_0=\bar L_0=0$ had been physical states.
However in general there will also be unphysical and pure gauge states.
Hence we need to show that their contribution to the cut diagram vanishes.
While for a general amplitude establishing this requires some
effort\cite{appear},
for the one loop two point function the analysis can be carried out as
follows.
Let us focus on states with $L_0=\bar L_0=0$
and annihilated by $b_0$ and $\bar b_0$, since these are the states that
are associated with a cut propagator
in the Siegel gauge. We choose a basis of states
such that unphysical states -- those not annihilated by the BRST charge
$Q_B$ -- are labelled as $|\phi_s\rangle$, and physical states -- annihilated by
$Q_B$ but not pure gauge -- are labelled as $|\chi_a\rangle$.
In this basis we do not need to introduce separately the basis of
pure gauge states. -- they can be taken to be $Q_B|\phi_s\rangle$.
Pure gauge states have non-zero inner product only with unphysical states,
while physical states can have non-zero inner product with unphysical and
physical states.
Using the fact that the BPZ inner product is non-degenerate, one can argue
that it is possible to choose a basis in which unphysical states have non-zero
inner product only with pure gauge states and physical states have non-zero inner
product only with physical states.
We denote by $|\phi_s^c\rangle$ and $|\chi_a^c\rangle$ another basis
of unphysical and physical states, also annihilated by $b_0$,
$\bar b_0$, and
satisfying
\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \label{einn}
&& \langle \phi_s^c|c_0^- c_0^+ Q_B |\phi_r\rangle
=\delta_{rs}, \quad \langle\phi_s^c |c_0^- c_0^+|\phi_r\rangle=0,
\quad \langle \chi_b^c |c_0^- c_0^+|\chi_a\rangle =\delta_{ab},
\nonumber \\ &&
\langle \phi_s^c |c_0^- c_0^+|\chi_a\rangle=0, \quad
\langle\chi_b^c |c_0^- c_0^+|\phi_r
\rangle=0\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation} c_0^\pm={1\over 2} (c_0 \pm \bar c_0), \quad b_0^\pm =b_0\pm \bar b_0,
\quad L_0^\pm = L_0\pm \bar L_0\, .
\end{equation}
{}From \refb{einn} we get
\begin{equation} \label{ensnsc}
n_s +n_s^c=3\, ,
\end{equation}
where $n_s$ and $n_s^c$ are
the ghost numbers of $\phi_s$ and $\phi_s^c$ respectively.
Since Siegel gauge propagator is proportional to $b_0^+ b_0^- (L_0^+)^{-1}
\delta_{L_0,\bar L_0}$, a cut propagator in the Siegel gauge will be
proportional to $b_0^+ b_0^-\delta(L_0^+) \delta_{L_0^-, 0}$. It is easy to see that in the
$L_0^\pm =0$ subspace,
$b_0^+ b_0^-$ may be decomposed as
\begin{equation} \label{ebbd}
b_0^+ b_0^- = |\phi_r\rangle \langle\phi_r^c|Q_B + Q_B |\phi_r\rangle \langle\phi_r^c|
+ |\chi_a\rangle \langle\chi_a^c|\, .
\end{equation}
Now consider the diagram of Fig.~\ref{fqft} but interpret this as a string theory diagram
with all string states propagating in the internal lines. A cut passing through both
internal propagators will insert a factor of \refb{ebbd} for each propagator. Let us denote
the first one by \refb{ebbd} and the second one by
\begin{equation} \label{ebbda}
|\phi_s\rangle \langle\phi_s^c|Q_B + Q_B |\phi_s\rangle \langle\phi_s^c|
+ |\chi_b\rangle \langle\chi_b^c|\, .
\end{equation}
We shall assume that the ket is inserted on the vertex to the left and the bra is
inserted on the vertex to the right. Now since the external state in each vertex
is physical, and since the three point function on the sphere
of two physical states and one pure
gauge state vanishes, it is easy to see that many of the contributions vanish.
For example, for the combination
\begin{equation}
Q_B |\phi_s\rangle \langle\phi_s^c| \, \otimes \, |\chi_a\rangle \langle\chi_a^c|
\end{equation}
the left vertex will represent the three point function on the sphere of
$Q_B \phi_s$, $\chi_a$ and the external state. Since $\chi_a$ and the external
state are BRST invariant, this amplitude vanishes by standard argument
involving deformation of the BRST contour.
Only the following combination survives
from the tensor product of \refb{ebbd} and \refb{ebbda} inserted at the vertices:
\begin{equation} \label{efull}
|\chi_a\rangle \langle\chi_a^c| \otimes |\chi_b\rangle \langle\chi_b^c|
+ |\phi_r\rangle \langle\phi_r^c|Q_B \otimes Q_B |\phi_s\rangle \langle\phi_s^c|
+ Q_B |\phi_r\rangle \langle\phi_r^c| \otimes |\phi_s\rangle \langle\phi_s^c|Q_B\, .
\end{equation}
Of these the first term gives the desired contribution -- the sum over physical
states.
Therefore we need to show that the contribution from the other two terms cancel.
Consider the second term. For this the left vertex has the insertion of $|\phi_r\rangle$,
$Q_B|\phi_s\rangle$ and the BRST invariant external state. We can now use the
usual argument involving deformation of the BRST contour to put $Q_B$ on the
$|\phi_r\rangle$ at the cost of getting an extra minus sign and whatever other sign
we get for passing $Q_B$ through the grassmann odd operators. Similarly for the last
term in \refb{efull},
the right vertex has the insertion of $\langle \phi_r^c|$, $\langle\phi_s^c|Q_B$ and
the external state, and we move $Q_B$ from $\phi_s^c$ to $\phi_r^c$. This brings
\refb{efull} to
\begin{equation} \label{eman1}
|\chi_a\rangle \langle\chi_a^c| \otimes |\chi_b\rangle \langle\chi_b^c|
-Q_B |\phi_r\rangle \langle\phi_r^c|Q_B \otimes |\phi_s\rangle \langle\phi_s^c|
+ Q_B |\phi_r\rangle \langle\phi_r^c|Q_B \otimes |\phi_s\rangle \langle\phi_s^c|\, .
\end{equation}
The minus sign in the second term is due to the reversal of the orientation of the BRST
contour. No further minus signs appear since here $Q_B$ has to pass through
$|\phi_r\rangle \langle\phi_r^c|Q_B$ which is grassmann even due to \refb{ensnsc}.
On the other hand in going from the last term in \refb{efull} to the
the last term in \refb{eman1}, $Q_B$ has to pass through the grassmann odd
combination $|\phi_s\rangle \langle\phi_s^c|$ that gives an extra minus sign and cancels
the minus sign coming from the reversal of orientation of the BRST contour. We now see
that the last two terms in \refb{eman1} cancel, leaving behind
the contribution from only the physical intermediate
states in the Cutkosky rules.
This proves unitarity of the one loop two point function.
Note that the cancelation described above involves loops carrying states of
different ghost numbers -- the ghost numbers of the states $Q_B\phi_s$ and
$\phi_s$ in \refb{efull}
differ by 1. This is a generalization of the results in ordinary
gauge theories where the proof of unitarity in the Feynman gauge involves
cancelation between unphysical states in the matter sector and the ghost states
propagating in the loop.
\bigskip
\noindent {\bf Acknowledgement:}
I wish to thank Bo Sundborg for raising the issue that led to this investigation,
useful discussions
and critical comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. I also thank
Roji Pius, D.~Surya Ramana and Barton Zwiebach
for useful discussions.
I thank the Pauli Center for Theoretical Studies at ETH,
Zurich, SAIFR-ICTP, Sao Paulo, Theoretical Physics group of the University
of Torino and LPTHE, Paris for hospitality
during my visit when part of this work was done.
This work was
supported in part by the
DAE project 12-R\&D-HRI-5.02-0303 and J. C. Bose fellowship of
the Department of Science and Technology, India.
|
\section{Introduction}
The bound states of a physical system have a fundamental importance for both quantum mechanics and classical theory. The curved surfaces and their bound states (such as curved strips \cite{surface}) have attracted much attention and these models can be useful for the device modelling area. When we look at the surfaces with different geometries, a particle constrained to the surface of a torus has been studied in classical and quantum theories \cite{mott}, \cite{sree}, \cite{jh} ,\cite{bol}. At the same time, some of these models lead to applications in nano-ribbons \cite{bol}. When it comes to the mathematical methods for the symmetries of the nonlinear systems, it is known that any second order non-linear differential equation admits eight parameter Lie point symmetries, thus they are solvable through point transformations \cite{ibr}, \cite{Lie1}, \cite{ben}, \cite{Lie2}, \cite{diff}. On the other hand, the integrable and super-integrable classical oscillators and their relationships with a nonlinear Li\'{e}nard type nonlinear equations are given in \cite{Car1}, \cite{Car2}, \cite{Car3}. The quantum version of a solvable non-linear oscillator and the complete solutions can be found in terms of a family of orthogonal polynomials \cite{Car4}.
Because the nonlinear differential equations also appear in the solutions of torus Lagrangians and Hamiltonians, the main objective of this work is to search nonlocal point transformations \cite{om} that can be available for our system. Thus, in this study, we obtain a couple of non-linear differential equations for the torus surface using the Euler-Lagrange equations. The position dependent mass approach and the quantization procedure are applied to one of those nonlinear differential equation. In fact, the authors have already found the exact solutions of the quantum nonlinear quadratic and Mathews-Lakshmanan oscillator models \cite{Car4} but we may follow a different approach for obtaining the solutions.
And this work is organized as follows; Section 2 contains the nonlinear equations obtained from the Lagrangian and the position dependent mass approach is adapted to the system. Moreover, adaptation of the toroidal equation to the examples of the nonlinear quadratic and Mathews-Lakshmanan position dependent mass(PDM) nonlinear oscillator equations \cite{ML} are involved. Section 3 is introduced for the quantization of these oscillators and the exact solutions are also involved. Finally, the results are discussed in Section 4.
\section{Differential equations}
The metric for the torus surface is given by
\begin{equation}\label{metric}
ds^{2}=(c+a\cos v)^{2}du^{2}+a^{2}dv^{2}
\end{equation}
where $u, v$ are the coordinates. The Lagrangian can be written in terms of the metric tensor as
\begin{equation}\label{L}
L(q,\dot{q})=g_{ij}\dot{q}_{i}\dot{q}_{j}
\end{equation}
where we take $q_1=u, q_2=v$. Then, the Lagrangian becomes
\begin{equation}\label{Lag}
L=(c+a\cos v)^{2}\dot{u}^{2}+a^{2}\dot{v}^{2}.
\end{equation}
Using the Euler-Lagrange equations, we can derive the equations given below
\begin{eqnarray}\label{1}
(c+a\cos v)\ddot{u}-2a\sin v~ \dot{u}\dot{v} &=& 0 \\
a^{2}\ddot{v}+a(c+a\cos v)\sin v~ \dot{u}^{2} &=& 0.\label{2}
\end{eqnarray}
If we multipliy (\ref{1}) by $\dot{u}$ and integrate it, we get
\begin{equation}\label{3}
\dot{u}=\frac{q_{1}}{(c+a\cos v)^{2}},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{4}
\dot{v}^{2}=\frac{q_{1}^{2}}{a^{2}(c+a\cos v)^{2}}+q_{2}.
\end{equation}
Here $q_{1}$ and $q_{2}$ are the integration constants. Differentiating each side of (\ref{3}) with respect to time and using (\ref{4}), we get
\begin{equation}\label{5}
\ddot{v}+\frac{q_{1}^{2}}{a}\frac{\sin v}{(c+a\cos v)^{3}}=0.
\end{equation}
We may also note that for the value of $q_{2}=0$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{0}
\ddot{u}=\frac{2q_{1}^{2}\sin v}{(c+a\cos v)^{4}}.
\end{equation}
We will continue with (\ref{5}) through this work.
\subsection{position dependent mass Lagrangian approach}
We will follow the notation given in \cite{om} here. Let us remind the Euler-Lagrange equation which is given by
\begin{equation}\label{06}
\frac{d}{d\tau}\frac{\partial L}{\partial q}-\frac{\partial L}{\partial q}=0,
\end{equation}
and hence
\begin{equation}\label{6}
\frac{d^{2}q}{d\tau^{2}}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial q}=0,
\end{equation}
where \cite{om}
\begin{equation}\label{60}
\frac{dq(x)}{dx}=\sqrt{g(x)},~~ \frac{d \tau}{dt}=f(x),~~x=x(t).
\end{equation}
Under these transformations, (\ref{6}) becomes \cite{om}
\begin{equation}\label{7}
\ddot{x}+\frac{1}{2}\frac{m^{'}(x)}{m(x)}\dot{x}^{2}+\frac{f(x)^{2}}{g(x)}\frac{\partial V}{\partial x}=0,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{70}
\frac{m^{'}(x)}{m(x)}=\frac{g^{'}(x)}{g(x)}-2\frac{f^{'}(x)}{f(x)}.
\end{equation}
We note that (\ref{7}) is also known as Li\'{e}nard type equation \cite{Lie1}. In \cite{om}, it is shown that the Euler-Lagrange equations (\ref{06}), (\ref{6}) and (\ref{7}) are invariant under the nonlocal point transformations:
\begin{equation}\label{8}
L=L(q,\dot{q},\tau)=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{dq}{d \tau})^{2}-V(q)=\frac{1}{2}m(x)\dot{x}^{2}-V(x).
\end{equation}
Next, we will use the procedure explained above to see how one can transform the system (\ref{5}) into (\ref{7}). Here, our task is to adapt (\ref{5}) to the nonlinear quadratic and Mathews-Lakshmanan oscillators.
\\
\emph{\textbf{Case 1}: \textbf{Nonlinear quadratic oscillator equation}}:\\
The nonlinear quadratic oscillator equation is written as \cite{Car1}, \cite{om}
\begin{equation}\label{pdm}
\ddot{x}-\frac{2\lambda}{1+\lambda x}\dot{x}^{2}+\alpha^{2}x(1+\lambda x)=0.
\end{equation}
If (\ref{pdm}) and (\ref{7}) are compared, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{9}
m(x)=\frac{C_1}{(1+\lambda x)^{4}},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{10}
V(x)=C_2-C_1\frac{\alpha^{2}(1+2x\lambda)}{2\lambda^{2}(1+x\lambda)^{2}}.
\end{equation}
Let us first consider (\ref{6}) and (\ref{5}). Time derivatives can correspond to derivatives with respect to $\tau$ in (\ref{5}) and let $q=v$ be the nonlocal point transformation such that
\begin{equation}\label{11}
\frac{d^{2}q}{d\tau^{2}}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial q}=0 \rightarrow \frac{\partial V}{\partial q}=\frac{q_{1}^{2}}{a}\frac{\sin q}{(c+a \cos q)^{3}} \rightarrow V(q)=\frac{q_{1}^{2}}{2a^{2}(c+a\cos q)^{2}}+const.
\end{equation}
In order to find $q=q(x)$, we match $V(q)$ in (\ref{11}) and $V(x)$ in (\ref{10}), we obtain four roots of $q(x)$ as
\begin{equation}\label{12}
q_{1,2}(x)=\pm \cos^{-1}(-\frac{c}{a}+\frac{i \lambda q_{1}}{\alpha a^{2}}\frac{1+\lambda x}{\sqrt{-C_1(1+2\lambda x)}}),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{q34}
q_{3,4}(x)= \pm \cos^{-1}(\frac{-a^{2}c C_1 \alpha^{2}(1+2\lambda x)+q_{1}^{2}\lambda^{2}(1+\lambda x)^{2}
\sqrt{-\frac{a^{2}C_1 \alpha^{2}(1+2\lambda x)}{q_{1}^{2}\lambda^{2}(1+\lambda x)^{2}}}}{a^{3}\alpha^{2}(C_1+2C_1 \lambda x)}).
\end{equation}
Using (\ref{70}) and (\ref{60}), it is obtained as \cite{om}
\begin{equation}\label{13}
q(x)=\int \sqrt{m(x)} f(x) dx
\end{equation}
then, we get
\begin{equation}\label{14}
f_{1,2}(x)=\pm \frac{q_{1}\lambda^{3}x(1+\lambda x)^{4}}{C_1 \alpha^{2}(1+2\lambda x)}(a^{2}(a^{2}-c^{2})C_1 \alpha^{2}(1+2\lambda x)-q_{1}^{2}\lambda^{2}F(x))^{-1/2}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{f34}
f_{3,4}(x)=\mp \frac{a x \lambda^{2}\alpha^{2}(1+\lambda x)^{3}}{\sqrt{-a^{2}(a^{2}-c^{2})C_1\alpha^{2}(1+2x\lambda)-q_{1}^{2}\lambda^{2}(1+\lambda x)^{2}(F(x)+2)}}
\end{equation}
where $F(x)=-1+2c\sqrt{-\frac{a^{2}C_1 \alpha^{2}(1+2\lambda x)}{q_{1}^{2}\lambda^{2}(1+\lambda x)^{2}}}$. And the mass function in terms of the torus parameters can be given by
\begin{equation}\label{f35}
m(x)=\frac{C_1}{a^{4}(1+2\lambda x)(1+\lambda x)^{-8}}\frac{(a^{2}(a^{2}-c^{2})C_1 \alpha^{2}(1+2\lambda x)-q_{1}^{2}\lambda^{2}F(x))^{-1/2}}
{1-(-c/a+\frac{iq_{1}\lambda(1+\lambda x)}{a^{2}\alpha}\sqrt{-C_1(1+2\lambda x)})^{2}}.
\end{equation}
Thus, using (\ref{f35}) and (\ref{10}), (\ref{5}) can be written in the form of a Li\'{e}nard type equation in (\ref{7}).
\\
\emph{\textbf{Case 2}:\textbf{Mathews-Lakshmanan PDM nonlinear oscillator equation}}:\\
The Mathews-Lakshmanan oscillator equation is \cite{Car1}, \cite{om}
\begin{equation}\label{15}
\ddot{x}-\frac{\lambda x}{1+\lambda x^{2}}\dot{x}^{2}+\frac{\omega^{2}x}{1+\lambda x^{2}}=0.
\end{equation}
In this case, comparing (\ref{15}) and (\ref{7}), we have
\begin{equation}\label{16}
m(x)=\frac{C_1}{1+\lambda x^{2}}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{17}
V(x)=-\frac{C_1 \omega^{2}}{2\lambda(1+\lambda x^{2})}+C_2.
\end{equation}
And we obtain the functions $q(x)$ and $f(x)$ as
\begin{equation}\label{18}
q(x)=\pm \cos^{-1}(-\frac{c}{a}\pm \sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{C_1}}\frac{q_{1}}{a^{2}\omega}\sqrt{1+\lambda x^{2}}),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{19}
f(x)=\mp \frac{\lambda x (\frac{C_1}{1+\lambda x^{2}})^{1/2}}
{C_1 a} \frac{1}{\sqrt{-\frac{1}{a^{2}}+\frac{C_1\omega^{2}(c^{2}-a^{2})}{q_{1}^{2}\lambda(1+\lambda x^{2})}\pm\frac{2c}{a^{2}}\sqrt{-\frac{a^{2}C_1\omega^{2}}{q_{1}^{2}\lambda(1+\lambda x^{2})}}}}.
\end{equation}
Finaly, the mass function can be written in terms of the torus parameters as
\begin{equation}\label{190}
m(x)=\frac{q_{1}^{2}\lambda}{a^{2}\omega^{2}}\frac{-1/a^{2}+
\frac{C_1\omega^{2}(c^{2}-a^{2})}{q_{1}^{2}\lambda(1+\lambda x^{2})}+
\frac{2c\omega}{q_{1}}\sqrt{-\frac{C_1}{\lambda(1+\lambda x^{2})}}}{1-(-\frac{c}{a}+\frac{q_{1}}{a^{2}\omega}\sqrt{\frac{\lambda(1+\lambda x^{2})}{C_1}})^{2}}.
\end{equation}
\section{Quantization}
Now let us consider (\ref{4}) again. If the Lagrangian is given for (\ref{4}) as
\begin{eqnarray}
L(t,x,\dot{x}) &=& \frac{1}{2}(c+a \cos x)^{2}\dot{\theta}^{2}-\frac{k^{2}}{2a^{2}}-\frac{\ell}{2}(c+a \cos x)^{2}.
\end{eqnarray}
where we use $v \leftrightarrow x $. And the corresponding Hamiltonian is
\begin{equation}\label{16}
H=\frac{1}{2}\frac{p^{2}}{(c+a \cos x)^{2}}+\frac{q_{1}^{2}}{2a^{2}}+\frac{q_{2}}{2}(c+a \cos x)^{2}.
\end{equation}
The momentum operator can be also given by
\begin{equation}\label{17}
\hat{p}=-i\frac{1}{c+a \cos x}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}.
\end{equation}
And the Hamilton operator becomes
\begin{equation}\label{18}
H=-\frac{1}{2(c+a\cos x)^{2}}\frac{d^{2}}{dx^{2}}-\frac{a\sin x}{2(c+a\cos x)^{3}}\frac{d}{dx}+\frac{q_{1}^{2}}{2a^{2}}+\frac{q_{2}}{2}(c+a \cos x)^{2},
\end{equation}
where we take $\hbar=1$. To our knowledge, this Hamiltonian system is not an exactly solvable one. We will re-consider the models in \cite{Car1, Car2, Car3, Car4} which are quantum version of the classical oscillators discussed above. \\
\emph{\textbf{Case 1}: \textbf{Nonlinear quadratic oscillator equation}}:\\
The Lagrangian and the Hamiltonian relations for the corresponding sytem are given by \cite{Car1}
\begin{eqnarray}
L &=& \frac{1}{2}\frac{C_1}{(1+\lambda x)^{4}}\dot{x}^{2}-C_2+C_1 \frac{\alpha^{2}(1+2\lambda x)}{2\lambda^{2}(1+\lambda x)^{2}} \\
H &=& \frac{1}{2C_1}(1+\lambda x)^{4}p^{2} +C_2-C_1 \frac{\alpha^{2}(1+2\lambda x)}{2\lambda^{2}(1+\lambda x)^{2}}
\end{eqnarray}
and we may give the momentum operator for the quantization procedure as
\begin{equation}\label{19}
p\rightarrow -i\sqrt{\frac{(1+\lambda x)^{4}}{C_1}}\frac{d}{dx}.
\end{equation}
The eigenvalue equation is
\begin{equation}\label{20}
H\psi=E\psi,
\end{equation}
and (\ref{20}) brings us to
\begin{equation}\label{21}
-\frac{1}{2C_1}(1+\lambda x)^{4}\psi^{''}(x)-\frac{\lambda}{C_1}(1+\lambda x)^{3}\psi^{'}(x)+\left(C_2-E-C_1 \frac{\alpha^{2}(1+2\lambda x)}{2\lambda^{2}(1+\lambda x)^{2}}\right)\psi(x)=0.
\end{equation}
Now we can give a point transformation as
\begin{equation}\label{22}
z=\int \frac{dx^{'}}{(1+\lambda x^{'})^{2}}
\end{equation}
and we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{23}
-\psi^{''}(z)+(2C_1C_2-2C_1E+C^{2}_1\alpha^{2}z^{2}+\frac{C^{2}_1\alpha^{2}}{\lambda}z)\psi(z)=0.
\end{equation}
The solution of the above equation is well known and we apply a coordinate shift $z_{\varphi}=z+\varphi$ and we get
\begin{equation}\label{24}
-\psi_{\varphi}^{''}(z_{\varphi})+(2C_1C_2-2C_1E+C^{2}_1\alpha^{2}z_{\varphi}^{2}-\frac{C^{2}_1\alpha^{2}}{4\lambda^{2}})\psi_{\varphi}(z_{\varphi})=0,
\end{equation}
where we take $\varphi=\frac{1}{2\lambda}$. Here we can write the solutions of (\ref{24}) as
\begin{equation}\label{25}
E_{n}=\alpha(n+\frac{1}{2})+2C_2-\frac{C_1\alpha^{2}}{4\lambda^{2}},~~~~n=0,1,2,...
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{26}
\psi(z)=\frac{C_1 \alpha}{\sqrt{\pi}2^{n}n!}e^{-\frac{\xi^{2}}{2}}H_{n}(\xi),
\end{equation}
where $\xi=\sqrt{C_1\alpha}(z+1/2\lambda)$, $H_n(\xi)$ are the Hermite polynomials.\\
\emph{\textbf{Case 2}: \textbf{Mathews-Lakshmanan PDM nonlinear oscillator equation}}:\\
The Lagrangian and the Hamiltonian for the corresponding sytem are written as \cite{Car1}
\begin{equation}\label{27}
L=\frac{1}{2}\frac{C_1}{1+\lambda x^{2}}\dot{x}^{2}+\frac{C_1\omega^{2}}{2\lambda (1+\lambda x^{2})}-C_2,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{28}
H=\frac{1}{2}(1+\lambda x^{2})p^{2}-\frac{C_1\omega^{2}}{2\lambda (1+\lambda x^{2})}+C_2
\end{equation}
and the momentum operator for the quantization procedure is
\begin{equation}\label{29}
p\rightarrow -i\sqrt{\frac{(1+\lambda x^{2})}{C_1}}\frac{d}{dx}.
\end{equation}
The form of the Hamiltonian operator becomes
\begin{equation}\label{30}
H=-\frac{1}{2}\frac{(1+\lambda x^{2})}{C_1}\frac{d^{2}}{dx^{2}}-\frac{\lambda x}{2C_1}\frac{d}{dx}-\frac{C_1 \omega^{2}}{2\lambda(1+\lambda x^{2})}+C_2.
\end{equation}
Using the transformation given below
\begin{equation}\label{31}
\psi(x)=(1+\lambda x^{2})^{\gamma}\phi(x)
\end{equation}
and the eigenvalue equation $H\psi=E\psi$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{32}
-(1+\lambda x^{2})\phi^{''}(x)-(1+4\gamma)\lambda x \phi^{'}(x)+\frac{1}{ (1+\lambda x^{2})}\left(2C_1(C_2-E)\lambda-2\gamma\lambda^{2}-C^{2}_1\omega^{2}+(2C_1(C_2-E)\lambda^{2}-4\gamma^{2}\lambda^{3})x^{2}\right)\phi(x)=0.
\end{equation}
Changing variable $z=-i\sqrt{\lambda }x$ in above equation leads to
\begin{equation}\label{33}
(1-z^{2})\phi^{''}(z)-(1+4\gamma)z\phi^{'}(z)+\frac{1}{1-z^{2}}(\frac{2C_1(C_2-E)}{\lambda}-2\gamma-\frac{C^{2}_{1}\omega^{2}}{\lambda^{2}}+
(4\gamma^{2}-\frac{2C_1(C_2-E))}{\lambda})z^{2})\phi(z)=0
\end{equation}
and using $(z^{2}-1)^{1/4-\gamma}F[z]$ in (\ref{33}), we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{34}
(1-z^{2})F^{''}(z)-2zF^{'}(z)+
\frac{1}{1-z^{2}}(\frac{2C_1(C_2-E)}{\lambda}-2\gamma-
\frac{C^{2}_{1}\omega^{2}}{\lambda^{2}}+\frac{4\gamma-1}{2}+(4\gamma^{2}-\frac{2C_1(C_2-E)}{\lambda}+\frac{1-16\gamma^{2}}{4})z^{2})G(z)=0.
\end{equation}
One can transform (\ref{34}) into a Legendre differential equation, if $\omega$ is constrained as
\begin{equation}\label{35}
\omega=\pm i\frac{\lambda}{2C_1},
\end{equation}
thus, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{36}
(1-z^{2})F^{''}(z)-2zF^{'}(z)+\nu(\nu+1)F(z)=0,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{37}
\nu(\nu+1)=-\frac{1}{4}+\frac{2C_1(C_2-E)}{\lambda}.
\end{equation}
Thus, the eigenvalues and the solutions are given respectively as
\begin{equation}\label{38}
E_{\nu}=C_2 -\frac{\lambda}{8C_1}(2\nu+1)^{2},~~~~\nu=0,1,2,...
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{39}
\phi_{\nu}(z)=(z^{2}-1)^{1/4-\gamma}P_{\nu}(z)
\end{equation}
where $P_{\nu}(z)$ are the Legendre polynomials. And the function $\psi(x)$ becomes
\begin{equation}\label{40}
\psi_{\nu}(x)=N(1+\lambda x^{2})^{1/4}P_{\nu}(-i\sqrt{\lambda }x).
\end{equation}
\section{Conclusions}
We have shown that a classical Lagrangian system for a torus surface can be transformed into a Li\'{e}nard equation using position dependent mass approach. In this manner, we have obtained the necessary coordinate and mass functions appearing in Euler-Lagrange equations to transform a toroidal equation to the well-known systems which are nonlinear quadratic oscillator and Mathews-Lakshmanan nonlinear oscillator equations. Finally we have discussed the exact solutions of the quantized eigenvalue equations of the corresponding classical oscillators. The quantum nonlinear quadratic oscillator Hamiltonian solutions are obtained in terms of Hermite polynomials with harmonic oscillator energy eigenvalues. Using necessary transformations we have solved quantum Mathews-Lakshmanan nonlinear oscillator whose solutions are given in terms of Legendre polynomials with an imaginary argument. In case of $C_2 < \frac{\lambda}{8C_1}(2\nu+1)^{2}$, the spectrum is negative which can be a difference between our results and the work in \cite{ML}. Here, another interesting result is an imaginary frequency in (\ref{35}) if $\lambda$ and $C_1$ are both real numbers. On the other hand, if one the constants $\lambda$ or $C_1$ is chosen as an imaginary parameter in order to make the frequency as a real number, this choice leads to a complex energy spectrum. Finally, we note that the transformation of (\ref{18}) to the eigenvalue equations (\ref{21}) and (\ref{32}) in examples 1 and 2 cannot be shown in the recent paper and this procedure will be in progress.
|
\section{Introduction}
\fi
\ifpnas
\dropcap{R}andomized
\else
Randomized\blfootnote{
{\bf Significance Statement.}
As datasets get larger and more complex, there is a growing interest in using machine learning methods to enhance scientific analysis. In many settings, considerable work is required to make standard machine learning methods useful for specific scientific applications. We find, however, that in the case of treatment effect estimation with randomized experiments, regression adjustments via machine learning methods designed to minimize test set error directly induce efficient estimates of the average treatment effect. Thus, machine learning methods can be used out-of-the-box for this task, without any special-case adjustments.}
\fi
controlled trials are often considered the gold standard for estimating the effect of an intervention, as they allow for simple model-free inference about the average treatment effect on the sampled population. Under mild conditions, the mean observed outcome in the treated sample minus the mean observed outcome in the control sample is a consistent and unbiased estimator for the population average treatment effect.
However, the fact that model-free inference is possible in randomized controlled trials does not mean that it is always optimal: as argued by Fisher \cite{fisher1932}, if we have access to auxiliary features that are related to our outcome of interest via a linear model, then controlling for these features using ordinary least squares will reduce the variance of the estimated average treatment effect without inducing any bias. This line of research has been thoroughly explored:
under low-dimensional asymptotics where the problem specification remains fixed while the number of samples grows to infinity, it is now well-established that regression adjustments are always asymptotically helpful---even in misspecified models---provided we add full treatment-by-covariate interactions to the regression design and use robust standard errors
\cite{athey2016econometrics,berk2014covariance,ding2016decomposing,Fr2008,freedman2008regression,
imbens2009recent,lin2013agnostic,rosenbaum2002covariance,cochran1977}.
The characteristics of high-dimensional regression adjustments are less well understood. In a recent advance, Bloniarz et al.\! \cite{blon2016} show that regression adjustments are at least sometimes helpful in high dimensions: given an ``ultra-sparsity'' assumption from the high-dimensional inference literature, they establish that regression adjustments using the lasso \cite{bp,Ti96} are more efficient than model-free inference. This result, however, leaves a substantial gap between the low-dimensional regime---where regression adjustments are always asymptotically helpful---and the high-dimensional regime where we only have special-case results.
In this paper, we show that high-dimensional regression adjustments to randomized controlled trials work under much greater generality than previously known. We find that any regression adjustment with a free intercept yields unbiased estimates of the treatment effect. This result is agnostic as to whether the regression model was obtained using the lasso, the elastic net \cite{ZH2005}, subset selection, or any other method that satisfies this criterion. We also propose a simple procedure for building practical confidence intervals for the average treatment effect.
Furthermore, we show that the precision of the treatment effect estimates obtained by such regression adjustments depends only on the prediction risk of the fitted regression adjustment. In particular, any risk-consistent regression adjustment can be made to yield efficient estimates of the average treatment effect in the sense of \cite{bickel1998,hahn1998role,imbens2004nonparametric,robins1995semiparametric}.
Thus, when choosing which regression adjustment to use, practitioners are justified in using standard model selection tools that aim to control prediction error, e.g., Mallow's Cp or cross-validation.
This finding presents a striking contrast to the theory of high-dimensional regression adjustments in observational studies. In a setting where treatment propensity may depend on covariates, simply fitting low-risk regression models to the treatment and control samples via cross-validation is not advised, as there exist regression adjustments that have low predictive error but yield severely biased estimates of the average treatment effect \cite{athey2016efficient,belloni2013program,belloni2014inference,farrell2015robust}. Instead, special-case procedures are needed: For example, Belloni et al.\! \cite{belloni2014inference} advocate a form of augmented model selection that protects against bias at the cost of worsening the predictive performance of the regression model.
The tasks of fitting good high-dimensional regression adjustments to randomized versus observational data thus present qualitatively different challenges.
The first half of this paper
develops a theory of regularized regression adjustments with
high-dimensional Gaussian designs. This analysis enables us to
highlight the connection between the predictive accuracy of the regression
adjustment and the precision of the resulting treatment effect estimate, and
also to considerably improve on theoretical guarantees available in
prior work. In the second half of the paper, we build on these insights to
develop cross-estimation, a practical method for inference about average
treatment effects that can be paired with either high-dimensional regularized
regression or non-parametric machine learning methods.
\section{Setting and notation}
We frame our analysis in terms of the Neyman--Rubin potential outcomes model \cite{neyman1990application,rubin1974estimating}.
Given $n$ i.i.d. observations $(X_i, \, Y_i, \, W_i)$,
$ i=1, \, 2, \, \ldots, \ n$, we posit potential outcomes $Y_i^{(1)}$ and $Y_i^{(0)}$; then,
the outcome that we the actually observe is \smash{$Y_i = Y_i^{(W_i)}$}.
We focus on randomized controlled trials, where $W_i$ is independent of all pre-treatment characteristics,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rct}
\cb{X_i, \, Y_i^{(0)}, \, Y_i^{(1)}} \ \mathlarger{\indep} \ W_i.
\end{equation}
We take the predictors to be generated as
$X_i \sim F(\cdot) \in \RR^p,$
and assume a homoskedastic linear model in each arm,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:linmodel}
Y_i = c^{(W_i)}+X_i \cdot \beta^{(W_i)} + \varepsilon_i^{(W_i)}, \ c^{(w)} \in \RR, \ \beta^{(w)} \in
\RR^p,
\end{equation}
for $w = 0, \, 1$,
where \smash{$\varepsilon_i^{(W_i)}$} is mean-zero noise with variance $\sigma^2$;
more general models will be considered later.
We use the notation $n_0= \abs{\cb{i : W_i = 0}}$ and $n_1= \abs{\cb{i : W_i =1}}$.
We study inference about the average treatment effect
$\tau =\EE{Y(1) - Y(0)}$.
In our analysis, it is sometimes also convenient to study estimation
of the conditional average treatment effect.
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\btau &= \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i = 1}^n \EE{Y_i^{(1)} - Y_i^{(0)} \cond X_i} \\
&= \bX \cdot \ppp{\beta^{(1)} - \beta^{(0)}} + c^{(1)} - c^{(0)}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
As discussed by \cite{imbens2004nonparametric}, good estimators for
$\btau$ are generally good estimators for $\tau$, and vice-versa.
In the homogeneous treatment effects model
$Y_i= c + X_i \cdot \beta + W_i \tau +\varepsilon_i$,
$\tau$ and $\bar\tau$ coincide.
\section{Regression adjustments with Gaussian designs}
Suppose that we have obtained parameter estimates
\smash{$\hc^{(w)}$}, \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$}, $w\in\cb{0, \, 1}$ for the linear model \eqref{eq:linmodel}
via the lasso, the elastic net, or any other method. We then get a natural estimator
for the average treatment effect:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:estimator}
\htau = \bX \cdot \ppp{\hbeta^{(1)} - \hbeta^{(0)}} + \hc^{(1)} - \hc^{(0)}.
\end{equation}
In the case where \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} is the ordinary least squares estimator for $\htau$, the behavior
of this estimator has been carefully studied by \cite{cochran1977,lin2013agnostic}.
Our goal is to characterize its behavior for generic regression adjustments \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$},
all while allowing the number of predictors $p$ to be much larger than the sample size $n$.
The only assumption that we make on the estimation scheme is that it be centered:
for $w \in \cb{0, \, 1}$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:intercept}
\begin{split}
&\bY_w = \bX_w \cdot \hbeta^{(w)} + \hc^{(w)},
\end{split}
\end{align}
i.e., that the mean of the predicted outcomes matches that of the observed outcomes;
and $\hbeta^{(w)}$ is translation invariant and only depends on
\begin{equation}
\ff_\beta = \cb{X_i - \bX_{W_i}, \, Y_i - \bY_{W_i}, \, W_i}_{i = 1}^n.
\end{equation}
Here, $\bX_w$ and $\bY_w$ denote the mean of the outcomes $Y_i$ and features $X_i$
over all observations with $W_i = w$. Algorithmically, a simple way to enforce this constraint
is to first center the training samples $X_i \rightarrow X_i - \bX_{W_i}$, $Y_i \rightarrow Y_i - \bY_{W_i}$,
run any regression method on this centered data,
and then set the intercept using \eqref{eq:intercept}; this is done by default in standard
software for regularized regression, such as \texttt{glmnet} \cite{FHT2010}. We also note
that ordinary least squares regression is always centered in this sense, even after common forms of model selection.
Now, if our regression adjustment has a well-calibrated intercept as in \eqref{eq:intercept},
then we can write \eqref{eq:estimator} as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:estimator2}
\begin{split}
\htau
&=\bX \cdot \ppp{\hbeta^{(1)} - \hbeta^{(0)}} + \ppp{\hc^{(1)} - \hc^{(0)}} \\
&= \bY_1 - \bY_0 + \ppp{\bX - \bX_1} \cdot \hbeta^{(1)} - \ppp{\bX - \bX_0} \cdot \hbeta^{(0)}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
To move forward, we focus on the case where the data-generating model for $(X_i, \, Y_i)$ is Gaussian, i.e.,
$X_i \sim \nn\ppp{m, \, \Sigma}$ for some $m \in \RR^p$ and positive-semidefinite
matrix \smash{$\Sigma \in \RR^{p \times p}$}, and \smash{$Y_i - \EE{Y_i \cond X_i, \, W_i} \sim \nn(0, \, \sigma^2)$}.
For our purpose, the key fact about Gaussian data is that the mean of
independent samples is independent of the within-sample spread, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:orth}
\cb{X_i - \bX_{W_i}, \, Y_i - \bY_{W_i}}_{i = 1}^n \ \mathlarger{\indep} \ \cb{\bX_0, \, \bX_1, \, \bY_0, \, \bY_1},
\end{equation}
conditionally on the treatment assignments $W_1, \, ..., \, W_n$.
Thus, because \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} only depends on
the centered data $X_i - \bX_{W_i}$ and $Y_i - \bY_{W_i}$, we can derive
a simple expression for the distribution of $\htau$.
The following is an exact finite sample result, and holds no
matter how large $p$ is relative to $n$; a key observation is
that \smash{$\bX - \bX_w$} is mean-zero by randomization of the treatment
assignment, for $w = 0, \, 1$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:main}
Suppose that our regression scheme for \smash{$\hc^{(w)}$} and \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} is centered,
and that our data-generating model is Gaussian as above. Then, writing
$\Norm{v}_\Sigma^2 := v^\top\Sigma \, v$ for $v \in \RR^p$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:gauss_cond}
\begin{split}
&\htau - \btau \ \Big| \ {n_0, \, n_1, \, \hbeta^{(0)}, \, \hbeta^{(1)}}\eqd\ \nn\ppp{0, \, A}, \\
&A = \ppp{\frac{1}{n_0} + \frac{1}{n_1}} \ppp{\sigma^2 + \Norm{\hat{\bbeta} - \bar{\beta}}_\Sigma^2}, \\
&\bar{\beta} = \frac{n_1 \, \beta^{(0)} + n_0 \, \beta^{(1)}}{n}, \ \ \hat{\bbeta} = \frac{n_1 \, \hbeta^{(0)} + n_0 \, \hbeta^{(1)}}{n}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
If the errors in $\hbeta^{(0)}$ and $\hbeta^{(1)}$ are roughly orthogonal, then
\begin{equation}
\Norm{\hat{\bbeta} - \bar{\beta}}_\Sigma^2 \approx \frac{n_1^2}{n^2} \Norm{\hbeta^{(0)} - \beta^{(0)}}_\Sigma^2 + \frac{n_0^2}{n^2} \Norm{\hbeta^{(1)} - \beta^{(1)}}_\Sigma^2
\end{equation}
and, in any case, twice the right-hand side is always an upper bound for the left-hand side.
Thus, the distribution of $\htau$ effectively depends on the regression
adjustments \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} only through the excess predictive error
\begin{equation*}
\Norm{\hbeta^{(w)} - \beta^{(w)}}_\Sigma^2 = \EE{\ppp{\ppp{X - m} \cdot \ppp{\hbeta^{(w)} - \beta^{(w)}}}^2 \cond \hbeta^{(w)}},
\end{equation*}
where the above expectation is taken over a test set example $X$.
This implies that, in the setting of Proposition \ref{prop:main}, the main practical concern in choosing which
regression adjustment to use is to ensure that \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} has
low predictive error.
The above result is conceptually related to recent work by Berk et al.\! \cite{berk2014covariance}
(see also \cite{pitkin2013improved}),
who showed that the accuracy of low-dimensional covariate adjustments using ordinary
least-squares regression depends on the mean-squared error of the regression fit; they also
advocate using this connection to provide simple asymptotic inference about $\tau$.
Here, we showed that a similar result holds for any regression adjustment on Gaussian designs,
even in high dimensions; and in the second half of the paper we will discuss how to move beyond the Gaussian case.
\subsection{Risk consistency and the lasso}
As stated, Proposition \ref{prop:main} provides the distribution of $\htau$ conditionally on
\smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$}, and so is not directly comparable to related results in the literature. However,
whenever \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} is risk consistent in the sense that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:risk_consistent}
R\ppp{\hbeta^{(w)}} := \Norm{\hbeta^{(w)}- \beta^{(w)}}_\Sigma^2 \rightarrow_p 0,
\end{equation}
for $w = 0, \, 1$, we can asymptotically omit the conditioning.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theo:efficient}
Suppose that, under the conditions of Proposition \ref{prop:main}, we have a sequence of problems
where \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} is risk consistent \eqref{eq:risk_consistent}, and $\PP{W = 1} \rightarrow \pi$. Then,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:efficient}
\begin{split}
&\sqrt{n}\ppp{\htau - \btau} \Rightarrow \nn\ppp{0, \, \frac{\sigma^2}{\pi\ppp{1 - \pi}}},
\end{split}
\end{align}
or, in other words, $\htau$ is efficient for estimating $\btau$
\cite{bickel1998,hahn1998role,imbens2004nonparametric,robins1995semiparametric}.
\end{theorem}
In the case of the lasso, Theorem \ref{theo:efficient} lets us substantially improve
over the best existing guarantees in the literature \cite{blon2016}.
The lasso estimates \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} as the minimizer
over $\beta$ of
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\cb{i : W_i = w}} \frac{1}{2} \ppp{Y_i - \bY_w - \ppp{X_i - \bX_w} \cdot \beta}^2
+ n_w \lambda \Norm{\beta}_1,
\end{equation}
for some penalty parameter $\lambda > 0$.
Typically, the lasso is used when we believe a sparse regression adjustment to be appropriate.
In our setting, it is well known that the lasso satisfies
\smash{$R\ppp{\hbeta^{(w)}} = \oo_P\ppp{\Norm{\Sigma}_{\text{op}}^2{\Norm{\beta^{(w)}}_0 \log(p)}\,\big/\,{n_w}}$},
provided the penalty parameter $\lambda$ is well chosen and $\Sigma$ does not
allow for too much correlation between features
\cite{bickel2009simultaneous,meinshausen2009lasso}.
Thus, whenever we have a sequence of problems as in Theorem \ref{theo:efficient}
where \smash{$\beta^{(w)}$} is $k$-sparse, i.e.,
\smash{$\beta^{(w)}$} has at most $k$ non-zero entries, and
$k \log(p) \,\big/\, n \rightarrow 0$,
we find that $\htau$ is efficient in the sense of \eqref{eq:efficient}.
Note that this result is much stronger than the related result of \cite{blon2016},
which shows that lasso regression adjustments yield efficient estimators $\htau$
in an ultra-sparse regime with $k \ll \sqrt{n}/\log(p)$.
To illustrate the difference between these two results, it is well known that
if $k \ll \sqrt{n}/\log(p)$, then it is possible to do efficient inference about the
coefficients of the underlying parameter vector $\beta$
\cite{javanmard2014confidence,van2014asymptotically,zhang2014confidence},
and so the result of \cite{blon2016} is roughly in line with the rest of the
literature on high-dimensional inference.
Conversely, if we only have $k \ll n/\log(p)$, accurate inference about
the coefficients of $\beta$ is in general impossible without further conditions on the covariance
of $X$ \cite{cai2015confidence,javanmard2015biasing}.
Yet we have shown that we can still carry out efficient inference about $\tau$.
In other words, the special structure present in randomized trials means that
much more is possible than in the generic high-dimensional regression setting.
\subsection{Inconsistent regression adjustments}
Even if our regression adjustment \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} is not risk consistent,
we can still use Proposition \ref{prop:main} to derive unconditional results
about $\htau$ whenever
\begin{equation}
R\ppp{\hat{\bbeta}} := \Norm{\hat{\bbeta} - \bar{\beta}}_\Sigma^2 \rightarrow_p R_\infty.
\end{equation}
We illustrate this phenomenon in the case of ridge regression, where regression
adjustments generally reduce---but do not eliminate---excess test-set risk.
Recall that ridge regression estimates \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} as the minimizer
over $\beta$ of
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\cb{i : W_i = w}} \frac{1}{2} \ppp{Y_i - \bY_w - \ppp{X_i - \bX_w} \cdot \beta}^2 + n_w \lambda \Norm{\beta}_2^2.
\end{equation}
The following result relies on random-matrix theoretic tools for analyzing the predictive risk of
ridge regression \cite{dobriban2015high}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theo:ridge}
Suppose we have a sequence of problems in the setting of Proposition \ref{prop:main} with $n, \, p \rightarrow \infty$ and $p/n \rightarrow \gamma \in (0, \, \infty)$, such that the spectrum of the covariance $\Sigma$ has a weak limit. Following \cite{dobriban2015high}, suppose moreover that the true parameters $\smash{\beta^{(0)}}$ and $\smash{\beta^{(1)}}$ are independently and randomly drawn from a random effects model with
\begin{equation}
\EE{\beta^{(w)}} = 0 \eqand \Var{\beta^{(w)}} = \frac{\alpha^2}{p} I_{p \times p}, \text{ with } \alpha > 0.
\end{equation}
Then, selecting \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)}$} in \eqref{eq:estimator} via ridge regression
tuned to minimize prediction error, and with $\PP{W = 1} \rightarrow \pi$, we get
$\sqrt{n} \ppp{\htau - \btau} \Rightarrow \nn\ppp{0, \, S}$,
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
&S = 2\sigma^2 + \frac{\alpha^2}{\gamma}\ppp{\frac{\pi}{v_0\big(-\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{\alpha^2(1 - \pi)}\big)} + \frac{1 - \pi}{v_1\big(-\frac{\gamma\sigma^2}{\alpha^2\pi}\big)}},
\end{split}
\end{align}
where the $v_w(-\lambda)$ are the companion Stieltjes transforms of the limiting
empirical spectral distributions for the treated and control samples,
as defined in the proof.
\end{theorem}
To interpret the above result, we note that the quantity $v_w(-\lambda)$
can also be induced via the limit \cite{bai2010spectral,marchenko1967distribution}
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{n_w} \tr\bigg(\bigg(\frac{1}{n_w} \sum_{\cb{i : W_i = w}} X_i X_i^\top + \lambda I_{n_w \times n_w}\bigg)^{-1}\bigg) \rightarrow_p v_w(-\lambda),
\text{ for } \lambda > 0.
\end{equation*}
Finally, we note that the limiting variance of $\htau - \btau$ obtained via
ridge regression above is strictly smaller than the corresponding variance
of the unadjusted estimator, which converges to
$(\sigma^2 + (\pi^2 + (1 - \pi^2))\alpha^2 \tr(\Sigma)/p)/(\pi(1 - \pi))$;
this is because optimally-tuned ridge regression strictly improves over the
``null'' model \smash{$\hbeta^{(w)} = 0$} in terms of its predictive accuracy.
\section{Practical inference with cross-estimation}
In the previous section, we found that---given Gaussianity assumptions---generic regression adjustments
yield unbiased estimates of the average treatment effect, and also that
low-risk regression adjustments lead to high-precision estimators.
Here, we seek to build on this insight, and to develop simple inferential
procedures about $\tau$ and $\btau$ that attain the above efficiency guarantees,
all while remaining robust to deviations from Gaussianity or homoskedasticity.
Our approach is built around \emph{cross-estimation}, a procedure
inspired by data splitting and the work of \cite{aronow2013class,TE2002}.
We first split our data into $K$ equally-sized
folds (e.g., $K = 5 \text{ or } 10$) and then, for each fold $k = 1, \, ..., \, K$, we compute
\begin{align}
\label{eq:kfold}
\begin{split}
\htau^{(k)} &= \bY_1^{(k)} - \bY_0^{(k)} + \ppp{\bX^{(k)} - \bX_1^{(k)}} \cdot \hbeta^{(1, \, -k)} \\
&\ \ \ \ \ \ - \ppp{\bX^{(k)} - \bX_0^{(k)}} \cdot \hbeta^{(0, -k)}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Here, \smash{$\bY_1^{(k)}$}, \smash{$\bY_0^{(k)}$}, etc. are moments taken over the $k$-th
fold, while \smash{$\hbeta^{(1, \, -k)}$} and \smash{$\hbeta^{(0, \, -k)}$} are centered regression
estimators computed over the $K - 1$ other folds. We then obtain an aggregate estimate
\smash{$\htau = \sum_{k = 1}^K \htau^{(k)} \, n^{(k)}/n$},
where \smash{$n^{(k)}$} is the number of observations in the $k$-th fold.
An advantage of this construction is that an analogue to the relation \eqref{eq:orth} now
automatically holds, and thus our treatment effect estimator $\htau$ is
unbiased without assumptions.
Note that the result below references both the average treatment effect $\tau$
and the conditional average treatment effect $\btau$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theo:CE}
Suppose that we have $n$ independent and identically distributed samples
satisfying \eqref{eq:rct}, drawn from a linear model \eqref{eq:linmodel}
where $X_i$ has finite first moments and the conditional variance of \smash{$Y_i^{(w)}$}
given $X_i$ may vary.
Then, \smash{$\EE{\htau \cond X_1, \, ..., \, X_n} = \btau$}.
If, moreover, the \smash{$\hbeta^{(w, \, -k)}$} are all
risk-consistent in the sense of \eqref{eq:risk_consistent} for $k = 1, \, ..., \, K$,
\sloppy{
and both the signals \smash{$X_i \cdot \beta^{(w)}$} residuals
\smash{$Y_i - \EE{Y_i \cond X_i, W_i = w}$} are asymptotically Gaussian
when averaged, then writing $\bar{\sigma}_w^2 = \mathbb{E}[\operatorname{Var}[Y_i^{(w)} \cond X_i]]$, we have
}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:eff2}
\sqrt{n} \ppp{\htau - \tau} \Rightarrow \nn\ppp{0, \, \frac{\bar{\sigma}_0^2}{1 - \pi} + \frac{\bar{\sigma}_1^2}{\pi} +\Norm{\beta^{(1)} - \beta^{(0)}}_\Sigma^2}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
In the homoskedatic case, i.e., when the variance of $Y^{(w)}$ conditionally on $X$ does
not depend on $X$, then the above is efficient. With heteroskedasticity, the above is no longer
efficient because we are in a linear setting and so inverse-variance weighting could improve
precision; however, \eqref{eq:eff2} can still be used as the basis for valid inference about $\tau$.
\subsection{Confidence intervals via cross-estimation}
Another advantage of cross-estimation is that it allows for moment-based
variance estimates for $\htau$. Here, we discuss practical methods for building
confidence intervals that cover the average treatment effect $\tau$.
We can verify that the variance of \smash{$\htau^{(k)}$} is \smash{$V_k$} after conditioning
on the \smash{$\hbeta^{(w, \, -k)}$} and \smash{$n_w^{(k)}$}, with
\begin{align}
\label{eq:vartau}
V_k = \sum_{w \in \cb{0, \, 1}} \frac{1}{n_w^{(k)}} \, \Var{Y^{(w)} - X \cdot \hat{\bbeta}^{(-k)} \cond \hat{\bbeta}^{(-k)}}.
\end{align}
Now, the above moments correspond to
observable quantities on the $k$-th data fold,
so we immediately obtain a moment-based plug-in
estimator \smash{$\hV_k$} for $V_k$. Finally,
we build $\alpha$-level confidence intervals for $\tau$ as
\begin{equation}
\tau \in \htau \pm z_{1 - \alpha/2} \, \hV, \ \ \hV = \sum_{k = 1}^K \ppp{\frac{n^{(k)}}{n}}^2 \, \hV_k,
\end{equation}
where $z_{1 - \alpha/2}$ is the appropriate standard Gaussian quantile. In the setting of
Theorem \ref{theo:CE}, i.e., with risk consistency and bounded second moments,
we can verify that the \smash{$\htau^{(k)}$} are asymptotically uncorrelated
and so the above confidence intervals are asymptotically exact.
\subsection{Cross-validated cross-estimation}
High-dimensional regression adjustments usually rely on a tuning
parameter that controls the amount of regularization, e.g., the
parameter $\lambda$ for the lasso and ridge regression. Although
theory provides some guidance on how to select $\lambda$, practitioners
often prefer to use computationally-intensive methods such as cross-validation.
Now, our procedure in principle already allows for cross-validation:
if we estimate $\hbeta^{(0, \, -k)}$ in \eqref{eq:kfold} via any cross-validated
regression adjustment that only relies on all but the $k$-th data folds, then
$\htau^{(k)}$ will be unbiased for $\tau$. However, this requires running the
full cross-validated algorithm $K$ times, which can be very expensive
computationally.
Here, we show how to obtain good estimates \smash{$\htau$} using only a
single round of cross-validation. First, we specify $K$ regression folds,
and for each $k \in \cb{1, \, ..., \, K}$ and $w \in \cb{0, 1}$ we compute
\smash{$\bX_{k, \, w}$} and \smash{$\bY_{k, \, w}$} as the mean
of all observations in the $k$-th
fold with $W_i = w$. Next, we center the data
such that \smash{$\tX_i = X_i - \bX_{k, \, W_i}$}
and \smash{$\tY_i = Y_i - \bY_{k, \, W_i}$} for all observations in the $k$-th fold.
Finally, we estimate \smash{$\hbeta^{(w, \, -k)}$} by running a standard
out-of-the-box cross-validated algorithm
(e.g., \texttt{cv.glmnet} for \texttt{R}) on
the \smash{$(\tX_i, \, \tY_i, \, W_i)$}-triples
with the same $K$ folds as specified before,
and then use \eqref{eq:kfold} to compute \smash{$\htau$}.
The actual estimator that we use to estimate $\hbeta^{(0)}$ and $\hbeta^{(1)}$
in our experiments is inspired by
the procedure of Imai and Ratkovic \cite{imai2013estimating}.
Our goal is to let the lasso learn shared ``main effects'' for the treatment and control
groups. To accomplish this, we first run a $2p$-dimensional lasso problem,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:joint_lasso}
\begin{split}
\hbeta, \, \hgamma &= \argmin_{\beta, \, \gamma} \Bigg\{ \lambda \ppp{\Norm{\beta}_1 + \Norm{\gamma}_1} \\
& \ \ \ \ \ + \sum \ppp{\tY_i - \ppp{\tX_i \cdot \beta + \ppp{2 W_i - 1} \tX_i \cdot \gamma}}^2 \Bigg\},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and then set $\hbeta^{(0)} = \hbeta - \hgamma$ and $\hbeta^{(1)} = \hbeta + \hgamma$.
We simultaneously tune $\lambda$ and estimate $\tau$ by
cross-validated cross-estimation as discussed above.
When all our data is Gaussian,
this procedure is exactly unbiased by the same argument as used in Proposition
\ref{prop:main}; and even when $X$ is not Gaussian, it appears to work well in
our experiments.
\section{Non-parametric machine learning methods}
In our discussion so far, we have focused on treatment effect estimation
using high-dimensional, linear regression adjustments, and showed how to
provide unbiased inference about $\tau$ under general conditions. Here,
we show how to extend our results about cross-estimation to general
non-parametric regression adjustments obtained using, e.g., neural
networks or random forests \cite{breiman01:_random_fores}.
We assume a setting where
$$ \EE{Y(w) \cond X = x} = \mu^{(w)}\ppp{x} $$
for some unknown regression functions \smash{$\mu^{(w)}(x)$}, and
our goal is to leverage estimates \smash{$\hmu^{(w)}(x)$} obtained
using any machine learning method to improve the precision
of $\htau$, as follows:\footnote{We
note that \eqref{eq:ml_adjust} only depends on
\smash{$\hmu^{(0, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i}$} and \smash{$\hmu^{(1, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i}$}
implicitly through
\smash{$\bar{\hmu}^{(-i)}\ppp{X_i} = {n_1}/{n} \ \hmu^{(0, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i} + {n_0}/{n} \ \hmu^{(1, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i}$}.
It may thus also be interesting to estimate \smash{$\bar{\hmu}^{(-i)}\ppp{X_i}$} directly using, e.g., the ``tyranny of the
minority'' scheme of Lin \cite{lin2013agnostic}.}\textsuperscript{,}\footnote{A related
estimator is studied by Rothe \cite{rothe2016value} in the context of classical non-parametric regression
adjustments, e.g., local regression, for observational studies with known treatment propensities.}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ml_adjust}
&\htau = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i = 1}^n \ppp{\hmu^{(1, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i} - \hmu^{(0, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i}} \\
\notag
&\ \ \ \ \ + \sum_{\cb{i : W_i = 1}} \! \frac{Y_i - \hmu^{(1, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i}}{n_1}
- \sum_{\cb{i : W_i = 0}} \! \frac{Y_i - \hmu^{(0, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i}}{n_0},
\end{align}
where \smash{$\hmu^{(w, \, -i)}$} is any estimator that does not depend on the $i$-th
training example; for random forests, we set \smash{$\hmu^{(w, \, -i)}(X_i)$} to be the
``out-of-bag'' prediction at $X_i$.
To motivate \eqref{eq:ml_adjust}, we start from \eqref{eq:estimator2}, and
expand out terms using the relation
$$ \ppp{\bX - \bX_1} \cdot \hbeta^{(1)} = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i = 1}^n \hmu^{(1)}\ppp{X_i} - \frac{1}{n_1} \! \sum_{\cb{i : W_i = 1}} \!\! \hmu^{(1)}\ppp{X_i},$$
where $\hmu^{(1)}(x) = x \cdot \hbeta^{(1)} + \hc^{(1)}$, etc.
The remaining differences between \eqref{eq:ml_adjust} and \eqref{eq:estimator2}
are due to the use of out-of-bag estimation to preserve randomization
of the treatment assignment $W_i$ conditionally on the corresponding regression adjustment.
We estimate the variance of $\htau$ using the formula
\begin{equation*}
\hV = \sum_{w \in \cb{0, \, 1}} \sum_{\cb{i : W_i = w}} \frac{\ppp{Y_i - \frac{n_0}{n} \, \hmu^{(1, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i} - \frac{n_1}{n} \, \hmu^{(0, \, -i)}\ppp{X_i}}^2}{n_w \, (n_w - 1)}.
\end{equation*}
The following result characterizes the behavior of this estimator, under the
assumption that the estimator is ``jackknife-compatible,'' meaning that the expected
jackknife estimate of variance for \smash{$\hmu^{(w)}$} converges to 0. We
define this condition in the proof,
and verify that it holds for random forests.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theo:ml}
Suppose that \smash{$\hmu$} is jackknife-compatible.
Then, the estimator $\htau$ \eqref{eq:ml_adjust} is asymptotically unbiased,
$ \EE{\htau \cond X_1, \, ..., \, X_n} = \btau + o(1/\sqrt{n})$. Moreover, if the regression
adjustments $\hmu_w$ are risk-consistent in the sense that\footnote{With
random forests, \cite{scornet2015consistency} provide such a risk-consistency result.}
$1/n \sum_{i = 1}^n (\hmu^{(w, \, -i)}(X_i) - \mu^{(w)}(X_i))^2 \rightarrow_p 0$,
and the potential outcomes \smash{$Y_i^{(w)}$} have finite second moments,
then \smash{$\htau$} is efficient and
\smash{$(\htau - \tau) / (\hV)^{1/2}$} is asymptotically standard Gaussian.
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\ifpnas
\vspace{-\baselineskip}
\fi
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{{len-1-1-500-0.2-0-1000}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{{cov-1-1-500-0.2-0-1000}.pdf}
\ifpnas
\vspace{-0.5\baselineskip}
\fi
\caption{Simulation results with $\beta = (1, \, 0, \, 0, \, ..., \, 0)$,
$\PP{W = 1} = 0.2$, $\rho = 0$, and $p = 500$. All numbers
are based on 1000 simulation replications.
The left panel shows both the average
variance estimate \smash{$\hV$} produced by each estimator (solid lines), and the
actual variance \smash{\text{Var}[$\htau$]} of the estimator (dashed-dotted lines);
note that \smash{$\hV$} is directly
proportional to the squared length of the confidence interval. The right
panels depict realized coverage for both 95\% confidence intervals (solid lines)
and 99\% confidence intervals (dashed lines).
\label{fig:simu1}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\ifpnas
\vspace{-\baselineskip}
\fi
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{{len-2-4-500-0.5-0.8-1000}.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\columnwidth]{{cov-2-4-500-0.5-0.8-1000}.pdf}
\ifpnas
\vspace{-0.5\baselineskip}
\fi
\caption{Simulation results with $\beta$ proportional to a permutation
of $(1, \, 2^{-1}, \, 3^{-1}, \, ..., \, p^{-1})$,
$\Norm{\beta}_2 = 2$, $\PP{W = 1} = 0.5$, $\rho = 0.8$, and $p = 500$.
All numbers are based on 1000 simulation replications.
The plots are produced the same way as in Figure \ref{fig:simu1}.\label{fig:simu2}}
\ifpnas
\vspace{-\baselineskip}
\fi
\end{figure}
We note that there has been considerable recent interest in using machine
learning methods to estimate heterogeneous treatment effects
\cite{athey2016recursive,green2012modeling,hill2012bayesian,wager2015estimation}.
In relation to this literature, our present goal is more modest: we simply seek to
use machine learning to reduce the variance of treatment effect estimates
in randomized experiments. This is why we obtain more general
results than the papers on treatment heterogeneity.
\section{Experiments}
In our experiments, we focus on two specific variants of treatment
effect estimation via cross-estimation. For high-dimensional linear
estimation, we use the lasso-based method \eqref{eq:joint_lasso}
tuned by cross-validated cross-estimation.
For non-parametric estimation, we use \eqref{eq:ml_adjust} with random forest adjustments.
We implement our method as an open-source \texttt{R}-package, \texttt{crossEstimation},
built on top of \texttt{glmnet} \cite{FHT2010} and
\texttt{randomForest} \cite{liaw2002classification}
for \texttt{R}.
The supporting information has additional simulation results.
\subsection{Simulations}
We begin by validating our method in a simple simulation
setting with $Y = X\beta + W\tau + \varepsilon$, where
$\varepsilon \sim \nn(0, \, 1)$.
In all simulations, we set the the features $X$ to be Gaussian
with auto-regressive AR-$\rho$ covariance.
We compare our lasso-based
cross-estimation with both the simple difference-in-means estimate
$\htau = \bY_1 - \bY_0$, and the proposal of Bloniarz et
al.\! \cite{blon2016} that uses lasso regression adjustments
tuned by cross-validation.
Our method differs from that of Bloniarz et al.\! in that we use
a different algorithm for confidence intervals, and also that
we use the joint lasso algorithm \eqref{eq:joint_lasso}
instead of computing separate lassos in both
treatment arms.
Figures \ref{fig:simu1} and \ref{fig:simu2} display results for different
choices of $\beta$, $\rho$, etc., while varying $n$. In both cases, we see that
the confidence intervals produced by our cross-estimation algorithm and the method
of Bloniarz et al.\! are substantially shorter than those produced by the difference in means
estimator. Moreover, our confidence intervals accurately represent the variance of
our estimator (compare solid and dashed-dotted lines in the left panels), and achieve nominal
coverage at both the 95\% and 99\% levels. Conversely, especially in small samples,
the method of Bloniarz et al.\! underestimates the variance of the method, and does not
achieve target coverage.
\subsection{Understanding attitudes towards welfare}
We also consider an experimental dataset collected as
a part of the General Social Survey.\footnote{Subjects were either asked
whether we, as a society, spend too much money on ``welfare'' or
on ``assistance to the poor.'' The questions were randomly assigned
and the treatment effect corresponds to the change in the proportion of
people who answer ``yes'' to the question. This dataset is discussed
in detail in \cite{green2012modeling};
we pre-process the data as in \cite{wager_thesis}.}
The dataset is large ($N=28646$ after pre-processing), so we know the true treatment effect
essentially without error: The fraction of respondents who say we spend too
much on assistance to the poor is smaller than the fraction of respondents
who say we spend too much on welfare by 0.35. To test our method, we repeatedly
drew subsamples of size $n=2000$ from the full dataset, and
examined the ability of both lasso- and random-forest-based
cross-estimation to recover the correct answer.
We had $p = 12$ regressors.
First of all, we note that both variants of cross-estimation
achieved excellent coverage. Given a
nominal coverage rate of 95\%, the simple difference-in-means estimator,
lasso-based cross-estimation and random forest cross-estimation had realized
coverage rates of 96.3\%, 96.5\% and 95.3\% respectively over 1,000 replications.
Meanwhile, given a nominal target of 99\%, the realized numbers became
99.0\%, 99.0\%, and 99.3\%. We note that this dataset has non-Gaussian features and exhibits
considerable treatment effect heterogeneity.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\ifpnas
\vspace{-1.57\baselineskip}
\fi
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{{welfare_boxplot}.pdf}
\ifpnas
\vspace{-1.9\baselineskip}
\fi
\caption{Reduction in squared confidence interval length achieved by random forests and a lasso-based method, relative to the simple difference in means estimator. Confidence intervals rely on cross-estimation. Aggregated over 1000 replications.\label{fig:welfare}}
\ifpnas
\vspace{-1.35\baselineskip}
\fi
\end{figure}
Second, Figure \ref{fig:welfare} depicts the reduction in squared confidence
interval length for individual realizations of each method. More formally, we
show boxplots of \smash{$\hV_{\text{lasso/rf}} \, / \, \hV_{\text{simple}}$},
where \smash{$\hV$} is the variance estimate used to build confidence intervals.
Here, we see that although cross-estimation may not improve the precision
of the simple method by a large amount, it consistently improves performance by
a small amount. Moreover, in this example, random forests result in a larger improvement in
precision than lasso-based cross-estimation.
\vspace{-0.7\baselineskip}
\section{Discussion}
In many applications of machine learning methods to causal inference,
there is a concern that the risk of specification
search, i.e., trying out many candidate methods and choosing the one
that gives us a significant result, may reduce the credibility of
empirical findings.
This has led to considerable interests in methodologies that allow for
complex model fitting strategies that do not compromise statistical inference.
One prominent example is the design-based paradigm to causal inference
in observational studies, whereby we first seek to build an
``observational design'' by only looking at the features $X_i$ and
the treatment assignments $W_i$, and only reveal the outcomes $Y_i$
once the observational design has been set
\cite{rosenbaum2002observational,rubin2007design}. The observational
design may rely on matching, inverse-propensity weighting, or other techniques.
As the observational design is fixed before the
outcomes $Y_i$ are revealed, practitioners can devote considerable
time and creativity to fine-tuning the design without compromising
their analysis.
From this perspective, we have shown that regression adjustments to
high-dimensional randomized controlled trials exhibit a similar
opportunity for safe specification search. Concretely, imagine that
once we have collected data from a randomized experiment, we only
provide our analyst with class-wise centered data: $W_i$, $X_i - \bX_{W_i}$,
and $Y_i - \bY_{W_i}$. The analyst can then use this data to obtain any
regression adjustment they want, which we will then plug into \eqref{eq:estimator}.
Our results guarantee that---at least with a random Gaussian
design---the resulting treatment effect estimates will be unbiased
regardless of the specification search the analyst may have done
using only the class-wise centered data. Cross-estimation enables
us to mimic this phenomenon with non-Gaussian data.
\ifpnas
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
\subsection{Background}
The classical Sylvester-Gallai theorem states that any finite non-collinear point set in $\mathbb{R}^2$ spans at least one \emph{ordinary line} (a line containing exactly two of the points).
A more sophisticated statement is the so-called Dirac-Motzkin conjecture, according to which every non-collinear set of $n>13$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ determines at least $n/2$ ordinary lines.
This conjecture was proved by Green and Tao \cite{GT13} for all sufficiently large $n$.
Their proof was based on a structure theorem, which roughly states that any point set with a linear number of ordinary lines must lie mostly on a cubic curve
(see Theorem \ref{thm:GT} for a precise statement).
It is natural to ask the corresponding question for \emph{ordinary circles} (circles that contain exactly three of the given points);
see for instance \cite{BMP05}*{Section~7.2} or \cite{KW91}*{Chapter~6}.
Elliott \cite{E67} introduced this question in 1967, and proved that any $n$ points, not all on a line or a circle, determine at least $\frac{2}{63}n^2-O(n)$ ordinary circles.
(Throughout the paper, by $O(f(n))$ we mean a function $g(n)$ such that $0\leqslant g(n)\leqslant Cf(n)$ for some constant $C>0$ and all sufficiently large $n$. Thus, $-O(n)$ is a function $g(n)$ satisfying $-Cn\leqslant g(n)\leqslant 0$ for sufficiently large $n$.)
He suggested, cautiously, that the optimal bound is $\frac{1}{6}n^2-O(n)$.
Elliott's result was improved by B\'alintov\'a and B\'alint \cite{BB94}*{Remark, p.~288} to
$\frac{11}{247}n^2-O(n)$, and Zhang \cite{Z11} obtained $\frac{1}{18}n^2-O(n)$.
Zhang also gave constructions of point sets on two concentric circles with $\frac{1}{4}n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary circles.
We will use the results of Green and Tao to prove that $\frac{1}{4}n^2-O(n)$ is asymptotically the right answer,
thus disproving the bound suggested by Elliott \cite{E67}.
Nassajian Mojarrad and De Zeeuw proved this bound in an earlier preprint \cite{MZ}, which is subsumed by this paper, and will not be published independently.
We will find the exact minimum number of ordinary circles,
for sufficiently large $n$, and we will determine which configurations attain or come close to that minimum.
We make no attempt to specify the threshold implicit in the phrase `for sufficiently large $n$'; any improvement would depend on an improvement of the threshold in the result of Green and Tao \cite{GT13}.
For small $n$, the bound $\frac{1}{9}\binom{n}{2}$ due to Zhang \cite{Z11} remains the best known lower bound on the number of ordinary circles.
Green and Tao \cite{GT13} also solved (for large $n$) the even older \emph{orchard problem},
which asks for the exact maximum number of lines passing through exactly three points of a set of $n$ points in the plane.
We refer to \cite{GT13} for the history of this problem.
The upper bound $\frac{1}{3}\binom{n}{2}$ is easily proved by double counting, but it is not the exact maximum.
Using group laws on certain cubic curves, one can construct $n$ non-collinear points with $\lfloor\frac{1}{6}n(n-3) + 1\rfloor $ $3$-point lines,
and Green and Tao \cite{GT13} proved (for large $n$) that this is optimal.
This does not follow directly from the Dirac-Motzkin conjecture, but it does follow from the above-mentioned structure theorem of Green and Tao for sets with few ordinary lines (Theorem \ref{thm:GT}).
The analogous orchard problem for circles asks for the maximum number of circles passing through exactly four points from a set of $n$ points.
As far as we know, this question has not been asked before.
We determine the exact maximum and the extremal sets for all sufficiently large $n$.
Although we do not consider other related problems, we remark that similar questions have been asked for ordinary conics \cite{WW88, CDFGLMSST15, BVZ16}, ordinary planes \cite{B16}, and ordinary hyperplanes \cite{BM16}.
\subsection{Results}\label{sec:results}
Our first main result concerns the minimum number of ordinary circles spanned by a set of $n$ points, not all lying on a line or a circle, and the structure of sets of points that come close to the minimum.
The first part of the theorem solves Problem~6 in \cite{BMP05}*{Section~7.2}.
\begin{theorem}[Ordinary circles]\label{thm:main}
\mbox{}
\begin{enumerate}[label=\rom]
\item\label{parti} If $n$ is sufficiently large, the minimum number of ordinary circles determined by $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$, not all on a line or a circle, equals
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
\frac14n^2-\frac32n & \text{if } n \equiv 0 \pmod{4},\\
\frac14 n^2 - \frac34n + \frac12 & \text{if } n \equiv 1 \pmod{4},\\
\frac14n^2 - n & \text{if } n \equiv 2 \pmod{4},\\
\frac14 n^2 - \frac54n + \frac32 & \text{if } n \equiv 3 \pmod{4}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\item Let $C$ be sufficiently large.
If a set $P$ of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ determines fewer than $\frac{1}{2}n^2-Cn$ ordinary circles,
then $P$ lies on the disjoint union of two circles, or the disjoint union of a line and a circle.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
In Section~\ref{sec:constr},
we will describe constructions that meet the lower bound in part~\ref{parti} of Theorem \ref{thm:main}.
For even $n$, the bound in part~\ref{parti} is attained by certain constructions on the disjoint union of two circles,
while for odd $n$, the bound is attained by constructions on the disjoint union of a line and a circle.
The main tools in our proof are circle inversion and the structure theorem of Green and Tao \cite{GT13} for sets with few ordinary lines,
together with some classical results about algebraic curves and their interaction with inversion.
Let us define a \emph{generalised circle} to be either a circle or a line.
Because inversion maps circles and lines to circles and lines, it turns out that in our proof it is more natural to work with generalised circles.
Alternatively, we could phrase our results in terms of the \emph{inversive plane} (or \emph{Riemann sphere}) $\mathbb{R}^2\cup\{\infty\}$, where $\infty$ is a single point that lies on all lines,
which can then also be considered as circles.
Yet another equivalent view would be to identify the inversive plane with the sphere $\mathbb{S}^2$ via stereographic projection, and consider circles on $\mathbb{S}^2$, which are in bijection with generalised circles.
All our statements about generalised circles in $\mathbb{R}^2$ could thus be formulated in terms of circles in $\mathbb{R}^2\cup\{\infty\}$ or on~$\mathbb{S}^2$.
We define an \emph{ordinary generalised circle} to be one that contains three points from a given set.
Our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:main} proceeds via an analogous theorem for ordinary generalised circles, which turns out to be somewhat easier to obtain.
\begin{theorem}[Ordinary generalised circles]\label{thm:ordgencircles}
\mbox{}
\begin{enumerate}[label=\rom]
\item If $n$ is sufficiently large, the minimum number of ordinary generalised circles determined by $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$, not all on a generalised circle, equals
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
\frac14 n^2 - n & \text{if } n \equiv 0 \pmod{4},\\
\frac38 n^2 - n + \frac{5}{8} & \text{if } n \equiv 1 \pmod{4},\\
\frac14 n^2 - \frac{1}{2}n & \text{if } n \equiv 2 \pmod{4},\\
\frac38 n^2 - \frac{3}{2}n + \frac{17}{8} & \text{if } n \equiv 3 \pmod{4}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\item\label{genpartii} Let $C$ be sufficiently large.
If a set $P$ of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ determines fewer than $\frac{1}{2}n^2-Cn$ ordinary generalised circles,
then
$P$ lies on two disjoint generalised circles.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
We also solve the analogue of the orchard problem for circles (for sufficiently large $n$).
We define a \emph{$4$-point \textup{(}generalised\textup{)} circle} to be a (generalised) circle that passes through exactly four points of a given set of $n$ points.
The `circular cubics' in part~\ref{genpartii} will be defined in Section \ref{sec:circularcurves}.
\begin{theorem}[$4$-point generalised circles]\label{thm:orchard}
\mbox{}
\begin{enumerate}[label=\rom]
\item If $n$ is sufficiently large, the maximum number of $4$-point generalised circles determined by a set of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ is equal to
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac14 n^2 + \frac{5}{6}n - 2 & \text{if } n \equiv 0 \pmod{8},\\
\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac14 n^2 + \frac{11}{24}n - \frac{1}{4} & \text{if } n \equiv 1, 3, 5, 7 \pmod{8},\\
\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac14 n^2 + \frac{7}{12}n - \frac12 & \text{if } n \equiv 2, 6 \pmod{8},\\
\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac14 n^2 + \frac56n - 1 & \text{if } n \equiv 4 \pmod{8}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\item
Let $C$ be sufficiently large.
If a set $P$ of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ determines more than $\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac{7}{24} n^2 + Cn$ $4$-point generalised circles,
then up to inversions, $P$ lies on an ellipse or a smooth circular cubic.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
Theorem~\ref{thm:orchard} remains true if we replace `generalised circles' by `circles'.
This is because we can apply an inversion to any set of $n$ points with a maximum number of generalised circles in such a way that all straight-line generalised circles become circles.
Therefore, the maximum is also attained by circles only.
The proofs of the above theorems are based on the following structure theorems in the style of Green and Tao \cite{GT13}.
The first gives a rough picture, by stating that a point set with relatively few ordinary generalised circles must lie on a bicircular quartic, a specific type of algebraic curve of degree four that we introduce in Section \ref{sec:circularcurves}.
\begin{theorem}[Weak structure theorem]\label{thm:weak}
Let $K>0$ and let $n$ be sufficiently large depending on $K$.
If a set $P$ of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ spans at most $Kn^2$ ordinary generalised circles,
then all but at most $O(K)$ points of $P$ lie on a bicircular quartic.
\end{theorem}
Ball \cite{B16} concurrently obtained a similar result as a consequence of a structure theorem for ordinary planes in $\mathbb{R}^3$.
He shows that $n$ points with $O(n^{2+\frac{1}{6}})$ ordinary circles must lie mostly on a quartic curve.
We define bicircular quartics in Section \ref{sec:circularcurves}; they can be reducible, so in Theorem \ref{thm:weak} the set $P$ may also lie mostly on a lower-degree curve contained in a bicircular quartic.
Our proof actually gives a more precise list of possibilities.
The curve that $P$ mostly lies on can be: a line; a circle; an ellipse; a line and a disjoint circle;
two disjoint circles; a circular cubic that is acnodal or smooth;
or a bicircular quartic that is an inverse of an acnodal or smooth circular cubic.
A more precise characterisation of the possible configurations with few ordinary generalised circles is given in the following theorem.
The group structures referred to in the theorem are defined in Section~\ref{sec:groups}; the circular points at infinity ($\alpha$ and $\beta$) referred to in Case~\ref{caseiii} are introduced in Section \ref{sec:circularcurves}; and the `aligned' and `offset' double polygons are defined in Section~\ref{sec:constr}.
\begin{theorem}[Strong structure theorem]\label{thm:strong}
Let $K>0$ and let $n$ be sufficiently large depending on $K$.
If a set $P$ of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ spans at most $Kn^2$ ordinary generalised circles,
then up to inversions and similarities, $P$ differs in at most $O(K)$ points from a configuration of one of the following types:
\begin{enumerate}[label=\rom]
\item\label{casei} A subset of a line;
\item\label{caseii} A subgroup of an ellipse;
\item\label{caseiii} A coset $H \oplus x$ of a subgroup $H$ of a smooth circular cubic,
for some $x$ such that $4x \in H \oplus \alpha \oplus\beta$, where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are the two circular points at infinity;
\item\label{caseiv} A double polygon that is `aligned' or `offset'.
\end{enumerate}
Conversely, every set of these types defines at most $O(Kn^2)$ ordinary generalised circles.
\end{theorem}
In Section \ref{sec:circularcurves}, we carefully introduce circular cubics and bicircular quartics, and show their connection to inversion.
In Section \ref{sec:groups}, we define group laws on these curves, which help us construct point sets with few ordinary (generalised) circles in Section \ref{sec:constr}.
In Section \ref{sec:proof}, which forms the core of our proof, we derive Theorems \ref{thm:weak} and \ref{thm:strong} from the structure theorem of Green and Tao \cite{GT13}.
In Section \ref{sec:extremal}, we combine the structure theorems with our analysis of the constructions from Section \ref{sec:constr} to establish the precise statements in Theorems \ref{thm:main}, \ref{thm:ordgencircles}, and \ref{thm:orchard}.
\section{Circular curves and inversion}\label{sec:circularcurves}
The key tool in our proof is \emph{circle inversion}, as it was in the earlier papers \cites{E67, BB94, Z11} on the ordinary circles problem; the first to use circle inversion in Sylvester-Gallai problems was Motzkin \cite{M51}.
The simple reason for the relevance of circle inversion is that if we invert in a point of the given set, an ordinary circle through that point is turned into an ordinary line.
Thus we can use results on ordinary lines, like those of Green and Tao \cite{GT13}, to deduce results about ordinary circles.
To do this successfully, we need a thorough understanding of the effect of inversion on algebraic curves, and in particular we need to introduce the special class of \emph{circular curves}.
\subsection{Circular curves and circular degree}\label{sec:inversion}
In this subsection, we work in the real projective plane $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$, and partly in the complex projective plane $\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^2$.
See for instance \cite{ST92}*{Appendix A} for an appropriate introduction to projective geometry.
We use the homogeneous coordinates $[x:y:z]$ for points in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ or $\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^2$,
and we think of the line with equation $z=0$ as the line at infinity.
An affine algebraic curve in $\mathbb{R}^2$,
defined by a polynomial $f\in \mathbb{R}[x,y]$,
can be naturally extended to a projective algebraic curve,
by taking the zero set of the homogenisation of $f$.
This curve in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ then extends to $\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^2$, by taking the complex zero set of the homogenised polynomial.
We define the \emph{circular points} to be the points
\[\alpha = [i:1:0],~~~\beta = [-i:1:0] \]
on the line at infinity in $\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^2$.
The circular points play a key role in this paper,
due to the fact that every circle contains both circular points.
Moreover,
any real conic containing $\alpha$ and $\beta$ is either a circle, or a union of a line with the line at infinity.
We could thus consider a generalised circle to be a conic that contains both circular points.
\begin{definition}
An algebraic curve in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ is \emph{circular} if it contains $\alpha$ and $\beta$.
For $k\geqslant 2$, an algebraic curve in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ is \emph{$k$-circular} if it has singularities of multiplicity at least $k$ at both $\alpha$ and $\beta$.
\end{definition}
A classical reference for circular curves is Johnson \cite{J77},
while a more modern one is Werner \cite{W11}.
Let us make the definition more explicit in three concrete cases.
A \emph{generalised circle} is an algebraic curve of degree two that contains $\alpha$ and $\beta$;
equivalently, it is a curve in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ defined by a homogeneous polynomial of the form
\begin{equation*}
t(x^2+y^2) + \ell(x,y,z)z ,
\end{equation*}
where $t\in\mathbb{R}$, and $\ell\in\mathbb{R}[x,y,z]$ is a non-trivial linear form.
If $t\neq 0$, then the curve is a circle, while if $t=0$, the curve is the union of a line with the line at infinity.
A \emph{circular cubic} is an algebraic curve of degree three that contains $\alpha$ and $\beta$;
equivalently, it is any curve in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ defined by a homogeneous polynomial of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:circular-cubic}
(u x + v y)(x^2+y^2) + q(x,y,z)z ,
\end{equation}
where $u,v\in\mathbb{R}$, and $q\in \mathbb{R}[x,y,z]$ is a non-trivial quadratic homogeneous polynomial.
Note that we do not require a circular cubic to be irreducible or smooth.
For instance, the union of a line and a circle is a circular cubic,
and so is the union of any conic with the line at infinity (take $u=v=0$ in \eqref{eq:circular-cubic}).
A \emph{bicircular quartic} is an algebraic curve of degree four that is $2$-circular;
equivalently, it is any curve in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ defined by a homogeneous polynomial of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bicircular-quartic}
t(x^2+y^2)^2+ (u x + v y)(x^2+y^2)z + q(x,y,z)z^2,
\end{equation}
where $t,u,v\in\mathbb{R}$, and $q\in \mathbb{R}[x,y,z]$ is a non-trivial homogeneous quadratic polynomial (see \cite{W11}*{Section 8.2} for a proof that a quartic is $2$-circular if and only if its equation has the form \eqref{eq:bicircular-quartic}).
A noteworthy example of a bicircular quartic is a union of two circles,
for which it is easy to see that the curve has double points at $\alpha$ and $\beta$, since both circles contain those points.
Every circular cubic is contained in a bicircular quartic,
since for $t=0$ in \eqref{eq:bicircular-quartic} we get a union of a circular cubic and the line at infinity.
A non-circular conic is also contained in a bicircular quartic, since for $t=u=v=0$ in \eqref{eq:bicircular-quartic} we get a union of a conic and $z^2=0$, which is a double line at infinity.
\begin{definition}\label{def:circular}
The \emph{circular degree} of an algebraic curve $\gamma$ in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ is the smallest $k$ such that $\gamma$ is contained in a $k$-circular curve of degree $2k$.
\end{definition}
The circular degree is well-defined, since given any curve $\gamma$ of degree $k$, we can add $k$ copies of the line at infinity, to get a $k$-circular curve of degree $2k$.
For example, a line has circular degree one, since its union with the line at infinity is a $1$-circular curve of degree two.
A conic that is not a circle has circular degree two,
since its union with two copies of the line at infinity is a $2$-circular curve of degree four.
Similarly, a circular cubic has circular degree two, since its union with the line at infinity is a $2$-circular curve of degree four.
We can thus classify curves of low circular degree as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\it Circular degree one}: lines and circles (that is, generalised circles);
\item {\it Circular degree two}: non-circular conics, circular cubics, and bicircular quartics;
\item {\it Circular degree three}: non-circular cubics, circular quartics, $2$-circular quintics, and $3$-circular sextics.
\end{itemize}
This classification is important to us, because we will see that circular degree is invariant under inversion.
We have defined circular curves and circular degrees in the projective plane, because that is their most natural setting.
In the rest of the paper, to avoid confusion between the projective and inversive planes,
we will use these notions for curves in $\mathbb{R}^2$,
with the understanding that to inspect the definitions we should consider $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ and $\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^2$.
\subsection{Inversion}
Circular curves are intimately related to circle inversion, which we now introduce.
A general reference is \cite{B00}.
\begin{definition}\label{def:inversion}
Let $C(p,r)$ be the circle with centre $p = (x_p, y_p) \in \mathbb{R}^2$ and radius $r>0$. The \emph{circle inversion} with respect to $C(p,r)$ is the mapping
$I_{p,r} : \mathbb{R}^2 \setminus\{p\} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2 \setminus\{p\}$
defined by
\begin{equation*}
I_{p,r}(x,y) = \left( \frac{r^2(x-x_p)}{(x-x_p)^2+(y-y_p)^2} + x_p, \frac{r^2(y-y_p)}{(x-x_p)^2+(y-y_p)^2} + y_p \right)
\end{equation*}
for $(x,y) \ne p$.
We write $I_p$ for $I_{p,1}$.
We call $p$ the \emph{centre} of the inversion $I_{p,r}$.
\end{definition}
In the inversive plane $\mathbb{R}^2\cup \{\infty\}$,
the inversion map can be completed by setting
$I_{p,r}(p) = \infty$ and $I_{p,r}(\infty) = p$,
so that inversions take generalised circles to generalised circles.
The group of transformations of the inversive plane generated by the inversions and the similarities is called the inversive group.
It is known that a bijection of the inversive plane that takes generalised circles to generalised circles has to be an element of this group, and that any element of this group is either a similarity or an inversion followed by an isometry \cite{Co69}*{Theorem~6.71}.
The image of an algebraic curve in $\mathbb{R}^2$ under an inversion is also an algebraic curve, in the following sense.
\begin{definition}
For any algebraic curve $\gamma$ there is an algebraic curve $\gamma'$ such that
\[I_{p,r}(\gamma\setminus\{p\}) = \gamma'\setminus\{p\}.\]
We refer to $\gamma'$ as the \emph{inverse of $\gamma$ with respect to the circle $C(p,r)$}, and abuse notation slightly by writing $\gamma'=I_{p,r}(\gamma)$.
Also, since for different choices of radius $r$, $I_{p,r}(\gamma)$ differs only by a dilatation in $p$, we will often only consider the inverse $I_p(\gamma)=I_{p,1}(\gamma)$ and refer to it as the \emph{inverse of $\gamma$ in the point $p$}.
\end{definition}
If a curve has degree $d$, then its inverse has degree at most $2d$ \cite{W11}*{Theorem 4.14}.
If $\gamma$ is irreducible, then its inverse is also irreducible.
Note that inverses of algebraic curves can behave somewhat unintuitively; for instance, Proposition \ref{prop:ellipseandacnodal} states that the inverse of an ellipse has an isolated point, which is surprising if one thinks of an ellipse as just a closed continuous curve.
It is well known that the inverses of generalised circles are again generalised circles.
It turns out that, more generally,
circular degree is preserved under inversion.
We now make precise what this means for curves of low circular degree.
A proof can be found in the classical paper \cite{J77}; for a more modern reference, see \cite{W11}*{Section 9.2}.
\begin{lemma}[Inversion and circular degree]\label{lem:inversion}
Let $C_k$ be a curve of circular degree $k$. Then:
\begin{enumerate}[label=\rom]
\item
The inverse of $C_1$ in a point on $C_1$ is a line; the inverse of $C_1$ in a point not on $C_1$ is a circle.
\item\label{inversion-case2}
The inverse of $C_2$ in a singular point on $C_2$ is a non-circular conic; the inverse of $C_2$ in a regular point on $C_2$ is a circular cubic; the inverse of $C_2$ in a point not on $C_2$ is a bicircular quartic.
\item\label{inversion-case3}
The inverse of $C_3$ in a singularity of multiplicity three is a non-circular cubic;
the inverse of $C_3$ in a singularity of multiplicity two is a circular quartic;
the inverse of $C_3$ in a regular point on $C_3$ is a $2$-circular quintic; the inverse of $C_3$ in a point not on $C_3$ is a $3$-circular sextic.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
One particular subcase of Case~\ref{inversion-case2} will play an important role in our paper, and we state it separately in Proposition \ref{prop:ellipseandacnodal}.
A proof can be found in \cite{H20}*{p. 202}.
Let us recall that an \emph{acnodal cubic} is a singular cubic with a singularity that is an isolated point;
for example, $(2x-1)(x^2+y^2)-y^2=0$ is an acnodal circular cubic with a singularity at the origin.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:ellipseandacnodal}
The inverse of an ellipse in a point on the ellipse is an acnodal circular cubic with the centre of inversion as its singularity; the inverse of an acnodal circular cubic in its singularity is an ellipse through the singularity.
\end{prop}
For example, the inverse of the cubic $(2x-1)(x^2+y^2)-y^2=0$ in its singularity at the origin is the ellipse $(x-1)^2+2y^2=1$.
\section{Groups on circular curves}\label{sec:groups}
\subsection{Groups on irreducible circular cubics}\label{ssec:irreducible}
The extremal configurations in our main theorems are all based on group laws on certain circular curves.
It is well-known that irreducible smooth cubics (elliptic curves) have a group law (see for instance \cite{ST92}).
These groups play a crucial role in the work of Green and Tao \cite{GT13}.
The reason that these groups are relevant to ordinary lines is the following collinearity property of this group (when defined in the standard way).
Three points on the curve are collinear if and only if in the group they sum to the identity element.
For this property to hold, the identity element must be an inflection point.
Here we will define a group in a slightly different way (described for instance in \cite{ST92}*{Section 1.2}), in which the identity element is not necessarily an inflection point, and the same collinearity property does not hold.
However, for circular cubics, we show that we can choose the identity element so that we get a similar property for concyclicity.
First let $\gamma$ be any irreducible cubic, write $\gamma^*$ for its set of regular points,
and pick an arbitrary point $o\in \gamma^*$.
We describe an additive group operation $\oplus$ on the set $\gamma^*$ for which $o$ is the identity element.
The construction is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:cir_elliptic}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{overpic}[scale=1.0]{fig1}
\put(75,84){$o$}
\put(6.5,40.5){$a$}
\put(44,39){$b$}
\put(81.5,37.5){$a*b$}
\put(77.8,65){$a \oplus b$}
\put(73.5,13.4){$\omega$}
\put(44.7,28.2){$\ominus a$}
\end{overpic}
\caption{Group law on a smooth circular cubic curve}\label{fig:cir_elliptic}
\end{figure}
Given $a,b\in\gamma^*$,
let $a*b$ be the third intersection point of $\gamma$ and the line $ab$,
and define $a \oplus b$ to be $(a*b)*o$, the third intersection point of $\gamma$ and the line through $a*b$ and $o$.
When $a=b$, the line $ab$ should be interpreted as the tangent line at $a$; when $a*b = o$, the line through $a*b$ and $o$ should be interpreted as the tangent line to $\gamma$ at $o$.
We refer to \cite{ST92} for a more careful definition and a proof that this operation really does give a group.
Now consider a circular cubic $\gamma$.
Since the circular points $\alpha$ and $\beta$ lying on it are conjugate,
$\gamma$ has a unique real point on the line at infinity, which we choose as our identity element $o$.
We define the point $\omega$ to be the third intersection point of the tangent line to $\gamma$ at $o$ (if there is no third intersection point, then $o$ is an inflection point, and we consider $o$ itself to be the third point).
Throughout this paper we will use $\omega$ to denote this special point on a circular cubic; note that $\omega$ is not fixed like $\alpha$ and $\beta$, but depends on $\gamma$.
Also note that $\omega$ is real, since it corresponds to the third root of a real cubic polynomial whose other two roots correspond to the real point $o$.
Observe that
\[\omega = \alpha \oplus \beta,\]
since $\alpha*\beta = o$, and by definition $o*o = \omega$.
With this group law, we no longer have the property that three points are collinear if and only if they sum to $o$ (unless $o$ happens to be an inflection point).
Nevertheless,
one can check that three points $a,b,c\in\gamma^*$ are collinear if and only if $a\oplus b\oplus c=\omega$.
More important for us,
four points of $\gamma^*$ lie on a generalised circle if and only if they sum to $\omega$.
This amounts to a classical fact (see \cite{B01}*{Article 225} for an equivalent statement), but we include a proof for completeness.
We use the following version of the Cayley-Bacharach Theorem, due to Chasles (see \cite{EGH96}).
\begin{theorem}[Chasles]\label{thm:cb}
Suppose two cubic curves in $\mathbb{C} \mathbb{P}^2$ with no common component intersect in nine points, counting multiplicities.
If $\gamma$ is another cubic curve containing eight of these intersection points, counting multiplicities, then $\gamma$ also contains the ninth.
\end{theorem}
Recall from Section~\ref{sec:circularcurves} that a generalised circle, viewed projectively, is either a circle, or the union a line with the line at infinity.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:cir_elliptic}
Let $\gamma$ be an irreducible circular cubic in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$,
and let $a,b,c,d\in \gamma^*$ be points that are not necessarily distinct.
A generalised circle intersects $\gamma$ in the points $a,b,c,d$ (taking into account multiplicity) if and only if $a\oplus b\oplus c\oplus d=\omega$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We consider the cubic $\gamma$ extended to $\mathbb{C}\mathbb{P}^2$.
We first show the forward direction.
All statements in the proof should be considered with multiplicity.
If the generalised circle is the union of a line $\ell$ and the line at infinity $\ell_\infty$,
then $\ell\cup \ell_\infty$ intersects $\gamma$ in $a,b,c,d,\alpha,\beta$.
Since $\ell$ intersects $\gamma$ in at most three points,
one of the points $a,b,c,d$ must equal $o$, say $d=o$.
Since $\ell_\infty$ also intersects $\gamma$ in at most three points, we must have $a,b,c\in\ell$.
Thus $a,b,c$ are collinear, and we have $a\oplus b\oplus c = \omega$, by the definition of the group law.
It then follows from $d=o$ that $a\oplus b\oplus c\oplus d=\omega$.
Suppose next that the generalised circle is a circle $\sigma$,
and intersects $\gamma$ in $a,b,c,d,\alpha,\beta$.
The construction that follows is depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:cb}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{overpic}[scale=1.0]{fig2}
\put(48,78){{\scriptsize asymptote}}
\put(23,56){$a$}
\put(50,54.5){$b$}
\put(55.5,31.2){$c$}
\put(15,45){$\sigma$}
\put(1,58){$\ell_2$}
\put(82.2,52){$a*b$}
\put(86,78){$\ell_1$}
\put(75.1,30.5){$a \oplus b$}
\put(1,23.5){$\ell_3$}
\put(21.4,27.1){$d'=d$}
\end{overpic}
\caption{Concyclicity of four regular points on a circular cubic}\label{fig:cb}
\end{figure}
Let $\ell_1$ be the line through $o$ and $a*b$ (and thus through $a \oplus b$), $\ell_2$ the line through $a$ and $b$ (and thus through $a*b$), and $\ell_3$ the line through $c$ and $a \oplus b$.
Note that $\sigma$ and $\ell_\infty$ intersect in $\alpha$ and $\beta$.
Then $\gamma_1 = \sigma \cup \ell_1$ and $\gamma_2 = \ell_2 \cup \ell_3\cup \ell_\infty$ are two cubic curves that intersect in nine points, of which the eight points $a$, $b$, $c$, $a*b$, $a \oplus b$, $o$, $\alpha$, and $\beta$ certainly lie on $\gamma$; the remaining point is the third intersection point of $\gamma_1$ and $\ell_3$ beside $c$ and $a\oplus b$, which we denote by $d'$.
By Theorem~\ref{thm:cb}, $\gamma$ contains $d'$.
By the group law on $\gamma$,
we have $d' = (a \oplus b)*c$.
Moreover, $d'$ must be the sixth intersection point of $\gamma$ and $\sigma$ beside $a,b,c,\alpha,\beta$, which is $d$,
so $d = d' =(a \oplus b)*c$.
By the definition of the group law, this implies $a\oplus b\oplus c = o*d$,
so $(a\oplus b\oplus c)* d = (o*d)*d = o$,
and finally $a\oplus b\oplus c\oplus d = o*o = \omega$.
For the converse, suppose that $a\oplus b\oplus c\oplus d=\omega$, and let $d'$ be the fourth point where the generalised circle $\sigma$ through $a,b,c$ intersects $\gamma$.
Then, by what we have just shown, $a\oplus b\oplus c\oplus d'=\omega$, and it follows that $d=d'$, and $a,b,c,d$ lie on $\sigma$.
\end{proof}
This proposition is a consequence of the more general fact that six points on a circular cubic lie on a conic if and only if they sum to $2\omega$.
(In the standard group structure on a cubic, where the identity $o$ is chosen as an inflection point, they would sum to $o$; see \cite{W78}*{Theorem 9.2}.)
Since a generalised circle in $\mathbb{R}\mathbb{P}^2$ is a conic containing $\alpha$ and $\beta$,
and $\alpha\oplus \beta = \omega$,
it follows that four points $a,b,c,d$ (possibly including $o$) lie on a generalised circle if and only if they sum to $\omega$.
\subsection{Groups on other circular curves}
\label{sec:groupsonother}
We now define group laws on two other types of curves of circular degree two,
and observe that they satisfy similar concyclicity properties.
Let us note at this point that most bicircular quartics can also be given a group structure (if an irreducible bicircular quartic has no singularities besides $\alpha$ and $\beta$, then it is a curve of genus one, and thus has a group law by \cite{S09}*{Section III.3}).
However, in our proofs we will handle bicircular quartics by inverting in a point on the curve,
which by Lemma \ref{lem:inversion} transforms a bicircular quartic into a circular cubic.
For that reason, we do not need to study the group law on bicircular quartics separately.
\paragraph{Ellipses.}
We discuss a group law on ellipses,
although we do not actually need it in our proof,
because inversion lets us transform an ellipse into an acnodal cubic (Proposition \ref{prop:ellipseandacnodal}), which we have already given a group structure in the previous section.
Nevertheless, we treat the group law on ellipses here because it is especially elementary, and it would be strange not to mention it.
Consider the ellipse $\sigma$ given by the equation $x^2+ (y/s)^2=1$, with $s\neq 0,1$.
For any point $a\in \sigma$, we project $a$ vertically to the point $a'$ on the unit circle around the origin,
as in Figure~\ref{fig:ellipse}, and call the angle $\theta_a$ the \emph{eccentric angle} of $a$.
We define the sum of two points $a,b\in \sigma$ to be the point $c=a\oplus b$ whose eccentric angle is $\theta_c = \theta_a+\theta_b$.
This gives $\sigma$ a group structure isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}$.
The identity element is $o=(1,0)$, and the inverse of a point is its reflection in the $x$-axis.
We have the following classical fact that describes when four points on an ellipse are concyclic (see \cite{J48} for the oldest reference we could find, and \cite{BPBS84}*{Problem 17.2} for two detailed proofs).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\definecolor{qqwuqq}{rgb}{0.,0.39215686274509803,0.}
\definecolor{qqqqff}{rgb}{0.,0.,1.}
\begin{tikzpicture}[line cap=round,line join=round,>=triangle 45,thick,x=1.0cm,y=1.0cm,scale=1.2]
\clip(-1.5,0) rectangle (3.3,4.8);
\draw [shift={(0.89,2.34)},color=qqwuqq,fill=qqwuqq,fill opacity=0.1] (0,0) -- (0.:0.4) arc (0.:59.807322877532016:0.4) -- cycle;
\draw [rotate around={0.:(0.89,2.34)}] (0.89,2.34) ellipse (2.0480822869644038cm and 1.1569533500436997cm);
\draw [dash pattern=on 3pt off 3pt,domain=-1.5:3.3] plot(\x,{(--7.9092-0.*\x)/3.38});
\draw [dash pattern=on 2pt off 2pt] (0.89,2.34) circle (2.0480822869644038cm);
\draw (0.89,2.34)-- (1.92,3.34);
\draw [dash pattern=on 3pt off 3pt] (1.92,0) -- (1.92,4.8);
\draw [dash pattern=on 2pt off 2pt] (0.89,2.34)-- (1.92,4.110237569982443);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (1.92,3.34) circle (1.2pt);
\draw[color=black] (2.1,3.45) node {$a$};
\draw [fill=black] (0.89,2.34) circle (1.2pt);
\draw [fill=black] (1.92,4.110237569982443) circle (1.2pt);
\draw[color=black] (2.1,4.35) node {$a'$};
\draw[color=black] (1.46,2.54) node {$\theta_a$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Eccentric angle of a point on an ellipse}\label{fig:ellipse}
\end{figure}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:ellipse}
Four points $a,b,c,d\in \sigma$ are concyclic if and only if $a\oplus b\oplus c\oplus d =o$.
We may allow two of the points to be equal, in which case the circle through the three distinct points is tangent to the ellipse at the repeated point.
\end{prop}
Another way to look at this group law is that we are parametrising the ellipse using lines through $o=(1,0)$ (see for instance \cite{ST92}*{Section 1.1}).
More precisely,
each point $a\in \sigma$ corresponds to the line $oa$;
$oa$ makes an angle $\pi-\theta_a/2$ with the $x$-axis,
and the set of lines through $o$ thus has a group structure equivalent to the one above.
This view lets us relate the group on the ellipse to the group on the acnodal cubic.
By Proposition \ref{prop:ellipseandacnodal},
inverting in $o$ maps the ellipse to an acnodal circular cubic $\gamma$, with $o$ becoming the isolated point of the cubic.
The lines through $o$ now parametrise the cubic,
and this parametrisation gives the same group on $\gamma$ as the line construction that we gave in Section~\ref{ssec:irreducible} (see \cite{ST92}*{Section 3.7}).
\paragraph{Concentric circles.}
We now define a group on the union of two disjoint circles.
For notational convenience, we identify $\mathbb{R}^2$ with $\mathbb{C}$.
After an appropriate inversion, we can assume the circles to be
\[\sigma_1 = \{ e^{2\pi i t} : t \in [0, 1) \}, ~~~\sigma_2 = \{ re^{-2\pi i t} : t \in [0, 1) \}, \]
with $r>1$,
and we represent each element of $\sigma_1\cup\sigma_2$ as $r^\varepsilon e^{2\pi i t}$ with $\varepsilon\in \mathbb{Z}_2$ (with the obvious convention $r^0=1$ and $r^1=r$).
We define a group operation on $\sigma_1\cup\sigma_2$ by
\[r^{\varepsilon_1} e^{2\pi i t_1} \oplus r^{\varepsilon_2} e^{2\pi i t_2} =
r^{(\varepsilon_1+\varepsilon_2)\bmod 2} e^{2\pi i (t_1+t_2)}, \]
which turns $\sigma_1\cup\sigma_2$ into a group isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z} \times \mathbb{Z}_2$,
with identity element $o = 1 = r^0 e^{2\pi i \cdot 0}$.
We again have the following concyclicity property, which is easily seen using symmetry.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:double-polygon-concyclic}
Points $a,b\in \sigma_1$ and $c,d\in\sigma_2$ lie on a generalised circle if and only if $a\oplus b\oplus c\oplus d =o$.
If $a=b$ or $c=d$, then the generalised circle is tangent at that point.
\end{prop}
\section{Constructions}\label{sec:constr}
\subsection{Ellipse}\label{constr:ellipse}
Let $\sigma$ be the ellipse defined by $x^2+(y/s)^2 =1$, with the group structure introduced in Section \ref{sec:groupsonother}.
Let $n\geqslant 5$.
We have a finite subgroup of size $n$ given by
\[S=\setbuilder{\left(\cos \left(\frac{2\pi k}{n}\right), s\sin \left(\frac{2\pi k}{n} \right) \right)}{k=0,\dotsc,n-1} \subset \sigma.\]
By Proposition \ref{prop:ellipse},
the circle through any three points $a,b,c\in S$ passes through the point $d = \ominus a \ominus b\ominus c\in S$.
Therefore, the only way $S$ spans an ordinary circle is when $d$ coincides with one of the points $a,b,c$ (which occurs if the circle is tangent to $\sigma$ at that point).
It follows that the number of ordinary circles is equal to
\[\frac{1}{2}\left|\setbuilder{(k_1,k_2,k_3)\in\mathbb{Z}_n^3}{2k_1+k_2+k_3\equiv0\pmod{n}, \quad k_1, k_2, k_3\text{ distinct}}\right|,\]
which is $\frac12 n^2 -O(n)$.
Similarly, the number of $4$-point circles is equal to
\[\frac{1}{4!}\left|\setbuilder{(k_1,k_2,k_3,k_4)\in\mathbb{Z}_n^4}{k_1+k_2+k_3+k_4\equiv0\pmod{n}, \quad k_1, k_2, k_3, k_4 \text{ distinct}}\right|,\]
which is, by inclusion-exclusion, equal to $\frac{1}{24}(n^3 - 6n^2 + (8 + 3 \delta_n)n - 6 \varepsilon_n)$, where $\delta_n$ is the number of solutions in $\mathbb{Z}_n$ to the equation $2k = 0$ and $\varepsilon_n$ is the number of solutions in $\mathbb{Z}_n$ to the equation $4k = 0$.
This works out to
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac14 n^2 + \frac{7}{12}n - 1 & \text{if } n \equiv 0 \pmod{4},\\
\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac14 n^2 + \frac{11}{24}n - \frac14 & \text{if } n \equiv 1, 3 \pmod{4},\\
\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac14 n^2 + \frac{7}{12}n - \frac12 & \text{if } n \equiv 2 \pmod{4}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\subsection{Circular cubic curve}\label{constr:cubic}
Let $\gamma$ be an irreducible circular cubic, and let $\oplus$ be the group operation defined in Section \ref{ssec:irreducible}.
It is well known (see for instance \cite{GT13}) that the group $(\gamma^*,\oplus)$ is isomorphic to the circle $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}$ if $\gamma$ is acnodal or if $\gamma$ is smooth and has one connected component, and is isomorphic to $\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}_2$ if $\gamma$ is smooth and has two connected components.
Let $H_n$ be a subgroup of order $n$ of $\gamma^*$, and let $x\in\gamma^*$ be such that $4x = \omega\ominus h$ for some $h \in H_n$.
By Proposition \ref{prop:cir_elliptic}, the number of ordinary generalised circles in the coset $S=H_n \oplus x$ equals
\[\frac{1}{2}\left|\setbuilder{(a, b, c)\in H_n^3}{2a \oplus b \oplus c = h, \quad a, b, c \text{ distinct}}\right|,\]
which is easily seen to equal $\frac12 n^2 - O(n)$.
Similarly, the number of ordinary circles in $S=H_n \oplus x$ equals
\[\frac{1}{2}\left|\setbuilder{(a, b, c)\in H_n^3}{2a \oplus b \oplus c = h, \quad a, b, c\neq \ominus x \text{ and distinct}}\right|,\]
which also equals $\frac12 n^2 - O(n)$.
As in the previous construction, if $o\notin S$ (equivalently, $x\notin H_n$) then the number of $4$-point circles is equal to $\frac{1}{24}(n^3 - 6n^2 + (8 + 3 \delta_n)n - 6 \varepsilon_n)$, where $\delta_n$ is the number of solutions in $H_n$ to the equation $2k = h$ and $\varepsilon_n$ is the number of solutions in $H_n$ to the equation $4k = h$. If $H_n$ is cyclic, then we get the same numbers as in the previous construction. Otherwise, $n = 0 \pmod{4}$, $H_n\cong\mathbb{Z}_{n/2}\times\mathbb{Z}_2$, and the number of $4$-point circles equals
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac14 n^2 + \frac{5}{6}n - 2 & \text{if } n \equiv 0 \pmod{8},\\
\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac14 n^2 + \frac{5}{6}n - 1 & \text{if } n \equiv 4 \pmod{8},
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
which is greater than the corresponding number in the previous construction.
\subsection{`Aligned' double polygons}\label{constr:even}
Let $n\geqslant 6$ be even and set $m=n/2$.
We identify $\mathbb{R}^2$ with $\mathbb{C}$.
Let $\sigma_1$ be the circle with centre the origin and radius one, and $\sigma_2$ the circle with centre the origin and radius $r>1$.
Let $S_1=\setbuilder{e^{2\pi i k/m}}{k=0,\dots,m-1}\subset \sigma_1$ and $S_2=\setbuilder{re^{2\pi i k/m}}{k=0,\dots,m-1}\subset \sigma_2$.
Thus, $S_1$ and $S_2$ are the vertex sets of regular $m$-gons on $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$ that are `aligned' in the sense that their points lie at the same set of angles from the common centre (see Figure \ref{fig:aligned}).
Let $S=S_1\cup S_2$.
By Proposition~\ref{prop:double-polygon-concyclic}, the points $a,b\in\sigma_1$, $c,d\in\sigma_2$ are collinear or concyclic if and only if $a\oplus b\oplus c\oplus d = o$.
In particular, if $a=b$, then the generalised circle through the three points is tangent to $\sigma_1$.
It follows that if $n\geqslant 8$, the ordinary generalised circles of $S$ are exactly those through $e^{2\pi i k_1/m}, re^{-2\pi i k_2/m},re^{-2\pi i k_3/m}$ or through $re^{-2\pi i k_1/m}, e^{2\pi i k_2/m},e^{2\pi i k_3/m}$ where $2k_1+k_2+k_3\equiv0\pmod{m}$, with $k_2\not\equiv k_3\pmod{m}$.
For generic $r>1$, we then obtain that the number of ordinary generalised circles equals
\[\left|\setbuilder{(k_1,k_2,k_3)\in \mathbb{Z}_m^3}{2k_1+k_2+k_3\equiv0\pmod{m}, \quad k_2, k_3 \text{ distinct}}\right|\]
(although $k_2$ and $k_3$ are not ordered, we either have two points on $\sigma_1$ or two points on $\sigma_2$).
This equals $m(m-2)$ if $m$ is even and $m(m-1)$ if $m$ is odd.
That is, for generic $r$, we obtain $\frac{1}{4}n^2-n$ ordinary generalised circles if $n\equiv 0\pmod{4}$ and $\frac{1}{4}n^2-\frac12n$ ordinary generalised circles if $n\equiv 2\pmod{4}$.
If we choose $r=(\cos(2\pi k/m))^{-1}$ (there are $\lfloor m/4\rfloor$ choices for $r$), then the tangent lines at points of $S_1$ pass through two points of $S_2$, so are ordinary generalised circles.
Thus, for these choices of $r$ we lose $m$ ordinary circles, and obtain $\frac{1}{4}n^2-\frac{3}{2}n$ ordinary circles if $n\equiv 0\pmod{4}$ and $\frac{1}{4}n^2-n$ ordinary circles if $n\equiv 2\pmod{4}$.
Note that this is much less than the number of ordinary circles given by Constructions~\ref{constr:ellipse} and~\ref{constr:cubic}.
Similarly, the number of $4$-point generalised circles spanned by $S$ equals
\[\frac{1}{4}\left|\setbuilder{(k_1,k_2,k_3,k_4)\in \mathbb{Z}_m^4}{k_1+ k_2+ k_3+k_4\equiv0\pmod{m}, \quad k_1 \ne k_2 \text{ and } k_3 \ne k_4}\right|,\]
which is $\frac14 m^3 - O(m^2) = \frac{1}{32}n^3 - O(n^2)$, also much less than the number in Constructions~\ref{constr:ellipse} and~\ref{constr:cubic}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.4\textwidth}
\centering
\definecolor{cqcqcq}{rgb}{0.0,0.0,0.6}
\definecolor{qqqqff}{rgb}{0.,0.,0.}
\begin{tikzpicture}[line cap=round,line join=round,>=triangle 45,thick,x=1.0cm,y=1.0cm,scale=1.25]
\clip(-2.2,-2.2) rectangle (2.2,2.2);
\draw(0.,0.) circle (2.cm);
\draw(0.,0.) circle (1.cm);
\draw [color=cqcqcq] (0.49422649730810375,0.8560254037844387) circle (0.9942767863877447cm);
\draw [color=cqcqcq] (-0.3,-0.5196152422706631) circle (1.4cm);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (2.,0.) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (1.,1.7120508075688772) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-1.,1.7320508075688772) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-2.,0.) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-1.,-1.7320508075688772) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (1.,-1.7320508075688772) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (1.,0.) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (0.5,0.8660254037844386) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-0.5,0.8660254037844386) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-1.,0.) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-0.5,-0.8660254037844386) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (0.5,-0.8660254037844386) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [color=black] (-1,-.7) node {$\sigma_1$};
\draw [color=black] (1.7,-.5) node {$\sigma_2$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{`Aligned' double hexagon}\label{fig:aligned}
\end{minipage}
\qquad
\begin{minipage}{0.4\textwidth}
\centering
\definecolor{cqcqcq}{rgb}{0.0,0.0,0.6}
\definecolor{qqqqff}{rgb}{0.,0.,0.}
\begin{tikzpicture}[line cap=round,line join=round,>=triangle 45,thick,x=1.0cm,y=1.0cm,scale=1.25, rotate=90]
\clip(-2.2,-2.2) rectangle (2.2,2.2);
\draw(0.,0.) circle (2.cm);
\draw(0.,0.) circle (1.cm);
\draw [color=cqcqcq] (0.6562278325107631,1.1366199472494412) circle (0.6702984246947132cm);
\draw [color=cqcqcq] (-0.26168644528051416,-0.45325421887794337) circle (1.4766271094389718cm);
\draw [color=cqcqcq] (0.375,-0.6495190528383289) circle (1.25cm);
\draw [color=cqcqcq] (-0.375,0.6495190528383289) circle (1.25cm);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (2.,0.) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (1.,1.7120508075688772) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-1.,1.7320508075688772) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-2.,0.) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-1.,-1.7320508075688772) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (1.,-1.7320508075688772) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (0.,1.) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (0.8660254037844386,0.5) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (0.8660254037844386,-0.5) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (0.,-1.) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-0.8660254037844386,0.5) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (-0.8660254037844386,-0.5) circle (1.4pt);
\draw [color=black] (.5,-1.1) node {$\sigma_1$};
\draw [color=black] (1.7,.5) node {$\sigma_2$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{`Offset' double hexagon}\label{fig:offset}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\subsection{`Offset' double polygons}\label{constr:offset}
We modify the previous construction by rotating $S_2$ around the origin by an angle of $\pi k/m$.
This results in $S_2'=\setbuilder{re^{-i \pi (2k-1)/m}}{k=0,\dots,m-1}$ and $S'=S_1\cup S_2'$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:offset}).
As before, if $n\geqslant 8$, the ordinary circles (including straight lines through exactly three points) of $S'$ are exactly those through $e^{2\pi i k_1/m}, re^{-i\pi (2k_2-1)/m},re^{-i\pi (2k_3-1)/m}$ or through $re^{-i\pi (2k_1-1)/m}, e^{2\pi i k_2/m},e^{2\pi i k_3/m}$, where $2k_1+k_2+k_3\equiv1\pmod{m}$ with $k_2\not\equiv k_3\pmod{m}$.
For generic $r>1$, we now have to count the number of ordered triples in the set
\[\setbuilder{(k_1,k_2,k_3)\in \mathbb{Z}_m^3}{2k_1+k_2+k_3\equiv1\pmod{m}, \quad k_2, k_3 \text{ distinct}}.\]
This equals $m^2$ if $m$ is even and $m(m-1)$ if $m$ is odd.
That is, for generic $r$, we obtain $\frac{1}{4}n^2$ ordinary generalised circles if $n\equiv 0\pmod{4}$, worse than Construction~\ref{constr:even}, and $\frac{1}{4}n^2-\frac12n$ ordinary generalised circles if $n\equiv2\pmod{4}$, the same number as in Construction~\ref{constr:even}.
Again, if we choose $r=(\cos(2\pi k/m))^{-1}$ (there are $\lfloor m/4\rfloor$ choices for $r$), we lose $m$ ordinary circles.
Thus, we obtain $\frac{1}{4}n^2-n$ ordinary circles if $n\equiv2\pmod{4}$, the same number as in Construction~\ref{constr:even}.
As in Construction~\ref{constr:even}, we get $\frac{1}{32}n^3 - O(n^2)$ $4$-point circles.
\subsection{Punctured double polygons}\label{constr:odd}
Let $n=2m-1\geqslant 11$ be odd. Take Construction~\ref{constr:even} with $n+1=2m$ points and remove an arbitrary point $p\in S_1$.
First assume that $m$ is odd.
Before we remove $p$, there are $m(m-1)$ ordinary generalised circles.
Of these, there are $(m-1)/2$ tangent at $p$. There are also $m-1$ ordinary generalised circles through $p$ tangent at some point of $S_2$.
Thus, by removing $p$, we destroy $3(m-1)/2$ ordinary generalised circles and create $\binom{m}{2}-(m-1)/2$ new ones.
Therefore, $S\setminus\{p\}$ has
\[m(m-1)-\frac{3}{2}(m-1)+\binom{m}{2}-\frac{1}{2}(m-1) = \frac32 m^2 - \frac{7}{2}m + 2\] ordinary generalised circles.
That is, there are $\frac38 n^2 - n + \frac{5}{8}$ ordinary generalised circles if $n\equiv1\pmod{4}$.
Next assume that $m$ is even.
Before we remove $p$, there are $m(m-2)$ ordinary generalised circles, of which
there are $(m-2)/2$ through two different points of $S_2$ tangent at $p$, and there are also $m-2$ ordinary generalised circles through $p$ tangent at a point of $S_2$.
As before, we obtain
\[ m(m-2)-\frac32(m-2)+\binom{m}{2}-\frac12(m-2) = \frac32 m^2 - \frac{9}{2}m + 4\] ordinary generalised circles.
Thus, we obtain $\frac38 n^2 - \frac{3}{2}n + \frac{17}{8}$ ordinary generalised circles if $n\equiv3\pmod{4}$.
Instead of starting with Construction~\ref{constr:even}, we can take the `offset' Construction~\ref{constr:offset} and remove a point.
It is easy to see that when $n\equiv1\pmod{4}$ we obtain the same number of ordinary generalised circles, while if $n\equiv3\pmod{4}$ we obtain more.
Since there are no $5$-point circles in Constructions~\ref{constr:even} and \ref{constr:offset} when $m\geqslant 6$, removing a point does not add any $4$-point circle, but destroys $O(n^2)$ of them. We thus get $\frac{1}{32}n^3 - O(n^2)$ $4$-point generalised circles, which is asymptotically the same as in Constructions~\ref{constr:even} and \ref{constr:offset}.
\subsection{Inverted double polygons}\label{constr:linecircle}
We can use inversion to make new constructions out of old ones.
Invert Construction~\ref{constr:odd} in the removed point $p$.
The resulting point set has $m$ points on a circle and $m-1$ points on a line disjoint from the circle.
Every ordinary circle after the inversion corresponds to an ordinary generalised circle not passing through $p$ before the inversion.
If $m$ is odd, there are $(m-1)/2$ ordinary generalised circles tangent at $p$ and a further $m-1$ ordinary generalised circles through $p$ tangent to $\sigma_2$,
so we obtain $m(m-1) - 3(m-1)/2 = \frac12(m-1)(2m-3)$ ordinary circles.
For even $m$ we similarly obtain $m(m-2) - 3(m-2)/2 = \frac12(m-2)(2m-3)$ ordinary circles.
That is, we have $\frac14(n-1)(n-2) = \frac14 n^2 - \frac{3}{4}n + \frac12$ ordinary circles when $n\equiv1\pmod{4}$ and $\frac14(n-3)(n-2) = \frac14 n^2 - \frac{5}{4}n + \frac32$ ordinary circles when $n\equiv3\pmod{4}$.
If we remove another point from this inverted construction, we obtain a set of $n$ points where $n$ is even, with $\frac38n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary circles.
\subsection{Other inverted examples}
If we invert Construction~\ref{constr:ellipse} in a point on the ellipse that is not in the set $S$, then by Proposition~\ref{prop:ellipseandacnodal}, we obtain points on an acnodal circular cubic (without its acnode) as in Construction~\ref{constr:cubic}, with the same number of ordinary and $4$-point generalised circles.
If we invert a circular cubic in a point not on the curve, then we obtain a bicircular quartic by Lemma~\ref{lem:inversion}.
There will again be $\frac12 n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary circles (or ordinary generalised circles) and $\frac{1}{24}n^3-O(n^2)$ $4$-point circles among the inverted points.
\section{The structure theorems}\label{sec:proof}
\subsection{Proof of the weak structure theorem}
The proofs of our structure theorems for sets with few ordinary circles crucially rely on the following structure theorem for sets with few ordinary lines due to Green and Tao~\cite{GT13}.
Recall that an \emph{ordinary line} is a line containing exactly two points of the given point set.
\begin{theorem}[Green--Tao]\label{thm:GT}
Let $K>0$ and let $n$ be sufficiently large depending on $K$.
If a set $P$ of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ spans at most $Kn$ ordinary lines, then $P$ differs in at most $O(K)$ points from an example of one of the following types:
\begin{enumerate}[label=\rom]
\item $n - O(K)$ points on a line;
\item $m$ points each on a line and a disjoint conic, for some $m = n/2 \pm O(K)$;
\item $n \pm O(K)$ points on an acnodal or smooth cubic.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\bigskip
We commence the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:weak}.
Let $P$ be a set of $n$ points spanning at most $Kn^2$ ordinary generalised circles.
We wish to show that $P$ lies mostly on a bicircular quartic (we will repeatedly use `mostly' to mean `for all but $O(K)$ points').
Note that for at least $2n/3$ points $p$ of $P$, there are at most $9Kn$ ordinary circles through $p$, hence the set $I_p(P \setminus \{p\})$ spans at most $9Kn$ ordinary lines.
Let $P'$ be the set of such points.
For $n$ sufficiently large depending on $K$,
applying Theorem~\ref{thm:GT} to $I_p(P \setminus \{p\})$ for any $p \in P'$ gives that $I_p(P \setminus \{p\})$ lies mostly on a line, a line and a conic, an acnodal cubic, or a smooth cubic.
If there exists $p \in P'$ such that $I_p(P \setminus \{p\})$ lies mostly on a line, then inverting again in $p$, we see that $P$ must lie mostly on a line or a circle.
If there exists $p \in P'$ such that $I_p(P \setminus \{p\})$ lies mostly on a line $\ell$ and a disjoint conic $\sigma$,
we have two cases,
depending on whether $p$ lies on $\ell$ or not.
If $p \in \ell$, we invert again in $p$ to find that $P$ lies mostly on the union of $\ell$ and $I_p(\sigma)$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:inversion},
$I_p(\sigma)$ is either a circle (if $\sigma$ is a circle) or an irreducible bicircular quartic (if $\sigma$ is a non-circular conic).
Furthermore, $p$ is the only point that could possibly lie on both $\ell$ and $I_p(\sigma)$.
Since roughly $n/2$ points of $P$ lie on $\ell$, there must be another point $q \in \ell \cap P'$ that does not lie on $I_p(\sigma)$.
In $I_q(P \setminus \{q\})$,
the line $\ell$ remains a line,
and by definition of $P'$ the set $I_q(P \setminus \{q\})$ spans few ordinary lines,
so Theorem~\ref{thm:GT} tells us $I_q(I_p(\sigma))$ is a conic.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:inversion} that $I_p(\sigma)$ cannot be a quartic,
since we inverted in the point $q$ outside $I_p(\sigma)$ and did not obtain a quartic.
That means $I_p(\sigma)$ has to be a circle, and it is disjoint from $\ell$.
Thus, $P$ lies mostly on the union of a line and a disjoint circle.
If $p \notin \ell$, we invert in $p$ to see that $P$ lies mostly on the union of the circle $I_p(\ell)$ and the curve $I_p(\sigma)$, which is either a circle or a quartic.
Again $p$ is the only point that can lie on both curves.
Inverting in another point $q \in I_p(\ell) \cap P'$,
$I_q(I_p(\ell))$ becomes a line,
so Theorem~\ref{thm:GT} tells us that $I_q(I_p(\sigma))$ is a conic, so that $I_p(\sigma)$ must be a circle disjoint from $I_p(\ell)$
as before.
Thus, $P$ lies mostly on the union of two disjoint circles.
The case that remains is when for all $p\in P'$, the set $I_p(P \setminus \{p\})$ lies mostly on an acnodal or smooth cubic $\gamma$.
Fix such a $p$, and consider $I_p(\gamma)$, which mostly contains $P$.
If $\gamma$ is not a circular cubic, then by the classification in Section \ref{sec:circularcurves} it has circular degree three,
so $I_p(\gamma)$ has circular degree three as well.
For any $q \in I_p(\gamma) \cap P'$ other than $p$,
the curve $I_q(I_p(\gamma))$ is also a cubic curve,
by the definition of $P'$ and Theorem \ref{thm:GT}.
By Case~\ref{inversion-case3} of Lemma~\ref{lem:inversion},
this can only happen if $q$ is a singularity of $I_p(\gamma)$.
But $I_p(\gamma)$ is an irreducible curve of degree at most six, and so has at most 10 singularities by~\cite{W78}*{Theorem 4.4}, which is a contradiction.
So $\gamma$ must be a circular cubic that is acnodal or smooth.
If $\gamma$ is acnodal, then $I_p(\gamma)$ is either a bicircular quartic (if $p\not\in \gamma$),
an acnodal circular cubic (if $p$ is a regular point of $\gamma$),
or a non-circular conic (if $p$ is the singularity of $\gamma$).
In the last case, the conic is an ellipse by Proposition \ref{prop:ellipseandacnodal}.
If $\gamma$ is smooth,
then $I_p(\gamma)$ is either a bicircular quartic or a smooth circular cubic.
We have encountered the following curves that $P$ could mostly lie on:
a line, a circle, an ellipse, a disjoint union of a line and a circle, a disjoint union of two circles, a circular cubic, or a bicircular quartic.
All of these are subsets of bicircular quartics, which proves the statement of Theorem \ref{thm:weak}.
\hfill$\blacksquare$
\subsection{Proof of the strong structure theorem}
We now prove Theorem~\ref{thm:strong}.
First of all, as explained in Section~\ref{sec:constr}, a subgroup of an ellipse and an appropriate coset of a subgroup of a smooth circular cubic both have at most $\frac12 n^2$ ordinary generalised circles, and a double polygon has at most $\frac14 n^2$ ordinary generalised circles.
It follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:stability} below that if we add and/or remove $O(K)$ points, then there will be at most $O(Kn^2)$ ordinary generalised circles.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:stability}
Let $S$ be a set of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ with $s$ ordinary generalised circles.
Let $T$ be a set that differs from $S$ in at most $K$ points: $|S\mathbin{\triangle} T|\leqslant K$.
Then $T$ has at most $s + O(Kn^2 + K^2n + K^3)$
ordinary generalised circles.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First note that if we add a point to any set of $n$ points, we create at most $\binom{n}{2}$ ordinary generalised circles.
Secondly, since two circles intersect in at most two points, the number of $4$-point circles through a fixed point in a set of $n$ points is at most $\frac13\binom{n-1}{2}$, so by removing a point we create at most $\frac13\binom{n-1}{2}<\binom{n}{2}$ ordinary generalised circles.
It follows that by adding and removing $O(K)$ points, we create at most
\[ \binom{n}{2}+\binom{n+1}{2}+\dots+\binom{n+K-1}{2} =O(Kn^2 + K^2n + K^3)
\]
ordinary generalised circles.
\end{proof}
Next, let $P$ be a set of $n$ points with at most $Kn^2$ ordinary generalised circles.
From the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:weak} above, we see that $P$ differs in at most $O(K)$ points from a line, a circle, an ellipse, a disjoint union of a line and a circle, a disjoint union of two circles, a circular cubic, or a bicircular quartic.
Moreover, in the proof we saw that the circular cubic must be acnodal or smooth, and that the bicircular quartic has the property that if we invert in a point on the curve, the resulting circular cubic is acnodal or smooth.
Using inversions, we can reduce the number of types of curves that we need to analyse further.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $P$ lies mostly on a line, then we are in Case~\ref{casei} of Theorem~\ref{thm:strong}, so we are done.
\item If $P$ lies mostly on a circle, then inverting in a point on the circle puts us in Case~\ref{casei} again.
\item If $P$ lies mostly on an ellipse,
then inverting in a point of the ellipse places $P$ mostly on an acnodal circular cubic.
\item If $P$ lies mostly on a bicircular quartic, then inverting in any regular point on the curve gives us a circular cubic.
As mentioned above, this cubic is acnodal or smooth.
\item If $P$ lies mostly on a line and a disjoint circle,
then an inversion in a point not on the line or circle places $P$ mostly on two disjoint circles.
\item If $P$ lies mostly on the disjoint union of two circles,
we can apply an inversion that maps the two disjoint circles to two concentric circles \cite{B00}*{Theorem 1.7}.
\end{itemize}
So, up to inversions, we need only consider the cases when $P$ lies mostly on an acnodal or smooth circular cubic,
or on two concentric circles.
We do this in Lemmas~\ref{lem:cir_elliptic} and \ref{lem:2cir} below, which will complete the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:strong}.
To determine the structure of $P$,
we use a variant of a lemma from additive combinatorics that was used by Green and Tao \cite{GT13}.
It captures the principle that if a finite subset of a group is almost closed under addition, then it is close to a subgroup.
The following statement is Proposition A.5 in \cite{GT13}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:A5}
Let $K>0$ and let $n$ be sufficiently large depending on $K$.
Let $A$, $B$, $C$ be three subsets of some abelian group $(G,\oplus)$, all of cardinality within $K$ of $n$. Suppose there are at most $Kn$ pairs $(a,b) \in A \times B$ for which $a \oplus b \notin C$. Then there is a subgroup $H \leqslant G$ and cosets $H \oplus x$, $H \oplus y$ such that
\begin{equation*}
|A \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus x)|, |B \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus y)|, |C \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus x \oplus y)| = O(K).
\end{equation*}
\end{prop}
The variant that we need is a simple corollary of Proposition~\ref{prop:A5}.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:four}
Let $K>0$ and let $n$ be sufficiently large depending on $K$.
Let $A$, $B$, $C$, $D$ be four subsets of some abelian group $(G,\oplus)$, all of cardinality within $K$ of $n$.
Suppose there are at most $Kn^2$ triples $(a,b,c) \in A \times B \times C$ for which $a \oplus b \oplus c \notin D$. Then there is a subgroup $H \leqslant G$ and cosets $H \oplus x$, $H \oplus y$, $H \oplus z$ such that
\begin{equation*}
|A \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus x)|, |B \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus y)|, |C \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus z)|, |D \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus x \oplus y \oplus z)| = O(K).
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By the pigeonhole principle, there exists an $a_0 \in A$ such that there are at most $K'n$ (where $K' = O(K)$) pairs $(b,c) \in B \times C$ for which $a_0 \oplus b \oplus c \notin D$, or equivalently $b\oplus c\notin D\ominus a_0$.
Applying Proposition~\ref{prop:A5}, we have a subgroup $H \leqslant G$ and cosets $H \oplus y$, $H \oplus z$ such that
\begin{equation*}
|B \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus y)|, |C \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus z)|, |(D \ominus a_0) \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus y \oplus z)| = O(K).
\end{equation*}
Since $|B\cap(H\oplus y)|\geqslant n-O(K)$, we repeat the argument above to obtain $b_0 \in B\cap(H\oplus y)$ such that there are at most $O(Kn)$ pairs $(a,c)\in A\times C$ with $a\oplus b_0\oplus c\notin D$, and Proposition~\ref{prop:A5} gives a subgroup $H' \leqslant G$ and cosets $H' \oplus x$, $H' \oplus z'$ such that
\begin{equation*}
|A \mathbin{\triangle} (H' \oplus x)|, |C \mathbin{\triangle} (H' \oplus z')|, |(D \ominus b_0) \mathbin{\triangle} (H' \oplus x \oplus z')| = O(K).
\end{equation*}
From this, it follows that $|(H \oplus z) \mathbin{\triangle} (H' \oplus z')| = O(K)$, hence $|(H \oplus z) \cap (H' \oplus z')| \geqslant n - O(K)$.
Since $(H\oplus z)\cap(H'\oplus z')$ is not empty, it has to be a coset of $H' \cap H$.
If $H'\neq H$, then $|H'\cap H| \leqslant n/2 + O(K)$, a contradiction.
Therefore, $H=H'$ and $H \oplus z = H' \oplus z'$.
So we have $|A \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus x)|, |B \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus y)|, |C \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus z)|, |D\mathbin{\triangle}(H\oplus x\oplus b_0\oplus z)| = O(K)$.
Since $b_0\in H\oplus y$, we obtain $|D \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus x \oplus y \oplus z)| = O(K)$ as well.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Circular cubic]\label{lem:cir_elliptic}
Let $K>0$ and let $n$ be sufficiently large depending on $K$.
Suppose $P$ is a set of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ spanning at most $Kn^2$ ordinary generalised circles,
and all but at most $K$ points of $P$ lie on an acnodal or smooth circular cubic $\gamma$.
Then there is a coset $H \oplus x$ of a subgroup $H\leqslant \gamma^*$,
with $4x \in H \oplus \omega$,
such that $|P \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus x)| = O(K)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $P' = P \cap \gamma^*$.
Then $|P\mathbin{\triangle} P'| = O(K)$, and by Lemma~\ref{lemma:stability}, $P'$ spans at most $O(Kn^2)$ ordinary circles.
If $a$, $b$, $c \in \gamma$ are distinct, then by Proposition~\ref{prop:cir_elliptic}, the generalised circle through $a$, $b$, $c$ meets $\gamma$ again in the unique point $d=\omega\ominus(a\oplus b\oplus c)$.
This implies that $d \in P'$ for all but at most $O(Kn^2)$ triples $a$, $b$, $c \in P'$,
or equivalently $a\oplus b\oplus c \in \omega \ominus P'$.
Applying Corollary~\ref{cor:four} with $A = B = C = P'$ and $D = \omega\ominus P'$, we obtain $H\leqslant\gamma^*$ and a coset $H \oplus x$ such that $|P \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus x)| = O(K)$ and
$|(\omega\ominus P')\mathbin{\triangle} (H\oplus 3x)|=O(K)$, which is equivalent to $|P \mathbin{\triangle} (H \ominus 3x \oplus \omega)| = O(K)$.
Thus we have $|(H \oplus x) \mathbin{\triangle} (H \ominus 3x \oplus \omega)| = O(K)$, which implies $4x \in H \oplus \omega$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}[Concentric circles]\label{lem:2cir}
Let $K>0$ and let $n$ be sufficiently large depending on $K$.
Suppose $P$ is a set of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ spanning at most $Kn^2$ ordinary generalised circles.
Suppose all but at most $K$ of the points of $P$ lie on two concentric circles, and that $P$ has $n/2 \pm O(K)$ points on each.
Then, up to similarity, $P$ differs in at most $O(K)$ points from an `aligned' or `offset' double polygon.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By scaling and rotating, we can assume that $P$ lies mostly on the two concentric circles $\sigma_1 = \{ e^{2\pi i t} : t \in [0, 1) \}$ and $\sigma_2 = \{ re^{-2\pi i t} : t \in [0, 1) \}$, $r>1$, which we gave a group structure in Section \ref{sec:groupsonother}.
Let $P_1= P\cap\sigma_1$ and $P_2=P\cap\sigma_2$.
Then $|P\mathbin{\triangle}(P_1\cup P_2)|=O(K)$, and by Lemma~\ref{lemma:stability}, $P_1\cup P_2$ spans at most $O(Kn^2)$ ordinary circles.
If $a,b\in \sigma_1$ and $c\in\sigma_2$ with $a\neq b$, then by Lemma~\ref{prop:double-polygon-concyclic}, the generalised circle through $a$, $b$, $c$ meets $\sigma_1 \cup \sigma_2$ again in the unique point $d=\ominus(a\oplus b\oplus c)$.
This implies $d \in P_2$ for all but at most $O(Kn^2)$ triples $(a,b,c)$ with $a,b\in P_1$ and $c \in P_2$. Applying Corollary~\ref{cor:four} with $A = B = P_1$, $C=P_2$ and $D = \ominus P_2$, we get cosets $H \oplus x$ and $H\oplus y$ of $\sigma_1 \cup \sigma_2$ such that $|P_1 \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus x)|, |P_2 \mathbin{\triangle} (H \oplus y)| = O(K)$ and $2x\oplus 2y\in H$, where $x\in\sigma_1$ and $y\in\sigma_2$.
It follows that $H\leqslant\sigma_1$, hence $H$ is a cyclic group of order $m=n/2\pm O(K)$, and $H\oplus x$ and $H\oplus y$ are the vertex sets of regular $m$-gons inscribed in $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$, respectively, either `aligned' or `offset' depending on whether $x\oplus y\in H$ or not.
\end{proof}
Together these lemmas prove Theorem \ref{thm:strong}.
It just remains to remark that if $P$ differs in $O(K)$ points from a coset on an acnodal circular cubic,
then we apply inversion in its singularity.
By Proposition \ref{prop:ellipseandacnodal},
we obtain that $P$ differs in $O(K)$ points from a coset $H\oplus x$ of a finite subgroup $H$ of an ellipse, where $4x=o$.
Thus, $x$ is a point of the ellipse with eccentric angle a multiple of $\pi/2$.
After a rotation, we can assume that $x=o$, which is Case~\ref{caseii} of Theorem \ref{thm:strong}.
\hfill$\blacksquare$
\section{Extremal configurations}\label{sec:extremal}
In this section we prove Theorems~\ref{thm:main}, \ref{thm:ordgencircles}, and \ref{thm:orchard}.
We first consider generalised circles.
\subsection{Ordinary generalised circles}
Suppose $P$ is an $n$-point set in $\mathbb{R}^2$ spanning fewer than $\frac{1}{2} n^2$ ordinary generalised circles, and that $P$ is not contained in a generalised circle.
Applying Theorem~\ref{thm:strong}, we can conclude that, up to inversions, $P$ differs in $O(1)$ points from one of the following examples: points on a line,
a coset of a subgroup of an acnodal or smooth circular cubic,
or a double polygon.
The first type of set is very easy to handle.
Note that the lower bound is on the number of ordinary circles, not counting $3$-point lines.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:extremal_line}
Let $K\geqslant 1$ and $n\geqslant 2K+4$. If all except $K$ points of a set $P \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ of $n$ points lie on a line, then $P$ spans at least $\binom{n-1}{2}$ ordinary circles.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\ell$ be a line such that $|P\cap\ell|=n-K$.
For any $p\in P\cap\ell$ and $q\in P\setminus\ell$ there are at most $K-1$ non-ordinary circles through $p$, $q$, another point on $P\cap\ell$, and another point in $P\setminus \ell$.
Therefore, there are at least $K(n-2K)$ ordinary circles through $p$.
This holds for any of the $n-K$ points $p\in P\cap\ell$, and we obtain at least $\frac12 K(n-2K)(n-K)$ ordinary circles.
It is easy to see that when $1\leqslant K\leqslant (n-4)/2$, $\frac12 K(n-2K)(n-K)$ is minimised when $K=1$.
\end{proof}
Cosets on cubics are also relatively easy to handle.
We again obtain a lower bound on the number of ordinary circles, not including $3$-point lines.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:extremal_cubic}
Suppose $P \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ differs in $K$ points from a coset $H\oplus x$ of an acnodal or smooth circular cubic, where $|H|=n\pm O(K)$ and $4x\ominus\omega\in H$.
Then $P$ spans at least $\frac{1}{2}n^2 - O(Kn)$ ordinary circles.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $P$ differs in $K$ points from $H\oplus x$.
We know from Construction~\ref{constr:cubic} that $H\oplus x$ spans $\frac{1}{2} n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary circles, all of which are tangent to $\gamma$.
We show that adding or removing $K$ points destroys no more than $O(Kn)$ of these ordinary circles, so that the resulting set $P$ still spans at least $\frac{1}{2}n^2 - O(Kn)$ ordinary circles.
Suppose we add a point $q \notin H\oplus x$.
For $p \in H\oplus x$, at most one circle tangent to $\gamma$ at $p$ can pass through $q$.
Thus, adding $q$ destroys at most $n$ ordinary circles.
Now suppose we remove a point $p \in H\oplus x$.
Since ordinary circles of $H\oplus x$ correspond to solutions of $2p\oplus q\oplus r = \omega$ or $p\oplus 2q\oplus r = \omega$,
there are at most $O(n)$ solutions for a fixed $p$.
Thus removing $p$ destroys at most $O(n)$ ordinary circles.
Repeating $K$ times, we see that adding or removing $K$ points to or from $H\oplus x$ destroys at most $O(Kn)$ ordinary generalised circles out of the $\frac{1}{2}n^2 - O(n)$ spanned by $H\oplus x$.
This proves that $P$ spans at least $\frac{1}{2}n^2 - O(Kn)$ ordinary circles.
\end{proof}
From the two lemmas above we know that there is an absolute constant $C$ such that a set of $n$ points, not all collinear or concyclic, spanning at most $\frac{1}{2}n^2 - Cn$ ordinary generalised circles, differs in $O(1)$ points from Case~\ref{caseiv} in Theorem~\ref{thm:strong}.
This case,
where $P$ is close to the vertex set of a double polygon,
requires a more careful analysis of the effect of adding or removing points.
We use the following special case of a result due to Raz, Sharir, and De Zeeuw \cite{RSZ15}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:rsz}
If $P\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ is a set of $n$ points contained in two circles,
then the number of lines with at least three points of $P$ is at most $O(n^{11/6})$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Denote the two circles by $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$.
We use \cite{RSZ15}*{Theorem 6.1}, which states that for (not necessarily distinct) algebraic curves $C_1,C_2,C_3$ of constant degree, and finite sets $S_i\subset C_i$,
the number of collinear triples $(p_1,p_2,p_3)\in S_1\times S_2\times S_3$, with $p_1,p_2,p_3$ distinct, is bounded by $O(|S_1|^{1/2}|S_2|^{2/3}|S_3|^{2/3}+|S_1| + |S_1|^{1/2}|S_2|+|S_1|^{1/2}|S_3|)$,
unless $C_1\cup C_2\cup C_3$ is a line or a cubic.
Let $C_1=\sigma_1$ and $C_2=C_3=\sigma_2$.
Set $S_i = P\cap C_i$ for $i=1,2,3$.
Every line with at least one point of $S_1$ and two points of $S_2=S_3$ corresponds to a collinear triple in $S_1\times S_2\times S_3$.
Since the union of two circles is not a line or a cubic,
we can apply the theorem to get the bound $O(n^{11/6})$ for the number of collinear triples in $P$ with one point in $\sigma_1$ and two points in $\sigma_2$.
Similarly, the number of collinear triples in $P$ with one point in $\sigma_2$ and two points in $\sigma_1$ is also $O(n^{11/6})$.
Since a line intersects $\sigma_1\cup\sigma_2$ in at most four points, we also obtain the bound $O(n^{11/6})$ for the number of lines with at least three points.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:add/remove}
Let $S$ be a double polygon with $m$
points on each circle.
Let $P = (S \setminus A) \cup B$ be a set of $n$ points, where $A$ is a subset of $S$ with $a = O(1)$ points and $B$ is a set disjoint from $S$ with $b = O(1)$ points.
Then $P$ spans at least $\frac18 (2 + a + 4b)n^2 - O(n^{11/6})$ ordinary generalised circles.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We know from Constructions~\ref{constr:even} and~\ref{constr:offset} that $S$ spans $\frac14 n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles.
Consider first the number of ordinary generalised circles spanned by $S \setminus A$.
As we saw in Construction~\ref{constr:odd},
removing a point $p \in S$ destroys at most $3m/2$ ordinary generalised circles spanned by $S$, and adds $\frac12 m^2 - O(m) = \frac18 n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles.
Noting that there are at most $m$ $4$-point generalised circles spanned by $S$ that go through any two given points of $A$, we thus have by inclusion-exclusion that $S \setminus A$ determines at least $(\frac14+\frac{a}{8})n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles.
Now consider adding $q\in B$ to $S$.
For any pair of points from $S\setminus A$,
adding $q\in B$ creates a new ordinary generalised circle,
unless the generalised circle through the pair and $q$ contains three or four points of $S\setminus A$.
We already saw that the number of ordinary generalised circles hitting a fixed point is $O(n)$, so it remains to bound the number of $4$-point generalised circles of $S$ that hit $q$.
If $q$ lies on one of the concentric circles, then no $4$-point generalised circles hit $q$, so we can assume that $q$ does not.
Applying inversion in $q$ reduces the problem to bounding the number of $4$-point lines determined by a subset of two circles.
By Proposition \ref{prop:rsz},
this number is bounded by $O(n^{11/6})$,
so $p$ lies on at most $O(n^{11/6})$ of the $4$-point generalised circles spanned by $S$.
Adding $q$ to $S$ thus creates at least $\binom{n}{2} - O(n^{11/6})$ ordinary generalised circles.
Note that each $p \in A$ that was removed destroys at most $n$ of these circles.
Adding $q$ to $S\setminus A$ also destroys at most $O(n)$ ordinary circles,
since for each $p\in S$ there is only one circle tangent at $p$ and going through $q$,
and for each $p \in A$, at most $m$ ordinary circles spanned by $S \setminus A$ go through $p$.
Finally, since there are at most $2m$ circles through two points of $B$ that also go through two points of $S \setminus A$, $P = (S \setminus A) \cup B$ spans at least $(\frac14+\frac{a}{8}+\frac{b}{2})n^2 - O(n^{11/6})$ ordinary generalised circles.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:ordgencircles} then follows easily from the lemmas above.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:ordgencircles}]
Suppose that $P$ is a set of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ with fewer than $\frac12n^2-Cn$ ordinary generalised circles, where $C$ is sufficiently large.
Without loss of generality, $n$ is also sufficiently large.
By Lemmas~\ref{lem:extremal_line} and \ref{lem:extremal_cubic},
we need only consider the case where $P$ differs by $O(1)$ points from a double polygon.
In the notation of Lemma~\ref{lem:add/remove},
we have $P = (S \setminus A) \cup B$ and $\frac{1}{8} (2+a+4b) < \frac12$, which implies that $a \leqslant 1$ and $b = 0$.
So $P$ is either equal to $S$, or is obtained from $S$ by removing one point,
which are exactly the cases in Constructions~\ref{constr:even}, \ref{constr:offset}, and~\ref{constr:odd}.
In particular, the minimum number of ordinary generalised circles occurs in Construction~\ref{constr:even} when $n\equiv0\pmod{4}$, in Construction~\ref{constr:odd} when $n\equiv1,3\pmod{4}$, and in Constructions~\ref{constr:even} and \ref{constr:offset} when $n\equiv2\pmod{4}$.
\renewcommand{\qedsymbol}{$\blacksquare$}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Ordinary circles}\label{sec:circles}
We now consider what happens if we do not count generalised circles that are lines,
and prove Theorem~\ref{thm:main}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}]
Let $P$ be a set of $n$ points not all on a line or a circle, with at most $\frac12 n^2-Cn$ ordinary circles, for a sufficiently large $C$.
By a simple double counting argument, there are at most $\frac{1}{6}n^2$ $3$-point lines,
so there are at most $\frac23n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles.
By Theorem~\ref{thm:strong}, up to inversions and up to $O(1)$ points, $P$ lies on a line, an ellipse, a smooth circular cubic, or two concentric circles.
By Lemmas~\ref{lem:extremal_line} and \ref{lem:extremal_cubic}, the first three cases give us at least $\frac12n^2-O(n)$ ordinary circles, contrary to assumption.
Therefore,
we only need to consider the case where, when $P$ is transformed by an inversion to $P'$,
we have $P'=(S\setminus A)\cup B$,
where $S$ is a double polygon (`aligned' or `offset'),
and $|A|=a$, $|B|=b$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:add/remove}, $P'$ has at least $\frac18(2+a+4b)n^2-O(n^{11/6})$ ordinary generalised circles, which gives us the inequality $\frac18 (2+a+4b) < \frac23$,
which in turn gives us $a\leqslant 3$ and $b=0$.
Therefore, $P'$ lies on two concentric circles, and $P$ lies on the disjoint union of two circles or the disjoint union of a line and a circle.
Suppose that $a=3$ (and $b=0$).
Then $P'$ has $\frac58n^2-O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles.
Those passing through the centre of the inversion that transforms $P$ to $P'$, are inverted back to straight lines passing through three points of $P$.
As in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:add/remove}, there are $\frac18n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles that pass through any point of $A$.
Also, we can use Lemma~\ref{lemma:tangent} below to show that there are at most $O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles spanned by $S\setminus A$ that intersect in the same point not in $S$.
Indeed, by Lemma~\ref{lemma:tangent}, there are at most $n/2$ ordinary generalised circles of $S$ that intersect in the same point $p\notin S$.
Furthermore, for each point $q\in A$ there are $O(n)$ generalised circles through $p$, $q$, and two more points of $S$.
It follows that there are $O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles spanned by $S\setminus A$ through $p$.
Thus, if the centre of inversion is in $A$, $P$ has $\frac12n^2-O(n)$ ordinary circles, which is a contradiction if $C$ is chosen large enough.
On the other hand, if the centre of inversion is not in $A$, then $P$ has $\frac58n^2-O(n)$ ordinary circles, also a contradiction.
Therefore, we have $a\leqslant 2$, which means that $P'$ is a set of $n$ points as in Constructions~\ref{constr:even}, \ref{constr:offset}, \ref{constr:odd}, or \ref{constr:linecircle}.
Next, suppose that $n$ is even.
If $a=2$, then there are $\frac12n^2-O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles and through both points of $A$ there are $\frac18n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles.
If we invert in one of these points in $A$, we obtain a set with $\frac38n^2-O(n)$ ordinary circles (as in Construction~\ref{constr:linecircle}), which is not extremal.
Otherwise, $a=0$, $P'$ is as in Constructions~\ref{constr:even} or \ref{constr:offset}, and there are at least $\frac14n^2-n$ ordinary generalised circles if $n\equiv0\pmod{4}$ and $\frac14n^2-\frac12 n$ if $n\equiv2\pmod{4}$.
Let $p$ be the centre of the inversion that transforms $P$ to $P'$.
Then all the $3$-point lines of $P$ are inverted to ordinary circles in the double polygon $P'$, all passing through $p$.
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:tangent} below, there are at most $n/2$ ordinary circles that intersect in the same point not in $P'$.
Thus, in $P$ there at most $n/2$ $3$-point lines,
and the number of ordinary circles (not including lines) is at least $\frac14n^2-\frac32n$ if $n\equiv0\pmod{4}$ and $\frac14n^2-n$ if $n\equiv2\pmod{4}$, which match
Construction~\ref{constr:even} (and Construction~\ref{constr:offset} if $n\equiv2\pmod{4}$), if the radii are chosen so that each vertex of the inner polygon has an ordinary generalised circle that is a straight line tangent to it.
Finally, suppose that $n$ is odd.
Then $a=1$ and $P'$ is as in Construction~\ref{constr:odd}, with $\frac38n^2 - O(n)$ ordinary generalised circles.
It follows that $P$ must be as in Construction~\ref{constr:linecircle}, with $\frac{1}{4}n^2-\frac{3}{4}n+\frac{1}{2}$ ordinary circles if $n\equiv 1\pmod{4}$ and $\frac{1}{4}n^2-\frac{5}{4}n+\frac{3}{2}$ ordinary circles if $n\equiv 3\pmod{4}$.
This finishes the proof.
\renewcommand{\qedsymbol}{$\blacksquare$}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:tangent}
Let $S$ be a double polygon (`aligned' or `offset') with $m$ points on each circle. Then a point $q \notin S$ lies on at most $m$ ordinary generalised circles spanned by $S$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Denote the inner circle by $\sigma_1$ and the outer circle by $\sigma_2$, both with centre $o$.
We proceed by case analysis on the position of $q$ with respect to $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$. Note that for each point $p \in S$, at most one of the ordinary generalised circles tangent at $p$ can go through $q$.
If $q$ lies on either $\sigma_1$ or $\sigma_2$, then $q$ does not lie on any ordinary generalised circle spanned by $S$.
If $q$ lies inside $\sigma_1$, then $q$ lies on at most $m$ ordinary generalised circles spanned by $S$, since ordinary generalised circles tangent to $\sigma_1$ cannot pass through $q$.
Similarly, if $q$ lies outside $\sigma_2$, it lies on at most $m$ ordinary generalised circles, since ordinary generalised circles tangent to $\sigma_2$ lie inside $\sigma_2$.
The remaining case to consider is when $q$ lies in the annulus bounded by $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$.
Consider the subset $S' \subset S$ of points $p$ such that there exists an ordinary generalised circle tangent at $p$ going through $q$.
Consider the four circles passing through $q$ and tangent to both $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$.
They touch $\sigma_1$ at $a_1,b_1,c_1,d_1$ and $\sigma_2$ at $a_2,b_2,c_2,d_2$ as in Figure~\ref{fig:bitangent_circles}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\definecolor{qqwuqq}{rgb}{0.,0.39215686274509803,0.}
\definecolor{zzttqq}{rgb}{0.6,0.2,0.}
\definecolor{uuuuuu}{rgb}{0,0,0}
\definecolor{qqqqcc}{rgb}{0.,0.,0.8}
\definecolor{xdxdff}{rgb}{0.49019607843137253,0.49019607843137253,1.}
\definecolor{yqyqyq}{rgb}{0.5019607843137255,0.5019607843137255,0.5019607843137255}
\definecolor{qqqqff}{rgb}{0.,0.,1.}
\begin{tikzpicture}[line cap=round,line join=round,>=triangle 45,thick,x=1.0cm,y=1.0cm,scale=0.925]
\draw [shift={(5.,0.5)},color=qqwuqq,fill=qqwuqq,fill opacity=0.1] (0,0) -- (18.194872338766768:0.69) arc (18.194872338766768:69.51268488527734:0.69) -- cycle;
\draw [shift={(5.,0.5)},color=qqwuqq,fill=qqwuqq,fill opacity=0.1] (0,0) -- (-110.48731511472266:0.57) arc (-110.48731511472266:-18.194872338766785:0.57) -- cycle;
\draw [color=uuuuuu] (5.,0.5) circle (2.5cm);
\draw [color=uuuuuu] (5.,0.5) circle (5.cm);
\draw [color=qqqqcc] (5.4375,1.6709371246996996) circle (3.75cm);
\draw [color=qqqqcc] (5.4375,-0.6709371246996997) circle (3.75cm);
\draw [color=qqqqcc] (8.5625,1.6709371246996996) circle (1.25cm);
\draw [color=qqqqcc] (8.5625,-0.6709371246996997) circle (1.25cm);
\draw [shift={(5.,0.5)},color=zzttqq,fill=zzttqq,fill opacity=0.1] (0,0) -- plot[domain=0.31756042929152123:1.213225223149386,variable=\t]({1.*5.*cos(\t r)+0.*5.*sin(\t r)},{0.*5.*cos(\t r)+1.*5.*sin(\t r)}) -- cycle ;
\draw [shift={(5.,0.5)},color=zzttqq,fill=zzttqq,fill opacity=0.1] (0,0) -- plot[domain=4.35481787673918:5.9656248778880645,variable=\t]({1.*2.5*cos(\t r)+0.*2.5*sin(\t r)},{0.*2.5*cos(\t r)+1.*2.5*sin(\t r)}) -- cycle ;
\draw [shift={(5.,0.5)},line width=1.5pt] plot[domain=0.31756042929152123:1.213225223149386,variable=\t]({1.*5.*cos(\t r)+0.*5.*sin(\t r)},{0.*5.*cos(\t r)+1.*5.*sin(\t r)});
\draw [shift={(5.,0.5)},line width=1.5pt] plot[domain=4.35481787673918:5.9656248778880645,variable=\t]({1.*2.5*cos(\t r)+0.*2.5*sin(\t r)},{0.*2.5*cos(\t r)+1.*2.5*sin(\t r)});
\draw [shift={(5.,0.5)},line width=1.5pt] plot[domain=0.31756042929152134:1.9283674304404066,variable=\t]({1.*2.5*cos(\t r)+0.*2.5*sin(\t r)},{0.*2.5*cos(\t r)+1.*2.5*sin(\t r)});
\draw [shift={(5.,0.5)},line width=1.5pt] plot[domain=5.0699600840302:5.9656248778880645,variable=\t]({1.*5.*cos(\t r)+0.*5.*sin(\t r)},{0.*5.*cos(\t r)+1.*5.*sin(\t r)});
\draw [fill=qqqqff] (5.,0.5) circle (2pt) node[left] {$o$};
\draw [fill=xdxdff] (9.,0.5) circle (2pt);
\draw[color=uuuuuu] (9.45,0.5) node {$q$};
\draw [fill=uuuuuu] (4.125,-1.8418742493994003) circle (2pt) node[below] {$a_1$};
\draw [fill=uuuuuu] (7.375,-0.2806247497997997) circle (2pt) node[right] {$b_1$};
\draw [fill=uuuuuu] (7.375,1.2806247497998) circle (2pt);
\draw [fill=uuuuuu] (7.23,0.97) node {$c_1$};
\draw [fill=uuuuuu] (4.125,2.8418742493993996) circle (2pt) node[below] {$d_1$};
\draw [fill=uuuuuu] (6.75,-4.183748498798798) circle (2pt) node[above] {$d_2$};
\draw [fill=uuuuuu] (9.75,-1.0612494995995996) circle (2pt) node[right] {$b_2$};
\draw [fill=uuuuuu] (9.75,2.0612494995995996) circle (2pt) node[right] {$c_2$};
\draw [fill=uuuuuu] (6.75,5.183748498798798) circle (2pt) node[above] {$a_2$};
\draw[color=uuuuuu] (5.33,0.8) node {$\varphi$};
\draw[color=uuuuuu] (5.15,0.2) node {$\theta$};
\draw (2.79,0.5) node {$\sigma_1$};
\draw (0.29,0.5) node {$\sigma_2$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Bitangent circles through $q$}\label{fig:bitangent_circles}
\end{figure}
Any circle through $q$ tangent to $\sigma_1$ and intersecting $\sigma_2$ in two points, must touch $\sigma_1$ on one of the open arcs $a_1b_1$ or $c_1d_1$.
Similarly,
any circle through $q$ tangent to $\sigma_2$ and intersecting $\sigma_1$ in two points, must touch $\sigma_2$ on one of the open arcs $a_2c_2$ or $b_2d_2$.
It follows that $S'$ must be contained in the relative interiors of one of these four arcs.
Since $S$ consists of $m$ equally spaced points on each of $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$,
\[|S'|< \left\lceil \frac{2m (\angle a_1ob_1 + \angle c_1od_1 + \angle b_2od_2 + \angle a_2oc_2)}{4\pi} \right\rceil = \left\lceil \frac{m(\theta+\varphi)}{\pi}\right\rceil,\]
where $\theta$ and $\varphi$ are as indicated in Figure~\ref{fig:bitangent_circles}.
In order to show that $|S'|\leqslant m$, it suffices to show that the angle sum $\theta + \varphi$ is strictly less than $\pi$.
This is clear from Figure~\ref{fig:bitangent_circles} (note that $a_1, o, a_2$ are collinear with $a_1$ and $a_2$ on opposite sides of $o$).
\end{proof}
\subsection{Four-point circles}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:orchard}]
Let $P$ be a set of $n$ points in $\mathbb{R}^2$ with at least $\frac{1}{24}n^3 - \frac{7}{24} n^2 + O(n)$ $4$-point generalised circles.
Let $t_i$ denote the number of $i$-point lines ($i\geqslant 2$) and $s_i$ the number of $i$-point circles ($i\geqslant 3$) in $P$.
By counting unordered triples of points, we have
\[ \binom{n}{3} = \sum_{i\geqslant 3}\binom{i}{3}(t_i+s_i) \geqslant t_3+s_3+4(t_4+s_4),\] hence \[\frac{1}{6}n^3 - O(n^2) \geqslant t_3 + s_3 + 4\left(\frac{1}{24}n^3 - O(n^2)\right)\] and $t_3+s_3 = O(n^2)$, so we can apply Theorem~\ref{thm:strong}.
We next consider each of the cases of that theorem in turn.
If all except $O(1)$ points of $P$ lie on a straight line, it is easy to see that $P$ determines only $O(n^2)$ generalised circles, contrary to assumption.
If all except $O(1)$ are vertices of two regular $m$-gons on concentric circles where $m= n/2 \pm O(1)$, then we know from Constructions~\ref{constr:even}, \ref{constr:offset}, and~\ref{constr:odd} that $P$ determines at most $\frac{1}{32}n^3 +O(n^2)$ $4$-point generalised circles, again contrary to assumption.
Suppose next that $P = ((H \oplus x)\setminus A) \cup B$, where $H$ is a finite subgroup of order $m=n\pm O(1)$ of a smooth circular cubic, $A$ is a subset of $H \oplus x$ with $a=O(1)$ points, and $B$ is a set disjoint from $H \oplus x$ with $b=O(1)$ points.
Then $n=m-a+b$.
The number of $4$-point generalised circles in $H \oplus x$ is $\frac{1}{24}m^3-\frac{1}{4}m^2 + O(m)$.
We next determine an upper bound for the number of $4$-point generalised circles in $P$.
For each $p\in A$, let $C_p$ be the set of $4$-point generalised circles of $H \oplus x$ that pass through $p$.
Then $|C_p|=\frac16 m^2 - O(m)$ and $|C_p\cap C_q|=O(m)$ for distinct $p,q\in A$.
By inclusion-exclusion, we destroy at least $|\bigcup_{p\in A}C_p|\geqslant \frac16 am^2 - O(m)$ $4$-point generalised circles by removing $A$, and we still have at most $\frac{1}{24}m^3-\frac{1}{4}m^2 - \frac16 am^2 + O(m)$ $4$-point generalised circles in $(H\oplus x)\setminus A$.
For each $p\in B$, the number of ordinary generalised circles spanned by $H \oplus x$ passing through $p$ is at most $O(m)$.
This is because each such generalised circle is tangent to the cubic at one of the points of $H \oplus x$, and there is only one generalised circle through $p$ and tangent at a given point of $H \oplus x$.
Also, for each pair of distinct $p,q\in B$, there are at most $O(m)$ generalised circles through $p$ and $q$ and two points of $H \oplus x$; and for any three $p,q,r\in B$ there are at most $O(1)$ generalised circles through $p,q,r$ and one point of $H \oplus x$.
Therefore, again by inclusion-exclusion, by adding $B$ we gain at most $O(m)$ $4$-point generalised circles.
It follows that the number of $4$-point generalised circles determined by $P$ is
\[ t_4+s_4 \leqslant \frac{1}{24}m^3-\frac{1}{4}m^2 - \frac16 am^2 + O(m) = \frac{n^3 - (a+3b+6)n^2 +O(n)}{24}.\]
Since we assumed that
\[t_4+s_4\geqslant \frac{n^3-7n^2+O(n)}{24},\] we obtain $a+3b < 1$.
Therefore, $a=b=0$ and $P= H \oplus x$.
The maximum number of $4$-point circles in a coset has been determined in Constructions~\ref{constr:ellipse} and \ref{constr:cubic}.
The final case, when all but $O(1)$ points of $P$ lie on an ellipse,
can be reduced to the previous case.
Indeed, by Lemma~\ref{prop:ellipseandacnodal}, if we invert the ellipse in a point on the ellipse, we obtain an acnodal circular cubic, and then the above analysis holds verbatim for the group of regular points on this cubic.
\renewcommand{\qedsymbol}{$\blacksquare$}
\end{proof}
\begin{bibdiv}
\begin{biblist}
\bib{BB94}{article}{
author={B{\'a}lintov{\'a}, A.},
author={B{\'a}lint, V.},
title={On the number of circles determined by $n$ points in the
{Euclidean} plane},
date={1994},
journal={Acta Math.\ Hungar.},
volume={63},
number={3},
pages={283\ndash 289},
}
\bib{B16}{unpublished}{
author={Ball, Simeon},
title={On sets defining few ordinary planes},
note={arXiv:1606.02138},
}
\bib{BM16}{unpublished}{
author={Ball, Simeon},
author={Monserrat, Joaquim},
title={A generalisation of {S}ylvester's problem to higher dimensions},
note={J. Geom., in press},
}
\bib{B01}{book}{
author={Basset, A.~B.},
title={An elementary treatise on cubic and quartic curves},
publisher={Cambridge},
date={1901},
}
\bib{BPBS84}{book}{
author={Berger, M.},
author={Pansu, R.},
author={Berry, J.-P.},
author={Saint-Raymond, X.},
title={Problems in geometry},
publisher={Springer},
date={1984},
}
\bib{B00}{book}{
author={Blair, D.},
title={Inversion theory and conformal mappings},
publisher={American Mathematical Society},
date={2000},
}
\bib{BVZ16}{article}{
author={Boys, Thomas},
author={Valculescu, Claudiu},
author={de~Zeeuw, Frank},
title={On the number of ordinary conics},
date={2016},
journal={SIAM J. Discrete Math.},
volume={30},
number={3},
pages={1644\ndash 1659},
}
\bib{BMP05}{book}{
author={Brass, P.},
author={Moser, W.},
author={Pach, J.},
title={Research problems in discrete geometry},
publisher={Springer},
date={2005},
}
\bib{Co69}{book}{
author={Coxeter, H. S.~M.},
title={Introduction to geometry},
edition={Second Edition},
publisher={Wiley},
date={1969},
}
\bib{CDFGLMSST15}{unpublished}{
author={Czapli{\'n}ski, A.},
author={Dumnicki, M.},
author={Farnik, {\L{}}.},
author={Gwo{\'z}dziewicz, J.},
author={Lampa-Baczy{\'n}ska, M.},
author={Malara, G.},
author={Szemberg, T.},
author={Szpond, J.},
author={Tutaj-Gasi{\'n}ska, H.},
title={On the {S}ylvester-{G}allai theorem for conics},
note={Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova, accepted. arXiv:1411.2648},
}
\bib{EGH96}{article}{
author={Eisenbud, David},
author={Green, Mark},
author={Harris, Joe},
title={Cayley-{B}acharach theorems and conjectures},
date={1996},
journal={Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.)},
volume={33},
number={3},
pages={295\ndash 324},
}
\bib{E67}{article}{
author={Elliott, P. D. T.~A.},
title={On the number of circles determined by $n$ points},
date={1967},
journal={Acta Math.\ Acad.\ Sci.\ Hungar.},
volume={18},
pages={181\ndash 188},
}
\bib{GT13}{article}{
author={Green, Ben},
author={Tao, Terence},
title={On sets defining few ordinary lines},
date={2013},
journal={Discrete Comput.\ Geom.},
volume={50},
number={2},
pages={409\ndash 468},
}
\bib{H20}{book}{
author={Hilton, Harold},
title={Plane algebraic curves},
publisher={Oxford University Press},
date={1920},
}
\bib{J48}{article}{
author={Joachimsthal, F.},
title={D{\'e}monstration d'un th{\'e}or{\`e}me de {M}r. {S}teiner},
date={1848},
journal={J. Reine Angew. Math.},
volume={36},
pages={95\ndash 96},
}
\bib{J77}{article}{
author={Johnson, W.~W.},
title={Classification of plane curves with reference to inversion},
date={1877},
journal={The Analyst},
volume={4},
number={2},
pages={42\ndash 47},
}
\bib{KW91}{book}{
author={Klee, V.},
author={Wagon, S.},
title={Old and new unsolved problems in plane geometry and number
theory},
publisher={Mathematical Association of America},
date={1991},
}
\bib{M51}{article}{
author={Motzkin, Theodore},
title={The lines and planes connecting the points of a finite set},
date={1951},
journal={Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.},
volume={70},
number={3},
pages={451\ndash 464},
}
\bib{MZ}{unpublished}{
author={{Nassajian Mojarrad}, Hossein},
author={de~Zeeuw, Frank},
title={On the number of ordinary circles},
note={arXiv:1412.8314},
}
\bib{RSZ15}{article}{
author={Raz, Orit~E.},
author={Sharir, Micha},
author={de~Zeeuw, Frank},
title={Polynomials vanishing on {C}artesian products: The
{E}lekes-{S}zab{\'o} {T}heorem revisited},
year={2016},
journal={Duke Math. J.},
volume={165},
number={18},
pages={3517\ndash 3566},
}
\bib{S09}{book}{
author={Silverman, J.~H.},
title={The arithmetic of elliptic curves},
edition={Second Edition},
publisher={Springer},
date={2009},
}
\bib{ST92}{book}{
author={Silverman, Joseph~H.},
author={Tate, John~T.},
title={Rational points on elliptic curves},
edition={Second Edition},
publisher={Springer},
date={1992},
}
\bib{W78}{book}{
author={Walker, R.~J.},
title={Algebraic curves},
publisher={Springer},
date={1978},
}
\bib{W11}{thesis}{
author={Werner, Thomas~Rainer},
title={Rational families of circles and bicircular quartics},
type={Ph.D. Thesis},
address={Friedrich-Alexander-Universit\"{a}t Erlangen-N\"{u}rnberg},
date={2011},
}
\bib{WW88}{article}{
author={Wiseman, J.},
author={Wilson, P.~R.},
title={A {S}ylvester theorem for conic sections},
date={1988},
journal={Discrete Comput.\ Geom.},
volume={3},
number={4},
pages={295\ndash 305},
}
\bib{Z11}{article}{
author={Zhang, R.},
title={On the number of ordinary circles determined by $n$ points},
date={2011},
journal={Discrete Comput.\ Geom.},
volume={46},
number={2},
pages={205\ndash 211},
}
\end{biblist}
\end{bibdiv}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
In the 1950s and 1960s, Atiyah and Segal studied a construction that associates a vector bundle to each (complex) representation of a group $G$. This construction yields a map
$$R[G] \longrightarrow K^* (BG),$$
from the complex representation ring of $G$ to the complex $K$--theory of its classifying space $BG$.
The simplest form of the Atiyah--Segal Completion Theorem~\cite{Atiyah-char-coh, Atiyah-Segal} states that when $G$ is a compact Lie group, this map becomes an isomorphism after completing $R[G]$ at its augmentation ideal.
We introduce an analogous map for infinite discrete groups, where the topology of the representation spaces $\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{GL}_n (\mathbb{C}))$ plays a key role. Loosely speaking, this map assigns to a spherical family of representations
$$\rho \colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{GL}_n (\mathbb{C}))$$ the $K$--theory class of the associated vector bundle
$$E_{\rho} \to S^m \times BG$$
with holonomy $\rho$. See Section~\ref{TAS-sec} for the definition of $E_{\rho} $, and a more precise statement along these lines (Theorem~\ref{TAS}). The construction ${\rho} \mapsto E_{\rho}$ was considered previously by Ramras--Willett--Yu~\cite{RWY}, where it was used to study the (strong) Novikov conjecture, and by Baird--Ramras~\cite{Baird-Ramras-smoothing}, where it was used to obtain cohomological lower bounds on the
homotopy groups of spaces of flat, unitary connections.
The appropriate context for this construction is that of \emph{deformation} $K$--\emph{theory}, as studied in~\cite{Lawson-thesis, Lawson-prod, Lawson-simul, Ramras-excision, Ramras-surface, Ramras-stable-moduli}. The reduced, unitary deformation $K$--theory of a group $G$ can be thought of as the homotopy group completion $\Omega B\mathrm{Rep}(G)$, where $\mathrm{Rep}(G)$ is the topological monoid
$$\mathrm{Rep}(G) = \coprod_n \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n)),$$
with block sum of matrices as the monoid operation.
(A small adjustment is needed to get the correct homotopy group in dimension zero; see Section~\ref{Kdef-sec}.)
General linear deformation $K$--theory is obtained by replacing $\mathrm{U}(n)$ by $\mathrm{GL}(n) = \mathrm{GL}_n (\mathbb{C})$.
The (reduced, unitary) topological Atiyah--Segal map is a homomorphism
\begin{equation} \label{alpha-intro} \wt{\alpha}_* \colon\thinspace \wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_* (G) \mathrel{\mathop :}= \pi_* \Omega B\mathrm{Rep}(G) \longrightarrow \wt{K}^{-*} (BG),
\end{equation}
induced by a map of topological monoids arising from the natural map
\begin{equation}\label{B-intro}B\colon\thinspace \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))\longrightarrow \mathrm{Map}_* (BG, B\mathrm{U}(n)).\end{equation}
The details of this construction appear in Section~\ref{TAS-sec}.
In order to describe $\wt{\alpha}_*$ explicitly, we provide a concrete description of the homotopy groups $\wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_m (G)$ in terms of homotopy classes of maps
$$S^m\to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n)).$$
This description, given in Theorem~\ref{Kdef}, can be viewed as an extension of one of the well-known properties of the homotopy group completion:
namely, for each topological monoid $M$, there is an isomorphism of monoids
$$\pi_0 (\Omega BM)\cong \mathrm{Gr} (\pi_0 M),$$
where the left-hand side has the monoid structure induced by loop concatenation, and the right hand side is the Grothendieck group (that is, the ordinary group completion) of the monoid $\pi_0 M$. Theorems~\ref{gen-thm} and~\ref{sgl} provide similar descriptions of the higher homotopy groups of $\Omega BM$, under a strong homotopy commutativity condition on $M$. These results lend some additional justification to the term \emph{deformation} $K$--\emph{theory}, since they show that the homotopy groups $\wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_* (G)$ parametrize continuous spherical families (``deformations") of representations.
Deformation $K$--theory has proven difficult to compute, and unlike similar functors such as algebraic $K$--theory of the group ring, or the $K$--theory of group $C^*$--algebras, there are no general conjectures describing its behavior. This should be seen as a positive feature of the theory: it is subtle enough to capture delicate information about the group in question, so that when computation can be achieved, concrete consequences follow.
Deformation $K$--theory was previously used to study the homotopy types of stable moduli spaces of flat connections over surfaces~\cite{Lawson-simul, Lawton-Ramras, JRW, Ramras-surface}.
Our results facilitate such geometric applications by explicitly linking deformation $K$--theory to spherical families of representations, vector bundles, and spaces of flat connections. Three such applications are provided:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\item In Section~\ref{prev-sec}, we reinterpret a result from Ramras--Willett--Yu~\cite{RWY} to show that rational surjectivity of $\wt{\alpha}_*$ in high dimensions implies the strong Novikov conjecture (Theorem~\ref{Nov}).
Thus surjectivity of $\wt{\alpha_*}$ should be viewed as a very strong Novikov-type property.
We show that surjectivity holds for surface groups (Theorem~\ref{TAS-2}), but fails for the 3-dimensional Heisenberg group and for property (T) groups (Section~\ref{image-sec}).
\item In Section~\ref{H-sec}, we use Lawson's calculations of deformation $K$--theory for the 3--dimensional Heisenberg group to produce huge families of homotopy classes in the space of flat, unitary connections on bundles over the Heisenberg manifold. This shows a marked difference between gauge theory in 2-- and 3--dimensions: over surfaces, homotopy in the space of flat connections is tightly controlled by Yang--Mills theory and complex geometric considerations, but in 3--dimensions the flood gates open.
\item In Section~\ref{image-sec}, we use results of Tyler Lawson and S. P. Wang to calculate the deformation $K$--theory of groups $G$ satisfying property (T). By exploiting the fact that our construction of the topological Atiyah--Segal map actually produces a map of $E_\infty$ ring spectra, we deduce that when $BG$ is finite, the vector bundle $E_\rho$ associated to a
spherical family of representations always represents a torsion class in $\wt{K}^0 (S^m \times BG)$.
\end{itemize}
We include a variety of open questions throughout the paper.
\vspace{.1in}
\section*{Acknowledgements}\label{ackref}
The results in Sections~\ref{htpy-sec},~\ref{Kdef-sec}, and~\ref{TAS-sec} of this article had a long genesis, beginning with conversations among the author, Willett, and Yu in 2010 surrounding the work in~\cite{RWY}.
Weaker versions of the results in these sections were included in a preliminary draft of the author's joint paper with Tom Baird~\cite{Baird-Ramras-arxiv-v3}, with different arguments.
Proposition~\ref{tf} arose from discussions with Robert Lipshitz regarding work of his student Kristen Hendricks~\cite{Hendricks}.
The author thanks Baird, Lipshitz, Willett, and Yu, as well as Markus Szymik and Peter May, for helpful discussions.
\section*{Notation and conventions}
Let $(X, x_0)$ and $(Y, y_0)$ be based spaces.
Given paths $\gamma, \eta\colon\thinspace [0,1]\to Y$ with $\gamma(1) = \eta(0)$, let $\gamma\Box\eta$ denote their concatenation (tracing out $\gamma$ on $[0,1/2]$ and $\eta$ on $[1/2, 1]$). The constant loop at a point $y\in Y$ will be denoted $c_y$. More generally, the constant map $X\to \{y\}$ will also be written $c_y$, or sometimes simply $y$, when $X$ is clear from context.
We denote the path component of $x\in X$ by $[x]$, and we write $x\simeq x'$ to indicate that $[x] = [x']$.
We write $\langle \phi \rangle$ to denote the based homotopy class of a based map $\phi\colon\thinspace (X,x_0) \to (Y, y_0)$, and $[\phi]$ denotes its unbased homotopy class. We write $\phi \simeq \phi'$ to indicate that $[\phi] = [\phi']$.
The unbased mapping space will be denoted $\mathrm{Map}(X, Y)$, and the based mapping space will be denoted by $\mathrm{Map}_* (X, Y)$ (when $x_0$ and $y_0$ are clear from context).
The set of unbased homotopy classes of unbased maps $X\to Y$ will be denoted $[X, Y]$, and the set of based homotopy classes of based maps will be denoted by $\langle (X, x_0), (Y, y_0) \rangle = \langle X, Y \rangle$.
For $m\geqslant 1$, we view $\pi_m (X, x_0)$ as the group $\langle (S^m, 1), (X, x_0)\rangle$, with multiplication $\Box$ defined via concatenation in the first coordinate of
$$(I^m/\partial I^m, [\partial I^m]) \cong (S^m, 1).$$ For $\phi \colon\thinspace (S^m, 1) \to (X, x_0)$ with $m\geqslant 1$, we let
$\overline{\phi}$ denote the reverse of $\phi$ with respect to the first coordinate of $I^m$ (so that $\langle \overline{\phi}\rangle =
\langle \phi \rangle^{-1}$ in $\pi_m (X, x_0)$).
We set $S^0= \{\pm 1\}$, with $1$ as basepoint. Depending on the situation at hand, we will view $\pi_0 (X)$ as either the set of path components of $X$ or as the (naturally isomorphic) set $\langle S^0, X\rangle$.
We will work in the category of compactly generated spaces, which we denote ${\bf CGTop}$, so in particular all mapping spaces and products have the compactly generated topology associated to the compact-open and product topologies, respectively.
\section{The homotopy groups of a homotopy group completion}\label{htpy-sec}
In this section we establish a general result (Theorem~\ref{gen-thm}) describing the homotopy groups of the homotopy group completion for certain topological monoids. This result applies in particular to the monoid $\mathrm{Rep} (G)$ defined in the Introduction, and to its general linear version, for all discrete groups $G$ (see Section~\ref{Kdef-sec}). Furthermore, the result applies to monoids underlying topological $K$--theory (Section~\ref{K-top}).
We begin by describing the general context for this section.
Throughout, $M$ denotes a topological monoid, with monoid operation $(m,n)\mapsto m \bullet n$
(so $\bullet$ is continuous, associative, and there exists a strict identity element in $e\in M$). We define
$$m^k = \underbrace{m \bullet \cdots \bullet m}_k,$$
and by convention $m^0 = e$.
All of our results will require $M$ to be homotopy commutative, in the sense that there exists a (possibly unbased) homotopy between $\bullet$ and $\bullet\circ \tau$, where
$$\tau \colon\thinspace M\times M\to M\times M$$
is the twist map $\tau (m,n) = (n,m)$.
The \emph{classifying space} of $M$, denoted $BM$, is the geometric realization of the topological category $\underline{M}$ with one object $*$ and with morphism space $M$. Composition in $\underline{M}$ is given by $m\circ n = m\bullet n$. The space $BM$ has a natural basepoint $*$ corresponding to the unique object in $\underline{M}$.
We note that the nerve $N_\cdot \underline{M}$, which is the simplicial space underlying $BM$, is the \emph{simplicial bar construction} $B_\cdot M$, and has the form $[n]\mapsto M^n$.
The \emph{homotopy group completion} of $M$ is the based loop space $\Omega BM$.
There is a natural map
$$\gamma \colon\thinspace M\to \Omega BM,$$
adjoint to the natural map $S^1 \wedge M \to BM$ (see Section~\ref{Gamma} for further discussion of this map), and it is a standard fact that
$\gamma$ induces an isomorphism
\begin{equation}\label{Gr} \mathrm{Gr} (\pi_0 M) \srm{\cong} \pi_0 ( \Omega BM),\end{equation}
where $\mathrm{Gr}$ denotes the Grothendieck group.\footnote{This can be deduced from the Group Completion Theorem~\cite{McDuff-Segal} using arguments similar to those in this section.}
In this section, we present conditions on $M$ under which the higher homotopy groups of $\Omega BM$ can be described in a manner analogous to (\ref{Gr}).
Our description of $\pi_* (\Omega BM)$ will be given in terms of unbased homotopy classes of maps from spheres into $M$.
Given a space $X$, the space $\mathrm{Map}(X, M)$ becomes a topological monoid, and the
set $[X, M]$ of unbased homotopy classes of maps $X\to M$ becomes a (discrete) monoid. We will often denote the operations in each of these
monoids simply by $\bullet$.
We may now form the Grothendieck group $\mathrm{Gr} [X, M]$. If $M$ is homotopy commutative, which we assume from here on, then $[X,M]$ is an abelian monoid (whose monoid operation we write as $+$) and $\mathrm{Gr} [X,M]$ is an abelian group. We will use additive notation $+$ and $-$ when working in $\mathrm{Gr} [X,M]$.
Choosing a basepoint $x\in X$ gives a monoid homomorphism
$$[X, M] \longrightarrow \pi_0 (M)$$
defined by restriction to $x$. This homomorphism is split by the homomorphism
$$\pi_0 (M) \to [X,M]$$
sending each path component to the homotopy class of a constant map into that component. Hence $[X, M]$ contains a copy of $\pi_0 (M)$ (generated by nullhomotopic maps), and it follows that $\mathrm{Gr}[X, M]$ contains a copy of $\mathrm{Gr}(\pi_0 M)$ as a direct summand (consisting of formal differences between nullhomotopic maps).
\begin{definition}$\label{a-d}$ For $k\in \mathbb{N}$, let $\Pi_k (M)$ denote the Grothendieck group $\mathrm{Gr} [S^k , M]$, and define
$$\rh_k (M) = \Pi_k (M)/\mathrm{Gr}(\pi_0 M).$$
\end{definition}
Note that we have
natural direct sum decompositions
$$\Pi_k (M) \cong \rh_k (M) \oplus \mathrm{Gr}(\pi_0 M),$$
with $\rh_k (M)$ corresponding to the subgroup consisting of those formal differences $[\phi] - [\psi]$ for which $\phi(1)$ and $\psi(1)$ lie in the same path component of $M$. Note also that there is a natural isomorphism $\rh_0 (M) \cong \mathrm{Gr}(\pi_0 M)$, induced by sending the class represented by $f\colon\thinspace S^0 \to M$ to $[f(-1)] - [f(1)]$.
In Section~\ref{Gamma}, we will construct a natural map
$$\wt{\Gamma} \colon\thinspace \rh_k (M) \longrightarrow \pi_k (\Omega BM),$$
and we will show that $\wt{\Gamma}$ is an isomorphism under certain conditions on $M$. We now explain these conditions.
\begin{definition}\label{proper-def}
We say that a topological monoid $M$ is \emph{proper} if the inclusion of the identity element is a closed cofibration.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{proper} If $M$ is proper, then the degeneracy maps for the simplicial space $N_\cdot \underline{M}$ underlying $BM$ are all closed cofibrations. This implies that the natural map from the ``thick" geometric realization of $N_\cdot \underline{M}$ to its ``thin" realization (namely $BM$) is a
homotopy equivalence~\cite{Segal-cat-coh}. We will work with the thin realization throughout, but it should be noted that the thick realization is used in~\cite{McDuff-Segal}, and the results from that paper play a key role in our arguments.
Additionally, it follows from Lillig's Union Theorem (\cite{Lillig-union} or~\cite[Chapter 5]{tomDieck-AT}) that $N_\cdot \underline{M}$ is \emph{proper} in the sense of~\cite[Appendix]{May-EGP}.
If a simplicial map between proper simplicial spaces is a homotopy equivalence on each level, then the same is true for the induced map between realizations~\cite[Appendix]{May-EGP}. In fact, the same statement holds for weak equivalences in place of homotopy equivalences~\cite{n-lab-geom-real}. These results will be needed in the proof of Theorem~\ref{gen-thm}.
\end{remark}
We will need to consider the action of $\pi_1 (M, m)$ on $\pi_k (M, m)$. We use the conventions in Hatcher~\cite[Section 4.1]{Hatcher}, so that this is a \emph{left} action. We note that if $[m]$ is invertible in $\pi_0 (M)$, then this action is trivial (this follows from~\cite[Example 4A.3]{Hatcher}, for instance, which shows that the identity component of an $H$--space is always simple).
\begin{definition}\label{a-def} Consider a topological monoid $M$ and a natural number $k\geqslant 1$. Given $m\in M$, let $[m]\subset M$ be its path component, viewed as a subspace of $M$.
We say that $m$ is $k$--\emph{anchored} there exists a homotopy
$$H \colon\thinspace [m]\times [m]\times I\to [m^2]$$
such that $H_0 = \bullet$, $H_1 = \bullet \circ \tau$,
and the loop $\eta(t) = H (m, m, t)$ acts trivially on $\pi_k (M, m^{2})$. When $k$ is clear from context, we will refer to $H$ as a \emph{homotopy anchoring} $m$. We say that $m$ is \emph{strongly} $k$--anchored if there are infinitely many $n\in \mathbb{N}$ for which
$m^n$ is $k$--anchored.
We say that $m$ is (strongly) \emph{anchored} if it is (strongly) $k$--anchored for all $k\geqslant 1$.
We say that a path component $C$ of $M$ is (strongly) $k$--anchored (or anchored) if there exists an element
$m\in C$ that is (strongly) $k$--anchored (respectively, anchored).
\end{definition}
\begin{remark} It is an elementary exercise to check that if $m_0\simeq m_1$ in $M$, then $m_0$ is (strongly) $k$--anchored if and only if $m_1$ is (strongly) $k$--anchored.
\end{remark}
\begin{examples} If $M$ is (strictly) abelian, then every element of $M$ is strongly anchored, since we can take $H$ to be the constant homotopy.
If $M$ is homotopy commutative, then every path component of $M$ with abelian fundamental group is 1--anchored (since the action of $\pi_1$ on itself is conjugation). If $M$ is homotopy commutative and every path component of $M$ is a simple space (e.g. if $\pi_0 (M)$ is a group), then every element in $M$ is strongly anchored.
\end{examples}
We will see more interesting examples in Sections~\ref{act-sec},~\ref{Kdef-sec}, and~\ref{K-top}.
\begin{remark}$\label{wa-rmk}$ In \cite{Ramras-excision}, an element $m_0\in M$ is called anchored if all powers of $m_0$ are anchored and the loops $\eta$ described in Definition~\ref{a-def} are all \emph{constant}.
A small modification to the proof of \cite[Lemma 3.13]{Ramras-excision} shows that the results in that article hold if one simply requires $m_0$ to be strongly $1$--anchored in the sense defined above $($see also \cite[Remark 3.7]{Ramras-excision}$)$. Following the notation of that paper, let $\wt{\alpha}$ and $\wt{\beta}$ be loops in $M$ based at $m\in M$. Let $\wt{\alpha} \bullet \wt{\beta}$ denote the pointwise product of these loops $($so that $(\wt{\alpha} \bullet \wt{\beta}) (t) = \wt{\alpha} (t) \bullet \wt{\beta} (t)$$)$, and similarly for $ \wt{\beta} \bullet \wt{\alpha}$.
The aim of \cite[Lemma 3.13]{Ramras-excision} is, essentially, to show that
$\langle \wt{\alpha} \bullet \wt{\beta} \rangle = \langle \wt{\beta} \bullet \wt{\alpha} \rangle$ whenever there exists a homotopy $H$ anchoring $m$. We now explain how to modify the argument from~\cite{Ramras-excision} to work whenever $\langle \eta \rangle$ is central in $\pi_1 (M, m^2)$.
For each $s\in [0,1]$, let $\eta_s$ be the path $\eta_s (t) = \eta (st)$, and set
$$h_s (t) = H(\wt{\alpha} (t), \wt{\beta} (t), s),$$
so that $h_s$ is a loop based at $\eta (s) = \eta_s (1)$.
The homotopy of loops $s\mapsto h_s$ is used in the proof of \cite[Lemma 3.13]{Ramras-excision}. To extend that argument to the present context, one can replaced $h_s$ by
$$g_s = \eta_s \Box h_s \Box \ol{\eta_s}.$$
Note that for each $s\in [0,1]$, $g_s$ is a loop based at $m^2$, and $\langle g_0\rangle = \langle\wt{\alpha} \bullet \wt{\beta}\rangle$. Also,
$g_1 = \eta \Box ( \wt{\beta} \bullet \wt{\alpha}) \Box \overline{\eta}$, so centrality of $\langle\eta\rangle$ implies that $\langle g_1\rangle = \langle\wt{\beta} \bullet \wt{\alpha}\rangle$.
Thus $\langle\wt{\alpha} \bullet \wt{\beta}\rangle = \langle\wt{\beta} \bullet \wt{\alpha}\rangle$, as desired.
For further details, compare with \cite{Ramras-excision}.
\end{remark}
In order to motivate the construction of the map $\wt{\Gamma}$ in Section~\ref{Gamma}, we now state the main result of this section.
Recall that a subset $S$ of a monoid $N$ is called \emph{cofinal} if for each $n\in N$ there exists $n'\in N$ such that $n\bullet n' \in S$.
\begin{theorem} $\label{gen-thm}$ Let $M$ be a proper, homotopy commutative
topological monoid such that the subset of strongly 1--anchored components is cofinal in $\pi_0 (M)$. Then for each $k\geqslant 0$, the natural map
$$\wt{\Gamma}\colon\thinspace \rh_k (M) \longrightarrow \pi_k (\Omega BM)$$
is an isomorphism.
\end{theorem}
We will see examples of monoids to which this result applies in Sections~\ref{act-sec},~\ref{Kdef-sec}, and~\ref{K-top}.
\begin{remark} The isomorphism in Theorem~\ref{gen-thm} \emph{does not} hold for all homotopy commutative topological monoids. For instance, let
$$M = \coprod_P B \mathrm{Aut} (P),$$
where $R$ is a ring and
$P$ runs over a set of representatives for the isomorphism classes of finitely generated projective $R$--modules. Direct sum makes $M$ a homotopy commutative topological monoid, and the homotopy groups $\pi_* (\Omega BM)\cong K_* (R)$ are the algebraic $K$--theory groups of the ring $R$~\cite{McDuff-Segal}. However,
$B \mathrm{Aut} (P)$ is the classifying space of the discrete group $\mathrm{Aut} (P)$, so for
$k\geqslant 2$ we have $\pi_k (B \mathrm{Aut} (P)) = 0$ and hence every map $S^k\to M$ is nullhomotopic. Thus $\rh_k (M) = 0$ for $k\geqslant 2$, whereas $K_* (R)$ is in general quite complicated.
\end{remark}
We end this section by establishing a helpful universal property of the natural map
\begin{equation}\label{pi}[S^k, M] \srm{i} \mathrm{Gr}[S^k, M] \srm{q} \rh_k (M),\end{equation}
where $i$ is the universal map from the monoid $[S^k, M]$ to its group completion, and $q$ is the quotient map. We denote the composite (\ref{pi}) by $\pi$.
\begin{proposition}$\label{univ}$
Let $M$ be a homotopy commutative topological monoid in which the subset of $k$--anchored components is cofinal. Then the map $\pi \colon\thinspace [S^k, M] \to \rh_k (M)$ is surjective, and if
$f \colon\thinspace [S^k, M] \to P$ is a
monoid homomorphism that sends all nullhomotopic maps to the identity, then $f$ factors uniquely as $\ol{f} \circ \pi$.
Furthermore $\pi ([\phi]) = 0$ if and only if $[\phi]$ is stably nullhomotopic in the sense that there exists a constant map $c\colon\thinspace S^k\to M$ such that
$\phi \bullet c$ is nullhomotopic.
\end{proposition}
In other words, $\rh_k (M)$ is the quotient, in the category of monoids, of $[S^k, M]$ by the submonoid $S \subset [S^k, M]$ of stably nullhomotopic maps. It follows that the submonoid of stably nullhomotopic maps is the normal closure of the submonoid $N$ of nullhomotopic maps, in the sense that $S$ is the smallest submonoid containing $N$ that is the kernel of a monoid homomorphism.
For the proof of Proposition~\ref{univ}, we need a version of the Eckmann--Hilton argument, and first we record a basic fact regarding the action of the fundamental group on higher homotopy.
\begin{lemma}\label{act}
Consider a $($not necessarily based$)$ homotopy $\alpha_s$ of maps $S^k\to X$ $(k\geqslant 1)$, and let
$\eta (t) = \alpha_t (1)$ be the track of this homotopy on the basepoint $1\in S^k$. Then $\langle \alpha_0 \rangle = \langle \eta \rangle \cdot \langle \alpha_1\rangle$ in $\pi_k (X, \alpha_0 (1))$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} In general, the action of $\pi_1 (X, x_0)$ on $\pi_k (X, x_0)$ is induced by an operation which takes in a map $\gamma\colon\thinspace [0,s]\to X$ (for some $s\in [0,1]$)
and a map $\alpha \colon\thinspace (I^k, \partial I^k) \to (X, \gamma(s))$ and produces a map
$$\gamma \cdot \alpha\colon\thinspace (S^k, 1) \to (X, \gamma(0))$$
defined by shrinking the domain of $\alpha$ to a concentric cube $C\subset I^k$ of side length $1-s/2$ and filling in the path $\gamma$ on each radial segment connecting $\partial C$ to $\partial I^k$ (compare with Hatcher~\cite[Section 4.1]{Hatcher}, for instance).
In this language, the desired homotopy is simply
$s\mapsto \eta|_{[0,s]} \cdot \alpha_s$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}$\label{EH}$
Let $M$ be a topological monoid and let $m\in M$ be $k$--anchored.
Then for any $\phi, \psi\colon\thinspace S^k \to M$ $($$k\geqslant 1$$)$ with $\phi(1) = \psi(1) = m$ we have
$$ \phi \bullet \psi \simeq ( \phi \bullet c_m )\Box ( \psi \bullet c_m ) = (\phi \Box \psi) \bullet c_m.$$
In particular, setting $\psi = \ol{\phi}$ gives
$$\phi \bullet \overline{\phi} \simeq \overline{\phi} \bullet \phi \simeq c_{m^{2}}.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Just as in the ordinary Eckmann--Hilton argument, the point is that $\bullet$ is a homomorphism
$$\pi_k (M, m) \times \pi_k (M, m) \srm{\bullet} \pi_k (M, m^2).$$
The relevant equation holds on the nose, not just up to homotopy: for all maps $\alpha, \beta, \alpha', \beta'\colon\thinspace S^k \to M$ satisfying
$\alpha(1) = \beta(1)$ and $\alpha'(1) = \beta'(1)$,
$$(\alpha\Box \beta) \bullet (\alpha' \Box \beta') = (\alpha \bullet \alpha') \Box (\beta \bullet \beta').$$
Hence we have:
$$\phi \bullet \psi \simeq (\phi \Box c_m) \bullet (c_m \Box \psi) = (\phi \bullet c_m) \Box (c_m \bullet \psi).
$$
To complete the proof, it suffices to show that $\langle c_m \bullet \psi \rangle = \langle \psi \bullet c_m \rangle$.
Let $H$ be a homotopy anchoring $m$, and set $\eta (t) = H(m, m, t)$.
By Lemma~\ref{act},
$$\langle c_m \bullet \psi \rangle = \langle \eta \rangle \cdot \langle \psi \bullet c_m\rangle,$$
and since $H$ anchors $m$, we have $ \langle \eta \rangle \cdot \langle \psi \bullet c_m\rangle = \langle \psi \bullet c_m\rangle$.\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{univ}]
Each element in $\mathrm{Gr}[S^k, M]$ has the form $[\phi]-[\psi]$ for some $\phi, \psi\colon\thinspace S^k \to M$. By assumption, there exists $m\in M$ such that $\psi(1) \bullet m$ is $k$--anchored. Adding $[c_m]$ to both $[\phi]$ and $[\psi]$ if necessary, we may assume that $\psi(1)$ is $k$--anchored.
By Lemma~\ref{EH}, $\psi\bullet\ol{\psi}$ is nullhomotopic, so the element
$$[\phi]-[\psi] = [\phi\bullet\ol{\psi}] - [\psi\bullet\ol{\psi}] \in \mathrm{Gr} [S^k, M]$$
is equivalent, modulo $\mathrm{Gr} (\pi_0 M)$, to $[\phi\bullet\ol{\psi}]$, which is in the image of $\pi$. Hence $\pi$ is surjective.
Now say $f \colon\thinspace [S^k, M] \to P$ is a
homomorphism sending all nullhomotopic maps to the identity. Since $\pi$ is surjective,
$\ol{f}$ is completely determined by the equation $\ol{f} (\pi [\phi]) = f([\phi])$.
To prove that $\ol{f}$ is well-defined, say
$\pi ([\phi]) = \pi ([\psi])$ for some $\phi, \psi\colon\thinspace S^k \to M$.
Then there exist $x, y\in M$ such that
$$[\phi] - [\psi] = [c_x] - [c_y],$$
in $\mathrm{Gr}[S^k, M]$, and hence there exists $\tau\colon\thinspace S^k \to M$ such that
$$[\phi] + [c_y] + [\tau] = [c_x] + [\psi] + [\tau]$$
in $[S^k, M]$. Again, we may assume without loss of generality that $\tau(1)$ is $k$--anchored.
Adding $[\ol{\tau}]$ to both sides and applying $f$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{homom}
f([\phi]) + f([c_y]) + f([\tau\bullet\ol{\tau}]) = f([c_x]) + f([\psi]) + f([\tau\bullet\ol{\tau}]).
\end{equation}
By Lemma~\ref{EH}, $\tau\bullet\ol{\tau}$ is nullhomotopic. Since $f$ sends all nullhomotopic maps to the identity, Equation (\ref{homom}) reduces to $f([\phi]) = f([\psi])$, showing that $\ol{f}$ is well-defined. It follows from the equation $f = \ol{f} \circ \pi$ (together with surjectivity of $\pi$) that $\ol{f}$ is a homomorphism as well.
Finally, say $\pi ([\phi]) = 0$ for some $[\phi]\in [S^k, M]$. Then there exist constant maps
$a, b\colon\thinspace S^k \to M$, such that
$$[\phi] = [a] - [b]$$
in $\mathrm{Gr} [S^k, M]$. This means that
$$\phi \bullet b \bullet \psi \simeq a \bullet \psi$$
for some $\psi\colon\thinspace S^k \to M$, and we may assume that $\psi(1)$ is $k$--anchored. Multiplying both sides by $\ol{\psi}$ and applying Lemma~\ref{EH} gives
$$\phi \bullet b \bullet \psi(1)^2 \simeq a \bullet \psi(1)^2,$$
where $\psi(1)^2$ denotes the constant map with image $\psi(1)^2$. The right-hand side is constant, as is $b \bullet \psi(1)^2$, so $\phi$ is stably nullhomotopic, as desired.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Construction of the map $\wt{\Gamma}$}\label{Gamma}
We now give the details behind the construction of the natural map
$$\wt{\Gamma}\colon\thinspace \rh_k (M) = \mathrm{Gr} [S^k , M]/\mathrm{Gr}(\pi_0 M) \longrightarrow \pi_k (\Omega BM).$$
We begin by discussing an alternate model for the groups $\pi_k (\Omega BM)$.
Concatenation of loops makes $\Omega BM$ into an $H$--space with the constant loop $c_*$ as identity, so the identity component of $\Omega BM$ is simple.
It now follows from Lemma~\ref{act} (see also \cite[Section 4.A]{Hatcher}) that the natural map
\begin{equation}\label{cn} J \colon\thinspace \pi_k \Omega BM = \langle (S^k, 1), (\Omega BM, c_*) \rangle \longrightarrow [S^k, \Omega BM]_*\end{equation}
is bijective for each $k\geqslant 0$, where right-hand side is the set of unbased homotopy classes of maps $f\colon\thinspace S^k\to \Omega BM$ such that $f(1)$ is homotopic to the constant loop $c_*$.
There is a natural operation on $[S^k, \Omega BM]_*$ coming from the $H$--space structure of $\Omega BM$. This operation is induced by the pointwise concatenation map
\begin{equation}\label{bd}\boxdot \, \colon\thinspace \mathrm{Map}(S^k, \Omega BM) \times \mathrm{Map}(S^k, \Omega BM) \longrightarrow \mathrm{Map}(S^k, \Omega BM),
\end{equation}
defined by
$$(\alpha \boxdot \beta) (z) = \alpha(z) \Box \beta (z).$$
The map $\boxdot$ also induces an operation on $\langle S^k, \Omega BM\rangle = \pi_k \Omega BM$, and the bijection (\ref{cn}) is a homomorphism with respect to these operations.
Moreover, when $k\geqslant 1$, the Eckmann-Hilton argument~\cite{Eckmann-Hilton} shows that the operation on $\langle S^k, \Omega BM\rangle$ induced by $\boxdot$ agrees with the usual multiplication operation on $\pi_k \Omega BM$. When $k=0$, we give $\pi_0 \Omega BM$ the monoid structure induced by $\boxdot$.
With this understood, we may now view $J$ as a group isomorphism.
Recall that there is a natural map
\begin{equation}\label{eta} [0,1]\times M\to BM\end{equation}
resulting from the fact that the simplicial space underlying $BM$ has $M$ as its space of 1-simplices\footnote{Our conventions on geometric realization come from Milnor~\cite{Milnor-realization}, and $\eta$ is induced by the homeomorphism $I = [0,1] \to \Delta^1 = \{(t_0, t_1, t_2) \in \mathbb{R}^3\,|\, 0=t_0\leqslant t_1 \leqslant t_2 = 1\}$ given by $t\mapsto (0, t, 1)$.}.
Since $BM$ has a single $0$--simplex, and since the 1-simplex corresponding to the identity element $e\in M$ is degenerate, the map (\ref{eta}) descends to a map
$$S^1\wedge M \longrightarrow BM$$
whose adjoint will be denoted by
\begin{equation} \label{gamma} \gamma \colon\thinspace M\longrightarrow \Omega BM.\end{equation}
We note that $\gamma$ is natural with respect to continuous homomorphisms of topological monoids.
One might like to define a map
$$[S^k , M] \longrightarrow [S^k, \Omega BM]_* \cong \pi_k (\Omega BM)$$
via composition with $\gamma$, but some correction is needed to make this map land in $ [S^k, \Omega BM]_*$.
Given $\alpha\in \Omega BM$ and $g\colon\thinspace S^k \to \Omega BM$, we simplify notation by writing $\alpha \boxdot g$ in place of $c_\alpha \boxdot g$.
For each $k\geqslant 0$, we now define
$$\Gamma \colon\thinspace [S^k , M] \longrightarrow [S^k, \Omega BM]$$
$$\hspace{.6in} [f]\mapsto [\ol{\gamma(f(1))} \boxdot (\gamma \circ f)].$$
We note that there is a potential ambiguity in this notation: the symbol $\ol{\gamma(f(1))}$ refers to the constant map with image $\ol{\gamma (f(1))}\in \Omega BM$, not to the reverse of the constant map with image $\gamma(f(1))$ (of course a constant map is its own reverse). We will continue to use this notation throughout the section.
It is straightforward to check that $\Gamma$ is well-defined on unbased homotopy classes, and for every $[f]$, we have $\Gamma ([f]) \in [S^k, \Omega BM]_*$ since evaluating at $1\in S^k$ gives the loop $\ol{\gamma( f(1))} \Box \gamma (f(1)) \simeq c_*$.
\begin{proposition}$\label{Gamma-hom}$ For each $k\geqslant 0$, the function $\Gamma$ is a monoid homomorphism, natural in $M$, and induces a natural homomorphism
$$\ol{\Gamma}_M \colon\thinspace \rh_k (M) \longrightarrow [S^k, \Omega BM]_*$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{definition} Let $M$ be a homotopy commutative topological monoid. Then we define
$$\wt{\Gamma} = \wt{\Gamma}_M \mathrel{\mathop :}= J^{-1} \circ \ol{\Gamma}_M \colon\thinspace \rh_k (M) \longrightarrow \pi_k \Omega BM,$$
where $J$ is the (natural) isomorphism (\ref{cn}).
\end{definition}
The proof of Proposition~\ref{Gamma-hom} will use the following elementary lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{loops}
Let $(M, \bullet)$ be a topological monoid. Then the diagram
\begin{equation}\label{alpha-diag}
\xymatrix{ M\times M \ar[r]^-{\bullet} \ar[d]^{\gamma\times\gamma} & M\ar[d]^\gamma\\
\Omega BM \times \Omega BM \ar[r]^-\Box &\Omega BM}
\end{equation}
is homotopy commutative. Moreover, if $M$ is homotopy commutative then
the maps
$$M\times M \to \Omega BM$$
given by $(m, n) \mapsto \gamma(m) \Box \gamma(n)$ and $(m, n) \mapsto \gamma(n)\Box \gamma(m)$ are homotopic.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The space of 2-simplices in the simplicial space $BM$ homeomorphic to $M\times M$, with $(m, n)$ corresponding to the sequence of composable morphisms
$$*\xrightarrow{(n, *)} * \xrightarrow{(m,*)} *.$$
We describe the desired homotopy $M\times M\times I\to \Omega BM$ by specifying its adjoint, which is induced by a map of the form
$$(M\times M\times I) \times I = M\times M \times (I \times I) \xrightarrow{\mathrm{Id}_M\times \mathrm{Id}_M \times H} M\times M\times \Delta^2 \srm{\pi} BM,$$
where $H\colon\thinspace I\times I \to \Delta^2$ is defined below and $\pi$ is induced by
the definition of geometric realization.
Set
$$\Delta^2 = \{( t_1, t_2 )\in I\times I \,:\, t_1 \leqslant t_2 \},$$
and define
$$\vec{w}_t =(1-t)(0,1) + t(1/2, 1/2) = (t/2, 1-t/2) \in \Delta^2.$$
The map $H$ is defined by
$$H(t,s) = \begin{cases} 2s \vec{w}_t & \textrm{if} \,\, 0 \leqslant s\leqslant 1/2\\ (2s-1) (1, 1) + (2-2s) \vec{w}_t & \textrm{if} \,\, 1/2 \leqslant s\leqslant 1,\end{cases}$$
and one may check that it has the desired properties
(note that we are using the conventions regarding (co)face and (co)degeneracy maps from~\cite{Milnor-realization}). This proves commutativity of
(\ref{alpha-diag}).
When $M$ is homotopy commutative, the second statement in the lemma follows from the first: we have
$$\Box \circ (\gamma\times \gamma) \simeq \gamma \circ \bullet \simeq \gamma \circ \bullet \circ \tau \simeq \Box \circ (\gamma\times \gamma) \circ \tau.$$
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{Gamma-hom}] First we show that $\Gamma$ is a monoid homomorphism.
Given $\phi, \psi \colon\thinspace S^k \to M$, we must show that
$$\Gamma ([\phi \bullet \psi]) = \Gamma ([\phi]) \boxdot \Gamma ([\psi]),$$
or in other words that
$$\ol{\gamma (\phi (1) \bullet \psi (1))} \boxdot \left(\gamma \circ (\phi \bullet \psi)\right)
\simeq (\ol{\gamma (\phi (1))} \boxdot \gamma \circ \phi) \boxdot (\ol{\gamma (\psi (1))} \boxdot \gamma \circ \psi).$$
Applying Lemma~\ref{loops} gives
\begin{eqnarray*}
\ol{\gamma (\phi (1) \bullet \psi (1))} \boxdot \left(\gamma \circ (\phi \bullet \psi)\right)
& \simeq &\left( \ol{ \gamma (\phi (1) ) \Box \gamma(\psi (1)) } \right)
\boxdot \left(\gamma \circ \phi \boxdot \gamma \circ \psi\right)\\
& = & \left( \ol{ \gamma (\psi (1)) } \Box \ol{ \gamma (\phi (1) )} \right) \boxdot
\left( \gamma \circ \phi \boxdot \gamma \circ \psi \right)\\
\end{eqnarray*}
Since the operation $\boxdot$ is homotopy associative, to complete the proof that $\Gamma$ is a homomorphism it remains only to show that $[\ol{ \gamma(\psi (1) )}]$, $ [\ol{ \gamma(\phi (1) )}]$, and $[\gamma \circ \phi]$ commute with one another under the operation $\boxdot$.
By Lemma~\ref{loops}, $[ \gamma(\psi (1) )]$, $[\gamma(\phi (1) )]$, and $[\gamma \circ \phi]$ commute with one another, which suffices because $[ \gamma(\psi (1) )]$ and $[\gamma(\phi (1) )]$ are the inverses of $[\ol{ \gamma(\psi (1) )}]$ and $ [\ol{ \gamma(\phi (1) )}]$ (respectively) under $\boxdot$.
It follows from the definitions that $\Gamma$ sends all nullhomotopic maps to the identity element in $[S^k, \Omega BM]_*$, so Proposition~\ref{univ} implies that $\Gamma$ induces a group homomorphism
$$\ol{\Gamma}\colon\thinspace \rh_k (M) = \Pi (M)/\mathrm{Gr} (\pi_0 M) \longrightarrow [S^k, \Omega BM]_* $$
as desired.
Naturality of $\Gamma$, and hence of $\ol{\Gamma}$, follows from naturality of $\gamma$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Stably group-like monoids}$\label{sgl-sec}$
We now show that under certain conditions, it is possible to construct an inverse to the homomorphism
$$\wt{\Gamma}\colon\thinspace \rh_k (M) \longrightarrow \pi_k (\Omega BM)$$
introduced in Section~\ref{Gamma}.
We recall some terminology from Ramras~\cite[Section 3]{Ramras-excision}.
\begin{definition}$\label{sg}$ A topological monoid $M$ is \emph{stably group-like} with respect to an element $[m]\in \pi_0 (M)$ if the submonoid of $\pi_0 (M)$ generated by $[m]$ is cofinal. More explicitly, $M$ is stably group-like with respect to $m$ if for every $x\in M$, there exists $x'\in M$ and $k\geqslant 0$ such that $x\bullet x'$ lies in the same path component as $m^k$.
Given $m_0 \in M$, we write $M\xrightarrow{\bullet m_0} M$ to denote the map $m\mapsto m\bullet m_0$.
We define
$$M_\infty (m_0) = \tele \left(M\xrightarrow{\bullet m_0} M \xrightarrow{\bullet m_0} M\xrightarrow{\bullet m_0} \cdots\right),$$
where the right-hand side is the infinite mapping telescope of this sequence.
As in~\cite{Ramras-excision}, we write points in $M_\infty (m_0)$ as equivalence classes of triples $(m,n,t)$, where $m\in M$, $n\in \mathbb{N}$, $t\in [0,1]$, and
$$(m,n,1) \sim (m\bullet m_0, n+1, 0)$$
for each $n\in \mathbb{N}$. We always use $[(e, 0, 0)]\in M_\infty (m_0)$ as the basepoint.
\end{definition}
Our next goal is to prove the following special case of Theorem~\ref{gen-thm}.
\begin{proposition}$\label{sgl}$ If $M$ is a proper, homotopy commutative topological monoid that is stably group-like with respect to a strongly $1$--anchored element $m_0\in M$, then
the natural map
$$\wt{\Gamma}\colon\thinspace \rh_k (M) \longrightarrow \pi_k (\Omega BM)$$
is an isomorphism for each $k\geqslant 0$.
\end{proposition}
Before giving the proof, we need to review some facts surrounding the Group Completion Theorem~\cite{McDuff-Segal}, which provides an isomorphism
\begin{equation}\label{MS} \pi_k (\Omega BM) \srm{\cong} \pi_k (M_\infty (m_0))\end{equation}
under the conditions in Proposition~\ref{sgl}.
We will give an explicit description of this isomorphism in Lemma~\ref{MS-iso} below. The proof of Proposition~\ref{sgl} will then proceed by
constructing another map
$$\Psi\colon\thinspace \pi_k (M_\infty (m_0)) \longrightarrow \rh_k (M)$$
so that the composite
$$\pi_k (\Omega BM) \srm{\cong} \pi_k (M_\infty (m_0))\srm{\Psi} \rh_k (M)$$
is inverse to $\wt{\Gamma}$.
If $M$ is proper and stably group-like with respect to a strongly 1--anchored component $[m_0]$, then (\ref{MS}) is induced by a zig-zag of weak equivalences, as we now explain.
The monoid $M$ acts continuously on $M_\infty (m_0)$ via
$$m \cdot [(m', n, t)] = [(m\bullet m', n, t)].$$
An action of $M$ on a space $X$ gives rise to a category (internal to ${\bf CGTop}$) with object space $X$ and morphism space $M \times X$; the morphism
$(m, x)$ has domain $x$ and range $m\cdot x$, and composition is just multiplication in $M$: $(n, m\cdot x) \circ (m, x) = (n\bullet m, x)$. We denote the classifying space of this category by $X_M$. Since $\{*\}_M \cong BM$ (where $\{*\}$ is the one-point space), we get a canonical map
$$q\colon\thinspace X_M \to BM$$
induced by the projection $X\to \{*\}$. When $X = M_\infty (m_0)$, we call this projection map $q(M, m_0)$.
The isomorphism (\ref{MS})
is induced by a zig-zag of weak equivalences of the form
\begin{equation}\label{MS1}\Omega BM \srm{\simeq} \mathrm{hofib} (q(M, m_0))
\stackrel{\simeq}{\longleftarrow} M_\infty (m_0).
\end{equation}
Here $\mathrm{hofib} (q(M, m_0))$ is the homotopy fiber of $q(M, m_0)$ over the basepoint $* \in BM$.
Points in $\mathrm{hofib} (q(M, m_0))$ are pairs
$$(z, \beta)\in (M_\infty (m_0))_M\times \mathrm{Map}(I, BM)$$
with $\beta(0) = q(M, m_0) (z)$ and $\beta(1) = *$. The basepoint of $\mathrm{hofib} (q(M, m_0))$ is the pair $([e, 0, 0], c_{*})$, where $[(e, 0, 0)] \in (M_\infty (m_0))_M$ corresponds to the point $[(e, 0, 0)]$ in the object space $M_\infty (m_0)$ of the category underlying $(M_\infty (m_0))_M$.
The first map in (\ref{MS1}) is induced by sending a based loop $\alpha\colon\thinspace S^1 \to BM$ to the point $([(e, 0, 0)], \alpha) \in \mathrm{hofib} (q(M, m_0))$. It is a weak equivalence because $(M_\infty (m_0))_M$ is weakly contractible (see~\cite[p. 281]{McDuff-Segal} or~\cite[pp. 2251--2252]{Ramras-excision}). Note here that $\Omega BM \cong \mathrm{hofib}(* \to BM)$.
The second map in (\ref{MS1}) is the natural inclusion of the fiber of $q(M, m_0)$ over $*\in BM$ into the homotopy fiber. The fact that this map is a weak equivalence is established in~\cite[Proof of Theorem 3.6]{Ramras-excision}. The main step in the argument is to show that the fundamental group of $M_\infty (M)$ is abelian for \emph{all} choices of basepoint. This part of the argument is the only place
in the proofs of Theorems~\ref{gen-thm} and~\ref{sgl}
where we need $m_0$ to be strongly 1--anchored (see Remark~\ref{wa-rmk} regarding the difference between the notion of anchored in the present paper and the notion used in~\cite{Ramras-excision}).
For each $k\geqslant 0$, there is a natural isomorphism
\begin{equation} \label{infty} \pi_k (M_\infty (m_0)) \cong \colim \left(\pi_k (M, e) \xrightarrow{\bullet m_0} \pi_k (M, m_0) \xrightarrow{\bullet m_0} \cdots\right),
\end{equation}
where the maps in the colimit on the right are those induced by (right) multiplication by the constant map $c_{m_0}$. We will denote the colimit on the right by
\begin{equation}\label{colim}\colim \limits_{n\to \infty} \pi_k (M, m_0^n).\end{equation}
Let $i_{n} \colon\thinspace M \to M_\infty (m_0)$ denote the inclusion of $M$ into the $n$th stage of the mapping telescope; explicitly
\begin{equation} \label{i}
\xymatrix@R=2pt{M \ar[r]^-{i_n} & M_\infty (m_0)\\
m \ar@{|->}[r] & [(m, n, 0)].}
\end{equation}
Additionally, define
\begin{equation} \label{fn}
\xymatrix@R=2pt{M \ar[r]^-{f_n} & \Omega BM\\
m \ar@{|->}[r] & \ol{\gamma(m_0^n)} \Box \gamma(m),}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma \colon\thinspace M\to \Omega BM$ is the map (\ref{gamma}).
\begin{lemma} \label{MS-iso} Let $M$ and $m_0$ be as in Proposition~\ref{sgl}. Then for each element $\alpha\in \pi_k (M, m_0^n)$,
the isomorphism
$$\pi_k (\Omega BM) \srm{\cong} \pi_k (M_\infty (m_0))$$
induced by the zig-zag $(\ref{MS1})$ carries $(f_n)_* (\alpha)$ to $(i_n)_* (\alpha)$.
\end{lemma}
Note that
every class in $\pi_k (M_\infty (m_0))$ has the form $(i_n)_* (\alpha)$ for some $\alpha\in \pi_k (M, m_0^n)$ (by (\ref{infty})), so Lemma~\ref{MS-iso} completely determines the isomorphism
$$\pi_k (\Omega BM) \srm{\cong} \pi_k (M_\infty (m_0))$$
induced by (\ref{MS1}). By abuse of notation, we will denote this isomorphism by $i \circ f^{-1}$ from now on.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{MS-iso}]
It suffices to show that the diagram
\begin{equation} \label{htpy-commutes-diag}
\xymatrix{ &M \ar[dl]_{f_{n}} \ar[dr]^{i_n} \\ \Omega BM \ar[r]^-\simeq & \mathrm{hofib} (q(M, m_0)) & M_\infty (m_0), \ar[l]_-\simeq}
\end{equation}
is homotopy commutative.
This can be proven using the argument at the end of the proof of~\cite[Theorem 3.6]{Ramras-excision}. That argument shows that the diagram commutes after passing to connected components, and it is routine to check that the paths constructed there give rise to a continuous homotopy.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
When $k=0$, the colimit $(\ref{colim})$ has a monoid structure defined as follows$:$
denoting elements in $\pi_k (M, m_0^n)$ $($$n = 0, 1, 2, \ldots$$)$ by pairs $([m], n)$ with $m\in M$, we define
$$[([m], n)] + [([m'], n')] = [([m\bullet m'], n+n')].$$
This monoid structure is in fact a group structure since $M$ is stably group-like with respect to $[m_0]$, and the bijection
$$\pi_0 (\Omega BM) \cong \colim \limits_{n\to \infty} \pi_0 (M, m_0^n)$$
given by composing $(\ref{MS})$ and $(\ref{infty})$
is a monoid isomorphism $($see Ramras~\cite[Theorem 3.6]{Ramras-excision} for details$)$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{sgl}]
Given a based homotopy class $\langle \phi\rangle \in \pi_k (M, m_0^n)$, we define
$$\Psi_n (\langle \phi\rangle ) = [\phi] \in \rh_k (M).$$
Since all constant maps are trivial in $\rh_k (M)$, the maps $\Psi_n$ are compatible with the structure maps for $\colim \limits_{n\to \infty} \pi_k (M, m_0^n)$
and induce a well-defined function
$$\Psi \colon\thinspace\colim \limits_{n\to \infty} \pi_k (M, m_0^n) \to \rh_k (M).$$
Let $\Phi = \Psi\circ (i \circ f^{-1})$, where $i \circ f^{-1}$ is the map from Lemma~\ref{MS-iso}. We will show that $\wt{\Gamma}$ and $\Phi$ are inverses of one another.\footnote{It then follows that $\Phi$ is a homomorphism, and that it independent of $a_0$ and is natural.
Since $i\circ f^{-1}$ is a homomorphism (in fact, an isomorphism), we also conclude that $\Psi$ is a homomorphism (and in fact, an isomorphism).}
First, consider
$\wt{\Gamma} \circ \Phi$.
As noted above, each element of $\pi_k (\Omega BM)$ has the form $(f_n)_* \langle \phi \rangle$ for some $\langle \phi \rangle \in \pi_k (M, m_0^n)$.
Now
\begin{align*}\wt{\Gamma} \circ \Phi \left( (f_n)_* \langle \phi \rangle \right) & = \wt{\Gamma} \circ \Psi ((i_n)_* \langle \phi \rangle ) = \wt{\Gamma} ([\phi])\\
& = J^{-1} \left( [\ol{\gamma(m_0^n)} \boxdot \gamma \circ \phi] \right) = (f_n)_* \langle \phi \rangle, \end{align*}
so $\wt{\Gamma}\circ \Phi$ is the identity map.
Next, consider the composition $\Phi \circ \wt{\Gamma}$.
The group $\rh_k (M)$ is generated by classes of the form $[\phi]$ with $\phi\colon\thinspace S^k \to M$, so it will suffice to check that $\Phi \circ \wt{\Gamma} ([\phi]) = [\phi]$ for each $\phi\colon\thinspace S^k \to M$.
Since $M$ is stably group-like with respect to $[m_0]$, there exists $m\in M$ such that $\phi(1)\bullet m$ lies in the path component of $m_0^n$ (for some $n$).
The maps $\phi$ and $\phi\bullet c_m$ represent the same class in $\rh_k (M)$, so we may assume without loss of generality that $[\phi(1)] = [m_0^n]$, and in fact we may assume $\phi (1) = m_0^n$ since the basepoint $1\in S^k$ is non-degenerate.
Now
$$\wt{\Gamma} ([\phi]) = J^{-1} \left( [\ol{\gamma (\phi (1))} \boxdot (\gamma \circ \phi)] \right) = J^{-1} \left( [\ol{\gamma(m_0^n)}
\boxdot (\gamma \circ \phi)] \right) = (f_n)_* \langle \phi \rangle.$$
Applying $(i\circ f^{-1})$ to this element gives $(i_n)_* \langle \phi \rangle $, which maps to $[\phi]$ under $\Psi$ as desired.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{gen-thm}}
We will need a definition.
\begin{definition}$\label{sub}$
Given a topological monoid $M$ and a submonoid $N \subset \pi_0 (M)$, we define
\begin{equation}\label{comp}\ol{N} = \{ m\in M\,|\, [m] \in N\}.\end{equation}
More generally, if $S$ is an arbitrary subset of $\pi_0 (M)$, we define
$$\ol{S} = \ol{\langle S \rangle},$$
where $\langle S \rangle$ is the submonoid of $\pi_0 (M)$ generated by $S$.
Note that $\ol{S}$ is a submonoid of $M$, and $\pi_0 \left(\ol{S}\right) = \langle S \rangle$. Moreover, $\ol{S}$ is a union of path components of $M$.
\end{definition}
Observe that if $M$ is homotopy commutative, so is $\ol{S}$ (for every $S\subset \pi_0 (M)$), and if $m\in \ol{S}$ is strongly 1--anchored in $M$, the same is true in $\ol{S}$.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{gen-thm}]
Consider the set $ \mathcal{F}$ of all finite subsets of $\pi_0 (M)$, which forms a directed poset under inclusion.
For each $F\in \mathcal F$, let $\sigma(F) \in \pi_0 (M)$ be the product of all elements in $F$ (this is well-defined, since $M$ is homotopy commutative).
Since the subset of strongly 1--anchored components is cofinal in $\pi_0 (M)$, the set
$$\mathcal{F}' \mathrel{\mathop :}= \{F\in \mathcal{F} : |F| < \infty \textrm{ and } \sigma (F) \textrm{ is strongly 1--anchored} \}$$
is cofinal in $\mathcal{F}$ (in the sense that each $F\in \mathcal{F}$ is contained in some $F'\in \mathcal{F}'$),
and hence the natural map
\begin{equation}\label{colim-F}\colim_{F\in \mathcal{F}'} \pi_0 \ol{F} \longrightarrow \pi_0 M\end{equation}
is bijective.
Since $\wt{\Gamma}$ is a natural transformation, to prove the theorem it will suffice to show that $\wt{\Gamma}_{\ol{F}}$ is an isomorphism for each $F\in \mathcal{F}'$ and that the natural maps
\begin{equation}\label{c1}\colim_{F\in \mathcal{F}} \rh_k (\ol{F}) \longrightarrow \rh_k (M)\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{c2}\colim_{F\in \mathcal{F}} \pi_k (\Omega B\ol{F}) \longrightarrow \pi_k (\Omega BM)\end{equation}
are isomorphisms for each $k$.
To show that $\wt{\Gamma}_{\ol{F}}$ is an isomorphism for each $F\in \mathcal{F}'$, it suffices (by Proposition~\ref{sgl}) to check that $\ol{F}$ is stably group-like with respect to the element $\sigma(F)$. Letting $F = \{a_1, \ldots, a_l\}$,
each component of $\ol{F}$ has the form
$$C = [a_1^{n_1}\bullet a_2^{n_2}\cdots \bullet a_{l}^{n_l}]$$
for some $n_j\geqslant 0$ ($j=1, 2, \ldots, l$).
Setting $N = \max \left\{n_1, \ldots, n_l\right\}$,
we have
$$C \bullet [a_1^{N-n_1}\bullet \cdots \bullet a_l^{N-n_l}] = [\sigma(F)^N],$$
so $\ol{F}$ is stably group-like with respect to $\sigma(F)$.
Next we show that (\ref{c1}) and (\ref{c2}) are isomorphisms.
For the former, it suffices to observe that since (\ref{colim-F}) is a bijection, every map from a path connected space (e.g. $S^k$ or $S^k \times I$) into $M$ factors through one of the embeddings $\ol{F}\hookrightarrow M$.
For the latter, it suffices to show that for each $k$, these embeddings induce an isomorphism
\begin{equation}\label{colim-eq}\colim_{F\in \mathcal{F}'} \pi_k (B\ol{F}) \srm{\cong} \pi_k (BM).\end{equation}
Given a topological monoid $A$, the singular simplicial set $S_\cdot A$ has the structure of a simplicial object in the category of (discrete) monoids, and we define $B (S_\cdot A)$ to be the geometric realization of the bisimplicial set $B_{\cdot \cdot} (S_\cdot A)$ formed by applying the bar construction to each monoid $S_p A$ ($p\in \mathbb{N}$); thus the set of simplices of $B_{\cdot \cdot} (S_\cdot A)$ in bi-degree $(p,q)$ is $(S_p A)^q \cong S_p (A^q)$.
Let $B_\cdot (S_\cdot A)$ be the simplicial space
$$q \mapsto |S_\cdot ( A^q)|,$$
so that $|B_\cdot (S_\cdot A)| = B (S_\cdot A)$.
One sees that the natural weak equivalences $|S_\cdot (A^q)| \srm{\simeq} A^q$ induce a map
$B_\cdot (S.A) \to B_\cdot A,$
natural in $A$, and this level-wise weak equivalence induces a weak equivalence
$$B (S.A) \srm{\epsilon_A} B A$$
on realizations whenever $B_\cdot A$ is a proper simplicial space (see Remark~\ref{proper}).
Now consider the commutative diagram
\begin{equation}\label{sing}\xymatrix{ \displaystyle{\colim_{F\in \mathcal{F}'} \pi_k B (S_\cdot \ol{F})} \ar[r] \ar[d]^-{\colim{(\epsilon_{\ol{F}})_*}} & \pi_k B (S_\cdot M) \ar[d]^{(\epsilon_M)_*}\\
\displaystyle{\colim_{F\in \mathcal{F}'} \pi_k (B \ol{F}) } \ar[r] & \pi_k (BM),}
\end{equation}
Our assumptions on $M$ imply that $BM$ is a proper simplicial space (Remark~\ref{proper}), as is each each $B\ol{F}$. So the vertical maps in (\ref{sing}) are both isomorphisms.
The bottom map in Diagram (\ref{sing}) is the same as (\ref{colim-eq}), and to prove that this map is an isomorphism, it remains to observe that top map in Diagram (\ref{sing}) is an isomorphism. By (\ref{colim-F}), each singular simplex $\Delta^n \to M$ factors through one of the embeddings $\ol{F}\to M$, and hence the natural map
$$\colim_{F\in \mathcal{F}'} S. \ol{F} \longrightarrow S. M$$
is an isomorphism, as is the induced map
$$\colim_{F\in \mathcal{F}'} B_{\cdot \cdot} (S. \ol{F}) \longrightarrow B_{\cdot \cdot} (S. M).$$
Since homotopy groups of the geometric realization commute with filtered colimits in the category of (bi)simplicial sets (see~\cite[Proposition A.2.5.3]{DGM}, for instance), this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Permutative categories arising from group actions}\label{act-sec}
In this section we introduce a framework for producing permutative categories (internal to ${\bf CGTop}$) from certain sequences of group actions. This will be used in subsequent sections to give compatible descriptions of deformation $K$--theory and topological $K$--theory, facilitating the construction of the topological Atiyah--Segal map as a morphism of spectra. The proofs of the claims made in this section are all routine (and, in fact, relatively short) and will mostly be left to the reader. In Section~\ref{ring-sec}, we briefly explain how this theory can be enhanced to produce \emph{bipermutative categories} and hence ring spectra.
We will use the following terminology regarding (topological) group actions: if $X$ is a $G$--space, $Y$ is an $H$--space, and $\phi \colon\thinspace G\to H$ is a (continuous) homomorphism, then a map $f\colon\thinspace X\to Y$ is called $\phi$--equivariant, or equivariant with respect to $\phi$, if
$$f(g\cdot x) = \phi(g) \cdot f(x)$$
for all $g\in G$, $x\in X$.
\subsection{Action sequences}
The canonical example to keep in mind when reading the following definition is the unitary (or general linear) groups acting on themselves by conjugation, with the usual matrix block sum operations (see Example~\ref{taut-add}).
\begin{definition}\label{p-action-seq}
A permutative (left) action sequence is an octuple
$$\mathcal{A} = (I, \{G_i\}_{i\in I}, \{X_i\}_{i\in I}, *, \oplus, \{C_{i,j}\}_{i,j\in I}),$$ where:
\begin{itemize}
\item $I$ is a commutative monoid, with identity element $0$ and monoid operation $+$;
\item $* = *_0\in X_0$ is a non-degenerate basepoint;
\item Each $G_i$ is a topological group with identity element $e_i\in G_i$, and each $X_i$ is a left $G_i$--space;
\item $\oplus = (\oplus^{\textrm{alg}}, \oplus^{\textrm{top}})$;
\item $\oplus^{\textrm{alg}}$ is an associative collection of homomorphisms
$$\oplus^{\textrm{alg}}_{i,j} \colon\thinspace G_i\times G_j \to G_{i + j}, \,\,\, i,j\in I;$$
\item $\oplus^{\textrm{top}}$ is an associative collection of $\oplus^{\textrm{alg}}_{i,j}$--equivariant maps
$$\oplus^{\textrm{top}}_{i,j} \colon\thinspace X_i\times X_j \to X_{i + j}, \,\,\, i,j\in I,$$
where equivariance refers to the product action of
$G_i\times G_j$ on $X_i\times X_j$ (and the action of $G_{i+j}$ on $X_{i+j}$);
\item For each $i, j\in I$, we have $C_{i,j} \in G_{i+j}$.
\end{itemize}
We will usually simplify notation by writing $\oplus$ in place of $\oplus^{\textrm{alg}}_{i,j}$ or $\oplus^{\textrm{top}}_{i,j}$.
The elements $C_{i,j}$ are subject to the following further axioms for all $i, j, k\in I$.
\begin{itemize}
\item $C_{i,j} \cdot (x_i \oplus x_j) = x_j \oplus x_i$ for each $x_i \in X_i$, $x_j\in X_j$
\item $C_{i, 0} = C_{0,i} = e_i$;
\item $C_{i,j} C_{j,i}= e_{i+j}$;
\item If $g_i\in G_i$ and $g_j\in G_j$, then
$C_{i, j} (g_i \oplus g_j) = (g_j \oplus g_i) C_{i,j}$;
\item $(C_{i, k} \oplus e_j ) (e_i \oplus C_{j, k}) = C_{i+j, k}$.
\end{itemize}
Note that it is not necessary to assume that the basepoint $*_0$ is fixed by the action of $G_0$.
We refer to the operations $\oplus$ as the \emph{monoidal}, or \emph{additive}, structure of $\mathcal{A}$, and we refer to the elements $C_{i,j}$ as the \emph{commutativity operators}.
It will be convenient to use the notation $X = \coprod_i X_i$, $G = \coprod_i G_i$, as well as to set $C = \{C_{i,j}\}$.
Then we can write an action sequence in the simplified notation
$\mathcal{A} = (I, G, X, *, \oplus, C)$.
A morphism of permutative action sequences
$$\mathcal{A} = (I, G, X, *, \oplus, C) \longrightarrow
\mathcal{B} = (J, H, Y, *, \oplus, D)$$
consists of a homomorphism of monoids $f\colon\thinspace I\to J$ together with group homomorphisms
$$\phi_i \colon\thinspace G_i \to H_{f(i)}$$
satisfying $\phi_{i+j} (C_{i,j}) = D_{f(i), f(j)}$,
and $\phi_i$--equivariant maps
$$\zeta_i\colon\thinspace X_i \to Y_{f(i)}$$
for each $i\in I$, such that
$\zeta_0 (*) = *$.
This defines the category ${\bf PAct}$ of permutative (left) action sequences.
\end{definition}
We will always work with left actions, and we drop the adjective \emph{left} from here on.
In what follows, we will assume familiarity with the notion of permutative categories (as defined in May~\cite{May-perm}).
\begin{construction}\label{act-cat} There is a functor
$$\mathcal{T}\colon\thinspace {\bf PAct} \longrightarrow {\bf PCat}$$
from the category of permutative action sequences to the category ${\bf PCat}$ of permutative categories internal to ${\bf CGTop}$, defined as follows.
Given an action sequence $\mathcal{A} = (I, G, X, *, \oplus, C)$,
the object space of $\mathcal{T} (\mathcal{A})$ is simply
$$X = \coprod_{i\in I} X_i,$$
while the morphism space is
$$\coprod_{i\in I} G_i \times X_i.$$
The domain of $(g, x)$ is $x$, the codomain is $g\cdot x$, and composition is given by
$$(h, g\cdot x) \circ (g, x) = (hg, x).$$
The operations $\oplus$ give rise to a continuous functor
$$\oplus \colon\thinspace \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A}) \times \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A}) \longrightarrow \mathcal{T}(A),$$
which is (strictly) associative and has the object $*_0\in X_0$ as (strict) unit. The commutativity isomorphisms are given by the morphisms $(C_{i,j}, x_i \oplus x_j)$, and our axioms on the $C_{i,j}$ are exactly what is needed to make the coherence diagrams in $\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A})$ commute.
\end{construction}
We refer to $\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A})$ as the \emph{translation category} of $\mathcal{A}$.
Note that $\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A})$ is in fact a groupoid.
\begin{example}\label{taut-add} The tautological (additive) unitary permutative action sequence is given by setting $I = \mathbb{N}$, with ordinary addition as the monoid operation, and setting $X_n = G_n = \mathrm{U}(n)$ for $n \in \mathbb{N}$. We define $\mathrm{U}(0) = \{0\}$, the trivial group.
Here we view $\mathrm{U}(n)$ as a left $\mathrm{U}(n)$--space via \emph{conjugation}, and we use the usual matrix block sum operation to define both $\oplus^{\textrm{alg}}$ and $\oplus^{\textrm{top}}$, with $0\in \mathrm{U}(0)$ acting as the unit element.
The commutativity operators are given by the (unitary) permutation matrices
\begin{equation}\label{Imn}I_{m,n} = \br{\begin{array}{cc} 0_{nm} & I_n \\
I_m & 0_{mn} \\
\end{array}},\end{equation}
where $0_{pq}$ denotes the $p\times q$ zero matrix.
The tautological additive general linear action sequence is defined similarly, by replacing $\mathrm{U}(n)$ by $\mathrm{GL} (n)$.
\end{example}
\begin{definition} An (additive) \emph{unitary permutative action sequence} is one in which the underlying monoid is $\mathbb{N}$, with its usual addition, and we have $G_n = \mathrm{U}(n)$ and $C_{m,n} = I_{m,n}$ for all $m,n\in \mathbb{N}$.
Note that such sequences are completely determined by their topological data, that is, the $\mathrm{U}(n)$--spaces $X_n$ (and the basepoint $x_0\in X_0$) together with the maps $\oplus^{\textrm{top}}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{dep} The notion of a permutative action sequence can be generalized by allowing the elements $C_{i,j}$ to depend on $x_i\in X_i$ and $x_j\in X_j$ rather than just on $i,j\in I$, and a small modification again gives a functor from this larger category of sequences to ${\bf PCat}$. Furthermore, there is no need to assume the $G_i$ are groups; monoids would suffice.\end{remark}
\subsection{The nerve of a permutative action sequence}\label{nerve-sec}
Consider a permutative action sequence $\mathcal{A} = (I, G, X, *, \oplus, C)$.
The continuous functor
$$\oplus \colon\thinspace \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A}) \times \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A}) \longrightarrow \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A})$$
makes $|N_\cdot \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A})|$ into a topological monoid (note here that geometric realization commutes with products of simplicial spaces~\cite{Milnor-realization}).
May's infinite loop space machine~\cite{May-perm} gives a functor $\mathbf{K}$ from ${\bf PCat}$ to the category of connective $\Omega$--spectra. One key feature of this functor is that for each permutative category $\mathcal{C}$, the infinite loop space underlying the spectrum $\mathbf{K}(\mathcal{C})$ is naturally weakly equivalent to $\Omega B |N_\cdot \mathcal{C}|$.
Our next goal is to give an explicit description of the monoid $|N_\cdot \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A})|$.
For a space $X$ with a left action of a topological group $G$, the homotopy orbit space (also known as the Borel construction) is the quotient space
$$X_{hG} = (EG \times X)/G,$$
where $EG$ is the geometric realization of the category $\overline{G}$, internal to ${\bf CGTop}$, with object space $G$ and morphism space $G\times G$ (here $(g,h)$ is the unique morphism from $h$ to $g$, and $(g,h) \circ (h, k) = (g, k)$).
Note that $\overline{G}$ admits a right action of $G$ (by functors), defined via right-multiplication in $G$. This induces a right action of $G$ on $EG$, and now $G$ acts on $EG\times X$ via $g\cdot (e, x) = (e\cdot g^{-1}, x)$.
When $G$ is a Lie group, the natural map $EG\to BG$ (induced by the functor sending a morphism $(g, h)$ in $\overline{G}$ to the morphism $gh^{-1}$) is a universal principal $G$--bundle~\cite{Segal-class-SS}, and the natural map $X_{hG}\to BG$ is a fiber bundle with fiber $X$.
Given a permutative action sequence $\mathcal{A} = (I, G, X, *, \oplus, C)$, we can form
$$\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A}) \mathrel{\mathop :}= \coprod_{i\in I} (X_i)_{hG_i}.$$
The maps $\oplus_{i,j}^{\textrm{alg}}$ induce continuous functors
$$\overline{G}_i \times \overline{G}_j \longrightarrow \overline{G}_{i+j}$$
and hence continuous maps
\begin{equation}\label{EG}EG_i \times EG_j \longrightarrow EG_{i+j}.\end{equation}
Since the maps $\oplus_{i,j}^{\textrm{alg}}$ are homomorphisms, the maps (\ref{EG}) are equivariant (with respect to $\oplus \colon\thinspace G_i\times G_j \to G_{i+j}$).
These maps, together with the equivariant maps $\oplus \colon\thinspace X_i \times X_j \to X_{i+j}$, induce a map
$$\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})\times\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A}) \longrightarrow \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A}).$$
It is an exercise to check that this map
makes $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$ into a topological monoid with $[*, *_0]\in (X_0)_{hG_0}\subset \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$ as unit element, where $*\in EG$ corresponds to the object in $\overline{G}$ represented by the identity of $G$.
\begin{proposition}\label{nerve} There is a natural homeomorphism of topological monoids
$$\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})\longrightarrow |N_\cdot \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A})|.$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} (Sketch) A special case of this statement is proven in Ramras~\cite[Proposition 2.4]{Ramras-excision} (and the argument given there is due to Tyler Lawson). That argument immediately generalizes to produce the desired map and to show that it is a continuous bijection. The argument proceeds by viewing each side as the geometric realization of a simplicial space, and providing a map of simplicial spaces that is a homeomorphism on each level.
In~\cite{Ramras-excision}, an appeal to compactness was made to deduce continuity of the inverse maps on each level, but it is in fact a simple matter to write down explicit formulas for these inverse maps, from which it is clear that the inverses are continuous.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{MA-htpy-comm}The commutativity operators $C_{i,j}$ induce a natural transformation between the functors
$\oplus \colon\thinspace \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A})\times \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A}) \to \mathcal{T}(A)$ and $\oplus \circ \tau$, where $\tau$ is the twist functor on the product category. It then follows from basic categorical homotopy theory (Segal~\cite[Proposition 2.1]{Segal-class-SS}) that $|N. (\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{A}))| \cong \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$ is homotopy commutative.
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition}\label{unitary-htpy}
If $\mathcal{A}$ is a unitary or general linear permutative action sequence, then every element in the monoid $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$ is $($strongly$)$ anchored. Consequently,
the natural map
$$\wt{\Gamma} \colon\thinspace \rh_k \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})\longrightarrow \Omega B \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$$
is an isomorphism for each $k\geqslant 0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} (Sketch) Theorem~\ref{gen-thm} implies that the second statement follows from the first.
A special case of the first statement is proven in Ramras~\cite[Proof of Corollary 4.4]{Ramras-excision}, and that argument immediately generalizes.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The homotopy provided by Remark~\ref{MA-htpy-comm} does not anchor elements. The argument in~\cite[Proof of Corollary 4.4]{Ramras-excision} involves constructing different homotopies, specific to each element we wish to anchor.
The main point in the proof is that for each $x\in X_n$, the matrix $I_{n,n}$ lies in the identity component of the stabilizer of $x^2$. The fact that this requires no extra assumptions on the stabilizer appears to be a rather special feature of the unitary and general linear groups.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Bipermutative action sequences} \label{ring-sec}
The notion of permutative action sequence introduced here can be extended to a notion of \emph{bipermutative action sequence}, in such a way that the translation category inherits the structure of a bipermutative category. In short, a bipermutative action sequence is a pair of permutative action sequences, sharing the same indexing set $I$, the same spaces $X_i$, and the same groups $G_i$. Additional coherence axioms relating the two permutative structures must hold (and these axioms imply that the two monoid structures on $I$ give it the structure of a rig, or a ``ring without negatives"). We give the details in Definition~\ref{bp-action-seq} below; the axioms are just direct translations of the axioms for bipermutative categories. Maps of bipermutative action sequences are just maps that respect both permutative structures.
As an example, the Kronecker product of matrices endows the tautological unitary and general linear action sequences
with a bipermutative structure. The details are just an elaboration of the discussion in May~\cite[VI \S5]{May-577}. We note that some care must be taken when specifying the exact definition of Kronecker product, so that the coherence axioms hold.
\begin{definition}\label{bp-action-seq}
A bipermutative action sequence is rig $R$ together with a pair of action sequences
$$((R, +), G, X, *_0, \oplus, C)$$
and
$$ ((R, \cdot), G, X, *_1, \otimes, D)$$
sharing the same groups $G_r$ and the same $G_r$--spaces $X_r$ for all $r\in R$.
Let $0\in R$ and $1\in R$ denote the additive and multiplicative identity elements of $R$, respectively.
These data must satisfy the following additional axioms for all $r, s, t, u\in R$
and all $x, y, z, w \in X$ and all $g, h, k, l \in G$:
\begin{itemize}
\item Zero Axioms: $*_0 \otimes x = *_0 = x \otimes *_0$ and $e_0 \otimes g = e_0 = g \otimes e_0$ (recall that $e_0 \in G_0$ is the identity element);
\item Right Distributivity Axioms: $(x\oplus y) \otimes z = (x \otimes z) \oplus (y \otimes z)$ and $(g\oplus h) \otimes k = (g \otimes k) \oplus (h \otimes k)$;
\item Coherence Axioms:
$C_{r,s} \otimes e_t = C_{r\cdot t, s \cdot t}$, and
\begin{eqnarray*}(D_{t, r+s} \oplus D_{u, r+s})D_{r+s, t+u} =\hspace{3in}\\
\hspace{.5in} (e_{r\cdot t} \oplus C_{r\cdot u, s\cdot t} \oplus e_{s\cdot u}) \left[ \left[ (D_{t, r} \oplus D_{u, r}) D_{r, t+u} \right] \oplus \left[ (D_{t, s} \oplus D_{u, s}) D_{s, t+u} \right] \right].\end{eqnarray*}
\end{itemize}
We will sometimes denote these sequences in the simplified form
$$(R, G, X, *_0, *_1, \oplus, C, \otimes, D).$$
A morphism of bipermutative action sequences
$$(R, G, X, *_0, *_1, \oplus, C, \otimes, D) \longrightarrow (S, H, Y, *_0, *_1, \oplus, C', \otimes, D')$$
consists of a function $f\colon\thinspace R\to S$ that is a monoid homomorphism for both $+$ and $\cdot$, together with homomorphisms $\phi_r \colon\thinspace G_r\to H_{f(r)}$ and $\phi_r$--equivariant maps $X_r \to Y_{f(r)}$ (preserving both basepoints) for all $r\in R$. The homomorphisms $\phi_r$ must satisfy $\phi_{s+t} (C_{s, t}) = C'_{f(s+t)}$ and $\phi_{s\cdot t} (D_{s, t}) = D'_{f(s\cdot t)}$.
\end{definition}
Bipermutative action sequence now form a category ${\bf BPAct}$, and the translation category construction provides a functor from ${\bf BPAct}$ to the category of bipermutative categories (internal to ${\bf CGTop}$).
Multiplicative infinite loop space theory, as developed by May~\cite{May-577, May-bipermutative, May-ring-space}, provides a functor taking a bipermutative category $\mathcal{C}$ to a (connective) $E_\infty$ ring spectrum $\mathbb{K}_\infty (\mathcal{C})$. Just as in the permutative case, the underlying infinite loop space $\Omega^\infty \mathbb{K}_\infty (\mathcal{C})$ is naturally weakly equivalent to the group completion $\Omega B \mathcal{C}$, where $B\mathcal{C}$ denotes the geometric realization of the bar construction applied to the nerve of $\mathcal{C}$, using its \emph{additive} monoidal structure (the key step in the proof of this statement is~\cite[Theorem 9.3]{May-ring-space}).
\section{Deformation $K$--theory}$\label{Kdef-sec}$
We can use Theorem~\ref{gen-thm} to describe the homotopy groups of the unitary and general linear deformation $K$--theory spectra associated to finitely generated discrete groups. We explain how to view the construction of these objects from~\cite{Ramras-excision} in terms of action sequences. We will focus on the unitary version; the definitions and statements in general linear version are closely analogous, and we will explain the necessary modifications to the proofs that are required in the general linear case.
\begin{definition}
Given a discrete group $G$, let $\mathcal{A}(G)$ denote the unitary permutative action sequence associated to the spaces $X_n = \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$, which we topologize as subsets of the mapping spaces $\mathrm{Map}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$. Note that $\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(0))$ consists of a single point, which will serve as $*$.
We let the unitary groups act on these spaces by conjugation, and the block sum operations are induced by block sum of matrices. Note that $\mathcal{A}(G)$ is contravariantly functorial in $G$.
The deformation $K$--theory spectrum of $G$ is the connective $\Omega$--spectrum $K^{\mathrm{def}} (G)$ associated to the permutative translation category $\mathcal{T} (\mathcal{A}(G))$, and we define
$$K^{\mathrm{def}}_* (G) = \pi_* K^{\mathrm{def}}(G) \cong \pi_* \Omega^\infty K^{\mathrm{def}} (G).$$
\end{definition}
By Proposition~\ref{nerve}, we have a natural homeomorphism
$$\Omega^\infty K^{\mathrm{def}}(G) \cong \Omega B\left(\coprod_{n=0}^\infty \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)}\right),$$
where the coproduct on the right has the topological monoid structure induced from the additive structure of $\mathcal{A}(G)$.
To simplify notation, we define
$$\mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}} = \coprod_{n=0}^\infty \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)}.$$
Proposition~\ref{unitary-htpy} implies that for each $m\geqslant 0$, the natural map
$$\wt{\Gamma} \colon\thinspace \rh_m (\mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}}) \longrightarrow K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (G)$$
is an isomorphism.
Our next goal is to describe these homotopy groups
explicitly
in terms of spherical families of representations $S^m \to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$.
\begin{definition}
Given a discrete group $G$, define
$$\mathrm{Rep} (G) = \mathrm{Rep}(G, \mathrm{U}) \mathrel{\mathop :}= \coprod_{n=0}^\infty \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n)).$$
Block sum of matrices makes $\mathrm{Rep}(G)$ into a topological monoid, with the unique element in
$\mathrm{Hom}(G,\mathrm{U}(0))$
as the identity. Replacing $\mathrm{U}(n)$ by $\mathrm{GL}(n)$, we obtain the monoid $\mathrm{Rep}(G, \mathrm{GL})$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{sa-Hom}
Let $G$ be a discrete group. Then each component in $\mathrm{Rep} (G, \mathrm{U})$
is $($strongly$)$ anchored, and the same holds for $\mathrm{Rep}(G, \mathrm{GL})$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We will phrase the proof so as to apply to both the unitary and general linear cases.
Consider an $n$--dimensional representation $\rho$. Since the matrix $I_{n,n}$ defined in (\ref{Imn}) is diagonalizable, Ramras~\cite[Lemma 4.3]{Ramras-excision} implies that there exists a path $A_t$ in $\mathrm{Stab} (\rho\oplus \rho)$ (the stabilizer under the conjugation action) with $A_0 = I_{2n}$ and $A_1 = I_{n,n}$. Now
$$(\psi, \psi') \mapsto A_t (\psi \oplus \psi') A_t^{-1}$$
defines a homotopy anchoring $\rho$.
\end{proof}
Let $K^{-m} (*)$ denote the complex $K$--theory of a point, so $K^{-m} (*) = \mathbb{Z}$ for $m$ even and $K^{-m} (*) = 0$ for $m$ odd.
\begin{theorem}$\label{Kdef}$ Let $G$ be a discrete group. Then there are natural isomorphisms
$$ K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (G) \cong \rh_m (\mathrm{Rep}(G)) \oplus K^{-m} (*)$$
for each $m > 0$, as well natural isomorphisms
$$K^{\mathrm{def}}_0 (G) \cong \rh_0 (\mathrm{Rep}(G)) \cong \mathrm{Gr} (\pi_0 \mathrm{Rep}(G)).$$
Analogous isomorphisms exist in the general linear case, so long as $G$ is finitely generated.
\end{theorem}
We will need a lemma regarding the fibrations
\begin{equation} \label{fibn} \mathrm{Hom} (G, \mathrm{U}(n)) \srm{i_n} \mathrm{Hom} (G, \mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)} \srm{q_n} B\mathrm{U}(n).\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{bdry}
Let $\rho\colon\thinspace G\to \mathrm{U}(n)$ be a representation of the form $\rho \cong \rho'\oplus I_k$, and assume that
$\rho'$ decomposes further as a direct sum of the form
$$\rho' = \bigoplus_i k \rho'_i$$
for some representations $\rho'_i$,
where $k \rho'_i$ denotes the $k$--fold block sum of $\rho'_i$ with itself.
Then for $m\leqslant 2k$, the map $i_n$ appearing in the fibration sequence $(\ref{fibn})$ induces an injection
$$(i_n)_* \colon\thinspace \pi_m (\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n)), \rho) \hookrightarrow \pi_m ( \mathrm{Hom} (G, \mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)}, i_n (\rho)).$$
The analogous statement holds with $\mathrm{U}(n)$ replaced by $\mathrm{GL} (n)$, so long as $G$ is finitely generated.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We begin by proving the unitary case. At the end, we will explain the additional arguments needed in the general linear case.
If $k=n$ (that is, if $\rho = I_n$), then this follows from the fact that the fibration (\ref{fibn}) admits a splitting sending $[e, *]\in B\mathrm{U}(n)\cong\{*\}_{h\mathrm{U}(n)}$ to $[e, I_n] \in \mathrm{Hom} (G, \mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)}$; this splitting is just the map on homotopy orbit spaces induced by the $\mathrm{U}(n)$--equivariant inclusion $\{I_n\} \hookrightarrow \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$ (note that in this case, $(i_n)_*$ is injective in all dimensions, not just when $m\leqslant 2k=2n$).
So we will assume $k<n$.
It will suffice to show that for $m\leqslant 2k$, the boundary map
$$\partial \colon\thinspace \pi_{m+1} (B\mathrm{U}(n), *) \longrightarrow \pi_m (\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n)), \rho)$$
is zero. Since we have assumed $k < n$, we have $m \leqslant 2k < 2n$, which means $\pi_{m+1} (B\mathrm{U}(n), *)$ is in the stable range, and is zero for $m$ even. Hence we will assume $m$ is odd for the remainder of the proof.
Let $O_\rho \subset \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$ denote the conjugation orbit of $\rho$. Then $\partial$ factors through the boundary map for the fibration
$$O_\rho \longrightarrow (O_\rho)_{h\mathrm{U}(n)}\longrightarrow B\mathrm{U}(n),$$
and we claim that $\pi_m (O_\rho) = 0$ if $m$ is odd and less than $2k$, which will complete the proof. Letting $\mathrm{Stab}_\rho \leqslant \mathrm{U}(n)$ denote the stabilizer of $\rho$ under conjugation, Schur's Lemma implies that
\begin{equation}\label{stab}\mathrm{Stab}_\rho \cong \prod_i \mathrm{U}(n_i),
\end{equation}
where the numbers $n_i$ are the multiplicities of the irreducible summands of $\rho$. Our assumption on $\rho$ implies that $n_i\geqslant k$ for each $i$.
The inclusion
$$\mathrm{Stab}(I_k) \cong \mathrm{U}_{k} \hookrightarrow \mathrm{Stab}_\rho \hookrightarrow \mathrm{U}(n)$$ is homotopic to the standard inclusion of $\mathrm{U}(k)$ into $\mathrm{U}(n)$, and hence is an isomorphism on homotopy in dimensions less than $2k$.
This implies that the inclusion
$\mathrm{Stab}_\rho \hookrightarrow \mathrm{U}(n)$
is surjective on homotopy in dimensions less than $2k$, and consequently the boundary map
for the fibration sequence
$$\mathrm{Stab}_\rho \longrightarrow \mathrm{U}(n) \srm{q} O_\rho$$
is an injection
$$\pi_m (O_\rho) \hookrightarrow \pi_{m-1} (\mathrm{Stab}_\rho )$$
for $m\leqslant 2k-1$. But we are assuming that $m$ is odd and $m<2k\leqslant 2n_i$
for each $i$, so
$$\pi_{m-1} \mathrm{Stab}_\rho \cong \prod_i \pi_{m-1} \mathrm{U}(n_i) = 0.$$
It follows that $\pi_m (O_\rho) = 0$ when $m$ is odd and less than $2k$. This completes the proof in the unitary case.
To extend this argument to the general linear case, we need to analyze $\mathrm{Stab}_\rho$ for representations $\rho\colon\thinspace G\to \mathrm{GL}(n)$, with $G$ finitely generated.
If $\rho$ is completely reducible (that is, isomorphic to a block sum of irreducible representations)
then a decomposition analogous to (\ref{stab}) still holds, but this can fail if $\rho$ is not completely reducible.
We claim there exists a representation in the path component of $\rho$ which is completely reducible and still satisfies the hypotheses of the Lemma. This will suffice, since the map $(i_n)_*$ is independent (up to isomorphism) of the chosen basepoint within the path component of $\rho$. Note that the rest of the unitary argument applies equally well in the general linear case, since $\mathrm{GL}(n) \simeq \mathrm{U}(n)$.
To prove this statement, we will appeal to some results from algebraic geometry.
Since $G$ is finitely generated, $\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{GL} (n))$ is an affine variety. To see this, first, note that
$$\mathrm{GL} (n)\cong \{(A,B) \in M_{n\times n} \mathbb{C} \cong \mathbb{C}^{n^2} : AB = I\}$$
is an affine variety. Now
if $G$ is generated by $l$ elements, then $\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{GL} (n))$ is cut out from $\mathrm{GL} (n)^l$ by the ideal of polynomials corresponding to the relations in $G$.
A basic result in Geometric Invariant Theory states for every conjugation obit $O \subset \mathrm{Hom} (G, \mathrm{GL} (n))$, there exists a (unique) completely reducible representation inside the closure $\ol{O}$ (in general, orbit closures of complex reductive groups acting on affine
varieties contain unique closed orbits~\cite[Corollary 6.1 and Theorem 6.1]{Dolgachev}, and in the present situation complete reducibility is equivalent to having a closed orbit~\cite[Theorem 1.27]{LM}). This implies that every path component of $\mathrm{Hom} (G, \mathrm{GL}(n))$ contains a completely reducible representation, since $ \mathrm{Hom} (G,\mathrm{GL} (n))$ is triangulable (as are all affine varieties~\cite{Hironaka}).
Recall that we have a decomposition
$$\rho =\left( \bigoplus_i k \rho'_i \right) \oplus I_k.$$
Letting $\rho''_i$ denote the completely reducible representation in the path component of
$\rho'_i$, we see that
$$\left( \bigoplus_i k \rho''_i \right) \oplus I_k$$
is again completely reducible, lies in the same path component as $\rho$, and satisfies the hypotheses of the Lemma, as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{Kdef}] For $m=0$, this is elementary (see the proof of~\cite[Lemma 2.5]{Ramras-excision}), so we will assume $m>0$. We will work in the unitary case; the proof in the general linear case is the same.
Lemma~\ref{sa-Hom} and Theorem~\ref{gen-thm} give a natural isomorphism
$$\pi_m \Omega B \mathrm{Rep} (G) \cong \rh_m (\mathrm{Rep}(G)).$$
To obtain natural isomorphisms between
$$ K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (G) = \pi_m \Omega B \left(\mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}}\right)$$
and
$$\rh_m(\mathrm{Rep}(G)) \oplus K^{-m} (*),$$
($m > 0$) it remains only to show that there are natural isomorphisms
\begin{equation}\label{split}\pi_m \Omega B \left(\mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}}\right) \cong
\pi_m \Omega B \left(\mathrm{Rep}(G)\right) \oplus K^{-m} (*).
\end{equation}
Each representation space for the trivial group is a single point, so
$$\mathrm{Rep}(\{1\})_{h\mathrm{U}} \cong \coprod_n B\mathrm{U}(n),$$
and this monoid is stably group-like with respect to each of its components.
Hence the Group Completion Theorem, together with Bott Periodicity, gives us isomorphisms
$$\pi_m \Omega B\left( \mathrm{Rep}(\{1\})_{h\mathrm{U}} \right) \cong K^{-m} (*),$$
and this will be our model for $K^{-m} (*)$.
The inclusion $\{1\} \hookrightarrow G$ induces a map of monoids
\begin{equation}\label{q} q \colon\thinspace \mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}} \longrightarrow \mathrm{Rep}(\{1\})_{h\mathrm{U}},\end{equation}
and hence a map
$$\Omega B q\colon\thinspace \Omega B \left( \mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}}\right) \longrightarrow \Omega B\left( \mathrm{Rep}(\{1\})_{h\mathrm{U}} \right).$$
The maps
\begin{equation}\label{in} i_n \colon\thinspace \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))\hookrightarrow \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)}
\end{equation}
combine into a monoid homomorphism
$$i\colon\thinspace \mathrm{Rep}(G)\hookrightarrow \mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}},$$
and we have an induced map
$$\Omega B i\colon\thinspace \Omega B \mathrm{Rep} (G) \longrightarrow\Omega B\left( \mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}} \right).$$
To complete the proof, it will suffice to show that the sequence
\begin{equation}\label{ses} 0\longrightarrow \pi_m \Omega B \mathrm{Rep} (G) \srm{i_*} \pi_m \Omega B\mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}} \srm{q_*}
\pi_m \Omega B \mathrm{Rep}(\{1\})_{h\mathrm{U}}\longrightarrow 0
\end{equation}
is split exact for each $m\geqslant 1$ (note that we are abbreviating $(\Omega B i)_*$ to $i_*$ and $(\Omega B q)_*$ to $q_*$).
The map $q_*$ admits a right inverse, induced by the projection $G\to \{1\}$, so the sequence (\ref{ses}) splits and $q_*$ is surjective.
Next, the composite $q\circ i$ factors through the discrete monoid $\mathbb{N}$. Since $\pi_m \Omega B\mathbb{N} = 0$ for $m > 0$, we have $q_* \circ i_* = 0$. To prove exactness of (\ref{ses}), it remains to show that $\ker(q_*) \subset \mathrm{Im} (i_*)$ and $\ker(i_*) = 0$. We will prove these statements by directs argument using Theorem~\ref{gen-thm}, which provides an isomorphism between (\ref{ses}) and the corresponding sequence obtained by applying the functor $\rh_m$ in place of $\pi_m \Omega B$. Hence for the rest of the argument we will work
with the sequence
\begin{equation}\label{ses'} 0\longrightarrow \rh_m \mathrm{Rep} (G) \srm{i_*} \rh_m\left(\mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}}\right) \srm{q_*}
\rh_m\left( \mathrm{Rep}(\{1\})_{h\mathrm{U}}\right) \longrightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
First we show that $\ker(q_*) \subset \mathrm{Im} (i_*)$.
By Proposition~\ref{univ},
each element in $\ker (q_*)$ is represented by a map $\psi \colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(k))_{h\mathrm{U}(k)}$ such that for some constant map $c\colon\thinspace S^m\to B\mathrm{U}(k')$, the map
$(q\circ \psi) \oplus c$ is nullhomotopic. It follows that for any constant map $\wt{c} \colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(k'))_{h\mathrm{U}(k')}$, the homotopy class
$\langle \psi \oplus \wt{c}\rangle$ lies in the kernel of
$$q_*\colon\thinspace \pi_* \left( \mathrm{Hom} (G, \mathrm{U}(k+k'))_{h\mathrm{U}(k+k')} \right) \longrightarrow \pi_* B\mathrm{U}(k+k')$$
(for appropriately chosen basepoints).
Since the sequence (\ref{fibn})
is a fibration sequence for each $n\geqslant 0$, there exists a map
$$\rho\colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(k+k'))$$
such that $i_n\circ \rho\simeq \psi \oplus \wt{c}$,
and this shows that $[\rho]$ is in the image of the map $i_*$ in (\ref{ses'}).
The proof that $\ker(i_*) = 0$ is similar, but will require Lemma~\ref{bdry}. Each element in $\ker(i_*)$ is represented by a map $\rho\colon\thinspace S^m\to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{psi} (i\circ \rho) \oplus d \simeq c \end{equation}
for some constant maps $c, d \colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}}$.
Let
$m\rho(1) \oplus I_m$ denote the constant map $S^m\to \mathrm{Rep}(G)$ with image $m\rho(1) \oplus I_m$.
Adding
$$md \oplus mc \oplus i ((m-1)\rho(1) \oplus I_m),$$
to both sides of (\ref{psi}) gives
\begin{eqnarray}\label{big}(i\circ \rho) \oplus (m+1)d \oplus mc \oplus i ((m-1)\rho(1) \oplus I_m)\\
\simeq (m+1)c \oplus md \oplus i ((m-1)\rho(1) \oplus I_m).\notag
\end{eqnarray}
Since $\mathrm{U}(n)$ is path connected, the map $i_n$ induces a bijection on path components for every $n$. Thus there exist constant maps $\wt{c}$ and $\wt{d}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{pr}i\circ \wt{c} \simeq c\,\,\, \textrm{ and } \,\,\, i\circ \wt{d} \simeq d.
\end{equation}
Setting
$$e = (m+1)\wt{d} \oplus m\wt{c} \oplus (m-1)\rho(1) \oplus I_m,$$
Equation (\ref{big}) gives
\begin{eqnarray}i \circ (\rho \oplus e)
\simeq i \circ ((m+1)\wt{c} \oplus m\wt{d} \oplus (m-1)\rho(1) \oplus I_m),
\end{eqnarray}
so in particular $i \circ (\rho \oplus e)$
is nullhomotopic (in the based sense, in fact).
Moreover, we have an isomorphism of representations
$$\rho(1) \oplus e(1) \cong m\rho(1)\oplus (m+1) \wt{d}(1) \oplus m \wt{c}(1) \oplus I_m,$$
so Lemma~\ref{bdry} implies that
the map
$$\pi_m \left(\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))\right)\xrightarrow{(i_n)_*} \pi_m \left(\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)}\right)
$$
is injective if we use $(\rho \oplus e) (1)$ as our basepoint for $ \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$.
Since $i \circ (\rho \oplus e)$
is nullhomotopic, we conclude that $\rho \oplus e$ is nullhomotopic as well, and since $e$ is constant it follows that $[\rho] = 0$ in $\rh_m \mathrm{Rep}(G)$. This completes the proof that (\ref{ses'}) is exact, and also completes the proof of the Corollary.
\end{proof}
It will also be helpful to consider a reduced form of deformation $K$--theory.
The unitary and general linear cases of this discussion are identical.
For each group $G$, the map $\{1\} \to G$ induces a map of spectra
$$q\colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}(G) \to K^{\mathrm{def}}(\{1\}),$$
which admits a splitting induced by the map $G\to \{1\}$. The map $q$ is just the spectrum level version of the map (\ref{q}).
Note that $K^{\mathrm{def}}(\{1\})$ is simply the connective $K$--theory spectrum $\mathbf{ku}$ (see May~\cite[VIII \S2]{May-577}, for instance).
\begin{definition}\label{rK}
We define $\wt{K}^\mathrm{def} (G)$ to be the homotopy fiber of the natural map
$K^{\mathrm{def}}(G) \to K^{\mathrm{def}}(\{1\})$, and we set $\wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_* (G) = \pi_* \wt{K}^\mathrm{def}(G)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{corollary}\label{rKdef}
There is a natural splitting
$$K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (G) \cong \wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_m (G) \oplus K^{-m} (*)$$
for each $m\geqslant 0$, and for $m>0$ there are natural isomorphisms
$$ \wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_m (G) \cong \rh_m \mathrm{Rep}(G) \cong \pi_m \Omega B \mathrm{Rep}(G).$$
Additionally, $\wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_0 (G)$ is naturally isomorphic to the quotient of
$$\mathrm{Gr} (\pi_0 \mathrm{Rep} (G)) \cong \pi_0 \Omega B\mathrm{Rep}(G)$$
by the subgroup generated by the trivial 1-dimensional representation.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} The splitting is immediate from the definitions.
Also, our definition of $\wt{K}^\mathrm{def} (G)$ implies that $\wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_m (G)$ is naturally isomorphic to the kernel of the surjection $K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (G) \to K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (\{1\}) \cong K^{-m} (*)$, and exactness of (\ref{ses'}) shows that for each $m > 0$, this kernel is naturally isomorphic to $\rh_m \mathrm{Rep} (G)$.
When $m=0$, the splitting gives a natural isomorphism between $\wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_0 (G)$ and the cokernel of the map
$K^{\mathrm{def}}_0 (\{1\}) \to K^{\mathrm{def}}_0 (G)$,
whose image is generated by the trivial 1-dimensional representation.
\end{proof}
\section{Topological $K$--theory}$\label{K-top}$
In this section, $X = (X, x_0)$ will denote a (based) path connected, paracompact space having the homotopy type of compact Hausdorff space. (For instance, $X$ might be $B\pi_1 (K)$ for some aspherical finite CW complex $K$.)
We will define a permutative category whose homotopy groups agree with the complex topological $K$--theory of $X$. Our construction, and the subsequent discussion, is designed to mirror the construction of deformation $K$--theory in the previous section. This will facilitate our construction and analysis of the topological Atiyah--Segal map in the next section. As discussed in Section~\ref{E-infty-sec}, the permutative category defined below can actually be given a \emph{bipermutative} structure. While this will be important for the results in Section~\ref{image-sec}, we note that it is unclear whether the induced ring structure agrees with the classical multiplication in $K$--theory (induced by tensor product of vector bundles) in general.
As in the previous section, there is both a unitary and a general linear version of the constructions given here. We focus on the unitary case; the general linear case is completely analogous (more so than for deformation $K$--theory).
\begin{definition} \label{map-act}
Let $B\mathrm{U}(n)$ denote the geometric realization of the one-object category $\underline{\mathrm{U}(n)}$ (as in Section~\ref{htpy-sec}). Then the (left) conjugation action of $\mathrm{U}(n)$ on itself induces an action, by continuous functors, of $\mathrm{U}(n)$ on the category $\underline{\mathrm{U}(n)}$, and hence an action of $\mathrm{U}(n)$ on $B\mathrm{U}(n)$. This in turn induces an action of $\mathrm{U}(n)$ on the based mapping space
$\mathrm{Map}_*(X, B\mathrm{U}(n))$. Throughout this section, we will view $\mathrm{Map}_*(X, B\mathrm{U}(n))$ as a $\mathrm{U}(n)$--space under this action.
The block sum operations $\oplus \colon\thinspace \mathrm{U}(m) \times \mathrm{U}(n) \to \mathrm{U}(m+n)$ are homomorphisms, and hence induce continuous functors $\underline{\mathrm{U}(m)} \times \underline{\mathrm{U}(n)}\to\underline{\mathrm{U}(m+n)}$, which realize to maps
$$B\mathrm{U}(m) \times B\mathrm{U}(n) \longrightarrow B\mathrm{U}(m+n),$$
and induce equivariant maps
$$\oplus \colon\thinspace \mathrm{Map}_*(X, B\mathrm{U}(m))\times \mathrm{Map}_*(X, B\mathrm{U}(n))\longrightarrow \mathrm{Map}_*(X, B\mathrm{U}(m+n)).$$
Functoriality of $B$ implies
that this data gives a unitary permutative action sequence $\mathcal{A}_K (X)$ with $n$th space $\mathrm{Map}_*(X, B\mathrm{U}(n))$.
Note that when $X = *$, we recover the unitary permutative action sequence whose associated spectrum is $\mathbf{ku}$.
Let $\mathcal{C}_K (X) = \mathcal{T}( \mathcal{A}_K (X))$ be the translation category of $\mathcal{A}_K (X)$, and let $\mathcal{K} (X)$ denote the associated spectrum. Let $\wt{\mathcal{K}} (X)$ denote the homotopy fiber of the natural map $\mathcal{K} (X) \to \mathcal{K}(*)$.
Finally, set $\mathcal{K}_* (X) = \pi_* \mathcal{K} (X)$ and $\wt{\mathcal{K}}_* (X) = \pi_* \wt{\mathcal{K}} (X)$.
\end{definition}
We have the following consequence of Propositions~\ref{nerve} and~\ref{unitary-htpy}.
\begin{corollary} The geometric realization of the nerve of $\mathcal{C}_K (X)$ is isomorphic, as a topological monoid, to the topological monoid
$$\mathcal{V}(X)_{h\mathrm{U}} \mathrel{\mathop :}= \coprod_n \mathrm{Map}_*(X, B\mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)},$$
and the natural map
$$\wt{\Gamma} \colon\thinspace \rh_m \left(\mathcal{V} (X)_{h\mathrm{U}} \right) \longrightarrow \pi_m \Omega B \left(\mathcal{V} (X)_{h\mathrm{U}} \right) \cong \mathcal{K}_m (X)$$
is an isomorphism for each $m\geqslant 0$.
\end{corollary}
Our goal in this section is to compare the homotopy groups $\mathcal{K}_* (X)$ with the (complex) topological $K$--theory of $X$ (for $*\geqslant 0$).
We need to specify a definition of topological $K$--theory. Note that the Group Completion Theorem gives a natural homotopy equivalence
$$\mathbb{Z} \times BU \longrightarrow \Omega B \left(\coprod_n B\mathrm{U}(n)\right),$$
where $BU = \colim_n B\mathrm{U}(n)$, the colimit being formed with respect to the maps induced by block sum with the identity $I_1 \in \mathrm{U}(1)$.
\begin{definition} For $m\geqslant 0$, we define the \emph{reduced} topological $K$--theory of $X$ by
$$\wt{K}^{-m} (X) = \wt{K}^0 (S^m \wedge X) = \langle S^m \wedge X, \mathbb{Z} \times BU \rangle$$
and the unreduced $K$--theory of $X$ is defined by
$$K^{-m} (X) = \wt{K}^{-m} (X) \oplus K^{-m} (*) = \wt{K}^{-m} (X) \oplus \pi_m (\mathbf{ku}).$$
Maps $X\to Y$ induce maps on both reduced an unreduced $K$--theory (in the latter case, all maps act as the identity on $K^{-m} (*)$).
\end{definition}
We will need to consider another topological monoid related to $\mathcal{K} (X)$.
\begin{definition} Define
$$\mathcal{V} (X) = \coprod_n \mathrm{Map}_* (X, B\mathrm{U}(n)),$$
and equip $\mathcal{V} (X)$ with the monoid structure induced by the block sum operations on $\{B\mathrm{U}(n)\}_n$ described in Definition~\ref{map-act}.
\end{definition}
We now have the following analogue of the results from Section~\ref{Kdef-sec}.
\begin{corollary}\label{rK-cor}
For each $m\geqslant 0$, there is a natural splitting
$$\mathcal{K}_m (X) \cong \wt{\mathcal{K}}_m (X) \oplus \wt{\mathcal{K}}_m (*) = \wt{\mathcal{K}}_m (X) \oplus \pi_m \mathbf{ku}$$
and a natural
isomorphism
$$\mathcal{K}_m (X) \cong K^{-m} (X),$$
which restricts to an isomorphism
$$\wt{\mathcal{K}}_m (X) \cong \wt{K}^{-m} (X).$$
Moreover, for $m> 0$ there are natural isomorphisms
$$ \wt{\mathcal{K}}_m (X) \cong \rh_m \mathcal{V}(X) \cong \pi_m \Omega B \mathcal{V}(X),$$
and $ \wt{\mathcal{K}}_0 (X) \cong \wt{K}^0 (X)$ is naturally isomorphic to the quotient of
$$\mathrm{Gr} (\pi_0 \mathcal{V}(X)) \cong \pi_0 \Omega B\mathcal{V}(X)$$
by the subgroup generated by the class of nullhomotopic $X\to B\mathrm{U}(1)$.
\end{corollary}
The proof is analogous to the arguments in Section~\ref{Kdef-sec}, but simpler.
The technical arguments in the proof of Lemma~\ref{bdry} are designed to show that each component of $\mathrm{Rep}(G)$ is a summand of a component on which the fibration (\ref{fibn}) is well-behaved. In the present context, each component of $\mathcal{V} (X)$ is a summand of a component of nullhomotopic maps: indeed, since $X$ is homotopy equivalent to a compact Hausdorff space $K$, each map $f\colon\thinspace X\to B\mathrm{U}(n)$ corresponds to a vector bundle over $K$, which is a direct summand of a trivial bundle, and it follows that there is a map $f'\colon\thinspace X\to B\mathrm{U}(m)$ (for some $m$) such that $f\oplus f'$ is nullhomotopic.
The desired statements about the fibration
$$\mathrm{Map}_* (X, B\mathrm{U}(n)) \longrightarrow (\mathrm{Map}_* (X, B\mathrm{U}(n)))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)} \longrightarrow B\mathrm{U}(n)$$
now follow from the existence of the splitting
$$B\mathrm{U}(n) \to (\mathrm{Map}_* (X, B\mathrm{U}(n)))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)},$$
which is simply the map on homotopy orbit spaces induced by the equivariant map $\{c_*\} \to \mathrm{Map}_* (X, B\mathrm{U}(n))$. Note here that the constant map $c_*$ to the basepoint $*\in B\mathrm{U}(n)$ is fixed under conjugation, since the same is true of $*$ itself.
\begin{remark} Corollary~\ref{rK-cor} requires the assumption that $X$ is path connected. Indeed, the homotopy group completion of $\mathcal{V}_* (X)_{h\mathrm{U}}$ has the form
$\mathbb{Z} \times \colim_{n\to \infty} \mathrm{Map}_* (X, B\mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)}$
(up to homotopy). For every space $X$ and every $m\geqslant 1$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
&\pi_m \left (\mathbb{Z} \times \colim_{n\to \infty} \mathrm{Map}_* (X, B\mathrm{U}(n))_{h\mathrm{U}(n)} \right)\\
&\hspace{1in} \cong \pi_m \mathrm{Map}_* (X, BU) \oplus \pi_m B\mathrm{U}\\
&\hspace{1in} = \pi_m \mathrm{Map}_* (X, \mathbb{Z}\times BU) \oplus \pi_m B\mathrm{U} \\
&\hspace{1in} = K^{-m} (X),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
but when $m=0$ there is a discrepancy if $X$ is disconnected.
\end{remark}
\section{The topological Atiyah--Segal map}$\label{TAS-sec}$
Let $G$ be a group whose classifying space $BG$ has the homotopy type of a finite CW complex.
We now define reduced and unreduced versions of the topological Atiyah--Segal map, which relates the deformation $K$--theory of $G$ to the topological $K$--theory of $BG$.
The unitary and general linear discussions are completely parallel, so we focus on the unitary case.
We will see that in dimension zero, the classical Atiyah--Segal map, which associates to each representation $\rho\colon\thinspace G\to \mathrm{U}(n)$ the $K$--theory class represented by the vector bundle $E_\rho\to BG$, factors as
$$R[G] = \mathrm{Gr} (\mathrm{Rep}(G)^\delta) \longrightarrow \mathrm{Gr}(\pi_0 \mathrm{Rep}(G)) \srm{\alpha_0} K^0 (BG),$$
where $\mathrm{Rep}(G)^\delta$ is the discrete monoid underlying the topological monoid $\mathrm{Rep}(G)$, and $\alpha_0$ is the topological Atiyah--Segal map (in dimension 0).
In this section we will discuss additive structures only, postponing the discussion of multiplicative structures to Section~\ref{image-sec}.
\subsection{Additive structure of the topological Atiyah--Segal map}
The simplicial classifying space functor $B$ induces continuous, $\mathrm{U}(n)$--equivariant maps
\begin{equation} \label{B}
\xymatrix@R=2pt{ B = B_n \colon\thinspace \mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma, \mathrm{U}(n)) \ar[r] & \mathrm{Map}_* (B\Gamma, B\mathrm{U}(n)) \\
\hspace{.5in}\rho\ar@{|->}[r] & B\rho}
\end{equation}
which combine to give a map between the associated unitary permutative action sequences. Recall that the spectra associated to these action sequences are $K^{\mathrm{def}}(G)$ and $\mathcal{K} (BG)$, respectively, and the homotopy groups of the latter are the complex $K$--theory groups of $BG$.
\begin{definition}\label{TAS-def}
The \emph{topological Atiyah--Segal map}
$$\alpha = \alpha^G \colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}(G) \longrightarrow \mathcal{K} (BG)$$
is the map of spectra induced by the above map of permutative action sequences. The reduced topological Atiyah--Segal map
$$\wt{\alpha} \colon\thinspace \wt{K}^\mathrm{def} (G) \longrightarrow \wt{\mathcal{K}} (BG)$$
is the induced map
$$\mathrm{hofib} \left(K^{\mathrm{def}}(G) \to K^{\mathrm{def}}(\{1\})\right) \longrightarrow \mathrm{hofib} \left( \mathcal{K}(BG) \to \mathcal{K}(*)\right).$$
Note that we have $K^{\mathrm{def}}(\{1\}) = \mathcal{K}(*) = \mathbf{ku}$.
\end{definition}
The results in the previous sections combine to give the following descriptions of the the induced maps $\alpha_*$ and $\wt{\alpha}_*$ on homotopy groups.
\begin{corollary}
For $m\geqslant 0$, the topological Atiyah--Segal map is naturally isomorphic to the maps
$$\pi_m \Omega B\mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}} \longrightarrow \pi_m \Omega B \mathcal{V} (BG)_{h\mathrm{U}}$$
and
$$\rh_m \mathrm{Rep}(G)_{h\mathrm{U}} \longrightarrow \rh_m \Omega B \mathcal{V} (BG)_{h\mathrm{U}}.$$
induced by the simplicial classifying space functor $B$, and there is a natural splitting
\begin{equation}\label{alpha-split}\alpha_* = \wt{\alpha}_* \oplus \mathrm{Id}_{\pi_* \mathbf{ku}}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, for $m > 0$, the reduced Atiyah--Segal map is naturally isomorphic to the maps
$$\pi_m \Omega B\mathrm{Rep}(G) \longrightarrow \pi_m \Omega B \mathcal{V} (BG)$$
and
$$\rh_m \mathrm{Rep}(G) \longrightarrow \rh_m \mathcal{V} (BG)$$
induced by $B$.
\end{corollary}
We can give an explicit description of the topological Atiyah--Segal map in terms of vector bundles.
Consider the diagram
\begin{equation}\label{TAS-diag}
\xymatrix{ \rh_m \mathrm{Rep} (G) \ar[r]^{\wt{\alpha}_m}
\ar@{-->}[dr]
& \rh_m \mathcal{V}(BG)
\\
& \pi_m \mathrm{Map}_* (BG, B\mathrm{U}) \ar[u]_-\cong^-\Psi
&\save[] *\txt<8pc>{
\,\,\,\,\,$\cong \wt{K}^{-m} (BG)$.}
\restore
}
\end{equation}
where
$\Psi$ is the isomorphism defined in Section~\ref{sgl-sec}. Our goal is to describe the diagonal map $\Psi^{-1} \circ \wt{\alpha}_m$.
By Proposition~\ref{univ},
each class in $\rh_m \mathrm{Rep}(G)\cong K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (G)$ has a representative of the form $[\rho]$ for some family of representations $\rho\colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Rep} (G)$.
Let
$E_\rho$ be the right principal $\mathrm{U}(n)$--bundle over $S^m \times BG$
defined by
\begin{equation*}
\xymatrix@R=2pt{E_\rho = \left(S^m \times EG \times \mathrm{U}(n)\right)/G \ar[r] & S^m \times BG \\
[z, e, A] \ar@{|->}[r] & (z, q(e)),}
\end{equation*}
where $q\colon\thinspace EG\to BG$ is the bundle projection and $g\in G$ acts via
$$g \cdot (z, x, A) \mathrel{\mathop :}= (z, x\cdot g^{-1}, (\rho (z) (g)) A).$$
Basic properties of this construction are reviewed in Baird--Ramras~\cite[Section 3]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing}.
We will use $1\in S^0 \subset S^m$ as the basepoint of $S^m$, and for any family
$$\rho\colon\thinspace S^m\to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n)),$$
we let $\wt{\rho(1)} \colon\thinspace S^m\to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$ denote the constant family with value
$\rho(1) \colon\thinspace G \to \mathrm{U}(n)$.
For based CW complexes $X_1$ and $X_2$, the long exact sequence in $K$--theory for the pair $(X_1\times X_2, X_1 \vee X_2)$ yields a (naturally) split short exact sequence
$$0\longrightarrow \wt{K}^0 (X_1\wedge X_2) \srm{\pi^*} \wt{K}^0 (X_1\times X_2)\srm{i^*} \wt{K}^0 (X_1\vee X_2)\longrightarrow 0.$$
If $\rho$ is an $S^m$--family ($m>0$),
the bundle $E_\rho \to S^m \times BG$ is trivial when restricted to $S^m \times \{x\}$ (for each point $\{x\}\in BG$): indeed, each point $\wt{x}\in q^{-1} (x) \subset EG$ gives rise to a continuous section $z\mapsto [z, \wt{x}, I]$ of the restricted bundle. Thus we have an isomorphism
$$E_\rho|_{S^m \vee BG} \cong E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}|_{S^m \vee BG},$$
and hence
$$[E_\rho] - [E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}] \in \ker (i^*) = \mathrm{Im} (\pi^*).$$
Since $\pi^*$ is injective, it follows that the class $[E_\rho] - [E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}]$ has a well-defined pre-image under $\pi^*$, which we will denote by
\begin{equation}\label{pi-inv}
(\pi^*)^{-1} ([E_\rho] - [E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}]) \in \wt{K}^0 (S^m\wedge BG) = \wt{K}^{-m} (BG).
\end{equation}
By~\cite[Lemma 3.1(2)]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing}, the bundles $E_\rho$ and $E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}$ only depend (up to isomorphism) on the unbased homotopy class of $\rho$. Hence the class (\ref{pi-inv}) depends only the unbased homotopy class of $\rho$.
Note that
if $\rho$ is constant, then $E_\rho = E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}$, so in this case the class (\ref{pi-inv}) is trivial.
With this understood, we have the following explicit description of $\wt{\alpha}_*$ (or more precisely, of the map $\Psi^{-1} \circ \wt{\alpha}_*$ in Diagram (\ref{TAS-diag})).
\begin{theorem} \label{TAS} Let $G$ be a group whose classifying space $BG$ is homotopy equivalent to a finite CW complex.
Then for $m\geqslant 1$, the reduced topological Atiyah--Segal map,
viewed as a map
$$\rh_m \mathrm{Rep} (G) \longrightarrow \wt{K}^{-m} (BG)$$
via the diagram $(\ref{TAS-diag})$, has the form
\begin{equation}\label{wtalpha} [\rho] \mapsto (\pi^*)^{-1} \left( [E_\rho] - [E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}]\right).\end{equation}
When $m=0$, the map
$$\alpha_0\colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}_0 (G)\cong \mathrm{Gr} (\pi_0 \mathrm{Rep}(G)) \longrightarrow K^0 (BG)$$
is given by $\alpha_0 ([\rho]) = [E_\rho]$.
\end{theorem}
Note that the statement for $m=0$ shows that the classical Atiyah--Segal map factors through $\alpha_0$, as claimed earlier.
\begin{proof} We assume $m>0$; the proof for $m=0$ is similar but simpler. By definition, $\wt{\alpha}_* ([\rho]) = [B\circ \rho]$, where $B$ is the map (\ref{B}).
Let $f\colon\thinspace S^m\wedge BG\to B\mathrm{U}(n)$ be a map classifying $(\pi^*)^{-1} \left( [E_\rho] - [E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}]\right)$. To prove the proposition, we need to show that the adjoint map $f^\vee \colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Map}_*(BG, B\mathrm{U}(n))$ satisfies
$$\Psi(\langle f^\vee \rangle) = [B\circ \rho]$$
in $\rh_m \mathcal{V} (BG)$. (Recall that
$\Psi (\langle f^\vee \rangle)$ is simply $[ f^\vee ]$.)
By choice of $f$, the composite $f\circ \pi$
classifies $[E_\rho] - [E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}]$, and
by Baird--Ramras~\cite[Lemma 4.1]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing},
if $c$ is the constant map $S^m\to \mathrm{Map}_* (BG, B\mathrm{U}(p))$ with image $B(\rho(1))$,
then $c^\vee \circ \pi$
classifies $[E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}]$ (here $c^\vee$ is the adjoint of $c$),
while $(B\circ \rho)^\vee \circ \pi$ classifies $[E_\rho]$. Hence the maps
$$(f\circ \pi) \oplus ( c^\vee \circ \pi ) = (f\oplus c^\vee) \circ \pi \textrm{ \,\,\, and \,\,\,} (B\circ \rho)^\vee \circ \pi$$
represent the same class in $\wt{K}^0 (S^m\wedge BG)$.
Since $\pi^*$ is injective,
it follows that $f\oplus c^\vee$ and $(B\circ \rho)^\vee $ are homotopic as maps $S^m\wedge BG\to B\mathrm{U}(N)$ (for sufficiently large $N$), and consequently $f^\vee \oplus c$ and $B\circ \rho$ are homotopic as maps $S^m\to \mathrm{Map}_*(BG, B\mathrm{U}(N))$. Since $c$ is constant, it follows that $[B\circ\rho] = [f^\vee] = \Psi (\langle f^\vee \rangle)$ in $\rh_m \mathcal{V} (BG)$.
\end{proof}
One may replace $\mathrm{U}(n)$ by $\mathrm{GL} (n)$ throughout the preceding discussion, yielding a general linear version $\alpha^{\mathrm{GL}}$ of the topological Atiyah--Segal map. We note that the unitary topological Atiyah--Segal map factors through this general linear version, which leads to the following natural question.
\begin{question} Does there exist a group $G$ for which the image of $\alpha^{\mathrm{GL}}_*$ is strictly larger than the image of $\alpha_*$?
\end{question}
The functor $\mathcal{K} (X)$ from Section~\ref{K-top} is well-defined on the entire category ${\bf CGTop}$, and hence $\alpha$ and $\wt{\alpha}$ make sense for arbitrary discrete groups $G$. Our analysis of the functor $\mathcal{K}$, however, relied on the fact that when $X$ is paracompact and has the homotopy type of a compact Hausdorff space, every vector bundle $E\to X$ is a direct summand of a trivial bundle.
\begin{question}
Does there exist a natural transformation of graded groups
$\wt{\eta} \colon\thinspace \wt{\mathcal{K}}_* (X) \longrightarrow \wt{K}^{-*} (X)$ defined for all for path connected CW complexes $X$ such that the composite
$$\wt{K}_* (G) \srm{\alpha_*} \wt{\mathcal{K}}_* (BG) \srm{\wt{\eta}} \wt{K}^{-*} (BG)$$
is described by the formula (\ref{wtalpha})?
\end{question}
\section{Relations with previous work}\label{prev-sec}
In this section, we reinterpret some of the main results from Baird--Ramras~\cite{Baird-Ramras-smoothing},
Ramras--Willett--Yu~\cite{RWY}, and Ramras~\cite{Ramras-stable-moduli} in terms of the topological Atiyah--Segal map.
\subsection{Bounds on the image of $\alpha_*$}
We now show that $\wt{\alpha}_*$ fails to be surjective in dimensions $\bbQ cd (G) - 2k$ ($k>0$), where $\bbQ cd (G)$ is the largest number $n$ for which $H^n (G; \mathbb{Q})$ is non-zero (Theorem~\ref{BR}).
This low-dimensional failure is closely analogous to the low-dimensional failure of the Quillen--Lichtenbaum conjectures (in the form discussed in~\cite{OR}, for instance), which the relate algebraic $K$--theory of a field $k$ to its \'{e}tale K--theory in dimensions greater than the virtual cohomological dimension of $k$ minus 2.
\begin{theorem} $\label{BR}$ The image of
$$\alpha_* \colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (G) \longrightarrow K^{-m} (BG)$$
$($and, in fact, of $\alpha^{\mathrm{GL}}_*$$)$
has rank at most $\beta_m(G) + \beta_{m-2} (G) + \cdots$, where $\beta_i (G)$ is the rank of $H_i (BG; \mathbb{Z})$.
Hence if $\beta_d (G)\neq 0$, then the maps $\alpha_{d-2}, \alpha_{d-4}, \ldots$ are not surjective.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} By Theorem~\ref{TAS} and \cite[Theorem 3.5]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing}, the image of $\alpha_m$ lies in the subgroup of $K^{-m} (BG)$ on which the Chern classes $c_{m+i}$, $i=1, 2, \cdots$, vanish rationally. It follows from \cite[Lemma 4.2]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing} that the rank of this subgroup is given by the above sum of Betti numbers. The last statement follows from the fact that the Chern character is a rational isomorphism, which implies that the rank of $K^{-m} (BG)$ is equal to the sum of all the Betti numbers of $BG$ in dimensions equivalent to $m$ modulo 2.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Relation with the Novikov conjecture}
Recall that a group $G$ satisfies the strong Novikov conjecture if the analytical assembly map (from the $K$--homology of $BG$ to the $K$--theory of the maximal $C^*$--algebra of $G$) is injective after tensoring with $\mathbb{Q}$. For background on this conjecture, see~\cite{RWY} and the references therein.
\begin{theorem}$\label{Nov}$ If $G$ is a group such that $BG$ is homotopy equivalent to a finite CW complex, and there exists $M>0$ such that the \emph{unitary} topological Atiyah--Segal map $\alpha_m$ is rationally surjective for all $m>M$, then $G$ satisfies the strong Novikov conjecture.
\end{theorem}
We note that Section~\ref{image-sec} provides examples of groups $G$ such that $BG$ is homotopy equivalent to a finite CW complex, but $\alpha$ \emph{does not} satisfy this surjectivity condition, while Theorem~\ref{TAS-2} provides examples in which surjectivity does hold.
\begin{proof} Surjectivity of $\alpha_m$ is equivalent to surjectivity of $\wt{\alpha}_m$, and
surjectivity of $\wt{\alpha}_m$ implies that for sufficiently large $n$, every element in
$$[S^m, \mathrm{Map}_* (B\Gamma, B\mathrm{U}(n))]$$ has the form $[B\circ \rho]$ for some $S^m$--family of representations $\rho$. It now follows from ~\cite[Theorem 3.16]{RWY} (or rather from the proof of that result) that $G$ lies in the class of \emph{flatly detectable groups}; all such groups satisfy the strong Novikov conjecture by~\cite[Corollary 4.3]{RWY}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Surface groups}
We now translate the results in~\cite{Ramras-stable-moduli} into information about the topological Atiyah--Segal map when $G = \pi_1 (\Sigma)$ is the fundamental group of a compact, aspherical surface $\Sigma$. Note that we allow $\Sigma$ to have boundary, in which case $\pi_1 (\Sigma)$ is a finitely generated free group.
We begin by recalling
a result from~\cite{Ramras-stable-moduli}, which was proven using Morse theory for the Yang--Mills functional.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Ramras-stable-moduli}, Theorem 3.4]$\label{B-thm}$ If $\Sigma$ is a compact aspherical surface, possibly with boundary, then for each $M\geqslant 0$, there exists $N$ such that for every $n>N$ the natural map
$$B_* \colon\thinspace \pi_m \mathrm{Hom}(\pi_1 \Sigma, \mathrm{U}(n)) \longrightarrow \pi_m \mathrm{Map}_* (B\pi_1 \Sigma, B\mathrm{U}(n))$$
induces an isomorphism on homotopy groups in dimensions $1 \leqslant m \leqslant M$ $($for all choices of compatible basepoints$)$.
If $\Sigma$ is non-orientable, or has non-empty boundary, then this statement holds for $0\leqslant m\leqslant M$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem} $\label{TAS-2}$ If $\Sigma$ is a compact aspherical surface, possibly with boundary, then the topological Atiyah--Segal map
$$\alpha_m \colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (\pi_1 \Sigma) \longrightarrow K^{-m} (\Sigma)$$
is an isomorphism for $m\geqslant 1$. If $\Sigma$ is non-orientable, or has non-empty boundary, then $\alpha_0$ is an isomorphism as well.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Note that it suffices to prove that $\wt{\alpha}_m$ is an isomorphism.
We work in the case $m>0$; the same reasoning will apply when $m=0$ and $\Sigma$ is non-orientable or has non-empty boundary, using the last part of Theorem~\ref{B-thm}.
We prove injectivity; the proof of surjectivity is similar but simpler.
By Proposition~\ref{univ}, each element in the kernel of $\wt{\alpha}_m$ has the form
$[\rho]$ for some $\rho\colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Hom}(\pi_1 \Sigma, \mathrm{U}(n))$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{inj}(B\circ \rho) \oplus d \simeq c \end{equation}
for some constant maps $c, d\colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathcal{V} (B\pi_1 \Sigma)$.
Since $\mathcal{V} (B\pi_1 \Sigma)$ is stably group-like with respect to the homotopy class of the constant map
$$S^m \to \mathrm{Map}_* (B\pi_1 \Sigma, B\mathrm{U}(1))$$
with image $B1$ (where $1$ is the trivial 1-dimensional representation of $\pi_1 \Sigma$), we may assume without loss of generality that $d \simeq BI_p$ for some $p$, where $I_p$ denotes the constant map $S^m \to \mathrm{Hom}(\pi_1 \Sigma, \mathrm{U}(p))$ with image the trivial representation. Equation (\ref{inj}) now implies that $B\circ (\rho \oplus I_p)$ is nullhomotopic, and the injectivity portion of Theorem~\ref{B-thm} implies that $\rho\oplus I_p$ must be nullhomotopic. Hence $[\rho] = 0$ in $\rh_m (\mathrm{Rep}(\pi_1 \Sigma))$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\section{Families of flat connections over the Heisenberg manifold}\label{H-sec}
In this section we study flat, unitary connections on complex vector bundles over the 3--dimensional Heisenberg manifold by combining the main results of this paper with computations due to Tyler Lawson.
We begin with a review of the definition and the basic properties of this manifold.
\subsection{Background.}
By definition, the discrete 3--dimensional Heisenberg group $H$ is the group of $3\times 3$ upper triangular integer matrices under ordinary matrix multiplication. This group sits as a (discrete) subgroup of the real Heisenberg group $H_\mathbb{R}$, which consists of all real upper triangular matrices. We will identify the real Heisenberg group with $\mathbb{R}^3$ via the function
$$\br{\begin{array}{rrrr} 1 & x & z \\
0 & 1& y \\
0& 0 &1
\end{array}} \mapsto (x,y,z)$$
(note, though, that we are using matrix multiplication to define the operation in $H_\mathbb{R}$, not addition in the vector space $\mathbb{R}^3$). The Heisenberg manifold is defined by
$$N^3 = \mathbb{R}^3/H,$$
where $H$ acts on $\mathbb{R}^3 \cong H_\mathbb{R}$ by (left) multiplication. This manifold is a Nil manifold in the sense of Thurston. We will not need this perspective here, so we refer to~\cite{Scott} for details.
It is an elementary exercise to check that $N^3$ is Hausdorff, and that the quotient map $\mathbb{R}^3\to N^3$ is a covering map. In particular, this means $N^3$ is an aspherical 3-dimensional manifold with fundamental group $H$ (and hence $N^3\simeq BH$), and $N^3$ is orientable since the action of $H$ on $\mathbb{R}^3$ is orientation-preserving. Moreover, $N^3$ is compact; this follows, for instance, from the fact that each closed unit cube in $\mathbb{R}^3$ surjects onto $N^3$.
Moreover, $N^3$ is a circle bundle over the 2-torus $\mathbb{R}^2/\mathbb{Z}^2$.
Indeed, consider the mapping
$$N^3 = \mathbb{R}^3/H \srm{q} \mathbb{R}^2/\mathbb{Z}^2$$
given by sending $[(x,y,z)]$ to $[(x,y)]$. It is elementary to check that this map is a fiber bundle with circle fibers; indeed, for each $[(x,y)]\in \mathbb{R}^2/\mathbb{Z}^2$, there exists $\epsilon>0$ such that the mapping
$$\xymatrix@R=1pt{ [x-\epsilon, x+\epsilon] \times [y-\epsilon, y+\epsilon] \times \mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z} \ar[r] & N^3\\
(x', y', [z]) \ar@{|->}[r] & [(x', y', z)]}
$$
is a homeomorphism onto
$$q^{-1} \left(\pi( [x-\epsilon, x+\epsilon] \times [y-\epsilon, y+\epsilon])\right),$$
where $\pi\colon\thinspace \mathbb{R}^2\to \mathbb{R}^2/ \mathbb{Z}^2$ is the quotient map.
The fibration sequence $S^1\to N^3 \to \mathbb{R}^2/\mathbb{Z}^2$ gives rise to a short-exact sequence on fundamental groups:
$$1\longrightarrow \mathbb{Z}\longrightarrow H \srm{q_*} \mathbb{Z}^2\longrightarrow 1.$$
Covering space theory gives canonical identifications of $\pi_1 (\mathbb{R}^3/H, [(0,0,0)])$ and $\pi_1 (\mathbb{R}^2/\mathbb{Z}^2, [(0,0)])$ with $H$ and $\mathbb{Z}^2$ (respectively), and under these identifications the map $q_*$
is simply
$$\br{\begin{array}{rrrr} 1 & a & c \\
0 & 1& b \\
0& 0 &1
\end{array}} \mapsto (a,b).$$
The kernel of $q_*$ is generated by
$$Z = \br{\begin{array}{rrrr} 1 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 1& 0 \\
0& 0 &1
\end{array}},$$
which is the commutator of the elements
$$ X = \br{\begin{array}{rrrr} 1 & 1 &0 \\
0 & 1&0 \\
0& 0 &1
\end{array}} \textrm{ and } Y = \br{\begin{array}{rrrr} 1 & 0 &0 \\
0 & 1&1 \\
0& 0 &1
\end{array}}.$$
It is elementary to check that $X$ and $Y$ generate $H$, and it follows that $\ker(q_*)$ is precisely the commutator subgroup of $H$, giving
\begin{equation}\label{ab}H_1 (N^3; \mathbb{Z}) \cong \mathbb{Z}^2.\end{equation}
Since $Z$ commutes with both $X$ and $Y$, we see that $\ker(q_*)$ is central, and it follows that $H$ is a nilpotent group.
Poincar\'{e} Duality, together with (\ref{ab}), shows that the (co)homology groups of $N^3$ are:
$$H_i (N^3; \mathbb{Z}) \cong H^i (N^3; \mathbb{Z}) \cong \begin{cases} \mathbb{Z}^2 & \textrm{ if } i=1,2,\\
\mathbb{Z} , & \textrm{ if } i=0,3.
\end{cases}
$$
In particular, the cohomology of $N^3$ is torsion-free.
\subsection{Flat bundles over the Heisenberg manifold}
To understand flat bundles over $N^3$, we will use the following fact.
\begin{proposition}\label{tf} If $X$ is a finite CW complex with torsion-free integral
cohomology, and $E\to X$ is a complex vector bundle whose Chern classes $c_i (E) \in H^{2i} (X; \mathbb{Z})$ vanish for $i\geqslant 1$, then $E$ is stably trivial.
In particular, if $M$ is a smooth manifold with torsion-free integral
cohomology and $E\to M$ is a vector bundle admitting a flat connection, then $E$ is stably trivial.
\end{proposition}
Note that for finite CW complexes, $H^*(X; \mathbb{Z})$ is torsion-free if and only if $H_*(X;\mathbb{Z})$ is torsion-free.
\begin{proof} The second statement follows from the first, because by Chern--Weil theory the Chern classes of a flat vector bundle over $M$ map to zero in $H^*(M; \mathbb{Q})$, and when $H^*(M; \mathbb{Z})$ is torsion-free the natural map
$$H^*(M; \mathbb{Z})\longrightarrow H^*(M; \mathbb{Q})$$
is injective (this follows by comparing the universal coefficient sequences for $\mathbb{Z}$ and $\mathbb{Q}$).
To prove the first statement, consider a vector bundle
$E\to X$ with $c_i (E) = 0$ for $i\geqslant 1$.
By~\cite[Section 2.5]{AHSS} (see also~\cite[Proposition 6.10]{Hendricks}) the complex $X$--theory of $X$ is torsion-free (and finitely generated), so the natural map $\wt{K}^*(X) \to \wt{K}^*(X)\otimes \mathbb{Q}$ is injective. Composing with the Chern character gives an injection
$$\wt{K}^*(X) \hookrightarrow \wt{K}^*(X)\otimes \mathbb{Q} \srm{\cong} \wt{H}^*(X; \mathbb{Q}).$$
Since $[E]$ maps to zero under this injection, we have $[E]=0$ in $\wt{K}^*(X)$, so $E$ is stably trivial as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary} \label{triv}
Let $G$ be a discrete group whose classifying space $BG$ has torsion-free integral cohomology and has the homotopy type of a CW complex $X$ of dimension at most $d$.
Then if $n \geqslant d/2$, the bundle $E_\rho$ associated to a representation $\rho\colon\thinspace G\to \mathrm{GL} (n)$ is always trivial.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition~\ref{tf}, we know that (the vector bundle associated to) $E_\rho$ is stably trivial, meaning that its classifying map
$$B\rho\colon\thinspace BG\simeq X \to B\mathrm{GL} (n)$$
becomes nullhomotopic after composing with the natural map
$$j\colon\thinspace B\mathrm{GL} (n)\to B\mathrm{GL}(n+n', \mathbb{C})$$
for sufficiently large $n'$. Since $j$ induces an isomorphism on homotopy groups up to dimension $2n$ and a surjection in dimension $2n+1$, the Whitehead Theorem~\cite[Section 10.3]{May-concise} shows that for all CW complexes
$X$ of dimension at most $2n$, the map
$$[X, B\mathrm{GL} (n)] \longrightarrow [X, B\mathrm{GL} (n)]$$
is bijective. In particular, since $j\circ B \rho$ is nullhomotopic, we conclude that $B \rho$ is itself nullhomotopic so long as $d \leqslant 2n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{H-rep}
The vector bundle associated to a complex representation of $H$ of is \emph{always} trivial.
Equivalently, every flat $\mathrm{GL} (n)$--bundle $($and every flat $\mathrm{U}(n)$--bundle$)$ over $N^3$ is trivial.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} Since $BH\simeq N^3$, Corollary~\ref{triv} shows that $E_\rho$ is trivial whenever the degree of $\rho$ is at least 2. Since the abelianization of $H$ is $\mathbb{Z}^2$, the space of representations $\rho\colon\thinspace H\to \mathrm{GL}(1, \mathbb{C})=\mathbb{C}^*$ is homeomorphic to $\mathbb{C}^* \times \mathbb{C}^*$, and in particular is path connected. This implies that the vector bundle associated to any such $\rho$ is isomorphic to the vector bundle associated to the trivial representation, which is a trivial vector bundle.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Homotopy in the space of flat connections over $N^3$}
Let $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ denote the space of flat connections on the trivial bundle $N^3\times \mathrm{U}(n)$ (or, equivalently, the space of flat unitary connections on $N^3 \times \mathbb{C}^n$). More precisely, $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ will denote the subspace of flat connections inside the Sobolev completion (with respect to a sufficiently strong Sobolev norm) of the space of all smooth connections on $N^3\times \mathrm{U}(n)$, as in~\cite[Section 5]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing}. In this section we study the homotopy groups of $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ as $n\to \infty$, using Lawson's calculation of the deformation $K$--theory of $H = \pi_1 (N^3)$~\cite{Lawson-thesis, Lawson-prod, Lawson-simul}.
It was proven in~\cite[Corollary 1.3]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing} that if $M^d$ is a closed, smooth, aspherical $d$--manifold with $H^3 (M; \mathbb{Q})\neq 0$, then $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (M)$ has infinitely many path components (so long as $n\geqslant (d+1)/2$). In particular, $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ has infinitely many path components so long as $n\geqslant 2$.
For manifolds $M$ of dimension $d> 3$,~\cite[Corollary 1.3]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing} also gives cohomological lower bounds on the rank of $\pi_m \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (M)$ for $0 < m \leqslant d-3 $, but for 3-manifolds no information about the homotopy groups $\pi_m \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (M)$ ($m\geqslant 1$) is obtained through the methods of that paper.
In this section, we will show that the homotopy groups of $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ are in fact very large. Moreover, while the classes in $\pi_m \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (M)$ produced by the methods in~\cite{Baird-Ramras-smoothing} all admit representatives lying inside a single gauge orbit, we produce classes in $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ that do not admit such representatives (although see Question~\ref{go}).
This result shows a sharp contrast between the topology of spaces of flat connections over 3--manifolds and the the corresponding spaces over surfaces.
Let $M^g$ denote a Riemann surface of genus $g$. Work of Atiyah--Bott~\cite{A-B}, Uhlenbeck~\cite{Uhl}, Daskalopoulos~\cite{Dask}, and R\"{a}de~\cite{Rade}
shows that the Yang--Mills functional
behaves roughly like a Morse function on the space of connections on $E = M^g\times \mathrm{U}(n)$, and its Morse indices can be calculated using methods from complex geometry. These ideas lead to the conclusion that $\pi_* \mathcal{A}^{\flat} (E)$ vanishes for $* \leqslant 2g(n-1)$. Work of Ho--Liu~\cite{Ho-Liu-ctd-comp-II, Ho-Liu-non-orient} extends these methods to non-orientable surfaces, leading to similar conclusions. For details and precise results, see Ramras~\cite{Ramras-surface, Ramras-YM}.
\begin{definition}\label{htpy-def}
Given a space $X$ together with a choice of representatives $\{x_C\}_{C\in \pi_0 (X)}$ for the path components of $X$, we define
$$\wt{\pi}_n (X) = \bigoplus_{C\in \pi_0 (X)} \pi_n (X, x_C).$$
Note that up to isomorphism, this group is independent of the chosen representatives $x_C$.
\end{definition}
Recall that the gauge group $\mathcal{G} = \mathrm{Map} (N^3, \mathrm{U}(n))$ acts on the space of all connections on $N^3 \times \mathrm{U}(n)$, and this action preserves the subspace $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ (more precisely, $\mathcal{G}$ is the Sobolev completion of the space of smooth maps with respect to the appropriate Sobolev norm). The based gauge group $\mathcal{G}_0 \leqslant \mathcal{G}$ is the kernel of the restriction map $\mathcal{G} \to \mathrm{U}(n)$ induced by evaluation at a fixed basepoint $x\in N^3$. The holonomy map induces a fibration sequence (in fact, a principal $\mathcal{G}_0$--bundle)
\begin{equation}\label{hol} \mathcal{G}_0 \srm{i_A} \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3) \xrightarrow{\mathcal{H}ol} \mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n))\end{equation}
for each $n$. The first map in this sequence is simply the inclusion of the gauge orbit of some flat connection $A\in \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$, and sends $g\in \mathcal{G}_0$ to $g\cdot A$.
We will refer to maps of the form $i_A$ (and their induced maps on $\wt{\pi}_*$) as (\emph{based}) \emph{gauge orbit inclusions}.
Our results about connections are an application of the following result of
Tyler Lawson~\cite[Section 4.2]{Lawson-simul}.
\begin{proposition}[Lawson]\label{Lawson-H}
For each $m\geqslant 0$, the group $K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (H)$ is free abelian of countably infinite rank.
\end{proposition}
The proof of this result relies on spectral sequences that compute $K^{\mathrm{def}}_* (G)$ from the integral homology of spaces of irreducible unitary representations of $G$. The construction of the spectral sequences, reviewed in Section~\ref{SS-sec}, makes essential use of the fact that $K^{\mathrm{def}}_* (G)$ is the homotopy of an $E_\infty$ ring spectrum, with the ring structure arising from tensor product of representations.
The representation-theoretic input for the computation comes from calculations of Lubotzky--Magid~\cite{LM} and Nunley--Magid~\cite{NM}.
\begin{theorem}\label{unbdd} Given $m, R\geqslant 1$, there exists $n_0\geqslant 1$ such that for all $n\geqslant n_0$, $\wt{\pi}_m (\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3))$ contains a subgroup $F$ satisfying:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The abelianization of $F$ is free of infinite rank;
\item $\mathcal{H}ol_* (F) \leqslant \wt{\pi}_m \mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n))$ has rank $R$; and
\item No non-trivial element in $F$ is in the image of a based gauge-orbit inclusion map.
\end{enumerate}
When $m=1$, and when $m$ is even, $(3)$ can be strengthened by replacing the based gauge group by the full gauge group.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Since $\wt{K}^{-m} (BH) \cong K^{-m} (N^3)$ is finitely generated,
Proposition~\ref{Lawson-H} implies that
the kernel of
$\wt{\alpha}_m$
is free abelian of countably infinite rank (note here that subgroups of free abelian groups -- of any rank -- are free~\cite[Appendix 2]{Lang-algebra}).
Now assume $m\geqslant 1$. By Proposition~\ref{univ}, the natural map
$$[S^m, \mathrm{Rep}(H)] \longrightarrow \rh_m (\mathrm{Rep} (H))\cong \wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_m (H)$$
is surjective. This means that we can choose families
$$\rho_i \colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n_i)),$$ $i=1, 2, \ldots$, such that the associated classes in $\rh_m (\mathrm{Rep} (H))$ are linearly independent and $\wt{\alpha}_*[\rho_i] = [B \circ \rho_i]$ is zero in $\rh_m (\mathcal{V} (BH))$ for each $i$.
Since $\mathcal{V} (BH)$ is stably group-like with respect to the homotopy class of the constant map $BH\to B\mathrm{U}(1)$,
this means that
$$B\circ \rho_i\colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n_i))$$ becomes nullhomotopic map after composing with the natural map
$$B\mathrm{U}(n_i)\to B\mathrm{U}(n_i+n_i')$$ (for sufficiently large $n_i'$). However, since $S^m\times BH$ is homotopy equivalent to $S^m\times N^3$, a CW complex of dimension $m+3$, it suffices to take $n_i' \geqslant (m+3)/2 - n_i$ (this is similar to the proof of Corollary~\ref{triv}). In particular, we can choose $k$ independent of $i$ such that
$$S^m \xrightarrow{B\circ \rho_i} \mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n_i)) \longrightarrow \mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n_i+k))$$
is nullhomotopic for each $i$.
Now fix an integer $R>0$. Choose $n_0$ such that $n_0 \geqslant n_i +k$ for at least $R$ values of the index $i$. Reordering the $\rho_i$ if necessary, we can assume that $n_1+k, \ldots, n_R + k \leqslant n_0$. Then for $i = 1, \ldots, R$, the map
$$S^m \xrightarrow{B\circ \rho_i} \mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n_i)) \longrightarrow \mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n_0))$$
is nullhomotopic, and it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{Br}B\circ \rho_i \simeq B\circ \wt{\rho_i (1)}
\end{equation}
as maps into $B\mathrm{U}(n_0)$. The same is true for each $n\geqslant n_0$.
Say $n\geqslant n_0$, and
let $G$ be the subgroup of $\wt{\pi}_m \mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n))$ generated by the elements $\{[\rho_i] - [\wt{\rho_i (1)}]\}_{i=1}^R$ (we use additive notation, although when $m=1$ the group $\wt{\pi}_m \mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n))$ may be non-abelian).
Then $G$
surjects onto the subgroup of $\rh_m (\mathrm{Rep} (H))$
generated by $\{[\rho_i]\}_{i=1}^R$, which is free abelian of rank $R$,
so the abelianization of $G$ must have rank $R$ (of course when $m > 1$, the group $G$ is already abelian).
By~\cite[Remark 5.6]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing}, the boundary map on homotopy groups associated to the principal bundle (\ref{hol})
can be identified (up to isomorphism) with the map
$$B_*\colon\thinspace \pi_* \mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n))\longrightarrow \pi_* \mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n)).$$
Note here that $\mathcal{G}_0$ is weakly equivalent to the continuous mapping space $\mathrm{Map}_* (N^3, \mathrm{U}(n))\simeq \mathrm{Map}_* (BH, \mathrm{U}(n))$, and
$\mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n))$ is the classifying space of $\mathrm{Map}_* (N^3, \mathrm{U}(n))$ (this result is originally due to Gottlieb~\cite{Gottlieb}). Hence
$$\pi_* \mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n))\cong \pi_{*-1} \mathcal{G}_0$$
for $*\geqslant 1$. It follows from (\ref{Br}) that for each $i$, $[\rho_i] - [\wt{\rho_i (1)}]$ maps to zero under the boundary map for the fibration sequence (\ref{hol}) (with appropriately chosen basepoints), and hence there exist maps $\alpha_i \colon\thinspace S^m \to \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ such that $\mathcal{H}ol_* ([\alpha_i]) = [\rho_i] - [\wt{\rho_i (1)}]$.
Let $A_i$ denote a flat connection in the image of $\alpha_i$, and let $\psi_i = \mathcal{H}ol(A_i)$. Consider the long exact sequence
$$\cdots \longrightarrow \pi_1 (\mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n)), \psi_i) \srm{\partial} \pi_0 \mathcal{G}_0 \xrightarrow{(i_{A_i})_*}\pi_0 \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3) \longrightarrow \cdots.$$
Again, $\partial$ can be identified (up to isomorphism) with
$$B_* \colon\thinspace \pi_1 (\mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n)), \psi_i) \longrightarrow \pi_1 (\mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n)), B\psi_i),$$
and the cokernel of this map has rank 1 by \cite[Corollary 1.3]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing}. This means there exists an element $g_i\in \mathcal{G}_0$ such that the path component $[g_i]$ has infinite order in
$$ \pi_0 \mathcal{G}_0 \cong \pi_1 (\mathrm{Map}_* (BH, B\mathrm{U}(n)), B\psi_i)$$
and the subgroup of $\pi_0 (\mathcal{G}_0)$ generated by $[g_i]$ intersects the image of $\partial$ trivially.
In general, given a principal bundle $K$--bundle
$$K \longrightarrow P \srm{q} B,$$
if $k_1, k_2 \in K$ and $p\in P$ are elements such that
$[k_1 \cdot p]=[k_2 \cdot p]$ in $\pi_0 P$, then $[k_1^{-1} k_2]$ is in the image of the boundary map
$$\pi_1 (B, q(p)) \srm{\partial} \pi_0 (G).$$
This means that for each fixed $i\in \{1,\ldots, R\}$, the elements $[\alpha_i], [g_i \cdot \alpha_i], [g_i^2 \cdot \alpha_i], \cdots$ are distinct in $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$.
Let $F\leqslant \wt{\pi}_m \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ be the subgroup generated by the elements
$[g_i^k\cdot \alpha_i]$, $i=1, \ldots, R$, $k = 0, 1, \ldots$. We claim that $F$ satisfies the conditions in the theorem. First, note that $\mathcal{H}ol_* (F) = G$, so $F$ satisfies (2).
Next, we show that the abelianization of $F$ is freely generated by the elements $[g_i^k\cdot \alpha_i]$. For simplicity, we give the argument when $m>1$, in which case $F$ is already abelian; the argument for $m=1$ just requires notational changes.
If $\sum_{i, k} \lambda_{i,k} [g_i^k \cdot \alpha_i]=0$, then summing the terms whose images lie in a particular path component $C$ of $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ will also give zero. By choice of the elements $g_i$, such a sum contains at most one term of the form $\lambda_{i,k} [g_i^k \alpha_i]$ for each $i$. Thus we have
$\sum_i \lambda_{i, k_i} [g_i^{k_i} \alpha_i] = 0$ for some collection of natural numbers $k_i$ ($i=1, \ldots, R$), and every term from the original sum whose image lies in $C$ appears in this new sum. But now
$$ 0 = \mathcal{H}ol_* (0) = \mathcal{H}ol_* \left(\sum_i \lambda_{i, k_i} [g_i^{k_i} \alpha_i]\right) =\sum_i \lambda_{i, k_i} [\rho_i],$$
and linear independence of the elements $[\rho_i]$ implies that $\lambda_{i, k_i} = 0$ for each $i$. Applying this argument to each path component, we see that all the coefficients $\lambda_{i,k}$ must be zero, as desired.
Finally, we consider gauge-orbit inclusions.
Say $f\in F$ is in the image of a based gauge-orbit inclusion. We need to prove that $f=0$.
We can write $f = \sum_{i, k} \lambda_{i,k} [g_i^k \cdot \alpha_i]$ (again, for notational convenience we work in the case $m>1$), and without loss of generality we may assume that there exists a single path component of $\mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ containing $g_i^k \cdot \alpha_i (S^m)$ for all $i$ and $k$. Then, as before, there can be at most one term in this sum for each $i$, so we can write $f = \sum_i \lambda_{i, k_i} [g_i^{k_i} \cdot \alpha_i]$.
Since $f$ is in the image of a based gauge-orbit inclusion $\mathcal{G}_0 \to \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$, and the composite
$$\mathcal{G}_0 \longrightarrow \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3) \longrightarrow \mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n))$$
is constant,
we have $\sum_i \lambda_{i, k_i} ([\rho_i] - [\wt{\rho_i (1)}]) = 0$. But this element maps to $\sum_i \lambda_{i, k_i} [\rho_i]$ in $\rh_m (\mathrm{Rep}(H))$,
which implies that all of the coefficients $ \lambda_{i, k_i}$ are in fact zero.
Finally, we consider the orbits of the full gauge group.
Evaluation at a point gives a split fibration
\begin{equation}\label{gf}\mathcal{G}_0 \to \mathcal{G}\to \mathrm{U}(n),
\end{equation}
and since $\mathrm{U}(n)$ is path connected, this means that $\wt{\pi}_* \mathcal{G} \cong \wt{\pi}_* \mathcal{G}_0 \times \pi_* \mathrm{U}(n)$ for each $*\in \mathbb{N}$.
In constructing the subgroup $F$, we are free to choose $n_0$ large with respect to $m$, so that $\pi_m \mathrm{U}(n) = 0$ whenever $n\geqslant n_0$ and $m$ is even. Thus when $m$ is even, the image of a full gauge-orbit inclusion is the same (in homotopy) as the image of the corresponding based gauge-orbit inclusion.
To obtain the desired conclusion when $m=1$, it suffices to show that for every gauge-orbit inclusion, the composite
$$\mathrm{U}(n) \srm{s} \mathcal{G} \longrightarrow \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3) \longrightarrow \mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n))$$
(where $s$ is a splitting of (\ref{gf}))
induces the zero map on $\pi_1$. The image of this composite map lies inside a single conjugation orbit inside $\mathrm{Hom}(H, \mathrm{U}(n))$, so this composite factors through the projection $\mathrm{U}(n) \to \mathrm{U}(n)/Z$, where $Z \cong \mathrm{U}(1)$ denotes the center of $\mathrm{U}(n)$. Since the inclusion $Z\hookrightarrow \mathrm{U}(n)$ induces isomorphisms on $\pi_0$ and $\pi_1$, we see that $\pi_1 (\mathrm{U}(n)/Z) = 0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} Despite the fact that $K^{\mathrm{def}}_* (H)$ is extremely large, we will see in Proposition~\ref{alpha-H} that for odd $m$, the map $\alpha_* \colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (H) \to K^{-m} (N^3)$ fails to be surjective.
\end{remark}
Here are two natural questions regarding the above results.
\begin{question} $\label{go}$ When $m$ is odd and greater than 1, are the classes in $\wt{\pi}_m \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$ constructed in Theorem~\ref{unbdd} in the images of gauge-orbit inclusions $\mathcal{G}\to \mathcal{A}^{\flat}_n (N^3)$$?$
\end{question}
\begin{question}\label{hd} Do the results of this section extended to higher-dimensional Heisenberg manifolds?
\end{question}
The first step in addressing Question~\ref{hd} would be to extend the underlying representation-theoretical work in~\cite{NM}.
\section{Multiplicativity of the topological Atiyah--Segal map}\label{image-sec}
In this final section, we explain how to enhance the topological Atiyah--Segal map into a map of $E_\infty$ ring spectra, so that the induced map $\alpha_*$ on homotopy becomes a ring homomorphism. This additional structure allows us to deduce further constraints on the image of $\alpha_*$ for certain groups, going beyond the general bounds provided by Theorem~\ref{BR}. In particular, we obtain such results for the 3--dimensional Heisenberg group and for groups satisfying Kazhdan's property (T).
In the case of property (T) groups, this leads to the following result regarding families of flat vector bundles.
\begin{theorem}\label{T-thm} Let $G$ be a discrete group satisfying property $(\emph{T})$, and assume that $BG$ has the homotopy type of a finite CW complex. Consider a family of representations
$$\rho\colon\thinspace S^{m}\to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$$
for some $m, n\geqslant 0$.
Then the bundle $E_\rho$ represents a torsion class in $\wt{K}^0 (S^m\times BG)$.
\end{theorem}
Note that by Lemma~\ref{tf}, when $H^*(BG; \mathbb{Z})$ is torsion-free the conclusion of Theorem~\ref{T-thm} can be strengthened: $E_\rho$ is in fact stably trivial.
There are many interesting groups to which this result applies. All torsion-free word hyperbolic groups admit finite CW models for $BG$ (such a model can be built using Rips complexes - see~\cite[Corollary 4.12]{Short-hyperbolic} for instance). There are many such groups with property (T), including cocompact, torsion-free lattices in Sp$(n, 1)$. The fact that lattices in Sp$(n, 1)$ have Property (T) is proven in~\cite{Bekka-T}.
\subsection{Bipermutative structures}\label{E-infty-sec}
Kronecker product of matrices makes the unitary permutative action sequences giving rise
to $K^{\mathrm{def}}(G)$ and $\mathcal{K} (BG)$ into \emph{bipermutative} action sequences, in the sense described in Section~\ref{ring-sec}; the details are just a routine extension of the computations in May~\cite[VI \S5]{May-577}.
We thus obtain functors $K^{\mathrm{def}}_\otimes$ and $\mathcal{K}_\otimes$ from the category of discrete groups to the category of $E_\infty$ ring spectra, which become naturally equivalent to $K^{\mathrm{def}}$ and $\mathcal{K}$ after applying the forgetful functor to spectra.
\begin{theorem}\label{TAS-mult} There is a natural transformation $\alpha^\otimes$ between the functors $K^{\mathrm{def}}_\otimes$ and $\mathcal{K}_\otimes$, which becomes equivalent to $\alpha$ after applying the forgetful functor from $E_\infty$ ring spectra to spectra. In particular, $\alpha_*$ is a homomorphism of unital rings, and $\wt{\alpha}_*$ is a homomorphism of non-unital rings.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} The desired natural transformation is again induced by the simplicial classifying space functor $B$, which respects the multiplicative structure as well as the additive structures (by functoriality, essentially). The statement regarding $\wt{\alpha}_*$ follows from the fact that $\wt{K}_* (G)$ and $\wt{\mathcal{K}}_* (BG)$ are simply the kernels of the compatible (ring) homomorphisms induced by the inclusion $\{1\} \to G$. So $\wt{\alpha}_*$ is just the induced map between these ideals.
\end{proof}
The defect in this construction is that while the homotopy groups $\mathcal{K}_* (X)$ agree \emph{additively} with the complex topological $K$--theory of $X$,
the ring structure
is not immediately accessible in general. Specifically, I do not know whether this ring always satisfies Bott periodicity. Nevertheless, applications of Theorem~\ref{TAS-mult} are provided in Section~\ref{image-sec} below, based on the following (rather limited) information regarding the rings $\mathcal{K}_* (X)$.
When $X = \{*\}$, May~\cite[VIII \S2]{May-577} showed that the ring $\mathcal{K}_* (*)$ is isomorphic to $\pi_* \mathbf{ku} = \mathbb{Z} [\beta]$, where $\beta\in \pi_2 (\mathbf{ku})\cong \mathbb{Z}$ is a generator. In other words, this is the standard Bott-periodic connective $K$--theory ring of a point. For each finite CW complex $X$, the injective ring map $ \mathcal{K}_* (*) \to \mathcal{K}_* (X)$ (induced by the projection $X\to *$) now embeds the ring $\pi_* \mathbf{ku}$ in $\mathcal{K}_* (X)$.
\begin{question} Is the additive isomorphism
$$\bigoplus_{m=0}^\infty K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (X) \cong \bigoplus_{m=0}^\infty K^{-m} (X)$$
an isomorphism of rings, where the latter graded group has the ring structure induced by tensor product of vector bundles?
More specifically, is there an isomorphism as above, induced by a natural map of $E_\infty$ ring spectra from $K^{\mathrm{def}}(X)$ to the function spectrum $F(X_+, \mathbf{ku})$? (Here $X_+$ denotes $X$ with a disjoint basepoint.)
\end{question}
We note that there is an unbased version of the topological monoid $\mathcal{V} (X)$, namely
$$\mathrm{Map}\left(X, \coprod_{n=0}^\infty B\mathrm{U}(n) \right),$$
which supports a multiplicative structure more closely related to the multiplication in $K$--theory. I do not know how to relate this monoid to $\mathcal{V}(X)_{h\mathrm{U}}$ in general, however.
\subsection{Deformation $K$--theory and spaces of irreducible representations}\label{SS-sec}
We need to review some of Lawson's results from~\cite{Lawson-prod, Lawson-simul}, which allow one to compute (unitary) deformation $K$--theory from homological information about spaces of irreducible representations.
First, consider the space
$$\ol{\mathrm{Rep}} (G) = \coprod_n \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))/\mathrm{U}(n),$$
where the quotient on the right is taken with respect to the conjugation action. Block sum makes this into a strictly commutative topological monoid. In fact, the sequence of spaces $$\mathrm{Rep}_n (G) = \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))/\mathrm{U}(n)$$
form a \emph{bipermutative} action sequence for the trivial groups $G_n = \{1\}$ (using Kronecker product to define the multiplicative structure) and the associated $E_\infty$ ring spectrum $R^{\mathrm{def}} (G)$ satisfies $\Omega^\infty R^{\mathrm{def}} (G) \simeq \ol{\mathrm{Rep}} (G)$ by Proposition~\ref{nerve}.
We define
$$R^{\mathrm{def}}_* (G) = \pi_* R^{\mathrm{def}} (G).$$
The quotient maps $\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n)) \to \mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))/\mathrm{U}(n)$ respect block sum and Kronecker product, so we obtain an induced map of $E_\infty$ ring spectra
$$K^{\mathrm{def}}(G) \longrightarrow R^{\mathrm{def}} (G).$$
At this point, we need to pass from the category of $E_\infty$ ring spectra
to the category of $\mathbf{S}$--algebras, as constructed in~\cite{EKMM}. The desired functor is discussed in~\cite[II.3]{EKMM}, and for us the important point is that it induces an isomorphism on the underlying homotopy rings. We will continue to use the same notation for our $E_\infty$ ring spectra and their associated $\mathbf{S}$--algebras, but it should be noted that smash products will be formed in the derived category of $\mathbf{S}$ modules or $\mathbf{ku}$--modules, as appropriate.
In~\cite{Lawson-prod}, it is shown that when $G$ is finitely generated, there is an equivalence $H\mathbb{Z} \wedge K^{\mathrm{def}}(G) \simeq R^{\mathrm{def}} (G)$. Fix a generator of $\pi_2 \mathbf{ku}$ and a map $\mathbf{S}^2 \to \mathbf{ku}$ representing it. Smashing this map with $\mathbf{ku}$ induces a map
$$\beta \colon\thinspace \Sigma^2 \mathbf{ku} \longrightarrow \mathbf{ku}$$
which we call the Bott map. Bott periodicity implies that the homotopy cofiber of $\beta$ is the Eilenberg--MacLane spectrum $H\mathbb{Z}$.
Smashing the homotopy cofiber sequence
$$\Sigma^2 \mathbf{ku}\longrightarrow \mathbf{ku} \longrightarrow H\mathbb{Z}$$
with $K^{\mathrm{def}}(G)$ (as $\mathbf{ku}$--modules; that is, applying $\wedge_\mathbf{ku}$) and taking homotopy groups now gives a long exact sequence of the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Lawson-LES}
\hspace{.3in} \cdots\srm{\partial} \ K^{\mathrm{def}}_* (G) \srm{\beta} K^{\mathrm{def}}_{*+2} (G) \longrightarrow R^{\mathrm{def}}_{*+2} (G) \srm{\partial} K^{\mathrm{def}}_{*-3} (G) \srm{\beta} \cdots.
\end{eqnarray}
Lawson also developed a spectral sequence for computing $R^{\mathrm{def}}_* (G)$ from the integral homology of the spaces
$$\mathrm{Irr}^+_n (G) \mathrel{\mathop :}= \mathrm{Rep}_n (G) / \mathrm{Sum}_n (G),$$
where $\mathrm{Sum}_n (G)$ denotes the subspace of reducible representations. Note that $\mathrm{Irr}^+_n (G)$ is the one-point compactification of complement of $\mathrm{Sum}_n (G)$ in $\mathrm{Rep}_n (G)$, and this complement is precisely the subspace of irreducible representations. The spectral sequence is constructed by considering the tower of spectra
$$\displaystyle{* = R^{\mathrm{def}}_{\leqslant 0} (G) \longrightarrow R^{\mathrm{def}}_{\leqslant 1} (G) \longrightarrow R^{\mathrm{def}}_{\leqslant 2} (G) \longrightarrow \ \cdots,}$$
where $R^{\mathrm{def}}_{\leqslant k}$ is the spectrum associated to the subspaces of $\mathrm{Rep}_n (G)$ consisting of representations whose irreducible summands all have dimension at most $k$; note that these subspaces provide a submonoid of $\ol{\mathrm{Rep}(G)}$, and in fact a permutative sequence of the sequence $(\mathrm{Rep}_n (G))_{n=0}^\infty$. The homotopy colimit of this sequence is $R^{\mathrm{def}} (G)$, and Lawson proves that there are homotopy cofiber sequences of spectra
$$R^{\mathrm{def}}_{k-1} (G) \longrightarrow R^{\mathrm{def}}_{k} (G)\longrightarrow H\mathbb{Z} \wedge \mathrm{Irr}^+_{k} (G)$$
for each $k\geqslant 1$.
In general, a sequence of spectra
$$X_0 \srm{f_0} X_1 \srm{f_1} X_2\srm{f_2} \cdots$$
gives rise to an
exact couple
$$\xymatrix{\displaystyle { \bigoplus_{q,p} \pi_q X_p} \ar[rr]^{\displaystyle{\oplus (f_p)_*}} && \displaystyle{\bigoplus_{q,p} \pi_q X_p} \ar[dl] \\ &
\displaystyle{\bigoplus_{q,p}} \pi_q (\hocofib f_p) \ar[ul]^\partial}$$
and hence to a spectral sequence of the form
\begin{equation*}E^1_{p,q} = \pi_{p+q} (\hocofib f_p ) \implies \pi_{p+q} \hocolim_i X_i,
\end{equation*}
with differentials
$$d^r_{p,q} \colon\thinspace E^r_{p, q} \longrightarrow E^r_{p-r, q+r-1}.$$
Since $H\mathbb{Z}$ is the spectrum representing integral homology, in the case at hand we obtain a spectral sequence
\begin{equation}\label{SS}E^1_{p,q} = \wt{H}_{p+q} ( \mathrm{Irr}^+_{p} (G); \mathbb{Z} ) \implies \pi_{p+q} R^{\mathrm{def}} (G).\end{equation}
Note that with this indexing, the spectral sequence can be non-zero in the quadrant where $p, q\geqslant 0$ and in the region where $-p\leqslant q < 0$.
\subsection{Groups satisfying Kazhdan's property (T)}
Property (T) has been widely studied since its introduction by Kazhdan in the late 1960s. Loosely speaking, property (T) is a weak rigidity property for (possibly infinite-dimensional) unitary representations of locally compact groups. For a broad introduction to this subject, see~\cite{Bekka-T}. We note that every discrete group with property (T) is finitely generated (this is a result of Kazhdan; for a proof see \cite[Theorem 1.3.1]{Bekka-T}).
Hence we can utilize the results of Lawson discussed above.
We need a lemma regarding finite-dimensional unitary representations of property (T) groups.\footnote{I learned this result from Rufus Willett.}
\begin{lemma} \label{T-comps}
Let $G$ be a discrete group with property $(\emph{T})$. Then the space $\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))/\mathrm{U}(n)$ is a finite, discrete space.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} This is a simple consequence of a theorem on S. P. Wang~\cite[Theorem 2.5]{Wang}, which states that if $\rho\colon\thinspace G\to \mathrm{U}(n)$ is an irreducible representation of a group with property (T), then the path component of $\rho$ in $\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))$ coincides with its conjugation orbit $O_\rho$.
Since $\mathrm{Hom} (G, \mathrm{U}(n))$ is compact and triangulable, it has finitely many path components, and hence Wang's theorem implies that there are only finitely many irreducible unitary representations in each dimension. Since every unitary representation is a direct sum of irreducibles, finiteness of $\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))/\mathrm{U}(n)$ follows immediately, and discreteness follows as well since this space is Hausdorff.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{K-T}
Let $G$ be a discrete group satisfying property $(\emph{T})$. Then $K^{\mathrm{def}}_{2m+1} (G)$ is trivial for all $m\geqslant 0$, and the iterated Bott map
$$\beta^m_* \colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}_0 (G) \cong \mathrm{Gr} (\pi_0 \mathrm{Rep} (G)) \longrightarrow K^{\mathrm{def}}_{2m} (G)$$
is an isomorphism for all $m\geqslant 1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{T-comps}, the space $\mathrm{Hom}(G, \mathrm{U}(n))/\mathrm{U}(n)$ is \emph{discrete} for every $n$, and it follows that the same is true for $\mathrm{Irr}^+_n (G)$. Hence the homology of these spaces vanishes in positive dimensions, and the spectral sequence (\ref{SS}) implies that $\pi_* (R^{\mathrm{def}} (G)) = 0$ for $*>0$. From the long exact sequence (\ref{Lawson-LES}), we now see that $K^{\mathrm{def}}_1 (G) \cong R^{\mathrm{def}}_1 (G) = 0$, and that
the Bott map $\beta_* \colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}_m (G) \longrightarrow K^{\mathrm{def}}_{m+2} (G)$ is an isomorphism for all $m\geqslant 0$.
\end{proof}
We need a standard fact regarding flat bundles, which follows from Chern--Weil theory.
\begin{lemma}\label{flat} Let $G$ be a discrete group such that $BG$ has the homotopy type of a finite CW complex, and let $\epsilon^n$ denote the trivial bundle $BG \times \mathrm{U}(n)$. Then for every representation $\rho\colon\thinspace G\to \mathrm{U}(n)$, the class $[E_\rho] - [\epsilon^n]$ is torsion in $\wt{K}^0 (BG)$.
\end{lemma}
A complete proof (of a much more general statement, in fact) can be found in~\cite[Theorem 3.5]{Baird-Ramras-smoothing}.
\begin{proposition}$\label{T-prop}$
Let $G$ be a discrete group satisfying property $(\emph{T})$, and assume that $BG$ has the homotopy type of a finite CW complex. Then the reduced unitary topological Atiyah--Segal map
$$\wt{\alpha}_m \colon\thinspace \wt{K}^\mathrm{def}_* (G) \longrightarrow \wt{K}^{-m} (G)$$
is zero when $m$ is odd, and its image is torsion when $m$ is even.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} For $m$ odd, this is immediate from Lemma~\ref{K-T}, so we consider the even case.
Let $G$ be a group satisfying the hypotheses.
By Theorem~\ref{TAS}, the image of $\alpha_0$
consists of the $K$--theory classes of the form $[E_\rho]$, where $\rho\colon\thinspace G\to \mathrm{U}(n)$ is a single representation.
Lemma~\ref{flat} implies that the image of $\alpha_0$ becomes torsion after modding out the summand $\pi_0 \mathbf{ku} \cong \mathbb{Z}$ corresponding to the trivial bundles. But since $\alpha_0 = \wt{\alpha}_0 \oplus \textrm{Id}_{\pi_0 \mathbf{ku}}$ (see (\ref{alpha-split})), this quotient is isomorphic to the image of $\wt{\alpha}_0$.
Now consider the commutative diagram
\begin{equation}\label{sq}
\xymatrix{ K^{\mathrm{def}}_{2m} (G) \ar[r]^-{\alpha_{2m}} & \mathcal{K}_{2m} (BG) \\
K^{\mathrm{def}}_0 (G) \ar[u]_-{\cong}^-{\beta^m_*} \ar[r]^-{\alpha_0} & \mathcal{K}_{0} (BG), \ar[u]_-{\cdot \alpha_0 (\beta^m)}
}
\end{equation}
where the map on the right is multiplication by $\alpha_0 (\beta^m)\in \pi_{2m} \mathcal{K} (BG)$.
Since $K^{\mathrm{def}}_* (BG)$ is a ring, this map is a group homomorphism.
Each group in the diagram contains a $\mathbb{Z}$ summand arising from the homotopy of $\mathbf{ku}$, via the maps induced by $G\to \{1\}$ and $BG\to \{*\}$, and these summands are complementary to the reduced subgroups.
All four maps in the diagram are isomorphisms when restricted to these $\mathbb{Z}$ summands,
so the image of $\beta^m \circ \alpha_0$, and hence also of $\alpha_{2m} \circ \beta^m$, has rank 1. Since $\beta^m_* \colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}_0 (G) \to K^{\mathrm{def}}_{2m} (G)$ is an isomorphism, we conclude that the image of $\alpha_{2m}$ has rank 1, and finally that
the image of $\wt{\alpha}_{2m}$ is torsion, as desired.
\end{proof}
We can now prove the promised result regarding families of flat bundles.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{T-thm}] By Proposition~\ref{T-prop} and Theorem~\ref{TAS}, we know that the class
$$\wt{\alpha}_m ([\rho]) = \pi_*^{-1} \left([E_\rho] - [E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}]\right)$$
is torsion in $\wt{K}^0 (S^{m} \wedge BG)$. But
$$\pi_*\colon\thinspace \wt{K}^0 (S^{m}\wedge BG)\longrightarrow \wt{K}^0 (S^{m} \times BG)$$
is (split) injective, so for some $k\geqslant 1$ we have
$$k[E_\rho] = k[E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}] \,\,\textrm{ in } \,\,K^0 (S^{m} \times BG).$$ Hence it will suffice to show that $l[E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}]$ represents a torsion class in reduced $K$--theory for some $l\geqslant 1$. This holds for the bundle $E_{\rho(1)} \to BG$ by Lemma~\ref{flat}, and since $E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}$ is a pullback of $E_{\rho(1)}$, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
It is tempting to attempt to prove Theorem~\ref{T-thm} directly from Lemma~\ref{T-comps}, which implies that the constituent representations $\rho(z)$ in a family $\rho$ are all isomorphic as $z$ varies over the sphere. This can be done when $\rho(z)$ is irreducible (as we explain), but it is not clear that this condition gives useful information in general: first, in any bundle over $S^m \times X$, the restrictions to $\{z\} \times X$ are all isomorphic; and second, there is no guarantee that one can find a continuous family of matrices $A_z$ satisfying $A\rho(z) A^{-1} = \rho (1)$ for all $z\in S^m$. When such a family $A$ exists, it is a simple matter to check that $E_\rho \cong E_{\wt{\rho(1)}}$.
However, such a family exists (up to homotopy), if and only if $[\rho]$ is in the image of the map
\begin{equation}\label{ub}[S^m, \mathrm{U}(n)] \longrightarrow [S^m, O_\rho]\end{equation}
induced by the quotient map $\mathrm{U}(n) \to \mathrm{U}(n)/\mathrm{Stab} (\rho) \cong O_\rho$. But this map often fails to be surjective; for instance when $m$ is even and $m<2n$, we have $\pi_m (\mathrm{U}(n)) = 0$, and
$$\pi_m (O_\rho) \cong \ker \left( \pi_{m-1} \left(\mathrm{Stab} (\rho) \right) \to \pi_{m-1} \mathrm{U}(n) \right).$$
When $\rho$ has more than one isotypical component, this kernel is non-trivial, and this prevents (\ref{ub}) from being surjective. On the other hand, when $\rho$ is irreducible, we have $O_\rho\cong P\mathrm{U}(n)$, the projective unitary group, and the map $\pi_m \mathrm{U}(n) \to \pi_m P\mathrm{U}(n)$ is indeed surjective for all $m\geqslant 0$, which gives an elementary proof of Theorem~\ref{T-thm} in this case.
\begin{remark}
Theorem~\ref{T-thm} provides a partial answer to~\cite[Question 3.20]{RWY}. If $G$ satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{T-thm}, then no non-trivial class in the \emph{reduced} rational $K$--homology of $BG$ can be detected by a spherical family of representations
(in the sense of~\cite[Definition 3.4]{RWY}). However, it remains possible that non-trivial classes can be detected by non-spherical families of representations.
\end{remark}
\subsection{The topological Atiyah--Segal map for the Heisenberg group}
In the case of the 3--dimensional integral Heisenberg group $H$, Lawson showed in~\cite{Lawson-thesis, Lawson-prod} that $R^{\mathrm{def}}_m (H) = 0$ for $m\geqslant 3$.
In dimension 1, Theorem~\ref{BR} tells us that the image of $\alpha_1 = \alpha_1^H$ has rank at most $ \beta_1 (N^3) = 2$.
Reasoning similar to the proof of Proposition~\ref{T-prop} yields the following result.
\begin{proposition}$\label{alpha-H}$
The image of the unitary topological Atiyah--Segal map
$$\alpha_{2m+1} \colon\thinspace K^{\mathrm{def}}_{2m+1} (H) \longrightarrow K^{-(2m+1)} (BH) \cong K^{-(2m+1)} (N^3)$$
has rank at most $2$ for each $m\geqslant 0$. In particular, $\alpha_*$ is never surjective in odd dimensions.
\end{proposition}
The failure of surjectivity is somewhat surprising, since as discussed in Section~\ref{H-sec}, Lawson showed that the deformation $K$--theory of $H$ is free abelian of infinite rank in each degree.
We note that the image of $\alpha_0^H$ has rank 1 by Theorem~\ref{BR}. It would be interesting to calculate the ranks of $\alpha_1^H$ and $\alpha_2^H$.
\def$'${$'$}
|
\section{Introduction}
The last decade has witnessed a rapid development of the theory of planar semimodular lattices; see the bibliographic section in the present paper and see many additional papers referenced in the book chapter Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite{czgggltsta}. Also, see \cite{czgggltsta} for a survey and for all concepts not defined here.
Since every planar semimodular lattice can be obtained from a slim semimodular lattice, a particularly intensive attention was paid to slim (hence necessarily planar) semimodular lattices; definitions will be given later.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline
{\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{czg-makay-fig02}}
\caption{A \pseq{} from $\inp$ to $\inq$ in a planar semimodular lattice}\label{figpsa}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{First target: the swing lemma}
Semimodularity is \emph{upper semimodularity}, that is, a lattice is \emph{semimodular} if the implication $x\preceq y\Rightarrow x\vee z\preceq y\vee z$ holds for all of its elements $x$, $y$ and $z$. A lattice $L$ is \emph{planar} if it has a planar Hasse-diagram.
Although Cz\'edli~\cite{czgdiagrectext}, which is a long paper, assigns a unique planar diagram to an arbitrary planar semimodular lattice,
we will not rely on \cite{czgdiagrectext} in the present elementary paper; we always assume that a planar diagram of our lattice is \emph{fixed} somehow. (Some concepts, like ``left'' or ''eye'', will depend on the choice of the diagram, but this fact will not cause any trouble.)
\emph{Edges} $\inp=[a,b]$ of (the diagram of) $L$ are
also called \emph{prime intervals}. For a prime interval $\inp=[a,b]$ of $L$, we denote $a$ and $b$ by $0_\inp$ and $1_\inp$, respectively. It follows from semimodularity that the edges divide the area of the diagram into quadrangles, which we call \emph{$4$-cells}; more details will be given later.
The least congruence collapsing (the two elements of) a prime interval $\inp$ is denoted by $\con(\inp)$ or $\con(0_\inp,1_\inp)$. In order to characterize whether $\con(\inp)$ collapses another prime interval $\inq$ or not, we need the following definition.
\begin{definition}\label{defSsd} Let $\inr$ and $\ins$ be distinct prime intervals of a planar semimodular lattice such that they belong to the same $4$-cell $S$.
\begin{enumeratei}
\item\label{defSsda} If $\inr$ and $\ins$ are opposite sides of $S$ then $\inr$ is \emph{cell-perspective} to $\ins$.
\item\label{defSsdb} If $1_\inr=1_\ins$, $1_\inr$ has at least three lover covers, and $0_\ins$ is neither the leftmost, nor the rightmost lower cover of $1_\inr$, then $\inr$ \emph{swings} to $\ins$.
\item\label{defSsdc} If $0_\inr=0_\ins$, $0_\inr$ has at least three covers, and $1_\ins$ is neither the leftmost, nor the rightmost cover of $0_\inr$, then $\inr$ \emph{tilts} to $\ins$.
\end{enumeratei}
For $n\in\set{0,1,2,\dots}$, a sequence
\begin{equation}
\vec{\inr}: \inr_0,\inr_1,\dots,\inr_n
\label{eqsseqpseq}
\end{equation}
of prime intervals is called an
\emph{\pseq} if
for each $i\in\set{1,\dots,n}$, $\inr_{i-1}$ is cell-perspective to or swings to or tilts to $\inr_i$. (The acronym ``SL'' comes from ``swing lemma''.) In $\vec{\inr}$, $\inr_0$ and $\inr_n$ play a distinguished role, and we often say that $\vec{\inr}$ is an
\emph{\pseq{} from $\inr_0$ to $\inr_n$}. It is \emph{cyclic} if $\inr_0=\inr_{n}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline
{\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{czg-makay-fig05}}
\caption{Cyclic \spseq{}s in $M_3$ and $M_6$}\label{figcyclM6}
\end{figure}
While \eqref{defSsda} describes a symmetric relation, \eqref{defSsdb} and \eqref{defSsdc} do not. To see some examples, consider the planar semimodular lattice in Figure~\ref{figpsa}. Then $\inr_{11}$ and
$\inr_{12}$ are mutually cell-perspective to each other, $\inr_{2}$ and $\inr_{3}$ mutually swing to each other, so do $\inr_{16}$ and $\inr_{17}$; $\inr_{8}$ tilts to $\inr_{9}$, and $\inr_{6}$ swings to $\inr_{7}$. However, $\inr_{9}$ does not tilt to $\inr_{8}$ and $\inr_{7}$ does not swing to $\inr_{6}$. The sequence $\inr_{0}$, $\inr_{1}$, \dots, $\inr_{24}$ is an \pseq{} from $\inp$ to $\inq$, and it remains an \pseq{} if we omit $\inr_{7}$ and~$\inr_{8}$. In Figure~\ref{figcyclM6}, the sequence $\inr_0$, $\inr_1$, \dots, $\inr_{14}=\inr_0$ is a cyclic \pseq{} in $M_6$.
\begin{remark}\label{remswtlslopes} If the diagram of $L$ belongs to the class $\mathcal C_1$ defined in Cz\'edli~\cite{czgdiagrectext}, then \eqref{defSsdb} and \eqref{defSsdc} from Definition~\ref{defSsd} can be formulated in the following, more visual way; see \cite{czgdiagrectext}. Namely, for \emph{distinct} edges $\inr$ and $\ins$ of the \emph{same} 4-cell,
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(ii)$'$] $\inr$ \emph{swings} to $\ins$ if $1_\inr=1_\ins$ and the slope of $\ins$ is neither $45^\circ$, nor $135^\circ$.
\item[(iii)$'$] $\inr$ \emph{tilts} to $\ins$ if $0_\inr=0_\ins$ and the slope of $\ins$ is neither $45^\circ$, nor $135^\circ$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
Note that the diagrams in this paper belong to $\mathcal C_2$, which is a subclass of $\mathcal C_1$; the reader may want (but does not need) to see \cite{czgdiagrectext} for details. Note also that, by \cite[Observation 6.2]{czgdiagrectext}, the condition that ``the slope of $\ins$ is neither $45^\circ$, nor $135^\circ$'' above is equivalent to the condition
that ``the slope of $\ins$ is strictly between neither $45^\circ$ and $135^\circ$''.
The following result was proved in Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite{czgggswing}.
\begin{gslemma}[Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite{czgggswing}]\label{genswinglemma} Let $L$ be a planar semimodular lattice, and let $\inp$ and $\inq$ be prime intervals of $L$. Then $\pair{0_\inq}{1_\inq}\in\con(\inp)$ if and only if there is an \pseq{} from $\inp$ to $\inq$.
\end{gslemma}
For a bit stronger but more technical variant of the swing lemma, see Theorem~\ref{thmstrongswinglemma}. Although the proof in Gr\"atzer and Cz\'edli~\cite{czgggswing} is short, it relies on a particular case, which we will call \emph{slim swing lemma}; see Section~\ref{sectionslimsl}. The slim swing lemma is due to Gr\"atzer~\cite{swinglemma} and there is another proof in Cz\'edli~\cite{czgdiagrectext}, but both these papers give long and complicated proofs. Furthermore, the proof in \cite{czgggswing} uses a lemma from Cz\'edli~\cite{czgrepres} that needed a three-page long proof.
So, if \cite{swinglemma} (or the relevant part of \cite{czgdiagrectext}) and the three pages from \cite{czgrepres} are also counted, the proof of the swing lemma is quite long. Our main goal is to give a much shorter proof.
\subsection*{Second target: the Swing lattice game}
Section~\ref{sectiongame} describes our online game called \emph{Swing lattice game}. Its purpose is to increase the popularity of lattice theory in an entertaining way. Besides the swing lemma, the game is also motivated by mechanical pinball games with flippers. A computer program realizing the game is available from the authors websites. Note that the game has a screen saver mode.
Another motivation for the Swing lattice game is that this paper is devoted to Professor Emeritus B\'ela Cs\'ak\'any, who is not only a highly appreciated algebraist and the scientific father or grandfather of almost all algebraists in Szeged, but he is interested in mathematical games. This interest is witnessed by, say, Cs\'ak\'any~\cite{csbhun} and
Cs\'ak\'any and Juh\'asz~\cite{csbjr}.
\color{black}
\section{Preliminaries and a survey}
Besides collecting some known facts that will be needed in our proof, the majority of this section gives a restricted survey on planar semimodular lattices. For a more extensive survey, the reader can resort to Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite{czgggltsta}.
A lattice $L$ is \emph{slim} if $J(L)$, the poset of join-irreducible elements of $L$, contains no 3-element antichain. By convention, both slim lattices and planar lattices are \emph{finite} by definition. By a \emph{diamond} we mean an $M_3$ (sub)lattice; see on the left of Figure~\ref{figcyclM6}. We know from Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite[Lemma 3-4.1]{czgggltsta} that slimness implies planarity. Hence, we will drop ``planar'' from ``slim planar semimodular''.
A sublattice $S$ of a lattice $L$ is a \emph{cover-preserving sublattice} if for any $a,b\in S$, $a\prec_S b$ implies that $a\prec_L b$.
By Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite[Thm.\ 3-4.3]{czgggltsta} or, originally, by Cz\'edli and Schmidt~\cite{czgschtJH} and Gr\"atzer and Knapp~\cite{gratzerknapp1},
a planar semimodular lattice is slim iff it contains no diamond iff it contains no cover-preserving diamond.
For example, by Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite[Theorem 3-4.3]{czgggltsta} or by Proposition~\ref{propczsdB}, Figure~\ref{figslima} is a slim semimodular lattice. Also, if we omit the four black-filled elements from
the planar semimodular lattice given Figure~\ref{figpsa}, then we obtain a slim semimodular lattice.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline
{\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{czg-makay-fig01}}
\caption{An \sseq{} from $\inp$ to $\inq$ in a slim semimodular (actually, a slim rectangular) lattice}\label{figslima}
\end{figure}
In (the fixed planar diagram of) a planar semimodular lattice $L$, let $a<b$ but $a\nprec b$. If $C_1$ and $C_2$ are maximal chains in the interval $[a,b]$ such that $C_1\cap C_2=\set{a,b}$ and every element of $C_2\setminus\set{a,b}$ is on the right of $C_1$, then the elements of $[a,b]$ that are simultaneously on the right of $C_1$ and on the left of $C_2$ form a \emph{region} of (the diagram of) $L$.
Note that $C_1\cup C_2$ is a subset of this region. For example, the elements belonging to the grey area in the second lattice of Figure~\ref{figindstep} form a region denoted by $R$.
We know from Kelly and Rival~\cite[Prop.\ 1.4 and Lemma 1.5]{kellyrival} that, in (the fixed planar diagram of) a planar lattice,
\begin{equation}
\parbox{6.4cm}{every interval is a region and every region is a cover-preserving sublattice.}
\label{eqtxtKellyRival}
\end{equation}
If we drop the condition $C_1\cap C_2=\set{a,b}$ above, then we obtain a union (actually, a so-called glued sum) of regions, which is clearly still a sublattice. More precisely, for elements $a<b$ in a planar lattice $L$,
\begin{equation}
\parbox{7.6cm}{if $C_1$ and $C_2$ are maximal chains in $[a,b]$ such that every element of $C_2$ is on the right of $C_1$, then $\{x\in [a,b]: x$ is on the right of $C_1$ and on the left of $C_2\}$ is a cover-preserving sublattice of $L$.}
\label{eqtxtmltKR}
\end{equation}
For more about planar lattice diagrams (of planar semimodular lattices), the reader may but need not look into Kelly and Rival~\cite{kellyrival} (or Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer \cite{czgggltsta}).
Minimal regions are called \emph{cells}. For example, the grey area in Figure~\ref{figslima} and that in the first lattice of Figure~\ref{figindstep} are cells; actually, they are \emph{$4$-cells} since they are formed by four vertices and four edges. In (the planar diagram of) a planar semimodular lattice, every cell is a 4-cell; see Gr\"atzer and Knapp~\cite[Lemma 4]{gratzerknapp1}. Hence, by Cz\'edli and Schmidt~\cite[Lemma 13]{czgschvisual},
\begin{equation}
\parbox{9 cm}{If $x$ and $y$ are neighboring lower covers of an element $z$ in a planar semimodular lattice, then $\set{x\wedge y, x, y, z}$ is a 4-cell.}
\label{eqtxttwcodhBtn}
\end{equation}
A 4-cell can be turned into a diamond by adding a new element into its interior. The new element is called an \emph{eye} and we refer to this step as \emph{adding an eye}. Note that after adding an eye, one ``old'' 4-cell is replaced with two new 4-cells.
We know from Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite[Cor.\ 3-4.10]{czgggltsta} that
\begin{equation}
\parbox{8.5cm}{
every planar semimodular $L$ lattice is obtained from a slim semimodular lattice $L_0$ by adding eyes, one by one.}
\label{eqtxtbddyS}
\end{equation}
Note that $L_0$ is a sublattice of $L$. Although $L_0$ is not unique as a sublattice, it is unique up to isomorphism; see \cite[Lemma 3-4.8]{czgggltsta}.
We call $L_0$ the \emph{full slimming} of $L$, while $L$ is an \emph{antislimming} of $L_0$.
Note that the full slimming of $L$ can be obtained from $L$ by omitting all eyes.
For example, the full slimming $L_0$ of the planar semimodular lattice $L$ given in Figure~\ref{figpsa} is obtained by omitting the four black-filled elements. Conversely, we obtain $L$ from $L_0$ by adding eyes, four times.
Based on, say, Gr\"atzer and Knapp~\cite[Lemma 8]{gratzerknapp1}, eyes are easy to recognize: an element $x$ of a planar semimodular lattice is an eye if and only if $x$ is doubly (that is, both meet and join) irreducible, its unique lower cover, denoted by $\dstar x$, has at least three covers, and $x$ is neither the leftmost, nor the rightmost cover of $\dstar x$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline
{\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{czg-makay-fig03}}
\caption{Inserting a fork}\label{figaddfork}
\end{figure}
\begin{definition}\label{defstrswtlt}
Let $\inr$ and $\ins$ distinct edges of the \emph{same} 4-cell in (the planar diagram of) a planar semimodular lattice $L$, and let $\Eye(L)$ denote the set of eyes of $L$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(ii)$'$] $\inr$ \emph{strongly swings} to $\ins$ if $\inr$ swings to $\ins$ and, in addition, the implication $0_\inr\in \Eye(L) \Longrightarrow 0_\ins\in\Eye(L)$ holds.
\end{enumerate}
The sequence $\vec\inr$ in \eqref{eqsseqpseq} will be called an \spseq{} if for each $i\in\set{1,\dots,n}$, $\inr_{i-1}$ is cell-perspective to or tilts to or strongly swings to $\inr_i$. (The acronym ``SSL'' comes from ``strong swing lemma''.)
\end{definition}
In a planar semimodular lattice,
\begin{equation}
\text{every \spseq{} is a \pseq{},}
\label{eqtxtspseqpseq}
\end{equation}
but not conversely. For example, in Figure~\ref{figpsa}, the two-element sequence $\inr_{18}$, $[x,y]$ is an \pseq{} but not an \spseq. Now, we are in the position to formulate the following theorem. By \eqref{eqtxtspseqpseq}, it implies Lemma~\ref{genswinglemma}, the swing lemma.
\begin{strswlemma}[Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite{czgggswing}]\label{thmstrongswinglemma}
If $L$ is a planar semimodular lattice and $\inp$ and $\inq$ are prime intervals of $L$, then the following two implications hold.
\begin{enumeratei}
\item\label{thmstrongswinglemmaa} If there exists an \pseq{} from $\inp$ to $\inq$ $($in particular, if there is an \spseq{} from $\inp$ to $\inq)$, then $\pair{0_\inq}{1_\inq}\in\con(\inp)$.
\item\label{thmstrongswinglemmab} Conversely, if $\pair{0_\inq}{1_\inq}\in\con(\inp)$, then there exists an \spseq{} from $\inp$ to $\inq$.
\end{enumeratei}
\end{strswlemma}
By \eqref{eqtxtbddyS}, in order to have a satisfactory insight into planar semimodular lattices, it suffices to describe the slim ones. In order to do so, we need the following concepts.
Based on Cz\'edli and Schmidt~\cite{czgschvisual}, Figure~\ref{figaddfork} visualizes how we \emph{insert a fork} into a 4-cell $S$ of a slim semimodular lattice $L$ in order to obtain a new slim semimodular lattice $L'$. First, we add a new element $s$ into the interior of $S$. Next, we add two lower covers of $s$ that will be on the lower boundary of $S$ as indicated in the figure.
Finally, we do a series of steps: as long as there is a chain $u\prec v\prec w$ such that $T=\set{x=z\wedge u, z, u, w=z\vee u}$ is a
4-cell in the original $L$ and $x\prec z$ at the present stage, then we insert a new element $y$ such that $x\prec y\prec z$ and $y\prec v$; see on the right of the figure. The new elements of $L'$, that is, the elements of $L'\setminus L$, are the black-filled ones in Figure~\ref{figaddfork}.
A doubly irreducible element $x$ on the boundary of a slim semimodular lattice is called a \emph{corner} if it has a unique upper cover $\ustar x$ and a unique lower cover $\dstar x$, $\ustar x$ covers exactly two elements, and $\dstar x$ is covered by exactly two elements. For example, after omitting the black-filled elements from Figure~\ref{figpsa}, there are exactly two corners, $u$ and $v$. Note that there is no corner in the slim semimodular lattice given by Figure~\ref{figslima}. A \emph{grid} is the (usual diagram of the) direct product of two finite non-singleton chains.
\begin{proposition}[Cz\'edli and Schmidt~\cite{czgschvisual}]\label{propczsdB}
Every slim semimodular lattice with at least three elements can be obtained from a grid such that
\begin{enumeratei}
\item\label{propczsdBa} first we add finitely many forks one by one,
\item\label{propczsdBb} and then we remove corners, one by one, finitely many times.
\end{enumeratei}
Furthermore, all lattices obtained in this way are slim and semimodular.
\end{proposition}
Note that by Cz\'edli and Schmidt~\cite[Prop.\ 2.3]{czgschslim2}, the lattices we obtain by \eqref{propczsdBa} but without \eqref{propczsdBb} are exactly the \emph{slim rectangular lattices} introduced by Gr\"atzer and Knapp~\cite{gratzerknapp3}; see Figure~\ref{figslima} for an example. We can add eyes to these lattices; what we obtain in this way are the so-called \emph{rectangular lattices}; see ~\cite[Prop.\ 2.3]{czgschslim2} and Gr\"atzer and Knapp~\cite{gratzerknapp3}.
\section{Slim swing lemma}\label{sectionslimsl}
The slim lemma was first stated and proved only for slim semimodular lattices; to make a terminological distinction, we will refer to it as the ``slim swing lemma".
\begin{definition}
The sequence $\inr$ from \eqref{eqsseqpseq} is an \emph{\sseq} if for each $i\in\set{1,\dots,n}$, $\inr_{i-1}$ is cell-perspective to or swings to $\inr_i$.
\end{definition}
For example, the edges $\inr_0$, $\inr_1$, \dots, $\inr_{16}$ in Figure~\ref{figslima} form an \sseq.
In a planar semimodular lattice, every \sseq{} is an \pseq{} but, in general, not conversely.
Since every element of a slim semimodular lattice has at most two covers by
Gr\"atzer and Knapp~\cite[Lemma 8]{gratzerknapp1}, tilts are impossible in \emph{slim} semimodular lattices. That is,
\begin{equation}
\parbox{8.2cm}{In a \emph{slim} semimodular lattice, \pseq{}s, \spseq{}s, and \sseq{}s are exactly the same.}
\label{eqtxthgmnB}
\end{equation}
Therefore, the following statement is a particular case of Lemma~\ref{genswinglemma}.
\begin{sslemma}[Gr\"atzer~\cite{swinglemma}]\label{specswinglemma} Let $L$ be a slim semimodular lattice, and let $\inp$ and $\inq$ be prime intervals of $L$. Then $\pair{0_\inq}{1_\inq}\in\con(\inp)$ if and only if there is an \sseq{} from $\inp$ to $\inq$.
\end{sslemma}
Note that Gr\"atzer~\cite{swinglemma} states this lemma in another way. In order to see that our version implies his version trivially, two easy observations will be given below.
For prime intervals $\inp$ and $\inq$, if $1_\inp\vee 0_\inq= 1_\inq$ and $1_\inp\wedge 0_\inq=0_\inp$, then $\inp$ is \emph{up-perspective} to $\inq$ and $\inq$ is \emph{down-perspective} to $\inp$. \emph{Perspectivity} is the disjunction of up-perspectivity and down-perspectivity. As an important property of \sseq s, we claim that, for prime intervals $\inp$ and $\inq$ in a finite semimodular lattice $L$,
\begin{equation}
\parbox{9cm}{If $\inp$ is up-perspective to $\inq$, then there is an \sseq{} $\vec\inr=\tuple{\inr_0,\dots,\inr_n}$ from $\inp$ to $\inq$ such that $\inr_{i-1}$ is upward cell-perspective to $\inr_i$ for all $i\in\set{1,\dots, n}$. Conversely, if there is such an $\vec\inr$, then $\inp$ is up-perspective to $\inq$.}
\label{eqtxbsLsP}
\end{equation}
The second part of \eqref{eqtxbsLsP} is trivial. In order to see its first part, assume that $\inp$ is up-perspective to $\inq$, and pick maximal chain $0_\inp=x_0\prec x_1\prec\dots\prec x_n=0_\inq$. For $i\in\set{1,\dots, n}$, $\set{x_{i-1}, x_i, 1_\inp\vee x_{i-1},1_\inp\vee {x_i}}$ is a covering square by semimodularity. (For more details, if necessary, see the explanation around Figure 1 in Cz\'edli and Schmidt~\cite{czgschthowtoderive}.) Covering squares are 4-cells by Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite[Thm.\ 3-4.3(v)]{czgggltsta}, whence
there is an \sseq{} $\vec\inr$ from $\inp$ to $\inq$ with the required property. This proves
\eqref{eqtxbsLsP}.
It is clear from Cz\'edli and Schmidt~\cite[Lemma 2.8]{czgschtJH}, and it can also be derived from Proposition~\ref{propczsdB} by induction, that in a slim semimodular lattice,
\begin{equation}
\parbox{8.5cm}{For a \emph{repetition-free} \sseq{} $\vec\inr$ from \eqref{eqsseqpseq} in a \emph{slim} semimodular lattice, if $\inr_{i-1}$ is up-perspective to $\inr_i$, then $\inr_{j-1}$ is up-perspective to $\inr_j$ for all $j\in\set{1,2,\dots, i}$.}
\label{eqtxtlttEcS}
\end{equation}
Now it is clear that, by \eqref{eqtxbsLsP} and \eqref{eqtxtlttEcS}, Lemma~\ref{specswinglemma} and
its original version in Gr\"atzer~\cite{swinglemma} mutually imply each other.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline
{\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{czg-makay-fig04}}
\caption{Illustration for \eqref{eqtxtindstp}}\label{figindstep}
\end{figure}
\section{The short proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thmstrongswinglemma}]
Part \eqref{thmstrongswinglemmaa}
follows easily from known results and \eqref{eqtxtspseqpseq}. For example, it follows from Cz\'edli~\cite[Theorems 3.7 and 5.5 (or 7.3)]{czgtrajcolor} and Cz\'edli~\cite[Thm.\ 2.2, Cor.\ 2.3, and Prop.\ 5.10]{czgdiagrectext},
; however, the reader will certainly find it more convenient to observe that both $\con(w_\ell,t)$ and $\con(w_r,t)$
collapses the pairs $\pair{s_i}{t}$ of $\sf S^{(n)}_7$ in \cite[Fig.\ 1]{czgtrajcolor} by routine calculations.
Before proving part \eqref{thmstrongswinglemmab}, some preparation is needed.
For $n\in\set{3,4,5,\dots}$, the $n+2$-element modular lattice of length 2 is denoted by $M_n$. For example, $M_3$ and $M_6$ are given in Figure~\ref{figcyclM6}. As this figure suggests, it is easy to see that, for $n\in\set{3,4,5,\dots}$,
\begin{equation}
\text{$M_n$ has a cyclic \spseq{} that contains all edges.}
\label{eqtxtM6}
\end{equation}
For a prime interval $\inr$ and elements $u\leq v$ of a planar semimodular lattice $L$, we will say that $\inr\,$ \emph{\spspan s} (respectively, $\inr\,$ \emph{\sspan s}) the interval $[u,v]$ if there is an $n\in\set{0,1,2,\dots}$ and there exists a maximal chain $u=w_0\prec w_1\prec \dots \prec w_n=v$ in $[u,v]$ such that, for each $i\in\set{1,\dots,n}$, there is an \spseq{} (respectively, an \sseq{}) from $\inr$ to $[w_{i-1},w_i]$. First, we focus on \sspan{}ning. We claim the following; see Figure~\ref{figindstep}.
\begin{equation}
\parbox{8.5cm}{If $a,b,c$ are elements of a \emph{slim} semimodular lattice $K$ such that $a\prec b$, then $[a,b]$ \sspan s $[a\wedge c, b\wedge c]$.}
\label{eqtxtindstp}
\end{equation}
We prove \eqref{eqtxtindstp} by induction on $|K|$. The base of the induction, $|K|\leq 4$, is obvious. We can assume that $c\leq b$, because otherwise we can replace $c$ with $b\wedge c$. Actually, we assume that $c<b$ but $c\nleq a$, since otherwise the satisfaction of \eqref{eqtxtindstp} is trivial. Pick an element $d$ such that $c\leq d\prec b$; see Figure~\ref{figindstep}. Since $c\nleq a$ and $a\prec b$, $a$ and $d$ are distinct lower covers of $b$. By left-right symmetry, we assume that $a$ is to the left of $d$. There are two cases to consider.
First, assume that among the lower covers of $b$, $a$ is immediately to the left of $d$; see the first lattice of Figure~\ref{figindstep}. Let $a'=a\wedge d$. By \eqref{eqtxttwcodhBtn}, $\set{a',a,d,b}$ is a 4-cell. Hence, there is a ``one-step'' \sseq{} from $[a,b]$ to $[a',d]$, which consists of a downwards cell-perspectivity.
Observe that $a\wedge c=a\wedge (d\wedge c)=(a\wedge d)\wedge c=a'\wedge c$ and the principal ideal $\ideal d$ does not contain $a$. Hence, $|\ideal d|<|K|$. Thus, the induction hypotheses yields that $[a',d]$ \sspan s $[a'\wedge c, c]=[a\wedge c, b\wedge c]$.
This is witnessed by some \sseq s; combining them with the one-step \sseq{} mentioned above, we conclude that $[a,b]$ \sspan s $[a\wedge c, b\wedge c]$, as required.
Second, assume that there is a lower cover of $b$ strictly to the right of $a$ and to the left of $d$. Let $e$ denote the rightmost one of these lower covers and let $a':=e\wedge d$; see the second lattice in Figure~\ref{figindstep}. Since $\set{a',e,d,b}$ is a 4-cell by \eqref{eqtxttwcodhBtn}, there is a one-step \sseq{} from $[e,b]$ to $[a',d]$. Combining it with a sequence of swings from $[a,b]$ to $[e,b]$, we obtain a \sseq{} from $[a,b]$ to $[a',d]$.
Applying the induction hypothesis to $\ideal d$, we obtain that $[a',d]$ \sspan s
$[a'\wedge c, d\wedge c]= [a'\wedge c, b\wedge c]$. Taking the above-mentioned \sseq{} into account, it follows that $[a,b]$ \sspan s
$[a'\wedge c, c]= [a'\wedge c, b\wedge c]$.
We know from Cz\'edli and Gr\"atzer~\cite[Exercise 3.4]{czgggltsta} and it also follows from \eqref{eqtxtKellyRival} that $a\wedge d\leq e\wedge d=a'$. Hence,
$a\wedge c= a\wedge d\wedge c \leq a'\wedge c$.
In the interval $[a\wedge c,b]$, let $C_2$ be a maximal chain such that $\set{a'\wedge c, a', e}\subseteq C_2$.
The elements of $[a\wedge c,b]$ on the left of $C_2$ form a cover-preserving sublattice $L_1$, because \eqref{eqtxtmltKR} applies for the leftmost maximal chain of $[a\wedge c,b]$ and $C_2$. Since $a$ is on the left of $e$, $a\in L_1$ by Kelly and Rival~\cite[Prop.\ 1.6]{kellyrival}.
Pick a maximal chain $C_1$ in $L_1$ such that $a\in C_1$, and let $R$ denote the cover-preserving sublattice of $L_1$ determined by $C_1$ and $C_2$ in the sense of \eqref{eqtxtmltKR}. Since $d$ is strictly on the right of $e\in C_2$, $d\notin R$ by Kelly and Rival~\cite[Prop.\ 1.6]{kellyrival}. Thus, $|R|<|K|$. Hence, the induction hypothesis applies for $\tuple{R, a, b, a'\wedge c}$ in the role of $\tuple{K, a, b, c}$, and we obtain that
$[a,b]$ \sspan s $[a\wedge c,a'\wedge c]$ in $R$. Since $R$ is a cover-preserving sublattice and also a region, the same holds in $K$. Therefore, since $[a,b]$ \sspan s both $[a\wedge c,a'\wedge c]$ and $[a'\wedge c,b\wedge c]$, it \sspan s $[a\wedge c,b\wedge c]$. This proves \eqref{eqtxtindstp}.
Next, we claim that
\begin{equation}
\parbox{8.2cm}{If $a,b,c$ are elements of a \emph{planar} semimodular lattice $L$ such that $a\prec b$, then $[a,b]$ \spspan s $[a\wedge c, b\wedge c]$.}
\label{eqtxtindPln}
\end{equation}
By \eqref{eqtxthgmnB}, \eqref{eqtxtindPln} generalizes \eqref{eqtxtindstp}.
In order to prove \eqref{eqtxtindPln}, let $K$ denote the full slimming of $L$. Its elements and edges will be called \emph{old}, while the rest of elements and edges are \emph{new}; this terminology is explained by \eqref{eqtxtbddyS} and the paragraph following it. The new elements are exactly the eyes.
As in the proof of \eqref{eqtxtindstp}, we can assume that $c<b$ but $c\nleq a$.
First, we deal only with the case where $[a,b]$ is an \emph{old edge}.
Since (the segments of) \sseq s are also \spseq s by \eqref{eqtxthgmnB}, \eqref{eqtxtM6} implies that
\begin{equation}
\parbox{9.7cm}{if $\ins_1$ and $\ins_2$ are old edges and there is an \sseq{} from $\ins_1$ to $\ins_2$ in $K$, then there is an \spseq{} from $\ins_1$ to $\ins_2$ in $L$.}
\label{eqtxtKthnLvn}
\end{equation}
Hence, for an old prime interval $\ins$ and old elements $u\leq v$,
\begin{equation}
\parbox{8.8cm}{if $\ins$ \sspan s $[u,v]$ in $K$, then $\ins\,$ \spspan s $[u,v]$ in $L$.}
\label{eqtxtLbnsPns}
\end{equation}
If $c$ is also an old element, then $\set{a\wedge c,b\wedge c}\subseteq K$, so the validity of \eqref{eqtxtindPln} follows from \eqref{eqtxtindstp} and \eqref{eqtxtLbnsPns}. Hence, we can assume that $c$ is an eye. Let $\ustar c$ and $\dstar c$ stand for its (unique) cover and lower cover, respectively; they are old elements. Since $c<b$ and $c$ is meet-irreducible, $\ustar c \leq b$. \eqref{eqtxtindstp} yields that $[a,b]$ \sspan s $[a\wedge \dstar c, b\wedge \dstar c]=[a\wedge \dstar c,\dstar c]$ in $K$. Since $c\nleq a$, $a\wedge c<c$. Using that $c$ is join-irreducible, we have that $a\wedge c=a\wedge \dstar c$. Hence, by \eqref{eqtxtLbnsPns},
\begin{equation}
\text{$[a,b]$ \spspan s $[a\wedge c,\dstar c]=[a\wedge \dstar c,\dstar c]$ in $L$.}
\label{eqtxtabspstcc}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, $a\wedge \ustar c< \ustar c$, since otherwise $c<\ustar c\leq a$ would contradict $c\nleq a$. \eqref{eqtxtindstp} yields that $[a,b]$ \sspan s $[a\wedge \ustar c, b\wedge \ustar c]=[a\wedge \ustar c,\ustar c]$. Thus, we can pick an old element $w$ such that $a\wedge \ustar c\leq w\prec \ustar c$ and there is an \sseq{} from $[a,b]$ to $[w,\ustar c]$ in $K$. By \eqref{eqtxtKthnLvn}, we have an \spseq{} from $[a,b]$ to $[w,\ustar c]$ in $L$. By left-right symmetry, we can assume that $w$ is to the left of $c$. Listing them from left to right, let $w=w_0, w_1,\dots, w_t$ be the old lower covers of $\ustar c$ that are neither strictly to the left of $w$, nor strictly to the right of $c$; see Figure~\ref{figabwcst} for $t=3$.
Note that the old elements are empty-filled while the new ones are black-filled, and the elements in the figure do not form a sublattice. Let $w_{t+1}$ be the neighboring old lower cover of $\ustar c$ to the right of $w_t$ in $K$; it is also to the right of $c$.
By \eqref{eqtxttwcodhBtn}, $\set{w_{i-1}\wedge w_i, w_{i-1}, w_i, \ustar c}$ is a 4-cell of $K$ for $i\in\set{1,\dots,t}$; these 4-cells are colored by alternating shades of grey in the figure. Clearly, $[w_{i-1}, \ustar c]$ strongly swings to $[w_{i}, \ustar c]$ in $K$, for $i\in\set{1,\dots,t}$. Hence, there is an \sseq{} in $K$ from $[w,\ustar c]=[w_0,\ustar c]$ to $[w_t,\ustar c]$. By \eqref{eqtxtKthnLvn}, we have an \spseq{} from $[w,\ustar c]$, and thus also from $[a,b]$, to $[w_t,\ustar c]$.
Also, since $\dstar c$, $\ustar c$, $w_t$, $w_{t+1}$, and the lower covers of $\ustar c$ between $w_t$ and $w_{t+1}$ form a region in $L$ and a cover-preserving sublattice $M_n$ for some $n$, \eqref{eqtxtM6} allows us to continue the above-mentioned \spseq{} to $[\dstar c, c]$. Hence, $[a,b]$ \spspan s $[\dstar c, c]=[\dstar c, b\wedge c]$ in $L$.
This fact and \eqref{eqtxtabspstcc} yield that $[a,b]\,$ \spspan s $[a\wedge c, b\wedge c]$ in $L$, proving \eqref{eqtxtindPln} for \emph{old edges} $[a,b]$.
Second, we assume that $[a,b]$ is a new edge. If $b$ is an eye, which has only one lower cover, then $c<b$ gives that $c\leq a$, whence $[a\wedge c, b\wedge c]$ is a singleton, which is clearly \spspan{}ned. So we can assume that $a$ is an eye with upper and lover covers $\ustar a=b$ and $\dstar a$, respectively. Let $S=\set{\dstar a,w_\ell,w_r,b}$ denote the 4-cell of $K$ into which $a$ has been added. Here this is understood so that several eyes could have been added to this 4-cell simultaneously, whence $[\dstar a,b]_L$ is isomorphic to $M_n$ for some $n\in\set{3,4,\dots}$.
Applying \eqref{eqtxtM6} to $[\dstar a,b]_L$ and using \eqref{eqtxtKellyRival}, we obtain that
\begin{equation}
\text{$[a,b]$ \spspan{}s both $[\dstar a, w_r]$ and $[w_r, b]$ in $L$.}
\label{eqtxtAbsslPsn}
\end{equation}
By the already proved ``old edge version'' of \eqref{eqtxtindPln},
\begin{equation}
\text{$[\dstar a, w_r]$ \spspan{}s $[\dstar a\wedge c, w_r\wedge c]$ and $[w_r, b]$ \spspan{}s $[w_r\wedge c, b\wedge c]$.}
\label{eqtxtdzBnWqVy}
\end{equation}
In \eqref{eqtxtAbsslPsn}, prime intervals are \spspan{}ned, whence \eqref{eqtxtAbsslPsn} yields \spseq{}s. Combining these \spseq{}s with those provided by \eqref{eqtxtdzBnWqVy} and using transitivity, we obtain that $[a,b]$
\spspan{}s $[\dstar a\wedge c, b\wedge c]$. Hence, we need to show only that $\dstar a\wedge c=a\wedge c$. If we had that $a\leq c$, then $a\prec b$ and $b<c$ would give that $a=c$, contradicting $c\nleq a$. Thus, $a\nleq c$ and $a\wedge c < a$. Since $\dstar a$ is the only lower cover of $a$, we have that $a\wedge c\leq \dstar a$ and so $a\wedge c\leq \dstar a\wedge c$. Since the converse inequality is obvious, $a\wedge c = \dstar a\wedge c$, as required. This completes the proof of \eqref{eqtxtindPln}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline
{\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{czg-makay-fig06}}
\caption{From $[w,\ustar c]$ to $[\dstar c, c]$}\label{figabwcst}
\end{figure}
Next, let $\ba=\{\pair xy\in L^2: \inp\,\text{ \spspan s }[x\wedge y, x\vee y]\}$, where $\inp$ is the prime interval from Theorem~\ref{thmstrongswinglemma}\eqref{thmstrongswinglemmab}.
We are going to show that $\ba$ is a congruence.
Obviously, $\pair x y\in\ba\iff \pair{x\wedge y}{x\vee y}\in\ba$ and
\begin{equation}
\bigl(x\leq y\leq z, \text{ } \pair x y\in\ba, \text{ and } \pair y z\in\ba \bigr) \Longrightarrow \pair x z\in\ba.
\label{equptrN}
\end{equation}
Hence, by Gr\"atzer~\cite[Lemma 11]{rGrLTFound}, it suffices to show that whenever $x\leq y$, $\pair x y\in \ba$, and $z\in L$, then $\pair{x\vee z}{y\vee z}\in\ba$ and $\pair{x\wedge z}{y\wedge z}\in\ba$. To do so, pick a maximal chain $x=u_0\prec u_1\prec\dots\prec u_n=y$ that witnesses $\pair x y\in\ba$. Then, for each $i\in\set{1,\dots,n}$, there is an \spseq{} from $\inp$ to $[u_{i-1},u_i]$. By \eqref{eqtxtindPln}, $\pair{u_{i-1}\wedge z}{u_i\wedge z}\in\ba$ for $i\in\set{1,\dots,n}$, and
\eqref{equptrN} yields that
$\pair{x\wedge z}{y\wedge z}=\pair{u_{0}\wedge z}{u_n\wedge z}\in\ba$. By semimodularity,
either $[{u_{i-1}},{u_i}]$ is up-perspective to $[{u_{i-1}\vee z},{u_i\vee z}]$, or ${u_{i-1}\vee z}={u_i\vee z}$. Hence, either by \eqref{eqtxbsLsP} or trivially, $\pair{u_{i-1}\vee z}{u_i\vee z}\in\ba$. Thus, \eqref{equptrN} implies that
$\pair{x\vee z}{y\vee z}=\pair{u_{0}\vee z}{u_n\vee z}\in\ba$, and we have shown that $\ba$ is a congruence.
Finally, since $\ba$ collapses $\inp$, we have that $\con(\inp)\subseteq \ba$. So if $\pair{0_\inq}{1_\inq}\in\con(\inp)$, then the containment $\pair{0_\inq}{1_\inq}\in\ba$ and the definition of $\ba$ yield an \spseq{} from $\inp$ to $\inq$. This completes the proof of the slim swing lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} For a \emph{slim} semimodular lattice $L$, \eqref{eqtxtindPln} is equivalent to \eqref{eqtxtindstp} by \eqref{eqtxthgmnB}. Actually, \eqref{eqtxtindPln} is not needed in this case. In this way, we obtain a proof for the
Swing slim lemma (Lemma~\ref{specswinglemma}) that is much shorter than the proof above.
\end{remark}
\section{Swing lattice game}\label{sectiongame}
In order to describe the essence of our online game, the \emph{Swing lattice game}, we need only two concepts. First, in Cz\'edli~\cite{czgdiagrectext}, a class $\sf C_2$ of aesthetic slim semimodular lattice diagrams has been introduced. Instead of repeating the long definition of $\sf C_2$ here, we only mention that the diagrams in Figures~\ref{figpsa}, \ref{figslima}, and \ref{figindstep} and $L'$ in Figure~\ref{figaddfork} belong to $\sf C_2$, but
the diagrams in Figure~\ref{figcyclM6} and $L$ in Figure~\ref{figaddfork} do not.
Second,
an \pseq{} $\vec\inr$ from \eqref{eqsseqpseq} is called an \emph{\gseq} if, for $i\in\set{1,2,\dots,n}$, $\inr_{i-1}\neq \inr_i$. (The acronym comes from ``Swing lemma game''.)
For the player, who can see the diagram, the exact definition of $\sf C_2$ is not at all important.
In order to avoid the concept of \gseq{}s, which may cause difficulty for a non-mathematician player, the program
says simply that a \emph{monkey} keeps moving from edge to edge such that the two edges in question have to belong to the same 4-cell. The monkey can jump or swing or tilt (these steps are easily described in a plain language), but it cannot move back to the edge it came from in the very next step.
The purpose of the game is to make sure that a random \gseq{} $\vec\inr$ continues as long as possible in a slightly varying diagram $L'$, to be specified later. In the language of the game, which we will use frequently below, the monkey should live as long as the player's luck and, much more significantly, his skill allows. The recent position, $\inr_i$, of the monkey is always indicated by a red thick edge.
At the beginning of the game, the program displays a randomly chosen diagram $L\in\sf C_2$ of a given length. This $L$ is fixed for a while. In order to obtain a bit larger planar semimodular lattice diagram $L'$, the player is allowed to add an eye to one of the 4-cells of $L$ (by a mouse click). Whenever he adds a new eye, the old one disappears; this action is called a \emph{change of the eye}. In this way, $L'$ is varying but the equality $|L'\setminus L|=1$ always holds. Besides the edges of $L$, which are called \emph{original edges}, $L'$ has two additional edges, the \emph{new edges}.
In order to influence the monkey's lifetime,
\begin{equation}
\text{the player's main tool is to change the eye frequently.}
\label{eqtxtchnEye}
\end{equation}
If the player clicks on a 4-cell while the monkey is moving between two old edges or when it has just arrived at an old edge, then the eye is immediately changed. However, if the monkey is moving from an old edge to a new one or conversely, then the change is delayed till the monkey arrives at an old edge.
At the beginning,
\begin{equation}
\text{the player has three seconds to choose an edge $\inr_0$ of $L$;}
\label{eqtxtinitedgE}
\end{equation} if he is late, then the computer chooses one randomly.
After departing from $\inr_0$, the monkey moves at a constant speed at the beginning; later, in order to increase the difficulty, this speed slowly increases.
If the monkey can make several moves, then the program chooses the actual move randomly. From time to time, the program turns a 4-cell into a \emph{bonus cell}, indicated by grey color; if the monkey can jump or swing between two edges of the grey cell within ten moves, then it earns an extra life. Similarly,
the program also offers \emph{candidate cells} in blue color;
\begin{equation}
\parbox{6.5cm}{if the player accepts the candidate cell by clicking on it within three moves, then this 4-cell becomes a purple \emph{adventure cell}.}
\label{eqtxtadVent}
\end{equation}
The monkey earns two extra lives if it jumps or swings between two edges of the adventure cell within 20 moves but it looses a life otherwise. Also, the monkey looses a life when no move is possible; this can happen only at a boundary edge of the diagram. If a life is lost but the monkey still has at least one life, then the game continues on a new random diagram. When the monkey has no more lives left, the game terminates.
The player, if quick enough, can always save the monkey at boundary edges by using \eqref{eqtxtchnEye}. Also, using \eqref{eqtxtchnEye} appropriately, the player can increase the probability that the monkey will go in a desired direction. In order to make a good decision
how to use \eqref{eqtxtinitedgE}, when to use \eqref{eqtxtadVent}, and when and how to apply \eqref{eqtxtchnEye}, the player should have some experience and insight into the process. Hence, the Swing lattice game is not only a reflex game.
The game is realized by a JavaScript program; see Cz\'edli and Makay~\cite{czgmgthegame}. Most browsers, like Mozilla, can run this program automatically.
The diagrams of length $n$ in $\sf C_2$ are conveniently given by their Jordan-H\"older permutations belonging to the symmetric group $S_n$.
Since not every diagram in $\sf C_2$ of a given length is appropriate for the game, the program defines the concept of ``good diagrams''. For example, neither a distributive diagram, nor a glued sum decomposable diagram is good.
We have characterized goodness in terms of permutations. Whenever a new diagram is needed, the program generates a random good permutation $\pi\in S_n$, and the diagram is derived from $\pi$.
The lattice theoretical background of this algorithm is not quite trivial. However, instead of going into details in the \emph{present} paper, we only mention that several tools given by Cz\'edli~\cite{czgcoord} and \cite{czgdiagrectext} and Cz\'edli and Schmidt~\cite{czgschperm} have extensively been used.
\color{black}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Quantum Annealing (QA) aims to solve computational problems by using a
guided quantum drive. The dynamics is generated by a time-dependent
Hamiltonian along a trajectory that ends at a final target Hamiltonian
whose ground state contains the solution of the
problem~\cite{Nishimori, Sipser, QAA}. QA is based on the adiabatic
theorem, which guarantees that if the Hamiltonian is changed
sufficiently slowly, transitions to excited states are suppressed
during the adiabatic evolution, thus preparing states that are close
to the target ground state. Unfortunately, the adiabatic condition
that ensures that the system remains in the instantaneous ground state
leads to long time scales for the solution of hard computational
problem. Within the framework of adiabatic computation, there has been
several theoretical proposals on the optimizations of the Quantum
Adiabatic Algorithm (QAA), such as heuristic guesses for the initial
state~\cite{Perdomo}, increasing the minimum gap~\cite{Mohan1,zhuang},
and the quantum adiabatic brachistochrone
formulation~\cite{Rezakhani}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,origin=c,width=8cm]{Fig1.pdf}
\caption{(a) Variational quantum algorithm as a closed-loop learning
control problem. (b) Increasing the total time expands the set of
final states that one can reach with the variational protocols. The
optimal protocol for a given time generates the closest state to a
low energy target state within this reachable set.}
\label{fig:VQA}
\end{figure}
The adiabatic trajectory is not the only path for reaching the ground
state of a final Hamiltonian that encodes the solution of the
computational problem. More generally, one could imagine many other
paths, including those where the Hamiltonian is varied rapidly, that land at the desired state or, of practical interest, reach low energy states. In fact, it has been already found
that for certain hard instances of problems, fast nonadiabatic paths
can sometimes prevent the system from getting stuck at local minima, thus improve the search results~\cite{troyer, heim, crosson}. The
Variational Quantum Algorithm (VQA) is an example where one searches
for such possible paths, using optimization of the outcome via the
variation of a fixed number of parameters in the protocol. A hybrid machine, combining
classical optimization and quantum evolution, optimizes the
variational parameters. Such hybrid variational approaches have proved
useful in the context of quantum state
preparation~\cite{Rohringer,Rosi,Rahmani1,Rahmani2}. Recently,
Ref. \cite{Peruzzo:14} introduced a variational quantum eigensolver (VQE)
for applications in quantum chemistry. This idea was further explored
in \cite{Yung:14, Wecker:15, wecker, McClean:16, McClean:16-2} and
experimentally tested in \cite{Shen:15, Eichler:15, Omalley:15}. In a
related approach \cite{Farhi,Farhi:2,Farhi:3, Yechao}, Farhi \textit{et al.}
introduced a Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) for
combinatorial optimization problems based on a parameterized square-pulse ansatz
for dynamical evolution of the solver.
In this paper, we make a connection between VQA and optimal control
theory~\cite{control1, Pontryagin, control2, Mohan2}. VQA is essentially an adaptive feedback control \cite{adaptive, Brif:10}
of a quantum system with the objective function encoding the solution
of a computational problem, see Fig. \ref{fig:VQA}(a). It utilizes a
hybrid system comprised of a classical computer that searches for the
optimal variational protocol using measurements done on a quantum
machine that generates the final states corresponding to different variational protocols,
via a closed-loop learning method \cite{Dong:10}.
Using Pontryagin's minimum principle of optimal control, we show that
the optimal protocol for VQA has a ``bang-bang'' form. Our results put
the bang-bang ansatz of QAOA on a rigorous ground in contrast to VQA
with a continuous-time evolution. A comparison of the performance of
the optimal nonadiabatic bang-bang protocol with conventional (linear
ramp) QAA demonstrates that the former significantly reduces error in
the final state in the absence of noise or decoherence. The advantage
over the linear ramp protocol in QAA survives weak dephasing white
noise as well as weak coupling to a thermal bath. Furthermore, we
perform a quantitative analysis of the characteristics of these
optimal protocols. We numerically find a system-size independent
distribution function for the duration of individual pulses, which may
facilitate the development of effective algorithms for the classical
optimizer through an efficient representation of the protocol with few
variational parameters. Interestingly, each of the pulses in our
bang-bang protocols contains commuting (either one-qubit or two-qubit)
terms. Thus our protocol can be implemented by applying a sequence of
one-qubit gates [ generated by the initial Hamiltonian, $g=0$ in
Eq.~\eqref{eq1}] and two-qubit gates generated by the problem
Hamiltonian ($g=1$).
\section{Variational Quantum Algorithm}
\label{sec:VQA}
Consider a computational optimization problem such as finding a sequence of $N$ bits that minimizes a certain function of all of the bits. To solve this problem with VQA, we consider a system of $N$ qubits with a parameterized Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}\label{eq:H_theta}
H_g(t)=\sum_\alpha g_\alpha(t) \; H_\alpha.
\end{equation}
Generically, we can cast the problem into generating a state $|\psi\rangle$ that minimizes a certain cost function such as the expectation value of an operator $O$ with respect to $|\psi\rangle$. A common example is finding the ground state of a disorderd classical Ising Hamiltonian \cite{Lucas:14}, where the operator $O$ is a Hamiltonian diagonal in the computational basis. In the context of quantum chemistry, VQE considers the operator $O$ to be the Hamiltonian of a molecule \cite{Yung:14}.
The essence of VQA, as depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:VQA}, is finding the time-dependent parameters $g_\alpha(t)$ over a time period $T$ such that
\begin{equation}
\ket{\psi(T)}={\cal T}{\rm e}^{-i\int_0^T H_g(t) dt}\ket{\psi(0)},
\label{eq:general}
\end{equation}
minimizes a cost function $\langle\psi(T)|O|\psi(T)\rangle$. Generically, the controls $g_\alpha(t)$ belong to a permissible set determined by the experimental setup. A common such set is given by simple bounds as seen in Eq.~\eqref{g-limits} below. The ideal solution could be a unique state $|\psi_{\rm target}\rangle$ [as depicted in Fig.\ref{fig:VQA}(b)] that is the ground state of the target Hamiltonian or more generally a set of states in the Hilbert space with an optimal figure of merit. One can either fix the initial state $|\psi(0)\rangle$ or add it to the list of the variational parameters (here we fix it motivated by experimental constraints). Generally, the longer the total time $T$, the closer we can get to an ideal solution.
One way to view this is to consider the reachable set, i.e., the set of all the final states one can reach by using one of the infinite number of permissible controls. The reachable set, naturally, grows with $T$ (in fact, if $g_\alpha=0$ is allowed, the reachable set for $T=T_1$ is strictly a subset of the reachable set for $T=T_2>T_1$).
As seen in Fig. \ref{fig:VQA}(b), there could be a critical time beyond which the reachable set includes the target state and an exact solution is possible. There is no advantage in increasing $T$ beyond this critical time. Generically, for smaller $T$, where the reachable set does not include the target state, the optimal protocols are highly constrained as they should prepare the closest point(s) of the reachable set to the target. For times longer than the critical time mentioned above, we expect an infinite number of protocols to produce the target as the evolution has extra time to meander in the Hilbert space. Our strategy is to fix $T$ and find the best variational protocol $g_\alpha(t)$. If the solution is not acceptable, we can increase $T$. Next we discuss how Pontryagin's minimum principle from optimal control theory determines the form of optimal $g_\alpha(t)$ functions.
\section{Pontryagin's minimum principle applied to VQA}
\label{sec:pontryagin}
\subsection{Bang-bang optimal protocols}\label{sec:bang}
The parameters in Hamiltonian~\eqref{eq:H_theta} are generically constrained by their range:
\begin{equation}
g^{\min}_\alpha\leqslant g_\alpha(t)\leqslant g^{\max}_\alpha
\label{g-limits}
\end{equation}
during the evolution $0<t<T$. Eq. ~\eqref{g-limits} implies that, by assumption, each $g_\alpha$ can be tunned in the above range independently of the values of the other control parameters. For fixed initial state $|\psi(0)\rangle$, the coupling constants $g_\alpha(t)$ uniquely determine the final wave function. Consequently, the cost function, which we take as an arbitrary function of the final state, is a functional of $g_\alpha(t)$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:f_cost}
F[\left\{ g_\alpha(t)\right\}]={\cal F}(|\psi(T)\rangle).
\end{equation}
The Pontryagin's minimum principle~\cite{Pontryagin} is directly applicable here. Briefly, this theorem states that for a set of dynamical variables $\bm x$ evolving from given initial values ${\bm x}(0)$ with the equations of motions $\dot {\bm x}={\bm f}({\bm x}, \boldsymbol{ g})$, where $\boldsymbol{ g}$ are a set of control functions, the control functions $\boldsymbol{ g}^*$ that minimize an arbitrary function ${\cal F}[{\bm x}(T)]$ of the final values of the dynamical variable satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pont}
{\cal H}({\bm x}^*,{\bm p}^*,\boldsymbol{ g}^*)=\min_{\boldsymbol{ g}}{\cal H}({\bm x}^*,{\bm p}^*,\boldsymbol{ g})
\end{equation}
at any point in time and for each of the control functions. The optimal-control Hamiltonian is defined as ${\cal H}({\bm x},{\bm p},\boldsymbol{ g})\equiv {\bm f}({\bm x}, \boldsymbol{ g})\cdot{\bm p}$ for conjugate variables $\bm p$ that evolve as $\dot {\bm p}=-\partial_{{\bm x}}{\cal H}$ with boundary conditions ${\bm p}(T)=\partial_{{\bm x}}{\cal F}[{\bm x}(T)]$. Here the ``$*$'' superscript indicates the optimal solution corresponding to $\boldsymbol{ g}^*$.
An important consequence of Eq.~\eqref{eq:pont} is that if the equations of motion for $\bm x$, and consequently the optimal-control Hamiltonian $\cal H$, are linear in $ \boldsymbol{ g}$, generically, the optimal protocol is bang-bang, i.e., at any time during the evolution we have $g^*_\alpha(t)= g^{\min}_\alpha$ or $g^*_\alpha(t)= g^{\max}_\alpha$. This follows from the fact that at any point in time we need to choose $g_\alpha$ to minimize ${\cal H}({\bm x}^*,{\bm p}^*,\boldsymbol{ g})$. If the sign of the coefficient of $g_\alpha$ in the optimal-control Hamiltonian is positive (negative), we should then choose the smallest (largest) $g_\alpha$ from the permissible range~\eqref{g-limits}. In other words, the optimal protocol for each control function involves a sequence of sudden jumps between its minimum and maximum permissible values. The only caveat for the above argument is the possibility that the coefficient of a particular $g_\alpha$ in ${\cal H}({\bm x}^*,{\bm p}^*,\boldsymbol{ g})$ vanishes over a finite interval (since the sign of this coefficient determines whether we should choose the minimum or maximum value). We expect this special scenario to be nongeneric particularly for the disordered systems considered in the present paper.
In the quantum mechanical context, if the physical Hamiltonian is linear in the controls, the equations of motion and consequently the optimal-control Hamiltonian will also be linear, giving rise to bang-bang protocols as verified in several recent studies on optimal topological quantum computing~\cite{Rahmani3,Rahmani4}.
To find the protocol $\boldsymbol{ g}$ that minimizes the cost function in our case, we expand the wave function in a complete orthonormal basis, e.g., the computational basis $|z\rangle$ as $|\psi(t)\rangle=\sum_z A_z(t) |z\rangle $ and treat the real and imaginary parts of the amplitudes $A_z(t)$ as dynamical variables, which evolve according to the Schr\"odinger equation
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{A}^R_z&=&{1\over 2}\sum_{\alpha,z'} g_\alpha
\left[\left(H_\alpha^{zz'}+H_\alpha^{z'z}\right)A^I_{z'}
-i\left(H_\alpha^{zz'}-H_\alpha^{z'z}\right)A^R_{z'}
\right],\\
\dot{A}^I_z&=&{1\over 2}\sum_{\alpha,z'} g_\alpha
\left[-\left(H_\alpha^{zz'}+H_\alpha^{z'z}\right)A^R_{z'}
-i\left(H_\alpha^{zz'}-H_\alpha^{z'z}\right)A^I_{z'}
\right],
\end{eqnarray}
where $H_\alpha^{zz'}\equiv \langle z|H_\alpha|z'\rangle$ and $A_z^{R,I}\equiv{\rm Re,Im}(A_z)$. Clearly, these equations of motion are linear in the control functions $g_\alpha$ and the cost function~\eqref{eq:f_cost} is a function of only the final values of the dynamical variables. Thus, the argument above holds and the optimal protocol is generically bang-bang regardless of the number of variational parameters. We remark that our optimal bang-bang protocol is nonadiabatic by construction, and we put no constraint on maximizing the degree of adiabaticity. The value of this result hinges upon the time scale over which a coupling constant is held fixed. The longer this time scale, the fewer parameters (switching times)
are needed to represent the protocol. In fact, in the limit where this time scale goes to zero, any protocol can be approximated by a sequence of square pulses through Trotterization. In this paper, we find that the time scale above is indeed finite and is set by the energy scale of the Hamiltonian for the Sherrington-Kirkpatrick (SK) Ising spin-glass model [see Eq.~\eqref{eq1}].
\subsection{Presence of decoherence}
From a practical point of view, it is important to assess the validity of the closed system findings in the presence of decoherence. Again, a straightforward application of the Pontryagin principle extends the above results for a closed system evolution to an open quantum system with Markovian dynamics described by a Lindblad equation
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\rho}{dt}=-i\left[\sum_\alpha g_\alpha(t) \; H_\alpha, \ \rho\right]+\sum_\beta f_\beta(t)\left(2F_\beta \ \rho \ F^\dagger_\beta-\left\{F^\dagger_\beta F_\beta,\ \rho\right\}\right)
\label{eqLindblad}
\end{equation}
where the optimal protocol $\{g_\alpha(t),f_\beta(t)\}$, if controllable, are of type bang-bang. This is due to the linearity of the dynamical equation (\ref{eqLindblad}). A decoherence operator $F_\beta$ can represent either noise in the Hamiltonian parameters (in which case, $F_\beta$ is Hermitian~\cite{Pilcher2013,Rahmani2015}) or an engineered bath~\cite{open}. In the former case, $f_\beta$'s are constant rates of noise processes and in the latter, $f_\beta(t)$'s are control knobs that the Pontryagin's minimum principle says should vary in bang-bang form for an optimal protocol. In the rest of the paper, we only focus on closed systems Schr\"odinger dynamics when finding the optimal protocol. We do, however, discuss the effects of noise and open-system dynamics on our optimal protocols.
\section{VQA for the SK Spin-Glass Model}
\label{sec:model}
We now focus on a canonical problem in combinatorial optimization, namely the SK Ising spin glass \cite{SK} with the energy function
\begin{equation}
C= \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\sum_{i,j=1}^n J_{ij}\sigma^z_i\sigma^z_j+\sum_{i=1}^n h_i \sigma^z_i.
\label{eq1}
\end{equation}
where $J_{ij}$ and $h_i$ are independent Gaussian random variables with zero mean and variance $J^2=h^2=1$, and each $\sigma^z$ spin can take the values $\pm 1$. The goal is to minimize $C$ over all the $2^n$ spin configurations. A multitude of practical combinatorial optimization problems map to this model. The computational cost of finding the minimum with classical algorithms is exponential in $n$.
In analogy with the simple instances of quantum annealing, we focus on
the case with only one control function $g(t)$ and use the following
parameterized Hamiltonian:
\begin{equation}\label{eq2}
H_ g(t)= g(t)C+[1- g(t)]B,
\end{equation}
with the operator $B\equiv -\sum_{i=1}^n \sigma^x_i$ representing a transverse field, which generates quantum fluctuations.
For the initial state, we choose the ground states of $B$. It is easy to prepare product state $|\psi(0)\rangle=\prod_i
\left(|\uparrow\rangle_i+|\downarrow\rangle_i\over \sqrt{2}\right)$ commonly used in other schemes such as the QAA. Here $\sigma^z_i|\uparrow\rangle_i=|\uparrow\rangle_i$ and $\sigma^z_i|\downarrow\rangle_i=-|\downarrow\rangle_i$. We would like to minimize the cost function $\langle\psi(T)|C|\psi(T)\rangle$. In the adiabatic scheme, a smooth ramp such as $g(t)={t\over T}$ is applied for $0<t<T$ and we can generate large overlap with the ground state of $C$ in the limit of large $T$. Here, we allow for arbitrary time dependence of the control function in the fixed range $0\leqslant g(t)\leqslant1$. According to the general argument of Sec.~\ref{sec:bang}, the optimal solution is bang-bang.
As discussed in the introduction, in VQA a classical optimization
algorithm commands a quantum system to find the optimal protocol
variationally from measurement of the cost function for many
protocols. This requires many repetitions and it is to our advantage
to use the shortest possible time $T$ for which the final state has an
acceptable overlap with the ground state of $C$ (projective
measurement is ultimately used in generating the ground state). In the
adiabatic scheme, we only need one shot but there are important
restrictions from the small energy gaps along the adiabatic
trajectory, which can lead to exceedingly long time scales, over which
quantum coherence cannot be even approximately sustained. Furthermore,
the presence of noise or modulation in the control fields places
important limitations on adiabatic schemes due to the emergence of the
recently proposed noise-induced anti-adiabaticity in the long-time
limit~\cite{Dutta}. Unlike QAA, which relies on the adiabatic theorem,
VQA has no known connection to instantaneous ground states and the
minimum gap to excitations as transitions to excited states during the
time evolution are allowed as long as the system eventually lands at
the ground state of the final Hamiltonian.
Given the limitations of adiabatic scheme, a quantum approximate algorithm has been introduced for solving combinatorial optimization problems~\cite{Farhi, Farhi:2, Farhi:3, Yechao} in the spirit of VQA. The algorithm of Ref.~\cite{Farhi} uses an ansatz
\begin{equation}
\ket{\boldsymbol{\gamma}, \boldsymbol{\beta}} = U (B, \beta_p) \, U (C, \gamma_p) \cdots U (B, \beta_1) \, U (C, \gamma_1)\, |\psi(0)\rangle,
\label{eq:ansatz}
\end{equation}
where the evolution operators are given by $U (C,\gamma) = e^{-i\gamma C}$ and $U (B, \beta) = e^{-i\beta B}$. The integer $p$ is a parameter characterizing a variational ansatz.
For a given $p$, the goal of the algorithm is to find a set of
variational parameters that minimizes the expectation value of $ F_p
(\boldsymbol{\gamma}, \boldsymbol{\beta}) = \bra{\boldsymbol{\gamma},
\boldsymbol{\beta}} C \ket{\boldsymbol{\gamma},
\boldsymbol{\beta}}$, which ensures that the state
$\ket{\boldsymbol{\gamma}, \boldsymbol{\beta}}$ approaches the ground
state of $C$. Physically, the ansatz describes time evolution for a
total time $ T=\sum_{i=1}^p\left(\gamma_i+\beta_i\right)$, and a
sequence of sudden switching between the Hamiltonians $B$ and
$C$. While this ansatz with a finite $p$ is an intelligent guess,
the result that we derived using Pontryagin's minimum principle implies
that given bounded independent control of Hamiltonian terms, the ansatz (\ref{eq:ansatz}) is the optimal
choice for a VQA approach to optimization. We reiterate that $B$ and $C$ are each a sum of commuting one- and/or two-qubit terms. Therefore, our protocol can be interpreted as a sequence of simple gates. Estimating the required $p$ requires an
analysis of the characteristic time scales of the pulses, which we
carry out in this paper.
\section{Numerical studies}
\label{sec:numerical}
We start by verifying for small system sizes and short annealing times that the optimal annealing protocol is indeed bang-bang, by using a Metropolis Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm, which makes no assumptions about the nature of the protocol. We divide the total time $T$ into $S$ slices of duration $\delta t=T/S$ and use a piece-wise constant protocol. The method approaches an unbiased optimization, i.e., it explores all permissible controls and chooses the optimal one, if the protocols obtained converge upon increasing $S$. We then proceed by carrying out a MC simulation starting from random initial protocols, without any assumption regarding the bang-bang nature of the protocol. In each step, we slightly change the control parameter $g$ in a randomly chosen discretized time interval. If the cost function gets smaller, we accept the attempt; if the cost function gets larger, we accept the attempt with probability ${\rm e}^{-\Delta E/T_{MC}}$, where $T_{MC}$ is a fictitious temperature that is gradually reduced to zero.
In Fig. \ref{fig:protocol}(a), we show the optimal protocol obtained from such MC simulation for a fixed instance of Hamiltonian (\ref{eq1}) with $n=5$ spins and total time $T=0.8$.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,origin=c,width=8.5cm]{Fig2.pdf}
\caption{(a) The optimal protocol obtained from MC simulations for a fixed instance of Hamiltonian (\ref{eq1}) with $n=5$ spins and total annealing time $T=0.8$. Different colors represent different initial protocols. The plots are for $S=40$, but the optimal protocol does not change upon increasing $S$. (b) A typical protocol obtained for a given instance of Hamiltonian (\ref{eq1}) with $n=5$ spins and $T=2$, using a classical optimization solver. We start from a uniform initial protocol with $S$ slices such that $\delta t=T/S=0.1$.}
\label{fig:protocol}
\end{figure}
Indeed, the MC simulation converge to a bang-bang protocol for different initial protocols in agreement with the Pontryagin's minimum principle.
Despite the convergence for short total time, the MC simulations often fail to converge for longer times and larger systems, signaling the difficulty of implementing VQA without any a priori knowledge about the form of the optimal protocol. However, based on the mathematical proof of the bang-bang nature of the optimal protocols, we can parameterize the protocol similar to QAOA \cite{Farhi} and use the durations of the pulses as variational parameters to be optimized with the interior-point minimization method (IPMM), increasing $p$ to achieve convergence.
We have checked that IPMM results are indeed in agreement with MC results, e.g., Fig. \ref{fig:protocol}(a) (it also runs much faster). In Fig.\ref{fig:protocol}(b), we show a typical optimized protocol obtained with IPMM for a certain instance of Hamiltonian (\ref{eq1}) with $n=5$ spins and $T=2$. Guided by MC results, we choose around $\sim 20\times T$ variational parameters, which proved to be adequate (we converged to a smaller number of bangs than we allowed in the ansatz).
\begin{figure}[!hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,origin=c,width=8cm]{Fig3.pdf}
\caption{The average probability distribution of the time scales of bangs for different system sizes: $n=6, 7, 8, 9$ and 10. The total annealing time is fixed to be $T=2$, leading to an average success rate around $0.33\sim0.47$, depending on the system sizes. Each curve is averaged over 50 instances of Hamiltonian (\ref{eq1}).}
\label{fig:distribution}
\end{figure}
We now turn to the critical question of the time scales of the pulses. We observe numerically and then argue analytically that the typical time scale of each bang is independent of the system size, and is only determined by some characteristic energy scale of Hamiltonian (\ref{eq1}). Therefore, from a complexity theory perspective, this result implies that the hardness of the optimization problem should translate into the number of pulses and/or the hardness of the protocol optimization. In Fig. \ref{fig:distribution} we plot the distribution of the time scales of each bang $\Delta t$ for system sizes $n=6, 7, 8, 9$ and 10. For each system size, we fix the total annealing time to be $T=2$, and average over 50 instances of the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq1}).
We find that the distributions for the bang time collapse for different system sizes, and peak at almost the same value. This observation suggests a universal average distribution of the bang times for the near optimal protocols, and a typical time scale (peak or average value) that is independent of the system size. Although we have only considered a few system sizes, the dependence on $n$ is extremely weak and we expect our results to extrapolate to large $n$.
Finally we comment on the performance of our protocols. The cost function we minimize is the expectation value $\langle \psi(T) |C|\psi(T)\rangle$. Minimizing the energy expectation value results in larger overlap with the ground state of $C$. As expected, the time scales for our protocols are significantly shorter than those of the adiabatic algorithm with similar success rate. A comparison between the optimal bang-bang protocols and linear ramps $g(t)=t/T$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:noise}. {The errors in the final wavefunctions $1-|\langle\psi_{GS}|\psi(T)\rangle|^2$ and final energies $E-E_{GS}\equiv\langle \psi(T) |C|\psi(T)\rangle-E_{GS}$ are averaged over the 20 instances (out of 50 generated realizations) with the highest success rates, for the optimal bang-bang protocol and linear QAA ramp respectively. We find that, in the system sizes considered in this work, the nonadiabatic bang-bang protocol with the same total time, significantly outperforms the linear ramp (commonly used in QAA) in the ideal case, where the thermal environment and external noise are neglected. Of course, in practice one needs to include the overhead of searching for the optimal solution, and understand how it scales as function of system size. In particular, while implementing the bang-bang protocol consisting of square pulses on a quantum annealer is feasible~\cite{Barends}, finding the optimal protocol with a classical optimizer could be difficult for certain hard instances of problems.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,origin=c,width=9cm]{Fig4.pdf}
\caption{Errors in the fidelity (upper panel) and final energies (lower panel) evolved with the bang-bang and QAA protocols in the presence of noise with different strengths for $n=5$.}
\label{fig:noise}
\end{figure}
\section{Effects of Dissipation and Dephasing}
\label{sec:noise}
Real-world implementations of the bang-bang and QAA protocols are inevitably subject to noise either in the external controls or due to coupling to the thermal environment. Therefore, it is important to examine the effects of these perturbations on our optimal protocols for practical applications. Here we consider two noise models in order to evaluate the robustness of our bang-bang protocol, at the same time comparing it with the performance of QAA.
\subsection{Random Dephasing Noise}
Here we consider pure dephasing noise, where we introduce random fields in the $x$ and $z$ directions. This type of noise can capture noise induced by hardware electronics. Our error model can be viewed as the continuous time analog of the depolarizing channel commonly used for simulating noise in quantum circuits \cite{Nielson}. Since in a bang-bang protocol we either have $g(t)=1$ or $g(t)=0$ at any given time, we can write the stochastic Hamiltonian as
\begin{eqnarray}
H(t)&=& C+\sum_{i=1}^n \delta h_i (t)\sigma^z_i+\sum_{i=1}^n \delta b_i(t)\sigma^x_i,\quad g=1,\\
H(t) &=& B+\sum_{i=1}^n \delta h_i (t)\sigma^z_i+\sum_{i=1}^n \delta b_i(t)\sigma^x_i,\quad g=0,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\delta h_i(t)$ and $\delta b_i(t)$ are noise in the $z$ and $x$ directions respectively, with strengths independent of the value of the coupling constants (additive noise). Assuming independent white noise for different terms with zero mean and second moments
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{whitenoise1}
\overline{\delta h_{i}(t)\delta h_{i'}(t')}&=&W_h^2\delta_{ii'}\delta(t-t'),\\
\overline{\delta b_{i}(t)\delta b_{i'}(t')}&=&W_b^2\delta_{ii'}\delta(t-t'),
\label{whitenoise2}
\end{eqnarray}
the noise-averaged density matrix evolves with the following master equation \cite{Rahmani2015}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
{d\rho(t)\over dt}= &-i[H,\rho(t)]-{1\over 2}W_h^2\sum_{i=1}^n[[\rho(t),\sigma^z_i],\sigma^z_i]\\
&-{1\over 2}W_b^2\sum_{i=1}^n[[\rho(t),\sigma^x_i],\sigma^x_i],
\label{eqn:master2}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we take $W_b=W_h=W$ for simplicity. In the bang-bang case, the Hamiltonian $H$ takes two different values $H=C$ ($H=B$) for $g=1$ ($g=0$), while in the QAA case, $H$ has the explicit time dependence of Eq.~\eqref{eq2} with $g(t)=t/T$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:noise} we show the errors in the fidelity $1-\langle
\psi_{GS}|\rho(T)|\psi_{GS}\rangle$ and final energy ${\rm
Tr}\left[\rho(T) C\right]-E_{GS}$ for different strengths of
noise. We find that in the small $W$ regime, the noise only slightly
decreases the fidelity, acting like a perturbation without inducing
any instability. The effects of the noise on the linear QAA ramp are
similar both qualitatively and quantitatively, changing the $W=0$
error by amount of the same order of magnitude. For the strongest
strength of noise that we studied ($W=0.01$), the fidelity of the
optimal bang-bang protocol remains higher than that of the linear ramp
protocol.
A comment is in order regarding the dimension of $W$ and the range used. As $\delta(t-t')$ has a dimension of time (inverse energy), $W^2$ has a dimension of energy. Strictly speaking, the $\delta$ function introduces infinitely large (albeit completely uncorrelated) random fields. This is unrealistic. In real experiments there is a characteristic high frequency, introducing a characteristic short time scale $\Delta \tau$, over which noise is correlated. This frequency scale is typically several orders of magnitude larger than the characteristic energy of the Hamiltonian (it diverges for the $\delta$ function). Therefore, Eq. (\ref{whitenoise1}) and (\ref{whitenoise2}) imply that $\delta h, \delta b \sim W/\sqrt{\Delta \tau}$, which means that for moderate noise in the random fields $\delta h$ and $\delta b$, the corresponding values of $W$ are suppressed by $\sqrt{\Delta \tau}$.
\subsection{Weak Thermal Bath}
Here we consider coupling the system to a weak thermal bath at temperature $1/\beta$. In this regime, the dynamics of the open system can be approximately described by the Redfield master equation which is commonly used to model noisy QAA for an actual annealing hardware \cite{Amin, Albash, Boixo}. Here we use the formulation in Ref. \cite{Amin} and apply it to both QAA and bang-bang protocols.
The system of many qubits is coupled to the thermal bath via the
Hamiltonian $\sum_i^{n} \sigma^z_i Q^z_i$, where $Q^z_i$ are bath
operators. We assume an Ohmic bosonic bath in thermal equilibrium,
with the spectral density function given by
\begin{eqnarray}
S^z_i(\omega)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} dt \;e^{i\omega t} \;\langle Q^z_i(t) Q^z_i(0)\rangle = \eta \omega\; \frac{1}{1-e^{-\beta\omega}}
\;,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\eta$ is a dimensionless coefficient describing the strength of
the coupling to the environment. We have taken the cut-off frequency
of the bath to be infinite, so as to guarantee the Markovian
assumption of dynamics. We employed Eqs.(4-9) in reference \cite{Amin}
to simulate the dynamics of open systems based on the Redfield master
equation.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[angle=0,origin=c,width=9cm]{Fig5.pdf}
\caption{Errors in the fidelity of final states evolved with the bang-bang and QAA protocols in the presence of different strengths of coupling to the environment for $n=5$. The inverse temperature is chosen to be $\beta=2/J$.}
\label{fig:redfield}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:redfield} shows the errors in the fidelity for different
strengths of coupling to the bath, for both QAA and bang-bang
protocols. Similar to the case of the closed system in the presence of
white noise, we find that the errors corresponding to both protocols
change in an analogous manner due to weak coupling to the environment in
both the short- and long-time regimes. There is an intermediate time
regime $8.5\lesssim T\lesssim11.5$, where QAA exhibits remarkable
robustness and a much smaller change in $\eta=0$ error. However, the
errors of the VQA and QAA get closer as we increase $T$. Once again,
the fidelity of the optimal bang-bang protocol remains higher than the
QAA even for open system dynamics.
\section{Pulse duration from the Pontryagin's minimum principle}
Here we provide more details on how the Pontryagin's minimum principle can not only tell about the form of optimal solution for VQA but can also shed light on when the pulses should be switched on and off, in the context of the SK model.
Using the computational basis $z=z_1\dots z_n$, we represent the wave function as $\ket{\psi(t)}=\sum_z A_z(t)\ket{z}$.
The initial state with all the spins in the $x$ direction corresponds to $A_z(0)= 1/{\sqrt{2^n}}$, and the Schr\"odinger equation reads
\begin{equation}
i\partial_t A_z(t)=g(t)C_zA_z(t)+[1-g(t)]\sum_{k=1}^n A_{\bar {z}(k)}(t),
\end{equation}
with $\bar {z}(k)=z_1\dots \bar{z}_k\dots z_n$, where $\bar{z}_k$ represents a flipped spin with respect to $z_k$ and $C_z$ is the energy function we would like to minimize. In terms of the real and imaginary parts of $A_z(t)=R_z(t)+i I_z(t)$ , we can then write
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_t R_z(t)&=&g(t)C_zI_z(t)+[1-g(t)]\sum_{k=1}^n I_{\bar {z}(k)}(t),\\
\partial_t I_z(t)&=&-g(t)C_zR_z(t)-[1-g(t)]\sum_{k=1}^n R_{\bar {z}(k)}(t).
\end{eqnarray}
Introducing conjugate momenta $P_z(t)$ and $Q_z(t)$ respectively for the real and imaginary parts of $A_z(t)$, the explicit form of the optimal-control Hamiltonian is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
{\cal H}=\sum_{z}\bigg\{&g(t)C_z\left[P_z(t)I_z(t)-Q_z(t)R_z(t)\right]\\
&+[1-g(t)]\sum_{k=1}^n \left[P_z(t)I_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)-Q_z(t)R_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)\right]\bigg\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The equations of motion for the conjugate momenta are $\partial_t P_z(t)=-{\partial{\cal H}\over \partial R_z(t)}$ and $\partial_t Q_z(t)=-{\partial{\cal H}\over \partial I_z(t)}$, which can be written explicitly as
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_t P_z(t)&=&g(t)C_zQ_z(t)+[1-g(t)]\sum_{k=1}^n Q_{\bar {z}(k)}(t),\\
\partial_t Q_z(t)&=&-g(t)C_zP_z(t)-[1-g(t)]\sum_{k=1}^n P_{\bar {z}(k)}(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used the relationships $\sum_{z,k}Q_z(t)R_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)=\sum_{z,k}Q_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)R_z(t)$ and $\sum_{z,k}P_z(t)I_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)=\sum_{z,k}P_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)I_z(t)$.
The cost function
\begin{equation}
F[g(t)]=\sum_z|A_z(T)|^2C_z
\end{equation}
leads to the following boundary conditions at $t=T$ for the conjugate momenta:
\begin{equation}
P_z(T)=2R_z(T)C_z,\quad Q_z(T)=2I_z(T)C_z.
\label{eqn:bc}
\end{equation}
Notice that $g(t)$ uniquely determines $A_z(t)$. From $A_z(T)$ and the expression above, we can find $P_z(T)$ and $Q_z(T)$, solve the equations of motion backward in time and determine the conjugate momenta as a function of time. Therefore, $g(t)$ also uniquely determines $P_z(t)$ and $Q_z(t)$. The Potryagin's minimum principle states that the optimal protocol $g^*(t)$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}(g^*,{\bf R}^*,{\bf I}^*,{\bf P}^*,{\bf Q}^*)=\min_{g}{\cal H}(g,{\bf R}^*,{\bf I}^*,{\bf P}^*,{\bf Q}^*),
\end{equation}
where ${\bf R}^*,{\bf I}^*,{\bf P}^*,{\bf Q}^*$ are the corresponding optimal solution. As argued in Sec.~\ref{sec:pontryagin}, $g^*(t)$ is bang-bang and can only take two values of $0$ and $1$. Which value will depend on the sign of $\partial{\mathcal H}\over \partial g$ given by the expression
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
{\partial{\mathcal H}\over \partial g}=\sum_{z}\bigg\{&C_z\left[P^*_z(t)I^*_z(t)-Q^*_z(t)R^*_z(t)\right]\\
&-\sum_{k=1}^n \left[P^*_z(t)I^*_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)-Q^*_z(t)R^*_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)\right]\bigg\}.
\end{split}
\label{eq:coeff}
\end{equation}
The sudden quenches at which $g(t)$ switches from 0 to 1 or vice versa correspond to the zeros of $\partial{\mathcal H}\over \partial g$ above.
Let us first combine $P_z$ and $Q_z$ into one complex momentum
\begin{equation}
\Pi_z(t)=P_z(t)+iQ_z(t).
\end{equation}
As we argued above, the optimal protocol is bang-bang with $g(t)=0,1$. In any interval with $g(t)=1$, we can write
\begin{eqnarray}
A_z(t)&=& {\rm e}^{-iC_z(t-t_0)}A(t_0) \\
\Pi_z(t)&=& {\rm e}^{-iC_z(t-t_0)}\Pi(t_0),
\end{eqnarray}
where $t_0$ is the beginning of the current bang $g(t_0)=1$. We first note that the term $P_z(t)I_z(t)-Q_z(t)R_z(t)={\rm Im}\left[A_z(t)\Pi^*_z(t)\right]$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:coeff} and does not change in intervals with $g(t)=1$. Moreover the terms
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
P_z(t)&I_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)-Q_z(t)R_{\bar {z}(k)}(t)\\
=&{\rm Im}\left[{\rm e}^{-i\left(C_z-C_{\bar {z}(k)}\right)(t-t_0)}A_z(t_0)\Pi^*_{\bar {z}(k)}(t_0)\right].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The above equation allows for an estimation of the typical time scale of the interval $g(t)=1$. Suppose at some $t_0$, $g(t)$ switches from 0 to 1, i.e. a bang starts. From the discussion above, we know that at $t=t_0$ we must have ${\partial \mathcal{H}\over \partial g}(t_0)=0$. The time when the bang stops corresponds to the next $t>t_0$ when ${\partial \mathcal{H} \over \partial g}(t)=0$. More explicitly, in the interval $g(t)=1$, Eq. (\ref{eq:coeff}) can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn20}
w(t)=\sum_z\sum_{k=1}^n {\rm Im}\left [ ({\rm e}^{-i(C_z-C_{\bar{z}(k)})(t-t_0)}-1)A_z(t_0)\Pi_{\bar{z}(k)}^*(t_0)\right].
\end{equation}
We have $w(t_0)=0$. The first root of the equation $w(t)=0$ with $t>t_0$ then determines the duration of a pulse.
While we cannot derive analytically the average first root for $t>t_0$ from Eq.~\eqref{eqn20}, one can see that the only time dependence in Eq. (\ref{eqn20}) within the current interval is in ${\rm
e}^{-i(C_z-C_{\bar{z}(k)})t}$. Thus, the energy difference $\Delta
C_{z,k}\equiv C_z-C_{\bar{z}(k)}$, which has zero mean (as both $C_z$ and $C_{\bar{z}(k)}$ have zero mean) and variance
$\overline{\Delta C_{z,k}^2}=4(J^2+h^2)$, sets the characteristic time
scale proportional to $1/\sqrt{J^2+h^2}$ observed in
Fig.~\ref{fig:distribution}. Importantly, this time scale is finite and system-size independent,
distinguishing our bang-bang type optimal protocol from the
Trotterization of generic protocols, where the duration of
individual pulses must be taken to zero. We believe the numerically obtained system-size independent distribution of Fig.~\ref{fig:distribution} follows from Eq.~\eqref{eqn20} whose root determines one set of the switching times for quenching $g(t)$ from 1 to 0, giving the duration of a pulse with $g(t)=1$ [the distributions of pulse durations with $g(t)=0$ and $g(t)=1$ were found numerically to be almost identical]. However, an analytical derivation of the distribution in Fig.~\ref{fig:distribution} has remained elusive.
\section{Summary and Outlook} We have shown that the optimal VQA
with bounded linear control parameters has a protocol of the bang-bang form. We
verified this prediction by finding numerically the optimal protocol
that minimizes the energy of a SK spin glass. The optimal nonadiabatic bang-bang protocols significantly reduce the error when compared to QAA within the same running time, and, at least for our system sizes, the advantage remains in the presence of weak additive white noise in the control parameters as well as weak coupling to a thermal environment.
Importantly, we
show that the characteristic time scale between bangs is fixed by
the energy scales in the problem and is independent of system size,
which we confirm numerically. This finding significantly reduces the number of variational parameters in VQA, potentially decreasing the computational cost of the VQA outer-loop classical optimization algorithm to a great extent.
Our results, that the bang-bang protocols are optimal and the duration of each square pulse is size-independent, inform the search for effective hybrid classical-quantum schemes for solving combinatorial optimization problems. Further progress relies on the development of efficient outer-loop algorithms as well as hardware development for quantum enhanced optimization. Ultimately, the power of our results lies in their application to larger systems, for which solving the time-dependent Schrodinger equation is impossible on a classical computer. Rapid developments in quantum technologies~\cite{Mohseni17}, together with the relative robustness of our protocols to specific models of external noise and thermal environment support the promise of such applications.
\acknowledgements{We are grateful to Ryan Babbush, Pedram Roushan, Eduardo Mucciolo, Dries Sels and Anatoli Polkovnikov for illuminating discussions. Z.-C. Y. would like to thank Quntao
Zhuang for many early discussions on QAA. This work was supported by
NSERC (A. R.), Max Planck-UBC Centre for Quantum Materials (A. R.), and DOE
Grant No. DE-FG02-06ER46316 (C. C. and Z.-C. Y.).}
|
\section{Introduction}
The various cosmological observations such as Type Ia Supernovae~\cite{SN,Riess:1998cb}, cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation~\cite{Planck:2015xua, Ade:2015lrj, Ade:2014xna, Ade:2015tva, Array:2015xqh, Komatsu:2010fb, Hinshaw:2012aka},
large scale structure~\cite{LSS,Seljak:2004xh}, baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO)~\cite{Eisenstein:2005su}, and weak lensing~\cite{Jain:2003tba}
have supported that the expansion of the current universe is accelerating. All of these observations also strongly indicate that the alleged acceleration is rather a recent phenomenon and the universe was decelerating in the past. Two representative approaches have been proposed to account for the late-time cosmic acceleration. The first approach is to assume the existence of ``dark energy'' (DE) in the framework of general relativity. The second approach is to consider the modification of gravity on the large scale (for reviews on the issues of DE and the modified theories of gravitation, see, for example, \cite{Nojiri:2010wj,Nojiri:2006ri,Book-Capozziello-Faraoni,Capozziello:2011et,delaCruzDombriz:2012xy,Bamba:2012cp,Joyce:2014kja,
Koyama:2015vza,Bamba:2015uma}). In this work, we will concentrate only on the first approach and consider DE to be responsible for this accelerated phenomenon. There are some excellent review articles where various DE models have been comprehensively discussed \cite{3,4,4a,5}. The simplest candidate of DE a is cosmological constant $\Lambda$ whose energy density remains constant with time and its {\it equation of state} (EoS) parameter is, $\omega_{\Lambda}=-1$. However, the models based upon cosmological
constant suffer from the {\it fine tuning} and the cosmological {\it coincidence} problems \cite{sw, Steinhardt}. Scalar field models with generic features can alleviate these problems and provide the late-time evolution of the universe (see Ref. \cite{4} for a review). Scalar field models are very popular as the simplest generalization of cosmological constant is provided by a scalar field, dubbed as quintessence field, which can drive the acceleration with some suitably chosen potentials. In this case, one needs some degree of fine tuning of the initial conditions to account for the accelerated expansion of the universe and none of the potentials really have proper theoretical support from field theory explaining their origin (for review, see \cite{6}). In the last decade, an enormous number of DE models were explored to explain the origin of this late time acceleration of the universe and none of these models have very strong observational evidence \cite{4}. Therefore, the search is on for a suitable DE model and the present study is one of them.\\
\par In Ref. \cite{ellis}, Ellis and Madsen had discussed about {\it reconstruction} method to find the scalar field potential. Recently, this method finds a very wide application in current research in cosmology. However, there are two types of reconstruction, namely, parametric and non-parametric. The parametric reconstruction method is an attempt to build up a model by assuming a specific evolution scenario for a model parameter and then estimate the values of the parameters from different observational datasets. On the other hand, the non-parametric reconstruction method does not require any specific assumption for the parameters and finds the nature of
cosmic evolution directly from observational dataset.\\
\par In the context of DE, the reconstruction method was first discussed in \cite{starpr}, where Starobinsky determined the scalar field potential from the observational dataset from the behavior of density perturbations in dust-like matter. Some other earlier works on reconstruction have been discussed in \cite{tdsprl,relz} where the dataset of cosmological distance measurement has been used. In practice, a large number of dynamical models have been proposed for DE in which the properties of DE component are generally summarized as a perfect fluid with a time-dependent EoS parameter $\omega_{\phi}(z)$. In building up the DE model by the parametric reconstruction method, efforts are normally made through the DE EoS parameter. In literature, there are many examples where the authors had proposed different redshift parametrizations of $\omega_{\phi}$ to fit with observational data \cite{lz1,lz2,cpl1,cpl2} (for review, see also Refs. \cite{jmang,kshi,aam,aam2}). However, it has been found that the parametrization of the energy density $\rho_{\phi}(z)$ (which depends on its EoS parameter through an integral) provides tighter constraints than $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ from the same observational dataset (for details, see Refs.\cite{mt0,mt1,mt2}). Recently, many investigations have been performed to find the actual functional form of $\omega_{\phi}$ directly from the available datasets \cite{np1,np2,np3,np4}. However, the problem with this method is that the parameters of interest usually contain noisy data. The present work uses the idea of parametrizing the DE density, where we have presented a parametric reconstruction of the DE function $X(z)$ (which is basically the DE density in units of its present value) to study the essential properties of DE. The basic properties of this chosen $X(z)$ has been discussed in detail in the next section. The functional form of $X(z)$ depends on the model parameters which have been constrained from the observational datasets. The constraints on the model parameters are obtained by using various observational datasets (namely, SN Ia, BAO and CMB) and $\chi^{2}$ minimization technique. With the estimated values of model parameters, we have then reconstructed the deceleration parameter and the EoS parameter at the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence levels. Furthermore, we have also tried to reconstruct the scalar potential $V(\phi)$ directly from the dark energy function $X(z)$. Clearly, the present study enables us to construct the scalar field potential without assuming its functional form. This is one of the main objectives of the present work. We have found that the results obtained in this work are consistent with the recent observations and the model do not deviate very far from the $\Lambda$CDM model at the present epoch. \\
\par The outline of the paper is as follows. In the next section, we have presented the basic formalism of a flat FRW cosmology along with the definitions of different cosmological parameters. We have then solved the field equations for this toy model using a specific choice of the dark energy function $X(z)$. The observational datasets and methodology are discussed in section \ref{data}. The main results of this analysis are summarized in section \ref{result}. Finally, in the last section, we have presented our main conclusions.
\section{Field equations and their solutions}\label{sec2
The action for a scalar field $\phi$ and the Einstein-Hilbert term is
described as
\begin{equation}
S = \int d^4 x \sqrt{-g} \left( \frac{R}{2\kappa^2}
- \frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu \phi \partial^\mu \phi - V(\phi) \right)\,,
\label{eq:2.1}
\end{equation}
where $g$ is the determinant of the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ and $R$ is the scalar curvature.
In this work, we have chosen natural units in which $\kappa^2=8\pi G = 1$. We have assumed the spatially flat Friedmann-Lema\^{i}tre-Robertson-Walker (FLRW)
space-time
\begin{equation}
ds^2 = dt^2 - a^2(t) \sum_{i=1,2,3}\left(dx^i\right)^2 \,.
\label{eq:2.2}
\end{equation}
Here, $a$ is the scale factor of the universe (taken to be $a = 1$ at the present epoch). In the above background, the corresponding Einstein field equations can be obtained as,
\begin{equation}\label{fe1}
3H^{2}=\rho_{m} + \frac{1}{2}{\dot{\phi}}^{2} + V(\phi)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{fe2}
2{\dot{H}} + 3H^{2}=-\frac{1}{2}{\dot{\phi}}^{2} + V(\phi)
\end{equation}
where $H=\frac{\dot{a}}{a}$ is the Hubble parameter, $\rho_{m}$ is the energy density of the matter field and $\phi$ is the scalar field with potential $V(\phi)$. Here and throughout the paper, an overhead dot implies differentiation with respect to the cosmic time $t$. \\
From equations (\ref{fe1}) and (\ref{fe2}), one can note that the energy density $\rho_{\phi}$ and pressure $p_{\phi}$ of the scalar field $\phi$ are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eqrp1}
\rho_{\phi} = \frac{1}{2}{\dot{\phi}}^{2} + V(\phi)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eqpp1}
p_{\phi}=\frac{1}{2}{\dot{\phi}}^{2} - V(\phi)
\end{equation}
Also, the conservation equation for the scalar field $\phi$ takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{ce1}
{\dot{\rho}}_{\phi} + 3H(\rho_{\phi} + p_{\phi})=0
\end{equation}
From these equations, one can now easily arrive at the matter conservation equation as
\begin{equation}\label{ce2}
{\dot{\rho}}_{m} + 3H\rho_{m}=0
\end{equation}
which can be easily integrated to yield
\begin{equation}\label{cem2}
\rho_{m}=\rho_{m0}a^{-3}
\end{equation}
where $\rho_{m0 }$is an integrating constant which denotes the present value of the matter energy density.
From equation (\ref{ce1}), the corresponding EoS parameter can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{wphirho}
\omega_{\phi}(z)=\frac{p_{\phi}}{\rho_{\phi}}=-1-\frac{(1+z)}{3X(z)}\frac{dX(z)}{dz}
\end{equation}
so that,
\begin{equation}
X(z)={\rm exp}{\left[3\int^{z}_{0}(1+\omega_{\phi}(z^{\prime}))dln(1+z^{\prime})\right]}
\end{equation}
where, $X(z)=\frac{\rho_{\phi}(z)}{\rho_{\phi 0}}$, $\rho_{\phi 0}$ denotes the present value of $\rho_{\phi}(z)$ and $z$ is the redshift parameter which is given by
$z=\frac{1}{a} -1$. It is evident from equation (\ref{wphirho}) that the EoS parameter becomes cosmological constant ($\omega_{\phi}=-1$) when $X(z)=$ constant. Clearly, the quantity $X(z)$, instead of $\omega_{\phi}(z)$, is a very good probe to investigate the nature of dark energy. In Refs. \cite{mt0,mt2}, the authors argued that one can obtain more information by reconstructing $\rho_{\phi}(z)$ rather than $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ from the observational data.\\
\par Using equations (\ref{fe1}), (\ref{cem2}) and (\ref{eans1}), the Hubble parameter for this model can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{eh}
H(z)=H_{0}\sqrt{\left[ \Omega_{m0}(1+z)^{3} + \Omega_{\phi 0}X(z)\right]}
\end{equation}
where $H_{0}$ is the present value of $H(z)$, $\Omega_{m0}=\frac{\rho_{m0}}{3H^{2}_{0}}$ and $\Omega_{\phi 0}=\frac{\rho_{\phi 0}}{3H^{2}_{0}}=(1-\Omega_{m0})$ are the present value of the density parameters of matter and scalar field respectively.\\
Next, we have used this $H$ to find out the behavior of the deceleration parameter $q$, which is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq}
q=-\frac{\ddot{a}}{aH^{2}}=-{\left(1+\frac{\dot{H}}{H^{2}}\right)}
\end{equation}
where $\dot{H}=-(1+z)H\frac{dH}{dz}$. \\
Using equations (\ref{eh}) and (\ref{eq}), we have obtained the expressions for the deceleration parameter $q$ (in terms of redshift $z$) as,
\begin{equation}\label{eq2}
q(z)=-1 + \frac{(1+z){\left[3\Omega_{m0}(1+z)^{2}+(1-\Omega_{m0})\frac{dX(z)}{dz}\right]}}{2{\left[\Omega_{m0}(1+z)^{3}+(1-\Omega_{m0})X(z)\right]}}
\end{equation}
Combining equations (\ref{eqrp1}) and (\ref{eqpp1}), one can obtain an expression for the scalar field $\phi(z)$ as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqrcpz1}
{\left(\frac{d\phi}{dz}\right)}^{2}=\frac{3H^{2}_{0}(1-\Omega_{m0})}{(1+z)H^{2}(z)}\frac{dX(z)}{dz}\nonumber\\ \\
\Rightarrow~\phi(z)=\phi_{0}+\int_{z}{\sqrt{\frac{3H^{2}_{0}(1-\Omega_{m0})}{(1+z^{\prime})H^{2}(z^{\prime})}\frac{dX(z^{\prime})}{dz^{\prime}}}}dz^{\prime}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\phi_{0}$ is an integration constant.\\
Similarly, using equations (\ref{eqrp1}) and (\ref{eqpp1}), one can reconstruct the potential for the scalar field as
\begin{equation}\label{eqrcvz1}
V(z)=3H^{2}_{0}(1-\Omega_{m0}){\left[X(z)-\frac{(1+z)}{6}\frac{dX(z)}{dz}\right]}
\end{equation}
Therefore, we can obtain the expression for the potential $V(\phi)$ as a function of $\phi$, by solving equations (\ref{eqrcpz1}) and (\ref{eqrcvz1}) if the values of the model parameters and the functional form of $X(z)$ are given.\\
\par Now, out of four equations (\ref{fe1}), (\ref{fe2}), (\ref{ce1}) and (\ref{ce2}), only three are independent as any one of them can be derived from the Einstein field equations with the help of the other three in view of the Bianchi identities. So, we have four unknown parameters (namely, $H$, $\rho_{m}$, $\phi$ and $V(\phi)$) to solve for. Hence, in order to solve the system completely, we need an additional input. For the present work, we have considered a simple assumption regarding the functional form for the evolution of $X(z)$ and is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eans1}
X(z)=(1+z)^{\alpha}{\rm e}^{\beta z}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are arbitrary constants to be fixed by observations. For this choice of $X(z)$, the EoS parameter $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ comes out as
\begin{equation}\label{wphiabl}
\omega_{\phi}(z)=-1+\frac{\alpha}{3}+\frac{\beta}{3}(1+z)
\end{equation}
which is similar to the well-known linear redshift parametrization of the EoS parameter $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ given by \cite{lz1,lz2}
\begin{equation}
\omega_{\phi}(z)=\omega_{0}+\omega_{1}z
\end{equation}
for $\omega_{0}=\omega_{\phi}(z=0)=-1+\frac{\alpha}{3}+\frac{\beta}{3}$ and $\omega_{1}=\frac{\beta}{3}$. This parametrization is well behaved at low redshifts, but
it diverges at high redshift. However, the above choice of $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ has been widely used in the context of dark energy (as it is a late-time phenomenon),
due to its simplicity. When $\alpha=0$ and $\beta=0$, the EoS parameter (\ref{wphiabl}) reduces to the standard $\Lambda$CDM model as well. Therefore, the simplicity of the functional form of $X(z)$ (or, equivalently, $\omega_{\phi}(z)$) makes it very attractive to study. In other words, the choice (\ref{eans1}) can be thought of as the parametrization of the DE density instead of $\omega_{\phi}(z)$. If desired cosmological scenario is achieved with this choice of $X(z)$, then some clues about the nature of DE may be obtained.\\
For this specific choice, equation (\ref{eh}) can be written as
\begin{equation}
H(z)=H_{0}\sqrt{\left[ \Omega_{m0}(1+z)^{3} + \Omega_{\phi 0}(1+z)^{\alpha}{\rm e}^{\beta z}\right]}
\end{equation}
The effective EoS parameter can be expressed in terms of $H$ and its derivative with respect to $z$ as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_{eff}(z)=\frac{p_{\phi}}{\rho_{m}+\rho_{\phi}}~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \nonumber \\ \\
\Rightarrow ~\omega_{eff}(z)=-\frac{2{\dot{H}}+3H^{2}}{3H^{2}}=-1+\frac{2(1+z)}{3H(z)}\frac{dH(z)}{dz}
\end{eqnarray}
and for the present model, the expression is
\begin{equation}
\omega_{eff}(z)=-\frac{(1-\Omega_{m0})(3-\alpha -\beta -\beta z){\rm e}^{\beta z}(1+z)^{\alpha}}{3{\rm e}^{\beta z}(1+z)^{\alpha}-3\Omega_{m0}((1+z)^{3}-{\rm e}^{\beta z}(1+z)^{\alpha})}
\end{equation} \\
In this case, $q(z)$, $V(z)$ and $\phi(z)$ evolve as
\begin{equation}\begin{split} &
q(z)=-1 \\& + \frac{{\left[3\Omega_{m0}(1+z)^{3}+(1-\Omega_{m0}){\rm e}^{\beta z}\lbrace \alpha (1+z)^{\alpha}+\beta (1+z)^{\alpha +1}\rbrace\right]}}{2{\left[\Omega_{m0}(1+z)^{3}+(1-\Omega_{m0})(1+z)^{\alpha}{\rm e}^{\beta z}\right]}}
\end{split}
\end{equation} \\
\begin{equation}\label{pz1}
\phi(z)=\phi_{0} + \int_{z} \sqrt{\frac{{(1-\Omega_{m0}){\rm e}^{\beta z^{\prime}}(1+z^{\prime})^{\alpha}[\alpha +\beta(1+z^{\prime})]}}{{\Omega_{m0}(1+z^{\prime})^{3}+(1-\Omega_{m0}){\rm e}^{\beta z^{\prime}}(1+z^{\prime})^{\alpha}}}}\frac{dz^{\prime}}{(1+z^{\prime})}
\end{equation} \\
\begin{equation}\label{vz1}
V(z)=\frac{H^{2}_{0}(\Omega_{m0}-1)}{2}{\rm e}^{\beta z}(1+z)^{\alpha}[\alpha +\beta(1+z)-6]
\end{equation} \\
Before reconstructing the functional form for $V(\phi)$ for given values of the model parameters (e.g., $\alpha$ and $\beta$), we first obtain the allowed ranges for these parameters from the observational datasets. In the next section, we shall attempt to estimate the values of $\alpha$ and $\beta$ using available observational datasets, so that the said model can explain the evolution history of the universe more precisely.
\section{Data analysis methods}\label{data}
Here, we have explained the method employed to constrain the theoretical models by using the recent observational datasets from Type Ia Supernova (SN Ia), Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) and Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation data surveying. We have used the $\chi^{2}$ minimum test with these datasets and found the best fit values of
arbitrary parameters for $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence levels (as discussed in section \ref{result}). In the following subsections, the $\chi^{2}$ analysis used for those datasets is described.
\subsection{SN Ia}
Firstly, we have used recently released Union2.1 compilation data \cite{sn1agnc} of 580 data points which has been widely used in recent times to constraint different dark energy models. The $\chi^2$ function for the SN Ia dataset is given by \cite{sndatamethodgnc}
\begin{equation}\label{eqchisnia}
\chi^2_{SN Ia}= {P} - \frac{{Q}^2}{R}
\end{equation}
where $P$, $Q$ and $R$ are defined as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
P = \sum^{580}_{i=1} \frac{[{\mu}^{obs}(z_{i}) - {\mu}^{th}(z_{i})]^2}{\sigma^2_{\mu}(z_{i})}\\
Q= \sum^{580}_{i=1} \frac{[{\mu}^{obs}(z_i) - {\mu}^{th}(z_{i})]}{\sigma^2_{\mu}(z_{i})}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{equation}
R= \sum^{580}_{i=1} \frac{1}{\sigma^2_{\mu}(z_{i})}
\end{equation}
where $\mu^{obs}$ represents the observed distance modulus while $\mu^{th}=5{\rm log}_{10}{[(1+z)\int^{z}_{0}\frac{H_{0}}{H(z)}dz]}+25-5{\rm log}_{10}H_{0}$, is the corresponding theoretical one. Also, the quantity $\sigma_{\mu}$ represents the statistical uncertainty in the distance modulus.\\
\par Alternatively, $\chi^2_{SN Ia}$ can be written (in terms of covariance matrix) as
\begin{equation}
\chi^2_{SN Ia}=X^{T} {C}^{-1}X\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $X$ is a vector of differences $X_{i}=\mu^{th}(z_{i})-\mu^{obs}(z_{i})$, and ${C}^{-1}$ is the inverse Union 2.1 compilation covariance matrix. It deserves mention that for large sample sets, one can use either equation (\ref{eqchisnia}) or equation (\ref{eqchibaocmb}) without any loss of generality.
\subsection{BAO/CMB}
Next, we have considered BAO \cite{bao1,bao2,bao3} and CMB \cite{cmb} measurement dataset to obtain the BAO/CMB constraints on the model parameters. In Ref. \cite{baocmb2}, the authors have obtained the BAO/CMB constrains on the model parameters by considering only two BAO measurements, whereas here we have considered six BAO data points (see table \ref{baodata}). For BAO dataset, the results from the WiggleZ Survey \cite{bao3}, SDSS DR7 Galaxy sample \cite{bao2} and 6dF Galaxy Survey \cite{bao1} datasets have been used. On the other hand, the CMB measurement considered is derived from the WMAP7 observations \cite{cmb}. The discussion about the BAO/CMB dataset has also been presented in a very similar way in \cite{aam3}, but the details of methodology for obtaining the BAO/CMB constraints on model parameters is available in Ref. \cite{goistri}. For this dataset, the $\chi^2$ function is defined as \cite{goistri}
\begin{equation}\label{eqchibaocmb}
\chi^2_{BAO/CMB} = X^{T}C^{-1}X
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
X=\left( \begin{array}{c}
\frac{d_A(z_\star)}{D_V(0.106)} - 30.95 \\
\frac{d_A(z_\star)}{D_V(0.2)} - 17.55 \\
\frac{d_A(z_\star)}{D_V(0.35)} - 10.11 \\
\frac{d_A(z_\star)}{D_V(0.44)} - 8.44 \\
\frac{d_A(z_\star)}{D_V(0.6)} - 6.69 \\
\frac{d_A(z_\star)}{D_V(0.73)} - 5.45
\end{array} \right)\,,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{center}
$C^{-1}={\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
0.48435 & -0.101383 & -0.164945 & -0.0305703 & -0.097874 & -0.106738 \\
-0.101383 & 3.2882 & -2.45497 & -0.0787898 & -0.252254 & -0.2751 \\
-0.164945 & -2.45499 & 9.55916 & -0.128187 & -0.410404 & -0.447574 \\
-0.0305703 & -0.0787898 & -0.128187 & 2.78728 & -2.75632 & 1.16437 \\
-0.097874 & -0.252254 & -0.410404 & -2.75632 & 14.9245 & -7.32441 \\
-0.106738 & -0.2751 & -0.447574 & 1.16437 & -7.32441 & 14.5022
\end{array}
\right)}$
\end{center}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{\it Values of $\frac{d_A(z_\star)}{D_V(Z_{BAO})}$ for different values of $z_{BAO}$. Here, $d_A(z)=\int_0^z \frac{dz'}{H(z')}$ is the co-moving angular-diameter
distance, $z_\star \approx 1091$ is the decoupling time and $D_V(z)=\left[d_A(z)^2\frac{z}{H(z)}\right]^{\frac{1}{3}}$ is the dilation scale \cite{goistri}.}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$z_{BAO}$ & 0.106 & 0.2& 0.35 & 0.44& 0.6& 0.73\\
\hline
$\frac{d_A(z_\star)}{D_V(Z_{BAO})}$ & $30.95 \pm 1.46$& $17.55 \pm 0.60$
& $10.11 \pm 0.37$ & $8.44 \pm 0.67$ & $6.69 \pm 0.33$ & $5.45 \pm 0.31$
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{baodata}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\par In this work, we have also considered the CMB shift parameter data (which is derived from Planck observation \cite{planckR}) and have examined its impact on the present dark energy constraints. For this dataset, the details of the methodology for obtaining the constraints on model parameters are described in Ref. \cite{planckR}). \\
\par Hence, the total $\chi^2$ for the combined dataset (SNIa+BAO/CMB) is given by
\begin{equation}
\chi^2_{tot}= \chi^2_{SN Ia} + \chi^2_{BAO/CMB}
\end{equation}
For the combination of SN Ia and BAO/CMB datasets, one can now obtain the best-fit values of parameters by minimizing $\chi^2_{tot}$. Then, one can use the maximum likelihood method and take the total likelihood function ${\cal L}_{tot}={\rm e}^{-\frac{\chi^2_{tot}}{2}}$ as the products of these individual likelihood functions of each dataset, i.e., ${\cal L}_{tot}={\cal L}_{SN} \times {\cal L}_{BAO/CMB}$. The best-fit parameter values $b^{*}$ are those that maximize the likelihood function ${\cal L}_{tot}(b^{*})$, or equivalently minimize $\chi^2_{tot}(b^{*})=-2{\rm ln}{\cal L}_{tot}(b^{*})$. The contours of $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ constraints correspond to the sets of cosmological parameters (centered on $b^{*}$) bounded by $\chi^2_{tot}(b) = \chi^2_{tot}(b^{*}) + 2.3$ and $\chi^2_{tot}(b)= \chi^2_{tot}(b^{*}) + 6.17$ respectively. For the present model, we have minimized the $\chi^{2}$ function with respect to the model parameters $\lbrace \alpha ,\beta\rbrace$ to obtain their best fit values. In order to do so, we have fixed $\Omega_{m0}$ to some constant value.
\section{Results of data analysis}\label{result}
Following the $\chi^{2}$ analysis (as presented in section \ref{data}), in this section, we have obtained the constraints on the model parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ for the combined dataset (SN Ia+BAO/CMB). In this work, we have obtained the confidence region ellipses in the $\alpha - \beta$ parameter space by fixing $\Omega_{m0}$ to $0.26$, $0.27$ and $0.28$ for the combined dataset. The $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence level contours in $\alpha - \beta$ plane is shown in figure {\ref{figc} for SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset. It has also been found from figure {\ref{figc} that current constraints favor a $\Lambda$CDM model within $1\sigma$ confidence limit (as shown by red dot). The best-fit values of $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are presented in the table \ref{tab:fntable1}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{allc.eps}
\caption{\em Plot of $1\sigma$ (light gray) and $2\sigma$ (gray) confidence contours on $\alpha-\beta$ parameter space for SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset. In this plot, black dot represents the best-fit value of the pair ($\alpha,\beta$) arising from the analysis of SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset. Also, the red dot represents the standard $\Lambda$CDM model (as $\omega_{\phi}=-1$ for $\alpha=0$ and $\beta=0$). The plot is for $\Omega_{m0} = 0.27$. }
\label{figc}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{\em Best fit values of the model parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ (within $1\sigma$ confidence level) for the analysis of SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset with different choices of $\Omega_{m0}$. Here, $\chi^{2}_{m}$ represents the minimum value of $\chi^{2}$. }
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Data & $\Omega_{m0}$ & $\alpha$ & $\beta$ & $\chi^{2}_{m}$ \\ \hline
SN Ia+BAO/CMB & $0.26$ &$0.03$ & $0.07$ & $564.81$\\
& $0.27$ &$-0.02$ & $0.05$ & $564.79$\\
& $0.28$ &$-0.08$ & $0.03$ & $564.80$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:fntable1}
\end{center}
\end{table}
The Marginalized likelihoods for the present model is shown in figure \ref{figl}. It is evident from the likelihood plots that the likelihood functions are well fitted
to a Gaussian distribution function for SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset. For a comprehensive analysis, we have also used $\Omega_{m0}$ and $H_{0}$ as free parameters along with $\alpha$ and $\beta$. The result of corresponding statistical analysis is presented in table \ref{tab:fntable2}. It is clear from table \ref{tab:fntable1} and \ref{tab:fntable2} that the best-fit value of $\Omega_{m0}$ comes out to be $0.28$ which was one of the choices in table \ref{tab:fntable1}, and the corresponding values of $\alpha$ and $\beta$ does not differ by very large values. However, the values of the parameters ($H_{0}$ and $\Omega_{m0}$) obtained in the present work are slightly lower than the values obtained by the Planck analysis, which puts the limit on the parameters as, $H_{0}=67.3\pm 1.2$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$ and $\Omega_{m0}=0.315\pm 0.017$ with $1\sigma$ errors \cite{planckh0}.\\
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{lhall1.eps}\\
\vspace{7mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{lhall2.eps}
\caption{\em The marginalised likelihood functions of the present model are shown for SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset. Both the plots are for $\Omega_{m0} = 0.27$. }
\label{figl}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\par In addition to this, we have also obtained the constraints on model parameters using the combination of SN Ia, BAO and the CMB shift parameter (which is derived from Planck observation \cite{planckR}) datasets to study the properties of our model extensively. For the SN Ia+BAO+CMB(Planck) dataset, the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence level contours in $\alpha - \beta$ plane is shown in figure {\ref{figcp}. The results of corresponding data analysis are summarized in table \ref{tab:fntable3} and \ref{tab:fntable4}. It has been found from figure \ref{figc} and \ref{figcp} that the constraints obtained on the parameter values by the SN Ia+BAO+CMB(Planck) dataset are very tight as compared to the constraints obtained from the SN Ia+BAO/CMB(WMAP7) dataset. However, the change in the best fit values of the model parameters ($\alpha$ and $\beta$) for the two datasets is very small. Also, the best fit values of $H_{0}$ and $\Omega_{m0}$ obtained in this case are very close to the values obtained by the Planck analysis \cite{planckh0}. We have found from figure \ref{figcp} that the present constraints obtained from SNIa+BAO+CMB(Planck) dataset favor a standard $\Lambda$CDM model within $2\sigma$ confidence limit as shown by the red dot, whereas for SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset, the $\Lambda$CDM model was favored with $1\sigma$ confidence limit as evident from figure \ref{figc}.\\
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{allcp.eps}
\caption{\em This figure shows the $1\sigma$ (light gray) and $2\sigma$ (gray) confidence contours on $\alpha-\beta$ parameter space using the SN Ia+BAO+CMB(Planck) dataset. In this plot, the black dot represents the best-fit value of the pair ($\alpha,\beta$), whereas the red dot represents the standard $\Lambda$CDM model ($\alpha=0$ and $\beta=0$). The plot is for $\Omega_{m0} = 0.3$. }
\label{figcp}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{\em Best fit values of $H_{0}$, $\Omega_{m0}$, $\alpha$ and $\beta$ (within $1\sigma$ confidence level) for the analysis of SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Data & $H_{0}$ &$\Omega_{m0}$ & $\alpha$ & $\beta$ & $\chi^{2}_{m}$ \\ \hline
SN Ia+BAO/CMB& $66.02$ & $0.28$ &$-0.03$ & $0.05$ & $564.78$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:fntable2}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{\em Best fit values of the model parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ (within $1\sigma$ confidence level) for the analysis of SN Ia+BAO+CMB (Planck) dataset by considering different values of $\Omega_{m0}$.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Data & $\Omega_{m0}$ & $\alpha$ & $\beta$ & $\chi^{2}_{m}$ \\ \hline
SN Ia+BAO+CMB (Planck) & $0.3$ &$-0.04$ & $0.03$ & $564.49$\\
& $0.315$ &$-0.05$ & $0.03$ & $564.32$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:fntable3}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{\em Best fit values of $H_{0}$, $\Omega_{m0}$, $\alpha$ and $\beta$ (within $1\sigma$ confidence level) for the analysis of SN Ia+BAO+CMB (Planck) dataset.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Data & $H_{0}$ &$\Omega_{m0}$ & $\alpha$ & $\beta$ & $\chi^{2}_{m}$ \\ \hline
SN Ia+BAO+CMB (Planck)& $66.83$ & $0.294$ &$-0.05$ & $0.04$ & $565.79$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:fntable4}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\par In the upper panel of figure \ref{figqz}, the evolution of the deceleration parameter $q(z)$ is shown within $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions around the best fit curve for the combined dataset. It is clear from figure \ref{figqz} that $q(z)$ shows a smooth transition from a decelerated ($q > 0$, at high $z$) to an accelerated ($q < 0$, at low $z$) phase of expansion of the universe at the transition redshift $z_{t}=0.75$ for the best-fit model (as shown by central dark line). It deserves mention here that the value of $z_{t}$ obtained in the present work is very close to the value obtained for various dark energy models by Magana et al. \cite{jmang}. They have found that the universe has a transition from a decelerated phase to an accelerated phase at $z_{t}\sim 0.75$, $z_{t}\sim 0.7$, $z_{t}\sim 1$ and $z_{t}\sim 0.7$ for the Polynomial, BA, FSLL I and FSLL II parametrizations of $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ respectively (see \cite{jmang} and references there in). Also, the present value of $q$ (say, $q_{0}$) obtained in this work for the best-fit model is $-0.58$. Hence, the values of $z_{t}$ and $q_{0}$ obtained in the present work are very close to the value obtained for the standard $\Lambda$CDM model ($z_{t}\approx 0.74$ and $q_{0}\approx-0.59$), as indicated by the red dashed line in the upper panel of figure \ref{figqz}. Recently Ishida et al. \cite{baocmb2} used a kink-like expression for $q(z)$ to study the expansion history of the universe. They have obtained $z_{t}=0.84^{+0.13}_{-0.17}$ and $z_{t}=0.88^{+0.12}_{-0.10}$ (at $2\sigma$ confidence level) for $SDSS+2dfGRS ~BAO+Gold182$ and $SDSS+2dfGRS~BAO+SNLS$ datasets respectively. So, our analysis ($z_{t}=0.75\pm 0.02$, at $2\sigma$ level) provides better constraint on $z_{t}$ as compared to the results of Ishida et al. \cite{baocmb2}. Next, we have shown the reconstructed evolution history of the effective EoS parameter $\omega_{eff}(z)$ in the lower panel of figure \ref{figqz} for this model using SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset. The lower panel of figure \ref{figqz} reveals that $\omega_{eff}(z)$ was very close to zero at high $z$ and attains negative value ($-1<\omega_{eff}<-\frac{1}{3}$, within $2\sigma$ limit) at low $z$, and thus does not suffer from the problem of `future singularity'. These results are also in good agreement with the observational data. We have also reconstructed the EoS parameter $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ for the scalar field in the inset diagram of the lower panel of figure \ref{figqz}. For the best-fit model, the present value of $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ comes out to be $-0.99^{+0.04}_{-0.03}$ (with $1\sigma$ errors) and $-0.99^{+0.08}_{-0.07}$ (with $2\sigma$ errors), which is definitely within the constraint range \cite{wv,dav}. Moreover, our results are also in good agreement with other previous works \cite{aam,jmang,kshi,aam2}, where the authors have considered different parameterizations of $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ and obtained $\omega_{\phi}(z=0)\approx -1$ at $1\sigma$ confidence level for the analysis of various observational datasets.\\
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{qc2.eps}\\
\vspace{7mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{weffc2.eps}
\caption{\em a) Upper panel: The evolution of $q(z)$ as a function of $z$. The dashed line represents $\Lambda$CDM model with $\Omega_{\Lambda 0}=0.725$ and $\Omega_{m0}=0.275$. b) Lower panel: The evolution of $\omega_{eff}(z)$ as a function of $z$. Both the plots are for the best-fit values of the pair ($\alpha$, $\beta$) arising from the analysis of SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset and $\Omega_{m0} = 0.27$ (see table \ref{tab:fntable1}). The $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions have been shown and the central dark line represents the best fit curve.}
\label{figqz}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\par The upper panel of figure \ref{figdmpot1} shows the evolution of the potential $V(z)$ as a function of $z$. The best fit of the potential, as indicated by the central line, remains almost constant in the range $0<z<3$. For the sake of completeness, using the parametric relations [$\phi(z)$, $V(z)$] given by equations (\ref{pz1}) and (\ref{vz1}), we have also obtained the form of the dark energy potential $V(\phi)$ by a numerical method for some given values of the model parameters. The evolution of $V(\phi)$ is shown in the lower panel of figure \ref{figdmpot1} and it has been found that $V(\phi)$ sharply increases with $\phi$ for the choice of $X(z)$ given by equation (\ref{eans1}). For this plot, we have considered $\alpha=-0.02$, $\beta=0.05$, $\Omega_{m0}=0.27$ and $\phi_{0}=0.1$. In this case, the potential $V(\phi)$ can be explicitly expressed in terms of $\phi$ as
\begin{equation}\begin{split} &
\frac{V(\phi)}{3H^{2}_{0}}\approx 2579.13 \phi^{5}-2554.97\phi^{4}\\&
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+998.06\phi^{3} -189.63\phi^{2}+17.57\phi +0.1
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which comes to be a polynomial in $\phi$.\\
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{vz.eps}\\
\vspace{7mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{vphim1.eps}
\caption{\em a) Upper panel: The plot of the scalar potential $V(z)$ (in units of $3H^{2}_{0}$) as a function of $z$ with $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions. The central dark line is the best fit curve. b) Lower panel: The evolution of the reconstructed potential (in units of $3H^{2}_{0}$) with the scalar field $\phi$ by considering $\phi_{0}=0.1$. Both the plots are for the best-fit values of ($\alpha ,\beta$) for the SNIa+BAO/CMB dataset and $\Omega_{m0}=0.27$. }
\label{figdmpot1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\par The upper panel of figure \ref{figxz} shows the evolution of $X(z)$ as a function of $z$ at the $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence levels. It can be seen from figure \ref{figxz} that $X(z)$ behaves like cosmological constant (i.e., $X(z)=1$) at the present epoch, but deviation from this is clearly visible at high redshift. The variation of energy densities $\rho_{m}$ and $\rho_{\phi}$ with the redshift $z$ are also shown in the lower panel of figure \ref{figxz}, which shows that $\rho_{\phi}$ dominates over $\rho_{m}$ at the present epoch. This result is in accordance with observational predictions.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{xz.eps}\\
\vspace{7mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth,height=0.21\textheight]{rho.eps}
\caption{\em Upper panel: The evolution of $X(z)$ with $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions. Lower panel: Plot of $\rho_{m}(z)$ (dashed curve) and $\rho_{\phi}(z)$ (with $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ confidence regions) as a function of $z$ for this toy model with $\Omega_{m0}= 0.27$ (in units of $3H^{2}_{0}$). In each panel, the central dark line is the best fit curve.}
\label{figxz}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}\label{conclusion}
In this paper, we have focused on a quintessence model in which the scalar field is considered as a candidate of dark energy. It has been shown that for a spatially flat FRW universe, we can construct a presently accelerating model of the universe with the history of a deceleration in the past by considering a specific choice of the dimensionless dark energy function $X(z)$. The motivation behind this particular choice of $X(z)$ has been discussed in details in section \ref{sec2} and for this specific ansatz, we have solved the field equations and have obtained the expressions for different cosmological parameters, such as $H(z)$, $q(z)$ and $\omega_{eff}(z)$. As mentioned earlier that the model parameters ($\alpha$ and $\beta$) are a good indicator of deviation of the present model from cosmological constant as for $\alpha=0$ and $\beta=0$ the model mimics the $\Lambda$CDM model. We have also constrained the model parameters using the SN Ia+BAO/CMB(WMAP7) and SN Ia+BAO+CMB(Planck) datasets to study the different properties of this model extensively. It is evident from table \ref{tab:fntable1} that the best-fit values of $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are very close to zero. So, our analysis indicates that the reconstructed $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ is very close to the $\Lambda$CDM value at the present epoch. In summary, using SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset jointly, we have then reconstructed various parameters (e.g., $q(z)$, $\omega_{eff}(z)$ and $\omega_{\phi}(z)$) as well as the quintessence potential $V(\phi)$ directly from the chosen $X(z)$, which describes the properties of the dark energy. The resulting cosmological scenarios are found to be very interesting. It has been found that the evolution of $q(z)$ in this model shows a smooth transition from a decelerated to an accelerated phase of expansion of the universe at late times. As discussed in section \ref{result}, it has been found that our reconstructed results of $q(z)$ and $\omega_{\phi}(z)$ are in good agreement with the previous works \cite{aam,jmang,kshi,aam2}. For completeness of the work, we have also derived the form of the effective scalar field potential $V(\phi)$, in terms of $\phi$, for this model and the resulting potential is found to be a polynomial in $\phi$. \\
\par From the present investigation, it can be concluded that the SN Ia+BAO/CMB dataset although supports the concordance $\Lambda$CDM model at the $1\sigma$ confidence level, but it favors the scalar field dark energy model as well. In other words, it is well worth emphasizing that the observational datasets are not yet good enough to strongly distinguish present dark energy model from the $\Lambda$CDM model at present. With the progress of the observational techniques as well as the data analysis methods in the future, we hope that the parameters in $X(z)$ can be constrained more precisely, which will improve our understanding about the nature of dark energy. The present analysis is one preliminary step towards that direction. In future, we plan to test this parametric form of $X(z)$ in scalar-tensor theories of gravity.
\section{Acknowledgements} A.A.M. acknowledges UGC, Govt. of India for financial support through Maulana Azad National Fellowship. This work was partially supported by the JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) \# 25800136 and the research-funds presented by Fukushima University (K.B.). S.D. wishes to thank IUCAA, Pune for associateship program. Authors are also thankful to the anonymous referee whose useful suggestions have improved the quality of the paper.
|
\section{Introduction}
Modeling stars within the framework of Einstein theory of gravity has occupied researchers for a century. The first exact solution of the Einstein field equations was obtained by Schwarzschild in 1916. This solution describes the exterior vacuum spacetime of a spherically symmetric body. In the same year, Schwarzschild presented the interior solution describing the gravitational behaviour of a uniform density sphere. Since then, hundreds of exact solutions of the classical field equations describing static fluid spheres have been obtained in which the energy-momentum tensor describing the matter distribution incorporated anisotropy, bulk viscosity, electromagnetic field, scalar field, dark energy as well as the cosmological constant. Various techniques ranging from adhoc assumptions of the gravitational potentials, specifying an equation of state, spacetime symmetry, conformal flatness, to name a few, have been employed to solve the field equations. A systematic study of the physical viability of these solutions have been carried out by \citet{Delgaty98} who showed that only a few class of available solutions are capable of describing realistic stellar configurations. Many of these results have later been extended to higher dimensions as well. Interestingly, the dimensionality of spacetime apparently influence the stability of these fluid spheres. With astronomical observations of compact objects becoming more precise and data sets of neutron stars and strange stars being readily available, a new and invigorated search for exact solutions of the $4$-D Einstein field equations are being carried out. In the recent past, there has been an explosion of such solutions describing compact objects which adequately fit observations. Observational data on mass-to-radius ratio, redshift and luminosity profiles are some of the key characteristics for testing the physical validity of these models. One of the objectives of these models is to fine-tune the equation of state in the high density regime. Apart from classical barotropic equation of state $p = \alpha \rho$, many models are being developed based on our current understanding of particle physics. The MIT bag model first proposed by \citet{Chodos74} has been widely used in modeling `strange stars' composed of $u$, $d$ and $s$ quarks. The Chaplygin equation of state \citep{Chap} incorporating dark energy into the stellar fluid configuration has been employed to model compact objects ranging from quark stars through to neutron stars. While these models are successful in accounting for observational data of compact objects, one cannot ignore the fact that gravitational behaviour (metric functions) and thermodynamical behaviour (energy-momentum tensor) can be tweaked by hand to align them with observations. Therefore, the fundamental question to be asked is: whether classical general relativity is sufficient to account for observed stellar characteristics. In other words, can certain, if not all, stellar features reside in higher order theories of gravity?\par
The behaviour and dynamics of the gravitational field can be extended to higher dimensions in a natural way. An elegant and fruitful generalization of classical general relativity is the so-called Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet (EGB) gravity which arises from the incorporation of an additional term to the standard Einstein-Hilbert action, which is quadratic in the Riemann tensor. Varying this additional term with respect to the metric tensor only produces a system of second order equations which are compatible with classical general relativity. In standard $4$-D, EGB and Einstein gravity are indistinguishable. The departure from the standard $4$-D Einstein gravity occurs in higher dimensions. There have been many interesting results in the $5$-D EGB theory ranging from the vacuum exterior solution due to \citet{dg} through to generalization of the Kerr-Schild vacuum solution. The dynamics of gravitational collapse and the resulting end-states in EGB gravity has also received widespread attention. The study of a spherically symmetric inhomogeneous dust (as well as null dust) in EGB gravity with $\alpha > 0$ was shown to alter the causal structure of the singularities compared to the standard $5$-D general relativistic case. The result is, in fact, a counter example of the cosmic censorship conjecture. The study of Vaidya radiating black-holes in EGB gravity has revealed that the location of the horizons is changed as compared to the standard $4$-D gravity. The universality of Schwarzschild's uniform density solution was established using EGB gravity and later extended to Lovelock gravity. The Buchdahl inequality for static spheres has been extended to $5$-D EGB gravity. It was shown that the sign of the Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet coupling constant plays a crucial role on the mass-to-radius ratio. An interesting outcome of the investigation was that one could pack in more mass in $5$-D EGB compared to standard $4$-D Einstein gravity to achieve stability. Despite the non-linearity of the field equations, several exact solutions in $5$-D EGB gravity have recently been found. The classic isothermal sphere has been generalized to $5$-D EGB gravity. Just as in the $4$-D case, the $5$-D EGB models exhibit a linear barotropic equation of state.\par
In $4$-D gravity, one of the exact solutions which has got much attention is the \citet{kb} solution. It is a solution of the Einstein-Maxwell system describing a spherically symmetric charged fluid sphere. The gravitational potentials are finite everywhere within the stellar distribution and the matter variables are well-behaved \cite{Ivanov2002}. Consequently, the Krori-Barua (KB) solution has been used by many to model compact objects within the framework of Einstein's gravity. Several researchers have utilized various equations of state, ranging from the MIT bag model through to the generalized Chaplygin gas together with the KB ansatz to model compact stars such as $Her X-1$, $4U 1820-30$, $SAX J 1808.4-3658$, $4U 1728-34$, $PSR 0943+10$ and $RX J185635-3754$ \cite{Junevicus1976,Varela2010,Rahaman2010,Rahaman2012}. In this work, we intend to extend the KB solution to $5$-D EGB gravity. The motivation for this modification is to analyze the effects, if any, of the EGB term on stability, compactness and other physical features of compact stellar objects.
\section{Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet Gravity}\label{sec:2}
The Gauss-Bonnet action in five dimensions is written as
\begin{equation}\label{1}
S=\int \sqrt{-g} \left[\frac{1}{2}(R-2 \Lambda +\alpha
L_{GB})\right]d^5x +S_{matter},
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is the Gauss-Bonnet coupling constant. The strength of the action $L_{GB}$ lies in the fact that despite the
Lagrangian being quadratic in the Ricci tensor, Ricci scalar and the Riemann tensor, the equations of motion turn out to be second
order quasi-linear which are compatible with the standard Einstein formalism of gravity. The Gauss-Bonnet term is of no consequence for $n\leq 4$ but is
generally nonzero for $n \geq 5$.
The EGB field equations may be written as
\begin{equation}\label{2}
G_{ab}+\alpha H_{ab}=T_{ab},
\end{equation}
with metric signature $(- + + + +)$ where $G_{ab}$ is the Einstein
tensor. The coupling constant $\alpha$ is related to the inverse string tension arising from the low energy effective action of string theory and to this end we consider $\alpha \geq 0$. The Lanczos tensor is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{3}
H_{ab}&= &2\left(R R_{ab}-2R_{ac}R^c_b- 2
R^{cd}R_{acbd}+R^{cde}_aR_{bcde}\right)\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{1}{2}g_{ab}L_{GB},
\end{eqnarray}
where the Lovelock term has the form
\begin{equation}\label{4}
L_{GB}=R^2 +R_{abcd}R^{abcd}- 4R_{cd}R^{cd}.
\end{equation}
In the above formalism we use geometric units with the coupling constant $\kappa$ set to unity.
\section{Field equations}
\label{sec:3}The $5$-dimensional line element for a static spherically symmetric spacetime has the standard form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{5} ds^{2}& =& -e^{2\nu(r)} dt^{2} + e^{2\lambda(r)} dr^{2} +
r^{2}(d\theta^{2} + \sin^{2}{\theta} d\phi^2\nonumber\\
&& +\sin^{2}{\theta} \sin^{2}{\phi^2}
d\psi),
\end{eqnarray}
in coordinates ($x^i = t,r,\theta,\phi,\psi$). By considering the comoving fluid velocity as $u^a=e^{-\nu}\delta_0^a$, the EGB field equation (\ref{2}) yields the following set of independent equations
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{7a}\rho&=& \frac{3}{e^{4\lambda }r^3} \left(4\alpha
\lambda'
+re^{2\lambda}-re^{4\lambda}- r^2 e^{2\lambda}\lambda' -4\alpha e^{2\lambda}\lambda'\right),\\
\label{7b} p_r& = &\frac{3}{e^{4\lambda }r^3}
\left[-re^{4\lambda}+
(r^2 \nu' +r +4\alpha \nu')e^{2\lambda} -4\alpha \nu'\right] , \\
\label{7c} p_t&=& \frac{1}{e^{4\lambda }r^2} \left(- e^{4\lambda
}- 4\alpha \nu''+ 12 \alpha \nu' \lambda' -4 \alpha
(\nu')^2\right)
\nonumber\\
&& +\frac{1}{e^{2\lambda }r^2} \left(1- r^2 \nu' \lambda' +2r \nu'
-2r \lambda' +r^2(\nu')^2 \right) \nonumber \\
&& +\frac{1}{e^{2\lambda }r^2} \left(r^2 \nu'' -4\alpha
\nu'\lambda' + 4\alpha (\nu')^2 +4\alpha \nu''\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\rho$, $p_r$ and $p_t$ respectively denote the matter density, radial and transverse pressure of the fluid. Note that a $\prime$ denotes the differentiation with respect to the radial coordinate $r$.
\section{A particular solution}
Note that equations (6)-(8) correspond to a system of three linearly independent equations with five unknowns, namely $\rho$, $p_r$, $p_t$, $\lambda$ and $\nu$. To analyze behaviour of the physical parameters, we assume that the metric potentials are given by the \citet{kb} solution
\[2\lambda(r) = Ar^{2}, 2\nu(r) = Br^{2}+C\]
where $A$, $B$ and $C$ are undetermined constants which can be obtained from the matching conditions.
Consequently, the matter density and the two pressures are obtained as
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho &=& \frac{3e^{-2Ar^{2}}}{r^{2}}\left[-4A\alpha+e^{2Ar^{2}}+e^{Ar^{2}}\left(4A\alpha+Ar^{2}-1\right)\right]\label{den},\\
p_r &=& \frac{3e^{-2Ar^{2}}}{r^{2}}\left[-4\alpha B-e^{2Ar^{2}}+e^{Ar^{2}}\left(1+4\alpha B+Br^{2}\right)\right]\label{pr},\\
p_t &=&\frac{e^{-2Ar^{2}}}{r^{2}}\left[-e^{-2Ar^{2}}-4\alpha B\left\{1+(B-3A)r^{2}\right\}\right]\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{e^{-Ar^{2}}}{r^{2}}\left[1+4\alpha B+\left\{B(3+4\alpha B)-2A(1+2\alpha B) \right\}r^{2}\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.+B(B-A)r^{4}\right]\label{pt}.
\end{eqnarray}
The anisotropy $\Delta=p_t-p_r$ is obtained as
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta&=&\frac{e^{-2Ar^{2}}}{r^{2}}\left[2e^{2Ar^{2}}+4\alpha B \left\{2+(3A-B)r^{2}\right\}\right]\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{e^{-Ar^{2}}}{r^{2}}\left[2+2Ar^{2}+(A-B)Br^{4}\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.+4\alpha B \left\{2+(A-B)r^{2}\right\}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Exterior spacetime and matching conditions}
The static exterior spacetime in $5$-D is described by the Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet-Schwarzschild
solution\cite{dg}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{8} ds^{2}& =& -F(r) dt^{2} + [F(r)]^{-1} dr^{2} +
r^{2}\left(d\theta^{2} + \sin^{2}{\theta} d\phi^2\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left. +\sin^{2}{\theta} \sin^{2}{\phi}
d\psi\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where,
\begin{equation}
\label{9} F(r) =1+\frac{r^2}{4 \alpha}
\left(1-\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha M}{r^4}}\right).
\end{equation}
In (\ref{9}) $M$ is associated with the gravitational mass of the hypersphere.
Using continuity of the metric functions and their derivatives, namely $g_{rr}$, $g_{tt}$ and $\frac{\partial g_{tt}}{\partial r}$ across the boundary $r=R$ we get,
\[e^{-AR^{2}}=1+\frac{R^2}{4 \alpha}
\left(1-\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha M}{R^4}}\right),\]
\[e^{BR^{2}+C}=1+\frac{R^2}{4 \alpha}
\left(1-\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha M}{R^4}}\right),\]
\[2B e^{BR^{2}+C}=-\frac{1}{2\alpha}\frac{1-\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha M}{R^{4}}}}{\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha M}{R^{4}}}}.\]
Solving the above set of equations we get,
\begin{equation}
A=-\frac{1}{R^{2}}\ln\left[1+\frac{R^{2}}{4\alpha}\left(1-\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha R}{R^{4}}}\right)\right],
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
B=-\frac{1}{4\alpha}\frac{1-\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha M}{R^{4}}}}{\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha M}{R^{4}}}}\frac{1}{1+\frac{R^{2}}{4\alpha}\left(1-\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha R}{R^{4}}}\right)},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
C=\ln\left[1+\frac{R^{2}}{4\alpha}\left(1-\sqrt{1+\frac{8\alpha R}{R^{4}}}\right)\right]-BR^{2}.
\end{equation}
\section{Physical features}
Physical features of our model are outlined below:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For a physically acceptable model, the energy density $\rho$ and two pressures $p_r$ and $p_t$ should be positive inside the star. Also, the radial pressure must vanish at a finite radial distance while the tangential pressure $p_t$ need not vanish at the boundary.
In our model, we note that for specific choices of the model parameters (we have assumed $A=0.006$, $B=0.008$ and $\alpha=0,~1.5$), the density and two pressures remain positive throughout the stellar interior (see Fig.~\ref{fg1}, Fig.~\ref{fg2} and Fig.~\ref{fg3} ). Most interestingly, the radial pressure $p_r$ vanishes at a greater radial distance ($10~$km) in EGB gravity as compared to GTR ($9.58~$km).
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{rho.pdf}
\caption{Matter density $\rho$ plotted against the radial distance $r$ where the (red) solid line and the dashed line correspond to EGB gravity and GTR, respectively. We have considered two cases: (i) $A=0.006$, $B=0.008$ and $\alpha=1.5$ (EGB gravity) and (ii) $A=0.006$, $B=0.008$ and $\alpha=0$ (GTR).}
\label{fg1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{pr.pdf}
\caption{Radial pressure $p_r$ plotted against against the radial distance $r$ by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1} }
\label{fg2}
\end{figure}
\item Fig.~\ref{fg4} shows that anisotropy is zero at the centre, i.e., $\Delta (r=0) = 0$ and it increase towards the surface. Interestingly, the higher dimensional correctional term has very little or no effect on the anisotropic stress as can be seen in the plot.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{pt.pdf}
\caption{Transverse pressure $p_t$ plotted against against the radial distance $r$ by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1}}
\label{fg3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{delta.pdf}
\caption{Anisotropic factor $\Delta$ plotted against against the radial distance $r$ by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1} }
\label{fg4}
\end{figure}
\item From Eqs.~(\ref{den}) and (\ref{pr}), we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d\rho}{dr}&=&-\frac{3e^{-2Ar^{2}}}{4\pi r^{3}}\left[e^{Ar^{2}}\left(4A^{2}r^{2}\alpha +A^{2}r^{4}-Ar^{2}+4A\alpha-1\right)\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.-4A\alpha(1+2Ar^{2})+e^{2Ar^{2}}\right],\\
\frac{dp_r}{dr}&=&-\frac{3e^{-2Ar^{2}}}{4\pi r^{3}}\left[e^{Ar^{2}}\left(Ar^{2}+4Ar^{2}\alpha B+ABr^{4}+1+4\alpha B\right)\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.-4\alpha B(1+2Ar^{2})-e^{2Ar^{2}}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
The radial variation of density and pressure have been shown in Fig.~\ref{fg5}and Fig.~\ref{fg6}respectively. which clearly shows that $\frac{dp_r}{dr} < 0$ and $\frac{d\rho}{dr} < 0$, both in EGB gravity and in GTR.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{drho.pdf}
\caption{The derivative of the matter density $\rho$ plotted against against the radial distance $r$ by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1} }
\label{fg5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{dp.pdf}
\caption{The derivative of radial pressure $p_r$ plotted against against the radial distance $r$ by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1} }
\label{fg6}
\end{figure}
\item Fig.~\ref{fg7} shows that the ratio of trace of stress tensor to energy density $(p_r+2p_t)/\rho$ decreases
radially outward both in EGB gravity as in GTR which is a desirable feature for a fluid sphere.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{sec.pdf}
\caption{$\frac{p_r+2p_t}{\rho}$ plotted against radial distance $r$ Radial pressure by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1} }
\label{fg7}
\end{figure}
\item For a physically acceptable model, it is expected that the radial sound speed $v_{sr}^{2} (=\frac{dp_r}{d\rho})$ and transverse sound speed $v_{st}^{2} (=\frac{dp_t}{d\rho})$ should be causal, i.e., we should have $ 0 < v_{sr}^{2} \leq 1$ and $ 0 < v_{st} \leq 1$. We have shown graphically that both in EGB gravity and GTR, the causality condition is not violated at any point within the stellar interior (see Fig.~\ref{fg8} and Fig.~\ref{fg9}). It is evident that in EGB gravity, both the sound speeds take a higher value as compared to its GTR counterpart.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{sv1.pdf}
\caption{Radial sound velocity $v_{sr}^2$ plotted against against the radial distance $r$ by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1} }
\label{fg8}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{sv2.pdf}
\caption{Transverse sound velocity $v_{st}^2$ plotted against against the radial distance $r$ by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1} }
\label{fg9}
\end{figure}
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Stability}
To check stability of the configuration, we follow the cracking (or overturning) method of Herrera\cite{her} which suggests that a potentially stable region is one where the inequality $ v_{st}^{2} - v_{sr}^{2} < 0$ holds. In Fig.~\ref{fg10}, we have shown the difference of $ v_{st}^{2} -v_{sr}^{2}$ do not change sign which clearly indicates that the configuration is stable for the assumed set of values.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{sv3.pdf}
\caption{$v_{st}^2-v_{sr}^2$ plotted against against the radial distance $r$ by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1} }
\label{fg10}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{sv4.pdf}
\caption{$|v_{st}^2-v_{sr}^2|$ plotted against against the radial distance $r$ by taking the same values of the constants mentioned in fig.\ref{fg1}}
\label{fg11}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Energy Conditions}
Let us now check whether our anisotropic stellar model satisfies the following energy conditions:
\begin{eqnarray}
(i)~ NEC:~~~~\rho\geq 0.\\
(ii)~WEC:~~~~\rho-p_r\geq 0,~~~\rho-p_t \geq 0.\\
(iii)~SEC:~~~~ \rho-p_r-2p_t\geq 0.
\end{eqnarray}
In Fig.~(\ref{fg12}-\ref{fg14}), we have shown graphically that all the energy conditions are satisfied for the assumed set of values of the model parameters.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{wecr.pdf}
\caption{$WEC_r$ plotted against radial distance $r$.}
\label{fg12}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{wect.pdf}
\caption{$WEC_t$ plotted against radial distance $r$.}
\label{fg13}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{sec2.pdf}
\caption{Verification of strong energy condition. }
\label{fg14}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Adiabatic index}
It has been proposed by Heintzmann and Hillebrandt \cite{hm} that a neutron star with an anisotropic equation of state would be stable if the adiabatic index $\Gamma > 4/3$. We have evaluated the values of the adiabatic index
\begin{equation}
\Gamma = \frac{\rho+p_r}{p_r}\frac{dp_r}{d\rho},
\end{equation}
both in GTR as well as in EGB gravity. In Fig.~\ref{fg15}, it has been shown that $\Gamma > 4/3$ everywhere within the stellar interior in GRT and in EGB gravity.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{gamma.pdf}
\caption{The adiabatic index $\Gamma$ plotted against $r$.}
\label{fg15}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
Gravitational theories with higher derivative curvature terms developed in the context of string theory in particular, have long been an area of great research attraction. Studies of gravitational behaviour in dimensions $n > 4$ have often been found to yield many non-trivial and interesting results. Of particular interest is the Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity in which the Lagrangian includes a second-order Lovelock
term as the higher curvature correction to GTR. Several vacuum solutions in $5$-dimensional Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity have been found and applied in astrophysics and cosmology. However, it is extremely difficult to generate interior solutions corresponding to star like systems in higher dimensions due to complex nature of the field equations and lack of sufficient information about the equation of state (EOS) of the matter content of the system. In this paper, rather than providing new solutions, we have developed the $4$-dimensional Krori and Barua stellar solution in the context of EGB gravity and analyzed the impacts of the higher derivative correction term on the gross physical behaviour of a relativistic star. Based on physical requirements, bounds on the model parameters have been identified. Within the admissible bounds, for a particular set of values of model parameters, physical characteristics of the developed stellar configuration in EGB gravity have been analyzed in details. In Fig.~\ref{fg1} - \ref{fg15}, graphical representation of various physically meaningful parameters has permitted us to investigate the higher derivative coupling term $\alpha$. It is to be noted that $\alpha =0$ case corresponds to $5$-dimensional Einstein analogue of EGB gravity. It turns out that the coupling constant $\alpha$ in EGB gravity has non-negligible effects on the physical quantities such as energy-density and pressure of the star. To illustrate this, we have plugged in $G$ and $c$ in appropriate places and determined the central density and pressure. In EGB gravity, the central density and pressure are obtained as $1.969 \times 10^{15}$~gm~cm$^{-3}$ and $3.318 \times 10^{35}$~dyne~cm$^{-2}$ , respectively. In its $5$-dimensional Einstein analogue the corresponding quantities take values $1.934 \times 10^{15}$~ gm~cm$^{-3}$ and $2.9 \times 10^{35}$~dyne~cm$^{-2}$, respectively. The higher curvature correction term apparently can accommodate more mass within a volume element. Most interestingly, the radius seems to increase marginally in EGB gravity as compared to its $5$-dimensional Einstein gravity.
To conclude, though many features like stability, causality and energy conditions remain unaffected, incorporation of a positive higher derivative term $\alpha$ appears to have non-negligible effect on the mass and radius of a star which provides an alternative mechanism to explain the compactness of a large class of observed pulsars.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:int}
The modern version of M\"uller-Israel-Stewart theory (MIS) \cite{Muller:1967zza,Israel:1979wp}, which will be
referred to as BRSSS \cite{Baier:2007ix}, is the basic phenomenological tool for understanding the dynamics of
quark-gluon plasma (QGP) produced in heavy ion (AA) collisions. It has recently been found that this theory of
relativistic hydrodynamics works remarkably well also in the case of other processes such as pA or even pp
collisions \cite{CasalderreySolana:2009uk,Bozek:2011if}, which lead to smaller drops of plasma. This raises
the question of why hydrodynamics applies here, and where the limit of its applicability lies
\cite{Shuryak:2013ke,Basar:2013hea,Romatschke:2015gxa,Habich:2015rtj}. The aim of this note is to address this
question in the context of recent advances in our understanding of relativistic hydrodynamics.
The key point is that the factor which signals the emergence of hydrodynamic behaviour in a microscopic theory
such as QCD is the decay of nonhydrodynamic modes. This point has frequently been emphasized in the context of
holographic studies of ${\mathcal N}=4$\ supersymmetric Yang-Mills
plasma~\cite{Kovtun:2005ev,Chesler:2009cy,Heller:2013fn}, but it is valid generally. In particular, it is
valid within for BRSSS theory, which incorporates a particular nonhydrodynamic sector needed for its
self-consistency~\cite{Heller:2015dha}.
Unlike nonrelativistic Navier-Stokes theory, its direct relativistic generalisation \cite{LLfluid} is not
consistent, because it is not causal~\cite{Hiscock:1985zz,Lindblom:1995gp,kostadt}. The only known way to
achieve causality is to include additional modes \cite{Muller:1967zza} beyond the basic hydrodynamic variables
(the energy density and fluid velocity). The simplest example where this works is MIS theory, which adds a
single purely damped nonhydrodynamic degree of freedom. This mode should be thought of as a regulator,
ensuring that the speed of propagation does not exceed the speed of light. Indeed, the speed of propagation of
linear perturbations\footnote{The formula \rf{velo} pertains specifically to the sound channel.} is
\bel{velo}
v = \f{1}{\sqrt{3}} \sqrt{1 + 4 \f{\eta/s}{T \tau_{\Pi}}} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\eta$ is the shear viscosity, $s$ is the entropy density, $T$ is the effective temperature and $\tau_{\Pi}$
is the relaxation time associated with the nonhydrodynamic mode.\footnote{Only the conformal case will be
discussed explicitly.} This formula (which follows from the sound channel dispersion relation given in
\rf{disprel} below) implies that as long as the relaxation time is sufficiently large
\bel{causal}
T \tau_{\Pi} > 2 \eta/s
\end{equation}
there is no transluminal signal propagation. This is clearly not the case if one tries to eliminate the
relaxation time by taking it to vanish.
The presence of nonhydrodynamic modes is therefore essential for the consistency of the hydrodynamic
description in the relativistic case. The success of relativistic hydrodynamics in describing the dynamics of
QGP created in AA collisions can be ascribed to the exponential decay of these modes, which leads to the fast
emergence of quasiuniversal, attractor behaviour of this system \cite{Heller:2015dha}.
The nonhydrodynamic modes act as a regulator which cannot be removed, but whose effects may or may not be
practically significant in the regime of interest. It is important to understand when the effects of
nonhydrodynamic modes may be ignored, otherwise one may be studying the physics of the regulator rather than
universal hydrodynamic behaviour. In particular, in the case of a small system it may happen that the
nonhydrodynamic modes do not have time to decay, and hydrodynamic simulations become sensitive to the choice
of the nonhydrodynamic sector -- that is, to the choice of regulator.\footnote{One can think of the regulator
sector as an analogue of the notion of a ``UV-completion'', which arose in the context of effective field
theories.} If this happens, it may be necessary to compare different regulators. Examples of hydrodynamic
theories with a qualitatively different nonhydrodynamic sector were discussed in Ref.~\cite{Heller:2014wfa}.
The statement that hydro works for small systems \cite{Bozek:2011if} means specifically that parameters of
BRSSS theory (or some other variant of MIS theory) can be fitted to describe the data. The point we are making
here is that in some situations this becomes a test of the nonhydrodynamic sector of this theory rather than
of hydrodynamics. This is problematic if one wishes to regard BRSSS as an effective description of QCD plasma.
Implications of this are further discussed in \rfs{sec:sum}.
The question of the domain of validity of hydrodynamics applied to small systems was considered recently in
Refs.~\cite{Romatschke:2015gxa,Habich:2015rtj}, which considered the dependence on the magnitude of second
order terms in the gradient expansion as a measure of systematic error. In cases where this error becomes
significant, the authors concluded that hydrodynamics ceases to be useful. From a theoretical standpoint it is
the decay of the nonhydro modes and not the size of gradient corrections which sets the domain of validity of
hydrodynamics. However, within BRSSS theory the parameter which governs the decay of the nonhydro modes, the
relaxation time, is also responsible for some of the second order terms --- indeed, from a modern perspective
\cite{Baier:2007ix} the MIS relaxation time is just one of a number of second order transport coefficients.
This is clearly the appropriate view when discussing the gradient expansion generated from the hydro equations
of motion. However when solving the equations numerically, the relaxation time should be regarded as a
regularization parameter. If the results depend significantly on the value taken for this parameter, one may
infer that one is not really testing the hydrodynamic sector, but rather the physics of the regulator itself.
Here we follow this logic directly: by comparing the decay rates of the hydro and nonhydro sectors. This leads
to a straightforward analytic argument which results in a simple inequality, whose violation indicates that
nonhydrodynamic modes are not subdominant. This inequality can be phrased either in terms of the size and
temperature of the system, or in terms of the final multiplicity measured. When expressed in terms of local
effective temperature and size the inequality is in fact more general than the context of small systems; it is
a bound on the size of features (such as spikes in the energy density), whose violation implies regulator
dependence.
\section{Dispersion relations in BRSSS theory}
\label{sec:mis}
The BRSSS theory of relativistic hydrodynamics~\cite{Baier:2007ix} is a generalization of the original MIS
theory~\cite{Muller:1967zza,Israel:1979wp}, which includes the full set of transport coefficients allowed by
Lorentz and conformal symmetry (the latter assumption was relaxed in \rfr{Romatschke:2009kr}). The spectrum of
linearized perturbations around equilibrium reveals two types of behavior: hydrodynamic modes whose frequency
vanishes with the wave vector, as well as nonhydrodynamic modes whose frequency approaches a nonzero value at
$k\equiv |\vec{k}|=0$. The imaginary parts of these frequencies determine the decay rates. Formally, at
$k\approx 0$ the hydro modes are long lived, while the nonhydro modes decay exponentially.
The dispersion relations for BRSSS theory, assuming solutions of the form
\begin{equation}
\delta T \sim \exp\left(-i(\omega t - \vec{k}\cdot\vec{x})\right),\quad
\delta u^\mu \sim \exp\left(-i(\omega t - \vec{k}\cdot\vec{x})\right)
\end{equation}
have been worked out in Ref.~\cite{Baier:2007ix}. In the sound channel
we have\footnote{An analogous argument can be carried out in the shear channel
and leads to identical conclusions.}
\bel{disprel}
\omega^3 + \f{i}{\tau_{\Pi}} \omega^2 - \f{k^2}{3} \left(1 + 4 \f{\eta/s}{T\tau_{\Pi}} \right) \,\omega - \f{i k^2}{3 \tau_{\Pi}} = 0
\end{equation}
For small $k$ one finds a pair of hydrodynamic modes (whose frequency tends
to zero with $k$)
\bel{hydrom}
\omega_H^{(\pm)} = \pm \f{k}{\sqrt{3}} - \f{2 i}{3 T} \f{\eta}{s} k^2 + \ldots
\end{equation}
and a nonhydrodynamic mode
\bel{nonhydrom}
\omega_{NH} = - i \left(\f{1}{\tau_{\Pi}} - \f{4}{3 T} \f{\eta}{s} k^2\right) +
\ldots
\end{equation}
The dominant mode at long wavelengths is the one whose imaginary part is
largest (least negative).
\begin{figure}[ht]
\center
\includegraphics[height=0.4\textheight]{mcross.png}
\caption{The hydrodynamic mode (blue) and the nonhydrodynamic mode (red,
dashed) cross at the value of $k$ given in \rf{kmax}. The plot was made
taking $\tau_{\Pi} T = 2 \eta/s$ and $\eta/s=1/4\pi$. }
\label{fig:cross}
\end{figure}
One usually assumes that the hydrodynamic modes dominate, but (as seen in
\rff{fig:cross}) this is true only for $k< K$, where\footnote{This follows by
taking the approximate solutions given in Eq.~(\ref{hydrom}) and
(\ref{nonhydrom}). If exact solutions of \rf{disprel} were used, the
curves in \rff{fig:cross} would not actually cross, but approach each other
to coincide asymptotically for large $k$. The adopted procedure is an
estimate of the scale at which the hydro modes cease to dominate.}
\bel{kmax}
K \approx \f{T}{\sqrt{2 (T\tau_{\Pi}) (\eta/s)}} \ .
\end{equation}
This can be read as follows \cite{Landsteiner:2012gn}: if a drop of plasma has
spacial extent\footnote{In the context of QGP created in colliders, $R$ should
be identified roughly with the transverse size of the plasma drop. This size
varies very slowly in comparison with the rate of longitudinal expansion.}
$R$, then for nonhydrodynamic modes to be subdominant one would like
$R>2\pi/K$. This way one gets the condition
\bel{bound}
R T > 2\pi \sqrt{2 (T\tau_{\Pi}) (\eta/s)} \ .
\end{equation}
Note that in a conformal theory $T\tau_{\Pi}$ as well as $\eta/s$ are dimensionless
constants.
The implication of this mode crossing\footnote{Similar mode-crossing phenomena
have recently been discussed (in different contexts) by Janik et
al. \cite{Janik:2015iry,Janik:2016btb}, Romatschke \cite{Romatschke:2015gic}
and Grozdanov et al. \cite{Grozdanov:2016vgg}. In the last two references,
the hydro modes disappear altogether rather than become subdominant. } is
that once the inequality \rf{bound} is violated, one is no longer testing
hydrodynamics, but rather the particular theory of the nonhydrodynamic sector
implicit in BRSSS theory; in other words, one is testing the regulator. In the
latter case one should really compare the regulator implicit in BRSSS theory
with alternatives, such as (for example) those discussed in
Ref.~\cite{Heller:2014wfa}.
The bound \rf{bound} is intuitively very clear and entirely consistent with
the idea that hydrodynamics may work well even in small systems as long as
they are strongly coupled, since for such systems one expects both $\eta/s$
and the relaxation time to be small. It is interesting to examine just how
small the RHS of \rf{bound} can be. The magnitude of the relaxation time is
bounded below by causality, as in \rf{causal}. There appears to be no firm
bound for $\eta/s$, but if we take the
Kovtun-Son-Starinets~\cite{Kovtun:2004de} value $\eta/s=1/4\pi$ as a
reasonable estimate, we find the simple result
\bel{minrt}
R T > 1 \ .
\end{equation}
This inequality is reminiscent of the condition that the system size should exceed the mean free path (set by
the inverse of the temperature), but we have obtained it here without any reference to a particle description,
which may or may not exist in a given situation. The number appearing on the RHS of \rf{minrt} is the smallest
sensible minimum, which is attained using parameter values suggested by the AdS/CFT description of strongly
coupled ${\mathcal N}=4$\ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory. In reality, the values of the relaxation time and shear
viscosity may be larger, which would imply that the nonhydrodynamic sector becomes important already on larger
scales.
The fact that the applicability of conformal hydrodynamics (in one sense or another) is governed by the
magnitude of the quantity $RT$ has been emphasized already in Refs.~\cite{Shuryak:2013ke,Basar:2013hea}. It
is also amusing to note that our findings are consistent with Chesler's
observations~\cite{Chesler:2015bba,Chesler:2016ceu} made in the context of AdS/CFT
simulations~\cite{Chesler:2015wra}. He found that the exact, numerically calculated energy-momentum tensor can
be well approximated by hydrodynamics down to drop sizes of order $RT\approx 1$ or even somewhat less. The
analysis presented here is very different, as it refers only to the effective, hydrodynamic description, but
it is perhaps not so surprising that the same answer appears, since hydrodynamics is a very general framework,
which clearly includes systems which are strongly coupled and whose typical excitations do not have a
quasiparticle interpretation.
\section{Relation to observables}
\label{sec:pheno}
The limit \rf{minrt} can be translated into an explicit estimate of the
minimum entropy per unit of rapidity $Y$ below which one can expect regulator
independence. First note that if one neglects the transverse expansion of the
plasma drop, and follows essentially the Bjorken model \cite{Bjorken:1982qr}
(see e.g. \rfr{Florkowski:2010zz}) one has
\bel{dsdy}
\f{dS}{dY} = \pi R^2 \tau_H s \ ,
\end{equation}
where $s$ is the entropy density and $\tau_H$ is the earliest time when
hydrodynamics could be applicable (the ``hydrodynamization time''). Numerical
studies of thermalization based on the AdS/CFT correspondence
\cite{Heller:2011ju,Heller:2012je,Jankowski:2014lna} indicate that $w_H\equiv
\tau_H T(\tau_H)$ varies in the approximate range $0.3-0.9$ (depending on
initial conditions). These results apply directly not to QCD, but to
${\mathcal N}=4$\ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, but we will take them to be a
reasonable indication of the real-world situation.
To estimate the entropy density appearing in \rf{dsdy} one can take the
expression for a gas of free gas of quarks and gluons corrected by a factor of
$3/4$ to account for strong interactions. This factor can be motivated by
recalling that in ${\mathcal N}=4$\ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory the ratio of
energy density at strong coupling to the energy density at zero coupling is
$3/4$. This way one obtains the estimate
\bel{edens}
s = \f{19}{12} \pi^2 T^3 \ ,
\end{equation}
which is numerically very close to the result of lattice calculations
\cite{Borsanyi:2010cj} at temperatures above the deconfinement
transition.
Combining the arguments outlined above one arrives at the conclusion that
\bel{entropy}
\f{dS}{dY} = \f{19}{12} \pi^3 w_H (R_HT_H)^2 \ ,
\end{equation}
where the subscripts indicate evaluation at $\tau=\tau_H$.
This formula can be used to translate the bound \rf{minrt} into the statement
that regulator dependence is inevitable if the entropy per unit of rapidity is
less than $(dS/dY)_{MIN} \approx 25$.
Finally, using the approximate connection between entropy and charged particle
multiplicity (see
e.g. Refs.~\cite{Florkowski:2010zz,Gubser:2008pc,Romatschke:2009im})
\bel{dndy}
\f{dS}{dY} \approx 7.5 \f{dN}{dY}
\end{equation}
one finds
\bel{mulbound}
\left(\f{dN}{dY}\right)_{MIN} \approx 3 \ .
\end{equation}
This result is at least qualitatively consistent with the studies of
Refs.~\cite{Romatschke:2015gxa,Habich:2015rtj}, which, as recalled in
\rfs{sec:int}, used a different, but related criterion for estimating the
limits of applicability of BRSSS hydrodynamics.
It is important to remember that to arrive
at \rf{mulbound} we assumed essentially the smallest possible values for
$\eta/s$ and the relaxation time as well as a number of other reasonable, but
not iron-clad estimates. However, the main point here is not the particular
number appearing in \rf{mulbound}, but the observation that a simple physical
argument concerning the relative importance of hydro and nonhydro modes leads
to an inequality of this kind, with the right hand side of \rf{mulbound} of
order $1$.
\section{Summary and conclusions}
\label{sec:sum}
From the perspective of fundamental theory, the reason why hydrodynamics
describes the late
time behaviour of QGP studied experimentally at RHIC and the
LHC is that it is an effective description of
the late-time behaviour of QCD. Our ignorance of QCD in this regime is
encapsulated in the values of the hydrodynamic transport coefficients which at
this time cannot be calculated {\em ab initio} and are treated as
phenomenological parameters. In principle however such a matching is
possible. Furthermore, in practice only very few of these parameters are
quantitatively relevant.
As reviewed in the Introduction, relativistic hydrodynamics necessarily
includes nonhydrodynamic modes which act as a regulator necessary for
causality. The underlying, microscopic theory, such as QCD, also has some
spectrum of nonhydro modes, but it is very difficult to make any plausible
statements about them. It is thus reasonable to focus on phenomena which do
not depend quantitatively on the details of the regulator.\footnote{In
particular, it is hard to attempt to match the nonhydrodynamic sector of QCD
with an effective hydrodynamic description.} The use of BRSSS theory
implicitly assumes this. As discussed in \rfs{sec:int}, experimental studies
of small systems arising in pA and pp collisions make it necessary to actually
test whether this assumption is realistic.
Here the issue was addressed directly by estimating the length scale on which
nonhydrodynamic modes decay at a rate comparable to the decay rate of hydro
modes. This leads to the inequality \rf{bound} which clearly shows that for
strongly coupled systems hydrodynamic behaviour can dominate despite small
size. This bound can be reformulated as a lower bound on the multiplicity,
supporting the conclusion of hydro simulations analysed in
Refs. \cite{Romatschke:2015gxa,Habich:2015rtj}. As discussed there, this
seemingly low bound is not at all absurd in the context of strongly coupled
systems. The basic reason for this may be summarized by saying that the
hydrodynamic description is invoked at a stage of evolution where QGP may not
even be amenable to a quasiparticle description, whereas the bound on
multiplicity pertains to the final state after the system has hadronized.
What is to be done in situations when \rf{mulbound} is violated? Since in such
cases BRSSS theory significantly depends on its implicit regulator sector, one
has to conclude that one is in fact testing this sector directly. If BRSSS
theory is found to work well in such circumstances, one should view
this as consistent with the possibility that the leading nonhydrodynamic mode
of QCD is purely damped. Otherwise one should consider using a hydrodynamic
theory with a different nonhydro sector, such as the theories proposed in
\cite{Heller:2014wfa}. In the end this may also not work unless leading
nonhydrodynamic modes are well isolated from higher ones. Whether this is true
in QCD is not known at this time.
\vskip 2em
{\bf Acknowledgments:} I would like to thank Paul Romatschke and Wojciech
Florkowski for important discussions. I also wish to thank Javier Mas and the
other organizers of NumHol2016, where this work was completed. This research
was supported by the National Science Centre Grant No. 2015/19/B/ST2/02824.
\bibliographystyle{utphys}
|
\section{Introduction}
In this work, we derive simple analytical formulae characterizing the shock evolution in a non-radiative supernova remnant (SNR). In order to obtain an analytical solution, we constrain our discussion to a simple situation: spherical expansion in a smooth medium (no clouds) with negligible external thermal pressure. Thermal conduction, magnetic fields and acceleration of cosmic ray particles are also neglected for simplicity. The possible extension of the current model to more complicated situations will be studied in future work.
The work presented here focuses on the evolution of a remnant in the post supernova phase. A point explosion with an ejecta mass of $M_{ej}$ and total energy of $E_{SN}$ is assumed as our initial condition. The energetic ejecta released in the supernova explosion drive a blast wave into the surrounding ambient medium, which is assumed to have a power law density profile with index $s$, i.e. $\rho_a \propto R^{-s}$. During the interaction between ejecta and ambient medium, both a forward shock into the surrounding medium with radius $R_b$ and a reverse shock into the expanding ejecta with radius $R_r$ are generated. The interface between the ejecta and the ambient medium is the shock contact discontinuity (CD). Its radius is defined as $R_c$.
At early times, when the ejecta mass $M_{ej}\gg M_{sw}$, the swept up mass, the evolution of the remnant can follow two different evolutionary tracks depending on the spatial density distribution of the ejecta envelope. If the ejecta envelope has a shallow density profile $\rho \propto R^{-n}$ with power law index $n<5$, the early evolution of a SNR is characterized by the free expansion (FE) of the ejecta, with a narrow outer shocked region. In the FE solution, the CD expands freely with a constant velocity while the forward shock follows a similarity solution \citep{Parker63,HS84}. Due to the accumulation of shocked ambient medium ahead of the CD, it is found that $R_b=q_{b}R_c$ where $q_{b}>1$ is a dimensionless constant.
If the ejecta envelope has a steep density profile $\rho \propto R^{-n}$ with power law index $n>5$, the early evolution of a SNR is instead described by the self similar driven wave (SSDW) solution \citep{Chevalier82,nadezhin85}. In the SSDW solution, $R_c\propto t^{(n-3)/(n-s)}$ based on dimensional analysis while $R_b=q_{b}R_c$ and $R_r=q_{r}R_c$ where $q_{b}$ and $q_{r}$ are dimensionless constants.
As the blast wave expands, $M_{sw}$ gradually increases with time and eventually becomes dynamically important. When $M_{sw} \gg M_{ej}$, the expanding SNR has already lost the memory of ejecta mass $M_{ej}$ and starts to follow the self similar Sedov-Taylor (ST) solution \citep{Taylor46,Sedov59} in which $R_b\propto t^{2/(5-s)}$.
According to the asymptotic behaviors described above at $M_{ej}\gg M_{sw}$ and $M_{ej}\ll M_{sw}$, \citep[][hereafter TM99]{TM99} derive analytic approximations for the evolution of the forward shock and reverse shock in a non-radiative SNR with further dynamical considerations. In TM99, the solution for the forward shock contains two parts: {\it a general ED solution} for the ED phase and {\it a general ST solution} for the ST phase. The transition time $t_{ST}$ defined in TM99, which separates the {\it general ED solution} from the {\it general ST solution}, is slightly different from the time when $M_{ej}=M_{sw}$ and in many cases is obtained through fitting numerical simulations. The {\it general ED solution} asymptotically approaches the FE solution when $n<5$ and the SSDW solution when $n>5$ as $t\rightarrow 0$, and is extended to finite $t$ by assuming the pressure behind the blast wave is proportional to that behind the reverse shock. It has two different forms depending on whether the reverse shock is in the envelope or the core of the ejecta. The {\it general ST solution} approaches the ST solution as $t\rightarrow \infty$ and equals to the value of the {\it general ED solution} at $t_{ST}$. It has the form of an offset power law and is designed to smoothly connect the {\it general ED solution} and the ST solution.
The solution for the reverse shock in TM99 also contains two parts. In the ED phase, the reverse shock position is derived by assuming the reverse shock radius is proportional to the forward shock radius. In the ST phase, the reverse shock is described by a solution with constant acceleration in the unshocked ejecta frame.
TM99 applied their method to a power law density ambient medium with a focus on the uniform medium and a brief discussion about the wind density profile. \cite{L&H03}, \cite{HL12} and \cite{Micelotta16} then studied the wind density profile in more detail with the method described in TM99. However, their solutions are not compared to numerical simulations. \cite{L&H03} and \cite{HL12} also presented analytical approximate formulae for the fitting coefficients used in the TM99 solution. Since all these analytical solutions \citep{TM99,L&H03,HL12,Micelotta16} are based on the method of TM99, from here on we refer to the TM model as the combination of the above solutions.
Here we present a new analytical method to derive approximate solutions describing the shock evolution in a SNR from the ED phase to the ST phase. The method is based on dimensional analysis and depends on only the asymptotic behaviors of the remnant, i.e. the FE solution and the SSDW solution for $M_{sw}\ll M_{ej}$ and the ST solution for $M_{sw}\gg M_{ej}$. Because no further assumptions about the dynamical structure of the remnant are required as in the TM model, the analytical approximations discussed here are much simpler than the TM model solutions. The method presented here could potentially be extended to other problems involving the transition between two adjacent asymptotic limits.
In Section \ref{sec:method}, we develop the analytical approach used to derive the approximate solutions. Then we use the new method to study the evolution of the forward shock and CD in a non-radiative SNR. Analytical approximations for both ejecta envelope with a shallow density profile $n<5$ and a steep density profile $n>5$ are investigated in detail. In Section \ref{sec:comparison}, we summarize the analytical approximations for both forward shock and CD, and then compare them with numerical simulations. For the forward shock, we also compare our new solutions with those from the TM model. We focus on two particularly interesting cases: SNR evolution in the interstellar medium with a constant density profile and SNR evolution in circumstellar material with a wind density profile. A reader who is only interested in the final expressions of the analytical approximations can go directly to this section. In Section \ref{sec:RS}, application of our new method to the reverse shock is discussed briefly. A final discussion and summary are in Section \ref{sec:DS}.
\section{BASIC METHOD}{\label{sec:method}}
\subsection{Dimensional analysis}
Based on the $\Pi$ theorem \cite[see, e.g., Chapter 1 of][]{Barenblatt96}, a physical relation involving $k+m$ physical variables with $k$ independent physical dimensions can be simplified into a physical relation with only $m$ independent dimensionless quantities. In other words, an equation
\begin{equation}
f(a_1,...,a_k,...,a_{k+m})=0
\end{equation}
involving $k$ independent physical dimensions is equivalent to the following simplified equation
\begin{equation}
F(\Pi_1,...,\Pi_m)=0,
\label{dim_general}
\end{equation}
where $\Pi_1, ...,\Pi_m$ are independent dimensionless quantities built by a combination of $a_1,..., a_{k+m}$.
If $m$ happens to be 1, eq. (\ref{dim_general}) then becomes $F(\Pi)=0$ and has a trivial solution $\Pi =C$, where $C$ is a constant. When $C \neq 0$, according to dimensional analysis, a self similar solution of the first kind exists for the problem. The evolution of such a system is characterized by the invariant dimensionless quantity $\Pi = C$.
The shock evolution in a non-radiative SNR under our simplified assumptions involves 5 different dimensional physical variables: explosion energy $E_{SN}$, ejecta mass $M_{ej}$, ambient medium density $\rho_a$, remnant age $t$, and blast wave radius $R_b$ (or CD radius $R_c$ and reverse shock radius $R_r$ depending on your interest). In this Section, we focus on the study of the forward shock while an approximate solution for the CD is presented at the end of this section. The reverse shock is discussed briefly in Section \ref{sec:RS}.
Our primary initial goal is to derive an analytical approximation for the physical relation
\begin{equation}
f_b(E_{SN},M_{ej},\rho_a,t,R_b)=0.
\label{eq_general}
\end{equation}
The problem has 3 independent physical dimensions: length, time and mass. According to the $\Pi$ theorem, eq. (\ref{eq_general}) is equivalent to the following relation
\begin{equation}
F_b(\Pi_1,\Pi_2)=0,
\label{dim}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Pi_1=\left(\frac{R_b}{t}\right)^2\left(\frac{M_{ej}}{E_{SN}}\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\Pi_2=\frac{R_b^5\rho_a}{ E_{SN}t^2}
\end{equation}
are the 2 independent dimensionless quantities available for our problem,
Eq. (\ref{dim}) offers a complete description of the shock evolution in a non-radiative SNR. The exact form of eq. (\ref{dim}) must depend on physical considerations during the transition time and may not have a simple solution in the form of $R(t)$ or $t(R)$. We instead seek analytical approximations for $F_b(\Pi_1,\Pi_2)$ which have a simple functional form and are consistent with numerical simulations within a few percent. The solution discussed below could be easily applied as a tool for more complicated problems involving the shock evolution in non-radiative SNRs.
\subsection{Characteristic scales}{\label{scale}}
Before we present our analytical solutions and compare them with numerical simulations, we first define the characteristic scales of the system to further simplify the expression. If we assume the ambient medium has a power law density profile, i.e. $\rho_a(r) = \eta_s r^{-s}$, where $\eta_s$ is a constant. Then the characteristic length, time and mass of the system are as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{ch}&=&M_{ej},\\
R_{ch}&=&M_{ej}^{1/(3-s)}\eta_s^{-1/(3-s)},\\
t_{ch}&=&E_{SN}^{-1/2}M_{ej}^{(5-s)/2(3-s)}\eta_s^{-1/(3-s)}.
\end{eqnarray}
We denote the physical quantity $X$ in units of the corresponding characteristic scale as $X^*$, i.e. $X^*=X/M_{ch}^{x_1}R_{ch}^{x_2}t_{ch}^{x_3}$, where $x_1,x_2$ and $x_3$ are constants depending on the dimension of the quantity. In the rest of the paper, unless specifically noted, we use the dimensionless quantity $X^*$
instead of $X$ throughout our discussion.
We are particularly interested in two situations: SNR evolution in the interstellar medium with a constant density profile ($s=0$) and SNR evolution in circumstellar matter with a wind density profile ($s=2$). For a uniform ambient medium, the characteristic radius and time are
\begin{equation}
R_{ch}=3.4~ {\rm pc}\left(\frac{M_{ej}}{~M_\odot}\right)^{1/3}\left( \frac{m_p\rm \rm ~cm^{-3}}{\eta_s}\right)^{1/3},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
t_{ch}=473~ {\rm yr}\left(\frac{10^{51} {\rm erg}}{E_{SN}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{M_{ej}}{~M_\odot}\right)^{5/6}\left(\frac{m_p {\rm \rm ~cm^{-3}}}{\eta_s}\right)^{1/3},
\end{equation}
where $m_p$ is the proton mass.
For a wind density profile, $\eta_s=\dot{M}_w/4\pi v_w$ where $\dot{M}_w$ is the mass loss rate and $v_w$ is the wind velocity. The characteristic radius and time now are
\begin{equation}
R_{ch}=12.9~ {\rm pc}\left(\frac{M_{ej}}{~M_\odot}\right) \left(\frac{10^{-5}~\Msun ~\rm yr^{-1}}{\dot{M}_w}\right) \left(\frac{v_w}{10 {\rm \rm ~km~s^{-1}}}\right)
\label{charact_R}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation*}
t_{ch}=1772~ {\rm yr}\left(\frac{10^{51} {\rm erg}}{E_{SN}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{M_{ej}}{~M_\odot} \right)^{3/2}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation}
\quad \,\times\left(\frac{10^{-5}~\Msun ~\rm yr^{-1}}{\dot{M}_w}\right) \left(\frac{v_w}{10 {\rm \rm ~km~s^{-1}}}\right).
\end{equation}
The dimensionless quantities $\Pi_1$ and $\Pi_2$ now simply become
\begin{equation}
\Pi_1=\left(\frac{R_b^*}{t^*}\right)^2 \quad \mbox{and} \quad \Pi_2=\frac{R_b^{*5-s}}{ t^{*2}}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Asymptotic behavior of the forward shock}\label{AB}
In this subsection, we examine the asymptotic behaviors of the forward shock during the non-radiative evolution, which is essential to derive the analytical approximation. The discussion here about the asymptotic behavior of a SNR is general and in principle could be extended to more complicated situations. But to obtain an explicit expression of the asymptotic solution, we have to make some assumptions about the density distribution in the ejecta and ambient medium. In this paper, we apply the same density distribution as that in TM99, which is presented in detail in Appendix \ref{App:basic_params}. Basically, the ejecta have a flat core, with core radius to ejecta radius ratio $w_{core}$, and a power law envelope with index $n$, while the ambient medium is assumed to have a power law profile with index $s$.
When $t\rightarrow \infty$, the remnant approaches the ST solution and the blast wave radius
$R_b^*=(\xi t^{*2})^{1/(5-s)}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
F_b(\Pi_1,\Pi_2)(t\rightarrow \infty)=F_b(\Pi_2)=\Pi_2-\xi=0,
\label{ST}
\end{equation}
where $\xi$ is a dimensionless constant depending on the density structure of the ambient medium $\rho_a$.
When $t\rightarrow 0$, the asymptotic behavior of SNRs becomes slightly complicated as we now have two different situations. If the ejecta have a shallow envelope in density with power law index $n<5$, the remnant simply follows the FE solution and the forward shock radius $R^*_b=q_bR^*_c=q_b\lambda_c t^*$ where $\lambda_{c}$ is a dimensionless constant depending on the density structure of the ejecta $\rho_{ej}$ \citep{Parker63,HS84}. We define $\lambda_b=q_b\lambda_c$ and then the blast wave radius $R^*_{b}=\lambda_{b} t^*$ as $t\rightarrow 0$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
F_b(\Pi_1,\Pi_2)(t\rightarrow 0)=F_b(\Pi_1)=\Pi_1-\lambda_{b}^2=0.
\label{FE}
\end{equation}
If the ejecta have a steep envelope with power law index $n>5$, the remnant instead asymptotically approaches the SSDW solution and the forward shock radius $R_b^*=\zeta_bt^{*(n-3)/(n-s)}$ \citep{Chevalier82} as $t\rightarrow 0$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
F_b(\Pi_1,\Pi_2)(t\rightarrow 0)=\Pi_1^{(n-5)/2(n-s)}\Pi_2^{1/(n-s)}-\zeta_b=0,
\label{SSDW}
\end{equation}
where $\zeta_b$ is a dimensionless constant depending on the density structure of both the ejecta $\rho_{ej}$ and the ambient medium $\rho_a$.
In Appendix \ref{App:basic_params}, we derive the dimensionless constants $\lambda_b(n)$, $\xi(s)$ and $\zeta_b(n,s)$ based on the density profile assumed in TM99. The resulting expressions are summarized in Table \ref{forwardshock}. According to the above discussion, the ST solution can be considered as the asymptotic solution of the general equation $F_b(\Pi_1,\Pi_2)=0$ in the limit $t\rightarrow \infty$ while the FE solution and SSDW solution behave like the asymptotic solution of equation $F_b(\Pi_1,\Pi_2)=0$ in the limit $t\rightarrow 0$. No matter what functional form of approximation we choose for eq. (\ref{dim}), it must satisfy the asymptotic limits described in eqs. (\ref{ST}), (\ref{FE}) and (\ref{SSDW}).
\subsection{Analytical approximation for the forward shock }
The problem of deriving analytical solutions to the physical relation in eq. (\ref{eq_general}) is now simplified to the problem of finding approximate solutions for eq. (\ref{dim}) under the boundary conditions eqs. (\ref{ST}), (\ref{FE}) and (\ref{SSDW}). The primary goal of this subsection is to derive analytical approximations for eq. (\ref{dim}) which have simple functional forms and satisfy the boundary conditions discussed before. More importantly, as we will show in the following section, the analytical approximations discussed here are consistent with numerical simulations within a few percent accuracy.
In this work, we focus on an analytical approximation with the following polynomial form
\begin{equation}
F_b(\Pi_1,\Pi_2)=\left(\frac{\Pi_1}{\lambda_b^2}\right)^\alpha+\left(\frac{\Pi_2}{\xi}\right)^\beta-1=0\quad \mbox{for}\,\, n<5
\label{dim_special}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
F_b(\Pi_1,\Pi_2)&=&\left(\frac{\Pi_1^{(n-5)/2(n-s)}\Pi_2^{1/(n-s)}}{\zeta_b}\right)^{\alpha}\nonumber \\
&+&\left(\frac{\Pi_2}{\xi}\right)^{\beta}
-1=0 \,\, \mbox{for}\,\, n>5.
\label{dim_n>5}
\end{eqnarray}
When $\alpha$ and $\beta$ satisfy certain conditions, it can be shown that the above solutions naturally satisfy the boundary conditions eqs. (\ref{ST}), (\ref{FE}) and (\ref{SSDW}). However such approximations are still complicated and do not always provide explicit expressions in the form of $R(t)$ or $t(R)$. If we further assume $2\alpha=(5-s)\beta>0$ for eq. (\ref{dim_special}) and $\alpha=(5-s)\beta>0$ for eq. (\ref{dim_n>5}), a simple analytical solution in the form of $R(t)$ can be derived easily.
A simple analytical approximation in the form of $t(R)$ can also be obtained if we instead assume $\alpha=\beta>0$ for eq. (\ref{dim_special}) and $\alpha=2\beta (n-s)/(n-3)>0$ for eq. (\ref{dim_n>5}). $R(t)$ and $t(R)$ type solutions are two ways to approach the exact solution and approximate the evolution of the forward shock in a non-radiative SNR. Both of them are able to provide good fits to the simulations within a few percent accuracy, despite the fact that each of them may have its own advantage over certain parameter ranges. For simplicity, we will stick with one type of solution during our discussion. It is found that overall the $R(t)$ type solutions show slightly better performance than the $t(R)$ solutions. In the rest of this section, we will focus on the $R(t)$ type solution.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Analytical approximation for the forward shock radius $R^*_{b}$}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\hline\hline
$n<5$\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
R_b^*(t^*)=\left[\left(\lambda_b t^*\right)^{-2\alpha}+\left({\xi t^{*2}}\right)^{-2\alpha/(5-s)}\right]^{-1/2\alpha},
\end{equation*}}\\
\hline
$n>5$\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
R^*_b(t^*)=\left[\left(\zeta_b t^{*(n-3)/(n-s)}\right)^{-\alpha}+\left(\xi t^{*2}\right)^{-\alpha/(5-s)}\right]^{-1/\alpha}
\end{equation*}}\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
\lambda_c^2(n>3)=2w_{core}^{-2}\left(\frac{5-n}{3-n}\right)\left( \frac{w_{core}^{n-3}-n/3}{w_{core}^{n-5}-n/5} \right),
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\lambda_c^2(n<3)=2\left(\frac{5-n}{3-n}\right),
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
^a\lambda_b=q_b\lambda_c \mbox{, where } q_b(s=0)=1.1 \mbox{ and } q_b(s=2)=1.19,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
^b\zeta_b =\left(\frac{R_1}{R_c}\right)\left(Af_0w_{core}^n\lambda_c^{n-3}\right)^{1/(n-s)},
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
^c\xi(s=0)=2.026 \quad\mbox{and}\quad \xi(s=2)=3/2\pi,
\end{equation*}
}\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{forwardshock}
\begin{tablenotes}
\small
\item[a] Reference \cite{Parker63} and \cite{HS84}.
\item[b] Exact values of $\zeta_b$ for $s=0$ and $s=2$ cases are presented in Table \ref{FSs0} and \ref{FSs2} respectively. See Appendix \ref{App:basic_params} for a detailed derivation.
\item[c] See eq. (\ref{xi}) in Appendix \ref{App:basic_params} for $\xi(s)$ with arbitrary $s$.
\item $\alpha$ is the free parameter in the model. The best fits $\alpha$ for $s=0$ and $s=2$ are recorded in Tables \ref{FSs0} and \ref{FSs2}, respectively.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\subsection{$n<5$ solution for the forward shock}
Assuming $2\alpha=(5-s)\beta>0$, eq. (\ref{dim_special}) now becomes
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{R_b^*}{\lambda_b t^*}\right)^{2\alpha}+\frac{R_b^{2\alpha}}{(\xi t^{*2})^{2\alpha/(5-s)}}=1.
\end{equation}
The solution of the equation can be expressed explicitly in the form
\begin{equation}
R_b^*(t^*)=\left[\left(\lambda_b t^*\right)^{-2\alpha}+\left({\xi t^{*2}}\right)^{-2\alpha/(5-s)}\right]^{-1/2\alpha}.
\label{n<5}
\end{equation}
Equation (\ref{n<5}) with various $\alpha$ forms a group of curves representing different shapes of the transition from the FE solution to the ST solution. If we define a transition time $t^*_{tran}$ and radius $R^*_{tran}$ at which the two terms on the RHS of eq. (\ref{n<5}) are equal to each other, then we have
\begin{equation}
t^*_{tran}=\left(\frac{\xi}{\lambda_b^{5-s}}\right)^{1/(3-s)} \quad \mbox{and }\quad
R^*_{tran}=2^{-1/2\alpha}\left(\frac{\xi}{\lambda_b^2}\right)^{1/(3-s)}.
\label{tran_n<5}
\end{equation}
$t^*_{tran}$ does not depend on $\alpha$ and can be considered as a critical time when the swept up mass becomes significant and dynamically important. The value of $R^*_{tran}$ does change with $\alpha$. When $\alpha\rightarrow\infty$, $R^*_{tran}\rightarrow (\xi/\lambda_b^2)^{1/(3-s)}$ and eq. (\ref{n<5}) represents an instantaneous transition from the FE solution to the ST solution. When $\alpha\rightarrow 0$, $R^*_{tran}\rightarrow 0$ and the equation instead characterizes a situation in which the system infinitely slowly and smoothly transits from one solution to another. In summary, when $\alpha$ varies from $0$ to $\infty$, the curve described by eq. (\ref{n<5}) changes from a slow and smooth transition to a break power law, as shown in Fig \ref{various_alpha}. It is expected that one of the curves in the group can approximate the evolution of a non-radiative SNR. Values of $t^*_{tran}$ and $R^*_{tran}$ calculated for various density structures are shown in Table \ref{FSs0} and \ref{FSs2} for $s=0$ and $s=2$, respectively.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{various_alpha.eps}
\caption{Dimensionless forward shock radius $R_b^*$ as a function of the dimensionless time $t^*$ for various $\alpha$. The calculation is based on eq. (\ref{n<5}) with $n=0$ and $s=0$ .}
\label{various_alpha}
\end{figure}
\subsection{$n>5$ solution for the forward shock}
Assuming $\alpha=(5-s)\beta>0$, eq. (\ref{dim_n>5}) then becomes
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{R_b}{\zeta_bt^{(n-3)/(n-s)}}\right)^{\alpha}+\left(\frac{R_b^{*5-s}}{\xi t^{*2}}\right)^{\beta}=1.
\end{equation}
The solution to the equation can be expressed explicitly in the form
\begin{equation}
R^*_b(t^*)=\left[\left(\zeta_b t^{*(n-3)/(n-s)}\right)^{-\alpha}+\left(\xi t^{*2}\right)^{-\alpha/(5-s)}\right]^{-1/\alpha}.
\label{n>5}
\end{equation}
Again we can define the transition time $t^*_{tran}$ and radius $R_{tran}^*$ between the SSDW solution and the ST solution:
\begin{equation}
t^*_{tran}=\left(\frac{\xi}{\zeta_b^{5-s} }\right)^{(n-s)/(n-5)(3-s)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
R^*_{tran}=\frac{\zeta_b}{2^{1/\alpha}} t^{*(n-3)/(n-s)}_{tran}=\frac{\zeta_b}{2^{1/\alpha}} \left(\frac{\xi}{\zeta_b^{5-s} }\right)^{(n-3)/(n-5)(3-s)}.
\end{equation}
As in the $n<5$ case, $t^*_{tran}$ does not depend on $\alpha$ and characterizes the time when the swept up mass becomes significant and dynamically important. When we vary $\alpha$ we only manipulate the transition radius $R_{tran}^*$, which determines the smoothness of the transition.
\subsection{Contact Discontinuity}\label{sec:CD}
The time evolution of the CD radius in non-radiative SNRs has not been discussed before in the literature. Since the method developed here depends on only the asymptotic behavior of the remnant, in principle it can also be applied to the evolution of the CD radius $R_c^*$. The asymptotic behavior of $R_c^*$ at early times, when $t^*\rightarrow 0$, is simply the FE solution
\begin{equation}
R_c^*=\lambda_c t^* \quad \mbox{for}\quad n<5
\end{equation}
and the SSDW solution
\begin{equation}
R_c^*=\zeta_c t^{*(n-3)/(n-s)}\quad \mbox{for}\quad n>5.
\end{equation}
$\lambda_c$ and $\zeta_c$ are constants that depend on the density profile of ejecta and ambient medium. $\lambda_c$ is related to $\lambda_b$ \citep{HS84} while $\zeta_c$ is proportional to $\zeta_b$ \citep{Chevalier82}. The detailed derivation of $\lambda_c$ and $\zeta_c$ is presented in Appendix \ref{App:basic_params}. The asymptotic behavior of the CD as $t^*\rightarrow \infty$, however, is not very clear at this point. If we assume the asymptotic behavior of the CD at $t^*\rightarrow \infty$ can be described by a simple power law relation $ct^{*b}$, where $c$ and $b$ are constants, then following the same spirit as for the forward shock we obtain the following approximation for $R^*_c$:
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{R^*_c}{\lambda_c t^*}\right)^\alpha+\left(\frac{R^*_c}{c t^{*b}}\right)^\alpha=1 \quad \mbox{for}\quad n>5
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{R^*_c}{\zeta_ct^{*(n-3)/(n-s)}}\right)^\alpha+\left(\frac{R^*_c}{c t^{*b}}\right)^\alpha=1 \quad \mbox{for}\quad n>5.
\end{equation}
Now $R^*_c$ has a simple analytical solution
\begin{equation}
R^*_c=\left[(\lambda_c t^*)^{-\alpha}+(c t^{*b})^{-\alpha}\right]^{-1/\alpha}\quad \mbox{for}\quad n<5,
\label{CDn<5}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
R^*_c=\left[(\zeta_ct^{*(n-3)/(n-s)})^{-\alpha}+(c t^{*b})^{-\alpha}\right]^{-1/\alpha}\quad \mbox{for}\quad n>5.
\label{CDn>5}
\end{equation}
In section \ref{sec:comparison}, we will show that the above solutions are able to provide good fits to numerical simulations within a few percent accuracy.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Analytical approximation for the CD radius $R^*_{c}$}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\hline\hline
$n<5$\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
R^*_c=\left[\left(\lambda_c t^*\right)^{-\alpha}+\left(c t^{*b}\right)^{-\alpha}\right]^{-1/\alpha},\quad \quad
\end{equation*}}\\
\hline
$n>5$\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
R^*_c=\left[\left(\zeta_ct^{*(n-3)/(n-s)}\right)^{-\alpha}+\left(c t^{*b}\right)^{-\alpha}\right]^{-1/\alpha},
\end{equation*}}\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
\lambda_c^2(n>3)=2w_{core}^{-2}\left(\frac{5-n}{3-n}\right)\left( \frac{w_{core}^{n-3}-n/3}{w_{core}^{n-5}-n/5} \right),
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\lambda_c^2(n<3)=2\left(\frac{5-n}{3-n}\right),
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
^a\zeta_c =\left(Af_0w_{core}^n\lambda_c^{n-3}\right)^{1/(n-s)}
\end{equation*}}\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{CD}
\begin{tablenotes}
\small
\item[a] Exact values of $\zeta_c$ for $s=0$ and $s=2$ cases are presented in Tables \ref{CDs0} and \ref{CDs2}, respectively. See Appendix \ref{App:basic_params} for a detailed derivation.
\item $\alpha$, $b$ and $c$ are free parameters of the model. Their best fit values for the $s=0$ and $s=2$ cases are recorded in Table \ref{CDs0} and \ref{CDs2}, respectively.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\section{COMPARISON TO NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS AND THE TM MODEL}{\label{sec:comparison}}
In this section, we compare our analytical approximations for the forward shock radius $R_b^*$ and the CD radius $R_c^*$ to numerical simulations. For the forward shock, we also compare our new solution to the TM model results if available. Physical variables with the symbol $^*$ are dimensionless quantities in units of the characteristic scales defined in section \ref{scale}.
\subsection{Summary of our model}
Our analytical approximations for the forward shock and CD are summarized in Tables \ref{forwardshock} and \ref{CD}, respectively. $w_{core},n$ and $s$ are constants characterizing the initial density distribution in the ejecta and ambient medium. Basically, the ejecta have a flat core, with core radius to ejecta radius ratio $w_{core}$, and a power law envelope with index $n$, while the ambient medium is assumed to have a power law profile with index $s$. $\lambda_b$, $\lambda_c$, $\zeta_b$, $\zeta_c$ and $\xi$ are dimensionless constants describing the asymptotic behavior of the remnant that can be derived analytically.
$\lambda_b$ and $\lambda_c$ correspond to the free expansion velocity of the forward shock and CD in the FE solution, respectively. $\zeta_b$ and $\zeta_c$ are the dimensionless constants for the forward shock and CD in the SSDW solution, respectively. $\xi$ is the dimensionless constant in the ST solution. For detailed definitions and derivations of the above parameters, see the discussion in Appendix \ref{App:basic_params}.
For the forward shock, $\alpha$ is the only free parameter in our new analytical approximations, while for the CD we have three free parameters $\alpha$, $b$ and $c$ in our new solution. In this paper, we focus on two particularly interesting situations: SNR evolution in the interstellar medium with a constant density profile ($s=0$) and SNR evolution in circumstellar matter with a wind density profile ($s=2$). In each situation, we run numerical simulations with selected $n$ from 0 to 14 and then compare the simulation results with the analytical model to obtain the best fit free parameters. For the forward shock, the best fit $\alpha$ for the $s=0$ and $s=2$ cases with different $n$ are presented in Table \ref{FSs0} and \ref{FSs2} respectively. For the CD, the best fit $\alpha$, $b$ and $c$ for $s=0$ and $s=2$ cases with different $n$ are recorded in Table \ref{CDs0} and \ref{CDs2} respectively.
Considering the uncertainty introduced by the code and the uncertainty in the input parameters like $\zeta_b$, $\zeta_c$, $\lambda_b$ and $\lambda_c$ which have only 2 or 3 effective digits, in the fitting with numerical results we did not pursue accuracy beyond $1\%$ and the best fit free parameters presented in Table \ref{FSs0} to \ref{CDs2} also have no more than 3 significant digits.
One uncertainty in the setup of the ejecta density profile is the core radius ratio, i.e. $w_{core}=R_{core}/R_{ej}$. In the numerical simulation, when $n<3$, $w_{core}=0$ is assumed for simplification. When $n>3$, a flat core is assumed to ensure the ejecta have a finite mass. $w_{core}$ can be estimated by investigating the core velocity to ejecta velocity ratio, i.e. $v_{core}/v_{ej}=w_{core}$. For $n>5$, typical values of $v_{core}$ are found to be between $10^3\, \rm \rm ~km~s^{-1}$ and $10^4\, \rm \rm ~km~s^{-1}$ \citep{CF94}. $v_{ej}$ of several $10^4\, \rm \rm ~km~s^{-1}$ has been observationally measured. Meanwhile $v_{ej}$ should be smaller than the speed of light. So a value between $0.01$ and $0.1$ would be reasonable for $w_{core}$. Here we adopt the values $w_{core}=0.05$ for $s=0$ and $w_{core}=0.1$ for $s=2$, which are slightly larger than the values used in TM99. A larger $w_{core}$ is used for the $s=2$ cases mainly due to numerical considerations. When $s=2$ the density contrast between the ejecta and ambient medium is very high especially for large $n$, which causes difficulty for numerical simulations with very small $w_{core}$.
A change in $w_{core}$ can affect $\lambda_b$ and $\lambda_c$ in the FE solution when $3<n<5$, plus $\zeta_b$ and $\zeta_c$ in the SSDW solution. When $n\geq 7$, $\zeta_b$ and $\zeta_c$ presented in Tables \ref{FSs0} to \ref{CDs2} for either $w_{core}=0.05$ or $w_{core}=0.1$ are consistent with the asymptotic value at $w_{core}\rightarrow 0$ within $2\%$. For $n=6$, the difference is slightly larger and about $5\%$. It is expected that a choice of different $w_{core}$ within the range $0.1-0.01$ would affect $\zeta_b$ and $\zeta_c$ by only a few percents. Variation of $w_{core}$ does change $\lambda_b$ and $\lambda_c$ with $3<n<5$ significantly, as $\lambda_b \propto \lambda_c \propto w_{core}^{-1}$ when $w_{core}\rightarrow 0$. However, $3<n<5$ cases are not very important for the study of SNR evolution. Overall we believe different choices of $w_{core}$ within $0.01-0.1$ would not affect the application of our approximate solutions for shock evolution significantly.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Basic parameters for the analytical approximation of the forward shock in a uniform medium with $s=0$}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{lccccccl}
\hline\hline
n &$\alpha$&$\zeta_b$&$t^*_{tran}$&$R^*_{tran}$&$|\Delta R_b^*|/R_b^* $\\
\hline
0&1.25&- &0.4 &0.6 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
1&1.19&- &0.34 &0.56 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
2&1.10&- &0.24 &0.48 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
4&0.80&- &0.04&0.2 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
6&36.1&1.06 &2.29&1.57 &$\lesssim 4\%$\\
7&20.3&1.06 &1.62 &1.35 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
8&14.7&1.08 &1.33 &1.23 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
9&10.4&1.12 &1.11 &1.12 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
10&8.91&1.15 &1.0 &1.07&$\lesssim 2\%$\\
12&7.11&1.21 &0.87 &0.99&$\lesssim 2\%$\\
14&6.23&1.26 &0.79 &0.94&$\lesssim 2\%$\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{FSs0}
\begin{tablenotes}
\small
\item $w_{core}=0$ for $n<3$ and $w_{core}=0.05$ for $n>3$.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Basic parameters for the analytical approximation of the forward shock in a wind profile medium with $s=2$}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{lccccl}
\hline\hline
n &$\alpha$ &$\zeta_b$&$t^*_{tran}$&$R^*_{tran}$&$|\Delta R_b^*|/R_b^* $\\
\hline
0&0.95&- &0.05 &0.07 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
1&0.91&- &0.04 & 0.06&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
2&0.85&- &0.02 &0.04 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
4&0.63&- &0.002 &0.007 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
6&11.3&0.77 &1.2 &0.83 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
7&8.00&0.83 &0.64 &0.53&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
8&6.22&0.90 &0.43 &0.4 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
9&5.16&0.97 &0.32 &0.32 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
10&4.56&1.03 &0.27 &0.28 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
12&3.81&1.14 &0.2 &0.22 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
14&3.40&1.23 &0.16 &0.19 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{FSs2}
\begin{tablenotes}
\small
\item $w_{core}=0$ for $n<3$ and $w_{core}=0.1$ for $n>3$.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Basic parameters for the analytical approximation of CD in a uniform medium with $s=0$}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{lcccccl}
\hline\hline
n &a &b &c &$\zeta_c$&$t^*_{lim}$ &$|\Delta R_c^*|/R_c^* $\\
\hline
0&0.89 &-0.37& 1.66&- &4 &$\lesssim 4\%$\\
1&0.94 &-0.25&1.42&- &4.5 &$\lesssim 4\%$\\
2&1.08 &-0.06&1.05 &-&5 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
4&1.38 &0.27&0.72&- &4 &$\lesssim 5\%$\\
6&5.54 &-0.1&1.11 &0.84 &4.5 &$\lesssim 1\%$\\
7&4.28 &-0.11&1.09 &0.89 &4.5 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
8&3.09 &-0.16&1.16 &0.94 &4 &$\lesssim 2\%$\\
9&3.01 &-0.13&1.09&0.98 &4 &$\lesssim 3\%$\\
10&2.92 &-0.12&1.07&1.01 &4 &$\lesssim 3\%$\\
12&2.35 &-0.16&1.11&1.08 &4 &$\lesssim 3\%$\\
14&2.20 &-0.16&1.10&1.13 &4 &$\lesssim 4\%$\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{CDs0}
\begin{tablenotes}
\small
\item $w_{core}=0$ for $n<3$ and $w_{core}=0.05$ for $n>3$.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Basic parameters for the analytical approximation of CD in a wind profile medium with $s=2$}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{lcccccl}
\hline\hline
n &a&b &c &$\zeta_c$&$t^*_{lim}$&$|\Delta R_c^*|/R_c^* $\\
\hline
0&1.23 &0.50&0.53&- &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
1&1.16 &0.50&0.54 &- &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
2&1.06 &0.51&0.52 &- &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
4&0.58 &0.47&0.71 &- &16&$\lesssim 2\%$\\
6&6.04 &0.53&0.47 &0.56 &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
7&4.61 &0.53&0.47 &0.64 &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
8&3.81 &0.53&0.47 &0.71 &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
9&3.35 &0.53&0.47&0.77 &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
10&2.94 &0.53& 0.47&0.83 &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
12&2.47 &0.52&0.48&0.93 &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
14&2.21 &0.52&0.48&1.01 &16&$\lesssim 1\%$\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{CDs2}
\begin{tablenotes}
\small
\item $w_{core}=0$ for $n<3$ and $w_{core}=0.1$ for $n>3$.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{SNR_simulation_s0.eps}
\caption{Fitting of the forward shock radius $R_b^*$ and CD radius $R^*_c$ with $s=0$. From top to bottom, the panels show $n=0$, 7 and 14, respectively. The x-axis is the dimensionless time $t^*$. The left y-axis is the dimensionless radius $R^*$ and the right y-axis is the radius offset $|\Delta R^*|/R^*$. The blue lines are for the forward shock while the red lines are for the CD. The solid line is the simulation result, the dot-dashed line is our model prediction, the dashed line is the TM model estimate and the dotted line is the normalized radius offset between the numerical simulation and our model. The black vertical dashed line characterizes the transition time $t_{tran}^*$ from early FE or SSDW solution to the late ST solution.}
\label{s0_fit}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{SNR_simulation_s2.eps}
\caption{Same as Fig \ref{s0_fit} but with $s=2$. Note $t_{tran}^*$ in top panel with $n=0$ is very small. }
\label{s2_fit}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Comparison with numerical simulations and TM model}
In Tables \ref{FSs0} to \ref{CDs2}, we introduce a dimensionless ratio $|\Delta R^*(t^*)| /R^*(t^*)$ to illustrate the performance of our model when comparing with numerical simulations. In $|\Delta R^*(t^*)| /R^*(t^*)$, $R^*$ is the radius estimated from our analytical model and $\Delta R^*$ is the radius offset between the numerical simulation and the analytical approximation. The numerical method applied in this paper is similar as that in TM99 with minor changes; see Appendix \ref{App:numerical_method} for the detailed numerical setup.
In Fig. \ref{s0_fit} and \ref{s2_fit}, we present example fits with selected $n$ for $s=0$ and $s=2$, respectively. The solution from the TM model, if available, is also provided in the figures for comparison. In the figures, we only show the fitting results in the time range $0.03<t^*<20$, which covers the transition region with $t^*\sim t_{tran}^*$ between the early FE solution ($n<5$) or SSDW solution ($n>5$) and the late ST solution. Remnants falling into this time range are found to have a radius between about $0.05R_{ch}$ to $4.5R_{ch}$, where $R_{ch}$ is the characteristic radius defined in section \ref{scale}. For typical SNR parameters, we found the corresponding dimensional radius is roughly in the range $[\rm 0.2pc, 15pc]$ for uniform medium ($s=0$) and $[\rm 0.6pc, 60pc]$ for wind density profile ($s=2$) which should be enough for comparison with observation. More importantly, the difference between the analytical approximation and simulated remnants is expected to gradually shrink to zero when $t^*$ moves far away from $t^*_{tran}$. $t_{tran}^*$ is shown as a vertical black dashed line in Figs. \ref{s0_fit} and \ref{s2_fit}. In Tables \ref{FSs0} to \ref{CDs2}, we also list the values of $t^*_{tran}$ and $R_{tran}^*$, which characterize the transition time and radius from the early ED phase to the late ST phase.
Next we discuss our model performance for the forward shock and the CD in detail. We begin with the forward shock model. As shown in Tables \ref{FSs0} and \ref{FSs2}, our model can reproduce the simulation results within about $2\%$ accuracy for $s=0$ and about $1\%$ accuracy for $s=2$. In Fig. \ref{s0_fit} and \ref{s2_fit}, the ratios $|\Delta R_b^*(t^*)| /R_b^*(t^*)$ in the top panel with $n=0$ show spikes at small $t^*$ that are mainly due to the spatial resolution of the simulation. Thus these spikes are not taken into account when counting the uncertainty of our model. For the middle and bottom panels in Figs. \ref{s0_fit} and \ref{s2_fit} with $n>5$, the large offset between the model and numerical simulation at small $t^*$ is mainly introduced by the initial setup of our code. In the simulation for $n>5$, we assume the remnant follows the FE solution at $t_0^*$ when the simulation starts. Although the SSDW solution works like a magnet and the simulated remnant quickly evolves to the SSDW solution. The results at small $t^*$ could still possibly be affected. This is clearly shown in the bottom panel of Fig. \ref{s0_fit}. We found when we decrease $t^*_0$, the deviation at small $t^*$ also decreases. We ignore the deviation at small $t^*$ when deriving the uncertainty $|\Delta R_b^*| /R_b^*$ shown in Tables \ref{FSs0} and \ref{FSs2}.
According to Figs. \ref{s0_fit} and \ref{s2_fit}, for a uniform medium with $s=0$ both our model and the TM model produce reasonably good fits to the simulations. For a wind density profile with $s=2$, our model provides better performance than the TM model especially for large $n$. It is probably because the solution developed in \cite{Micelotta16} for a wind density profile is simply a connection of the SSDW solution and the {\it general ST solution}. However the SSDW solution is only valid when the reverse shock is still in the ejecta envelope. After the reverse shock enters the flat core, a {\it general ED solution} is needed for the TM model, especially for $n\gg 5$ cases. Also when \cite{Micelotta16} extend the solutions in TM99 to a wind density profile situation, they do not compare their model results with numerical simulations. The difference between our model and the TM model could be more easily identified in the evolution of velocity. In case the {\it general ED solution} and the {\it general ST} solution are imperfectly connected, the velocity provided by the TM model may exhibit a small break in the transition region while our model velocity is a smooth function of time. For the TM model, we found this break is mainly significant for cases with large $n$. In Fig. \ref{forwardvelocity}, we plot the forward shock velocity as a function of time for two cases, $n=14$, $s=0$ and $n=14$, $s=2$. The simulation velocity presented in the figure is calculated using the strong shock condition, i.e. the shock velocity is $4/3$ of the post shock velocity. We also calculated the shock velocity with the time derivative, i.e. $v=dR/dt$, as in TM99. We found that the velocities from the above two methods are consistent with each other for the time range studied here.
Our model provides a good fit for the $n=4$ case, while the TM model runs into trouble with this case. It is probably due to the following two reasons. At first, when $n=4$ the majority of mass is concentrated in the core of the ejecta while the majority of the energy is stored in the envelope of the ejecta. Because of this special configuration, the remnant can quickly enter the ST phase as long as the bulk of the energy is transferred to the ambient medium, while the majority of the mass in the ejecta still remains unshocked. In our fitting for $n=4$, we found a very small transition time $t_{tran}^*$ (see Tables \ref{FSs0} and \ref{FSs2}) that is much smaller than the $t^*_{ST}$ derived in the TM model. Due to the small $t^*_{tran}$, the remnant simply follows the ST solution during almost the entire time range presented in the figures, which is easy to fit. Secondly our model only depends on the asymptotic behavior of the remnant without any assumption about the dynamical structure. Thus it is not strongly affected by the mass and energy distribution within the ejecta.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{forward_velocity.eps}
\caption{Dimensionless forward shock velocity as a function of time. The upper panel is for $n=14$ and $s=0$ while the lower panel is for $n=14$ and $s=2$. The black solid line is the simulation result, blue dot-dashed line is our model prediction, and the red dashed line is the TM model estimate.}
\label{forwardvelocity}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We now consider the CD model. As shown in Tables \ref{CDs0} and \ref{CDs2}, our model can reproduce the simulation results within about $4\%$ accuracy for $s=0$ and about $1\%$ accuracy for $s=2$. In Figs. \ref{s0_fit} and \ref{s2_fit}, at small $t^*$ we also see spikes due to limited spatial resolution in the top panel and the large offset due to the initial setup of our code in the middle and bottom panels. As in the forward shock fitting, we ignore those features at small $t^*$ when deriving the uncertainty $|\Delta R_c^*| /R_c^*$. At large $t^*$, the CD radius exhibits different behaviors in a uniform medium and a wind density profile, so we will discuss them separately.
In a uniform medium, the CD radius starts to show oscillations around $t^*\sim 4$, which is probably due to the reflected wave generated when the reverse shock reaches the remnant center. Because of this feature, we only fit the simulation results up to a time $t_{lim}^*$ which marks the beginning of the oscillation phase for the CD. The choices of $t_{lim}^*$ for different $n$ are listed in Table \ref{CDs0}. The parameters $\alpha$, $b$, $c$ and $|\Delta R_c^*| /R_c^*$ provided in Table \ref{CDs0} are only valid up to $t_{lim}^*$. Beyond this limit, the evolution of the CD radius is complicated and hard to model.
In a wind density profile, we did not see the oscillation seen in a uniform medium up to $t_{lim}^* \approx 16$. It is probably because there is less material in the surrounding medium and it takes a longer time for the reverse shock to reach the remnant center and generate the reflected wave. Since the asymptotic behavior of $R^*_c$ at $t^* \rightarrow \infty$ is unclear, the parameters $\alpha$, $b$, $c$ and $|\Delta R_c^*| /R_c^*$ provided in Table \ref{CDs2} are expected to be only valid up to $t_{lim}^*\approx 16$. At $t^*=t^*_{lim}\approx 16$, we find the forward shock radius $R_{b}$ already reaches about $5R_{ch}$. According to eq. \ref{charact_R}, the wind bubble radius $R_b$, for a case with ejecta mass $M_{ej}=~M_\odot$, mass loss rate $\dot{M}_w=10^{-5}~M_\odot yr^{-1}$ and wind velocity $v_w=10 \rm km/s$, is about 65 pc.
\section{REVERSE SHOCK}\label{sec:RS}
The method developed in this paper depends only on the asymptotic behavior of the remnant and in principal can also be applied to the evolution of the reverse shock radius $R_r^*$. The asymptotic behavior of $R_r^*$ at early times $t\rightarrow 0$ is simply the FE solution for $n<5$ and the SSDW solution for $n>5$. The asymptotic behavior of the reverse shock, when it is approaching the remnant center, however, is not very clear at this point. If we assume the asymptotic behavior of the reverse shock in this limit can be described by the following relation
\begin{equation}
R_r^*(t^*\rightarrow t_c^*)=c (t_c^*-t^*)^b\rightarrow 0,
\label{Rr_limit}
\end{equation}
where $t_c^*$ represents the dimensionless time when the reverse shock reaches the remnant center. $b$ and $c$ together characterize how fast the reverse shock is approaching the remnant center. The analytical approximation for the reverse shock radius can then be constructed as for the forward shock and CD. One simple way of building the analytical approximation is as follows:
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{R_r^*}{\lambda_r t^*}\right)^{\alpha}+\left[\frac{R_r^{*}}{c (t_c^*-t^*)^b}\right]^\alpha=1.
\end{equation}
Now we have a solution in the form of $R(t)$ which is
\begin{equation}
R_r^*=\lbrace(\lambda_r t^*)^{-\alpha}+[c (t_c^*-t^*)^b]^{-\alpha}\rbrace^{-1/\alpha},
\label{Rr_n<5}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_r(n=0)=\lambda_c(n=0)$ \citep{HS84} is the dimensionless constant for the reverse shock in the FE solution. In Fig. \ref{reverse_shock}, we use the $s=0$ and $n=0$ case as an example to show the validity of the above approximation. The fitting parameters we use are $\alpha=1.23$, $b=0.58$, $c=0.74$ and $t^*_c=2.37$. The new solution provides a good fit to the numerical simulation and is comparable to results from the TM model. However, because we do not know the asymptotic behavior of the reverse shock when it is approaching the remnant center, we have to make an arbitrary assumption, e.g., eq. (\ref{Rr_limit}). As a result, the approximate solution for the reverse shock now has four free parameters instead of one as for the forward shock, and the model becomes more complicated. Since the overall improvement of eq (\ref{Rr_n<5}) compared to the TM model is not very significant, we do not investigate these solutions. Instead, we recommend that readers use the TM model solution for the evolution of reverse shock. In Tables \ref{TM_reverse1} and \ref{TM_reverse2}, we summarize the reverse shock solution from the TM model for different situations \citep{TM99,TM2000,HL12,Micelotta16}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{reverse_shock.eps}
\caption{Reverse shock fitting with $s=0$ and $n=0$ with a linear scale. The black solid line is the simulation result, the blue dot-dashed line is our model prediction and the red dashed line is the TM model estimate.}
\label{reverse_shock}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{TM model solution for the reverse shock radius $R_r^*$ with $0\leq n<3$ and $s=0$}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{l}
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$t^*<t^*_{ST}$}\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
t^*(R_r^*)=0.707 h R^*_r[1-0.762(3-n)^{1/2}R_r^{*3/2}]^{-2/(3-n)}
\end{equation*}}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$t^*\geq t^*_{ST}$}\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{eqnarray*}
R^*_r(t^*)&=& t^*\lbrace 1.56 h^{-1}R^*_{r,ST}-(0.106-0.128n)(t^*-0.639h)\\
&-&\left[\tilde{v}^*_{r,ST} -(0.0676-0.0819n)h\right]\rm ln(1.56h^{-1}t^*)\rbrace
\end{eqnarray*}}\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
h=\left(\frac{3-n}{5-n}\right)^{1/2}
\end{equation*}}\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{TM_reverse1}
\begin{tablenotes}
\small
\item $t^*_{ST}$, $R^*_{r,ST}$ and $\tilde{v}^*_{r,ST}$ are given in Table 3 of TM99.
\item Reference: \cite{TM99} and \cite{TM2000}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{TM model solution for the reverse shock radius $R_r^*$ with $5< n\leq 14$ and $s=0,2$}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{l}
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$t^*<t^*_{core}$}\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
R_r^*=\frac{1}{l_{ED}}\left\lbrace v_{core}^{*n-3}\frac{(3-s)^2}{n(n-3)}\frac{3}{4\pi}\frac{l^{n-2}_{ED}}{\phi_{ED}}\right\rbrace^{1/(n-s)} t^{*\frac{n-3}{n-s}},
\end{equation*}}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$t^* \geq t^*_{core}$}\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{equation*}
R^*_r=\left[ \frac{R^*_b(t^*=t_{core}^*)}{l_{ED}t^*_{core}}-\frac{3-s}{n-3}\frac{v^*_b(t^*=t^*_{core})}{l_{ED}}\rm ln\frac{t^*}{t^*_{core}}\right]t^*,
\end{equation*}}\\
\hline
\parbox{3cm}{
\begin{eqnarray*}
t^*_{core}&=&\left[\frac{l^{s-2}_{ED}}{\phi_{ED}}\frac{3}{4\pi}\frac{(3-s)^2}{n(n-3)}\right]^{1/(3-s)}\frac{1}{v_{core}^*}\\
v^*_{core}&=&\left[\frac{10(n-5)}{3(n-3)}\right]^{1/2}\\
l_{ED}&=&1+\frac{8}{n^2}+\frac{0.4}{4-s}\\
\phi_{ED}&=& [0.65-\exp (-n/4)]\sqrt{1-\frac{s}{3}}
\end{eqnarray*}}\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{TM_reverse2}
\begin{tablenotes}
\small
\item Reference: \cite{Micelotta16}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
\section{Discussion and Summary}{\label{sec:DS}}
In fitting the CD, we assume that the CD asymptotically approaches the power law relation $R_c^* \sim ct^{*b}$. For a wind density profile ($s=2$), the values of $b$ and $c$ (see Table \ref{CDs2}) we found are almost constant for ejecta with different density profiles, which implies a universal asymptotic limit for the CD like the ST solution for the forward shock. For a uniform medium, the derived $b$ and $c$ show larger variations because the reflected wave driven by the reverse shock complicates the situation. Thus we have to apply an arbitrary upper cutoff $t_{lim}^*$ during the fitting, which could affect the values of $b$ and $c$.
In this paper, we present a new approach to derive analytical approximations describing the shock evolution in a non-radiative SNR. The new approach depends on only the asymptotic behaviors of the remnant during its evolution and thus is greatly simplified compared with the TM model. We then use the new method to closely investigate the shock evolution in a non-radiative SNR in both the interstellar medium with a constant density profile and a circumstellar medium with a wind density profile. We focus on the study of the forward shock and CD while application to the reverse shock is also briefly discussed. We compare our new analytical approximation with numerical simulations and find that a few percent accuracy is achieved for all investigated cases. For the forward shock, we also compare our new solutions to the TM model. In a uniform ambient medium, our solutions are comparable to the TM model while for a wind density profile medium our solutions perform better, especially when the ejecta envelope has a steep density profile. In order to obtain the analytical solution, we made several simplifying assumptions. Possible extensions of the current solutions to more complicated situations will be studied in future work. The transition from the ST phase to the radiative phase in SNR evolution has been discussed in \cite{Cioffi88}. In the future, we would like to use the method developed here to investigate the problem.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank the referee Dr. Christopher F. McKee for useful comments and constructive suggestions that helped us improve the manuscript. We would also like to thank Dr. Fabio Acero for discussion about the forward shock velocity. XT got the main idea for this work while undertaking PhD research with RAC at the Department of Astronomy University of Virginia and then moved to Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics to finish most of the work. XT would like to thank the Department of Astronomy at UVa for a stimulating atmosphere, and Eugene Churazov and Rashid Sunyaev at MPA for support of this work. The research was supported in part by NASA grant NNX112AF90G.
|
\section{The top-quark sector in the SME}
Many experiments involving the top quark have been performed to determine the top-quark properties and test new physics. With the advent of the LHC, it is also possible to test some fundamental symmetries, for example Lorentz and CPT symmetries, using the top quark, given the great statistical power of the LHC data. The use of the top quark is motivated by its large mass, since the Lorentz and CPT violation may be largest for the top quark, and by its short lifetime, since it decays before hadronization and can be treated as a free quark.\cite{Berger:2015yha}
The Lorentz and CPT violation can be described by an effective field theory called the Standard-Model Extension (SME).\cite{Colladay:1996iz,Colladay:1998fq} Numerous experiments in various fields of physics have been conducted to search for Lorentz and CPT violation.\cite{datatables} The only experiment testing Lorentz symmetry in the top-quark sector of the SME has been carried out by the D0 collaboration, with the dominant production process being $q\overline{q}\rightarrow t\overline{t}$ and the CPT-even coefficients measured to about 10\%.\cite{Abazov:2012iu} To make a similar measurement at the LHC, we need a theoretical analysis of the $t\overline t$ production via gluon fusion ($gg\rightarrow t \overline t$), the dominant $t\overline t$ production process at the LHC. We expect these coefficients to be measured to a few percent, for the LHC has much higher statistical power. On the other hand, our analysis of single-top production lays the foundations for measuring CPT violation in the top-quark sector.\cite{Berger:2015yha}
To search for Lorentz and CPT violation, we can look for sidereal signals. For CPT-odd effects, we may also use a different kind of signal called an asymmetry,
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal{A}_{\mathrm{CPT}}}\equiv\dfrac{R-\overline{R}}{R+\overline{R}},
\label{zliu}
\end{equation}
where $R$ and $\overline{R}$ are the rates of one process and its CPT-conjugated process.
\section{Top-antitop pair production}
Top quarks are produced dominantly in pairs via quark fusion and gluon fusion in hadron colliders. The top and antitop then decay. The squared matrix element for the whole process can be written as the product of production and decay parts in the narrow-width approximation.
We start with the Lagrange density in the top-quark sector of the minimal SME assuming the only nonzero coefficients are those that involve the top-quark fields. For the matrix element we calculate, all physically observable effects come from the symmetric part of $c_{\mu\nu}$ by field redefinitions. Moreover, CPT violation is unobservable in $t\overline t$ production and decay at the leading order.\cite{Berger:2015yha}
The leading-order SME corrections to the matrix element for $gg\rightarrow t \overline t$, which is the dominant $t\overline t$ production process at the LHC, can be calculated as follows. Extracting from the SME Lagrange density, we obtain the modified Feynman rules, which include insertions on the quark-gluon vertices and the top-quark propagators. To compute the contribution from the vertex insertions, we add five diagrams, each of which has one vertex insertion, to the Standard Model (SM) $s$, $t$ and $u$ channel tree-level diagrams, take the modulus square, average over polarizations and colors, and sum over spins. For the corrections from the propagators, we use the full propagator, which can be obtained from the modified momentum-space Dirac equation. The sum of all these SME corrections is symmetric under $\mu \leftrightarrow \nu$, which is consistent with the previous discussion that the antisymmetric part of $c_{\mu\nu}$ is not physically observable.\cite{Berger:2015yha}
The combination of the production and decay parts\cite{Berger:2015yha} leads to the matrix element for the whole process, which can then be used to obtain experimental signals like the cross sections and sidereal variations.
\section{Single-top production}
Although CPT violating effects are absent in $t\overline t$ production, they appear in single-top production, which includes the $s$ channel ($q\overline{q'}\rightarrow t\overline{b}$), $t$ channel ($bq\rightarrow tq'$ and $b\overline{q}\rightarrow t\overline{q'}$) and $tW$ mode ({$bg\rightarrow tW^-$}).
For the Lagrange density, in addition to the assumptions we make in the $t\overline t$ production analysis, we further assume the only nonzero coefficient is $b_\mu$. This leads to an insertion on a top-quark line and modified spin sums for top quarks. To find the spin sums, we use Appendix A of Ref.\ \refcite{Colladay:1996iz} to obtain the approximate solutions to the modified Dirac equation, compute the spin sums in the zero-momentum frame of the particle, and finally do an observer Lorentz transformation.
In the narrow-width approximation, the SME corrections to the matrix elements for all four production processes can be calculated in a similar way. The SME corrections to the corresponding single-antitop production processes have the same magnitudes as those single-top processes, but have opposite signs. The decay part is found to be the same as the SM results.\cite{Berger:2015yha}
\section{Signals}
For $t\overline t$ production, a similar sidereal analysis at the LHC is expected to measure $c_{\mu\nu}$ to about a few percent. For single-top production, in addition to sidereal variations, the asymmetry defined in Eq.\ \refeq{zliu} gives another type of signal. For example, the cross sections of $tW^-$ and $\overline{t}W^+$ modes are the same in the SM\cite{Bernreuther:2008ju} but have opposite SME corrections, and this asymmetry is sensitive to $b_Z$ and $b_T$. The estimated sensitivity to $b\cdot p/s$ is about 5\%.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
I am very grateful to M.S. Berger and V.A. Kosteleck\'y for their collaboration. This work is supported partly by DOE grant DE-SC0010120 and by the Indiana University Center for Spacetime Symmetries (IUCSS).
|
\section{Introduction}
The fast-growing electric energy consumption has become a serious concern for existing power systems. According to the study reported by the US energy information administration (EIA), the worldwide energy consumption will grow by $56\%$ from 2010 to 2040 \cite{Demand}. This motivates a green power system with users widely deploying distributed renewable energy generators to meet their individual demand locally, which can effectively reduce both the carbon dioxide emissions of traditional fossil fuel based power plants and the transmission losses from power plants to far apart users. However, the intermittent and stochastic characteristics of renewable energy sources can cause imbalanced supply with demand and yield fluctuation in the power system frequency and/or voltage \cite{Vedady}.
Deploying energy storage system (ESS) is a practical solution to smooth out the power fluctuation in the renewable energy generation and improve the system reliability \cite{Palomar,Katayoun_SmartGridComm2014,Katayoun_journal}. In practice, integrating individual ESSs for all energy consumers (especially for residential and commercial users) may not be feasible, due to both the space limitation and high capital cost of the large number of ESSs.
With the technology advances in bidirectional power flow and distributed monitoring and control in smart grids, the concept of {\it shared ESS} has become appealing \cite{Z.Wang,Paridari,W.Tushar}. In this case, the surplus renewable energy of some users can be charged into a shared (common) ESS, and then be discharged by others with renewable energy deficit. Moreover, given the real-time/day-ahead price information, the shared ESS can reduce the total cost of purchasing conventional energy from the main grid by being charged within off-peak-demand period, with low electricity prices, and being discharged during peak-demand period, with high electricity prices \cite{Z.Wang}. However, the main challenge to realize the shared ESS is how to manage users to optimally charge/discharge energy to/from the shared ESS, which will be addressed in this paper.
In this paper, we consider a system of multiple energy consumers with their individually owned renewable energy generators, and one ESS shared among them. Since users are self-interested in practice, each of which wants to use the shared ESS as much as possible to maximize its profit, i.e., the energy cost saving resulted from deploying the shared ESS. This can cause fairness issue in general, i.e., one user may use the shared ESS more frequently than others. To tackle this issue, we propose a centralized algorithm, under which a central controller jointly optimizes the amount of energy charged/discharged to/from the shared ESS by all users, given a profit coefficient set that specifies the desired proportion of the total profit allocated to each user.
Next, for performance comparison, we formulate the profit maximization problem for the conventional case of distributed ESSs, where each user owns its small-scale ESS and does not share energy with others. To have a fair comparison, we set the sum capacity of all individual ESSs to be the same as the shared ESS. Our simulations show that the shared ESS can potentially increase the total profit of users compared to the case of distributed ESSs. This is because the surplus energy of one user can be utilized by others with energy deficit, and also the energy curtailment is avoided more effectively due to the higher capacity of shared ESS. Moreover, we show that the diversity in users' renewable energy sources/loads can highly increase the profit gain resulting from the shared ESS, i.e., users with different types of renewable energy sources can benefit significantly by sharing an ESS.
There have been previous works on the energy management problem for users with ESSs \cite{Palomar,Katayoun_SmartGridComm2014,Katayoun_journal,Paridari,W.Tushar,Z.Wang}.
Most of the previous works, e.g., \cite{Katayoun_journal,Katayoun_SmartGridComm2014,Palomar}, assume that either each user owns its ESS (that is not shared with others) or all users belong to the same entity, where maximizing the profit of each individual user is not the case. However, this might not always be valid in practical systems, especially when the number of users is large. The idea of shared ESS among users was introduced in \cite{Z.Wang}, where interesting results on the shared ESS deployment in the system were presented. However, the proposed charging/discharging policy in \cite{Z.Wang} is only based on the hourly prices offered by the main grid. Recently, \cite{Paridari} solved the cost minimization problem for energy consumers with demand response capability, but no renewable energy integration, which limits the application of their derived solution. Moreover, \cite{W.Tushar} proposed an auction based approach for the interactions between the shared ESS and users, using game theoretical techniques.
In contrast to the prior works, in this paper, we propose an algorithm under which a central controller optimally sets the charging/discharging power to/from the shared ESS by all users, using the profit coefficients technique. We then compare the profit gain in this case with the extensively studied case of users with distributed small-scale ESSs. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{Sec:System_Model} describes the system model. Section \ref{Sec:Shared_ESS} formulates and solves the energy management problem for the shared ESS.
Section \ref{Sec:Benchmark} describes the case of
distributed ESSs. Section \ref{Sec:Simulations} presents our simulation results.
Last, Section \ref{Sec:Conclusion} concludes the paper and discusses possible future directions.
\section{System Model}\label{Sec:System_Model}
We consider a time-slotted system with slot index $n$, $n \in {\cal N}=\{1,\ldots,N\}$, where $N \ge 1$ is the total number of scheduling times slots. For simplicity, we assume that the duration of each slot is normalized to a unit time; as a result, power and energy are used interchangeably in this paper. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:SystemModel}, we consider $M \ge 1$ number of users, indexed by $m$, $m\in {\cal M}=\{1,\cdots,M\}$. Particularly, each user can be a single energy consumer (residential, commercial, and/or industrial) or a group of consumers controlled by an aggregator. We assume that users have their individual renewable energy generators; thus, can supply a part or all of their load over time. However, a single large-scale energy storage system (ESS) is shared among all users, where they can charge/discharge to/from it whenever necessary.
Moreover, users are all connected to the main grid, which consists of conventional fossil fuel based energy generation units, and can draw energy from it in case of renewable energy deficit.
We assume that a central controller who is trusting of all users optimizes the amount of charging/discharging to/from the shared ESS while ensuring that practical constraints of the system are satisfied.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.6cm]{Fig1.eps}\\
\caption{Case of shared ESS.}\label{fig:SystemModel}\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure}
Let $0 \le C_{mn} \le \overline{C}$ and $0 \le D_{mn} \le \overline{D}$ denote the energy charged/discharged to/from the shared ESS by user $m$ at time slot $n$, respectively, where $\overline{C}>0$ and $\overline{D}>0$ are the maximum charging and discharging rates of the shared ESS, respectively. Furthermore, there are some energy losses during the charging and discharging processes of the ESS in practice, which are specified by charging and discharging efficiency parameters, denoted by $0< \dot{\alpha} < 1$ and $0 <\ddot{\alpha} < 1$, respectively. Let $S_n\ge 0$ denote the available energy in the shared ESS at the beginning of time slot $n$, which can be derived recursively as follows:
\begin{align}
S_{n+1}=S_n+\dot{\alpha} \sum_{m=1}^{M}{C_{mn}} - \frac{1}{\ddot{\alpha}} \sum_{m=1}^{M}{D_{mn}} .
\end{align}
In addition, a practical ESS has finite capacity and cannot be fully discharged to avoid deep charging. We thus have the following constraints for the states of the shared ESS over time
\begin{align}\label{eq:storage}
\underline{S} \le S_{n} \le \overline{S},~\forall n \in {\cal N},
\end{align}
where $\underline{S} \ge 0$ and $\overline{S} \ge 0$ are the minimum and maximum allowed states of the shared ESS, respectively. By default, we assume $\underline{S} \le S_{1} \le \overline{S}$.
Denote $R_{mn}\ge 0$ and $L_{mn}\ge 0$ as the renewable energy generation and the load of user $m$ at time slot $n$. We then define $\Delta_{mn}=R_{mn}-L_{mn}$ as the {\it net energy profile} of user $m$. Note that $\Delta_{mn}$ can be either positive (case of surplus renewable energy) or negative (case of renewable energy deficit). In general, $\Delta_{mn}$'s are stochastic due to the randomness in both the renewable energy generation and load, but can be predicted with finite errors. However, in this paper, we assume that $\Delta_{mn}$'s are perfectly predicted and thus are known to the users prior to the scheduling, e.g., day-ahead energy management.\footnote{In the practical case of stochastic net energy profiles, we can design online algorithms for the real-time implementation using, e.g., sliding-window technique given in \cite{Katayoun_journal}. Due to the space limitation, we do not discuss the online energy management in this paper.} By denoting $G_{mn} \ge 0$ as the energy drawn from the main grid by user $m$ at time slot $n$, we have the following constraints for each user $m$:
\begin{align}\label{eq:Nut}
G_{mn}-C_{mn}+D_{mn}+\Delta_{mn} \ge 0,~\forall n \in {\cal N}.
\end{align}
The constraints in (\ref{eq:Nut}) ensure that the load of user $m$ is satisfied in all time slots, from its own renewable energy generation, the shared ESS, and/or the main grid. Drawing energy from the main grid incurs some cost for user $m$, which can be modelled by a set of time-varying functions $f_{mn}(G_{mn})$, $n=1,\ldots,N$. Specifically, we assume that each $f_{mn}(G_{mn})$ is convex \cite{Boyd} and increasing over $G_{mn}$, e.g., piece-wise linear and/or quadratic functions \cite{Wood}.
\section{Problem Formulation: Shared ESS}\label{Sec:Shared_ESS} \label{sec:PF-Shared}
As discussed earlier, drawing energy from the main grid results in some cost for individual users. As a result, each user wants to use the shared ESS as much as possible in order to maximize its own {{\it profit}, which is defined as the difference between its energy costs without and with the shared ESS. In this case, the central controller should ensure that the ESS is shared appropriately (fairly) among all users while satisfying the practical constraints of the system.
In the following, we first formulate the profit maximization problem for each individual user, and derive its profit as a function of the charging/discharging values. Next, we apply the technique of profit coefficients under which the central controller proportionally allocates the total profit to users.
Given $\{ G_{kn} \ge 0\}_{k\neq m}$, $\{0 \le C_{kn} \le \overline{C}\}_{k\neq m}$, $\{ 0 \le D_{kn} \le \overline{D}\}_{k\neq m}$, satisfying constraints in (2) and (3), $\forall k \neq m$, the {\it profit maximization problem} for each user $m$ is given by
\begin{align}
\mathrm{(P1)}\hspace{-.7mm}:&~\hspace{-1mm}\mathop{\mathtt{max}}_{\{G_{mn}\}_{n \in \cal N},\{C_{mn}\}_{n \in \cal N},\{D_{mn}\}_{n \in \cal N}}
~\hspace{-1mm}{\hat{f}_m\hspace{-.5mm}-\hspace{-.5mm}\sum_{n=1}^{N}{f_{mn}(G_{mn})} }\nonumber \\
\mathtt{s.t.}
&~ \underline{S} \le S_n \le \overline{S},~\forall n \in {\cal N} \nonumber\\
&~ G_{mn}-C_{mn}+D_{mn}+\Delta_{mn} \ge 0,~\forall n \in {\cal N} \nonumber\\
&~ G_{mn}\hspace{-.4mm} \ge\hspace{-.4mm} 0,\hspace{-.7mm}~0\hspace{-.5mm}\le\hspace{-.4mm} C_{mn} \hspace{-.4mm}\le \overline{C},\hspace{-.7mm}~\hspace{-.5mm}0\hspace{-.4mm}\le\hspace{-.4mm} D_{mn} \hspace{-.4mm}\le \overline{D},\hspace{-.7mm}~\hspace{-.4mm}\forall n \in {\cal N}, \nonumber
\end{align}
where $\hat{f}_m=\sum_{n=1}^{N}f_{mn}([-\Delta_{mn}]^+)$, with $[x]^+=\max\{0,x\}$, denotes the energy cost for user $m$ when the shared ESS is not deployed. In (P1), we can first solve the problem over $\{G_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N}$, given fixed $\{0\le C_{mn}\le \overline{C}\}_{n\in \cal N}$ and $\{0 \le D_{mn} \le \overline{D}\}_{n\in \cal N}$. By solving the resulted problem, we obtain $G_{mn}=[C_{mn}-D_{mn}-\Delta_{mn}]^+$, $\forall n \in \cal N$. Accordingly, the user's profit can be expressed as a function of its charging/discharging values as follow:
\begin{align}\label{eq:Profit}
&P_m(\{C_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N},\{D_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N})=
\nonumber\\&\sum_{n=1}^{N}{\hspace{-.5mm}f_{mn}([-\Delta_{mn}]^+\hspace{-.3mm})}\hspace{-.8mm}-\hspace{-.8mm}\sum_{n=1}^{N}{\hspace{-.5mm}f_{mn}([C_{mn}-D_{mn}-\Delta_{mn}]^+}\hspace{-.3mm}).
\end{align}
Next, the central controller needs to jointly design $\{C_{mn}\}^{m\in \cal M}_{n\in \cal N},\{D_{mn}\}^{m\in \cal M}_{n\in \cal N}$ for all users such that their individual profits are maximized proportionally while practical constraints of the shared ESS are satisfied. Let $P_m(\{C_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N},\{D_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N})=\beta_m t^*$, where $0 \le \beta_m \le 1$, $\forall m \in {\cal M}$, satisfying $\sum_{m=1}^{M}{\beta_m}=1$, are given profit coefficients\footnote{In practice, there are different approaches to design the profit coefficients $\beta_m$'s. For instance, consider the scenario that users invest to purchase a bulk battery, according to their budget. In this case, the system operator can set $\beta_m$'s such that users benefit from the shared ESS according to their initial investment. As another example, consider a scenario that the ESS is already installed in the system, e.g., by the government funding. In this case, the central controller sets the use of ESS such that users with higher average renewable energy deficit can draw more from the shared ESS.} that specify the proportion of the total profit received by individual users, and $t^* \ge 0$ denotes the maximum total profit of all users, i.e., $t^*=\sum_{m=1}^{M}P_m(\{C_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N},\{D_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N})$.
Specifically, $t^*$ can be obtained by solving the following optimization problem:
\begin{align}
&\mathrm{(P2)}:~\mathop{\mathtt{max}}_{t, \hspace{.2mm}\{C_{mn}\}^{m\in \cal M}_{n\in \cal N},\{D_{mn}\}^{m\in \cal M}_{n\in \cal N}}~{t}\nonumber \\
\mathtt{s.t.}
&~ \underline{S} \le S_n \le \overline{S},~\forall n \in {\cal N},\nonumber\\
&~ P_m(\{C_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N},\{D_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N}) \ge \beta_m t,~ \forall m \in {\cal M} \nonumber\\
&~\hspace{-.4mm}~0\hspace{-.4mm}\le\hspace{-.4mm} C_{mn} \hspace{-.4mm}\le \overline{C},\hspace{-.4mm}~\hspace{-.4mm}0\hspace{-.4mm}\le\hspace{-.4mm} D_{mn} \hspace{-.4mm}\le \overline{D},\hspace{-.6mm}~ t\ge0, \hspace{-.6mm}~\forall m \hspace{-.4mm}\in \hspace{-.4mm}{\cal M}, \hspace{-.6mm}~\forall n\hspace{-.4mm} \in\hspace{-.4mm} {\cal N}\hspace{-.4mm}.\nonumber
\end{align}
It can be easily verified that (P2) is convex \cite{Boyd}, and thus can be solved using standard convex optimization techniques such as interior point method. Alternatively, (P2) can be solved by a bisection search over $t$, where in each search iteration, it suffices to solve a feasibility problem that checks whether all constraints of (P2) can be satisfied for given $t$. Eventually, $t$ converges to its optimal value that is $t^*$. In this paper, we use CVX software\cite{CVX} to derive the optimal solution to (P2), i.e., $t^*$, $\{C_{mn}^*\}^{m\in \cal M}_{n\in \cal N}$, and $\{D_{mn}^*\}^{m\in \cal M}_{n\in \cal N}$.
\section{Performance Benchmark: Distributed ESSs}\label{Sec:Benchmark}
In this section, we consider a system setup of distributed ESSs, where users own their individual small-scale ESSs, but do not share energy with each other.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.6cm]{Fig2.eps}\\
\caption{Case of distributed small-scale ESSs.}\label{fig:SystemModel_Split}\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure}
In this case, the state of the ESS for each user $m$, denoted by $S_{mn}$ at time slot $n$, can be derived as
\begin{align}
S_{mn+1}=S_{mn}+\dot{\alpha}_m{C_{mn}} - \frac{1}{\ddot{\alpha}d_m} {D_{mn}}, \label{Storage_Split}
\end{align}
where $ 0<\dot{\alpha}_m<1$ and $0<\ddot{\alpha}_m<1$ are charging and discharging efficiency parameters, respectively. We then have the following constraints for the ESS of user $m$:
\begin{align}\label{eq:storage_distributed}
\underline{S}_m \le S_{mn} \le \overline{S}_m,~\forall n \in {\cal N},
\end{align}
where $\underline{S}_m\ge 0$ and $\overline{S}_m\ge 0$ are the minimum and maximum allowed states of the ESS. The charging and discharging values should also satisfy $0 \le C_{mn} \le \overline{C}_m$ and $0 \le D_{mn} \le \overline{D}_m$, where $\overline{C}_m>0$ and $\overline{D}_m>0$ are the maximum charging and discharging rates, respectively. To have a fair comparison with the case of shared ESS in Section \ref{sec:PF-Shared}, we set $\underline{S}=\sum_{m=1}^{M}\underline{S}_m$, $\overline{S}=\sum_{m=1}^{M}\overline{S}_m$, $\overline{C}=\sum_{m=1}^{M}\overline{C}_m$, and $\overline{D}=\sum_{m=1}^{M}\overline{D}_m$.
We now proceed to formulate the profit maximization problem for each user $m$. This problem can be formulated for each user independently, since ESS constraints are not coupled over users any more.
Hence, the profit maximization problem for each user $m$ can be given as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathrm{(P3)}&:~\hspace{-1mm}\mathop{\mathtt{max}}_{\{G_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N},\{C_{mn}\}_{n\in \cal N},\{D_{mn}\}_{n\in{\cal N}}}~\hspace{-1mm}
{\hat{f}_m-\sum_{n=1}^{N}{f_{mn}(G_{mn})} }\nonumber \\
\mathtt{s.t.}
&~ \underline{S}_m \le S_{mn} \le \overline{S}_m,~\forall n \in {\cal N} \nonumber\\
&~ G_{mn}-C_{mn}+D_{mn}+\Delta_{mn} \ge 0,~\forall n \in {\cal N} \nonumber\\
&~ G_{mn}\hspace{-.4mm} \ge\hspace{-.4mm} 0,\hspace{-.7mm}~0\hspace{-.5mm}\le\hspace{-.4mm} C_{mn} \hspace{-.4mm}\le \overline{C}_m,\hspace{-.7mm}~\hspace{-.5mm}0\hspace{-.4mm}\le\hspace{-.4mm} D_{mn} \hspace{-.4mm}\le \overline{D}_m,\hspace{-.7mm}~\hspace{-.4mm}\forall n \in {\cal N}.\nonumber
\end{align}
It can be easily verified that (P3) is convex \cite{Boyd}, and thus can be solved using CVX software\cite{CVX}.
In the next section, we present a numerical example to reveal the possible profit gain resulting from the shared ESS, compared to the case of distributed ESSs. We also discuss the effectiveness of the shared ESS in users' profit maximization under different system settings.
\section{Simulation Results}\label{Sec:Simulations}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5cm]{Fig3.eps}\\
\caption{Load profiles of the three users over one week.}\label{fig:Users_Load_Profile}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5cm]{Fig4.eps}\\
\caption{Renewable energy generation (both solar and wind) of the three users over one week.}\label{fig:Users_RE}
\end{figure}
In this section, we consider a system with three users $M=3$ based on the real data available from California,
US, over one week $N=168$ (from 1 January, 2006 to 7 January, 2006) \cite{Load_Profile,NREL,NREL_Solar,Price_CAISO}. Specifically, user 1 is modelled as an apartment of $30$ units, user 2 as a medium-size office, and user 3 as a restaurant \cite{Load_Profile}.
The hourly energy consumption of the three users is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Users_Load_Profile}.
We assume that each user has its own renewable energy generators, including both solar and wind, with generation profiles shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Users_RE} \cite{NREL,NREL_Solar}.
For the shared ESS setup, we set $\dot{\alpha}=0.7$, $\ddot{\alpha}=0.8$, $\underline{S}=0$, and $\overline{S}= 1$ MW. On the other hand, for the distributed ESSs setup, we set charging and discharging efficiency parameter of individual ESSs as $\dot{\alpha}_m=0.7$, $\ddot{\alpha}_m=0.8$, $\forall m\in \cal M$, respectively. We also set $\underline{S}_m=0$, $\forall m\in \cal M$, $\overline{S}_{1}=300$ kW, $\overline{S}_{2}=600$ kW, and $\overline{S}_{3}=100$ kW.
We model the cost function of purchasing energy from the main grid as $f_{mn}=\lambda_{mn}G_{mn}$, where we set $\lambda_{mn}=45$ $\$$/kW, $\forall m\in {\cal M}$, $\forall n\in {\cal N}$ \cite{Price_CAISO}.
\subsection{Shared versus Distributed ESSs}
\begin{table}[t!]
\centering
\caption{Comparison between the shared and distributed ESSs}
\label{Table}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{ESS values} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Total profit gain of all users} \\ \hline
Shared ESS & Distributed ESS & Shared ESS & Distributed ESS \\ \hline
$\overline{S}=1$ MW & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\overline{S}_{1}=300$ kW\\ $\overline{S}_{2}=600$ kW\\ $\overline{S}_{3}=100$ kW\end{tabular} & $28.4$$\%$ & $18.5$$\%$ \\ \hline
$\overline{S}=1.5$ MW & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\overline{S}_{1}=450$ kW\\ $\overline{S}_{2}=900$ kW\\ $\overline{S}_{3}=150$ kW\end{tabular} & $32.6$$\%$ & $25.4$$\%$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
First, we set the profit coefficients as $\beta_1=0.3$, $\beta_2=0.6$, and $\beta_3=0.1$.
Table \ref{Table} shows the total profit gain of all users, i.e., energy cost saving due to using ESS, resulting from the two system setups of shared and distributed ESSs. It is observed that shared ESS can result in higher profit, e.g., profit gain with a shared ESS of $\overline{S}=1$ MW is $28.4\%$, while distributed ESSs setup with $\overline{S}_{1}=300$ kW, $\overline{S}_{2}=600$ kW, and $\overline{S}_{3}=100$ kW yields a lower profit gain of $18.5\%$. This is because the surplus energy of one user can be utilized by others with energy deficit and users can thus cooperatively exploit the shared ESS. In addition, the shared ESS can avoid renewable energy curtailments more effectively over the case of distributed ESSs, due to its higher capacity compared to each distributed ESS.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.7cm]{Fig5.eps}\\
\caption{Profit of users over profit coefficient $\beta_2$, given $\beta_1=0.3$ and $\beta_3=0.7-\beta_2$.}\label{fig:Profit_Over_Beta}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Impact of Profit Coefficients}
As discussed earlier, profit coefficients $\beta_m$'s are set by the system operator to allocate a certain proportion of the total profit to each user. Fig. \ref{fig:Profit_Over_Beta} shows the individual profits of users, i.e., $P_m(\cdot)$'s given in (\ref{eq:Profit}), versus $\beta_2$, with $\beta_1=0.3$ and $\beta_3=0.7-\beta_2$. It is observed that $P_1(\cdot)$ remains almost constant over $\beta_2$, since $\beta_1$ is assumed to be fixed in this simulation. In addition, $P_2(\cdot)$ increases over $\beta_2$, since higher proportion of the total profit is allocated to user 2 as $\beta_2$ increases, while the opposite is true for $P_3(\cdot)$.
\subsection{Impact of Renewable Energy Diversity}
Herein, by keeping the load profile of each user unchanged, we consider a scenario that all users have only solar energy generators (low diversity), which is in contrast to the initial setup of solar together with wind energy generators (high diversity). The solar energy generation of users is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:User_RE_Only_PV}.
The total profit gain of all users for the two cases of high and low renewable energy diversity are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Shared_ESS_Evaluation}. It is observed that the case with high diversity of renewable energy generators yields a higher profit gain compared to the low diversity case. This is because when diversity is high, it is more likely that the energy surplus/deficit in users' renewable energy profiles do not happen concurrently; thus, the surplus energy in one user can compensate the energy deficit in others. In addition, it is observed that the profit gain is almost constant for $\overline{S} > 1$ MW in the low diversity case, while in the high diversity case, it happens for $\overline{S} >5$ MW. This is because when the diversity is low, the chance for energy cooperation among users using the shared ESS is small.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}\label{Sec:Conclusion}
In this paper, we study the shared ESS management problem for users with renewable energy integration. We propose an algorithm under which a central controller optimizes the charging/discharging power to/from the shared ESS by all users, given a profit coefficient set.
By comparing the performance of this setup in terms of profit gain with the conventional setup of distributed small-scale ESSs, we show that the shared ESS can potentially increase the total profit of all users (up to $10\%$ in our simulations). Our results are helpful in practical systems where installing individual ESS for each user is either very costly (due to the large number of users) or requires space that is not available.
Devising efficient online algorithms for the real-time energy management of the shared ESS, given stochastic renewable energy generation/load, is an interesting future direction.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5cm]{Fig6.eps}\\
\caption{Renewable energy generation (only solar) of the three users over one week.}\label{fig:User_RE_Only_PV} \vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.7cm]{Fig7.eps}\\
\caption{Impact of renewable energy diversity on the performance of shared ESS.}\label{fig:Shared_ESS_Evaluation}\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure}
|
\section{Entanglement measures and correlation functions}
\subsection{Correlated reduced density operators}
We consider the Hamiltonian for a system of $L$ lattice sites of the form
\begin{equation}
\label{Hlat}
\hat H
=
\sum_{\ell_1\ne\ell_2}
\hat H_{\ell_1\ell_2}
+
\sum_{\ell}
\hat H_\ell
\;,
\end{equation}
where $\hat H_\ell$ and $\hat H_{\ell_1\ell_2}$ are local and two-site operators, respectively;
the indices label the lattice sites.
The state of the whole system can be described by the density operator
$\hat\rho=|\psi\rangle\langle\psi|$.
In order to study parts of the system, we introduce reduced density operators
for $q$ lattice sites via averaging
(partially tracing) over all other sites:
\begin{equation}
\hat\rho_{\ell_1\dots \ell_q}
=
{\rm Tr}_{\ell_{q+1}\dots \ell_L}
\hat\rho
\;,
\end{equation}
where all $\ell_1,\dots ,\ell_L: \{1,\dots,L\}$ are distinct.
Information about all possible spatial correlations of the lattice sites $\ell_1\dots \ell_q$
is directly contained in the correlated parts of
the reduced density operator $\hat\rho_{\ell_1\dots \ell_q}^{\rm corr}$.
They are constructed in the same manner as cumulants.
For $q=2,3$ they are explicitly given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat\rho_{\ell_1\ell_2}^{\rm corr}
&=&
\hat\rho_{\ell_1\ell_2}-\hat\rho_{\ell_1}\hat\rho_{\ell_2}
\\
\hat\rho_{\ell_1\ell_2\ell_3}^{\rm corr}
&=&
\hat\rho_{\ell_1\ell_2\ell_3}
-
\hat\rho_{\ell_1\ell_2}^{\rm corr}\hat\rho_{\ell_3}
-
\hat\rho_{\ell_1\ell_3}^{\rm corr}\hat\rho_{\ell_2}
-
\hat\rho_{\ell_2\ell_3}^{\rm corr}\hat\rho_{\ell_1}
\nonumber\\
&&-
\hat\rho_{\ell_1}\hat\rho_{\ell_2}\hat\rho_{\ell_3}
\;.
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The operators
$\hat\rho_{\ell_1\dots \ell_q}^{\rm corr}$ are hermitean and their traces vanish:
${\rm Tr}\hat\rho_{\ell_1\dots \ell_q}^{\rm corr}=0$.
They allow to calculate (connected) correlation functions of local operators $\hat O_\ell$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle
\hat O_{\ell_1} \dots \hat O_{\ell_q}
\rangle^{\rm corr}
=
{\rm Tr}
\left(
\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_{{\ell_1} \dots {\ell_q}}
\hat O_{\ell_1} \dots \hat O_{\ell_q}
\right)
\;.
\end{eqnarray}
In order to obtain quantitative estimates of the $q$-point correlations,
it is convenient to consider the Schatten $p$-norms
\begin{equation}
||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_{{\ell_1} \dots {\ell_q}}||_p
:=
\sqrt[p]{{\rm Tr} |\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_{{\ell_1} \dots {\ell_q}}|^p}
\equiv
\left(
\sum_i |\lambda_{{\ell_1} \dots {\ell_q}}^{(i)}|^p
\right)^{1/p}
\;,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_{{\ell_1} \dots {\ell_q}}^{(i)}$ are the eigenvalues of the correlated density operators
$\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_{{\ell_1} \dots {\ell_q}}$.
The Schatten one-norm is also known as the trace norm
and the two-norm is often called the Frobenius norm or the Hilbert-Schmidt norm.
Assuming that the aboslute value of the matrix elements
$\langle i|\hat O_{\ell_1}\dots\hat O_{\ell_q}|i\rangle$
in the eigenstates $|i\rangle$ of the operator
$\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_{{\ell_1} \dots {\ell_q}}$ are not larger than one,
it is easy to see that
$
\left|\langle\hat O_{\ell_1} \dots \hat O_{\ell_q}\rangle^{\rm corr}\right|
\le
||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_{{\ell_1} \dots {\ell_q}}||_1
$.
In the present work, we deal with the ground states of one-dimensional
translationally invariant systems.
In this case, the density matrices depend only on the distances between the lattices sites.
One can always order the site indices such that $\ell_1<\ell_2<\dots<\ell_q$
and we can write
$\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_{{\ell_1} \dots {\ell_q}} \equiv \hat\rho_q^{\rm corr}(d_1,\dots,d_{q-1})$,
where $d_i=\ell_{i+1}-\ell_i>0$ are the corresponding distances.
Intuitively, one would expect that
(i) the correlations of a fixed number of sites decrease with the distances between the sites and
(ii) the correlations for fixed distances decrease with the number of sites.
For nearest neighbors, the latter would lead to inequalities
\begin{equation}
\label{ineq}
\!
||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_2(1)||_p
\gg
||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_3(1,1)||_p
\gg
\dots
\end{equation}
Our analysis of two completely different models presented below shows that
the expectation (i) is always satisfied whereas (ii) does not necessarily hold.
\subsection{Correlations as upper bounds to entanglement}
For pure states, the largest correlation function
$||\hat\rho_{\ell_1\ell_2}^{\rm corr}||_1$
coincides with the concurrence $C_2(\ell_1,\ell_2)$~\cite{sVerstraetePC04}.
This strict equality for pure states
turns into an upper bound for the concurrence of mixed states
(see Fig.~\ref{Corr.1u2}).
It is interesting to see whether the respective correlation functions
are an upper bound to the corresponding entanglement measure.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs1.pdf}
\caption{The concurrence $C_2(d)$ is plotted together with
$|\!|\rho_2^{\rm corr}(d)|\!|_1$ for distances $d=1$ (left figure)
and $d=2$ (right figure). For $d=1$, it is clearly seen that indeed
$|\!|\rho_2^{\rm corr}(1)|\!|_1$ as largest correlation function
is an upper bound to the corresponding concurrence. For $d=2$,
the concurrence drops to $0.04$ at its maximum at the critical point, wheras
$|\!|\rho_2^{\rm corr}(2)|\!|_1$ is about roughly the same as
$|\!|\rho_2^{\rm corr}(1)|\!|_1$. }
\label{Corr.1u2}
\end{figure}
For the three-tangle $\tau_3$ we find that it is almost upper bounded by
$|\!|\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}|\!|_1$ for pure states of three qubits
(see Fig.~\ref{tau3-of-rho3_s} or Fig.~\ref{tau3-of-rho3} in the main paper).
There are however some pure states
for which $\tau_3$ is slighly above $|\!|\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}|\!|_1$.
We do not reach a satisfactory statistics to make a similar statement also
in the situation of pure states for four qubits. The result is shown for
900.000 random choices of pure states for $\tau_4^{a}$
in Fig.~\ref{tau4-of-rho4}. It can be seen, however, that for almost all states
out of this sample the inequality holds; there are examples shown for which
$|\!|\hat\rho_4^{\rm corr}|\!|_1$ is smaller than $\tau_4^{a}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs2.pdf}
\caption{The three-tangle is plotted against the largest correlation
for pure states. We have done a plot for each state as labled by an Acin state~\cite{sAcin01}
statistically. Each dot in the figure corresponds
to a single state. Although the largest correlation function
is not always larger that the three-tangle (as for two qubits) it is
however satisfied approximately (see the thin black line, signalling
equality of the both). The green and red curve are GHZ states which
are made of two and four components, respectively. The four component GHZ state
connects the W states with the product states. It is seen that
some states do exist with an even larger $|\!|\rho_3^{\rm corr}|\!|_1$
as the W state. }
\label{tau3-of-rho3_s}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs3.pdf}
\caption{The four-tangle $\tau_4$ is shown here against $|\!|\hat\rho_4^{\rm corr}|\!|_1$ for pure states.
We have chosen the pure states statistically from the extended Schmidt form~\cite{sCarteret00}.
Each dot in the figure corresponds to a single state. We do not have enough statistics, as can be seen from
our viewgraph. Although states for arbitrary value of $\tau_4$ should be there whose value
of $|\!|\hat\rho_4^{\rm corr}|\!|_1$ comes arbitrarily close to the line $\tau_4=|\!|\hat\rho_4^{\rm corr}|\!|_1$,
we don't see any occurrences at larger values of $\tau_4$.}
\label{tau4-of-rho4}
\end{figure}
The genuine multipartite entanglement content, i.e. the three-tangle
$\sqrt{\tau_3}$ and the three four-tangles $\tau_4^a=\sqrt[3]{{\cal F}_1^{(4)}}$,
$\tau_4^b=\sqrt[4]{\left\langle{\cal F}_2^{(4)}\right\rangle_s}$, and
$\tau_4^c=\sqrt[6]{{\cal F}_3^{(4)}}$ from Ref.~\cite{sDoOs08}
for the nearest-neighboring sites are shown in Fig.~\ref{tangles}
of the main article.
Numerical calculations show that $\tau_4^a$, $\tau_4^b$, $\tau_4^c$
for the nearest neighbors are the same,
although we do not have a rigorous analytical proof of that.
Therefore, we do not need to distinguish between the
three four-tangles and drop the upper index.
This also means that the entanglement would only be due to the
three- or four-particle GHZ-states, respectively.
Such a behaviour goes conform with the expectations
for that particular model~\cite{OstUpperBound16}.
\section{Results for the Ising model}
\subsection{Rank-two approximation}
The quantum transverse Ising model is a special case of the transverse XY-model
\begin{equation}
\label{XY}
\hat H
=
-J\sum_{i=1}^\ell\left(\frac{1+\gamma}{2}\hat\sigma_i^x\hat\sigma_{i+1}^x
+\frac{1-\gamma}{2}\hat\sigma_i^y\hat\sigma_{i+1}^y\right)
-\sum_{i=1}^\ell\hat\sigma_i^z
\,.
\end{equation}
For $\gamma\neq 0$ it has a quantum phase transition of the Ising type.
The reduced density matrices of two,
$\hat\rho_2=\hat\rho_{ij}$, three, $\hat\rho_3=\hat\rho_{ijk}$, and four,
$\hat\rho_4=\hat\rho_{ijkl}$, neighboring spins~\cite{sPFEUTY,sHofmann14}
essentially possess two
dominant eigenvalues $p_1$ and $p_2$ while the sum of the remaining
sub-dominant eigenvalues stays below $2.5\%$.
The second eigenvector interferes strongly with the entanglement of the first,
whereas we checked that this is not the case for the third;
the remaining error is maximally $p_{I>3}\approx 0.5\%$.
Therefore we only consider the case of rank two density matrices
and neglect the rest of few percents of weight.
What one is left with are the two
highest weights $p_1$ and $p_2$ of the density matrix.
We briefly discuss two ways of taking care of them:
1) take $p_1$
or
2) take $p_1/(p_1+p_2)$
as the highest weight of the new rank-two density matrix.
Whereas in 1) one assumes that the neglected part
is as destructive to the entanglement as the second state is, in 2) the remaining states do not enter
the calculation at all.
Both are neither an upper bound nor a lower bound to the entanglement.
Details on how the approximations works for the concurrence can be seen in Figs.~\ref{Conc} and \ref{Concd3g0-5}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs4a.pdf}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs4b.pdf}
\caption{
Top:
The concurence $C_2(1)$ is plotted together with the two approximations 1) and 2) (see text)
for the transverse Ising model.
It can be seen that approximation 1) (blue dashed curve; almost invisible here)
basically coincides with the exact concurrence (black curve). The approximation following scheme 2)
(green dash-dotted curve) slightly lies above the exact curve. This is demonstrated in the inset, where the
differences $C_{{\rm Diff.}}^{(1)}:=C-C^{(1)}$ (blue dashed curve) and $C_{{\rm Diff.}}^{(1)}:=C^{(2)}-C$ (red curve) are shown.
\\
Bottom:
The same plots as for the transverse Ising chain are shown here for the transverse XY model
with anisotropy parameter $\gamma=0.5$. Here the concurrence $C_2(1)$
is well described by approximation scheme 1) up to the factorising field. Beyond this point,
the approximation is still reasonable, but lies above the exact curve.}
\label{Conc}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs5.pdf}
\caption{The concurrence $C_2(3)$ is shown for the transverse XY-model and anisotropy parameter $\gamma=0.5$.
The approximation following scheme 1) is reasonable around the critical point in between the two zeros.
Beyond these points it deviates considerably from zero.
It however gives a close prediction of the non-trivial zero of $C_2(3)$.}
\label{Concd3g0-5}
\end{figure}
The procedure 1) works perfectly for nearest neighbors, where the plots can hardly be distinguished
for the transverse Ising model and also for the transverse XY-model for $J$
up to the factorising field, where they start to deviate considerably.
This is different when considering larger distances, where both curves have similar shapes
only around the critical point (see Fig.~\ref{Concd3g0-5}).
It gives good estimates even for the zeros of the exact concurrence
and avoids over-estimating the entanglement in the state.
\subsection{Correlation functions}
The concurrences $C_2(\ell_1,\ell_2)\equiv C_2(d)$, where $d=|\ell_2-\ell_1|$
are shown together with the 1-norm of $\rho_2^{\rm corr}$ in Fig.~\ref{Corr.1u2}.
Wheras the 1-norm of the correlations has no substantial
changes, the concurrence at distance $d=2$ modifies to about $2\%$ of the maximal value
for nearest neighbors (see inset).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs6.pdf}
\caption
{
$|\!|\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}(d_1,d_2)|\!|_1$ is shown for $(d_1,d_2)$ from nearest neighbors $(1,1)$~(black, 0)
to $(1,3)$~(green, 2) together with $(2,2)$~(blue, 3). It is not much affected like for the two-site case,
in that it only goes down to about one third of $|\!|\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}(1,1)|\!|_1$. The maximum is
assumed at roughly $J\gtrsim 0.945$ and is slighly moving towards the critical point $J_c=1$
when the sites are moving away from each other.
}
\label{Corr3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs7.pdf}
\caption{$|\!|\hat\rho_4^{\rm corr}|\!|_1$ is shown for distances corresponding to $(1,d_2,1)$ for
$d=1$ (red, 1) to $3$ (blue, 3). The effect of growing $d$ seems to be that the curve for $d$ be an upper limit to $m$ with $m<n$.
The major change is done around the critical value of $J_c=1$.
The inset shows the distances $(2,1,2)$ and $(2,2,2)$ as compared to $(1,1,1)$.
There is not much difference noted.}
\label{rho4.1-n-1.gamma1}
\end{figure}
This qualitatively doesn't change much for $3$ sites at distances $(d_1,d_2)$ which means that if
the first particle is at site $\ell_1$ the next site is at $\ell_1+d_1$ and the third one at $\ell_1+d_1+d_2$
(hence, the next neighbor reduced density matrix would be $\hat\rho_3(1,1)$).
This is shown in Fig.~\ref{Corr3},
where different distances have been considered for $|\!|\hat\rho^{\rm corr}(d_1,d_2)|\!|_1$:
$(d_1,d_2)=(1,1)$ to $(1,3)$ and $(2,2)$. $|\!|\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}(d_1,d_2)|\!|_1$ decays to about one third
of the nearest neighbor situation $|\!|\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}(1,1)|\!|_1$ with a maximum at $J\gtrsim 0.945$
which is moving tinily up to $0.98$. One could extract the tendency that the maximum moves
for $(1,1)$ to $(1,d_2)$ and from $(1,1)$ to $(d_1,d_1)$ closer to the critical point (where in the ulimate example we have only
considered the additional case $(2,2)$).
Observe the astonishingly parallel situation to the two-site case,
namely that $|\!|\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}(d_1,d_2)|\!|_1$ doesn't change so drastically with growing distance.
This continues to hold for $|\!|\hat\rho_4^{\rm corr}(d_1,d_2,d_3)|\!|_1$
(see Fig.~\ref{rho4.1-n-1.gamma1}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs8a.pdf}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs8b.pdf}
\caption{
Norms of correlated reduced density operators
$\hat\rho_{2}^{\rm corr}(1)$~(red,2),
$\hat\rho_{3}^{\rm corr}(1,1)$~(green,3),
$\hat\rho_{4}^{\rm corr}(1,1,1)$~(blue,4)
for the ground state of the transverse Ising model.
(a)~1-norms.
For $J\lesssim0.8$,
$||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_2(1)||_1>||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_3(1,1)||_1>||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_4(1,1,1)||_1$.
For $0.8\lesssim J\lesssim1$,
$||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_2(1)||_1>||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_4(1,1,1)||_1>||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_3(1,1)||_1$.
For $J\gtrsim1$,
$||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_4(1,1,1)||_1>||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_2(1)||_1>||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_3(1,1)||_1$.
(b)~\mbox{2-norms}.
$||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_2(1)||_2$ is always larger than $||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_3(1,1)||_2$ and $||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_4(1,1,1)||_2$.
For $J\lesssim0.9$, $||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_4(1,1,1)||_2 < ||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_3(1,1)||_2$,
and for $J\gtrsim0.9$ we have the opposite.
}
\label{norm1.2to4_s}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\iffalse
\psfrag{Conn2}[b]{$\lambda_2(1)$}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{rho2-corr-evals.eps}
\psfrag{Conn3}[b]{$\lambda_3(1,1)$}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{rho3-corr-evals.eps}
\psfrag{Conn4}[b]{$\lambda_4(1,1,1)$}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{rho4-corr-evals.eps}
\fi
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs9.pdf}
\caption{
Eigenvalues of the correlated reduced density operators
$\hat\rho_{2}^{\rm corr}(1)$~(a),
$\hat\rho_{3}^{\rm corr}(1,1)$~(b),
$\hat\rho_{4}^{\rm corr}(1,1,1)$~(c)
for the ground state of the transverse Ising model.
}
\label{rhoconnevals.2to4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Difference in the norm}
We have seen that the 1-norm serves as an upper bound to
the correlation functions in the model. We nevertheless studied also the
2-norm, known as the Hibert-Schmidt or Frobenius norm.
The result is shown in Fig~\ref{norm1.2to4_s}.
It is seen that the 2-norm close to the crtitical point
$\hat\rho_{4}^{\rm corr}(1,1,1)$ is still
considerably larger than $\hat\rho_{3}^{\rm corr}(1,1)$;
it is however still smaller than $\hat\rho_{2}^{\rm corr}(1)$
showing only a partial reordering. The corresponding eigenvalues of
the matrices $\hat\rho_{q}^{\rm corr}(1)$, $q=2,3,4$ is shown in
Fig.~\ref{rhoconnevals.2to4}.
\section{Results for the Bose-Hubbard model}
The ground state of the Hamiltonian~(\ref{BHH}) is obtained numerically for arbitrary $J$
by exact diagonalization in the subspace of the Hilbert space where the total momentum is zero.
This allows to calculate exactly the reduced density matrices.
In the basis of the occupation numbers $n_1\dots n_q$,
the entries $\langle n_1\dots n_q | \hat\rho_q(d_1,\dots,d_{q-1}) | n_1'\dots n_q'\rangle$
do not vanish, provided that
$
\sum_{i=1}^q
n_i
=
\sum_{i=1}^q
n_i'
=
n_{\rm B}
=0,\dots,N
$.
Thus, the reduced density matrices possess a block-diagonal structure and the blocks are labeled by $n_{\rm B}$.
The correlated density matrices have a similar structure.
\begin{figure}[t]
\iffalse
\psfrag{J}[b]{$J$}
\psfrag{y}[b]{$\lambda_2(1)$}
\psfrag{a}[b]{(a)}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{rdmcorr01_ev-L_12.eps}
\psfrag{a}[b]{(b)}
\psfrag{y}[b]{$\lambda_3(1,1)$}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{rdmcorr3_ev-L_12.eps}
\psfrag{a}[b]{(c)}
\psfrag{y}[b]{$\lambda_4(1,1,1)$}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{rdmcorr4_ev-L_12.eps}
\fi
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs10.pdf}
\caption{
Eigenvalues of the correlated reduced density operators
$\hat\rho_{2}^{\rm corr}(1)$~(a),
$\hat\rho_{3}^{\rm corr}(1,1)$~(b),
$\hat\rho_{4}^{\rm corr}(1,1,1)$~(c)
for the ground state of the Bose-Hubbard model.
Black lines -- exact diagonalization for $N=L=12$.
Red lines -- strong-coupling expansion, see Eqs.~(\ref{evcorr}).
}
\label{ev}
\end{figure}
The eigenvalues of the correlated reduced density operators $\hat\rho_q^{\rm corr}(1,\dots,1)$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{ev}.
With the increase of the number of lattice sites $q$,
the number of nonvanishing eigenvalues grow but their magnitudes decrease.
This leads to a qualitatively different behavior of the one- and two-norms
that are plotted in Fig.~\ref{bhm_norms}.
The one-norms $||\hat\rho_q^{\rm corr}(1,\dots,1)||_1$ grow monotonically with the increase of $J$ and tend
to finite constant values in the limit $J\to\infty$.
For small values of $J$, we indeed have~(\ref{ineq})
but already at moderate values of $J$ the one-norms for different $q$ become comparable to each other.
It is quite surprising that $||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_4(1,1,1)||_1$ becomes quickly larger than
$||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_3(1,1)||_1$ and later also larger than $||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_2(1)||_1$.
This happens much before the critical point $J_{\rm c}$ of the superfluid--Mott-insulator transition.
Hence we observe the same behavior as for the integrable Ising model.
\begin{figure}[t]
\iffalse
\psfrag{a}[b]{(a)}
\psfrag{J}[b]{$J$}
\psfrag{y}[b]{$||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_q||_1$}
\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{norm1sce.eps}
\psfrag{a}[b]{(b)}
\psfrag{y}[b]{$||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_q||_2$}
\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{norm2sce.eps}
\fi
\includegraphics[width=.9\linewidth]{figs11.pdf}
\caption{
Norms of correlated reduced density operators
$\hat\rho_{2}^{\rm corr}(1)$~(red,2),
$\hat\rho_{3}^{\rm corr}(1,1)$~(green,3),
$\hat\rho_{4}^{\rm corr}(1,1,1)$~(blue,4)
for the ground state of the Bose-Hubbard model.
The results of exact diagonalization are shown by dashed curves for $N=L=9$
and by solid curves for $N=L=12$.
Horizontal dotted lines - the limit of the ideal Bose gas ($J\to\infty$, $N=L=12$).
Thin solid lines -- strong-coupling expansion [Eq.~(\ref{norms_sce1})].
}
\label{bhm_norms}
\end{figure}
The two-norms $||\hat\rho_q^{\rm corr}(1,\dots,1)||_2$ display completely different behavior because
the contribution of small eigenvalues is suppressed.
The inequalities~(\ref{ineq}) are satisfied for the two-norms at any value of $J$,
although the difference between $q=2,3,4$ is not very large near and above $J_{\rm c}$.
The two-norms possess broad maxima and approach their asymptotic values at $J\to\infty$ from above.
If we consider one- and two-norms for fixed $q$ but vary the distances between the sites,
we find that both norms decrease with the distance which is demonstrated in Fig.~\ref{bhm_norms_2p} for two sites ($q=2$).
The same was also observed for the transverse Ising model.
\begin{figure}[t]
\iffalse
\psfrag{a}[b]{(a)}
\psfrag{J}[b]{$J$}
\psfrag{y}[b]{$||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_2||_1$}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{norm1_2p.eps}
\psfrag{a}[b]{(b)}
\psfrag{y}[b]{$||\hat\rho^{\rm corr}_2||_2$}
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{norm2_2p.eps}
\fi
\includegraphics*[width=.9\linewidth]{figs12.pdf}
\caption{
Norms of correlated reduced density operators
$\hat\rho_{2}^{\rm corr}(1)$~(red,1),
$\hat\rho_{2}^{\rm corr}(2)$~(green,2),
$\hat\rho_{2}^{\rm corr}(3)$~(blue,3)
for the ground state of the Bose-Hubbard model.
The results of exact diagonalization are shown by dashed curves for $N=L=9$
and by solid curves for $N=L=12$.
Horizontal dotted lines - the limit of the ideal Bose gas ($J\to\infty$, $N=L=12$).
Thin solid lines -- strong-coupling expansion [Eq.~(\ref{norms_sce_n})].
}
\label{bhm_norms_2p}
\end{figure}
The correlated reduced density matrices can be calculated analytically for small values of $J$,
employing the strong-coupling expansion~\cite{sFM96}.
In the leading order of $J$, this gives the following results for their nonvanishing eigenvalues
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{evcorr}
\lambda_2^{(\pm1)}(1)
&\approx&
\pm
\sqrt{2n(n+1)}
\,J
\;,
\\
\lambda_2^{(\pm1)}(2)
&=&
\lambda_2^{(\pm2)}(2)
\approx
\pm
n(n+1)
\,J^2
\;,
\nonumber\\
\lambda_2^{(\pm2)}(2)
&\approx&
\pm
(2n+1)
\sqrt{2n(n+1)}
\,J^2
\;,
\nonumber\\
\lambda_3^{(\pm1)}(1,1)
&\approx&
\pm
2n(n+1)
\,J^2
\;,
\nonumber\\
\lambda_3^{(\pm2)}(1,1)
&=&
r_3^{(\pm3)}(1,1)
\approx
\pm
n(n+1)
\,J^2
\;,
\nonumber\\
\lambda_3^{(\pm4)}(1,1)
&\approx&
\pm
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{n(n+1)(2n^2+2n-1)}
\,J^2
\;,
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $n=N/L$ is assumed to be an arbitrary integer.
Then for the norms we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{norms_sce_n}
||\hat\rho_2^{\rm corr}(1)||_1
&\approx&
2 \sqrt{2n(n+1)}
\;
J
\;,
\\
||\hat\rho_2^{\rm corr}(1)||_2
&\approx&
2 \sqrt{n(n+1)}
\;
J
\;,
\nonumber\\
||\hat\rho_2^{\rm corr}(2)||_1
&\approx&
2
\left[\vrule width0em height2.58ex depth0ex
2n(n+1)\right.
\nonumber\\
&&\left. \ + (2n+1)\sqrt{2n(n+1)}
\right]
J^2
\;,
\nonumber\\
||\hat\rho_2^{\rm corr}(2)||_2
&\approx&
2
\sqrt{n(n+1)(5n^2+5n+1)}
\,J^2
\;,
\nonumber\\
||\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}(1,1)||_1
&\approx&
\left[\vrule width0em height3.58ex depth0ex
8 n(n+1)\right.\nonumber\\
&& \left.\ +
\frac{4}{3}
\sqrt{n(n+1)(2n^2+2n-1)}
\right]
J^2
\;,
\nonumber\\
||\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}(1,1)||_2
&\approx&
\frac{2}{3}
\left\{
n(n+1)
\left[
31n(n+1)-2
\right]
\right\}^{1/2}
J^2
\;.
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
In the special case $n=1$, this gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{norms_sce1}
&&
||\hat\rho_2^{\rm corr}(1)||_1 \approx 4 J
\;,\quad
||\hat\rho_2^{\rm corr}(1)||_2 \approx 2.82 J
\;,
\\
&&
||\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}(1,1)||_1 \approx 19.266 J^2
\;,\quad
||\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}(1,1)||_2 \approx 7.3 J^2
\;,
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which is in excellent agreement with our numerical calculations (see Fig.~\ref{bhm_norms}).
In the limit of the ideal Bose gas ($J\to\infty$), the entries of the reduced density matrices
depend only on the number of sites $q$ but not on the distances between those:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{rdm_ibg}
&&
\!\!\!\!\!\langle n_1 \dots n_q |
\hat\rho_q
| n_1' \dots n_q' \rangle
=
\frac{N!}{(N-n_{\rm B})!n_{\rm B}!}\left(
\frac{n_{\rm B}!}{n_1!\dots n_q!}
\right)^{1/2}
\nonumber\\
&&
\qquad
\times
\left(
\frac{n_{\rm B}!}{n_1'!\dots n_q'!}
\right)^{1/2}
\left(
1 - \frac{q}{L}
\right)^{N-n_{\rm B}}
\left(
\frac{1}{L}
\right)^{n_{\rm B}}
\;.
\end{eqnarray}
Eq.~(\ref{rdm_ibg}) leads to rather simple expressions for the 2-norms in the thermodynamic limit
\begin{eqnarray}
||\hat\rho_2^{\rm corr}||_2
&=&
\left[
I_0(4\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle)
-
I_0^2(2\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle)
\right]^{1/2}
e^{-2\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle}
\;,
\nonumber\\
||\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}||_2
&=&
\left[
I_0(6\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle)
-
3 I_0(2\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle) I_0(4\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle)
\right.
\nonumber\\
&&+
\left.
2 I_0^3(2\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle)
\right]^{1/2}
e^{-3\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle}
\;,
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle=N/L$ is not necessarily an integer and
$I_0(x)$ is the modified Bessel function of the first kind.
For $\langle\hat n_\ell\rangle=1$, this yields
$||\hat\rho_2^{\rm corr}||_2\approx 0.334$, $||\hat\rho_3^{\rm corr}||_2\approx 0.184$.
These values are slightly lower than those shown in Fig.~\ref{bhm_norms}(b) indicated by the horizontal dotted lines,
which is a manifestation of the finite-size effects.
|
\section{\label{sec:introduction}Introduction}
Artificial kagome spin ice is a well-known geometrically frustrated two-dimensional magnetic system.\cite{heyderman2013,nisoli2013} It consists of elongated ferromagnetic nanomagnets placed on the nodes of a kagome lattice, or equivalently on the bonds of the hexagonal lattice (see Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure1]{1}), and coupled via their dipolar magnetic fields. Most of the experimental studies on artificial spin ice have been performed on static systems\cite{wang2006, tanaka2006, ke2008} or systems with slow magnetization dynamics\cite{farhan2013} using imaging techniques such as magnetic force microscopy (MFM) and X-ray photoemission electron microscopy (PEEM). In recent years, however, thermally active artificial spin systems have gained a considerable interest\cite{kapaklis2012} and provided a successful route to reach the low-energy magnetic states of artificial spin ice.\cite{farhan2013, farhanprl2013, anghinolfi2015,kapaklis2014,morgan2011} Additionally, analysis of the thermal behavior of nanomagnetic systems is particularly important for understanding the limitations of future spintronic devices.\cite{chumak2015} However, as the dynamics of artificial spin systems gets faster, observations using traditional microscopy techniques become limited by their temporal resolution (approximately 1~s for PEEM), so that the magnetic correlations of the systems with rapidly fluctuating moments cannot be probed. Therefore, complementary techniques are needed to study magnetic correlations in systems with faster fluctuation timescales in order to gain information about the magnetic phases over a broad temperature range. This is particularly of interest for thermally-induced magnetization dynamics,\cite{farhan2013,farhan2014} order-disorder transitions\cite{moller2009,chern2011} and spin-wave excitations in magnonic crystals.\cite{krawczyk2014,chumak2015}
Here we show that soft X-ray resonant magnetic scattering (SXRMS) is a highly sensitive momentum-resolved technique for studying magnetic correlations in mesoscopic systems with fast magnetization dynamics. Field-driven studies of athermal systems using this technique have already been reported, with measurements of the X-ray magnetic circular dichroism (XMCD) signals at the Bragg peaks.\cite{morgan2012,perron2013,arnalds2012} Such measurements can directly give information about the ordering in the sample or the net magnetic moment. However, systems without long-range order, but rather short-range correlations, are characterized by \textit{diffuse} scattering with a relatively weak XMCD signal.
In the present work, we focus our attention on a highly dynamic regime of thermally-active artificial kagome spin ice. The magnetic correlations in this regime have not yet been explored due to difficulties in capturing the weak magnetic diffuse signal, which we overcome by masking out the Bragg peaks. Comparing experimental scattering patterns with the patterns calculated from Monte Carlo simulations, we observe the emergence of quasi-pinch points in the kagome ice I phase of artificial kagome spin ice, and explain their relation to the pinch-point singularities in both in-field\cite{tabata2006, fennell2007} and zero-field spin ice pyrochlores.\cite{fennell2009} While we currently cannot access the kagome ice II phase experimentally, we develop a theoretical understanding of how genuine pinch points in the kagome ice II phase emerge smoothly from precursors or quasi-pinch points in the structure factor of the kagome ice I phase by virtue of breaking the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry associated with magnetic charge order.\cite{moller2009, brooksbartlett2014, chern2011} These sharp pinch points in the magnetic structure factor\cite{brooksbartlett2014} are characteristic features of the Magnetic Coulomb phase.
Our experimental data resolving X-ray magnetic diffuse scattering in highly dynamic artificial kagome spin ice confirms the existence of kagome ice I phase correlations and thus provides convincing evidence for the picture of a classical spin-liquid that thermally samples the large manifold of near degenerate spin-ice states.
\section{\label{sec:methods}Methods}
\subsection{\label{sec:samples}Sample preparation}
Our 2$\times$2~mm$^2$ arrays of nanomagnets, that are superparamagnetic at room temperature, were produced using electron beam lithography. The nanomagnets have an elongated shape with a length of 62~nm and a width of 24~nm, and are placed on the nodes of a two-dimensional kagome lattice with lattice vectors of length 170~nm (see inset of Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure1]{1(a)}). A 70~nm-thick polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) layer was spin-coated on a Si~(100) substrate. The patterns were exposed in the resist using a Vistec EBPG electron beam writer operated at 100~keV accelerating voltage. After development, a 5~nm-thick Permalloy (Ni$_{80}$Fe$_{20}$) film was deposited by thermal evaporation and capped with about 3~nm of Al to prevent oxidation. The remaining resist with unwanted metallic material was removed in acetone by ultrasound-assisted lift-off.
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[width=70mm]{figure1_final.pdf}
\label{fig:figure1}
\caption{(a) Scanning electron microscopy image of our artificial kagome spin ice sample with sub-70~nm nanomagnets. A magnified image of a single kagome ring is given in the inset with the lattice and nanomagnet dimensions in nm. (b) Schematic illustration of the nanomagnets on the kagome lattice with the structural unit cell marked in pink, which belongs to $p6mm$ plane group. $\bf{a_1}$, $\bf{a_2}$ and $\bf{a_3}$ are the structural lattice unit vectors. Thin gray lines represent mirror planes and serve as a guide for the eye. The experimental scattering plane is parallel to the crystallographic direction $\textless$1\={2}1$\textgreater$ indicated by the black arrow. There are three nanomagnets per unit cell, indicated by the three nanomagnets shaded in black.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{\label{sec:simulations}Monte Carlo simulations}
To model the behavior of artificial kagome spin ice, the Monte-Carlo method was used. We have generated magnetic moment configurations for a kagome lattice with Ising degrees of freedom by thermal Monte-Carlo sampling of an array of 24$\times$24 unit cells using the implementation of M$\mathrm{\ddot{o}}$ller and Moessner.\cite{moller2006, moller2009} Each nanomagnet is modeled as a needle dipole with uniform magnetic moment density $\vec{\mu}/l$ along the length $l$ of the nanomagnet,\cite{moller2006} and we use the value of $l/a=0.6$ corresponding to our sample geometry throughout this paper, where $a$ is the distance between the vertices of the kagome lattice or the bond length of the parent hexagonal lattice. The interaction between such needle dipoles is equal to the magnetostatic energy of pairs of magnetic charges $\pm{q}$ at the tips of each dipole, and the value of the Ising spin defines which end hosts the positive charge. This gives rise to an effective description of magnetic configurations in the system in terms of the total magnetic charge $Q$ at a vertex, i.e. the sum of charges at the three dipole tips closest to it (a detailed picture of the energetics in the system can be obtained in a multipole expansion of the available charge configurations).\cite{moller2009} Using this representation, the paramagnetic phase is fully disordered allowing all possible random configurations with $Q=\pm{q}$ or $Q=\pm3q$ at each vertex. In the kagome ice I phase, the ice rule (``two in, one out'' or vice versa at each vertex) enforces $Q=\pm{q}$, with an exponentially suppressed population of $Q=\pm3q$ excitations upon lowering the temperature. The kagome ice II phase is fully ordered in terms of charges but still carries a macroscopic degeneracy in terms of spin configurations, with a finite entropy per magnetic moment.\cite{moller2009} Finally, the (six-fold degenerate) ground state configuration forms a crystal of `loops' of spins with long range order (LRO) in both charge and moment ordering. For more details about these phases see Ref.~\onlinecite{moller2009}. The sampled configurations of the magnetic moments from the kagome ice I and paramagnetic phases are then used to numerically simulate the SXRMS patterns that are compared with the experimental results.
\subsection{\label{sec:softXray}Soft X-ray resonant magnetic diffuse scattering}
SXRMS experiments were performed using the RESOXS chamber\cite{staub2008} at the SIM beamline\cite{flechsig2010} of the Swiss Light Source, Paul Scherrer Institut. Experimental scattering patterns were measured at an X-ray energy of 708~eV corresponding to the Fe L$_3$ edge and at 690~eV (below the edge) to verify that the scattering signal at resonance is of magnetic origin. The off-specular reflection geometry (Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure2]{2}) ensures sensitivity to the in-plane magnetic moments of the sample. The angle of incidence $\theta_i=8^{\circ}$ is kept constant throughout the experiment. The diffraction patterns were acquired for four seconds with a Princeton Instrument PME charge-coupled device (CCD) camera with 1340$\times$1300~pixels (20$\times$20~$\mu$m$^2$ pixel size).
Using the CCD camera, an extended fraction of reciprocal space can be recorded simultaneously,\cite{perron2013} which is ideally suited for capturing diffuse scattering. However, the CCD detectors used for soft X-rays have a lower dynamic range compared to the CMOS hybrid photon counting detectors developed for hard X-rays that are used for detecting structural diffuse scattering.\cite{kraft2009} As a result of the low dynamic range, it is much harder to capture diffuse scattering in the soft X-ray scattering experiments, since the diffuse intensity is usually three orders of magnitude lower than the Bragg peak intensity. In addition, the magnetic scattering contribution is usually about two to three orders of magnitude lower than the charge scattering contribution. This results in five to six orders of magnitude difference in intensity between the magnetic diffuse and the structural Bragg scattering, which is beyond the dynamic range of the standard CCD detectors. To separate the two, we therefore placed a custom-made arc-shaped aluminum mask in front of the CCD detector to block the high intensity Bragg peaks and the specular reflection. Thus features in diffuse magnetic scattering with intensities $\approx10^{-6}-10^{-5}$ of the Bragg peak intensities could be resolved. This simple technique opens the possibility to investigate magnetic diffuse scattering, and the associated magnetic correlations, that might otherwise be overlooked in such experiments.
In order to numerically simulate the two-dimensional SXRMS patterns, we make use of kinematic scattering theory as described in Refs.~\onlinecite{blume1985} and \onlinecite{hannon1989}. For more details about the numerical implementation of this theory see Ref.~\onlinecite{van2008} and, in particular, our previous work Ref.~\onlinecite{perron2013}. To directly compare the simulated pattern with the experiment, only the magnetic contribution to the scattering signal was calculated. We assume that the nanomagnets are homogeneous Permalloy particles supporting a single magnetic domain, so we obtain three distinct form factors, one for magnets on each of the three sublattices in the unit cell of the kagome lattice. Improving on the method in Ref. \onlinecite{perron2013}, in this work we also include the scattering geometry and the reflectivity of the sample, which is important to reproduce the shape of the scattering pattern obtained on the 2D detector and the intensity decay in the $q_x$ direction. Taking this into account, we consider a plane wave scattered by the sample and collected at each detector pixel with a momentum transfer $\bf{q}=\bf{k_f}-\bf{k_i}$. The simulated scattering pattern is then corrected for the Fresnel reflectivity from a flat interface, approximated as $(\frac{q_c}{2q_x})^4$ at high angles,\cite{als2011} where ${q_x}$ is the wavevector transfer in the scattering plane and ${q_c}$ is the wavevector transfer at the critical angle.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=86mm]{figure2_final.pdf}
\label{fig:figure2}
\caption{Experimental geometry for X-ray resonant magnetic scattering with circularly polarized $\mathrm{C_+}$ synchrotron X-rays. $\bf{k_i}$, $\mathrm{\theta_i}$ are the incident X-ray wavevector and angle, and $\bf{k_f}$, $\mathrm{\theta_f}$ are the final wavevector and angle. $\mathrm{q_z}$ and $\mathrm{q_x}$ are the momentum transfers along the z and x directions, respectively. The orientation of the nanomagnets relative to the scattering plane is shown schematically in the inset.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=75mm]{figure3_final.pdf}
\label{fig:figure3}
\caption{Zero field-cooled and field-cooled magnetization (ZFC/FC) measurements of our artificial kagome spin ice sample performed with a SQUID magnetometer using an external magnetic field of 10~Oe. The blocking temperature $T_b$~=~160~K is indicated with an arrow. The standard errors are smaller than the data markers.}
\end{figure}
\section{\label{sec:results}Results and discussion}
\subsection{\label{sec:correlations}Magnetic correlations in highly dynamic artificial kagome spin ice}
In order to investigate the magnetic correlations in the dynamic regime, our samples are designed to achieve an appropriate balance between the magnetic anisotropy energy, the energy associated with the dipolar interaction between the nanomagnets and the thermal energy of the system. The interplay between these energies results in a blocking temperature $T_b$. Tuning the lateral size and thickness of the nanomagnets, as well as the distance between them, we move the blocking temperature to sufficiently low values to ensure fast fluctuations of the magnetic moments, while at the same time keeping the interaction energy between the nanomagnets high enough to preserve collective magnetic behavior. The blocking temperature $T_b$ of the nanomagnets was estimated from zero field-cooled and field-cooled (ZFC/FC) magnetization measurements performed with a Superconducting Quantum Interface Device (SQUID) magnetometer, as shown in Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure3]{3}. A characteristic peak is found at the blocking temperature $T_b$ that represents a crossover from static to dynamic behavior and is associated with an average energy barrier of the magnetic switching process.\cite{kapaklis2012} For our samples the blocking temperature is around 160~K.
In order to probe magnetic correlations in our highly dynamic artificial kagome spin ice, diffuse scattering patterns were measured at several temperatures above the blocking point. Eleven scattering patterns were taken at each temperature to check that the scattering pattern did not change in time and therefore confirm that the sample is thermally equilibrated. To single out the magnetic scattering part (Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(a)}~and~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(c)}), we took the difference between on-resonance and off-resonance patterns at X-ray energies of 708 eV and 690 eV, respectively. The off-resonance patterns feature no magnetic diffuse scattering and provide a background intensity. It should be noted here that the arcs of small peaks in the experimental patterns in Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(a)}~and~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(c)} arise due to contamination from higher-order harmonics of the undulator. The dark blue broad stripes are the shadows of the aluminum mask, which is used to cover the structural Bragg peaks. The specular reflection is covered by the mask and is estimated to be at $q_x\approx1.03~nm^{-1}$ and $q_z=0~nm^{-1}$.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{figure4_final.pdf}
\label{fig:figure4}
\caption{Comparison between experimental and calculated magnetic diffuse scattering patterns in reflection geometry. (a)~Magnetic scattering pattern measured at 200 K, obtained from the difference between the on-resonance and off-resonance patterns at 708~eV and 690~eV, respectively. (b) Numerical calculation of the resonant magnetic scattering from Monte Carlo configurations in the kagome ice I phase. (c)~Magnetic scattering pattern measured at 280 K, obtained from the difference between the on-resonance and off-resonance patterns at 708~eV and 690~eV, respectively. (d) Numerical calculation of the resonant magnetic scattering from Monte Carlo configurations in the paramagnetic phase. Only the magnetic scattering contribution was simulated. The scattering plane was oriented along the $\textless$1\={2}1$\textgreater$ crystallographic direction (see Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure1]{1(b)}~and~\hyperref[fig:figure2]{2}). Each experimental pattern is an average over eleven measurements. The dark blue broad stripes on the experimental patterns are the shadows of the aluminum mask, which covers the Bragg peaks and specular reflection. The arcs of closely packed reflections in the experimental patterns arise due to the contamination from higher-order harmonics of the undulator.}
\end{figure*}
At the lower temperature of 200~K, the scattering has bands of intensity oriented along $q_x$, indicating the presence of magnetic correlations (Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(a)}). The stripes become broader near $q_x\approx1.03~nm^{-1}$, forming elongated diamond-shaped features that appear to touch at $q_z=\pm0.037~nm^{-1}$ (the touching point is obscured by the mask). As we will argue below, this feature is related to the formation of ``quasi-pinch points" in the structure factor. Since the temperature of the system is above the blocking temperature $T_b$~=~160~K, the system is dynamic and the magnetic correlations arise from the ice-rule constraints. This constrained collective motion is characteristic of classical spin ices and spin liquids.\cite{bal2010} At the higher temperature of 280~K, the scattering signal becomes uniform indicating that the thermal energy at this temperature is sufficient to break the ice-rule short range correlations of artificial kagome spin ice and it is in a disordered state (Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(c)}). It should be noted that the intensities of the experimental patterns are slightly asymmetric with higher intensity at negative $q_z$. This is due to a small misalignment of the sample from the $\textless$1\={2}1$\textgreater$ crystallographic direction.
To understand the observed diffuse magnetic scattering patterns, we match our experimental data to predictions based on Monte Carlo simulations. Given a set of spin configurations from a Monte-Carlo run, scattering patterns were obtained using kinematic scattering theory,\cite{blume1985,hannon1989,van2008} as described in the Methods section \ref{sec:methods}. The calculated scattering patterns corresponding to experimental results are shown in Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(b)}~and~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(d)}. Experimental data at 200~K visually matches the calculated scattering patterns in the kagome ice I phase. Hence, the scattering pattern reflects ice-like correlations resulting from the ice rule ``two moments in -- one moment out'' or vice versa and vertex charges of $Q =\pm{q}$ are energetically enforced. The experimental data taken at 280~K matches the scattering patterns calculated from paramagnetic phase configurations. At this temperature, the simulations indicate that the ice rule is frequently violated and vertices with a total charge of $Q =\pm3q$ are common. At both temperatures, we have used an overall prefactor to scale the intensity of numerically simulated patterns from Monte Carlo configurations to match the experimental data. Also, an overall broadening of the experimental data compared with the numerically simulated patterns can be attributed to the limited resolution of the instrument and small variations in the shape of the nanomagnets which produce an additional structural and magnetic diffuse background.
Given the characteristic differences in the scattering within these high- and low-temperature regimes, we can conclude that, from the magnetic diffuse signal obtained with soft X-ray resonant magnetic scattering, we can distinguish magnetic correlations associated with different phases in an artificial spin system.
\subsection{\label{sec:pinch points}Pinch points in the magnetic scattering and the structure factor}
Bulk 3D spin ice realizes a cooperative paramagnet where spins fluctuate in a correlated manner between low energy states.\cite{villain1979} Dipolar correlations are present despite the absence of long-range order and are one of the most interesting features of spin ice systems.\cite{isakov2004,moessner2003} In reciprocal space, their characteristic hallmarks are sharp singularities in the spin structure factor known as bow ties or pinch points. They were initially found in ferroelectrics\cite{skalyo1970,youngblood1981} and more recently, their presence was predicted for many magnetic systems,\cite{isakov2004,moessner2003,henley2005} and they have been observed in both in-field\cite{tabata2006, fennell2007} and zero-field spin ice pyrochlores.\cite{fennell2009} Pinch points reflect the presence of a local divergence free condition of atomic spins, when considering the lattice flux where the local ice rule is obeyed. In the pyrochlore spin ice, the ice rule refers to the local energy minimization condition of spins on the corners of a single tetrahedron with two spins pointing towards and two spins pointing away from the center.\cite{anderson1956}
In order to determine whether pinch points may in principle be observed for artificial kagome spin ice, we have calculated the spin structure factor. This is the most familiar quantity and is independent of the particular experimental setup in a neutron or X-ray scattering experiment. As an experimentally accessible signature, we have also calculated the magnetic diffuse scattering in a transmission geometry from our Monte Carlo simulations. Results for these are shown in Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5}. For the patterns in the transmission geometry, that we use also to assess the width of the pinch points, we assume an incident angle of 30$^\circ$ and calculate the forward scattering of X-rays. Only the magnetic scattering contribution was calculated. In Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(a)}--\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(d)}, we show data for the paramagnetic and kagome ice I phases using the same set of Monte Carlo configurations that we used for comparison with the experimental results shown in Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4}. In addition, we also show simulation data for the kagome ice II phase in Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(e)}~and~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(f)}. In this phase an additional magnetic Bragg contribution appears at the pinch point positions of (01$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$), (10$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$), (0$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$1) and ($\mathrm{\bar{1}}$01) Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(e)}. However it is absent at the (1$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$0) and ($\mathrm{\bar{1}}$10) positions, which makes the latter ideal for the measurements of the pinch point intensity profiles, see insets in Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(b)},~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(d)}~and~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(f)}. We also note that the kagome ice II phase can be distinguished from the kagome ice I phase by its partial magnetic order, as also shown in Ref. \onlinecite{brooksbartlett2014}. Evidence of this can be best seen by the magnetic Bragg peaks appearing in kagome ice II phase at, for example, (11$\mathrm{\bar{2}}$) or ($\mathrm{\bar{\frac{1}{3}}}$$\mathrm{\bar{\frac{1}{3}}}$$\frac{2}{3}$) and equivalent positions [see Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(e)}]. It should also be noted that, for the scattering patterns of Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5}, we have used the crystallographic conventions for the hexagonal planar group $p6mm$\cite{burzlaff2006, steurer2009} with the unit cell defined in Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure1]{1(b)}. To describe this planar hexagonal lattice, we employ $hki$ indices, with the $i$ index being redundant. For the native kagome unit cell, the positions of the pinch points are described by $hki$ indices that have $integer$ values. In previous works \cite{fennell2007, fennell2009, brooksbartlett2014} that considered the three-dimensional pyrochlore unit cell, the pinch point positions are described by $fractional$ $hkl$ indices.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{figure5_final.pdf}
\label{fig:figure5}
\caption{Numerical calculation of the structure factor (top row) and resonant magnetic scattering in transmission geometry (bottom row). Only the magnetic contribution is shown, as predicted from Monte Carlo simulations. Data for the paramagnetic (a,~b) and kagome ice I phase (c,~d) are based on the same set of Monte Carlo configurations that we used for comparison with the experimental results shown in Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4}. For the kagome ice II phase (e,~f) the representative configurations were also taken from our Monte Carlo simulations. Note that magnetic pinch points appear at the same positions as the structural peaks (not shown), e.g. at~(01$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$), (10$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$), (1$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$0), (0$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$1), ($\mathrm{\bar{1}}$01) and ($\mathrm{\bar{1}}$10). Insets in the lower row are the intensity profiles of the pinch point at the ($\mathrm{\bar{1}}$10) position.}
\end{figure*}
To show the evolution of the correlations across the different phases, let us first consider the structure factor. Upon lowering the temperature from the paramagnetic phase, where the scattering signal is uniform Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(a)}, characteristic regions of high- and low-intensity scattering start to emerge and form quasi-pinch points in the kagome ice I phase (Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(c)}). These subsequently evolve into sharp, singular features in the kagome ice II phase (Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(e)}). An analogous evolution of the of the pinch points is seen in the transmission geometry calculations [see Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(b)},~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(d)},~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(f)} and insets]. Finally, in the reflection geometry of our experiments, we now recognize that the previously described touching of elongated diamond-shaped features at regular points in reciprocal space (Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(a)}~and~\hyperref[fig:figure4]{4(b)}), should also evolve into sharper and sharper features that correspond to the appearance of the pinch points in Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5}. As already noted, the magnetic pinch points emerge at the positions of the structural Bragg peaks (not shown), some of which we have indicated in Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(d)}~and~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(f)}, for example at (01$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$), (10$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$), (1$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$0), (0$\mathrm{\bar{1}}$1), ($\mathrm{\bar{1}}$01) and ($\mathrm{\bar{1}}$10) at the edges of the first Brillouin zone.
We now explain these observations in more detail. The emergence of pinch points requires the presence of a local conservation law for lattice fluxes,\cite{youngblood1981, huse2003, isakov2004, moessner2003, henley2010} which is one of the defining features of a Coulomb phase. In particular, the observation of pinch points in neutron scattering patterns has provided a direct experimental evidence for a field-induced and zero-field Coulomb phase in pyrochlore magnets. \cite{tabata2006,fennell2007,fennell2009,isakov2004,moessner2003} However, the trivalent vertices of the planar kagome lattice cannot inherently realize conservation of flux, and only allow configurations with a local lattice divergence of absolute value $\geq 1$. Nevertheless, the charge-ordered kagome ice II phase can be shown to be a Coulomb phase, due to the fact that it spontaneously breaks the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ sublattice symmetry due to the formation of magnetic charge order.\cite{moller2009, chern2011} In this symmetry broken phase, the allowed spin configurations are identical to the constraints found on the kagome planes of the three-dimensional pyrochlore spin ice with a magnetic field along the [111] direction that was experimentally investigated in Refs.~\onlinecite{fennell2007,tabata2006}. In this 3D situation, the sublattice symmetry of the (buckled) kagome planes of the pyrochlore lattice is inherently broken, as one sublattice features out-of-plane spins pointing along [111] direction, while the out-of-plane spins on the other sublattice point towards the negative [111] direction. In the presence of a field along the [111] axis, the flux along that direction is fixed and vertices in the kagome planes are forced to have alternating minority spins (pointing towards or away from the center of a tetrahedron) \cite{udagawa2002}, which amounts to an explicit breaking of the sublattice symmetry. The local flux conservation is fulfilled for the low-energy configurations in this three-dimensional setting and, by extension, the same is true for the kagome ice II phase. However, this 3D picture requires the global sublattice symmetry to be explicitly broken, and it would be desirable to develop a more local picture that can accommodate the spontaneous symmetry breaking of the ice I to ice II transition. Indeed, such a viewpoint can be developed on the basis of a dimer mapping.\cite{huse2003,misguich2002}
Let us consider the mapping from oriented hard-core dimers to a divergence-free configuration of fluxes on the links of the lattice by Huse et al.\cite{huse2003}. Indeed, due to the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ sublattice symmetry breaking of magnetic charge order, the kagome ice II phase allows a unique mapping of spin configurations to oriented hard-core dimers on the kagome lattice:\cite{moller2009, chern2011,udagawa2002} At each vertex, there is precisely one minority charge, which connects to the minority charge of one adjacent vertex, and uniquely identifies the corresponding link as carrying a dimer oriented from the negative minority charge to the positive one, while the other two links are empty.\cite{moller2009, chern2011} Following Huse et al.,\cite{huse2003} we can then define the lattice flux carried by a link in terms of the occupation number $n_i(\mathbf{r})$ of dimers on the link $\mathbf{r}\to\mathbf{r}+\mathbf{e}_i$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:LatticeFlux}
\mathbf{B}_i(\mathbf{r})= Q(\mathbf{r})\left(n_i(\mathbf{r})-\frac{1}{3}\right),
\end{equation}
using the fact that the total monopole charge $Q(\mathbf{r})=\pm1$ has long-range order in the kagome ice II phase and thus sets the orientation of the fluxes for the respective sublattices. Note that this lattice flux has twice the magnitude on the links carrying dimers compared with the flux on the empty ones. Therefore, one can picture a pair of fluxes entering one vertex, being carried to an adjacent vertex along the dimer, and re-emerging as two separate fluxes from there. Clearly, such ``flux dimers'' satisfy flux conservation. Thus, as in the case of the square and cubic lattices of Huse et al.,\cite{huse2003} the lattice divergence vanishes, and the field can be cast into the habitual language of a lattice gauge theory and forms a Coulomb phase. As the kagome ice II phase is a genuine Coulomb phase with a local conservation law, its structure factor is predicted to feature sharp singularities at the pinch points.\cite{brooksbartlett2014} This is shown by the pinch point intensity profile in the inset of Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(f)}.
To proceed with our discussion, we note that spin configurations can be uniquely mapped to a dimer covering only in the monopole charge ordered kagome ice II phase. By contrast, the kagome ice I phase has no long range charge order and thus must violate the divergence-free condition. Consequently, it does not allow for uniquely defined flux dimers as in Eq.~\hyperref[eq:LatticeFlux]{(1)}.\footnote{More general flux dimers could be defined, such that the dimer carries an effective flux of zero, and the two adjacent vertices have one spin in- and out- each. However, one cannot assign such dimers in a unique fashion in either of the ice I or ice II phases.} Nevertheless, there will be charge ordered clusters in the kagome ice I phase so that, while a global dimer mapping does not exist, it is still possible to locally identify dimers within each charge-ordered cluster. As the structure factor is expressed in reciprocal space, and can be thought of as a spatial average over the system, the overall structure encoded in the local conservation law of the low-temperature ordered phase is therefore also observed in the kagome ice I phase. Additionally, the larger number of vertices that are not covered by flux dimers gives rise to the broadening of the pinch-points.
Indeed, a broadening of the pinch points can be seen in our calculations of the structure factor and of the resonant magnetic scattering in a transmission geometry for the kagome ice I phase (Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5}). Comparing the calculations from the different phases in Fig.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5}, we note that the quasi-pinch-points in the scattering profiles of the kagome ice I phase are very similar to the fully developed pinch points of kagome ice II phase. However, following the arguments above, no sharp singularity can exist at the center of these quasi-pinch points. Finally in the Paramagnetic phase there is a random distribution of $Q =\pm{q}$ and $Q =\pm3q$ charges. Therefore a smoothly varying diffuse signal is established, as can be seen in Figs.~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(a)}~and~\hyperref[fig:figure5]{5(b)}.
It should be noted that, in general, the experimental detection of the pinch points in a transmission geometry is extremely challenging: due to the p6mm symmetry of the lattice and the absence of systematic extinctions, structural Bragg peaks are positioned at the same $\bf{q}$ values as the pinch points, thus overlapping with them. Furthermore, a soft X-ray detector with the required dynamic range to capture both strong Bragg scattering and a weaker magnetic diffuse scattering is not commonly available. Despite these difficulties, our results show that it is possible to qualitatively distinguish the different phases of artificial kagome spin ice and capture features that are directly related to pinch points in the reflection geometry employed in our set-up.
Given these insights, we conclude that our experimental data provides the first evidence of the emergence of pinch-point scattering in artificial kagome spin ice. These correlations are highly distinct from those found in the high-temperature paramagnetic phase, and present direct evidence that the ice-rules are obeyed, reflecting the spin dynamics that minimize the dominant nearest neighbor interaction terms of the needle dipole Hamiltonian on the kagome lattice.
\section{\label{sec:conclusions}Conclusions}
We have demonstrated that the measurement of diffuse scattering with resonant synchrotron X-rays provides a highly sensitive method for the investigation of short-range correlations in nanomagnet systems. In particular, we have shown that the phases of artificial kagome spin ice can be distinguished and comparison with Monte Carlo simulations confirms the realization of kagome ice I phase magnetic correlations at high moment fluctuation rates. This combination of a highly dynamic system with strong short-range correlations is characteristic of a classical spin liquid (or a cooperative paramagnet). Although the kagome ice I phase is not a genuine Coulomb phase, since the divergence-free condition does not extend throughout the lattice, the features of quasi-pinch points already bear similarities to the fully-developed pinch points with sharp singularities associated with the kagome ice II Coulomb phase. We have used a mapping to oriented dimer coverings to argue that such quasi-pinch points should indeed be expected above the phase transition to the charge ordered kagome ice II phase.
We conclude that, like in the bulk pyrochlore spin ices, diffuse scattering gives a unique signature of ice-like behavior in artificial spin ices. This technique also promises to cast light onto a number of other problems in nanoscale magnetic systems, for example to understand the ordering processes during magnetic self-assembly of nanoparticles\cite{carbone2011} or the formation of skyrmion lattices.\cite{muhlbauer2009} This highly sensitive method will therefore be an important tool for the discovery of novel physics in two-dimensional systems beyond artificial spin ice.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We are grateful to V.~Guzenko, A.~Weber, T.~Neiger, M.~Horisberger and E.~Deckardt for their support in the sample preparation, N.~S.~Bingham for his help with experiments, P.~Schifferle for technical support at the X11MA beamline, and T.~Fennell and R.~Moessner for helpful discussions. Part of this work was carried out at the X11MA beamline of the Swiss Light Source, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland. The first soft X-ray magnetic diffuse scattering patterns were taken at the SEXTANTS beamline of Synchrotron SOLEIL, Saclay, France under the proposal~20120875. The research leading to these results has received funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation, the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) -- Grant No.~290605 (COFUND PSI-FELLOW) and the Royal Society -- Grant No.~UF120157.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{An Overview of Existing Approaches}
This section categorises the proposed solutions to service matching problem as: syntactic, ontology based and Fuzzy Set Theory based. Some
approaches combine several techniques. This categorisation is based on the statements of the authors of the respective papers. The aim of this
categorisation is to follow the discourse in literature and identify connections between the proposed solutions, i.e. issues in existing
approaches identified by others and how the newer approaches build up on former related work.
\subsection{Syntactic approaches}\label{sec:syntacticApp}
Syntactic approaches, for example proposed by \cite{eleyan2011service}, \cite{kritikos2009mixed} and \cite{yu2007efficient}, take the
service request as a set of constraints and the result set as a subset of all service descriptions which satisfy these constraints, i.e. a
constraint satisfaction problem (CSP). They utilise mathematical models to describe the problem and then apply techniques such as Constraint
Programming \cite{rossi2006handbook}, Mixed Integer Programming \cite{leyffer2012mixed}, and Analytic Hierarchy Process \cite{saaty1990make}.
Other points common among these approaches are the ranking and the relaxation steps. To enhance the results after the initial matchmaking, they
are ordered according to the service requester's priorities (ranking) \cite {eleyan2011service}, and non-exact matches which satisfy the most
important constraints are added to them (relaxation) \cite{mobedpour2013user}.
The matchmaking approach proposed by \cite{ruiz2005improving} is an early example of the application of CSPs to the service matching problem.
\cite {kritikos2008evaluation} evaluates the algorithm proposed in \cite{ruiz2005improving} and two versions of the algorithm for unary
constraints proposed in \cite{kritikos2007semantic} by their time performance and precision. The algorithm defined by \cite
{ruiz2005improving} in \cite {ruiz2005improving} categorises the results only in exact matching and fail groups and places the service
descriptions which are better than the request in the fail group. For these reasons, it exhibits lower precision than the other algorithms
evaluated in \cite{kritikos2008evaluation}. The first algorithm proposed in \cite{kritikos2007semantic} addresses this problem and the second one
proposes further categorisation of results in super, exact, partial and fail sets. The time performance experiments show that the first two
algorithms are faster than the third algorithm, however they do not return partial matches which might help the service requester find an
acceptable service description.
\cite{kritikos2009mixed} evaluates MIP versions of the \cite{ruiz2005improving}, two versions of A and a simpler version of B in \cite
{kritikos2007semantic}. \cite{mobedpour2013user} builds on an MIP algorithm presented in \cite{kritikos2009mixed} and integrates it in a
user-centered service selection system.
It can be observed that the above presented related work focuses on time performance and on precision of the algorithms which take QoS
requirements as numerical values. An exception to this observation is the system developed by \cite{mobedpour2013user} which shifts the focus
to usability issues. Figure \ref{fig:matchersTaxC} shows the relations between constraint based approaches.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=15cm,height=12cm]{graph.pdf}
\caption{Constraint Programming Based Service Matchers in Literature}\label{fig:matchersTaxC}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Ontology Based Approaches}
Ontology based approaches, such as the ones presented by \cite{d2008semantic}, \cite {liu2009weighted} and \cite {liu2011syntactic},
utilise OWL-S to capture comprehensive descriptions of cloud services and utilise ontology reasoners to match services to service queries. These
systems provide accurate results with the help of detailed comparison of semantic data, however they give up efficiency for accuracy\cite
{tuw2011qos}. The source of the problem is the performance problems of ontology reasoners.
\subsection{Fuzzy Set Theory Based Approaches} \label{subsec:fuzzyApp}
Approaches presented by \cite{wang2009qos}, \cite{mobedpour2013user} and \cite{bacciu2010adaptive} utilise fuzzy set theory to
categorize and match services to the service requester's query. The approaches by \cite{wang2009qos} and \cite {mobedpour2013user} utilise
various techniques to map linguistic terms such as moderate, good, very good to actual values in service descriptions. They achieve this by:
\begin{itemize}
\item building up intuitionistic fuzzy sets using consumers perception
\item clustering
\end{itemize}
On the other hand, the method proposed by \cite{bacciu2010adaptive} does not apply linguistic term matching, but uses fuzzy membership values
for providing variational scope.
\cite{wang2009qos} aggregates the perceived quality expressed in linguistic terms to form an objective service description and weights for QoS properties.
The disadvantage of this approach \cite{wang2009qos} is its demand on a great amount of user input. It expects the users to look at each service for each QoS property
and tell the system their opinion. This is not feasible to be used as a standalone in the TRESOR/TCC context. For the attributes which cannot
be measured, it provides a systematical way to combine former user reviews with the service requester's priorities.
\cite{mobedpour2013user} uses a symbolic clustering algorithm (SCLUST) with the assumption that fuzzy values are
only meaningful for numeric QoS properties. SCLUST places service descriptions on one of the intervals corresponding to good, medium, poor. The values for the
limits of the intervals are calculated relatively considering all the services in the repository.
\cite{bacciu2010adaptive} focuses on QoS requirements which state soft constraints and utilises trapezoidal fuzzy numbers to address this issue i.e.
a QoS requirement of availability between 95\% and 99\% is mapped to acceptable answers ranging between 94\% and 100\% where the acceptability degree to values
graph forms a trapezoid.
\subsection{Hybrid Approaches }
\paragraph*{Fuzzy and Syntactic Approaches} In the user-centered prototype presented by \cite{mobedpour2013user}, constraint based and fuzzy
approaches are combined. For constraint based, they use an algorithm presented in \cite{kritikos2009mixed}. See Subsection \ref{subsec:fuzzyApp}
for the description of the fuzzy component.
\paragraph*{Fuzzy and Semantic Approaches} The fuzzy matching for numerical values described in \cite{bacciu2010adaptive}, is part of the Dino
Broker\cite{mukhija2007qos} implemented as part of the EU funded Sensoria Project. Dino Broker aims to achieve "dynamic discovery and invocation in open dynamic environments". In this context, service selection or matching is
just one of the components in the system. The authors define the stages of service composition as service discovery, selection, binding, delivery,
monitoring and adaptation. The open dynamic environment means that services might have changing properties in run-time (dynamic) and they might be
entering to, and exiting from, the environment (open). Dino Broker uses OWL-S descriptions of services to perform functional properties and API matching.
\paragraph*{Syntactic and Semantic Approaches}
The publications from the S-Cube project \cite{scube} are complementary \cite {kritikos2006semantic}, \cite{kritikos2007semanticover}, \cite
{kritikos2007semantic}, \cite{kritikos2008evaluation}, \cite{kritikos2009mixed},\cite{kritikos2012optimal}. Their main idea is that the semantic
approaches which use ontology reasoners have performance problems, while the constraint based approaches deliver inaccurate results. They conclude
that the solution should utilize the best of both worlds.
These publications claim that the main reason of inaccuracy in constraint based approach is the metric incompatibility among service descriptions
and service requests. The solution proposed in the S-Cube project defines QoS metrics in QoS requests and service specifications in OWL-Q \cite
{kritikos2006semantic}, \cite {kritikos2007semanticover} and aligns the units of metrics of all available service descriptions in the repository.
After the alignment of metrics, the constraint programming algorithms proposed in \cite{ruiz2005improving}, \cite{kritikos2007semantic} and \cite
{kritikos2009mixed} are applied and evaluated in their time performance and accuracy. See also Section \ref{sec:syntacticApp}.
\subsection{Fuzziness Considerations in Existing Approaches} \label{subsec:sourceofFuzzy}
The objective of the service matching process is to find the most suitable service for the service request. To provide detailed results, a service
matcher should be able to evaluate to which extent a service matches the request. Namely, the service matcher should provide the service requester
with details other than a definitive yes or no response. For this reason, some service matchers utilise sources of fuzziness. Three sources of
fuzziness in existing service matching approaches are identified by Platenius et. al \cite {platenius2013survey}:
\begin{itemize}
\item incomplete knowledge
\item variational scope
\item heuristics \& simplifications
\end{itemize}
Incomplete knowledge refers to how the matching approach deals with missing values for the input parameters, and can be considered in two ways:
\begin{itemize}
\item The service requester is not sure about all the constraints and therefore does not define a requirement for each property of the service
\item The service provider might not supply information for all the properties of the service.
\end{itemize}
Variational scope can be introduced to a service matching approach in three ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The matching of service description parameters to requirements
with a certain amount of tolerance---assuming most requesters would accept a service with a value slightly different than the specified value
\item The parameters are specified with fuzzy terms such as "good" or "very fast"
\item The requirements are specified with their level of importance to the
requester with qualifiers such as mandatory and optional.
\end{enumerate}
A concrete example for the first type is the relaxation step which is suggested in \cite {mobedpour2013user}. An example for the second type can
be found in \cite{wang2009qos} in the ranking of services based on weights assigned to QoS requirements by users.
Heuristics are used to simplify the problem when the underlying mathematical modelling of the problem is
NP-Hard or NP-Complete. However, the effects of these simplifications on the result set remains unclear.
\section{Introduction}
The increasing number and diversity of services available in the cloud computing environment causes the service selection to become more complex. Cloud service marketplaces in the industry provide merely keyword search and categories to select applications from such as marketing and customer management \cite{googlemarketplace}, \cite{appexchange}. Moreover, in multi-cloud application management platforms such as Right Scale or Bitnami service requesters have the option to deploy parts of their applications on different clouds. Service matching research aims at finding suitable services according to the service requester's requirements. These requirements cover a wide range of properties such as functional, quality of service (QoS) and compliance.
The service matching problem is discussed in the literature in different contexts: Internet of Services, SOA, Semantic Web Services and Cloud Services. For service descriptions, several languages are suggested, each focusing on another group of service properties depending on the context such as WSDL\cite{christensen2001web}, Linked-USDL\footnote{Linked Unified Service Description Language} \cite{linkedUSDL}, SMI\footnote{Service Measurement Index} \cite{smi2014v2} and OWL-S\footnote{Semantic Markup for Web Services} \cite{martin2004owl}. Based on the context, the \textit{scope of matching} covers QoS matching, input-output matching, precondition and postcondition matching.
Due to different opinions on the content of the service descriptions and different contexts, a variety of service matching approaches have been suggested. However, these approaches have different problem definitions and have to be examined in detail in order to identify the subproblems solved in each.
Research questions that this survey attempts to answer are:
\textbf{Q1} How do they select QoS parameters to work with? Based on interviews, non-functional properties research or datasets?
\textbf{Q2} Where do the service descriptions stem from: cloud computing or web services context?
\textbf{Q3} What context do they target in their problem definitions? Web services, semantic web services or cloud computing in particular?
\textbf{Q4} Are there any approaches which meet the essential requirements of cloud service marketplaces?
\textbf{Q5} Do the existing approaches support all data types to be matched?
Our survey builds on the related work presented in \cite{platenius2013survey} and \cite{jula2014cloud}. These surveys provide a good overview of service matching approaches, however they have different focuses, on-the-fly computing and cloud service composition, respectively.
To answer our research questions \textbf{Q1}, \textbf{Q2}, and \textbf{Q3} we examine the service description languages used, the source of service descriptions and the research or project context where the matching approach was developed. For \textbf{Q4} and \textbf{Q5}, we assess to what extent the service matching approaches accomplish their objectives with an in-depth examination of the most relevant approaches for the context where the user takes the final decision of service selection. Moreover, we provide clear statements on the relation between the objectives and the service matching context.
This paper is organized as follows: The next section presents the survey procedure. Section 3 examines the existing approaches to answer the research questions. Section 4 presents the discussion.
\section{Survey Procedure}
Within ACM, IEEE, and Springer digital libraries, we have searched with the keywords "service composition", "service matching", "service matchmaking", "service selection", and "QoS". Following the references, we added some more to the list. We omitted the approaches which do not fully explain how to perform QoS matching or provide only initial steps. Following this, we evaluated the approaches with two essential requirements in the cloud service marketplaces context: service requester perspective and handling incomplete knowledge. Section \ref{sec:existingApp} examines the related work to answer the research questions \textbf{Q1-Q5}.
\section{Existing Service Matching Approaches}\label{sec:existingApp}
As service matchmaking approaches evolve, several methods and toolsets are suggested and evaluated in the literature. This section examines existing approaches closely.
Table \ref{tab:toolsettable} shows the examination of matching approaches to answer the research questions provided above. Each column is described as follows:
\textbf{Service Descriptions Source } lists the service description language used for describing the services or the source for the QoS parameters in the service descriptions. This information is utilized to answer \textbf{Q1} and \textbf{Q2}.
\textbf{Target Context} explains for which context the matching approach was designed, since the research objectives might vary accordingly. Moreover, the target features of the matcher depend on the analysis of the QoS properties to be matched. This field targets answering \textbf{Q3}.
\textbf{Calculation concepts} refer to the mathematical model(s) used to structure the problem.\footnote{FL=Fuzzy Logic MIP= Mixed-Integer Programming CP=Constraint
Programming MMKP,MCOP=Multidimensional Multiple-choice 0-1 Knapsack Problem, Multi-Constrained Optimal Path FL=Fuzzy Logic AHP=Analytic
Hierarchy Process NFP=Non-Functional Property IFS=Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets IOPE= Input, Output, Precondition, Effect FL=Fuzzy Logic FST=Fuzzy Set Theory SR=Subsumption Reasoning PCM=Policy Centered Meta-Model SWRL=Semantic Web Rule Language IFS=Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets SWS= Semantic Web Services}
Three main sources for the service descriptions are: i) Numerical QoS parameters, non-functional properties research by \citeauthor{al2007qos} \cite{al2007qos} and by \citeauthor{menasce} \cite{menasce} in web services context, examples include execution time, price, availability, ii) WSDL input and output parameters, iii) Semantic web service challenge and OWL-S. The specific requirements of service matchmaking in cloud computing is to be further investigated. Apart from the contributions by the developers of USDL and Linked USDL \cite{linkedUSDL}, and SMI \cite{garg2013framework} themselves, there are no matching approaches which are applied to these cloud context non-functional properties.
\begin{table*}[htp]
\rowcolors[]{3}{white}{gray!30}
\rotatebox{360}{
\begin{minipage}{\textheight}
\begin{tabular}{p{30mm}|p{40mm}p{40mm}p{40mm}} \toprule
\textbf{Research Work} & \textbf{Properties} && \\\midrule
\textbf{Matcher} & \textbf{Service Descriptions Source} & \textbf{Target Context} & \textbf{Calculation Concepts} \\
\hline
\citeauthor{yu2007efficient} \cite{yu2007efficient} & numeric QoS parameters, cites non-functional properties research in web services context with focus on performance and cost optimization by Menasce & web services composition in SOA & MMKP, MCOP \\
\citeauthor{hu2008web} \cite{hu2008web} & numeric QoS parameters by Menasce & web services composition in SOA & vector normalization \\
\citeauthor{kritikos2009mixed} \cite{kritikos2009mixed} & numeric QoS parameters along with their measurement units and methods in OWL-Q\cite{kritikos2006semantic}, OWL-S & WS & MIP \\
\citeauthor{kritikos2007semantic} \cite{kritikos2007semantic} & OWL-Q\cite{kritikos2006semantic}, OWL-S & WS & CP \\
\citeauthor{jie2011dynamic} \cite{jie2011dynamic} & SWRL rules, OWL-S, WSDL & semantic WS, sws-challenge.org & - \\
\citeauthor{palmonari2009effective} \cite{palmonari2009effective} & WSMO, WSML & semantic WS & - \\
\citeauthor{d2008semantic} \cite{d2008semantic} & OWL-S & semantic WS in IoS, e-shopping domain & SR \\
\citeauthor{sarang2012clustering} \cite{sarang2012clustering} & WSDL input output parameters & WS from IBM UDDI registries & Peano space filling curve \\
\citeauthor{eleyan2011service} \cite{eleyan2011service} & as described in \cite{eleyan2010extending}& WS & AHP and \newline Euclidean distance \\
\citeauthor{mobedpour2013user} \cite{mobedpour2013user} & numeric QoS with QWS dataset \cite{al2007qos},\cite{al2007discovering} & WS & FL \\
\citeauthor{wang2009qos} \cite{wang2009qos} & user perception & service marketplace & IFS,FL \\
\citeauthor{bacciu2010adaptive} \cite{bacciu2010adaptive}&numeric QoS parameters & service composition & FST,FL \\
\citeauthor{liu2009weighted} \cite{liu2009weighted}, \cite{liu2012fuzzy} & WSDL + OWL-S,WSMO & semantic WS & SR, FL \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage} }
\caption{Examination for Service Descriptions Used} \label{tab:toolsettable} \end{table*
Table \ref{tab:basicReqTable} aims at answering \textbf{Q4}.
It evaluates the approaches with two essential requirements in the cloud service marketplaces context.
\textbf{Non-technical service requester perspective} assesses if the matcher answers one or all the needs of non-technical requesters with QoS requirements by allowing them to: i) make the final decision, ii) set weights on each constraint, iii) specify constraints for each property which will be compared to the service specifications rather than arranging the repository in itself, iv) specify fuzzy requests.
\textbf{Incomplete knowledge}
refers to how the matchmaking method deals with missing constraints in the service query and missing properties in the service description.
In the list provided in the survey by \citeauthor{platenius2013survey} \cite{platenius2013survey}, the QoS matching approaches which explicitly deal with incomplete knowledge are: \cite{palmonari2009effective}, \cite{wang2009qos}, and \cite{bacciu2010adaptive}. Some approaches provide gradual results which implicitly deal with it: \cite{d2008semantic}, \cite{liu2009weighted}, and \cite{liu2012fuzzy}.
\begin{table*}[htpb]
\rowcolors[]{3}{gray!30}{white}
\begin{minipage}{\textheight}
\begin{tabular} {p{30mm}|p{60mm}p{50mm}p{10mm}}
\toprule \textbf{Research Work} & \textbf{Properties} && \\\midrule
\textbf{Matchmaker} & \textbf{Service Requester Perspective} & \textbf{Incomplete Knowledge \newline(requester-provider)} &\textbf{Adequate}\\
\hline
\citeauthor{yu2007efficient} \cite{yu2007efficient} & no, intended for dynamic service composition & works with precise data & no \\
\citeauthor{hu2008web} \cite{hu2008web} & yes, weights on constraints & no & no \\
\citeauthor{kritikos2009mixed} \cite{kritikos2009mixed} & yes, constraints for each property & yes,classified results & yes \\
\citeauthor{kritikos2007semantic} \cite{kritikos2007semantic} & yes, classifies according to requester's needs& implicitly yes, two of the algorithms return classified results& yes \\
\citeauthor{jie2011dynamic} \cite{jie2011dynamic} & performs comparison of requesters constraints to services¬ explicitly documented &no\\
\citeauthor{palmonari2009effective} \cite{palmonari2009effective} & yes, but how QoS request will be converted WS-Policy or WSLA and to PCM is not documented & both on the requester and the provider side & no \\
\citeauthor{d2008semantic} \cite{d2008semantic} & merely ordering service descriptions, no comparison to service requester's constraints
& implicitly yes, returns gradual results
using semantic distances & no \\
\citeauthor{sarang2012clustering} \cite{sarang2012clustering} &no, clusters services with similar ones ¬ explicitly documented & no \\
\citeauthor{eleyan2011service} \cite{eleyan2011service} & yes, uses AHP \footnote{Analytic Hierarchy Process} for converting the service requester’s preferences to weights & implicitly yes,ranks services in preference order& yes \\
\citeauthor{mobedpour2013user} \cite{mobedpour2013user} & yes, user-centered & implicitly yes, returns super-exact and partial matches & yes \\
\citeauthor{wang2009qos} \cite{wang2009qos} & yes, addresses imprecise preferences of service requesters & on the provider side & yes \\
\citeauthor{bacciu2010adaptive} \cite{bacciu2010adaptive} & yes, fuzzy sets to allow imprecise service requests & on the provider side & yes \\
\citeauthor{liu2009weighted} \cite{liu2009weighted}, \cite{liu2012fuzzy} &yes, constraints for each property &gradual results&yes\\
\bottomrule \hline \end{tabular}\end{minipage} \caption{Evaluation for Essential Requirements of Cloud Service Marketplaces} \label{tab:basicReqTable}
\end{table*}
Table \ref{tab:summaryTable} aims at answering \textbf{Q5}. Some approaches only explain how the format of the constraint should be, however they do not state how the service descriptions should be. Mostly, the QoS property is described as a tuple that can be added to existing service description languages.
\begin{table*}[htpb]
\rowcolors[]{3}{gray!30}{white}
\begin{minipage}{\textheight}
\begin{tabular}
{p{20mm}|p{35mm}p{25mm}p{30mm}p{35mm}} \toprule
\emph{Research Work} & \emph{Properties} &&& \\\midrule
Matchmaker & QoS Constraint\newline Description & Service\newline Description &Data Types of Constraints & Prototype \\
\hline
\cite{eleyan2011service} & as described in \cite{eleyan2010extending} & WSDL extension & numeric & In C\# \\
\cite{mobedpour2013user} & QoS query language which separates relaxation and preference orders\cite
{mopedpour2010lang} & QWS dataset\cite{al2007qos},\cite{al2007discovering} & fuzzy \footnote{only for numeric properties such as reliability, response time}, range, discrete numeric data &
non-functional matching layer: C\#, ASP.NET, lp\textunderscore solve \footnote{functional matching layer: Lucene and Java}\\
\cite{bacciu2010adaptive} & Fuzzy
Sets & Trapezoidal fuzzy numbers & Only Numeric Examples
& Extension in MATLAB, Dino Broker in Java\\
\cite{wang2009qos} & linguistic terms & no formal description & decision maker's perception
converted to intuitionistic fuzzy number \footnote{this one addresses non-measurable QoS properties which the author calls non-functional properties
such as reliability, \newline integrity,availability and security} & -\\
\cite{kritikos2009mixed},\cite{kritikos2007semantic}
& as described in \cite{kritikos2006semantic} & as described in \cite{kritikos2006semantic} & numeric, range & using MATLAB and Java \\ \bottomrule
\hline \end{tabular} \end{minipage}
\caption{Summary of the Most Relevant Related Work} \label{tab:summaryTable}
\end{table*}
The work by \citeauthor{eleyan2010extending} \cite{eleyan2010extending} states that non-functional properties should be added to the service matching process, however they do not
specify what they improve from other matching approaches that handle non-functional properties. Moreover, they assume the service descriptions to be equal to the query in terms of properties they include.
The aim of \citeauthor{wang2009qos} \cite{wang2009qos} is to develop a matchmaking approach for QoS properties which cannot be measured and depend largely on the
perception of service providers and consumers. It models the problem as a fuzzy multi-criteria decision making problem. The proposed method takes
linguistic terms which express the decision maker's opinion on the QoS property as input; e.g., very good, fair, poor. These linguistic terms are
converted to intuitionistic fuzzy numbers, and scores for each service based on decision maker's weighting for each property are calculated. Finally,
the results of the decision makers are aggregated, and the services are ordered from the best to the worst.
\citeauthor{mobedpour2013user} \cite{mobedpour2013user} state that in existing matching approaches such as \cite{kritikos2009mixed} and \cite{ruiz2005improving} that the
non-technical or inexperienced service requesters are expected to learn their service query languages or to gain background knowledge on defining fuzzy membership
functions. To solve this problem, the authors propose a process where the service requester is supported and guided by the system to formulate QoS queries along
with an improved selection model. In contrast to the approach by \citeauthor{wang2009qos} \cite{wang2009qos}, the authors utilize interval clustering to classify
services under the linguistic terms, which also decreases user effort. These ideas are implemented in a prototype which uses the algorithm presented
in \cite {kritikos2009mixed} as a baseline. The experiments show that more accurate results are achieved while the response time remains as before.
However, no user reviews are conducted to evaluate the main purpose of this approach. Service descriptions do not contain any enumeration parameters
and parameters related to business. This results in that the system does not support a use case where there are different price models for several
editions of a service.
\citeauthor{mobedpour2013user} \cite{mobedpour2013user} criticize fuzzy models approaches since they
require high user evaluation effort (when they have to define fuzzy numbers or membership functions) and that they might be wrong since they are based
on personal opinions of the decision makers. Moreover, they do not consider crisp data. However, the approach represented in \cite{wang2009qos} takes
linguistic terms as input which does not require substantial user effort. On the other hand, the QoS description is based on users' personal
impressions. The last step of aggregating the scores to rank the services improves this aspect to some extent.
\citeauthor{bacciu2010adaptive} \cite{bacciu2010adaptive} address
the service composition problem in two steps: integration of heterogeneous services and dynamic service selection---since the service properties change
due to resource availability or network connectivity variations. The authors present three artifacts: a method for fuzzy specification of QoS
parameters both in service requests and descriptions, a matchmaking procedure for those, and a method which targets the dynamic update of service
descriptions. For doing so, they extend an existing service broker which had crisp matching functionality with the imprecise QoS parameter support.
\citeauthor{bacciu2010adaptive} \cite{bacciu2010adaptive} report that the extension in MATLAB code is planned to be integrated to Dino Broker \cite{mukhija2007qos}, however, there are no publications
about the integration. The available version of Dino Broker is in Java and the published code does not contain the fuzzy extension. \citeauthor{bacciu2010adaptive} \cite{bacciu2010adaptive} present an example of variational scope as a source of fuzziness. This approach expresses numeric QoS descriptions and
requirements as trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. The authors assume that when a QoS requirement is a range such as "availability between 95\% and 99\%",
the acceptable service specifications start at 94\% with a lower membership value, increasing to the best membership value between 96\% and 98\%, and
the membership value starts decreasing at 98\% and ends at 100\%. The idea that neighbor values of the specified range are also likely acceptable by the service requester is correct on the lower side,
however on the upper side it does not make sense for properties with positive tendency because it considers 99\% less good than 98\%, although availability is a high-value preferred property. The
authors give examples for the application with numeric values, however not with enumeration type QoS descriptions such as location or compatible
browsers, although it is mentioned that the operators of set theory can be generalized to fuzzy set theory.
\section{Discussion}
At first glance, there are cloud service matchmakers which try to solve the same service matchmaking problem. However, the problem definition
varies according to the use cases and project contexts. For this reason, they either optimize on automation and leave the usability issues aside or vice versa. The different problem definitions result in their solutions not being directly comparable.
From our analysis in Table \ref{tab:toolsettable}, we conclude the following. In most cases, the project context provides the service description language used. If the service description language is an ontology, the service matchmaker is based on ontology
reasoners. In other cases, the service matchmakers use different mathematical methods. However, the service matchmakers vary also because of other
factors: the target service requesters and their definition for the process of service matchmaking.
One group is for automatic service composition, where the requester is another service and the service matchmaker has to find the best service specification for the request. Another group is user-oriented where the requester is a person who makes the final service selection from a list of alternative services. For the former group, the process of service matchmaking ends with the presentation of the optimal solution to the problem. For the latter group, further requirements are considered: (i) a categorization of results as very good, good and acceptable, (ii) providing an initial list and then applying relaxation, (iii) step-by-step guidance for the service requester to add constraints to the request. Another problem definition aims at answering "a developer's query" which focuses on matching the input output parameters of functions. An additional consideration in the related work is static and dynamic service descriptions, some approaches foresee an integrated monitoring module and updating the service descriptions accordingly (\textbf{Q3}).
Table \ref{tab:basicReqTable} shows that there are some approaches which meet the essential requirements of cloud service marketplaces on a high level (\textbf{Q4}).
The service description languages mostly provide very generic property definitions, therefore the constructs give too much freedom to the person
who describes the service and no standardized measures for most of the properties. While service description languages such as Linked USDL \cite{linkedUSDL} and
Service Measurement Index \cite{smi2014v2} define properties of services in very detailed yet generic ways, most existing service matchers use only numerical
values as examples for their proof-of-concept implementations.
In the existing approaches, the service descriptions stem mostly from the web services context. Some QoS properties which are specific to cloud services are not considered, for example scalability, elasticity and different price models. Moreover, some matching approaches do not provide concrete examples for the service properties their service matcher targets. An example for this is the n-ary constraints in the mixed integer programming approach \cite{kritikos2009mixed}. Another example is the constraint-specification combinations with intervals and values. While they examine interval to interval exact matching in great detail (this combination comes quite rarely in our SDL and SLA parameters in general), they do not solve the feature list matching problem (\textbf{Q1,Q2}).
In our work \cite{zilci2015cloud}, we provide an analysis of QoS properties in service descriptions. Based on this analysis, we define the subproblems of service matching as discrete numeric matching, enumeration matching, feature list matching, interval matching, and fuzziness. We examine the matching approaches presented in \cite{mobedpour2013user}, \cite{bacciu2010adaptive} and \cite{mukhija2007qos}, the three complementary papers \cite{kritikos2009mixed},\cite{kritikos2007semantic}, and \cite{kritikos2008evaluation}, and the approach presented in \cite{wang2009qos}. Most of the service matchers address discrete numeric matching and interval matching. Some matchers consider also enumerations: the query and the specification can take only one of the values from a predefined list. In feature list matching, both the query and the specification can take multiple values from a predefined list and a greater overlap of these two lists is targeted. However, none of the service matchers cover this subproblem (\textbf{Q5}).
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
The differences in the definition of the service matching problem results in the authors defining the functional requirements for the service matcher. The tools are selected according to the requirements. The different problem definitions of the related work result in conceptual artifacts which should be carefully examined for reusing. A catalog of components which address the subproblems of service matching can be useful to identify building blocks available to be combined.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
This work is supported by the Horizon 2020 EU funded Integrated project
CYCLONE\footnote{cyclone-project.eu}, grant number 644925.
|
\subsection{Determination of CKM phases from isospin analysis of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}d$ transitions}
\label{sec:alpha}
Despite its low branching fraction, large yields of the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decay are available.
The \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace parameters have been measured from decay-time-dependent analyses by \mbox{BaBar}\xspace, \mbox{Belle}\xspace and LHCb, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pipi}.
The world averages for the observables are~\cite{HFAG,LHCb-PAPER-2013-040,Lees:2012mma,Adachi:2013mae}
\begin{equation}
S_{\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace} = -0.66 \pm 0.06 \, , \qquad
C_{\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace} = -0.31 \pm 0.05 \, .
\end{equation}
Thus, both \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay and in mixing/decay interference have been observed in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{babarlhcb_pipi_combined.pdf}
\caption{
Asymmetries in the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decay-time distributions at (left) \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Adachi:2013mae}, (right top) \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Lees:2012mma}, and (right bottom) \mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-040}, with fit results superimposed.
The \mbox{Belle}\xspace plot includes also the background subtraction signal distributions separately for (blue) \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and (red) \ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace tags.
}
\label{fig:pipi}
\end{figure}
If it were the case that $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays were tree-dominated, there would be no \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay, hence $C_f = 0$, and the parameter of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing/decay interference could be interpreted with low theoretical uncertainty as $S_f(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace) = +\eta_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace} \sin(2\alpha)$, where $\alpha$ is one of the Unitarity Triangle angles introduced in Sec.~\ref{sec:UT} and $\alpha \equiv \pi - \beta - \gamma$ by definition.
Loop diagrams, however, lead to so-called ``penguin pollution'' that makes such straightforward interpretation impossible.
The large measured magnitude of the value of $C_{\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace}$ shows unambiguously that the penguin contribution is highly significant.
Isospin analysis of $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$, $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace\piz$ decays, and their charge conjugates, can be used to isolate, and correct for, the penguin pollution~\cite{Gronau:1990ka}.
The isospin decomposition leads to relations between the decay amplitudes (with obvious notation),
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:GLisospin}
A^{+0} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} A^{+-} + A^{00} \, , \quad
\bar{A}^{-0} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \bar{A}^{+-} + \bar{A}^{00} \, , \quad
A^{+0} = \bar{A}^{-0} \, ,
\end{equation}
with small corrections possible due to isospin violation effects such as electroweak penguin contributions~\cite{Gronau:2005pq,Gardner:2005pq}.
These relations can be expressed as triangles that share a base, in which the phase between $A^{+-}$ and $\bar{A}^{+-}$, denoted $2\Delta \alpha$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:GLisospin}, is precisely the value needed to correct the value of $S_f$ and obtain $\alpha$,
\begin{equation}
S_{\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace} = \sqrt{1-C^2_{\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace}} \sin \left(2\alpha - 2\Delta \alpha\right) \, .
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{hh_triangle}
\caption{
Isospin triangles for $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\pi\pi$ decays~\cite{Gronau:1990ka}; reproduced from Ref.~\cite{Antonelli:2009ws}.
}
\label{fig:GLisospin}
\end{figure}
Thus, to determine $\alpha$ from $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \pi\pi$ decays, the limiting factor becomes the knowledge of $\Delta \alpha$, which requires measurements of the branching fraction and \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetry parameters of the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace\piz$ decay.
This mode is, unfortunately, difficult to study experimentally and its decay-time dependence cannot be determined due to the absence of a reconstructed vertex (see, however, Ref.~\cite{Ishino:2007pt}) which precludes a determination of $S_{\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace\piz}$.
The world averages~\cite{HFAG,Lees:2012mma,Vanhoefer:2014mfa} are
\begin{equation}
{\cal B}(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace\piz) = (1.17 \pm 0.13) \times 10^{-6} \, , \
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace\piz) = 0.43 \pm 0.27 \, .
\end{equation}
The quoted ${\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace\piz)$ average does not include results published by \mbox{Belle}\xspace in 2005~\cite{Abe:2004mp} since these are known to be affected by a source of background~\cite{Abe:2005bs} that was not accounted for in the analysis.
Nor is any scaling applied to the uncertainty due to the discrepancy between the \mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace results for the branching fraction.
Together with results on $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$~\cite{Aubert:2007hh,Duh:2012ie}, constraints on $\alpha$ can be obtained, but with an eight-fold ambiguity due to the triangle relations.
This has been done by various groups~\cite{Charles:2004jd,Bona:2006ah,Bona:2007qta}; an example of the constraints obtained is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:alpha}.
The ambiguities can be clearly seen, although it should be noted that the solution at $\alpha = 0$, which is allowed if only the isospin relations are used in the analysis, is excluded by the observation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$.
Imposing physical constraints on the hadronic parameters further restricts the allowed region near $\alpha = 0$~\cite{Antonelli:2009ws,Bona:2007qta}.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.58\textwidth]{CKMfitter-B2UUAll_alpha.png}
\caption{
Constraints on the CKM angle $\alpha$ obtained from isospin analysis of (red) $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\pi\pi$, (green) $\rho\pi$ and (blue) $\rho\rho$ decays~\cite{Charles:2004jd}.
The combined result is $\alpha = (87.6\,^{+3.5}_{-3.3})^\circ$, consistent with the prediction from the CKM fit, $(90.6\,^{+3.9}_{-1.1})^\circ$, both of which are also shown.
}
\label{fig:alpha}
\end{figure}
A similar isospin analysis can be performed for $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \rho\rho$ decays.
In principle, matters are more complicated, as the final state involves two vector mesons, and the isospin triangles should be constructed for each polarisation state separately.
However, it is observed that the decays are dominated by longitudinal polarisation~\cite{Aubert:2007nua,Vanhoefer:2015ijw}.
The finite width of the $\rho$ states leads to a further complication of the isospin analysis, but the effects are ${\cal O}\left(\Gamma/m\right)^2$ and hence small~\cite{Falk:2003uq}.
The world average values for the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation parameters in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\rhomeson^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\rhomeson^-}\xspace$ are~\cite{HFAG,Aubert:2007nua,Vanhoefer:2015ijw}
\begin{equation}
S_{\ensuremath{\rhomeson^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\rhomeson^-}\xspace} = -0.14 \pm 0.13 \, , \qquad C_{\ensuremath{\rhomeson^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\rhomeson^-}\xspace} = 0.00 \pm 0.09 \, ,
\end{equation}
where the consistency of $C_{\ensuremath{\rhomeson^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\rhomeson^-}\xspace}$ with zero suggests smaller penguin pollution effects compared to the $\pi\pi$ case.
Indeed, the isospin triangles are found to be stretched and overlapping, which leads to good precision on $\alpha$, as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:alpha}.
In this case, the isospin analysis benefits from the fact that the parameters of the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace\rhoz$ channel are more tractable for experimental study~\cite{Aubert:2008au,Adachi:2012cz,LHCb-PAPER-2015-006}, where existing results include a first measurement of $S_{\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace\rhoz}$, with large uncertainty~\cite{Aubert:2008au}.
However, improved determinations of the branching fraction and \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetry for the longitudinal component of $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\rhomeson^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace$ decays~\cite{Zhang:2003up,Aubert:2009it} are needed in order to constrain further the $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\rho\rho$ isospin triangles.
Since the latest \mbox{Belle}\xspace result~\cite{Zhang:2003up} is based on analysis of around $10\,\%$ of the final \mbox{Belle}\xspace $\Upsilon(4S)$ sample, significant improvement should be possible.
Further channels involving only light non-strange mesons also have sensitivity to $\alpha$, but the isospin analysis tends to be more complicated~\cite{Lipkin:1991st}.
For example, results are available on decay-time-dependent \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation parameters in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace a_1^\pm \ensuremath{\pion^\mp}\xspace$ decays~\cite{Aubert:2006gb,Dalseno:2012hp}, but these are often not used in global fits to obtain constraints on $\alpha$.
An exception occurs for $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \rho\pi$ decays, where the interference of $\ensuremath{\rhomeson^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$, $\ensuremath{\rhomeson^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ amplitudes in the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ Dalitz plot allows, in principle, penguin pollution to be corrected for and $2\alpha$ to be determined without ambiguity~\cite{Snyder:1993mx,Quinn:2000by}.
The relevant parameters have been measured in decay-time-dependent Dalitz plot analyses by \mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Kusaka:2007dv,Kusaka:2007mj,Lees:2013nwa}; although the parameters associated with \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\rhomeson^\pm}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\mp}\xspace$ decays are determined quite precisely, giving evidence of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay, the obtained constraints on $\alpha$ are not yet competitive with those from other methods as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:alpha}.
\section{\boldmath \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decays of $b$ baryons}
\label{sec:baryons}
As baryons do not oscillate, only \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay can occur, but no \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation has been observed in any $b$ baryon decay to date.
Since the same classes of quark-level transitions as in the meson case are possible, it is likely that asymmetries of similar magnitude can arise.
In search of a first observation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in baryon decays, it is therefore of greatest interest to study charmless decays mediated by $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}d$ transitions.
However, calculations of the expected effects are difficult due to hadronic uncertainties.
There has been much less experimental study of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $b$ baryons than in $b$ mesons.
In part this is because many of the most accessible decays where \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation might be observed are experimentally more complex than their $b$-meson counterparts, and consequently there has been only limited exploitation of the significant samples of $b$-baryons available from the Tevatron and the LHC.
In particular, $b$-baryon production at the LHC is strongly biased towards low transverse momenta~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-004}, which reduces the trigger and selection efficiencies compared to \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson production.
The lightest $b$ baryon is the \ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace ($udb$) state.
Searches for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in its decays to charmless two-body final states have been performed by CDF~\cite{Aaltonen:2014vra}, giving
\begin{eqnarray*}
A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace) & = & +0.06 \pm 0.07 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,(stat)}}\xspace \pm 0.03 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,(syst)}}\xspace \, , \\
A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace p\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace) & = & -0.10 \pm 0.08 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,(stat)}}\xspace \pm 0.04 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,(syst)}}\xspace \, .
\end{eqnarray*}
Within the current uncertainties, these results are compatible both with no asymmetry, and with the ${\cal O}(10\,\%)$ effects seen in charmless \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson decays such as $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$, discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:tree-penguin}.
LHCb should be able to improve on the precision, but the measurements require good knowledge of both \ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace production and $p/\bar{p}$ detection asymmetries and are therefore not trivial.
The search for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $b$ baryons can be extended to three-body charmless hadronic decays.
These channels have the advantage that, if there is a component with an intermediate charmed hadron, it can be used to cancel the production and detection asymmetries.
Such searches have been carried out by LHCb with the $\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS p \ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ $\ensuremath{\PLambda}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\PLambda}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ channels~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-061,LHCb-PAPER-2016-004}, with the $\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Lz^+_\cquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$, $\ensuremath{\Lz^+_\cquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS p$ and $\ensuremath{\Lz^+_\cquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PLambda}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$ modes as reference.
The yields available are rather limited, due to the \KS\ and \ensuremath{\PLambda}\xspace\ reconstruction efficiency at LHCb, and no significant asymmetry has yet been observed.
Since large \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetries have been seen in \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson decays to three charged particles, it is natural to look for such effects in similar decays of $b$ baryons.
The weakly decaying charged $b$ baryons are the \ensuremath{\Xi^-_\bquark}\xspace ($bsd$) and \ensuremath{\Omega^-_\bquark}\xspace ($bss$) states.
Charmless decays of these particles have not yet been observed, but if sufficient yields can be obtained they will provide good possibilities to search for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects.
Larger yields are available for some four-body charmless hadronic \ensuremath{\Pb}\xspace-baryon decays such as $\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Pp}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\Pp}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-030}.
For these modes it is thus possible not only to determine phase-space integrated \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetries, but also to study the asymmetry in certain regions of the phase-space.
By comparing the yields in regions with the scalar triple product, constructed from the momenta of three final-state particles in the \ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace\ rest frame, either positive or negative, observables can be constructed that are robust against systematic uncertainties from production and detection asymmetries.
The measurement of such an observable for $\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Pp}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays reveals evidence, at the $3.3\,\sigma$ level, for a \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effect~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-030}.
Finally, $\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D\ensuremath{\PLambda}\xspace$ decays can be used to determine the CKM angle $\gamma$ through \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation caused by the interference of the $b\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u$ and $b\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c$ tree-level transitions, in the same way as discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:gamma-tree-level}.
This decay remains unobserved to date, so it is impossible to say whether it will make a useful contribution to the overall sensitivity to $\gamma$.
The related decay $\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace p\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ has, however, been seen~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-056}.
Further studies are needed to understand the contribution to the total rate from $p\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ resonances which could be used for a future measurement of $\gamma$.
\subsection{Measurement of $\beta$ and $\beta_s$ using $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}q$ transitions}
\label{sec:ccq}
The $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}q$ transitions are characterised by a dominant $b\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c$ tree diagram, as well as subleading $b\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q$ penguin diagrams in which the $c\bar{c}$ quark pair is emitted from the loop.
In the limit of negligible penguin contribution in a decay to a \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstate $f$,
the parameter $\lambda_f$ has unit magnitude and phase determined by the relevant CKM matrix elements involved in the mixing and decay amplitudes.
Therefore effects due to \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the interference of mixing and decay can be measured from the $S_f$ parameter of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ACS-defs}) giving theoretically clean determinations of $\beta$ and $\beta_s$ in the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$ systems, respectively:
\begin{eqnarray}
S_f(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\KS) & = & -\eta_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace} \sin(2\beta) \, , \label{eq:sin2b} \\
S_f(\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\phi) & = & +\eta_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace} \sin(2\beta_s) \, . \label{eq:sin2bs}
\end{eqnarray}
In the above, $\eta_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}$ is the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenvalue of the final state, which is $-1$ for $\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\KS$ and depends on the transversity amplitude in the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\phi$ decay (these and other decay channels are discussed in more detail in Secs.~\ref{sec:sin2b} and~\ref{sec:psiphiandbuddies} below).\footnote{
Here, and throughout the review, the symbols $\rho$, $\omega$, $K^*$ and $\phi$ refer to the lightest vector meson of the corresponding family: $\rho(770)$, $\omega(782)$, $K^*(892)$ and $\phi(1020)$.
Only a few measurements have been performed with final states involving higher excitations; these are not discussed for reasons of brevity.
}
Note that the change of sign between Eq.~(\ref{eq:sin2b}) and Eq.~(\ref{eq:sin2bs}) arises due to the conventional definition of Eq.~(\ref{eq:angles-betas}) that makes the SM expectation for $\beta_s$ positive.
The expected level of suppression of the penguin/tree ratio for $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions is ${\cal O}(\lambda^2) \times f_{\rm loop}$, where $\lambda = \sin \theta_C \approx 0.23$ is the Wolfenstein parameter~\cite{Wolfenstein:1983yz} ($\theta_C$ is the Cabibbo angle~\cite{Cabibbo:1963yz}) and $f_{\rm loop}$ is the loop suppression factor.
Since there is no reliable first principles calculation of the size of this factor, it is of great interest to study also $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}d$ transitions, where the penguin/tree ratio is not CKM-suppressed.
Several methods have been proposed that use flavour symmetries to relate decay modes mediated by the two sets of quark-level transitions, and thereby to constrain the possible amount of ``penguin pollution'' in the determination of $\beta$ and $\beta_s$, as discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:ccd}.
Explicit calculations suggest that the effects of ``penguin pollution'' on the determinations of $2\beta$ and $2\beta_s$ are $\lsim 1\ensuremath{^{\circ}}\xspace$~\cite{Jung:2012mp,DeBruyn:2014oga,Frings:2015eva}.
\subsubsection{Measurements of $\beta$}
\label{sec:sin2b}
The determination of $\sin(2\beta)$ from $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \KS$~\cite{Carter:1980tk,Bigi:1981qs} has long been considered a ``golden mode'' of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace system.
The experimental challenge is to measure the coefficient of the sinusoidal oscillation of the decay-time asymmetry of Eq.~(\ref{eg:tdcpv-asym}).
This motivated the design of the asymmetric $\ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace$ \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace factory experiments, \mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace, in which the boost of the produced \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace mesons in the laboratory frame results in a separation of their decay vertices.
Due to the quantum correlations of the $B$ mesons produced in $\Upsilon(4S)$ decay, the decay of one into a final state that tags its flavour ($\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$ or $\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace$) can be used to specify the flavour of the other at that instant.
Through the measurement of $\sin 2\beta$, \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2001nu} and \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Abe:2001xe} were able to make the first observations of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation outside the kaon sector, thus validating the Kobayashi-Maskawa mechanism.
The results based on the final data samples of \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2009aw} and \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Adachi:2012et}, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:sin2beta}, clearly show the large \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effect.
These analyses include not only $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \KS$, but also decays to the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-odd final states $\psi(2S)\KS$, $\eta_c\KS$ and $\chi_{c1}\KS$ as well as the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even final state $\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\KL$.
As well as these, results have also been published on $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\chi_{c0}\KS$~\cite{Aubert:2009me} and $\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$~\cite{Aubert:2004cp,Itoh:2005ks} decays.
The latter are particularly interesting since the interference between the $K^{*0}$ resonance and the $K\pi$ S-wave can be used to measure $\cos(2\beta)$ and hence resolve an ambiguity in the solution for $\beta$ if only $\sin(2\beta)$ is known.
The results prefer the SM solution, but the precision is not sufficient to completely rule out the ambiguity.
Updates of the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ analysis with the full \mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace statistics may be able to resolve the solutions definitively.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{BaBar-sin2beta-fig2.pdf}
\hspace{3mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{Belle-sin2beta-ccks_dt_asym_goodtag_v4.pdf}
\caption{\small
Results from (left) \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2009aw} and (right) \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Adachi:2012et} on the determination of $\sin2\beta$.
The \mbox{BaBar}\xspace data are separated by the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-eigenvalue of the final state, while only \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-odd modes from \mbox{Belle}\xspace are shown here.
}
\label{fig:sin2beta}
\end{figure}
Results from LHCb also provide competitive precision on $\sin(2\beta)$ from $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\KS$.
The latest LHCb result is compared to those from \mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace in Table~\ref{tab:sin2beta}.
For all experiments, the results are still statistically limited.
Moreover, the largest sources of systematic uncertainty differ between the $\ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace$ and $pp$ collision environments.
Among important sources of uncertainty for \mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace are understanding of the vertexing and decay time resolution.
For \mbox{LHCb}\xspace, however, the dominant source is due to possible tagging asymmetries.
Since these effects are expected to scale with statistics, to some extent, there are good prospects for considerable further reduction in the uncertainty with larger data samples.
\begin{table}[!htb]
\caption{
Latest experimental results on $\sin(2\beta)$.
The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.
}
\label{tab:sin2beta}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline
& From $\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\KS$ only & From all $c\bar{c}\KS$ \\
\hline
\mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2009aw} & $0.657 \pm 0.036 \pm 0.012$ & $0.687 \pm 0.028 \pm 0.012$ \\
\mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Adachi:2012et} & $0.670 \pm 0.029 \pm 0.013$ & $0.667 \pm 0.023 \pm 0.012$ \\
\mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-004} & $0.731 \pm 0.035 \pm 0.020$ & \\
\hline
World average~\cite{HFAG} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$0.691 \pm 0.017$} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The world average value, using determinations based on $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions, is~\cite{HFAG}
\begin{equation}
\sin 2 \beta = 0.682 \pm 0.019 \ {\rm which \ gives} \ \beta = (21.5 \,^{+0.8}_{-0.7})^\circ \, .
\end{equation}
Here only the solution consistent with the SM is given.
The ambiguous value at $\pi/2 - \beta$ is disfavoured by several measurements (as discussed in this review); there is a further ambiguity at $\pi + \beta$ which cannot be resolved through any measurement of $2\beta$.
In addition to the well-studied charmonium-kaon modes discussed above, it is also possible to determine $\beta$ using $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^{(*)+}}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^{(*)-}}\xspace\KS$ decays.
These have been been proposed as providing potential to resolve ambiguities in the determination of $\beta$, since quantities proportional to both $\sin(2\beta)$ and $\cos(2\beta)$ can be measured~\cite{Browder:1999ng}.
Measurements have been performed by both \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2006fh} and \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Dalseno:2007hx}, but are not yet sufficiently precise to resolve the sign of $\cos(2\beta)$.
\subsubsection{Measurements of $\beta_s$}
\label{sec:psiphiandbuddies}
Three $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions have been used to measure $\beta_s$ to date: $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace K^+K^-$, $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \pi^+\pi^-$, and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace$.
The latest results are collected in Table~\ref{tab:btoccbarqcpv}.\footnote{
A recent result from LHCb with $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\Ppsi{(2S)}}\xspace\phi$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-027} is not included as it has worse precision compared to the other LHC results.
}
Note that the results are presented in terms of the experimentally observable \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-violating phase \ensuremath{\phi_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace, which is equal to $-2\ensuremath{\beta_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace$ if the penguin contributions to these decays are small.
All measurements agree well with each other and with the SM prediction~\cite{Charles:2011va} of $-2\ensuremath{\beta_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace = -0.0363 \pm 0.0013 \ensuremath{\rm \,rad}\xspace$, and give a world average~\cite{HFAG} of
\begin{equation}
-2\beta_s = -0.034 \pm 0.033 \ensuremath{\rm \,rad}\xspace \, .
\end{equation}
\begin{table}[!htb]
\caption{
Latest experimental results on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace K^+K^-$, $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \pi^+\pi^-$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace$ decays.
Results are quoted in terms of $\ensuremath{\phi_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace$, in units of radians, which is equal to $-2\ensuremath{\beta_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace$ in the limit of vanishing penguin contributions.
For the \mbox{CDF}\xspace result the quoted interval combines statistical and systematic uncertainties at the $68\,\%$ confidence level, while \mbox{D0}\xspace report only the total uncertainty.
For all other results, the first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic.
The known sign of $\Delta\Gamma_s$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2011-028} has been used to break the ambiguity in the reported solutions.
}
\label{tab:btoccbarqcpv}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
& $\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace K^+K^-$ & $\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \pi^+\pi^-$ & $\ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace$ \\
\hline
\mbox{CDF}\xspace~\cite{Aaltonen:2012ie} & $[-0.06,0.30]$ & -- & -- \\
\mbox{D0}\xspace~\cite{Abazov:2011ry} & $-0.55\,^{+0.38}_{-0.36}$ & -- & -- \\
\mbox{ATLAS}\xspace~\cite{Aad:2016tdj} & $-0.098 \pm 0.084 \pm 0.040$ & -- & -- \\
\mbox{CMS}\xspace~\cite{Khachatryan:2015nza} & $-0.075 \pm 0.097 \pm 0.031$ & -- & -- \\
\mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-059,LHCb-PAPER-2014-019,LHCb-PAPER-2014-051} & $-0.058 \pm 0.049 \pm 0.006$ & $0.070 \pm 0.068 \pm 0.008$ & $0.02 \pm 0.17 \pm 0.02$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The most widely used decay mode for the determination of $\beta_s$ is $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$, which in the low $m(\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace)$ region is dominated by the $\phi$ resonance.
As $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\phi$ is a pseudoscalar to vector-vector transition, it contains a mixture of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even and \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-odd amplitudes, due to the different possible polarisations of the final state, which must be accounted for in the fit.
These terms are disentangled by performing a simultaneous fit to the decay-time and decay-angle distributions of the signal, where the relevant angles are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:psiphihel} in the so-called ``helicity basis'' used in the \mbox{LHCb}\xspace measurement~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-059}.
A further complication arises due to interference between the $\phi$ resonance and a broad S-wave $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ component, which must be accounted for in the fit.
However, these features can be turned to the benefit of the analysis, providing better sensitivity and allowing to resolve an ambiguity in the results.
For this reason, results are presented in terms of $\phi_s$ rather than $\sin(\phi_s)$ and $\cos(\phi_s)$ or the $C_f$, $S_f$ and $A_{f}^{\Delta \Gamma}$ quantities introduced in Sec.~\ref{sec:rates}.
The separation of the different components in the simultaneous decay-time and decay-angle fit in the LHCb analysis is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:LHCb-PAPER-2014-059}.
It should be noted that in principle there could be different weak phase differences in each of the polarisation amplitudes; to date, only LHCb has taken this into account in the analysis~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-059}.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth,bb=80 620 545 755,clip=true]{figs/helAngles_compiled}
\caption{
Angular (helicity) basis of the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace K^+K^-$, $\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$ transition, reproduced from Ref.~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-002}.
\label{fig:psiphihel}
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{LHCb-PAPER-2014-059-Fig2a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{LHCb-PAPER-2014-059-Fig2b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{LHCb-PAPER-2014-059-Fig2c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{LHCb-PAPER-2014-059-Fig2d.pdf}
\caption{
Background-subtracted decay-time and decay-angle distributions for $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays (data points) in LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-059}, with the one-dimensional fit projections overlaid.
The solid blue line shows the total signal contribution, which is composed of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even (long-dashed red), \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-odd (short-dashed green) and S-wave (dotted-dashed purple) contributions.
}
\label{fig:LHCb-PAPER-2014-059}
\end{figure}
All current measurements are statistically limited.
The dominant systematic uncertainty for the most precise measurements is the knowledge of the variation of the selection efficiency with the decay angles.
This is taken from simulation samples reweighted to match the data distributions, and therefore significant further reduction in the uncertainty is expected to be possible with larger data samples.
Moreover, all results until now use only the low $m(\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace)$ region of $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays, and further sensitivity to $\phi_s$ can be achieved from contributions such as $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace f_2^\prime(1525)$ at higher mass~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2012-040}.
\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the decay $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \pi^+\pi^-$ has to date only been studied by \mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-019}.
The decay proceeds predominantly through the $f_{0}(980)$ resonance, and has been shown to be an almost pure \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-odd eigenstate~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-069}.
In that limit, angular analysis of the final state would not be required; nevertheless, because the precision is quite similar to that of $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace K^+K^-$, a decay-time-dependent amplitude analysis has been used to model both the dominant \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-odd and subleading \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even components.
The dominance of one \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenvalue allows the decay-time-dependent asymmetry to be visualised, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:LHCb-PAPER-2014-019}.
The result is statistically limited, with the dominant systematic uncertainty coming from the precision of the amplitude model.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{figs/LHCb-PAPER-2014-019-Fig.pdf}
\caption{
Decay-time asymmetry for $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays (data points) in LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-019}, with the fit projection overlaid.
The data are folded into one oscillation period.
}
\label{fig:LHCb-PAPER-2014-019}
\end{figure}
\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the decay $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace$ has also been studied only by LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-051}.
In this case the final state consists of two pseudoscalar mesons and there is no ambiguity about its \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace content and consequently no need for any angular analysis.
However, since there are no muons in the final state, requirements imposed in the trigger (in particular, on the impact parameter with respect to the primary $pp$ collision vertex) tend to bias the decay-time distribution.
Precise knowledge of this effect is necessary, and causes the largest contribution to the systematic uncertainty, which nonetheless is negligible compared to the current statistical precision.
It is worth noting that in the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace K^+K^-$ mode, all of \ensuremath{\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace, \ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace, \ensuremath{\Delta m_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace, and \ensuremath{\phi_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace can be measured simultaneously, together with parameters that describe the relative magnitudes and phases of the different polarisation amplitudes.
Indeed, this channel gives the most precise determination of $\ensuremath{\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace$, and also gives good precision on $\ensuremath{\Delta m_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace$ (though not competitive with the result based on $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-006}).
In some of the experimental analyses, however, these parameters are fixed in order to simplify the analysis.
For the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-eigenstate modes, only a specific combination of $\ensuremath{\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace$ (corresponding to the effective lifetime; see Eq.~(\ref{eq:tau-eff})) can be determined, and it is common to fix these parameters, as well as $\ensuremath{\Delta m_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace$, in order to reduce the need for precise understanding of the variation of the efficiency with decay time.
\subsubsection{Investigation of penguin contributions with $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}d$ transitions}
\label{sec:ccd}
As experimental precision improves, it becomes increasingly important to quantify the contribution of penguin diagrams to $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ modes, in order to interpret the results in terms of $\beta$ and $\beta_s$ with minimal theoretical uncertainty.
One consequence of a significant penguin contribution could be a non-zero parameter of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions.
Results for $C_f$ in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$ decay modes are consistent with zero within a few percent uncertainty~\cite{HFAG};
results in $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$ decays are also consistent with no \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay.
The most precise limit on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in this type of transition is however~\cite{PDG2016,Abazov:2013sqa,Sakai:2010ch}
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace) = 0.003 \pm 0.006 \, .
\end{equation}
While these results indicate that the penguin contribution is likely to be small, it is possible that effects of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay are suppressed by small strong phase differences.
Thus, additional information is needed to estimate the size of the penguin effect on $\beta$ and $\beta_s$.
As mentioned in the introduction to Sec.~\ref{sec:ccq}, one way to investigate further the penguin transitions is to search for their effects in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}d$ transitions (for detailed discussions, see for example Refs.~\cite{Faller:2008gt,Jung:2012mp,DeBruyn:2014oga,Jung:2014jfa,Frings:2015eva,Ligeti:2015yma}).
Searches for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay, for example in $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2011-024} and $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^+}\xspace$ decays~\cite{Adachi:2008cj}, set limits at the level of a few percent, but as mentioned above there may be suppression due to small strong phase differences.
A more comprehensive approach is to search for deviations from the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ values of $\beta$ and $\beta_s$ in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$ decays to self-conjugate final states.
This is particularly attractive in cases where decays can be related by the U-spin flavour-symmetry of the strong interaction, such as $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\KS \longleftrightarrow \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \KS$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace \longleftrightarrow \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-}\xspace$~\cite{Fleischer:1999nz}.
Measurements of mixing-induced \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{Aubert:2008ah,Rohrken:2012ta,LHCb-PAPER-2016-037} are, in fact, in slight tension with the value of $\sin(2\beta)$ from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ decays, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HFAG-ccd}.
However, this arises partly because the central value of the \mbox{Belle}\xspace result~\cite{Rohrken:2012ta} lies outside the physical region $S_f^2 + C_f^2 \leq 1$, and therefore any interpretation must be made with great care.
Improved measurements are needed.
In the case of $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \KS$ decays, the available yield is sufficient only for a rather imprecise determination of the mixing-induced asymmetry parameters, as has recently been performed by LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-005}.
ATLAS and CMS may be able to contribute measurements of these observables, which would be useful to reduce the overall uncertainty.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.60\textwidth]{figs/ccdS_CPvsC_CP.pdf}
\caption{
Summary of measurements of $-\eta_f S_f$ and $C_f$ in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$ decays dominated by the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}d$ transition~\cite{HFAG}.
The yellow point shows the reference point ($-\eta_f S_f = \sin(2\beta)$) determined from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions.
}
\label{fig:HFAG-ccd}
\end{figure}
Better knowledge about the penguin effects can be obtained by using a larger basis of flavour-symmetries, such as SU(3).
For example, measurements of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ can be used to obtain useful constraints on the penguin contribution to $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \KS$~\cite{Ciuchini:2005mg,Jung:2012mp}.
Similarly, results on $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace$ decays provide information about possible penguin pollution in $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \phi$.
Branching fraction measurements are also an important component of the SU(3) analysis.
The latest results on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$~\cite{Aubert:2008bs,Lee:2007wd} and $\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-058} decays are also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HFAG-ccd}; these currently provide the strongest experimental limits on penguin pollution in $\beta$ and $\beta_s$.
Note that $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace$ is a pseudoscalar to vector-vector decay, and therefore contains an admixture of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even and \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-odd in the final state; however results are presented in terms of $-\eta_f S_f$ and $C_f$ to enable a useful comparison with other measurements.
Another channel that can help to understand penguin effects is $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\ensuremath{\Kbar^{*0}}\xspace$~\cite{Faller:2008gt,DeBruyn:2014oga,Frings:2015eva}.
A detailed analysis allowing for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects that may differ between different polarisation amplitudes has recently been performed by LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-034}.
No significant \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effect is seen.
Current determinations of the possible penguin effects in the determinations of $2\beta$ and $2\beta_s$ limit the bias at less than about $1^\circ$.
This is less than the current experimental uncertainties, as given in Secs.~\ref{sec:sin2b} and~\ref{sec:psiphiandbuddies}, but not by much.
Further reduction should be possible with improved measurements in the channels discussed above.
\section*{Bibliography}
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
\subsection{Measurement of $\beta_{(s)}$ using $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ transitions}
\label{sec:cud}
An alternative approach to reduce uncertainties from penguin contributions is to determine $\beta$ and $\beta_s$ from decay modes where there is no possibility of such amplitudes.
Decays mediated by the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ transition, for example $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D \ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D \KS$, provide such potential~\cite{Grossman:1996ke}.
When the neutral \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace meson is reconstructed in a \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstate, the formalism of Eqs.~(\ref{eg:tdcpv1})--(\ref{eg:tdcpv-asym}) can be used.
(The additional light meson, $\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ or $\KS$, must also be reconstructed in a \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstate, as achieved with the $\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \gamma\gamma$ and $\KS\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays.)
This, however, allows amplitudes mediated by the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u \bar{c}d$ transition to contribute.
The relative weak phase between $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u \bar{c}d$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ is $\gamma$, while the ratio of magnitudes is expected to be around 0.02.
Therefore, some small biases in the determination of $\beta_{(s)}$ can be expected.
The leading effects, however, have opposite signs for the cases where the \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace meson is reconstructed in \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even and -odd final states~\cite{Fleischer:2003ai,Fleischer:2003aj}, and therefore if both are measured the theoretical uncertainty on $\beta_s$ can be kept under excellent control.
Note also that, in certain circumstances, the interference between $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u \bar{c}d$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ amplitudes can be used to make a competitive determination of $\gamma$, as discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:gamma-tree-level:mix}.
An interesting modification of this method utilises multibody decays of the \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace meson such as $\KS\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$~\cite{Bondar:2005gk}.
In this case, interference between amplitudes contributing to the \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay provides sensitivity to $\cos(2\beta_{(s)})$ as well as $\sin(2\beta_{(s)})$.
Similarly to the methods discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:ccq}, the determination of $\cos(2\beta)$ can remove the ambiguity inherent in measurements of $\sin(2\beta)$ alone.
Measurements of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the decay-time dependence of $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$ decays mediated by the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ transition have been performed combining many final states of the form $D^{(*)} h^0$, where $h^0$ is a light meson (such as $\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ or $\eta$).
\mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace have independently performed analyses with $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$~\cite{Krokovny:2006sv,Aubert:2007rp}, and a combined analysis of $D_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}^{(*)} h^0$ decays has been performed~\cite{Abdesselam:2015gha}.
The latter gives the first observation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ transitions, and a combination of all results~\cite{HFAG} gives
\begin{equation}
\sin(2\beta)^{b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d} = 0.63 \pm 0.11 \, .
\end{equation}
Thus, \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the interference between mixing and decay has been observed in these transitions.
The average for $\cos(2\beta)$ prefers the SM solution for $\beta$.
The comparison of the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ value of $\beta$ with that from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ processes will become more and more important as the precision improves.
All measurements of $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ processes to date are statistically limited, and therefore further reduction of uncertainties can be anticipated with larger samples.
These modes are, however, challenging to reconstruct at hadron colliders when the decay products of the light meson $h^0$ include photons.
A more attractive channel for LHCb is therefore $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$, including a significant contribution from the $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\rho^0$ intermediate state.
The decay-time distribution of this decay provides sensitivity to both $\sin(2\beta)$ and $\cos(2\beta)$~\cite{Charles:1998vf,Latham:2008zs}.
A Dalitz plot analysis of $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ with $\ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-070} demonstrates the large yields available at LHCb and the potential for a future decay-time-dependent analysis with the \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace meson reconstructed in \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstates.
It should be noted that in the case of the measurements with $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$, lack of knowledge of the correct \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay Dalitz plot model leads to a significant source of systematic uncertainty.
As precision improves, it could therefore be of interest to explore model-independent approaches based on binning the Dalitz plot, as discussed for the determination of $\gamma$ from $B \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace DK$ in Sec.~\ref{sec:gamma-tree-level:decay}.
First results with the model-independent approach have been reported by \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Vorobyev:2016npn}.
While good experimental progress has been made on $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$ decays mediated by the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ transition, the same cannot be said for the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$ modes.
The $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \KS$ decay has recently been observed~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-050}, but rather modest yields are available at LHCb, due to the relatively low efficiency to reconstruct the long-lived \KS meson.
Prospects may be somewhat better for $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$ decays mediated by the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}s$ transition.
The phenomenology in this case is similar to that for the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ case, but the interference effects between $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}s$ are larger.
This leads to greater sensitivity to $\gamma$, and therefore these modes will be discussed in that context in Sec.~\ref{sec:gamma-tree-level:mix}.
However, it is germane to the discussion here to note that both the quasi-two-body $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace\phi$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-035}, and the three-body $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2012-018} decays have been measured at LHCb.
With larger data samples, these modes (in cases where the \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace meson is reconstructed in a final state accessible to both \ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace decay) can be used to probe $\beta_s$ without uncertainty due to penguin contributions~\cite{Nandi:2011uw}.
\section{Experimental facilities and techniques}
\label{sec:experiment}
The measurements which delimit our current knowledge of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violating observables in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector can be split into two kinds: those performed at $e^+e^-$ colliders, and those performed at hadron
colliders. The available experimental techniques also largely divide into those feasible at $e^+e^-$ colliders, at hadron colliders, and at both.
In this Section, following a brief introduction to the different features relevant for $B$ physics of each type of collider facility, the techniques used in the measurements are discussed.
For reasons of brevity some early experiments which searched for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector, including the \mbox{LEP}\xspace detectors and \mbox{CLEO}\xspace, are omitted.
The term ``stable charged particles'' is used throughout this section to mean the electron, muon, pion, kaon and proton, while ``stable charged leptons/hadrons'' refers to the appropriate subset of these.
The term ``trigger'' is used to refer to real-time preselection of interesting events which are then kept for later analysis.
\subsection{Features of $B$ physics experiments at $e^+e^-$ colliders}
A great deal of $B$ physics has been achieved by the asymmetric $e^+e^-$ collider experiments \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2001tu,BABAR:2013jta} and \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Abashian:2000cg}, located at the SLAC and KEK collider facilities, respectively.
They share, and their physics reach is defined by, the following characteristics:
\begin{itemize}
\item
The production of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson/antimeson pairs via the decay of a $b\bar{b}$ resonance produced in the $e^+e^-$ collision.
When the collision energy corresponds to the mass of the $\Upsilon(4S)$ resonance, the only species produced are the \ensuremath{\B^+}\xspace and \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace (anti)mesons.
The production is coherent, so that the wavefunction of the produced \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace pair evolves in phase until one or the other decays.
By operating at the $\Upsilon(5S)$ resonance it is, however, possible to
produce also $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0_\squark}\xspace$ pairs.
\item
Asymmetric $e^+e^-$ beam energies which provide a boost large enough to resolve \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace, but not \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace, oscillations.
As the centre-of-mass energy of each collision is known, it can be used to distinguish genuine \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace hadrons, each carrying half of the centre-of-mass energy, from backgrounds.
\item
Detectors with close to $4\pi$ solid angle coverage, providing the ability to efficiently reconstruct all visible decay products of the produced \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace particles, both charged and neutral.
Solenoidal magnetic fields allow track momenta to be determined; the field strength ($1.5 \, {\rm T}$ for both \mbox{BaBar}\xspace\ and \mbox{Belle}\xspace) is optimised to provide good resolution while allowing all but the lowest momentum tracks to escape the inner detector.
Particle identification devices~\cite{Iijima:2000uv,Adam:2004fq} provide the capability to distinguish efficiently between all the different species of stable charged particles over the momentum range of interest.
\item
Trigger systems that are highly efficient for $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace$ events, allowing essentially all such events to be saved to tape without any inefficiencies.
\end{itemize}
Because of the clean production environment and hermetic detectors, $e^+e^-$ collider experiments are particularly useful for studying \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violating decays involving one or more neutral particles in the final state.
Fig.~\ref{fig:epemperf} shows the typical transverse momentum and impact parameter resolutions achieved in $e^+e^-$ collider experiments.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{BabarDetPerf_MomRes.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.08\textwidth]{blank.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{BabarDetPerf_IPRes.png}
\caption{
(Left) transverse momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) and (right) impact parameter resolutions of the \mbox{BaBar}\xspace detector, reproduced from Ref.~\cite{Aubert:2001tu}.
}
\label{fig:epemperf}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Features of $B$ physics experiments at hadron colliders}
The most significant hadron collider experiments to date, in terms of $B$ physics and \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation, are \mbox{D0}\xspace and \mbox{CDF}\xspace at the Tevatron\xspace proton-antiproton collider, as well as \mbox{CMS}\xspace, \mbox{ATLAS}\xspace and \mbox{LHCb}\xspace at the \mbox{LHC}\xspace proton-proton collider.
Although there are some important differences in the production environment between these two colliders, the experiments largely share the following characteristics:
\begin{itemize}
\item
The production of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace (anti)hadrons via gluon fusion (LHC) or $q\bar{q}$ annihilation (Tevatron), which gives access to all species of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace (anti)hadrons.
The production is incoherent, so that any combination of beauty hadron and antihadron can in principle be produced together.
\item
A geometrical acceptance that is far from hermetic.
Although \mbox{D0}\xspace, \mbox{CDF}\xspace, \mbox{CMS}\xspace and \mbox{ATLAS}\xspace all cover close to $4\pi$ of solid angle (and are therefore equipped with solenoidal magnets), the production of $b\bar{b}$ pairs in high energy hadron collisions is predominantly at large pseudorapidity, \mbox{\itshape i.e.}\xspace\ close to the beam-line, so that many of the decay products pass through the uninstrumented region.
The \mbox{LHCb}\xspace detector is designed as a forward spectrometer, covering the approximate pseudorapidity region $2 < \eta < 5$, in order to maximise the acceptance for \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace physics.
A dipole magnet, with bending power of about $4~{\rm T\,m}$, deflects charged particles and allows their momentum to be determined.
\item
A sufficiently large boost of the produced (anti)hadrons to enable, together with precision vertex detectors, both \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace oscillations to be resolved.
\item
Large numbers of additional particles from the underlying proton-(anti)proton interaction which make it infeasible to perform the same kind of full event reconstruction as at $e^+e^-$ colliders.
\item
Very high production cross-sections, that necessitate the separation of $b\bar{b}$ events from other types of events using non-trivial trigger systems.
The trigger systems introduce substantial inefficiencies for certain \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace (anti)hadron decay channels.
\item
Multiple inelastic collisions per beam crossing, known as ``pile-up''.
Since the \mbox{CMS}\xspace\ and \mbox{ATLAS}\xspace\ experiments are primarily focussed on searching for signatures of rare high-\mbox{$p_{\rm T}$}\xspace processes, significant pile-up helps to achieve high integrated luminosity, although it can introduce significant challenges for the detector operations.
For \mbox{LHCb}\xspace, limited pile-up is necessary to obtain acceptable detector performance and to associate \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace-hadron candidates with the correct primary $pp$ vertex.
Since the instantaneous luminosity is below the maximum available, it can be tuned to remain constant throughout each LHC fill, providing stable data taking-conditions.
\item
An ability to distinguish efficiently the different kinds of charged leptons, but no general ability to distinguish between the different kinds of stable charged hadrons.
There are two exceptions: \mbox{CDF}\xspace was able to achieve around $1.5\sigma$ separation between kaons and pions using \ensuremath{\mathrm{d}\hspace{-0.1em}E/\mathrm{d}x}\xspace information, while \mbox{LHCb}\xspace is unique among hadron collider experiments as its ring imaging Cherenkov detectors~\cite{LHCb-DP-2012-003} provide the capability to distinguish efficiently between all the different species of stable charged particles over the momentum range $2$--$100 \ensuremath{{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V\!/}c}}\xspace$.
\end{itemize}
Because hadron collider experiments have highly selective triggers, their physics reach greatly depends on what kinds of signatures these triggers can select.
The \mbox{CMS}\xspace, \mbox{ATLAS}\xspace, and \mbox{D0}\xspace experiments rely predominantly on the signature of one or more relatively high transverse momentum muons, but this approach restricts the $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace$ physics programme to the class of decays that produce such muons.
On the other hand, since \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace hadrons are produced in pairs and decay producing a muon around $11\,\%$ of the time,
signatures of the decay of the other \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace in the event can provide a minimum trigger efficiency even for channels that are hard to reconstruct.
The most distinctive feature of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays at a hadron collider experiment that can be exploited in a trigger system is the displaced vertex that is a consequence of the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace lifetime and the significant Lorentz boost.
If the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decay (secondary) vertex can be efficiently separated from the primary ($pp$ or $p\bar{p}$) interaction vertex, large backgrounds due to the high multiplicity of charged particles (tracks) originating from the primary vertex can be avoided.
\mbox{CDF}\xspace was the first hadron collider experiment whose trigger could use information about the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decay vertex displacement at the earliest stage of the event selection~\cite{Ristori:2010zz}.
This gave \mbox{CDF}\xspace the ability to efficiently select hadronic as well as leptonic \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays, a feature shared with \mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-DP-2014-001,LHCb-DP-2012-004}.
While hadron collider experiments are able to study certain final states containing neutral particles, the high occupancies make background discrimination very difficult even in experiments with excellent calorimeter resolution.
Figs.~\ref{fig:hadronperflhcb}~and~\ref{fig:hadronperfcms} shows the momentum and vertex resolutions achieved by the \mbox{LHCb}\xspace and \mbox{CMS}\xspace experiments, respectively.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.485\textwidth]{LHCbDetPerf_MomRes.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.470\textwidth]{LHCbDetPerf_IPRes.png}
\caption{
(Left) momentum and (right) impact parameter resolution of the \mbox{LHCb}\xspace detector, reproduced from Ref.~\cite{LHCb-DP-2014-002}.
}
\label{fig:hadronperflhcb}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{CMS-TRK-11-001_Figure_025-e.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{CMS-TRK-11-001_Figure_025-a.pdf}
\caption{
(Left) transverse momentum and (right) impact parameter resolution of the \mbox{CMS}\xspace detector, reproduced from Ref.~\cite{Chatrchyan:2014fea}.
The solid (open) symbols correspond to the half-width for $68\,\%$ ($90\,\%$) intervals centred on the mode of the distribution in residuals.
}
\label{fig:hadronperfcms}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Techniques for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation measurements}
Regardless of the type of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in question, all measurements of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays amount to quantifying the difference in the total or differential decay rates of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace and \ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace hadrons to a particular final state.
Depending on the specific measurement in question, systematic uncertainties may arise from asymmetries in the contributing backgrounds, asymmetries in the way the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace hadrons are produced, or asymmetries in the signal detection efficiency for each \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace hadron flavour.
\subsubsection{Signal reconstruction}
The efficiency to reconstruct most final state particles within the detector acceptance is broadly similar across $e^+e^-$ and hadron collider experiments: if
a particle traverses the detector, it will deposit sufficient energy to allow it to be reconstructed.
Specific techniques can, in certain cases, be used to reconstruct particles such as neutrinos for which this is not the case.
The challenge is therefore to achieve good background rejection while retaining high signal efficiency.
At $e^+e^-$ collider experiments operating near the $\Upsilon(4S)$ resonance this is done by exploiting the event shape, since continuum $e^+e^- \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q\bar{q}$ ($q=u,d,s,c$) events tend to be more jet-like compared to $e^+e^- \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace B\bar{B}$ events which are more spherical.
At hadron collider experiments, the long lifetime of the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace hadron and its large mass (which leads to large transverse momentum for its decay products) results in a distinctive decay topology which can be used to reject background.
Consequently, for many \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace hadron decays of interest the selection efficiency is broadly comparable between $e^+e^-$ and hadron collider experiments, especially for final states which involve only charged particles.
The larger rate of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace hadron production at hadron colliders then leads to larger yields, if the trigger efficiency is not too low, as can be seen in Table~\ref{tab:dacproundup}.
\begin{table}[!tb]
\caption{
Summary of yields per unit luminosity and sensitivity of certain representative $A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}$ measurements at different experiments.
The first quoted uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.
}
\label{tab:dacproundup}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llcr@{$\,\pm\,$}r@{$\,\pm\,$}rc}
\hline
Mode & Experiment & Yield/fb$^{-1}$ & \multicolumn{3}{c}{$A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}$ (\permil)} & Reference \\
\hline
$\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$ & \mbox{BaBar}\xspace & 3 & $123$ & $85$ & $4$ & \cite{Aubert:2004pra} \\
& \mbox{LHCb}\xspace & 5100 & $5$ & $27$ & $11$ & \cite{LHCb-PAPER-2011-024} \\
& \mbox{D0}\xspace & 300 & $-42$ & $44$ & $9$ & \cite{Abazov:2013sqa} \\
\hline
$\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ & \mbox{BaBar}\xspace & 12.5 & $-107$ & \multicolumn{2}{r}{$\!\!16\quad^{+6}_{-4}$} & \cite{Lees:2012mma} \\
& \mbox{Belle}\xspace & 10.5 & $-69$ & $14$ & $7$ & \cite{Duh:2012ie} \\
& \mbox{LHCb}\xspace & 41400 & $-80$ & $7$ & $3$ & \cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-018} \\
& \mbox{CDF}\xspace & 1300 & $-83$ & $13$ & $4$ & \cite{Aaltonen:2014vra} \\
\hline
$\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\gamma$ & \mbox{BaBar}\xspace & 7.5 & $-16$ & $22$ & $7$ & \cite{Aubert:2009ak} \\
& \mbox{LHCb}\xspace & 5300 & $8$ & $17$ & $9$ & \cite{LHCb-PAPER-2012-019} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Background suppression}
Backgrounds in \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ hadron \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation measurements generally divide into two categories: random combinations of particles produced in the underlying event (hadron collision or \ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace\ continuum), and backgrounds due to other \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace~hadron decays which are mistaken for the signal.
Combinatorial background is generally suppressed through topological selection criteria and the kinematic variables used to identify signal \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays.
In hadron collider experiments, the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace candidate mass is almost always used, as the good momentum resolution leads to a narrow peak for signal while the combinatorial background has a slowly varying shape.
In the \ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace\ environment, constraints from the known beam energies can be used, and it is typical to use the two almost uncorrelated variables $\Delta E$ and $m_{\rm ES}$.
The former is the difference between the energy of the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ candidate and $\sqrt{s}/2$ and is strongly correlated with the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace candidate mass, while $m_{\rm ES}=\sqrt{s/4-{\bf p}^2_\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace}$, where $\sqrt{s}$ is the total energy, ${\bf p}_\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace$ is the momentum of the candidate \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ meson, and all variables are determined in the centre-of-mass frame.
Backgrounds due to \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ hadron decays typically occur when another \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ hadron decay is partially reconstructed and the missing particle has low energy, for example $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^{*+}}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ as a background to $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$, or when a final state particle is misidentified, for example $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ as a background to $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$.
Partially reconstructed backgrounds have a lower reconstructed mass than the true mass of the decaying particle, with a distribution that is smeared depending on the missing energy.
Thus good $\Delta E$ resolution, which is ultimately dependent on good final state particle momentum resolution, is critical to reject such backgrounds in \ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace\ experiments.
Good resolution is also essential for hadron collider experiments, but the situation is more complicated since decays of higher mass \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ hadrons can lead to partially reconstructed backgrounds that peak near the signal region, \mbox{\itshape e.g.}\xspace\ $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ as a background to $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$ decays.
In most cases such backgrounds can be separated from the signal due to their different reconstructed mass distributions.
Further rejection of this type of background can be achieved, to some extent, through isolation criteria.
However, in some cases the residual background level must be estimated from the (absolute or relative) production rates of the relevant \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ hadrons, their branching fractions to the final states of interest, and the selection efficiencies.
For this reason, it is important for experiments to determine systematically the branching fractions of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ hadrons into all accessible final states.
Misidentified backgrounds are also shifted in \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace mass with respect to the signal, by an amount that depends on the correct and assumed particle-type hypotheses and on the particle's momentum.
Such backgrounds can be suppressed using particle identification, but typically remain at non-negligible levels after optimisation of selection criteria.
Knowledge of both the level and shape of these backgrounds in the reconstructed mass distribution are critical to reduce associated systematic uncertainties.
\subsubsection{Production and detection asymmetries}
In principle all experiments face issues due to production and detection asymmetries, though in many cases the effects are small enough to be negligible.
Although \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace and \ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace mesons are produced in pairs, and hence in equal numbers, at \ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace colliders, there is in principle a forward-backward asymmetry that arises due to electroweak interference effects.
When coupled with an asymmetric detector, this can result in a production asymmetry, as has been seen for $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace/\kern 0.2em\overline{\kern -0.2em \PD}{}\xspace$ production~\cite{delAmoSanchez:2011zza,Ko:2012pe}.
The effect is, however, suppressed by the resonant production of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace mesons in \ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace collisions and is negligible for all measurements to date.
Similarly, the production of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace and \ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace hadrons in $p\bar{p}$ collisions is symmetric, and therefore asymmetries are negligible.
The $pp$ collision environment, in contrast, does {\it a priori} introduce a production asymmetry, that may vary as a function of collision energy and of the kinematics of the produced \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace~hadron.
The asymmetry can be determined from the data, using control modes in which \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation can be assumed to be negligible.
Such determinations have been performed for various \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace~hadron species~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-042,LHCb-PAPER-2015-032}.
Since the effects are below the percent level, consistent with expectations~\cite{Norrbin:2000zc}, they concern only the most precise measurements.
The dominant source of detection asymmetries is the different interaction of positively and negatively charged particles with the detector material, which causes their reconstruction efficiencies to differ.
Because of their nature, detection asymmetries are difficult to simulate accurately and it is essential to measure them directly from the data for each experiment, typically using tag-and-probe techniques.
A control decay which can be selected with a good signal-to-background ratio
without reconstructing all final state tracks (tag) is required, and the detection asymmetry is measured from the efficiency to add the missing (probe) track.
A good example of this technique is the case of $\ensuremath{\D^{*+}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace(\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\pip\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace)\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$ decays, in which the near-threshold $\ensuremath{\D^{*+}}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace$ mass difference remains a powerful signal-to-background discriminant even when one of the four $\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace$ decay products is not reconstructed.
Similar methods can be applied for all stable charged particles.
In general, the most challenging asymmetries are those of protons, both because the difference in material interaction is largest and because tag-and-probe methods rely on decays of charmed baryons, which are less plentiful and less well-known than charmed mesons.
It is also possible to induce detection asymmetries through certain specific selection criteria, for example, because the calorimeter response may be different for positively or negatively charged electrons.
However, plentiful control samples exist for all particle species and consequently the only challenge is to select a control sample with the same kinematic and geometric distribution as the signal.
Detection asymmetries can also be minimised by reversing the polarity of the magnetic field; this is not possible for all detectors, but is the case in the \mbox{LHCb}\xspace and \mbox{D0}\xspace experiments.
Measurements of detection asymmetries are discussed for example in Refs.~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2012-009,LHCb-DP-2013-002,LHCb-PAPER-2014-013,LHCb-PAPER-2014-053,Lees:2015rka,Nakano:2005jb,Abazov:2013uma}.
\subsubsection{Decay-time measurement and flavour tagging}
Several important \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation observables can be determined from asymmetries in the decay-time distributions of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace and \ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace mesons to specific final states.
These measurements require precise determination of vertex positions, in order to determine the decay time, together with ``flavour tagging'', \mbox{\itshape i.e.}\xspace\ information on whether the decaying meson was in a \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace or \ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace state at the time it was tagged.
Silicon vertex detectors~\cite{Bozzi:2000ic,Natkaniec:2006rv,LHCb-DP-2014-001} are used to determine vertex positions.
In the case of experiments at $e^+e^-\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\Upsilon(4S)\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace$ colliders, the decay time is determined from the difference between the positions of the vertices of the two \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace mesons; the known boost of the $\Upsilon(4S)$ system in the laboratory frame caused by the asymmetric beam energies results in a linear relation between the vertex separation and the decay time difference.
Hence, $t$ (with range $0 \leq t \leq \infty$) is replaced with $\Delta t$ (with range $-\infty \leq \Delta t \leq \infty$) in Eqs.~(\ref{eg:tdcpv1}),~(\ref{eg:tdcpv2}), and~(\ref{eg:tdcpv-asym}).
For experiments at hadron colliders, the relevant quantity is instead the distance between the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson decay vertex and the primary collision vertex; the boost in this case is determined directly from measurement of the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace momentum vector.
Since selection of signal in the trigger often involves requirements on the displacement of the candidate \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace vertex, the efficiency can vary significantly as a function of decay time.
In certain analyses, this leads to a potential source of systematic uncertainty that is not relevant for experiments at $e^+e^-$ colliders.
There are distinct differences in the methods used for flavour tagging at $e^+e^-$ and hadron colliders.
In the former case, signatures that can indicate the flavour of the other \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson in the $\Upsilon(4S)\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace$ event are combined.
These include the charge of a lepton produced in a semileptonic \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decay and the charge of a kaon produced in the $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PK}\xspace$ decay sequence.
Multivariate techniques can be used to determine the optimum combination of the information that is available in any given event.
The relative preponderance and clarity of these signatures leads to good performance~\cite{Aubert:2002rg,Kakuno:2004cf}, as quantified in terms of the effective flavour tagging efficiency $\epsilon_{\rm eff} = \epsilon D^2$
where $\epsilon$ is the efficiency to obtain a tag and $D = 1-2w$ is the dilution caused by the probability $w$ to incorrectly determine the flavour.
However, the use of tags from decays which are not fully flavour-specific, such as $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^{*-}}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$, results in interference effects which lead to systematic uncertainties~\cite{Long:2003wq}.
Hadron collisions produce, in general, a large number of particles in addition to those from \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson decays, and therefore flavour tagging is more challenging.
The methods used can be characterised as either ``opposite-side'' or ``same-side'' taggers.
Opposite-side algorithms~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2011-027,LHCb-PAPER-2015-027} are similar in concept to those used in $e^+e^-$ colliders, and search for decay products of the other \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson produced from the primary collision.
Same-sign algorithms~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-056,LHCb-PAPER-2016-039} exploit the fact that additional particles are produced in the fragmentation processes that produces the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson of interest.
These are particularly useful for tagging \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mesons, since conservation of strangeness in strong interactions implies that an associated charged kaon can effectively tag the \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace flavour at production.
The effective tagging efficiency achieved depends on both whether a \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ or \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ decay is considered and on the kinematics (particularly the \mbox{$p_{\rm T}$}\xspace) of the selected decays, which may be affected for example by trigger requirements.
\subsection{Complementarity of experimental techniques}
Table~\ref{tab:gibson} summarises some key properties of hadron and $e^+e^-$ collider experiments relevant for measurements of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector.
It can be seen that the two kinds of environments complement each other: $e^+e^-$ collider experiments have much more powerful flavour tagging capabilities and are better able to study final states involving multiple neutral particles or missing energy.
On the other hand, hadron colliders provide access to all flavours of \ensuremath{\Pb}\xspace hadrons and generate much larger yields for final states involving only charged particles, especially leptons.
Because of this complementarity, a new generation of both hadron and $e^+e^-$ collider experiments is planned.
The \mbox{Belle}\xspace~II~\cite{Aushev:2010bq,Abe:2010gxa} and upgraded \mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-TDR-012,LHCb-PAPER-2012-031} experiments aim to begin data-taking within the next five years and will improve on their predecessor's integrated luminosity by around an order of magnitude, while maintaining or improving detector resolutions and particle identification performance.
In the further future, the Future Circular Collider (FCC) initiative is investigating possibilities for both \ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace~\cite{Gomez-Ceballos:2013zzn} and hadron colliders, operating at significantly higher energies than their \mbox{LEP}\xspace\ and \mbox{LHC}\xspace\ predecessors; the potential for $b$ physics at each of these is currently under active investigation.
\begin{table}[!htb]
\caption{
Summary of some relevant properties for $b$ physics in different experimental environments. Adapted from Ref.~\cite{Gershon:2013aca}.
}
\label{tab:gibson}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{p{3.8cm}p{4.2cm}@{\hspace{3mm}}cc}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
& $e^+e^- \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \Upsilon(4S) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace B\bar{B}$ & $p\bar{p} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace b\bar{b}X$ & $pp \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace b\bar{b}X$ \\
& & ($\sqrt{s} = 2 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Te\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace$) & ($\sqrt{s} = 13 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Te\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace$) \\
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{PEP-II, KEKB} & Tevatron & LHC \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Production & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$1 \ensuremath{\rm \,nb}\xspace$} & $\sim 100 \ensuremath{{\rm \,\upmu b}}\xspace$ & $\sim 500 \ensuremath{{\rm \,\upmu b}}\xspace$ \\
\multicolumn{1}{r}{cross-section} \\ [0.2ex]
Typical $b\bar{b}$ rate & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$10 \ensuremath{{\rm \,Hz}}\xspace$} & $\sim 100 \ensuremath{{\rm \,kHz}}\xspace$ & $\lsim 1 \ensuremath{{\rm \,MHz}}\xspace$ \\ [0.2ex]
Pile-up & \multicolumn{1}{c}{0} & 1.7 & 1--40 \\ [0.2ex]
Trigger efficiency & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$100\,\%$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$20$--$80\,\%$} \\ [0.2ex]
\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ hadron mixture & $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace\,(\sim 50\,\%)$, & \multicolumn{2}{l}{\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace (40\,\%), \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace (40\,\%), \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace (10\,\%),} \\
& \multicolumn{1}{r}{$\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace\,(\sim 50\,\%)$} & \multicolumn{2}{r}{$\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace$ (10\,\%), others ($<1\,\%$)} \\ [0.2ex]
\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ hadron boost & \multicolumn{1}{c}{small ($\beta\gamma \sim 0.5$)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{large ($\beta\gamma \sim 100$)} \\ [0.2ex]
Underlying event & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$B\ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace$ pair alone} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Many additional particles} \\ [0.2ex]
Production vertex & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Not reconstructed} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Reconstructed from many tracks} \\ [0.2ex]
$\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace$ pair production & Coherent & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Incoherent} \\
& \multicolumn{1}{r}{(from $\Upsilon(4S)$ decay)} \\ [0.2ex]
Effective flavour & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\sim 30\,\%$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\lsim 6\,\%$} \\
\multicolumn{1}{r}{tagging efficiency} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Global fits and future prospects}
\label{sec:fits}
As discussed throughout this review, studies of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector can be carried out with decays mediated by many different quark transitions.
A powerful way to probe the SM is through global fits which test the consistency of the different \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation measurements, both with each other and with \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace conserving quantities.
Since studies of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector allow all three angles of the Unitarity Triangle to be measured, and the two non-trivial lengths of sides can also be determined, the apex of the triangle, located at $(\ensuremath{\overline \rho}\xspace,\ensuremath{\overline \eta}\xspace)$ as defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:rhoetabar}), can be over-constrained.
Each measurement defines an allowed area, at a given confidence level, in the $(\ensuremath{\overline \rho}\xspace,\ensuremath{\overline \eta}\xspace)$ plane; within the SM all these areas must overlap at the true position of the apex of the Unitarity Triangle.
Any inconsistency between measurements would therefore indicate physics beyond the SM.
\subsection{Global fits to CKM matrix parameters}
\label{sec:fits-now}
There are two well-established collaborations who perform global fits to the CKM matrix parameters, differing in their preferred statistical treatment.
(Some other analyses have also been performed, \mbox{\itshape e.g.}\xspace\ those of Refs.~\cite{Lunghi:2008aa,Eigen:2013cv}, but will not be discussed in detail here.)
The CKMfitter~\cite{Charles:2004jd} collaboration uses a frequentist approach, while the UTFit~\cite{Bona:2006ah} collaboration uses a Bayesian method.
Both collaborations include the latest measurements of individual observables, as well as theory input, for example from lattice QCD calculations~\cite{Aoki:2013ldr}, required to interpret the experimental observables in terms of the CKM matrix elements.
The fit tests the overall consistency of the available results.
Typically, only the experimentally most precise and theoretically cleanest observables are included.
Among the observables related to \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace system, these include $\beta$ and $\beta_s$ from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions (see Sec.~\ref{sec:ccq}), $\gamma$ from interference between $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}s$ transitions (see Sec.~\ref{sec:gamma-tree-level}) and $\alpha$ from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}d$ transitions (see Sec.~\ref{sec:alpha}).
The lengths of the two sides of the Unitarity Triangle are obtained from the relative magnitudes of CKM matrix elements $\left| V^{}_{ub} / V^{}_{cb} \right|$, determined from semileptonic \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays~\cite{KowalewskiMannel}, and $\left| V^{}_{td} / V^{}_{ts} \right|$, determined from neutral \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson oscillation frequencies~\cite{Schneider}; in both cases calculations of relevant hadronic quantities are also needed.
The parameter of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation of $\ensuremath{\kaon^0}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Kbar^0}\xspace$ mixing, $\epsilon_K$, is also usually included and provides a constraint in the $(\ensuremath{\overline \rho}\xspace,\ensuremath{\overline \eta}\xspace)$ plane in the shape of a hyperbola~\cite{Buchalla:1995vs}.
The results of the most recent analyses from the CKMfitter and UTfit collaborations are reproduced in Fig.~\ref{fig:ckmfitterutfit}; both show excellent consistency with the SM picture.
It is worth noting, however, that another analysis~\cite{Blanke:2016bhf} using more recent lattice QCD calculations of hadronic parameters relevant to $\ensuremath{\B^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace$ mixing~\cite{Bazavov:2016nty}, indicates some tension in the fit.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{rhoeta_large_Vub.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{rhoeta-fullfit-sm.pdf}
\caption{
Results of the latest (left) CKMfitter~\cite{Charles:2004jd} and (right) UTFit~\cite{Bona:2006ah} global fits to the CKM matrix parameters, showing good agreement with the SM picture of quark transitions.
}
\label{fig:ckmfitterutfit}
\end{figure}
The agreement with the SM can be quantified by excluding direct measurements of one of the parameters as inputs to the fit, and comparing the prediction for that quantity, obtained from the fit results, to the measured value.
Comparison of the predicted and measured values of the angle $\gamma$ is particularly interesting, as the fit is dominated by quantities determined from loop-level processes, while the measurement is obtained from tree-level decays.
Therefore, an inconsistency could be interpreted as a sign of physics beyond the SM.
The latest predictions for $\gamma$ from the fits performed by the CKMfitter and UTFit collaborations are~\cite{Charles:2004jd,Bona:2006ah}
\begin{equation}
\gamma^{\rm CKMfitter} = (66.9\,^{+0.9}_{-3.4})^\circ \, , \qquad
\gamma^{\rm UTFit} = (69.5 \pm 3.9)^\circ \, ,
\end{equation}
and are consistent with the measurements given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:gammaAverages}).
\subsection{Constraints on physics beyond the Standard Model}
\label{sec:BSMconstraints}
The large number of constraints on the parameters of the CKM matrix allows more sophisticated analyses to be performed.
For example, under the assumption that there is no contribution from physics beyond the SM to tree-level decay amplitudes, the consistency of the different measurements allows constraints to be put on possible beyond SM contributions~\cite{Buras:2000dm,Bona:2006sa,Bona:2007vi,Lenz:2010gu}.
The results of such an analysis~\cite{Lenz:2012az} are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:BSMconstraints}.
The results are presented in terms of the real and imaginary parts of $\Delta_d$ and $\Delta_s$, which are the amplitudes for $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0_\squark}\xspace$ mixing, respectively, normalised to their SM expectations; thus, the SM point is at $(1,0)$.
The consistency with the SM is again evident, and can now be interpreted as giving constraints on additional contributions to the amplitudes $\Delta_{d,s}$ at the $5$--$10\,\%$ level, with similar precision in both $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0_\squark}\xspace$ systems.
Consequently, as discussed for example in Ref.~\cite{Isidori:2010kg}, if
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{d,s} = \Delta_{d,s}^{\rm SM} + \Delta_{d,s}^{\rm BSM} \, ,
\ {\rm and} \
\Delta_{d,s}^{\rm BSM} = c_{d,s}^{\rm BSM} / \left( \Lambda_{d,s}^{\rm BSM} \right)^2 \, ,
\end{equation}
then if the beyond SM coupling $c_{d,s}^{\rm BSM}$ is SM-like, \mbox{\itshape i.e.}\xspace\ with loop and CKM-suppression as in scenarios referred to as ``minimal flavour violation''~\cite{D'Ambrosio:2002ex}, then the scale $\Lambda_{d,s}^{\rm BSM}$ of the additional contribution must be a factor of at least a few above the SM scale.
On the other hand, in models where additional contributions enter with ${\cal O}(1)$ couplings, the scale must be ${\cal O}(10 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Te\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace)$ or higher.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{figs/NPmix_ReImDeltad-noASL.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{figs/NPmix_ReImDeltas-noASL.png}
\caption{
Constraints on contributions from physics beyond the SM to (left) $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace$ and (right) $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0_\squark}\xspace$ mixing~\cite{Charles:2004jd}.
The inclusive dimuon asymmetry result from the \mbox{D0}\xspace collaboration~\cite{Abazov:2013uma} (see Sec.~\ref{sec:SL}) is not included.
}
\label{fig:BSMconstraints}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Future prospects}
\label{sec:future}
Global fits to the CKM matrix parameters have established that the SM picture of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation holds at the $5$--$10\,\%$ level, and the challenge in the coming years will be to test this picture at the percent level.
This necessitates an order of magnitude improvement in experimental precision as well as strict control of theoretical uncertainties that are associated with the interpretation of experimental observables in terms of CKM matrix parameters.
The already approved \mbox{Belle}\xspace~II~\cite{Aushev:2010bq,Abe:2010gxa} and upgraded \mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-TDR-012,LHCb-PAPER-2012-031} experiments will deliver the necessary increase in recorded luminosity by the the mid-2020s, while \mbox{ATLAS}\xspace and \mbox{CMS}\xspace are expected to continue to contribute a few important measurements, in particular with decays such as $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\phi$ which have high trigger efficiencies.
There are also good prospects for further reduction of uncertainties associated to quantities obtained from lattice QCD calculations~\cite{Pena:2016xww}.
The expected evolution of the constraint on the apex of the Unitarity Triangle determined from tree-level processes only~\cite{Charles:2013aka} is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:ckmevol}.
The high precision that will be achieved will not only lead to much greater sensitivity to effects of physics beyond the SM in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0_\squark}\xspace$ mixing, but the larger number of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation parameters that will be measured will allow to search also for non-SM effects in the decay amplitudes.
Comparisons of the types of measurements mediated by different quark-level transitions, as outlined in Secs.~\ref{sec:tree-dominated}--\ref{sec:tree-penguin}, will enable the CKM paradigm to be tested at unprecedented precision.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.325\textwidth]{NPmix_rhoeta_Prosp13.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.325\textwidth]{NPmix_rhoeta_Prosp18.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.325\textwidth]{NPmix_rhoeta_Prosp23.png}
\caption{
Anticipated evolution of the fit to the CKM matrix using tree-level processes only, from (left) 2013 to projections for (middle) 2018 and (right) 2023~\cite{Charles:2013aka}.
Constraints from $\left| V^{}_{ub} \right|$ from rates of semileptonic \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays, $\gamma$ from interference between $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}s$ transitions and $\alpha$ from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}d$ transitions are shown, where the latter is interpreted as a constraint on $\gamma$ using $\alpha \equiv \pi - \beta - \gamma$ together with the measurement of $\beta$ from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions.
The limitations of each of these quantities is expected to come from different sources: for $\left| V^{}_{ub} \right|$ from the precision of lattice QCD calculations; for $\alpha$ from necessary approximations in the isospin analysis; for $\gamma$ from experimental uncertainty.
}
\label{fig:ckmevol}
\end{figure}
While measurements of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector form an important part of this programme, it must be stressed that there are many additional observables that provide complementary sensitivity to the parameters of the CKM matrix.
In addition to the rates of semileptonic decays and of neutral \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson oscillations, mentioned above, important constraints can also be obtained from rare \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson decays such as $\ensuremath{\B^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$~\cite{Blake:2015tda}.
The rare kaon decays, $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace \nu\bar{\nu}$ and $\KL \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace \nu\bar{\nu}$, also provide constraints on the apex of the Unitarity Triangle~\cite{Bryman:2011zz,Cirigliano:2011ny}.
Results on both modes are anticipated to be forthcoming in the next few years~\cite{NA62-10-07,Yamanaka:2012yma}, and will greatly add to the global fit to the CKM matrix parameters.
\subsection{Measurement of $\gamma$ exploiting interference between $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}s$ transitions}
\label{sec:gamma-tree-level}
\subsubsection{Methods based on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay}
\label{sec:gamma-tree-level:decay}
Interference between the tree-level $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}s$ transitions allows the angle $\gamma$ to be determined from \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay.
This is possible since, although the two transitions give different final states, for example $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$, interference occurs when the neutral \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace meson is reconstructed in a decay mode that is accessible to both, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma}.
It is important to note that, since only tree-level amplitudes are involved, the determination of $\gamma$ provides a SM benchmark measurement of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation, with essentially negligible theoretical uncertainty from higher-order electroweak amplitudes~\cite{Brod:2013sga}.
Small effects from mixing and \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the $\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace$ system can be included in the analysis, and are neglected in this discussion.
In the simplest case, where the \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace meson is reconstructed in a \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstate, the asymmetry of Eq.~(\ref{eq:acp-decay}) becomes
\begin{equation}
A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace} = \frac{\pm 2 \, r_B \sin(\delta_B) \sin(\gamma)} {1 + r_B^2 \pm 2 \, r_B \cos(\delta_B) \cos(\gamma)} \, ,
\label{eq:acp-gamma}
\end{equation}
where the $+$ ($-$) sign corresponds to \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even (-odd), $r_B$ is the ratio of the magnitudes of the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}s$ amplitudes and $\delta_B$ is their relative strong phase.
The parameter $r_B$ governs the possible size of interference effects between the two amplitudes.
In $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays, the expectation (confirmed by experiment) is $r_B \sim 0.10$ due to the magnitudes of relevant CKM matrix elements and the ``colour-suppression'' of the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}s$ amplitude which arises as the $s$~quark produced from the internal virtual $W$~boson must form a colour neutral object with the spectator $\bar{u}$~quark, as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma}(right).
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.495\textwidth]{figs/52000007.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.495\textwidth]{figs/52000006.pdf}
\caption{
Leading diagrams for $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays: (left) $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}s$ and (right) $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}s$ transitions.
}
\label{fig:gamma}
\end{figure}
The crucial feature of $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ (and similar) decays is that the neutral \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace meson can be reconstructed in different final states -- this provides the unique potential to determine a CKM phase from \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay with low theoretical uncertainty.
A two-body \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay final state $f$ introduces two new hadronic parameters ($r_D$ and $\delta_D$, which are, respectively, the ratio of the magnitudes and the relative phase of the amplitudes for $\ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace$ decay to $f$), leading to a modified version of Eq.~(\ref{eq:acp-gamma}):
\begin{equation}
A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace} = \frac{2 \, r_D r_B \sin(\delta_B + \delta_D) \sin(\gamma)} {r_D^2 + r_B^2 + 2 \, r_B r_D \cos(\delta_B + \delta_D) \cos(\gamma)} \, .
\label{eq:acp-gamma2}
\end{equation}
The hadronic parameters describing the \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay can be independently determined, either from samples of quantum-correlated $\psi(3770) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\kern 0.2em\overline{\kern -0.2em \PD}{}\xspace$ decays~\cite{Gronau:2001nr,Atwood:2002ak,Atwood:2003mj,Asner:2005wf} or from studies of charm mixing~\cite{Harnew:2013wea,Harnew:2014zla,HFAG}.
By combining this information with measurements of asymmetries and also rates in $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ processes with various different \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decays, sufficient independent constraints can be obtained to determined the three parameters $\gamma$, $r_B$ and $\delta_B$.
Multibody \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decays can also be used, in a similar way.
It has become conventional to refer to analyses of $B \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace DK$ decays with different \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace meson final states by the initials of authors of theory papers discussing their use.
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\item The use of \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decays to \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstates is referred to as the GLW method~\cite{Gronau:1990ra,Gronau:1991dp}.
Reasonably high yields can be obtained with the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even final states $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$, and results are available from several experiments~\cite{delAmoSanchez:2010ji,Abe:2006hc,Aaltonen:2009hz,LHCb-PAPER-2016-003}.
The \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-odd final states, such as $\KS\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$, are challenging to reconstruct in a hadronic collision environment, and therefore results are only available from the $\ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace$ \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace factory experiments \mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{delAmoSanchez:2010ji,Abe:2006hc}.
The world averages are~\cite{HFAG}
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace+}\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace) & = & +0.111 \pm 0.018\,, \nonumber \\
A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-}\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace) & = & -0.10 \pm 0.07\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The first average demonstrates \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay in these modes.
The most precise of the available results is that from LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-003}, illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:LHCb-PAPER-2016-003}.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{hidef_Fig4.png}
\caption{
Yields of (top) $\ensuremath{\B^\mp}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^\mp}\xspace$ and (bottom) $\ensuremath{\B^\mp}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^\mp}\xspace$ candidates in LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-003}, with fit projections overlaid.
The \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace mesons are reconstructed in the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ final state.
The \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetry, measured to be $A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace} = +0.097 \pm 0.018 \pm 0.009$ (including also $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays), can be seen as an excess in the $B \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace DK$ signal peak for (left) \ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace compared to (right) \ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace candidates.
}
\label{fig:LHCb-PAPER-2016-003}
\end{figure}
\item Some multibody decays have been found to be dominantly \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even, although they are not {\it a priori} \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstates.
This can be quantified in terms of the fractional \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even content $F_+$.
This quantity has been measured using CLEOc $\psi(3770) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\kern 0.2em\overline{\kern -0.2em \PD}{}\xspace$ data for three modes: $F_+(\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace) = 0.973 \pm 0.017$, $F_+(\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace) = 0.732 \pm 0.055$ and $F_+(\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace) = 0.737 \pm 0.028$ ~\cite{Malde:2015mha}.
It has been shown that such decays can be used to obtain information about $\gamma$ in a ``quasi-GLW'' analysis~\cite{Nayak:2014tea}, in which Eq~(\ref{eq:acp-gamma}) is modified to
\begin{equation}
A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace} = \frac{2 \,(2F_+-1)\, r_B \sin(\delta_B) \sin(\gamma)} {1 + r_B^2 + 2 \,(2F_+-1)\, r_B \cos(\delta_B) \cos(\gamma)} \, .
\label{eq:acp-gamma3}
\end{equation}
Such analyses have been performed by LHCb with the $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$, $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-014} and $\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-003} decays.
An earlier analysis with $\ensuremath{\B^\pm}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \left[ \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace \right]_\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$ decays by \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2007ii} had noted the dominantly \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even nature of the final state and measured $A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}$, whilst also using this information in an amplitude analysis.
\item The asymmetry of Eq.~(\ref{eq:acp-gamma2}) can be largest when $r_D \sim r_B$.
Therefore, it is particularly interesting to use doubly-Cabibbo-suppressed \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decays, such as $\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ for which $r_D \sim 0.06$~\cite{HFAG}, which is known as the ADS method~\cite{Atwood:1996ci,Atwood:2000ck}.
The fact that the $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \left[ \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace \right]_\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ final state involves only charged tracks makes this channel accessible to several experiments~\cite{delAmoSanchez:2010dz,Belle:2011ac,Aaltonen:2011uu,LHCb-PAPER-2016-003}.
The world average is~\cite{HFAG}
\begin{equation}
A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \left[ \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace \right]_\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace) = -0.41 \pm 0.06 \, ,
\end{equation}
representing a significant \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace\ violation effect in this mode.
\item Multibody doubly-Cabibbo-suppressed \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decays can be used in an extension of the ADS method~\cite{Atwood:2000ck}.\footnote{
Since Ref.~\cite{Atwood:2000ck} describes the use of multibody \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decays, this is considered part of the ADS method rather than a ``quasi-ADS'' approach.
}
Similarly to the quasi-GLW method, additional hadronic parameters are introduced in a modified version of Eq.~(\ref{eq:acp-gamma2}),
\begin{equation}
A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace} = \frac{2 \,\kappa\, r_D r_B \sin(\delta_B + \delta_D) \sin(\gamma)} {r_D^2 + r_B^2 + 2 \,\kappa\, r_B r_D \cos(\delta_B + \delta_D) \cos(\gamma)} \, .
\label{eq:acp-gamma4}
\end{equation}
where the coherence factor $\kappa$ quantifies the dilution of the asymmetry due to interference between different resonances in the multibody final state ($0 < \kappa < 1$).
The parameters $r_D$ and $\delta_D$ also become effective parameters, averaged over the phase space of the decay.
Multibody ADS analyses have been performed by \mbox{BaBar}\xspace, \mbox{Belle}\xspace and LHCb for $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \left[ \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace \right]_\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{Lees:2011up,Nayak:2013tgg,LHCb-PAPER-2015-014} and by LHCb for $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \left[ \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace \right]_\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-003}.
\item In the case of \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay to a multibody self-conjugate final state that is not dominated by one \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstate, the distribution of decays over the phase space provides additional sensitivity to $\gamma$.
The study of this distribution can be performed either with an amplitude model for the \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay or model-independently; either approach is referred to as the GGSZ method~\cite{Giri:2003ty,Bondar}.
In the former case, the choice of amplitude model results in a systematic uncertainty that is hard to quantify.
In the model-independent analysis the phase space (described by a Dalitz plot in the case of three-body decays) is binned, and the method requires knowledge of the average cosine and sine of the strong phase difference between amplitudes for $\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\Dbar^0}\xspace$ decays to points within each bin~\cite{Giri:2003ty,Bondar:2005ki,Bondar:2008hh}.
Such knowledge can be obtained from $\psi(3770) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\kern 0.2em\overline{\kern -0.2em \PD}{}\xspace$ samples, with results available from CLEOc~\cite{Briere:2009aa,Libby:2010nu}.
The limited precision of these measurements leads to a systematic uncertainty on $\gamma$ which, however, often appears as part of the statistical error since it is experimentally convenient to constrain these hadronic parameters within uncertainties through a Gaussian penalty term in the likelihood function used in the fits.
The GGSZ method gives good sensitivity to $\gamma$ as it combines the strong features of the GLW and ADS approaches in channels with relatively large yields available.
For example, in $\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays there are contributions from the singly-Cabibbo-suppressed decay to the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstate $\KS\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace$ and from the doubly-Cabibbo-suppressed decay to $\ensuremath{\kaon^{*+}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$, and interference between these resonances not only enhances the sensitivity, but allows ambiguities in the determination of $\gamma$ to be resolved.
In fact, unlike most other methods, the value of $\gamma$ can be determined directly in the GGSZ method, but it has become conventional for experiments to fit instead for the parameters $x_\pm$, $y_\pm$ where
\begin{equation}
x_\pm + i y_\pm = r_B \exp \left\{ i (\delta_B \pm \gamma)\right\}\,.
\label{eq:xy}
\end{equation}
These parameters are statistically more robust, and allow for more straightforward combination with results from other methods.
Model-dependent results for $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \left[ \KS\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace \right]_\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ are available from \mbox{BaBar}\xspace, \mbox{Belle}\xspace and LHCb~\cite{delAmoSanchez:2010rq,Poluektov:2010wz,LHCb-PAPER-2014-017} (the \mbox{BaBar}\xspace analysis also uses the $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decay).
The model-independent approach has been used by \mbox{Belle}\xspace and LHCb~\cite{Aihara:2012aw,LHCb-PAPER-2014-041}, in the former case using $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ only, and in the latter including also the $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decay.
The experimental results are summarised in Table~\ref{tab:GGSZ} and illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:GGSZ}.
The averages are more precise in the model-dependent case, and are~\cite{HFAG}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{c@{\qquad}c}
x_+ = -0.098 \pm 0.024 \, , & y_+ = -0.036 \pm 0.030 \, , \\
x_- = \phantom{-}0.070 \pm 0.025 \, , & y_- = \phantom{-}0.075 \pm 0.029 \, ,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where the effect of model dependence has been neglected since it is not known how much uncertainty should be applied to the average (the uncertainties assigned by \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{delAmoSanchez:2010rq} and \mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-017} are an order of magnitude smaller than those assigned by \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Poluektov:2010wz}).
If this problem is overlooked, corresponding to negligible model dependence, the results demonstrate \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays.
\item A final category of hadronic \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decays contains singly-Cabibbo-suppressed transitions to non-self-conjugate final states, for example $\ensuremath{\D^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{*\pm}}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\mp}\xspace$.
These modes can be studied in the GLS approach~\cite{Grossman:2002aq}.
One experimental result is available from LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-068}.
Until now, the yields available in the relevant channels make this method less statistically sensitive than the others.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[!htb]
\centering
\caption{
Results from $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ GGSZ analyses.
For the model-dependent analyses the third uncertainty is due to the choice of \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay model, while for the model-independent analyses the third uncertainty arises from the precision of the constraints of the hadronic parameters describing the average strong phase difference in each Dalitz plot bin.
Note that the data samples used in the model-dependent and -independent analyses by each experiment are overlapping, and therefore the results are not statistically independent.
}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
& \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{delAmoSanchez:2010rq} & \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Poluektov:2010wz,Aihara:2012aw} & LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-017,LHCb-PAPER-2014-041} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{Model-dependent} \\
$x_+$ & $-0.103 \pm 0.037 \pm 0.006 \pm 0.007$ & $-0.107 \pm 0.043 \pm 0.011 \pm 0.055$ & $-0.084 \pm 0.045 \pm 0.009 \pm 0.005$ \\
$y_+$ & $-0.021 \pm 0.048 \pm 0.004 \pm 0.009$ & $-0.067 \pm 0.059 \pm 0.018 \pm 0.063$ & $-0.032 \pm 0.048 \,^{+0.010}_{-0.009} \pm 0.008$ \\
$x_-$ & $\phantom{-}0.060 \pm 0.039 \pm 0.007 \pm 0.006$ & $\phantom{-}0.105 \pm 0.047 \pm 0.011 \pm 0.064$ & $\phantom{-}0.027 \pm 0.044 \,^{+0.010}_{-0.008} \pm 0.001$ \\
$y_-$ & $\phantom{-}0.062 \pm 0.045 \pm 0.004 \pm 0.006$ & $\phantom{-}0.177 \pm 0.060 \pm 0.018 \pm 0.054$ & $\phantom{-}0.013 \pm 0.048 \,^{+0.009}_{-0.007} \pm 0.003$ \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{Model-independent} \\
$x_+$ & & $-0.110 \pm 0.043 \pm 0.014 \pm 0.007$ & $-0.077 \pm 0.024 \pm 0.010 \pm 0.004$ \\
$y_+$ & & $-0.050 \,^{+0.052}_{-0.055} \pm 0.011 \pm 0.007$ & $-0.022 \pm 0.025 \pm 0.004 \pm 0.010$ \\
$x_-$ & & $\phantom{-}0.095 \pm 0.045 \pm 0.014 \pm 0.010$ & $\phantom{-}0.025 \pm 0.025 \pm 0.010 \pm 0.005$ \\
$y_-$ & & $\phantom{-}0.137 \,^{+0.053}_{-0.057} \pm 0.015 \pm 0.023$ & $\phantom{-}0.075 \pm 0.029 \pm 0.005 \pm 0.014$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\label{tab:GGSZ}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{figs/D_DalitzKxvsy.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{figs/D_DalitzKmodIndxvsy.pdf}
\caption{
Compilation of (left) model-dependent and (right) model-independent results from GGSZ analyses of $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{HFAG}.
The plotted variables $x_\pm$ and $y_\pm$ are defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:xy});
the angle between the two lines from the positions of $(x_\pm,y_\pm)$ to the origin is equal to twice the value of $\gamma$.
Note that in the model-dependent case the average is performed without including the model uncertainty.
}
\label{fig:GGSZ}
\end{figure}
In addition to there being numerous \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay final states to consider, there are also strong reasons to include additional \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays.
Each \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decay has its own hadronic parameters $r_B$ and $\delta_B$, but as well as contributing to the reduction of statistical uncertainty, certain decays have particular advantageous features that can be exploited.
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\item In $B \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D^*K$ decays, there is an effective strong phase shift of $\pi$ between the $D^*$ decays to $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\gamma$~\cite{Bondar:2004bi}.
This must be accounted for in any analysis involving $D^*$ decays, but is particularly beneficial for the ADS method since it provides additional constraints on the phase $\gamma$.
Results based on $B \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D^*K$ decays are available with the GLW, ADS and GGSZ methods from \mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2008ay,Lees:2011up,Abe:2006hc,delAmoSanchez:2010rq,Poluektov:2010wz}.
These modes are challenging for experiments at hadron colliders.
\item The value of $r_B$ is expected to be larger in neutral \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson decays to $DK$, compared to that for charged \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson decays, as both amplitudes are colour-suppressed: the expectation is $r_B \sim 0.3$.
In $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ decays, the charge of the kaon in the $\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decay provides a tag of the flavour of the decaying \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson~\cite{Dunietz:1991yd}.
Thus initial state flavour tagging, which would lead to a reduction in sensitivity, is not required.
However, the finite width of the $\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ resonance means that other contributions to the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ Dalitz plot can enter the selection window.
Consequently an additional hadronic parameter must be included in the analysis in a similar way to the coherence factor of Eq.~(\ref{eq:acp-gamma4}), and the quantities $r_B$ and $\delta_B$ become effective parameters corresponding to the region of the $\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ Dalitz plot particular to the $\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ selection requirements~\cite{Gronau:2002mu}.
Results on $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ decays are available from \mbox{BaBar}\xspace, \mbox{Belle}\xspace and LHCb with GLW, ADS and GGSZ methods~\cite{Aubert:2009ao,Negishi:2012uxa,LHCb-PAPER-2014-028,Aubert:2008yn,Negishi:2015vqa,LHCb-PAPER-2016-006,LHCb-PAPER-2016-007}.
\item The methodology of Ref.~\cite{Gronau:2002mu} can be extended to any $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace X_s$ decay, where $X_s$ is a charged or neutral hadronic system with unit strangeness.
Results on $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^{*-}}\xspace$ have been presented by \mbox{BaBar}\xspace and \mbox{Belle}\xspace using GLW, ADS and GGSZ methods~\cite{Aubert:2009yw,delAmoSanchez:2010rq,Poluektov:2006ia}, but the comparatively small yields available limit the sensitivity achievable.
LHCb has presented results on $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-020}, which appears to be a promising channel.
\item The $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ analysis can be extended by using an amplitude model to fit the full $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ Dalitz plot~\cite{Gershon:2008pe,Gershon:2009qc}.
In this case interference between $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D_2^*(2460)^-\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ can be exploited to obtain additional sensitivity and to break ambiguities in the determination of $\gamma$.
LHCb have obtained results with this method using favoured $D\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$ decays as well as the $D\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ modes~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-017,LHCb-PAPER-2015-059}.
The results of the analysis include values for the $x_\pm, y_\pm$ parameters for $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ decays as well as determinations of the hadronic parameters for this channel.
\item In addition to GLW- and ADS-like analyses of the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ Dalitz plot distribution, a double Dalitz plot analysis of $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \left[ \KS\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace \right]_\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ (and similar) decays is possible~\cite{Gershon:2009qr}.
In this case, it is possible to perform the analysis without model assumptions for both the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace and \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay Dalitz plots.
This approach, however, requires large samples and has not yet been pursued experimentally.
\item Interference between the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}d$ transitions contributing to $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays can, in principle, be used to determine parameters sensitive to $\gamma$ in a similar way as for $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays.
However, the expected small size of the interference effect ($r_B \sim 0.01$) makes this approach in general less statistically sensitive, and more susceptible to systematic biases.
An exception arises for the ADS method, as $r_D$ and $r_B$ are still of comparable magnitude.
Such analyses have been carried out with $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D^{(*)}\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays by several experiments~\cite{delAmoSanchez:2010dz,Belle:2011ac,Aaltonen:2011uu,LHCb-PAPER-2016-003,Nayak:2013tgg,LHCb-PAPER-2015-014}.
In fact, it is becoming common for the experiments to report results with $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays also for the GLW and GGSZ methods, and to include these channels in combinations to determine $\gamma$ (\mbox{\itshape e.g.}\xspace in Refs.~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-020,LHCb-PAPER-2016-032}).
Even if $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays have less sensitivity to $\gamma$, the inclusion of these modes is valuable to obtain the best possible precision and to ensure that subleading effects are correctly handled.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Methods based on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in interference between mixing and decay}
\label{sec:gamma-tree-level:mix}
The \ensuremath{\Bbar^0_\squark}\xspace meson can decay to both $\ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace$ final states, through $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}s$ transitions respectively.
Since different final states are involved, there is no \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay, but instead the parameters of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the interference between mixing in decay, given in Eq.~(\ref{eg:tdcpv1})--(\ref{eq:ACS-defs}), are sensitive to $\gamma - 2\beta_s$~\cite{Aleksan:1991nh,Dunietz:1997in,Fleischer:2003yb}.
If $\gamma$ were well-known from other processes, results on $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^{\mp}_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$ could therefore be used to obtain a determination of $\beta_s$ using only tree-level decays.
Since this is not the case, but instead $\beta_s$ is well-known from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions, the results are more commonly interpreted in terms of $\gamma$.
Similar determinations are possible in related processes -- for example \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in interference between mixing and decay in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^{(*)\mp}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$ processes, which are mediated by $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}d$ transitions, probes $2\beta+\gamma$.
Indeed, the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^{\mp}_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^\mp}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$ processes are related to U-spin, and therefore the measurements can combined in a joint analysis~\cite{Fleischer:2003yb} in order to better control the hadronic parameters.
This, however, results in only a small~\cite{Gligorov:1106345} improvement on the knowledge of $\gamma$ which could be obtained from $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^{\mp}_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$ alone.
Due to the small value of $\Delta \Gamma_d$, the only relevant observables in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^{(*)\mp}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$ decays are $S_f$ and $S_{\bar{f}}$ which depend on $2 R_{\ensuremath{\D^{(*)}}\xspace\pi} \sin(2\beta+\gamma \pm \delta_{\ensuremath{\D^{(*)}}\xspace\pi})$.
The ratio of magnitudes of $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{c}d$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{u}d$ amplitudes, $R_{\ensuremath{\D^{(*)}}\xspace\pi}$, has large CKM suppression and is expected to be about $0.02$, making the deviation of $\left| C_f \right|$ and $\left| C_{\bar{f}} \right|$ from unity unobservably small.
In addition the strong phase difference between the two amplitudes, $\delta_{\ensuremath{\D^{(*)}}\xspace\pi}$ must be determined from the data.
Since there are only two observables that depend on three unknown quantities, it is necessary to use additional information, for example exploiting flavour symmetry relations to constrain $R_{\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\pi}$ from the measured branching fraction of $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$~\cite{Dunietz:1997in}.
Such an approach however introduces theoretical uncertainty due to breaking of the SU(3) flavour symmetry.
Moreover, there are discrete ambiguities in the solutions for $2\beta+\gamma$.
Measurements have been made of the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation parameters in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^\mp}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$~\cite{Aubert:2006tw,Ronga:2006hv}, $\ensuremath{\D^{*\mp}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$~\cite{Aubert:2005yf,Aubert:2006tw,Ronga:2006hv,Bahinipati:2011yq} and $\ensuremath{\D^\mp}\xspace\ensuremath{\rhomeson^\pm}\xspace$~\cite{Aubert:2006tw} decays.
The samples of $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^{*\mp}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$ decays available are increased by use of a partial reconstruction technique~\cite{Aubert:2005yf,Bahinipati:2011yq}, and the average of results in this mode provides evidence for a significant \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effect.
It is not, however, as yet possible to obtain strong constraints on $2\beta+\gamma$.
In the case of $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^{\mp}_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$ decays, the ratio $R_{D_sK}$ is expected to be around $0.3$--$0.4$, allowing the full set of observables in Eq.~(\ref{eg:tdcpv1})--(\ref{eq:ACS-defs}) to be determined from the four decay-time-dependent decay rates.
They are related to the physics parameters $\gamma-2\beta_s$, $\delta_{D_sK}$ and $R_{D_sK}$ by
\begin{equation}
\arraycolsep=1.4pt\def1.5{1.5}
\label{eq:dskobservables}
\begin{array}{r@{\ }c@{\ }l@{\qquad}r@{\ }c@{\ }l}
C_{f} & = & - C_{\bar{f}} = \frac{1-R_{D_sK}^2}{1+R_{D_sK}^2} \,, \\
A_{f}^{\Delta \Gamma} & = & \frac{-2 R_{D_sK} \cos(\gamma-2\beta_s-\delta_{D_sK})}{1+R_{D_sK}^2} \,, &
A_{\bar{f}}^{\Delta \Gamma} & = & \frac{-2 R_{D_sK} \cos(\gamma-2\beta_s+\delta_{D_sK})}{1+R_{D_sK}^2} \,, \\
S_{f} & = & \frac{-2 R_{D_sK}\sin(\gamma-2\beta_s-\delta_{D_sK})}{1+R_{D_sK}^2} \,, &
S_{\bar{f}} & = & \frac{-2 R_{D_sK}\sin(\gamma-2\beta_s+\delta_{D_sK})}{1+R_{D_sK}^2} \,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
In this case the sinusoidal and hyperbolic observables result in staggered constraints in the $\delta_{D_sK}:(\gamma -2\beta_s)$ plane,
and consequently their combination results in only a twofold ambiguity in the measured value of $\gamma -2\beta_s$.
The observables have been measured by LHCb using the $1\ensuremath{\mbox{\,fb}^{-1}}\xspace$ sample collected in 2011, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:PAPER-2014-038}, to be~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-038}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{r@{\ }c@{\ }l@{\qquad}r@{\ }c@{\ }l}
C_{f} & = & \phantom{-}0.53\pm0.25\pm0.04 \, , \\
A_{f}^{\Delta \Gamma} & = & \phantom{-}0.37\pm0.42\pm0.20 \, , &
A_{\bar{f}}^{\Delta \Gamma} & = & \phantom{-}0.20\pm0.41\pm0.20 \, ,\\
S_{f} & = & -1.09\pm0.33\pm0.08 \, , &
S_{\bar{f}} & = & -0.36\pm0.34\pm0.08 \, ,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic.
From an experimental point of view, the key difficulty is the fact that the hyperbolic observables $A_{f}^{\Delta \Gamma}$ and $A_{\bar{f}}^{\Delta \Gamma}$ require precise knowledge of the variation with decay time of the selection efficiency, which is reflected in the larger systematic uncertainties on those observables.
This can, however, be reduced in future using the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$ decay as a control channel.
The results do not yet give strong constraints on $\gamma-2\beta_s$, but reduction in uncertainty is expected when larger data samples are analysed.
It is anticipated that it will also be possible to use $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^{*\mp}_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-008} to help reduce the uncertainty.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth]{figs/PAPER-2014-038-Fig6c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth]{figs/PAPER-2014-038-Fig6d.pdf}
\caption{
Decay-time-dependent asymmetries of Eq.~(\ref{eg:tdcpv-asym}) for (left) $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^+_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ and (right) $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-038}.
To improve the visualisation the decay-time has been folded by $2\pi/\Delta m_s$.
}
\label{fig:PAPER-2014-038}
\end{figure}
In addition to the two-body decays discussed above, similar methods can be applied to multibody final states.
In such cases additional interference effects arise due to the different resonances that contribute to the decay, potentially leading to enhanced sensitivity.
For example, a decay-time-dependent analysis of the Dalitz plot distribution of $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^\mp}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$ decays can be used to determine $2\beta+\gamma$~\cite{Aleksan:2002mh}.
Unfortunately, the available yields do not allow a useful constraint~\cite{Aubert:2007qe}.
Similarly, the proposal to study \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{Nandi:2011uw} requires much larger samples than are available at present~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2012-018}.
\subsubsection{Combined constraints on $\gamma$}
\label{sec:gamma-tree-level:combo}
For a specific \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decay, the methods discussed above are all sensitive to the same underlying parameters: $\gamma$ and the hadronic parameters $r_B$ and $\delta_B$.
The different methods introduce additional hadronic parameters related to the \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace decay used, but these are known from independent measurements, typically from quantum-correlated $\psi(3770)\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\Dbar}\xspace$ samples.
Therefore, the best sensitivity to $\gamma$, and the hadronic parameters, can be achieved by combining results from as many different methods as possible.
Similarly, it is desirable to include \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays to different final states ($D\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$, $D\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$, $\ensuremath{\D^*}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$, \mbox{\itshape etc.}\xspace), as long as there are sufficient measurements in each mode to compensate for the additional hadronic parameters introduced.
Such combinations have been performed by \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Lees:2013nha}, \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Trabelsi:2013uj} and \mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-020,LHCb-PAPER-2016-032}, each using only their own results, together with auxiliary data on the hadronic parameters in charm decays, as inputs.
The results are
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gammaAverages}
\gamma = \left\{
\begin{array}{c@{\quad}c}
\left(69 \,^{+17}_{-16}\right)^\circ & \mbox{BaBar}\xspace \, ,\\
\left(68 \,^{+15}_{-14}\right)^\circ & \mbox{Belle}\xspace \, ,\\
\left(72.2^{+6.8}_{-7.3}\right)^\circ & \mbox{LHCb}\xspace \, .\\
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
Two-dimensional contours for $\gamma$ versus the hadronic parameter $r_B$ in $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ decays, obtained by LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-032}, are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lhcbgamma}.
The world average, combining results from all experiments, gives $\gamma = (71.3\,^{+5.7}_{-6.1})^\circ$~\cite{HFAG}.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{PAPER-2016-032-Fig2a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{PAPER-2016-032-Fig2d.pdf}
\caption{
Two-dimensional contours for $\gamma$ versus the hadronic parameter $r_B$ in (left) $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ and (right) $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-032}.
The obtained constraints on the hadronic parameters are $r_B^{DK} = 0.1019 \pm 0.0056$ and $r_B^{D\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace} = 0.218 \,^{+0.045}_{-0.047}$.
}
\label{fig:lhcbgamma}
\end{figure}
As mentioned above, it is also possible to include results from $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays.
In this case, however, the smaller value of $r_B$ makes the determination of $\gamma$ more sensitive to effects due to charm mixing~\cite{Silva:1999bd,Grossman:2005rp,Rama:2013voa}.
Biases are also possible due to \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the kaon or charm systems, although these are not important effects with the current precision.
Since the fractional uncertainty on $r_B$ in $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays is larger compared to the $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace D\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ case, the analysis is less statistically robust, and more dependent on the choice of framework used for the combination (such as frequentist or Bayesian).
For these reasons, results from $\ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PD}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays are often excluded from the combinations, as here.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Among the possible discrete symmetries of nature, the combined symmetry under charge conjugation ($C$) and parity ($P$) is particularly interesting.
The $C$ operation conjugates all internal quantum numbers, and therefore transforms particles into antiparticles and vice versa, while under $P$ all spatial co-ordinates are inverted.
Violation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace symmetry allows an absolute distinction between matter and antimatter to be made~\cite{Landau:1957tp,Okubo:1958zza}, and is a prerequisite for the evolution of a matter dominated universe~\cite{Sakharov:1967dj}.
The observation of the long-lived neutral kaon decaying to two charged pions provided the first experimental observation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation~\cite{Christenson:1964fg}.
Among the various ideas put forward to explain these phenomena, only that proposed by Kobayashi and Maskawa~\cite{Kobayashi:1973fv} has survived the test of time, and is now an integral part of the Standard Model (SM).
By extending the quark mixing concept of Cabibbo~\cite{Cabibbo:1963yz} to include three quark pairs (or ``families''), a single irreducible phase appears and gives rise to \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation.
The phase of the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix is the sole source of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the Standard Model.
Therefore, all possible \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violating observables in the quark sector are related to this single quantity, which allows for a wide range of tests of the SM predictions to be made.
Remarkably, the theory has survived all such tests to date.
In particular, there are a wide range of observables in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector, \mbox{\itshape i.e.}\xspace\ with particles involving \ensuremath{\Pb}\xspace quarks, that are useful to test the SM predictions for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation.
It is the purpose of this review to describe these observables, giving both the current experimental status as well as future prospects.
It is a striking feature of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector that many of the experimental measurements can be interpreted without the need for detailed calculation of hadronic effects in the initial and final states.
Consequently, the review is focussed on experimental aspects, with only brief discussions of the relevant theoretical methods given at appropriate places.
Progress in theory that proceeds in parallel with improved experimental measurements is, of course, nonetheless essential.
Reviews of theoretical methods appropriate for \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace physics can be found in Refs.~\cite{Hocker:2006xb,Antonelli:2009ws,Artuso:2015swg}.
It must be stressed that the purpose of ongoing investigations into \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector is not simply to measure the SM parameters ever more precisely, but to uncover evidence of physics beyond the SM.
In addition to the general arguments that lead to an expectation for discoveries of non-SM physics in the near future (see, for example, Ref.~\cite{Feng:2013pwa}), it is known that the SM cannot explain the baryon asymmetry of the Universe~\cite{Morrissey:2012db} and therefore new sources of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation must exist.
There is, however, no guarantee that the new \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation will be observable in \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace physics, and it is important to search also in other areas.
Nonetheless, since the precision of current \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace physics measurements is still far from the limiting theoretical uncertainties for many important observables, there is a window of possible discovery that must be thoroughly investigated.
Moreover, the rapidly increasing size of the available data samples provides good prospects for discoveries in the next 5--10 years.
While this review is intended to be self-contained, it is impossible to include details of all of the huge range of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace system \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation measurements that have been proposed and performed.
Detailed reviews of quark flavour physics can be found in Refs.~\cite{Antonelli:2009ws,HFAG,Blake:2015tda,NirGershon,PDG2016}, and extensive discussions of the physics programmes of various \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace physics experiments in Refs.~\cite{Brodzicka:2012jm,Bevan:2014iga,Browder:2008em,Aushev:2010bq,LHCb-PAPER-2012-031}.
The reader may also be interested in recent reviews on kaon~\cite{Bryman:2011zz,Cirigliano:2011ny} or charm~\cite{Artuso:2008vf,Gersabeck:2012rp} physics, on the strong \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace problem~\cite{Peccei:2006as,Kim:2008hd} and searches for electric dipole moments~\cite{Engel:2013lsa}, or on prospects for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation measurements in the lepton sector~\cite{Nunokawa:2007qh,Branco:2011zb}.
The remainder of the review is organised as follows.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:theory} the notations and conventions for discussion of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects are described.
Sec.~\ref{sec:experiment} gives an overview of the experimental facilities and techniques that are used for measurements of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation parameters.
Sections~\ref{sec:tree-dominated}--\ref{sec:tree-penguin} contain descriptions of the current status of measurements, organised by quark-level process.
A dedicated, though brief, discussion of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects in $b$ baryon decays in given in Sec.~\ref{sec:baryons}.
The combination of experimental results in global fits is reviewed in Sec.~\ref{sec:fits}, where a discussion of future prospects is also given.
Finally, a summary can be found in Sec.~\ref{sec:summary}.
\section{Introduction: file preparation and submission}
The \verb"iopart" \LaTeXe\ article class file is provided to help authors prepare articles for submission to the IOP journals. Submission is not restricted to those using of this class file and articles prepared using any other class or style files can also be submitted. Use of the \verb"iopart" class file does, however, help to speed the publication process and it is hoped it will make it easy for authors to prepare their articles. This document describes and demonstrates the use of \verb"iopart.cls" to produce a preprint for submission and refereeing. The detailed formatting for print and web use will be undertaken by IOP as part of the production process after the article has been accepted for publication, but use of \verb"iopart" does make this simpler.
\subsection{What you will need to supply}
Full details on how to submit files to a particular IOP journal are contained in the document {\it Guidelines for authors} which is discussed in section \ref{agide}. Here we mention the key points you need to consider when preparing your files for submission.
\subsubsection{{\bf Text}} The \LaTeX\ source code of your paper with all figures included in
the source code (see section \ref{figinc}). Although we recommend that authors use the \verb"iopart" class file, articles prepared using almost any version of \TeX\ or \LaTeX\
can be handled.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Using \LaTeX\ packages} Most \LaTeXe\ packages can be used if they are
available in the normal distribution of \LaTeXe; however, if it is essential to use
a non-standard package then any extra files needed to process the article must
also be sent in. Authors should be aware that the final version will be printed on
a different page size and using different fonts to the preprint version so that any
special effects used should not contain material that is not easily scalable.
Alterations to the source code will be made during the production process in order to
conform to IOP house style and journal format.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{\bf Figures} Figures must be included in an article as encapsulated PostScript files
(see section \ref{figinc}) or created using standard \LaTeX\ drawing commands.
Please name all figure files using the guidelines in section \ref{fname}. For more detail
on preparation of EPS figure files, please refer to IOP's graphics guidelines ({\it Preparing graphics for IOP journals})
which can be downloaded from authors.iop.org.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Including figures\label{fig1}} All figures can be included within the body of the text
at an appropriate point or grouped together with their captions at the end of the article. A standard graphics inclusion package such as \verb"graphicx" should be used for figure inclusion.
Authors should avoid using special effects generated by including verbatim
PostScript code. Wherever possible, please try to use standard \LaTeX\ tools
and packages.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{\bf BiBTeX \label{bibby}} If you use BiBTeX to prepare your
references, our preferred \verb".bst" styles are:
\begin{itemize}
\item for the numerical (Vancouver) reference style we recommend that authors use
\verb"unsrt.bst";
\item for alphabetic (Harvard) style reference we recommend that authors use
the \verb"jphysicsB.bst" BiBTeX style file together with the harvard \LaTeX\ package.
\verb"jphysicsB.bst" is supplied as part of the \verb"harvard.sty" package which can be
downloaded from www.ctan.org.
\end{itemize}
Please make sure that you include your .bib bibliographic database file(s) and any
.bst style file(s) you have used (other than unsrt.bst or jphysicsB.bst).
\subsubsection{\bf Copyrighted material} If you wish to illustrate your article using material for which you do not own the copyright then you must seek permission from the copyright holder, usually both the author and the publisher. It is the author's responsibility to obtain copyright permissions and this should be done prior to submitting your article. If you have obtained permission, please provide full details of the permission granted---for example, copies of the text of any e-mails or a copy of any letters you may have received. Figure captions must include an acknowledgment of the original source of the material even when permission to use has been obtained. Full details on copyright can be found in IOP's {\it Guidelines for authors} which can be accessed online at authors.iop.org.
\subsection{Naming your files}
Please name all your files, both figures and text as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item use only characters from the set a to z, A to Z, 0 to 9 and underscore (\_);
\item do not use spaces in file names;
\item include an extension to indicate the file type (e.g., .tex, .eps, .txt, etc);
\item do not use any accented characters in file names; for example, \'a, \^e, \~n, \"o, etc because
they can cause difficulties when processing your files.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{\label{fname}Naming your figure files} In addition to the above points, please give each figure file a name which indicates the number of the figure it contains; for example, figure1.eps, figure2a.eps etc. If the figure file contains a figure with multiple parts, for example figure 2(a) to 2(e), give it a name such as figure2a\_2e.eps, and so forth.
\subsection{Submitting your article files to an IOP journal}
For most IOP journals you send your files directly to us by web, e-mail or FTP; however, there are a number of exceptions to this. For certain IOP journals you need to send your files to a different institution or to an external editor. How to find the submission address for a particular journal is discussed in section 1.4, below.
\subsection{Where to send your files \label{agide}}
Full details of how to submit files to a particular IOP journal are contained in IOP's {\it Guidelines for authors} which can be accessed online by going to authors.iop.org. From this document's table of contents, select the `How to submit' link to access full details of the submission address for a particular journal.
\subsection{Obtaining the class file and documentation}
The \LaTeXe\ class file and guidelines can be downloaded from \verb"authors.iop.org".
Files are available in zipped format for PCs, tar compressed format files for
Unix or as a stuffit archive for Macintosh.
\section{Preparing your article}
Please follow these guidelines as closely as possible, particularly with regard to the preparation of the reference list.
At the start of the \LaTeX\ source please include
commented material to identify the journal, author and reference number if
known. The first non-commented line should be
\verb"\documentclass[12pt]{iopart}" to load the preprint class
file. Omitting \verb"[12pt]" produces an article with the normal journal
page and type sizes. The start of the article text is signalled by
\verb"\begin{document}".
Authors of very long articles may find it convenient to separate
their article into a series of files each containing a section, each of which is called
in turn by the primary file.
Authors may add their own macros
at the start of an article provided they do not overwrite existing definitions and
that they send copies of their new macros with their text file. Macros for the individual paper not included
in a style file should be inserted in the preamble to the paper with comments to
describe any complex or non-obvious ones.
\verb"iopart" can be used with other package files such
as those loading the AMS extension fonts
\verb"msam" and \verb"msbm" (these fonts provide the
blackboard bold alphabet and various extra maths symbols as well as symbols useful in figure
captions); an extra style file \verb"iopams.sty" is provided to load these
packages and provide extra definitions for bold Greek letters.
\subsection{Double-column journals}
Authors writing for double-column journals should use the \verb"iopart" class file. Conversion from the single-column format to the double-column output required for printing will be done during the production process.
However, authors should bear in mind that all mathematical formulae will need to be fitted
into the width of a single column, so individual lines of equations should not occupy more than two thirds of the line width in this preprint form.
\section{The title and abstract page}
The code for setting the title page information is slightly different from
the normal default in \LaTeX.
\subsection{Titles and article types}
The title is set using the command
\verb"\title{#1}", where \verb"#1" is the title of the article. The
first letter
of the title should be capitalized with the rest in lower case.
Mathematical expressions within the title may be left in light-face type.
If the title is too long to use as a running head at the top of each page (apart from the
first) a short
form can be provided as an optional argument (in square brackets)
before the full title, i.e.\ \verb"\title[Short title]{Full title}".
For article types other than papers, \verb"iopart.cls"
has a generic heading \verb"\article[Short title]{TYPE}{Full title}"
and the specific definitions given in table~\ref{arttype}. In each case (apart from Letters
to the Editor) an
optional argument can be used immediately after the control sequence name
to specify the short title; where no short title is given the full title
will be used as the running head.
For Letters use \verb"\letter{Full title}", no short title is required as
the running head is automatically defined to be {\it Letter to the Editor}.
The generic heading could be used for
articles such as those presented at a conference or workshop, e.g.
\small\begin{verbatim}
\article[Short title]{WORKSHOP ON HIGH-ENERGY PHYSICS}{Title}
\end{verbatim}\normalsize
Footnotes to titles may be given, though acknowledgment of
funding should be included in the acknowledgments section rather than here. A footnote can be included by using \verb"\footnote{Text of footnote.}" immediately after the title.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{arttype}Types of article defined in the {\tt iopart.cls}
class file.}
\footnotesize\rm
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{}l*{15}{@{\extracolsep{0pt plus12pt}}l}}
\br
Command&Type&Heading on first page\\
\mr
\verb"\title{#1}"&Paper&---\\
\verb"\review{#1}"&Review&REVIEW\\
\verb"\topical{#1}"&Topical review&TOPICAL REVIEW\\
\verb"\comment{#1}"&Comment&COMMENT\\
\verb"\note{#1}"&Note&NOTE\\
\verb"\paper{#1}"&Paper&---\\
\verb"\prelim{#1}"&Preliminary communication&PRELIMINARY COMMUNICATION\\
\verb"\rapid{#1}"&Rapid communication&RAPID COMMUNICATION\\
\verb"\letter{#1}"&Letter&LETTER TO THE EDITOR\\
\verb"\article{#1}{#2}"&Other articles&Whatever is entered as {\tt
\#1}\\
\br
\end{tabular*}
\end{table}
\subsection{Authors' names and addresses}
The next information required is the list of authors' names and
their affiliations. For the authors' names type \verb"\author{#1}",
where \verb"#1" is the
list of all authors' names. The style for the names is initials then
family name, with a comma after all but the last
two names, which are separated by `and'. Initials should {\it not} be followed by full stops. First (given) names may be used if
desired and Chinese-style names included in the form they should be printed in. If the authors are at different addresses a superscripted number, e.g. $^1$, \verb"$^1$", should be used after each
name to reference the author to his/her address.
If an author has additional information to appear as a footnote, such as
a permanent address, a normal \LaTeX\ footnote command
should be given after the family name and address marker
with this extra information.
The addresses of the authors' affiliations follow the list of authors.
Each address is set by using
\verb"\address{#1}" with the address as the single parameter in braces.
If there is more
than one address then the appropriate superscripted number, followed by a space, should come at the start of
the address.
Please also add the e-mail addresses for at least one of the authors. This is done by inserting the
command \verb"\ead{#1}" after the postal address(es) where \verb"#1" is the e-mail address.
See section~\ref{startsample} for sample coding. For more than one e-mail address, please use the command
\verb"\eads{\mailto{#1}, \mailto{#2}}" with \verb"\mailto" surrounding each e-mail address.
\subsection{The abstract}
The abstract follows the addresses and
should give readers concise information about the content
of the article and indicate the main results obtained and conclusions
drawn. It should be self-contained with no reference to
figures, tables, equations, bibliographic references etc
included and should not normally exceed 200
words.
To indicate the start
of the abstract type \verb"\begin{abstract}" followed by the text of the
abstract (not in braces). The abstract should normally be restricted
to a single paragraph and is terminated by the command
\verb"\end{abstract}"
\subsection{Subject classification numbers}
Any Physics and Astronomy Classification System (PACS)
codes or Mathematics Subject Classification (MSC) scheme
numbers should come immediately after the abstract.
Classification codes can greatly help in the choice of suitable
referees and allocation of articles to subject areas.
For {\it Inverse Problems} and {\it Nonlinearity} authors may
use either PACS or MSC codes.
PACS or MSC numbers are included after the abstract
using \verb"\pacs{#1}" and \verb"\ams{#1}" respectively.
After any classification numbers the command
\verb"\submitto{#1}" can be inserted, where \verb"#1" is the journal name written in full or the appropriate control sequence as
given in table~\ref{jlab1}. This command is not essential to the running of the file.
\subsubsection{Information on PACS and MSC}
For more information on PACS and MSC see
\begin{itemize}
\item MSC: http://www.ams.org/msc
\item PACS: http://www.aip.org/pacs
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Keywords}
Keywords should be provided for submissions to {\it Measurement Science and Technology, Physical Biology, Physiological Measurement}, and both parts of {\it Journal of Optics\/}. Add these as a new paragraph starting \verb"\noindent{\it Keywords\/}:" after the end of the abstract.
\subsection{Making a separate title page}
The command \verb"\maketitle" forces a page break after the point where it
is inserted and so to keep the header material on a separate page from the
body of the text insert \verb"\maketitle" or \verb"\newpage" before the start of the text.
If \verb"\maketitle" is not included the text of the
article will start immediately after the abstract.
\subsection{Sample coding for the start of an article}
\label{startsample}
The code for the start of a title page of a typical paper might read:
\small\begin{verbatim}
\documentclass[12pt]{iopart}
\begin{document}
\title[The anomalous magnetic moment of the
neutrino]{The anomalous magnetic moment of the
neutrino and its relation to the solar neutrino problem}
\author{P J Smith$^1$, T M Collins$^2$,
R J Jones$^3$\footnote{Present address:
Department of Physics, University of Bristol, Tyndalls Park Road,
Bristol BS8 1TS, UK.} and Janet Williams$^3$}
\address{$^1$ Mathematics Faculty, Open University,
Milton Keynes MK7~6AA, UK}
\address{$^2$ Department of Mathematics,
Imperial College, Prince Consort Road, London SW7~2BZ, UK}
\address{$^3$ Department of Computer Science,
University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E~6BT, UK}
\ead{<EMAIL>}
\begin{abstract}
...
\end{abstract}
\pacs{1315, 9440T}
\submitto{\JPG}
\maketitle
\end{verbatim}
\normalsize
\section{The text}
\subsection{Sections, subsections and subsubsections}
The text of articles may be divided into sections, subsections and, where necessary,
subsubsections. To start a new section, end the previous paragraph and
then include \verb"\section" followed by the section heading within braces.
Numbering of sections is done {\it automatically} in the headings:
sections will be numbered 1, 2, 3, etc, subsections will be numbered
2.1, 2.2, 3.1, etc, and subsubsections will be numbered 2.3.1, 2.3.2,
etc. Cross references to other sections in the text should, where
possible, be made using
labels (see section~\ref{xrefs}) but can also
be made manually. See section~\ref{eqnum} for information on the numbering of displayed equations. Subsections and subsubsections are
similar to sections but
the commands are \verb"\subsection" and \verb"\subsubsection" respectively.
Sections have a bold heading, subsections an italic heading and
subsubsections an italic heading with the text following on directly.
\small\begin{verbatim}
\section{This is the section title}
\subsection{This is the subsection title}
\end{verbatim}\normalsize
The first section is normally an introduction, which should state clearly
the object of the work, its scope and the main advances reported, with
brief references to relevant results by other workers. In long papers it is
helpful to indicate the way in which the paper is arranged and the results
presented.
Footnotes should be avoided whenever possible and can often be included in the text as phrases or sentences in parentheses. If required, they should be used only for brief notes that do not fit conveniently into the text. The use of
displayed mathematics in footnotes should be avoided wherever possible and no equations within a footnote should be numbered.
The standard \LaTeX\ macro \verb"\footnote" should be used.
\subsection{Acknowledgments}
Authors wishing to acknowledge assistance or encouragement from
colleagues, special work by technical staff or financial support from
organizations should do so in an unnumbered `Acknowledgments' section
immediately following the last numbered section of the paper. The
command \verb"\ack" sets the acknowledgments heading as an unnumbered
section. For Letters
\verb"\ack" does not set a heading but leaves a line space and does not
indent the next paragraph.
\subsection{Appendices}
Technical detail that it is necessary to include, but that interrupts
the flow of the article, may be consigned to an appendix.
Any appendices should be included at the end of the main text of the paper, after the acknowledgments section (if any) but before the reference list.
If there are
two or more appendices they should be called Appendix A, Appendix B, etc.
Numbered equations will be in the form (A.1), (A.2), etc,
figures will appear as figure A1, figure B1, etc and tables as table A1,
table B1, etc.
The command \verb"
\section{\boldmath \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in loop-dominated transitions}
\label{sec:penguin-dominated}
Decays that receive contributions from penguin diagrams only are of interest to test the SM, as effects of physics at high energy scales can contribute through loops.
This is true for the radiative and semileptonic decays $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace (s,d)(\gamma,\ell^+\ell^-,\nu\bar{\nu})$, as well as for hadronic decays that proceed through $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\bar{s}s$, $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{d}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\bar{s}d$ quark-level transitions.
However, there is some uncertainty in the SM predictions for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violating phenomena since, unlike the case for pure tree amplitudes, each penguin diagram can have three different SM quarks appearing in the loop, and therefore there may be contributions with different weak phases.
For example, the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s$ amplitude can be written
\begin{equation}
P = P_u \, V^{}_{ub}V^*_{us} + P_c \, V^{}_{cb}V^*_{cs} + P_t \, V^{}_{tb}V^*_{ts} \, .
\end{equation}
CKM unitarity can be used to replace one of these terms, for example
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:P-reparam}
P = (P_c-P_u) \, V^{}_{cb}V^*_{cs} + (P_t-P_u) \, V^{}_{tb}V^*_{ts} \, .
\end{equation}
This choice cannot, of course, affect the physical observables, as emphasised in the concept of ``reparametrisation invariance''~\cite{Botella:2005ks}.
It does, however, affect the weak phase between the two remaining terms and hence the interpretation of the observables.
A further complication, due to hadronisation, affects particularly the decays mediated by $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\bar{s}s$, $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{d}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\bar{s}d$ transitions.
If one of the final state mesons has a $u\bar{u}$ component in its wavefunction, then tree diagrams can also contribute.
For the discussion in this section, the $\phi$ and $\ensuremath{\Peta^{\prime}}\xspace$ resonances will be considered as $s\bar{s}$ dominated; in some works this is also considered a good approximation for the $f_0(980)$ meson, however since the scalar sector is in general less well understood~\cite{GarciaMartin:2011jx,Pelaez:2015qba}, that is not done here.
In all cases it should be remembered that subleading amplitudes -- which can include long-distance rescattering contributions (see, for example, Ref.~\cite{Gronau:2012gs}) -- can have important effects.
For the same reasons, the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{d}d$ transition is not considered in this section as a loop-dominated process.
Decays with both tree and loop contributions are discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:tree-penguin}.
\subsection{Searches for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay in loop-dominated transitions to hadronic final states}
\label{sec:penguin-dominated:decay}
For $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\bar{s}s$ transitions, the relative weak phase between the two terms of Eq.~(\ref{eq:P-reparam}) is $\beta_s$.
Since this is small, and since the $P_t$ term is expected to dominate, decays dominated by this transition are not expected to exhibit \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay in the Standard Model.
As loop diagrams are sensitive to physics at high scales, such decays can be used to make powerful tests of the SM with, as usual, the caveat that a strong phase difference is also necessary for any manifestation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay.
Large yields are available in the $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Peta^{\prime}}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace$ decays.
Searches for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay in these modes~\cite{Lees:2012kxa,LHCb-PAPER-2013-048,Schumann:2006bg,Aubert:2009yx,LHCb-PAPER-2014-065} have not revealed any significant effect up to the precision of a few percent, as expected in the SM.
The world averages are
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace) = 0.016 \pm 0.013 \, , \quad
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Peta^{\prime}}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace) = 0.004 \pm 0.011 \, .
\end{equation}
Possible evidence for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace$ decays, seen by \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Lees:2012kxa}, is not confirmed by other experiments and appears to be due to contributions from other structures in the $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace$ Dalitz plot~\cite{Lees:2013ngt,LHCb-PAPER-2014-044}, as discussed further in Sec.~\ref{sec:tree-penguin}.
This demonstrates that, even for a relatively narrow resonance such as the $\phi$ meson ($\Gamma < 5 \ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Me\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace$~\cite{PDG2016}), amplitude analyses of the full Dalitz plot structure of three-body decays are necessary to separate correctly the different contributions.
Such analyses have already been performed for several modes including $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace$~\cite{Garmash:2004wa,Lees:2012kxa}, but more detailed investigations with larger data samples are needed.
Another interesting channel to search for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay is $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi \ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$, where the $\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ mode is used to tag the flavour of the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson, so decay-time-dependent analysis is not required.
As the final state contains two vector mesons, it is possible to search for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the polarisation amplitudes in addition to the rates, leading to a wider range of tests of the SM.
However, all measurements of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects~\cite{Aubert:2008zza,LHCb-PAPER-2014-005,Prim:2013nmy} are consistent with zero, as expected in the SM.
The relative weak phase in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{d}s$ transitions is also $\beta_s$, and so effects of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay are expected to be small.
Results to date, for example in $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$ decays~\cite{Aubert:2006gm,Duh:2012ie,LHCb-PAPER-2013-034}, are consistent with this expectation.
The $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\Kbar^{*0}}\xspace$ decay provides a vector-vector final state, and therefore additional observables, but is not self-tagging.
Nonetheless, \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay can in principle still be observed through asymmetries in the distribution of final state particles~\cite{Gardner:2002bb,Gardner:2003su,Durieux:2015zwa}, but such effects are consistent with zero in the currently available data~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-068}.
This decay can also be used to probe \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the interference of mixing and decay, as discussed in subsequent sections.
It should also be noted that if any \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation is observed, the large width of the $\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ state means that
a full amplitude analysis of $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ will be required to correctly interpret the observables.
Within the SM, larger effects of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay may occur in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\bar{s}d$ transitions, since the relative weak phase involved is $\beta$.
However, the yields of the relevant decays are smaller due to the additional CKM suppression of the amplitudes.
Searches have been made, for example in the $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Peta^{\prime}}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$~\cite{Schumann:2006bg,Aubert:2009yx} and $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace$~\cite{Aubert:2006gm,Duh:2012ie,LHCb-PAPER-2013-034} modes, with results consistent with zero.
The available yields of the vector-vector decays $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\Kbar^{*0}}\xspace$~\cite{Aubert:2007xc,Chiang:2010ga,LHCb-PAPER-2014-068} and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-012} are not yet sufficient to obtain useful constraints on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violating parameters.
\subsection{Searches for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing/decay interference in loop-dominated transitions}
\label{sec:penguin-dominated:mix}
Values of $\beta$ and $\beta_s$ can be determined from the decay-time-dependence of the decay rate of $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\bar{s}s$ transitions, in the same way as described for $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions in Sec.~\ref{sec:ccq}.
For the loop-dominated transitions, the measured values may be affected by contributions from new particles contributing to the penguin amplitudes, and therefore a difference between the measured value of $\beta_{(s)}$ from that obtained in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ transitions could be a signature of physics beyond the SM.
However, since small deviations are possible in the SM, the observables are often denoted as $\beta^{\rm eff}_{(s)}$.
Various theoretical methods have been used to try to evaluate the deviation in the SM~\cite{Grossman:2003qp,Gronau:2003ep,Gronau:2004hp,Cheng:2005bg,Gronau:2005gz,Buchalla:2005us,Beneke:2005pu,Cheng:2005ug,Engelhard:2005ky,Gronau:2006qh,Silvestrini:2007yf}, with the conclusion that the shifts are expected to be at or below the few percent level for the cleanest modes involving $\phi$ or $\ensuremath{\Peta^{\prime}}\xspace$ mesons.
The situation for modes involving $f_0(980)$ mesons is less clear, due to uncertainties concerning the quark-level substructure of this state~\cite{Dutta:2008xw}.
For $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{d}s$ transitions, significant contributions with different weak phases are possible in the SM, making a straightforward interpretation of results in terms of $\beta_{(s)}$ impossible.
Nonetheless, interesting tests of the SM are possible, most notably for $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{(*)0}}\xspace \ensuremath{\Kbar^{(*)0}}\xspace$ decays, for example by exploiting flavour symmetries~\cite{Fleischer:2004vu,Datta:2006af,DescotesGenon:2006wc}.
\subsubsection{Measurements of $\beta^{\rm eff}$}
Measurements of $\beta^{\rm eff}$ have been made in many $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s$ transitions at the $\ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace$ \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace factories, as summarised in Fig.~\ref{fig:bsssbetaeff}.
The results are generally reported in terms of
\begin{equation}
S_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}} = -\eta_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}\sin\left(2\beta^{\rm eff}\right)\,,
\end{equation}
where $\eta_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}$ is the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenvalue of the final state $f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}$,
but are converted to $\sin\left(2\beta^{\rm eff}\right)$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:bsssbetaeff}.
The cosine coefficient, $C_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}$ is also measured, with all values consistent with zero.
No significant departure from the SM expectation is observed.
All individual measurements are statistically limited, with systematic uncertainties of typically a few percent.
The most precise results are for the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\Peta^{\prime}}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^0}\xspace$~\cite{Aubert:2008ad,Santelj:2014sja} (as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:etaprKS}) and $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi\ensuremath{\kaon^0}\xspace$~\cite{Lees:2012kxa,Nakahama:2010nj} modes, where the latter are determined from decay-time-dependent Dalitz plot analyses of $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^0}\xspace$ decays.
There are no results yet available from LHCb on the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation parameters in these modes, although large yields have been reported~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-042}.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.58\textwidth]{sPengS_CP_woKsPi0Pi0.png}
\caption{
Measurements and world averages of $\sin(2\beta^{\rm eff})$ in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s$ transitions, compared to the world average value of $\sin(2\beta)$ in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace c\bar{c}s$ decays~\cite{HFAG}.
Note that the measurements labelled $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^0}\xspace$ exclude the contribution with an intermediate $\phi$ meson.
}
\label{fig:bsssbetaeff}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.29\textwidth]{projPlot_etapks_dt.pdf}
\hspace{5mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{etapks_asym1.pdf}
\caption{
Decay time distributions and asymmetries in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Peta^{\prime}}\xspace\KS$ decays from (left) \mbox{BaBar}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2008ad} and (right) \mbox{Belle}\xspace~\cite{Santelj:2014sja}.
In the \mbox{BaBar}\xspace plot, the solid (dotted) line displays the total fit function (signal component), separated into (a) \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and (b) \ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace tags.
In the \mbox{Belle}\xspace plot, background-subtracted data are shown, with $q = +1~(-1)$ indicating a \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace~(\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace) tag.
}
\label{fig:etaprKS}
\end{figure}
Among $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{s}s$ transitions, decay-time-dependent analyses have been performed only for $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\KS\KS$ decays~\cite{Aubert:2006gm,Nakahama:2007dg}.
The available yields are too small to provide significant constraints on $S_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}$.
\subsubsection{Measurements of $\beta_s^{\rm eff}$}
The $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi\phi$ channel is of particular interest among the relevant \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace meson decays.
In the approximation that the $\phi$ meson is a pure $s\bar{s}$ state, the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-violation phases from mixing and decay cancel, so that the relation $S_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}} \approx 0$ holds in the SM~\cite{Beneke:2006hg,Bartsch:2008ps,Cheng:2009mu} (for consistency, the determination of $S_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}$ is nonetheless considered here as a measurement of $\beta_s^{\rm eff}$).
Moreover, the small width of the $\phi$ meson makes this channel experimentally attractive when reconstructed in the $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ final state, and ensures the contribution in the signal window from $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ pairs in a S-wave configuration is small.
Since the vector-vector final state contains a mixture of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-even and \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-odd terms, a combined fit to the \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace decay-time and angular distributions is necessary, similarly as for $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace J/\psi\phi$ discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:psiphiandbuddies}.
Among current and planned experiments, \mbox{LHCb}\xspace\ is uniquely able to study the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi\phi$ decay mode, and has measured~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-026}
\begin{equation}
\phi_s^{\rm eff} = -2\beta_s^{\rm eff} = -0.17 \pm 0.15 \pm 0.03 \ \ensuremath{\rm \,rad}\xspace \, .
\end{equation}
A number of other parameters are determined, including untagged asymmetries; there is no significant \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effect seen in any of them.
The $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{d}s$ transition $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\Kbar^{*0}}\xspace$ also has great potential to test the SM, for example through exploitation of the U-spin relation with \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace decays to the same final state~\cite{DescotesGenon:2006wc,Ciuchini:2007hx,Bhattacharya:2012hh}.
No decay-time-dependent analysis of this modes has yet been carried out, but the yields available at LHCb are sufficient for initial studies~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-068}.
As mentioned in the context of measurements of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay,
the non-negligible width of the $\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace$ resonance means that a full amplitude analysis of $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ final state will ultimately be necessary in order to separate $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\Kbar^{*0}}\xspace$ decays from contributions with a $K\pi$ pair in S-wave, or from reflections from other decays such as $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$.
\input{rare}
\subsection{Studies of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q\gamma$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q\ell^+\ell^-$ transitions}
\label{sec:penguin-dominated:rad}
A large number of observables in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q\gamma$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q\ell^+\ell^-$ transitions are sensitive to physics beyond the SM (see, for example, Ref.~\cite{Blake:2015tda} for a review).
In general, since the final states contain particles that do not undergo strong interactions, the hadronic uncertainties in the SM predictions for these observables are reduced compared to fully hadronic final states.
These arguments are relevant for the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetries discussed in this section.
Searches for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects in several different $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q\gamma$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q\ell^+\ell^-$ transitions have been carried out.
In addition to studies of particular exclusive final states, inclusive measurements have been performed at the $\ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace$ $B$ factory experiments.
Such measurements can be made either by summing together as many different exclusive states as possible, or by exploiting the potential to reconstruct fully the $\Upsilon(4S) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace$ event so that the hadronic system (denoted $X_s$ or $X_d$ depending on the flavour of the produced quark, or $X_{s+d}$ for their sum) need not be reconstructed at all.
The latest results on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay in inclusive processes are~\cite{HFAG,Lees:2014uoa,Lees:2013nxa}
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(B \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace X_s \gamma) = 0.015 \pm 0.020 \, , \quad
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(B \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace X_s \ell^+\ell^-) = 0.04 \pm 0.11 \, ,
\end{equation}
where both are obtained with the sum-of-exclusive method.
More precise results are available for exclusive decays, in particular in channels where large yields are available at LHCb.
Among $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\gamma$ decays, the most precise result is~\cite{HFAG,Aubert:2009ak,LHCb-PAPER-2012-019}
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace \gamma) = -0.002 \pm 0.015 \, .
\end{equation}
With the large yields available in some $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\ell^+\ell^-$ modes, it is possible to study asymmetries as a function of $q^2$, the dilepton invariant mass squared.
This has been done, for example, for the rate asymmetries in $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-032}, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:acp-btosmumu}.
All results are consistent with the SM prediction of small \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation.
The yields available in the $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$ channel, which is mediated by the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\ell^+\ell^-$ transition and therefore may exhibit larger \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the SM, now allow a similar analysis to be performed~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-035}.
The precision achieved is however not sufficient to observe a non-zero asymmetry.
Asymmetries in angular observables have also been measured in $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-051} and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2015-023}, where in the latter case the analysis is currently limited to untagged asymmetries; all measured angular asymmetries are also consistent with zero.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{PAPER-2014-032-Fig4.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{PAPER-2014-032-Fig3.pdf}
\caption{
\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetries as a function of $q^2$ in (left) $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$ and (right) $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-032}.
The horizontal grey bands show the average over all $q^2$ bins.
Vertical red lines indicate regions vetoed due to contributions from the $\phi$, $\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace$ and $\psi(2S)$ resonances.
}
\label{fig:acp-btosmumu}
\end{figure}
The photon emitted in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q \gamma$ transitions is expected to be almost fully polarised in the SM.
This feature suppresses the observability of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing/decay interference, since the photons produced in, for example, $\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\Kbar^{*0}}\xspace\gamma \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace\gamma$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^{*0}}\xspace\gamma \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace\gamma$ decays have predominantly left- and right-handed polarisations respectively, and therefore interference cannot occur.
This, however, provides an interesting possibility to test the SM prediction for the polarisation, since the magnitude of the parameter $S_f$ is reduced from that of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ACS-defs}) by a factor of $\sin 2 \Psi$, where $\tan \Psi$ is the relative magnitude of the suppressed and favoured polarisation amplitudes~\cite{Atwood:1997zr,Atwood:2004jj}.
Decays of the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$ meson by the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace s\gamma$ transition are ideal for such measurements, as the relatively large value of $\sin 2\beta$ would allow an observable effect in case $\sin 2 \Psi$ is non-zero.
Several measurements have been made, with the most precise results for $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace\gamma$~\cite{Ushiroda:2006fi,Aubert:2008gy} and $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace\gamma$~\cite{Li:2008qma,Sanchez:2015pxu}.
All results to date are consistent with zero \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation and therefore with the SM prediction of strong polarisation of the emitted photon.
For \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace meson decays through the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\gamma$ transition, the SM \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violating phase is small and the oscillations are further suppressed by the photon polarisation, giving a vanishing value of $S_f$.
The $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace\gamma$ mode therefore provides a null test of the SM, that is sensitive to models that introduce new sources of both right-handed currents and \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation.
The experimental sensitivity is, however, rather limited~\cite{Ushiroda:2007jf}.
A similar argument applies for $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi \gamma$ decays, although in this case the $A^{\Delta\Gamma}$ observable provides additional sensitivity~\cite{Muheim:2008vu}.
Large $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi \gamma$ yields are available~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2012-019}, but no decay-time-dependent analysis has yet been performed.
As the available data samples increase, searches for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing/decay interference, from decay-time-dependent analyses, will be possible in an increasing number of $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q\gamma$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace q\ell^+\ell^-$ transitions.
One particularly interesting possibility is to probe for non-SM \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the recently observed $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pmu^+\Pmu^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{Chatrchyan:2013bka,LHCb-PAPER-2013-046,LHCb-PAPER-2014-049,Aaboud:2016ire}.
This will allow to probe several extensions of the SM that do not significantly change the value of the branching fraction~\cite{DeBruyn:2012wk,CERN-THESIS-2013-249}.
\subsection{Studies of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation using semileptonic decays}
\label{sec:SL}
Semileptonic decays of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace mesons such as $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^-}\xspace \ensuremath{\Pmu^+}\xspace \nu_\mu$ can be considered the archetypal tree-dominated transition.
In the SM there is only a single amplitude;
the decay is therefore expected to be both \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-conserving and flavour-specific.\footnote{
Neither of these features has been subjected to rigorous experimental tests~\cite{Brod:2014bfa}.}
Although extensions to the SM, in particular models with charged partners of the Higgs boson, could introduce additional diagrams, these features are not expected to change.
Semileptonic decays are therefore ideal to provide theoretically clean measurements of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace or \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mixing, parametrised by $\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace$ respectively.
These quantities can be predicted with good precision in the SM from~\cite{Lenz:2011ti,Artuso:2015swg}
\begin{equation}
\ensuremath{a^{q}_{sl}}\xspace = {\rm Im}\left(\frac{\Gamma_{12}^q}{M_{12}^q}\right) \equiv \left| \frac{\Gamma_{12}^q}{M_{12}^q} \right| \sin \phi_{12}^q = \frac{\Delta\Gamma_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}}{\Delta m_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}} \tan \phi_{12}^q \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma_{12}^q$ and $M_{12}^q$ are the off-diagonal elements of the effective weak Hamiltonian that describes $\ensuremath{\B^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace$--$\ensuremath{\Bbar^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace$ mixing (and that was diagonalised in Eq.~(\ref{eq:physicalStates}) to obtain the physical states), and $\phi_{12}^q$ is their relative phase.
From these expressions and the measured (or predicted) values of $\Delta\Gamma_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}$ and $\Delta m_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}$, it can be seen that the SM values of both $\ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace$ are smaller than a permille.
The experimental signature of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing is an asymmetry in the yield of mixed decays (\mbox{\itshape e.g.}\xspace\ $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^+}\xspace\mun\ensuremath{\overline{\Pnu}}\xspace_\mu$ {\it vs.} $\ensuremath{\Bbar^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\D^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pmu^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\Pnu}\xspace_\mu$).
To measure such an asymmetry requires knowledge of detection and production asymmetries, as well as tagging of the initial flavour of the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson.
However, since there should be no asymmetry in the unmixed yields, the effect of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing can also be probed from the asymmetry in the total yields.
This approach is attractive for experiments at hadron colliders, where the comparatively small effective tagging efficiency would lead to an important reduction in sensitivity.
The untagged asymmetry is diluted compared to the mixed asymmetry by a factor given by the inverse of the mixed fraction.
Due to the large value of $\Delta m_s/\Gamma_s$, this factor is effectively 2 in the \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace system; for the \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace system it is somewhat larger and depends on the decay time acceptance.
Although the asymmetry is independent of the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decay time, analysis of the decay time distribution can help to separate signal from background, and to isolate the asymmetry in mixing from production or detection related effects.
A powerful method to obtain high yields with reasonable tagging efficiency is to reconstruct same-sign lepton pairs.
If both leptons originate from semileptonic \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays, this signature can only arise when a neutral \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson has oscillated, and therefore the asymmetry between positive and negative same-sign lepton pairs depends on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing.
In the $e^+e^- \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \Upsilon(4S) \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace\ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace$ environment, only $\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace$ can contribute, while for higher energy $\ensuremath{\Pe^+\Pe^-}\xspace$, $p\bar{p}$ or $pp$ collisions the inclusive dilepton asymmetry is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:absl}
\ensuremath{A^{b}_{sl}}\xspace = C_{d}\;\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace + C_{s}\;\ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace \, ,
\end{equation}
where $C_{d}$ and $C_{s}$ depend on the relative production rates of \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mesons, as well as their respective probabilities to have mixed (which may depend on the selection requirements).
A possible additional term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:absl}) is discussed below.
Another approach to determine these asymmetries inclusively is to tag \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace particles produced in top quark decays~\cite{Gedalia:2012sx}.
This method, recently implemented by ATLAS~\cite{Aaboud:2016bmk}, however results in low yields so that the measurements do not currently have competitive precision.
\begin{table}[!htb]
\caption{
Summary of the latest results for the \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace mixing (\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace) and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mixing (\ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace) \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetries, as well as the inclusive dimuon asymmetry \ensuremath{A^{b}_{sl}}\xspace measured at \mbox{D0}\xspace.
In all cases the statistical uncertainty is quoted first and the systematic second.
All values are percentages.
The world averages~\cite{HFAG} are from a fit to all $\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace$, $\ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{A^{b}_{sl}}\xspace$ results, except for the latest LHCb \ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace\ result~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-013}; an earlier result~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-033} is included instead.
The latest SM predictions~\cite{Lenz:2011ti,Artuso:2015swg} are given for comparison.
}
\label{tab:semilepcpv}
\centering
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
& \ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace~(\%) & \ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace~(\%) & \ensuremath{A^{b}_{sl}}\xspace~(\%) \\
\hline
\mbox{BaBar}\xspace $K$-tag~\cite{Lees:2013sua,Lees:2015rka} & $0.06 \pm 0.17\,^{+0.38}_{-0.32}$ & -- & -- \\
\mbox{BaBar}\xspace $\ensuremath{\ell}\xspace\lepton$~\cite{Lees:2014qma} & $-0.39 \pm 0.35 \pm 0.19$ & -- & -- \\
\mbox{Belle}\xspace $\ensuremath{\ell}\xspace\lepton$~\cite{Nakano:2005jb} & $-0.11 \pm 0.79 \pm 0.70$& -- & -- \\
\mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-053,LHCb-PAPER-2016-013} & $-0.02 \pm 0.19 \pm 0.30$ & $\phantom{-}0.39 \pm 0.26 \pm 0.20$ & -- \\
\mbox{D0}\xspace~\cite{Abazov:2012hha,Abazov:2012zz,Abazov:2013uma} & $\phantom{-}0.68 \pm 0.45 \pm 0.14$ &$-1.12 \pm 0.74 \pm 0.17$ & $-0.496 \pm 0.153 \pm 0.072$ \\
\hline
World average~\cite{HFAG} & $-0.15 \pm 0.17$ & $-0.75 \pm 0.41$ \\
\hline
SM & $-0.00047 \pm 0.00006$ & $\phantom{-}0.0000222 \pm 0.0000027$ & $-0.023 \pm 0.004$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.60\textwidth]{figs/asl_overview.pdf}
\caption{
Measurements of \ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace\ and \ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace, with simple one-dimensional averages (that differ from the values shown in Table~\ref{tab:semilepcpv}) shown as horizontal and vertical bands, respectively~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-013}.
The yellow ellipse represents the D0 inclusive dimuon measurement~\cite{Abazov:2013uma} with $\Delta \Gamma_d$ set to its SM expectation value.
}
\label{fig:asls_asld}
\end{figure}
Measurements of $\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace$, $\ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{A^{b}_{sl}}\xspace$ have been performed by the \mbox{BaBar}\xspace, \mbox{Belle}\xspace, \mbox{LHCb}\xspace, and \mbox{D0}\xspace collaborations.
The latest results are collected in Table~\ref{tab:semilepcpv} together with the world averages and SM predictions, which are also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:asls_asld}.
\mbox{Belle}\xspace have measured $\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace$ using the inclusive dilepton approach~\cite{Nakano:2005jb}.
The data analysed correspond to approximately one-tenth of the final \mbox{Belle}\xspace $\Upsilon(4S)$ sample, and therefore an update of this analysis would be well motivated.
\mbox{BaBar}\xspace also have a measurement with an inclusive dilepton sample~\cite{Lees:2014qma} and in addition have a measurement in which the signal $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^{*-}}\xspace X\ensuremath{\ell}\xspace^+\ensuremath{\neu_\ell}\xspace$ decay is partially reconstructed and a charged kaon reconstructed
on the opposite side of the event ($K$-tag) determines whether the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson has mixed or not~\cite{Lees:2013sua,Lees:2015rka}, allowing the determination of detection asymmetries as well as $\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace$.
The measurements of $\ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace$ from \mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-053} and \mbox{D0}\xspace~\cite{Abazov:2012hha} are obtained from untagged samples of $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^{(*)-}}\xspace X\mu^+\ensuremath{\neu_\mu}\xspace$ decays.
Measurements of $\ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace$ from \mbox{LHCb}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-013} and \mbox{D0}\xspace~\cite{Abazov:2012zz} are obtained from untagged samples of $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\D^-_\squark}\xspace X\mu^+\ensuremath{\neu_\mu}\xspace$ decays.
Due mainly to the common method to determine the muon detection asymmetry, there is a correlation of $+0.13$ between the LHCb \ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace\ and \ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace\ results.
The determination of the inclusive dimuon asymmetry $\ensuremath{A^{b}_{sl}}\xspace$ by \mbox{D0}\xspace~\cite{Abazov:2013uma} has attracted a great deal of attention due to the deviation, estimated to be $2.8\sigma$, from the SM prediction.
Since the probabilities for \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mesons to have mixed depend on the selection criteria, \mbox{D0}\xspace have performed the measurement in bins of the distances of closest approach of the muons to the primary $p\bar{p}$ interaction.
This provides separation between regions where $\ensuremath{A^{b}_{sl}}\xspace$ is dominated by \ensuremath{a^{d}_{sl}}\xspace and those where it is dominated by \ensuremath{a^{s}_{sl}}\xspace.
There is no significant difference between the values of \ensuremath{A^{b}_{sl}}\xspace measured in the different regions, however the consistency of the binned data with the SM prediction gives a more significant deviation of $3.6\sigma$.
It has been noted~\cite{Artuso:2015swg,Borissov:2013wwa} that there is another possible contribution to \ensuremath{A^{b}_{sl}}\xspace, in addition to those given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:absl}).
This contribution arises from \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in interference between mixing and decay and is expected to be negligible in the SM due to the small value of $\Delta \Gamma_d$.
Current constraints, both direct and indirect, on $\Delta \Gamma_d$ do not, however, exclude a significant enhancement~\cite{Gershon:2010wx,Bobeth:2014rda}, and therefore improved determinations are needed.
A similar possible contribution due to interference between mixing and decay in \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ oscillations is negligible due to the small value of $2\beta_s$.
Thus, all measurements of the possible contributions to the inclusive dimuon asymmetry are currently consistent with zero, and so the inclusion of the D0 result causes some tension in the global fit.
It should be noted that many of the results given in Table~\ref{tab:semilepcpv} are dominated by systematic uncertainties.
Although some of these, for example due to uncertainty in lepton misidentication probabilities, can be expected to scale with increased data samples, it may prove hard to reduce the uncertainties below the permille level.
The systematic uncertainties in results from \mbox{D0}\xspace tend to be smaller than those from other experiments, as symmetries in the initial state and in the detector configuration can be exploited to reduce the sizes of possible biases in the measurement.
There is no immediate prospect of larger data samples becoming available in such a symmetric environment, although the possibility of this type of measurement at a future high luminosity $Z$ factory should be considered.
\section{Summary}
\label{sec:summary}
The wealth of experimental results on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace system, primarily from the \mbox{BaBar}\xspace, \mbox{Belle}\xspace\ and \mbox{LHCb}\xspace\ experiments, have transformed the understanding in this sector.
The Kobayashi-Maskawa mechanism, that provides a unique source of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation within the SM, has been confirmed.
Moreover, the consistency of measurements with SM predictions leads to increasingly strong constraints on effects beyond the SM.
This remarkable progress has been achieved due to the development of new techniques in both experimental and theoretical methods.
Since the currently achieved precision is far from the level at which these approaches are expected to reach fundamental limitations, significant further progress can be anticipated.
A next generation of experiments is planned, and there are exciting prospects for significant advances in this sector in the next ten years.
Some of these, such as the observation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in $b$ baryon decays, and of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing/decay interference in the \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace system, are anticipated within the SM.
For some others it remains to be seen whether or not the effects seen in the data can be explained by SM dynamics alone: these include the $K\pi$ puzzle and the large asymmetries seen in regions of phase space of charmless three-body \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays.
There are also observables where any observation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation at the achievable precision would be a clear signal of beyond SM physics: examples include the parameters of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in both \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mixing, or in decays to final states involving photons or leptons.
The powerful approach of testing the consistency of the SM paradigm through global fits to CKM matrix parameters requires improved measurements of several important quantities including $\gamma$, $\beta$ and $\beta_s$.
The study of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector will therefore remain a high-priority component of the global programme in particle physics for the foreseeable future.
Complemented by progress in other areas, including kaon and charm physics, precision measurements of low energy observables, searches for new phenomena at the energy frontier, and neutrino physics, there is a real possibility of a breakthrough.
Understanding of the physics that will be probed in these studies may help to resolve the shortcomings of the SM, and to explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the Universe.
\section{Notations and conventions}
\label{sec:theory}
\subsection{Types of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the quark sector}
\label{sec:CPV-types}
Since quarks are charged under the strong interaction, they are never observed directly but are always bound into hadrons.
This has important implications for the phenomenology of quark mixing; in particular, a $\ensuremath{\B^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace$ meson can oscillate into its antiparticle $\ensuremath{\Bbar^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace$.
Consequently, the physical states (\mbox{\itshape i.e.}\xspace\ the states that have well-defined masses and lifetimes) are admixtures of the flavour eigenstates
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:physicalStates}
B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)\,\rm H} = p \ensuremath{\B^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace + q \ensuremath{\Bbar^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace ~~ {\rm and} ~~
B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)\,\rm L} = p \ensuremath{\B^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace - q \ensuremath{\Bbar^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace \, ,
\end{equation}
where $p$ and $q$ are complex coefficients that satisfy $p^2 + q^2 = 1$.
The physical states are labelled $B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)\,\rm H}$ and $B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)\,\rm L}$ to distinguish the heavier (H) from the lighter (L), and have mass difference $\Delta m_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)} = m_{B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)\,\rm H}} - m_{B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)\,\rm L}}$ and width difference $\Delta \Gamma_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)} = \Gamma_{B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)\,\rm L}} - \Gamma_{B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)\,\rm H}}$.
Note that $\Delta m_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}$ is positive by definition while with the given sign convention $\Delta \Gamma_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}$ is predicted to be positive, for both \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mesons, in the SM.
The values of $\Delta m_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}$ and $\Delta \Gamma_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}$ have important consequences for the decay-time-dependent decay rates as will be discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:rates}.
The amplitude for the decay of a \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace hadron to a final state $f$ can be expressed as $A_f$, and that for the decay of a \ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace hadron to the same final state as $\bar{A}_f$.
The corresponding amplitudes for the conjugate processes ($\ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \bar{f}$ and $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \bar{f}$ decays) are $\bar{A}_{\bar{f}}$ and $A_{\bar{f}}$.
For hadrons carrying any conserved quantum numbers (\mbox{\itshape i.e.}\xspace\ charged mesons and all baryons), it is not possible for both \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace and \ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace to decay to the same final state, and therefore the only possible manifestation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation is when $\bar{A}_{\bar{f}}$ and $A_f$ are not equal in magnitude.
For neutral \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace mesons, however, additional \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects related to particle-antiparticle mixing can occur.
Considering the concrete case where $f$ is a \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace-eigenstate, \mbox{\itshape i.e.}\xspace\ $f = \bar{f} = f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}$, the possible \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects depend on the quantity
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lambda}
\lambda_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}} = \frac{q}{p}\frac{\bar{A}_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}}{A_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}}\,.
\end{equation}
Consequently there are two additional possible ways for asymmetries to arise.
The different types of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation can be summarised as
\begin{itemize}
\item \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing: $\left| q/p \right| \neq 1$;
\item \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing/decay interference: ${\rm arg}(\lambda_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}})\neq 0$;
\item \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay: $\left|\bar{A}_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}/A_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}\right| \neq 1$.
\end{itemize}
A summary of which of these types of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation have been observed, and in which different hadronic systems, is shown in Table~\ref{tab:scoreboard}.
\begin{table}[!htb]
\centering
\caption{
\label{tab:scoreboard}
Summary of the systems where \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects have been observed.
A five standard deviation ($\sigma$) significance threshold is required
for a \checkmark; several such observations in different channels are
required for a $^{\small \checkmark}$\kern-1.3ex\checkmark.
Note that \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay is the only possible category for particles that do not undergo oscillations.
}
\vspace{0.3pc}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccccc}
\hline \\ [-2.8ex]
& $K^0$ & $K^+$ & $\ensuremath{\PLambda}\xspace$ & $D^0$ & $D^+$ & $D_s^+$ & $\ensuremath{\Lz^+_\cquark}\xspace$ & $B^0$ & $B^+$ & $B_s^0$ & $\ensuremath{\Lz^0_\bquark}\xspace$ \\
\hline \\ [-2.5ex]
\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing & $^{\small \checkmark}$\kern-1.3ex\checkmark & -- & -- & \hspace{1pt}\ding{55} & -- & -- & -- &
\hspace{1pt}\ding{55} & -- & \hspace{1pt}\ding{55} & -- \\ [0.5ex]
\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in & \multirow{2}{*}{\checkmark} & \multirow{2}{*}{--} & \multirow{2}{*}{--} & \multirow{2}{*}{\hspace{1pt}\ding{55}} & \multirow{2}{*}{--} & \multirow{2}{*}{--} & \multirow{2}{*}{--} & \multirow{2}{*}{$^{\small \checkmark}$\kern-1.3ex\checkmark} & \multirow{2}{*}{--} & \multirow{2}{*}{\hspace{1pt}\ding{55}} & \multirow{2}{*}{--} \\
mixing/decay interference\\ [0.5ex]
\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay & \checkmark & \hspace{1pt}\ding{55} & \hspace{1pt}\ding{55} & \hspace{1pt}\ding{55} & \hspace{1pt}\ding{55} & \hspace{1pt}\ding{55} & \hspace{1pt}\ding{55} & $^{\small \checkmark}$\kern-1.3ex\checkmark & $^{\small \checkmark}$\kern-1.3ex\checkmark & \checkmark & \hspace{1pt}\ding{55} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Another categorisation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects, as either indirect or direct, can be found in the literature.
This is of mainly historical interest, related to the 1964 proposal of Wolfenstein~\cite{Wolfenstein:1964ks} that the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects observed in the kaon system could be due to a new ``superweak'' force that contributes only to meson-antimeson mixing.
In this scenario, all observed \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects must be consistent with a universal phase in the mixing amplitude.
The phrase ``indirect \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation'' refers to effects that are consistent with this hypothesis, while ``direct \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation'' refers to effects that are not; this categorisation is thus useful to test the superweak hypothesis.
Since direct \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation has been observed in all of the kaon~\cite{Fanti:1999nm,AlaviHarati:1999xp}, \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace~\cite{Aubert:2004qm,Chao:2004mn} and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-018} systems, there is little reason for further consideration of the superweak hypothesis, and this terminology is in principle obsolete.
\subsection{\boldmath Strong and weak phases}
\label{sec:phases}
As discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:CPV-types}, the condition for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay is $\left|\bar{A}_{\bar{f}}/A_f \right| \neq 1$.
In order for this to be realised, the amplitudes $\bar{A}_{\bar{f}}$ and $A_f$ must have at least two components with different strong and weak phases.
The labelling of phases as ``strong'' or ``weak'' simply reflects their behaviour under the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace operation: ``strong'' phases (denoted by $\delta$ in the following) do not change sign under \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace, while weak phases ($\phi$) do.
In the SM, the strong and weak phases arise from hadronic interactions and from the CKM matrix, respectively.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{BKpi-tree.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{BKpi-penguin.pdf}
\caption{
SM (left) tree and (right) penguin diagrams for the decay $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$.
}
\label{fig:TandP}
\end{figure}
The separation of the amplitudes into components can be done in many ways.
It is particularly useful to separate the components according to the CKM elements involved, whose relative weak phase is therefore known in the SM.
Another approach, of heuristic benefit, is to distinguish ``tree'' ($T$) from ``penguin'' ($P$) amplitudes (example diagrams are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:TandP}), so that
\begin{equation}
A_f = \left| T \right| e^{i(\delta_T - \phi_T)} + \left| P \right| e^{i(\delta_P -\phi_P)} \, ,~~
\bar{A}_{\bar{f}} = \left| T \right| e^{i(\delta_T + \phi_T)} + \left| P \right| e^{i(\delta_P + \phi_P)} \, .
\end{equation}
The \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetry is defined from the rate difference between the particle involving the quark ($\bar{B}$) and that containing the antiquark ($B$),
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace} & = & \frac{\left| \bar{A}_{\bar{f}} \right|^2 - \left| A_{f} \right|^2}{\left| \bar{A}_{\bar{f}} \right|^2 + \left| A_{f} \right|^2} \, , \nonumber \\
& = &
\frac{2 \left| T \right| \left| P \right| \sin(\delta_T - \delta_P) \sin(\phi_T - \phi_P)} {\left| T \right|^2 + \left| P \right|^2 + 2 \left| T \right| \left| P \right| \cos(\delta_T - \delta_P) \cos(\phi_T - \phi_P)} \, , \label{eq:Acp} \\
& = &
\frac{2 r \sin(\delta_T - \delta_P) \sin(\phi_T - \phi_P)} {1 + r^2 + 2 r \cos(\delta_T - \delta_P) \cos(\phi_T - \phi_P)} \, , \label{eq:acp-decay}
\end{eqnarray}
where $r = \frac{\left| P \right|}{\left| T \right|}$ or $\frac{\left| T \right|}{\left| P \right|}$ (it is conventional to choose $r < 1$).
For the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetry to be non-zero, it is therefore necessary that all of $\left| T \right|$, $\left| P \right|$, $\sin(\delta_T - \delta_P)$ and $\sin(\phi_T - \phi_P)$ are also non-zero.
For any given \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decay to a final state $f$ there are only two observables (the branching fraction and $A_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}$) and so it is impossible to determine all four underlying parameters without additional input.
Such external information could ideally be taken from first-principles calculations, and a great deal of effort has been invested in developing theoretical methods to enable such calculations (see, for example, Refs.~\cite{Li:1994iu,Li:1995jr,Keum:2000wi,Beneke:1999br,Beneke:2000ry,Beneke:2001ev,Beneke:2002jn,Beneke:2003zv,Bauer:2000yr,Bauer:2001cu,Bauer:2001yt,Beneke:2002ph,Bell:2007tv,Bell:2009nk}).
However, the associated uncertainties are often large.
Fortunately, there are many cases where the parameters of different decay modes can be related, for example by flavour symmetries, and so data-driven methods can be used to determine the weak phase difference.
In such cases, theoretically clean interpretation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects is still possible in processes involving more than one weak phase.
Processes where only a single weak phase contributes can also, in general, be interpreted with low theoretical uncertainty.
An important subtlety in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Acp}) is that the final state $f$ should be a unique point in phase space.
This equation can therefore be trivially applied to two-body decays, but care is needed when discussing multibody final states.
In particular, it is often useful to consider multibody final states in terms of their resonant components, \mbox{\itshape e.g.}\xspace\ in a Dalitz plot analysis of a three-body decay, or an angular analysis of a ($B \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace VV$) decay mediated by two vector particles.
In such cases, the resonant lineshapes of contributing intermediate states and the different angular distributions of contributing partial waves can guarantee the required strong phase difference even if none is present in the expressions for the intermediate amplitudes.
Consequently, analysis of multibody \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays is a powerful approach to investigate \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation.
\subsection{\boldmath The Unitarity Triangle}
\label{sec:UT}
The usefulness of the \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace sector for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation tests can be conveniently visualised by considering the unitarity relation between the first and third columns of the CKM matrix
\begin{equation}
V_{\rm CKM} =
\left( \begin{array}{ccc}
V_{ud} & V_{us} & V_{ub} \\
V_{cd} & V_{cs} & V_{cb} \\
V_{td} & V_{ts} & V_{tb} \\
\end{array} \right) \, ,
\label{eq:CKM}
\end{equation}
that is
\begin{equation}
V_{ud}^{}V_{ub}^* + V_{cd}^{}V_{cb}^* + V_{td}^{}V_{tb}^* = 0 \, .
\label{eq:UT}
\end{equation}
The result of Eq.~(\ref{eq:UT}) can, after a trivial rescaling, be expressed as a triangle in the complex plane that is known as the Unitarity Triangle and is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:UT}.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{UT.pdf}
\caption{\small
The Unitarity Triangle, with both the $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ and $\phi_1,\phi_2,\phi_3$ notation for the angles.
Reproduced from Ref.~\cite{Gligorov:1106345}.
}
\label{fig:UT}
\end{figure}
The apex of the Unitarity Triangle is located at the point $(\ensuremath{\overline \rho}\xspace,\ensuremath{\overline \eta}\xspace)$ given by~\cite{Wolfenstein:1983yz,Buras:1994ec}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rhoetabar}
\ensuremath{\overline \rho}\xspace + i\ensuremath{\overline \eta}\xspace
\equiv -\frac{V_{ud}V_{ub}^*}{V_{cd}V_{cb}^*}
\equiv 1 + \frac{V_{td}V_{tb}^*}{V_{cd}V_{cb}^*} \, .
\end{equation}
The angles of the Unitarity Triangle are defined as
\begin{equation}
\alpha \equiv
\arg\left(-\frac{V_{td}^{}V_{tb}^*}{V_{ud}^{}V_{ub}^*}\right) \, , ~~
\beta \equiv
\arg\left(-\frac{V_{cd}^{}V_{cb}^*}{V_{td}^{}V_{tb}^*}\right) \, , ~~
\gamma \equiv
\arg\left(-\frac{V_{ud}^{}V_{ub}^*}{V_{cd}^{}V_{cb}^*}\right) \, ,
\label{eq:angles}
\end{equation}
each of which can be measured from various different \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decay processes, as described below.
Among several alternative notations that can be found in the literature, that with
$\phi_2 \equiv \alpha,~\phi_1 \equiv \beta,~\phi_3 \equiv \gamma$ is particularly widely used.
The $(\alpha, \beta, \gamma)$ notation is, however, prevalent, and is used in this review.
A similar triangle that can be formed from the second and third columns of the CKM matrix has an angle defined by
\begin{equation}
\beta_s \equiv
\arg\left(-\frac{V_{ts}^{}V_{tb}^*}{V_{cs}^{}V_{cb}^*}\right) \, .
\label{eq:angles-betas}
\end{equation}
This quantity is particularly relevant for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation studies involving oscillations of \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mesons.
\subsection{Decay-time-dependent decay rates}
\label{sec:rates}
Following Refs.~\cite{Dunietz:2000cr,HFAG}, the most general decay-time-dependent rates for a \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson that is initially (at time $t=0$) known to be in the $B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}$ or $\overline{B}^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)}$ flavour eigenstate to decay into a final state $f$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d\Gamma_{B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace f}(t)}{dt} & \propto & e^{-\Gamma_{(s)}t}
\Big[
\cosh(\frac{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)} t}{2}) +
A_{f}^{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)}} \sinh(\frac{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)} t}{2}) + \nonumber \\
& & \hspace{30mm} C_f \cos(\Delta m_{(s)} t) - S_f \sin(\Delta m_{(s)} t)
\Big] \, , \label{eg:tdcpv1} \\
\frac{d\Gamma_{\overline{B}^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace f}(t)}{dt} & \propto & e^{-\Gamma_{(s)}t}
\Big[
\cosh(\frac{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)} t}{2}) +
A_{f}^{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)}} \sinh(\frac{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)} t}{2}) - \nonumber \\
& & \hspace{30mm} C_f \cos(\Delta m_{(s)} t) + S_f \sin(\Delta m_{(s)} t)
\Big] \, , \label{eg:tdcpv2}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
A^{\Delta \Gamma}_f \equiv - \frac{2\, \Re(\lambda_f)}{1 + |\lambda_f|^2} \, , ~~
C_f \equiv \frac{1 - \left|\lambda_f\right|^2}{1 + \left|\lambda_f\right|^2} \, , ~~
S_f \equiv \frac{2\, \Im(\lambda_f)}{1 + \left|\lambda_f\right|^2} \, ,
\label{eq:ACS-defs}
\end{equation}
and $\lambda_f$ is the quantity defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lambda}).
The relation $|C_f|^2+|S_f|^2+|A^{\Delta \Gamma}_f|^2 = 1$ holds by definition.
(An alternative notation, $A_f \;\equiv\; -C_f$ is also in use in the literature; moreover, some texts use a different sign convention for $A^{\Delta \Gamma}_f$.)
The decay-time-dependent asymmetry is then
\begin{equation}
\label{eg:tdcpv-asym}
\frac{\Gamma_{\overline{B}^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace f}(t) - \Gamma_{B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace f}(t)}
{\Gamma_{\overline{B}^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace f}(t) + \Gamma_{B^0_{(\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace)} \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace f}(t)} =
\frac{S_f \sin(\Delta m_{(s)} t) - C_f \cos(\Delta m_{(s)} t)}
{\cosh(\frac{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)} t}{2}) +
A_{f}^{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)}} \sinh(\frac{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)} t}{2})} \, .
\end{equation}
If $f$ is not self-conjugate, similiar decay rates hold for the conjugate final state $\bar{f}$, with parameters $C_{\bar{f}}$, $S_{\bar{f}}$ and $A^{\Delta \Gamma}_{\bar{f}}$.
For convenience, the $C_f$ and $S_f$ parameters will be referred to as ``sinusoidal'' observables in what follows, while $A_{f}^{\Delta \Gamma}$ terms will be referred to as ``hyperbolic'' observables.
Since $\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Pd}\xspace}}\xspace=0$ to a good approximation in the SM, the hyperbolic observables are only relevant when considering decays of \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mesons.
Depending on the process in question the final state might be flavour specific (either $\bar{A}_f = 0$ or $A_f = 0$), in which case only \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing or decay are possible, or it might be accessible to both flavour eigenstates (both $\bar{A}_f, A_f \neq 0$), so that \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation can also arise in the interference of mixing and decay.
Again, it should be stressed that in Eqs.~(\ref{eg:tdcpv1}) and~(\ref{eg:tdcpv2}), $f$ refers to a particular point in phase space.
In case that the same formalism is used to refer to a state that is an admixture of different components, as in the case of a $B \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace VV$ decay such as $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\phi$ or in a three-body decay such as $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$, similar expressions can be formed for each individual component of the final state, but there are additional effects arising from interference between the different components which must
also be accounted for.
The importance of Eqs.~(\ref{eg:tdcpv1}) and~(\ref{eg:tdcpv2}) is that in certain cases they allow straightforward measurement of underlying \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation parameters.
Considering the case that $f$ is a \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstate, $S_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}$ probes \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing/decay interference, while $C_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}$ is sensitive to both \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing and \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay -- in practice since \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing is universal and is known to be small, $C_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}$ can in many cases be interpreted as probing the latter.
If only a single weak phase appears in the decay amplitudes, then $C_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}$ will be zero and $S_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}$ can be cleanly interpreted in terms of that phase plus the phase of the mixing amplitude.
Measurement of the hyperbolic parameter $A^{\Delta \Gamma}_{f_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}}$ provides additional sensitivity to the same sum of phases.
In the case that $f$ is not a \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace eigenstate, the situation is slightly more complicated.
None of the parameters correspond directly to \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation, but their combinations do: if $S_f \neq - S_{\bar{f}}$ there is \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing/decay interference, while if $C_f \neq - C_{\bar{f}}$ there is \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay.
An additional probe of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay comes from the normalisation of Eqs.~(\ref{eg:tdcpv1}) and~(\ref{eg:tdcpv2}) and their equivalents for the $\bar{f}$ final state -- any difference in the normalisation factors for $f$ and $\bar{f}$ corresponds to \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation.
Again, it is only in
the case that a single weak phase contributes
that \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation measurements can be cleanly interpreted, but this situation is expected to occur for several decay modes, as discussed below.
It is also possible to obtain weak phase information, through the $A_{f}^{\Delta \Gamma_{(s)}}$ term, in an untagged decay-time-dependent analysis of \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace decays
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d\left(\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace f}(t) + \Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Bbar^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace f}(t)\right)}{dt}
& \propto & e^{-\ensuremath{\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace t}
\Big[
\cosh\left(\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace t}{2}\right) + A_{f}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace} \sinh\left(\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace t}{2}\right)
\Big] \, . \nonumber \\
\label{eg:tdcpv-untagged}
\end{eqnarray}
This distribution can be fitted with a single exponential function to determine the effective lifetime $\tau_{\rm eff}$ given by~\cite{Fleischer:2011cw}
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_{\rm eff} \ensuremath{\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace
& = & \frac{1}{1-y_s^2} \left( \frac{1+ 2A_{f}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace}\,y_s + y_s^2}{1+A_{f}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace}\,y_s} \right) \, ,
\nonumber \\
& = & 1 + A_{f}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace}y_s +
\left[ 2 - (A_{f}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace})^2 \right] y_s^2 + ... \,
\label{eq:tau-eff}
\end{eqnarray}
where $y_s = \left(\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace}{2\ensuremath{\Gamma_{\ensuremath{\Ps}\xspace}}\xspace}\right)$ and the ellipses denote higher order terms.
The effective lifetimes of several \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace decays have been measured (for reviews, see Refs.~\cite{HFAG,Stone:2014pra}).
However, since tagged analyses give more precise information on the weak phase and thereby on \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation, results on effective lifetimes are not mentioned in this review except in a few specific cases.
\section{\boldmath \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in tree-dominated transitions}
\label{sec:tree-dominated}
\input{semileptonic}
\input{ccq}
\input{cud}
\input{gamma}
\section{\boldmath \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in interference between tree and loop amplitudes}
\label{sec:tree-penguin}
There are several types of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace decays to hadronic final states where both tree and loop amplitudes are expected to contribute with comparable magnitudes.
These include decays mediated by the $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}d$ quark-level transitions.
The interference between tree and loop amplitudes causes \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay to be expected in the SM, but its interpretation in terms of fundamental parameters is challenging due to hadronic uncertainties.
As will be shown, several approaches, often involving flavour symmetries, have been proposed to overcome this problem.
As mentioned in Sec.~\ref{sec:penguin-dominated}, decays mediated by $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{d}s$ and $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{d}d$ loop transitions often contribute to the same final states due to hadronisation effects, and therefore modes involving $\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$, $\eta$, $\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace$ and $\omega$ mesons are relevant to this Section.
There is consequently an enormous number of different final states, of which only a selection will be discussed.
Full listings of all measurements, including several where the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace\ asymmetries are reaching an interesting level of significance (\mbox{\itshape e.g.}\xspace\ ${\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \eta\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace)$) can be found in Refs.~\cite{HFAG,PDG2016}.
\subsection{Studies of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}q$ transitions}
Ever since the relative branching fractions of $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ were first measured~\cite{Godang:1997we,CroninHennessy:2000kg} it was known that loop diagrams make sizable contributions to these decays.
However, it was not known if \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects would be large, as it remained possible that small strong phase differences could cause suppression; a range of values were predicted in explicit models of QCD effects in these decays~\cite{Keum:2000wi,Beneke:2001ev}.
The first measurement of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson decays, in the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ channel~\cite{Aubert:2004qm,Chao:2004mn} was therefore of great importance, bearing in mind that it occurred only a few years after the first observation of direct \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in the kaon system~\cite{Fanti:1999nm,AlaviHarati:1999xp}.
The latest world average is~\cite{HFAG,Lees:2012mma,Duh:2012ie,Aaltonen:2014vra,LHCb-PAPER-2013-018}
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace) = -0.082 \pm 0.006 \, .
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[!b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{PAPER-2013-018-cpvall.pdf}
\caption{
Measurements of ${\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace)$ and ${\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace)$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-018}.
The final states are separated by charge: (a,c) $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$; (b,d) $\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$.
The lower plots zoom in to allow better inspection of the \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace region.
}
\label{fig:AcpKpi}
\end{figure}
The production of all types of \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace meson in hadron collider experiments means that \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects can be studied simultaneously in \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace decays to the same final state.
Consequently, the first observation of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-018} was made together with the most precise determination of ${\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace)$, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:AcpKpi}.
Although in $pp$ collisions there may be production asymmetry effects that could differ for \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace mesons, these have been measured to be small~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-042}.
The result is~\cite{HFAG,Aaltonen:2014vra,LHCb-PAPER-2013-018}
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace) = 0.26 \pm 0.04 \, .
\end{equation}
This is consistent with the SM prediction of approximately equal and opposite width differences between $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace$~\cite{He:1998rq,Fleischer:1999pa,Gronau:2000md,Lipkin:2005pb}.
The difference $\Delta {\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K\pi) = {\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace)-{\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace)$ has been suggested as an interesting observable~\cite{Lin:2008zzaa}.
The measured value ${\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace) = 0.040 \pm 0.021$~\cite{Aubert:2007hh,Duh:2012ie} leads to
\begin{equation}
\Delta {\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K\pi) = -0.122 \pm 0.022 \, ,
\end{equation}
where possible correlations among systematic uncertainties have been neglected.
As seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:TandP}, the tree and penguin diagrams involved differ only by the spectator quark, and therefore if only these diagrams contribute then similar asymmetries, and $\Delta {\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K\pi) \approx 0$, would be expected.
Additional subleading amplitudes which contribute only to the $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ decay and QCD corrections can, however, potentially explain the effect~\cite{Chiang:2004nm,Charng:2004ed,Chua:2007cm,Liu:2015upa}.
In order to investigate whether any non-SM physics causes the anomalous $\Delta {\cal A}_{\ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace}(\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K\pi)$ value, a theoretically clean sum rule involving all four $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K\pi$ decays has been proposed~\cite{Gronau:2008gu,Baek:2009hv}.
The precision of this approach is limited by the precision achieved with the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ mode, where tagged analyses are necessary~\cite{Aubert:2008ad,Fujikawa:2008pk}.
Significant improvement can be expected with data from \mbox{Belle}\xspace~II.
Another interesting approach is to extend these measurements to final states involving pseudoscalar and vector mesons, \mbox{\itshape i.e.}\xspace\ $B\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^*}\xspace \pi$ and $K \rho$.
Due to the non-negligible widths of the vector particles, such measurements must be made from Dalitz plot analyses, but large yields are available in most channels.
Several of the asymmetries have been measured~\cite{Garmash:2005rv,Aubert:2008bj,Aubert:2009me,Dalseno:2008wwa,BABAR:2011ae,BABAR:2011aaa,Lees:2015uun}, but the precision is not yet competitive with that in the $K\pi$ modes.
To determine information about the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation associated with particular resonant amplitudes, such as those for $B\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^*}\xspace \pi$ and $K \rho$ decays, it is necessary to perform a model-dependent amplitude analysis of the distribution of the three-body final state over the Dalitz plot.
It is also possible to search for \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation model-independently, by comparing the binned distribution of events between \ensuremath{\PB}\xspace and \ensuremath{\kern 0.18em\overline{\kern -0.18em \PB}{}}\xspace decays~\cite{Aubert:2008yd,Bediaga:2009tr,Williams:2011cd,Bediaga:2012tm}.
(Similar methods have also been proposed for untagged decays~\cite{Burdman:1991vt,Gardner:2002bb,Gardner:2003su}.)
This has been done by LHCb for all of the $\ensuremath{\B^\pm}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$, $\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$, $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-027,LHCb-PAPER-2013-051,LHCb-PAPER-2014-044}, revealing very large \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation effects in some parts of the phase space as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Bto3h}.
The \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation is not localised around narrow resonances, but rather seems more pronounced in regions dominated by broad structures.
This presents a challenge for the interpretation, since the dynamical origin of the broad structures is not clear~\cite{Nogueira:2015tsa,Bediaga:2015mia}.
Detailed Dalitz plot studies will be necessary to gain deeper insights.
In addition to understanding the hadronic physics, it is of course interesting to investigate if the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation is consistent with the SM, for which several methods based on flavour symmetries have been proposed~\cite{Ciuchini:2006kv,Ciuchini:2006st,Gronau:2006qn,Gronau:2007vr,Bediaga:2006jk,Gronau:2010dd,Gronau:2010kq,Imbeault:2010xg,Bhattacharya:2015uua}.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.41\textwidth]{PAPER-2014-044-Fig4a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.41\textwidth]{PAPER-2014-044-Fig5a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.41\textwidth]{PAPER-2014-044-Fig6b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.41\textwidth]{PAPER-2014-044-Fig7a.pdf}
\caption{
Yields of \ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace and \ensuremath{\Bub}\xspace decays as a function of two-body invariant mass in the (top left) $\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$, (top right) $\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$, (bottom left) $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^\pm}\xspace$ and (bottom right) $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^\pm}\xspace$ final states~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-044}.
In the first three plots, selections on the helicity angle have been imposed to enhance the observed \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace asymmetry.
The bottom left plot shows as an inset a zoom in the $\phi$ region.
}
\label{fig:Bto3h}
\end{figure}
Similar analyses can also be performed for $\ensuremath{\B^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS h^+h^{\prime -}$ decays, where $h^{(\prime)} = \pi,K$.
These provide additional interesting potential due to U-spin relations between \ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace and \ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace decays~\cite{Cheng:2014uga}, but the available yields are much smaller compared to modes with three charged tracks in the final state~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-042}.
Ideally, such analyses should be complemented by results from the $\ensuremath{\B^0_{(\squark)}}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace h^+h^{\prime -}\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\Bu}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS h^+\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ modes, but the reconstruction of neutral particles is challenging at a hadron collider and LHCb has not yet produced any results on these modes.
\mbox{Belle}\xspace~II, however, is expected to be able to study at least some of these channels.
\subsection{Studies of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in mixing/decay interference in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}q$ transitions}
As noted above, hadronisation of states with $u\bar{u}$ content, produced from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}s$ transitions, inevitably means that contributions from $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace d\bar{d}s$ penguin amplitudes will also be present.
Thus, results on modes such as $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \KS\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$, $\KS\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace$ and $\KS\omega$ are included in Fig.~\ref{fig:bsssbetaeff} in Sec.~\ref{sec:penguin-dominated:mix}.
The interpretation of these results in terms of CKM phases and potential non-SM amplitudes is not trivial due to the need to disentangle different SM contributions, but flavour symmetries can be exploited to reduce theoretical uncertainties~\cite{Fleischer:2008wb,Gronau:2008gu,Ciuchini:2008eh,Duraisamy:2009kb}.
In the case of $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace$ decays, $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}s$ transitions can lead to two types of final states: either $(s\bar{s})(u\bar{u})$, such as $\phi\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$, or $(s\bar{u})(\bar{s}u)$, such as $\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$.
In the former case the decays are isospin-violating and consequently both rare and sensitive to physics beyond the SM in electroweak penguin amplitudes~\cite{Hofer:2010ee}.
There are no experimental results on the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\phi\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$ channel, but a recent amplitude analysis of $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\phi\ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays by LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2016-028} provides evidence for the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \phi\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace$ decay with a branching fraction of ${\cal O}(10^{-7})$.
Much larger data samples will be required for decay-time dependent analysis.
The LHCb experiment is well-suited to study the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decay.
The two-track final state allows high acceptance and trigger efficiency, leading to large yields.
An analysis of the $1\ensuremath{\mbox{\,fb}^{-1}}\xspace$ sample collected in 2011 gave the first measurement of the \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation parameters in this mode~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-040}, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:KKpipi}:
\begin{equation}
C_{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace} = 0.14 \pm 0.11 \pm 0.03 \, , \qquad
S_{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace} = 0.30 \pm 0.12 \pm 0.04 \, ,
\end{equation}
where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.
The constraint $|C_{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace}|^2+|S_{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace}|^2+|A_{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace}^{\Delta \Gamma}|^2 = 1$ has been used.
An effective flavour tagging efficiency of $(2.45 \pm 0.25)\,\%$ was achieved.
It is likely that this can be improved in updated measurements based on larger data samples, and therefore there are good prospects for strong constraints to be obtained on $C_{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace}$ and $S_{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace}$, potentially leading to observations of \ensuremath{C\!P}\xspace violation in decay and/or in mixing/decay interference in this channel.
In this context it is noteworthy that the largest sources of systematic uncertainty, due to the knowledge of the efficiency variation as a function of decay time and the decay time resolution function, are expected to be reducible.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth]{PAPER-2013-040-Fig6.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{PAPER-2014-045-Fig3a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{PAPER-2014-045-Fig3b.pdf}
\caption{
Asymmetries in the decay-time distributions, with fit results superimposed, for (top) $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decays~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-040}, where the data have been folded to a single period of the oscillation.
Constraints on (bottom left) $\gamma$ and (bottom right) $-2\beta_s$ obtained from $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ and $\ensuremath{\PB}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \pi\pi$ decays as a function of the amount of non-factorisable U-spin breaking parametrised by $\kappa$~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-045}.
}
\label{fig:KKpipi}
\end{figure}
If the contributions from the tree and penguin amplitudes to the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decay can be disentangled, the results on $C_{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace}$ and $S_{\ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace}$ can be used to determine their relative weak phase, $\gamma$.
Alternatively, if the value of $\gamma$ from tree-dominated decays (Sec.~\ref{sec:gamma-tree-level}) is used as a constraint, a value of $-2\beta_s$ can be obtained.
There are not enough observables in the $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\kaon^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\kaon^-}\xspace$ decay alone, but a U-spin relation with $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{\pion^+}\xspace\ensuremath{\pion^-}\xspace$ decays that are discussed in the next subsection can be exploited~\cite{Fleischer:1999pa,Fleischer:2010ib,Ciuchini:2012gd}.
Such an interpretation has been made by LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2014-045}.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:KKpipi}, it is found that the sensitivity to $\gamma$ depends strongly on the uncertainty assigned due to non-factorisable U-spin breaking effects.
The result for $-2\beta_s$, however, appears more robust to such effects, and therefore this method could be used to obtain a complementary and competitive determination to that from $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace \ensuremath{{\PJ\mskip -3mu/\mskip -2mu\Ppsi\mskip 2mu}}\xspace\phi$ and similar decays (Sec.~\ref{sec:psiphiandbuddies}).
As regards mixing/decay interference in $b \ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace u\bar{u}d$ transitions, the $\ensuremath{\B^0}\xspace$ decays are discussed in the next subsection.
The $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\rhomeson^0}\xspace$ decay can in principle be studied at LHCb~\cite{LHCb-PAPER-2013-042}, but much larger data samples than currently available will be needed.
Other decays, such as $\ensuremath{\B^0_\squark}\xspace\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace\KS\ensuremath{\pion^0}\xspace$, $\KS\eta^{(\prime)}$, $\KS\omega$, appear even less attractive.
\input{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
The counting of~$k$-mers in large amounts of reads is a common task in bioinformatics. The problem is to count the occurrences of all~$k$-long substrings in a large amount of sequencing reads. Its most prominent application is de novo assembly of genome sequences.
Although building a histogram of~$k$-mers seems to be quite a simple task from an algorithmic point of view, it has attracted a considerably amount of attention in recent years. In fact, the counting of~$k$-mers becomes a challenging problem for large instances, if it is to be both resource- and time-efficient and therefore makes it an interesting object of study for algorithm engineering. Existing tools for~$k$-mer counting are often optimized for~$k<32$ and lack good performance for larger~$k$. Recent advances in technology towards larger read lengths are leading to the quest to cope with values of~$k$ exceeding~32. Studies elaborating on the optimal choice for the value of~$k$ recommend for various applications relatively high values
\cite{Xavier2014, Chikhi01012014}. In particular, working with long sequencing reads helps to improve accuracy and contig assembly (with~$k$ values in the hundreds)~\cite{Sameith-et-al2016}.
In this paper, we develop a tool with a high performance for such large values of~$k$.
\subsection{Related Work}
Among the first software tools that succeeded in counting the~$k$-mers of large genome data sets was Jellyfish \cite{marccais2011fast}, which uses a lock-free hash table that allows parallel insertion. In the following years, several tools were published, successively reducing running time and required memory. BFCounter~\cite{Melsted2011} uses Bloom filters for~$k$-mer counting to filter out rarely occurring~$k$-mers stemming from sequencing errors.
Other tools like DSK \cite{rizk2013dsk} and KMC \cite{Deorowicz2013} exploit a two-disk architecture and aim at reducing expensive IO operations. Turtle \cite{Roy10032014} replaces a standard Bloom filter by a cache-efficient counterpart. MSPKmerCounter \cite{li2015mspkmercounter} introduces the concept of minimizers to the~$k$-mer counting, thus further optimizing the disk-based approach. The minimizer approach was later on refined to signatures within KMC2 \cite{Deorowicz15052015}. Up to now, the two most efficient open source software tools have been KMC2 and DSK. KMC2 uses a sorting based counting approach that has been optimized for~$k<32$. However, its performance drops when~$k$ grows larger. Instead, DSK uses a single large hash table and is therefore efficient for large~$k$ (but does not support~$k > 127$). However, for small~$k$, it is clearly slower than KMC2.
To the best of our knowledge, the only existing approach that uses GPUs for counting~$k$-mers is the work by Suzuki et al.~\cite{Suzuki2014}.
\subsection{Contribution}
In this article we present the open source~$k$-mer counting tool \textsl{Gerbil}. Our software is the result of an extensive process of algorithm engineering that tried to bring together the best ideas from the literature.
The result is a~$k$-mer counting tool that is both time efficient and memory frugal.\footnote{The tool is named \textsl{Gerbil} because of its modest resource requirements, which it has in common with the name-giving mammal.}
In addition, \textsl{Gerbil} can optionally use GPUs to accelerate the counting step. It outperforms its strongest competitors both in efficiency and resource consumption significantly. For large values of~$k$, it reduces the runtime by up to a factor of four. The software is written in C++ and CUDA and is freely available at \url{https://github.com/uni-halle/gerbil} under MIT license.
In the next section we describe the general algorithmic work flow of \textsl{Gerbil}. Thereafter, in Section~\ref{sec:implementation}, we focus on algorithm engineering aspects that proved essential for high performance and describe details, like the integration of a GPU into the counting process. In Section~\ref{sec:results}, we evaluate \textsl{Gerbil}'s performance in a set of experiments and compare it with those of KMC2 and DSK. We conclude this article by a short summary and a glance on future work.
\section{Methods}
\textsl{Gerbil} is divided into two phases: (1) Distribution and (2) Counting. In this section, we give a high-level description of \textsl{Gerbil}'s work flow.
\subsection{Distribution}
Whole genome data sets typically do not fit into the main memory. Hence, it is necessary to split the input data into a couple of smaller temporary files.
\textsl{Gerbil} uses a two-disk approach that is similar to those of most contemporary~$k$-mer counting tools \cite{Deorowicz15052015, rizk2013dsk, li2015mspkmercounter}. The first disk contains the input read data and is used to store the counted~$k$-mer values. We call this disk input/output-disk. The second disk, which we call working disk, is used to store temporary files.
The key idea is to assure that the temporary files partition the input reads in such a way, that all occurrences of a certain~$k$-mer are stored in the same temporary file. This way, one can simply count the~$k$-mers of the temporary files independently of each other, with small main memory requirements.
To split the genome data into temporary files, we make use of the \emph{minimizer} approach that has been proposed by~\cite{roberts2004preprocessor} and later on refined by~\cite{Deorowicz15052015}.
A genome sequence can be decomposed into a number of overlapping \emph{super-mers}. Each super-mer is a substring of maximal length such that all~$k$-mers on that substring share the same minimizer. Hereby, a minimizer of a~$k$-mer is defined as its lexicographically smallest substring of a fixed length~$m < k$ with respect to some total ordering on strings of length~$m$.
See Fig.~\ref{Fig:MiminizerExample} for an example.
It suffices to partition the set of super-mers into different temporary files to achieve a partitioning of all different~$k$-mers \cite{Deorowicz15052015}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{minimizer.pdf}
\caption{Minimizers and super-mers of the DNA string \texttt{CAAGAACAGTG}. Here,~$k=4$ and~$m=3$. For each~$k$-mer, the bold part is its minimizer. The example uses the lexicographic ordering on 3-mers based on~$A<C<G<T$. The sequence is divided into the five super-mers \texttt{CAAGA}, \texttt{AGAA}, \texttt{GAACA}, \texttt{ACAG}, and \texttt{CAGTG} that would be stored in temporary files.}
\label{Fig:MiminizerExample}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Counting}
The counting of~$k$-mers is typically done by one of two approaches: Sorting and Compressing~\cite{Deorowicz15052015} or using a hash table with~$k$-mers as keys and counters as values~\cite{marccais2011fast, rizk2013dsk}. The efficiency of the sorting approach typically relies on the sorting algorithm Radix Sort, whose running time increases with the length of~$k$-mers. Since we aim at high efficiency for large~$k$, we decided to implement the hash table approach. Therefore, we use a specialized hash table with~$k$-mers as keys and counters as values. We use a hash table that implements open addressing and solves collisions via double hashing. Alg.~\ref{Alg:HashInsert} shows a high level description of the insertion method.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Insert the~$k$-mer~$x$ into the hash table~$t$.} \label{Alg:HashInsert}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE~Hash Table~$t$,~$k$-mer~$x$, Maximal number of trials~$\theta$.
\STATE~$i \gets 0$
\WHILE[while max number of trials not reached]{$i< \theta$}
\STATE~$p \gets hash(x,i)$
\IF[matching $k$-mer detected]{$t_p = (x, c)$}
\STATE~$t_p \gets (x, c+1)$
\RETURN
\ELSIF[empty table entry]{$t_p$ is empty}
\STATE~$t_p \gets (x,1)$
\RETURN
\ELSE[entry locked by another~$k$-mer]
\STATE~$i \gets i+1$
\ENDIF
\ENDWHILE
\STATE Start emergency mechanism.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Work Flow}
Although the following description of the main process is sequential, all of the steps are interleaved and therefore executed in parallel. This is done by a classical pipeline architecture. Each output of a step makes the input of the next. We use ring buffers to connect the steps of the pipeline.
Such buffers are specialized for all combinations of single (S)/multiple (M) producers (P) and single (S)/multiple (M) consumers (C).
The actual number of parallel threads depend on the system and is determined by the software at runtime to achieve optimal memory throughput.
\subsubsection{Phase One: Distribution} The goal of the first phase is to split the input data into a number of temporary files. Fig.~\ref{Fig:Phase1} visualizes the first phase.
\begin{enumerate}
\item A group of reader threads read the genome reads from the input disk into the main memory. For compressed input, these threads also decompress it.
\item A second group of parser threads convert the read data from the input format into an internal read bundle format.
\item A group of splitter threads compute the minimizers of the reads. All subsequent substrings of a read that share the same minimizer are stored as a super-mer into an output buffer.
\item A single writer thread stores the output buffers to a variable number of temporary files at the working disk.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{phase1.pdf}
\caption{Work flow of Phase One.\label{Fig:Phase1}}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{phase2.pdf}
\caption{Work flow of Phase Two.\label{Fig:Phase2}}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Phase Two: Counting}
After the first phase has been completed, the temporary files are sequentially re-read from working disk and processed in the following manner (see Fig.~\ref{Fig:Phase2}).
\begin{enumerate}
\item A single reader thread reads the super-mers of a temporary file and stores them in main memory.
\item A group of threads split the super-mers into~$k$-mers.
Each~$k$-mer is distributed to one of multiple hasher threads by using a hash function on each~$k$-mer. This ensures that multiple occurrences of the same~$k$-mer are assigned to the same hasher thread and allows the distribution of separated hash tables to different memory spaces.
\item A group of hasher threads insert the~$k$-mers into their thread-own hash tables. After a temporary file has been completely processed, each hasher thread sends the content of its hash table to an output buffer.
\item A single writer thread writes from the output buffer to the output disk.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{DNA Sequence Handling}
\subsubsection{Undetermined bases}
DNA reads typically contain bases that could not been identified correctly during the sequencing process. Usually, such bases are marked $N$ in FASTQ input files. In accordance with established~$k$-mer counting tools, we ignore all~$k$-mers that contain an undetermined base.
\subsubsection{Reverse-Complement}
Since DNA is organized in double helix form, each~$k$-mer~$x \in \{A,C,G,T \}^k$ corresponds to its \emph{reverse-complement} that is defined by reversing~$x$ and replacing~$A \Leftrightarrow T$ and~$C \Leftrightarrow G$. Thus, the~$k$-mer~$ACCG$ corresponds to~$CGGT$. Many applications do not distinguish between a~$k$-mer and its reverse-complement. Thus, each occurrence of~$ACCG$ and~$CGGT$ is counted as occurrences of their unique \emph{canonical} representation. \textsl{Gerbil} uses the lexicographically smaller~$k$-mer as canonical representation. The use of reverse complement normalization can be turned off by command flag.
\section{Implementation Details}\label{sec:implementation}
We now want to point out several details on the algorithm engineering process that were essential to gain high performance.
\subsection{Total ordering on minimizers}
The choice of a total ordering has large effects on the size of temporary files and thus, also on the performance. To find a good total ordering, we have to balance various aspects. On the one hand, the total number of resulting super-mers are to be minimized to reduce the total size of disk memory that is needed by temporary files. On the other hand, the maximal number of distinct~$k$-mers that share the same minimizer should not be too large since we want an approximately uniform distribution of~$k$-mers to the temporary files.
An ``ideal'' total ordering would have both a large total number of super-mers and a small maximal number of distinct~$k$-mers per minimizer. Since these requirements contradict each other, we experimentally evaluated the pros and cons of various ordering strategies.
\begin{description}
\item[CGAT] The lexicographic ordering of minimizers based on~$C < G < A < T$.
\item[Roberts et al. ~\cite{Roberts12122004}] They propose the lexicographic ordering of minimizers with respect to~$C<A<T<G$. Furthermore, within the minimizer computation all bases at even positions are to be replaced by their reverse complement. Thus, rare minimizers like~$CGCGCG$ are preferred.
\item[KMC2] The ordering that is proposed by~\cite{Deorowicz15052015} is a lexicographic ordering with~$A<C<G<T$ and some built-in exceptions to eliminate the large number of minimizers that start with~$AAA$ or~$ACA$.
\item[Random] A random order of all string of fixed length~$m$ is unlikely to have both a small number of super-mers and a highly imbalanced distribution of distinct~$k$-mers. It is simple to establish, since we do not need frequency samples or further assumptions about the distribution of minimizers.
\item[Distance from Pivot (dfp($\mathbf{p}$))] To explain this strategy, consider the following observations: Ascendingly sorting the minimizers by their frequency favors rare minimizers. As a consequence, the maximal number of distinct~$k$-mers per minimizer is small. However, the total number of super-mers can be very large. Similarly, an descendingly sorted ordering results in quite the opposite effect. To find a compromise between both extremes, we initially sort the set of minimizers by their frequency. Since the frequencies depend on the data set, we approximate them by taking samples during runtime. We fix a pivot factor~$0\leq p \leq 1$ and re-sort the minimizers by the absolute difference of their initial position to the pivot position~$4^mp$. The result is an ordering that does neither prefer very rare nor very common minimizers and therefore makes a good compromise.
\end{description}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{rating_minimizer.pdf}
\caption{Evaluation of various total ordering strategies for minimizers (\emph{F Vesca},~$m=6$,~$k=28$). Strategy dfp($p$) has been tested with~$p \in \{0, 0.5, 0.8, 1\}$.}
\label{Fig:Minimizer}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Evaluation}
See Fig.~\ref*{Fig:Minimizer} for a rating of each strategy. The value on the~$x$-axis corresponds to the expected temporary disk memory, whereas the value on the~$y$-axis is correlated with the maximal main memory consumption of our program. A perfect strategy would be located at the bottom left corner. Several strategies seem to be reasonable choices. We evaluated each strategy and found that a small number of super-mers is more important than a small maximal number of~$k$-mer per minimizer for most data sets. As a result, we confirm that the total ordering that is already been used by KMC2 is a good choice for most data sets. Therefore, \textsl{Gerbil} uses the strategy from KMC2 for its ranking of minimizers.
\subsection{Length of miminizers}
The length~$m$ of miminizers is a parameter that has to be chosen with care. However, we can consider a basic rule: The larger $m$ is chosen, the less likely it becomes that consecutive $k$-mers share the same minimizer. Therefore, the number of super-mers decreases with growing $m$. An advantage of a smaller number of super-mers is that the set of super-mers can be distributed to the temporary files more uniformly, which results in temporary files of approximately uniform size. However, a major drawback of a large number of super-mers is the increased total size of temporary files. Thus, a small $m$ results in a better data compression.
In our experiments, we found that choosing minimizer length~$m=7$ is most efficient for the data sets.
\subsection{GPU Integration}
To integrate one or more GPUs into the process of~$k$-mer counting, several problems have to be dealt with. Typically, a GPU performs well only if it deals with data in a parallel manner. In addition, memory bound tasks (i.\,e.\,tasks that do not require a lot of arithmetic operations) like the counting of~$k$-mers require a carefully chosen memory access pattern to minimize the number of the accesses to the GPU's global memory.
We decided to transfer the hash table based counting approach to the GPU.
\subsubsection{GPU Hash Tables}
When compiled and executed with GPU support, \textsl{Gerbil} automatically detects CUDA capable GPUs. For each GPU, \textsl{Gerbil} replaces a CPU hasher thread by a GPU hasher thread which maintains its own hash table in GPU memory.
Each GPU hash table is similar in function to a traditional hash table. However, unlike the traditional approach, we add a large number of~$k$-mers in parallel. Therefore, the insertion procedure is slightly changed.
First, a bundle of several thousand~$k$-mers is copied to the GPU global memory space. Afterwards, we launch a large number of CUDA blocks, each consisting of 32 threads. Each block sequentially inserts a few~$k$-mers into the GPU hash table.
Since with increasing running time, it becomes more and more probable to find a mismatch when probing a hash table position, we additionally scan adjacent table positions in a range of 128 bytes when probing a hash table entry~(see Fig.~\ref{Fig:MemAccess}). Due to the architecture of a GPU, this can be done within the same global memory access. Thus, we scan up to 16 table entries in parallel, thereby reducing the number of accesses to a GPU's global memory.
In addition, the total number of probing operations is drastically reduced. In particular, by probing just one entry after the other, 90.37\% of all~$28$-mers of the \emph{F Vesca} data set (Table~\ref{Tab:Data}) can be inserted at first probing and no~$28$-mer needed more than 29 probings. In contrast, through scanning of adjacent table entries, 99.94\% of all~$28$-mers could be inserted at the first trial and no~$28$-mer needed more than seven probing operations.
To eliminate race conditions between CUDA blocks, we synchronize the probing of the hash table by using atomic operations to lock and unlock hash table entries. Since such operations are efficiently implemented in hardware, a large number of CUDA blocks can be executed in parallel.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{tiny}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,0.25) -- (1,0.25);
\draw (0,-0.25) -- (1,-0.25);
\node [xshift=1cm,draw,rectangle,minimum width=1cm,minimum height=.5cm,label=below:$p\phantom{+0}$] {$AGC$};
\node [xshift=2cm,draw,rectangle,minimum width=1cm,minimum height=.5cm,label=below:$p+4$] {$3$};
\node [xshift=3cm,draw,rectangle,minimum width=1cm,minimum height=.5cm,label=below:$p+8$] {$-$};
\node [xshift=4cm,draw,rectangle,minimum width=1cm,minimum height=.5cm,label=below:$p+12$] {$0$};
\draw (4.5,0.25) -- (5,0.25);
\draw (4.5,-0.25) -- (5,-0.25);
\node [text width=1cm] at (6,0) {...};
\draw (6,0.25) -- (6.5,0.25);
\draw (6,-0.25) -- (6.5,-0.25);
\node [xshift=7cm,draw,rectangle,minimum width=1cm,minimum height=.5cm,label=below:$p+124$] {$1$};
\node [xshift=8cm,draw,rectangle,minimum width=1cm,minimum height=.5cm,label=below:$p+128$] {$CAG$};
\draw (8.5,0.25) -- (9,0.25);
\draw (8.5,-0.25) -- (9,-0.25);
\draw [decorate, decoration={brace}, yshift=0.5cm] (0.5,0) -- node[above=0.4ex] {Area that is scanned in parallel.} (7.5,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{tiny}
\caption{GPU memory access pattern. The figure shows the memory area that is being scanned while probing a hash table entry that is stored at memory address~$p$. In this example,~$k=3$ and each table entry needs four bytes for the key and four bytes for the counter. Therefore, 16 entries can be loaded from global memory within one step and are scanned in parallel.}
\label{Fig:MemAccess}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Load Balancing}
We dynamically balance the amount of~$k$-mers that are assigned to the various CPU and GPU hasher threads. Therefore, we constantly measure the throughput of each hasher thread, i.\,e. the CPU-time needed to insert a certain number of~$k$-mers. Whenever a new temporary file is loaded from disk, we rebalance the number of~$k$-mers that are assigned to each hasher thread, considering the throughput and capacity of each hash table. By that, we automatically determine a good division of labour between CPU and GPU hasher threads without the need of careful hand-tuning.
\subsection{Hash Table Details}
\subsubsection{Estimating table sizes}
We aim at estimating the expected size of each hash table as closely as possible to save main memory. We do so since reduced memory consumption leaves more memory to the operating system that can be used as cache when writing temporary files. Therefore, we approximate the number of expected distinct~$k$-mers in each temporary file. We use a simple approximation mechanism that predicts the number of distinct~$k$-mers in a file by multiplying the number of~$k$-mers in each file with a constant that has been determined experimentally (see Fig.~\ref{Fig:KmerUKmers}). Since this ratio depends on properties of the data set, we dynamically adjust the ratio during runtime.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{kmersUkmers2.eps}
\caption{Number of~$28$-mers and number of distinct~$28$-mers in the 512 temporary files that have been created while processing the \emph{F Vesca} data set. Each point corresponds to a temporary file. Here, the KMC2 minimizer ordering did not succeed in creating uniformly sized temporary files since a single file contains far more~$28$-mers than the other 511 files.}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{kmersUkmersHisto2.eps}
\caption{Dividing the number of~$28$-mers in each file by number of its distinct~$28$-mers leads to a ratio that is used to determine the size of the hash tables. A ratio between 0.15 and 0.2 is a proper choice for the \emph{F Vesca} data set.}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Estimation of hash table sizes.}
\label{Fig:KmerUKmers}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Hash Function}
To insert a $k$-mer into the hash table, we use a hash function that implements double hashing.
\begin{verbatim}
/**
* Hash function based on byte-wise interpretation of k-mers.
* @param kmer: a kmer that shall be inserted
* @param trial: the number of probings
*/
uint32_t hash(const Kmer<k>& kmer, const uint32_t trial) {
uint8_t* keyBytes = (uint8_t*) &kmer; // interpret kmer as byte array
uint32_t h1 = 0; // value of first hash function
uint32_t h2 = 0; // value of second hash function
for (uint32_t i = 0; i < sizeof(kmer); i++) {
h1 = 31 * h1 + keyBytes[i];
h2 = 37 * h2 + ~keyBytes[i];
}
return h1 + trial * h2;
}
\end{verbatim}
\subsubsection{Probing Strategy} As a general strategy we use double hashing. We stop the probing of the hash table after a constant number of trials. Therefore, it is possible that~$k$-mers could not be inserted into a hash table.
For that reason, \textsl{Gerbil} has a built-in emergency mechanism that handles such~$k$-mers to prevent them from getting lost. Hereby, CPU and GPU hasher threads have different strategies. CPU hasher threads store such~$k$-mers in an additional temporary file, which
is processed after
the work with the current temporary file has been completed. In contrast, GPU hasher threads use part of free GPU memory
to sequentially store those~$k$-mers that could not be inserted. After all~$k$-mers of a temporary file have been processed, the~$k$-mers in this area are counted via a sorting and compression approach. However, it is still possible to exceed the available GPU memory. In such a case, we copy the whole amount of~$k$-mers in that area back to main memory and store them in a temporary file, similar to the CPU emergency handling. Such an operation is very costly. However, we have never observed a single GPU error handling and only few executions of CPU error handling when processing real world data sets.
\section{Results}\label{sec:results}
We tested our implementation in a set of experiments, using the same instances as Deorowicz et al.~\cite{Deorowicz15052015}
(see Table~\ref{Tab:Data}).
For each data set we counted all~$k$-mers for~$k=28,40,56,$ and~$65$ and compared \textsl{Gerbil}'s running time with those of KMC2 in version 2.3.0 and DSK in version 2.0.7. In addition, we used a synthesized test set \emph{GRCh38}, created from Genome Reference Consortium Human Reference 38 (GCA\_000001405.2), from which we uniformly
sampled~$k$-mers of size 1000. The purpose of this data set is to
have longer reads allowing to test the performance for larger values of~$k$.
To judge performance on various types of hardware, we executed the experiments on two different desktop computers. See Table~\ref{Tab:hardware} for details about the hardware configuration of the test systems.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Data Sets.}
\label{Tab:Data}
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrr}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Data Set & Format & Size (GB) & Read Length & $28$-mers & distinct~$28$-mers\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\emph{F Vesca} & FASTQ & 10.2 & 353 & 4 134 078 256 & 632 436 468\\
\emph{M Balbisiana} & FASTQ & 98.6 & 100 & 20 531 572 597 & 965 691 662 \\
\emph{G Gallus} & FASTQ & 115.9 & 101 & 25 337 974 831 & 2 727 529 829 \\
\emph{H Sapiens} & FASTQ & 223.3 & 100 & 62 739 461 708 & 6 336 805 684\\
\emph{H Sapiens 2} & FASTQ & 339.5 & 101 & 98 892 620 173 & 6 634 382 141\\
\emph{GRCh38} & FASTA & 100.0 & 1000 & 97 300 000 000 & 1 802 953 276\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\centering
\caption{Test Systems.}
\label{Tab:hardware}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
& System One & System Two\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
CPU & Intel Core-i5 2550k (4 cores) & Intel Xeon(R) E3-1231 v3 (8 cores)\\
RAM & 16 GB DDR3 & 32 GB DDR3\\
GPU & GeForce GTX 970 & GeForce GTX TITAN X \\
& & GeForce GTX 970 \\
Working-Disk & 256 GB Crucial M550 & 2x Samsung 850 EVO 500 GB (RAID-0)\\
Free disk space & 128 GB & 1000 GB \\
OS & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Ubuntu 14.04 LTS \phantom{xxxxxxxxxx} }\\
In/Out-Disk & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Transcend StoreJet 35T3 USB 3.0 (External HDD)} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table~\ref{Tab:runningTimes} and Fig.~\ref{Fig:ScaleK} show the results of the performance evaluation.
We want to point out several interesting observations.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textsl{Gerbil} with GPU support (\textsl{gGerbil}) is the most efficient tool in almost all cases. Exceptions occur for small~$k=28$, where the sorting based approach KMC2 is sometimes slightly more efficient.
\item Fig.~\ref{Fig:ScaleK1} shows that Gerbil starts outperforming KMC2 at $k\approx36$. Interestingly, the running time of each tool decreases with growing $k$. This can be explained by the small read length of the \emph{G Gallus} data set. In addition, one can observe the erratic increase of running time near~$k=32$ and~$k=64$ for all tools, due to a change of the internal~$k$-mer representation.
\item When~$k$ grows, KMC2 becomes more and more inefficient, while \textsl{Gerbil} stays efficient.
When counting the~$200$-mers in the \emph{GRCh38} data set, KMC2 did not finish within 20 hours, whereas \textsl{Gerbil} required only 98 minutes (Fig.~\ref{Fig:ScaleK2}). The running time of DSK grows similarly fast as that of KMC2. Recall that DSK does not support values of~$k > 127$.
\item For small~$k$, the use of a GPU decreases the running time by a significant amount of time. However, with growing~$k$, the data structure that stores~$k$-mers grows larger. Therefore, the number of table entries that can be scanned in parallel decreases. Experimentally, we found that the GPU induced speedup vanishes when~$k$ exceeds $150$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Running times in the format mm:ss (the best performing in bold). Each entry is the average over three runs. Missing running times for DSK are due to insufficient disk space. The label `gGerbil' stands for \textsl{Gerbil} with activated GPU mode. Instead, standard `Gerbil' does not use any GPU.}
\label{Tab:runningTimes}
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{tabular}{ll|rrrc|rrrc}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\multicolumn{2}{l}{} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{System One}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{System Two}}\\
Data Set &~$k$ & Gerbil & {gGerbil} & {KMC2} & {DSK} & Gerbil & {gGerbil} & {KMC2} & {DSK}\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\emph{F Vesca} & 28 & 02:08 & {\bf 01:40} & 02:01 & 03:00 & 01:36 & {\bf01:18} & 01:32 & 02:05 \\
& 40 & 02:34 & {\bf 01:53} & 03:03 & 04:14 & 02:01 & {\bf01:38} & 02:12 & 02:52 \\
& 56 & 02:58 & {\bf 01:53} & 03:19 & 03:55 & 02:25 & {\bf01:39} & 02:30 & 02:50 \\
& 65 & 03:05 & {\bf 01:59} & 04:34 & 05:23 & 02:16 & {\bf01:42} & 03:35 & 03:37 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\emph{M Balbisiana} & 28 & 13:37 & {\bf 11:42} & 12:54 & 14:49 & 11:17 & {\bf10:07} & 10:50 & 11:06 \\
& 40 & 13:48 & {\bf 12:24} & 16:15 & 16:12 & 11:46 & {\bf10:59} & 13:46 & 12:26 \\
& 56 & 12:46 & {\bf 11:36} & 16:06 & 14:56 & 10:50 & {\bf 10:18} & 13:36 & 11:44 \\
& 65 & 12:32 & {\bf 11:28} & 18:33 & 15:52 & 10:46 & {\bf10:16} & 15:47 & 12:34 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\emph{G Gallus} & 28 & 18:41 & {\bf 14:25} & 15:39 & 26:54 & 15:47 & {\bf12:31} & 13:10 & 21:00 \\
& 40 & 19:55 & {\bf 16:00} & 19:44 & 29:42 & 16:29 & {\bf14:10} & 16:49 & 23:48\\
& 56 & 18:12 & {\bf 14:48} & 19:48 & 24:11 & 15:38 & {\bf13:12} & 16:48 & 19:59 \\
& 65 & 18:27 & {\bf 15:22} & 22:49 & 26:50 & 15:41 & {\bf13:08} & 19:25 & 21:33 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\emph{H Sapiens} & 28 & 41:10 & {\bf 30:04} & 32:18 & - & 33:26 & {\bf25:16} & 26:44 & 50:15 \\
& 40 & 45:02 & {\bf 35:52} & 43:19 & - & 35:20 & {\bf29:00} & 35:59 & 54:21 \\
& 56 & 39:47 & {\bf 33:21} & 42:53 & - & 32:21 & {\bf26:46} & 35:25 & 45:32 \\
& 65 & 38:09 & {\bf 35:32} & 51:23 & - & 32:09 & {\bf26:27} & 42:19 & 47:50 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\emph{H Sapiens 2} & 28 & 65:33 & 49:41 & {\bf 49:17} & - & 53:40 & {\bf39:24} & 41:47 & 76:50 \\
& 40 & 72:06 & {\bf 66:04} & 70:33 & - & 57:03 & {\bf46:00} & 57:02 & 83:59 \\
& 56 & 64:00 & {\bf 60:27} & 69:58 & - & 51:34 & {\bf42:15} & 56:28 & 72:35 \\
& 65 & {\bf 61:05} & 64:44 & 87:24 & - & 51:16 & {\bf41:30} & 68:10 & 78:13 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{kscale1.eps}
\caption{Running times for~$20 \leq k \leq 80$ of \emph{G Gallus} data set.}
\label{Fig:ScaleK1}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{kscale3.eps}
\caption{Running times for~$28 \leq k \leq 200$ of \emph{GRCh38} data set.}
\label{Fig:ScaleK2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Running time for various $k$. (Test System Two)}
\label{Fig:ScaleK}
\end{figure}
\noindent
We gain some additional interesting insights when we take a closer look into Table~\ref{Tab:runningTimes2} that shows detailed information on running time and memory usage.
\begin{itemize}
\item The use of a GPU accelerates \textsl{Gerbil}'s second phase by up to a factor of two, whereas the additional speedup given by a second GPU is only moderate.
\item All tools were called with an option that sets the maximal memory size to 14~GB on Test System One and 30 GB on Test System Two. However, \textsl{Gerbil} typically uses much less memory due to its dynamic prediction of the hash table size. In contrast, both KMC2 and DSK use more main memory.
\item \textsl{Gerbil}'s disk usage is comparable to KMC2's disk usage, whereas the disk usage of DSK is much larger.
\item \textsl{Gerbil}'s frugal use of disk- \emph{and} main memory is a main reason for its high performance. The use of little main memory gives the operating system opportunity to use the remaining main memory for buffering disk operations. A small disk space consumption is essential since disk operations are far more expensive than the actual counting.
\item We can compare the actual running time with the theoretically minimal running time that is given by hardware constraints (hereby done with Test System Two). We find that the running time of phase one is bounded by the read rate of the input disk. Thus, a further speedup of the first phase can only be achieved by reading compressed input files. In contrast, there is potential speedup in phase two: In GPU mode, Gerbil's throughput in phase two is just about 61\% of the possible throughput given by write rate of the output disk. In non-GPU mode it is about 35\%. Interestingly, the throughput of the working disk is not a critical component at our test system.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Detailed running times (in format mm:ss) and maximal main memory and disk space consumption (in GB) for the \emph{G Gallus} instance. Each entry is the average of three runs.}
\label{Tab:runningTimes2}
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{tabular}{ll|rrrr|rrrr}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\multicolumn{2}{l}{} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{System One}} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\textbf{System Two}}\\
& $k$& Gerbil & {gGerbil} & {KMC} & {DSK} & Gerbil & {gGerbil} & {KMC} & {DSK}\\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
Phase 1 & 28 & 10:08 & 10:06 & 10:51 & 10:22 & 09:46 & 09:43 & 09:52 & 09:30 \\
Phase 2 & 28 & 08:32 & 04:19 & 04:46 & 16:00 & 06:01 & 02:47 & 03:16 & 11:01 \\
Main Memory & 28 & 2.36 & 1.77 & 14.28 & 15.28 & 2.20 & 2.01 & 26.99 & 16.69 \\
Disk Space & 28 & 23.66 & 23.66 & 24.86 & 37.30 & 23.66 & 23.66 & 24.86 & 37.30 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
Phase 1 & 56 & 10:07 & 10:06 & 10:40 & 10:26 & 09:47 & 09:43 & 09:47 & 09:30 \\
Phase 2 & 56 & 08:05 & 04:42 & 09:08 & 13:13 & 05:50 & 03:28 & 06:59 & 10:00 \\
Main Memory & 56 & 4.24 & 3.20 & 14.29 & 15.00 & 4.00 & 3.40 & 26.98 & 14.78 \\
Disk Space & 56 & 16.25 & 16.25 & 17.02 & 57.20 & 16.25 & 16.25 & 17.02 & 57.20 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
We introduced the~$k$-mer counting software \textsl{Gerbil} that uses a hash table based approach for the counting of~$k$-mers. For large~$k$, a use case that becomes important for long reads, we are able to clearly outperform the state-of-the-art open source~$k$-mer counting tools, while using significantly less resources.
We showed that \textsl{Gerbil}'s running time can be accelerated by the use of GPUs. However, since this only affects the second phase, the overall additional speedup is only very moderate.
As future work, we plan to evaluate strategies to use GPUs to accelerate also the first phase. Another option for further speed-up would be to give up exactness by using Bloom filters.
\FloatBarrier
|
\section{Introduction} \label{intro}
The Fornax cluster around the giant elliptical \object{NGC~1399} possesses a very rich system of globular clusters (GCs). \citet{gregg09} estimated $11\,100 \pm 2\,400$ GCs in total within a radius of 0$^{\circ} \!$.9 around \object{NGC~1399}, corresponding to a radius of 320~kpc at a distance of 19~Mpc based on a distance modulus of $(m-M) = 31.4 \pm 0.2$ (\citealt{dirsch03, dirsch04}, see also \citealt{ferrarese00, blakeslee09}). Within $15'$, which corresponds to roughly 83~kpc, \citet{dirsch03} estimated a smaller number of $6\,450 \pm 700$ GCs. Of particular interest is the upper end of the GC mass function, which is dominated by ultra-compact dwarf galaxies (UCDs). The term UCD \citep{phillipps01} is somewhat misleading since these objects are not necessarily dwarf galaxies: They show similarities with nuclei of dwarf galaxies, but they also share many properties with GCs, for which reason two main formation scenarios for UCDs in the Fornax cluster are discussed in the recent literature \citep[e.g.,][]{evstigneeva08, chilingarian08, chilingarian11, mieske12, francis12}:
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item UCDs are dynamically evolved nucleated dwarf galaxies, from which outer stellar components were removed while orbiting in the center of the Fornax galaxy cluster and suffering from its strong tidal gravitational field \citep[threshing scenario; e.g.,][]{bekki01, bekki03, drinkwater03, goerdt08, thomas08, pfeffer13, pfeffer14, pfeffer16}.
\item UCDs are the brightest GCs of the rich \object{NGC~1399} globular cluster system and thus they are the result of star cluster formation processes \citep[e.g.,][]{mieske02, mieske12}. Moreover, it has been proposed that the very massive UCDs could also form in the so-called merged star cluster scenario, where massive complexes of star clusters merge and thereby form a super star cluster \citep{kroupa98, fellhauer&kroupa02, mieske06, bruens11, bruens12}.
\end{enumerate}
Although almost two decades of research have passed since the discovery of UCDs \citep{minniti98, hilker99, drinkwater00}, their nature is still puzzling \citep[e.g.,][]{phillipps13}: Various investigations found evidence for both formation scenarios, but could not confirm either of the hypotheses with certainty \citep[e.g.,][]{mieske04, evstigneeva08, wittmann16}. However, there is growing evidence that UCDs are rather a "mixed bag of objects" \citep{hilker09book} than a distinct type of object \citep[e.g.,][]{chilingarian11}.
In the Fornax galaxy cluster, GCs have effective radii from smaller than 1 and up to 10~pc with an average of around 3~pc \citep{masters10, puzia14}. Their masses range from $10^4~M_{\odot}$ up to lower than $10^7~M_{\odot}$ \citep[][their Fig.~15]{puzia14}. UCDs, on the other hand, have some overlap with GCs, but also extend the parameter space to larger sizes and masses: their effective radii range from a few pc to up to 100~pc \citep[e.g.,][]{drinkwater03, evstigneeva07, evstigneeva08, hilker07, mieske08}, while their masses lie between $10^6~M_{\odot}$ and lower than $10^8~M_{\odot}$ \citep[e.g.,][]{drinkwater03, evstigneeva07, hilker07, mieske08, frank11}, bridging the region between classical GCs and compact elliptical galaxies.
In the literature, several arguments support that most of the Fornax UCDs are very massive GCs:
\begin{itemize}
\item The luminosities of GCs and UCDs are distributed smoothly and their luminosity functions do not show any bimodality \citep{mieske02, mieske04}. Furthermore, the UCDs in Fornax are consistent with being drawn from the bright tail of the GC luminosity function. However, a small excess at the bright end is statistically possible \citep{mieske04, gregg09, mieske12}.
\item GCs and UCDs form a continuum in the luminosity-size plane \citep{mieske06}.
\item UCDs exhibit the full range of (high and low) metallicities as observed for GCs \citep{francis12}.
\item The spread of age and metallicity of the UCDs is consistent with that observed for GCs \citep{francis12}.
\item Most of the UCDs have super-solar $\alpha$-element abundances, implying short formation times, similar to those of GCs \citep{francis12}.
\end{itemize}
However, even if the UCDs were not genuine GCs, several findings suggest that they are at least the result of a star cluster (SC) formation process:
\begin{itemize}
\item \citet{kissler-patig06} placed young massive clusters (YMCs) with masses higher than $10^7 M_{\odot}$ on three different scaling relations and found their positions to be similar to those of the UCDs, in particular for the most massive YMCs.
\item UCDs have metallicities close to but slightly below those of YMCs of comparable masses \citep{mieske06}.
\item Fitting a simple stellar population model to the spectra of UCDs reveals that UCDs are in agreement with a pure stellar content \citep{hilker07, chilingarian11} so that no DM component is needed in UCDs within their 1--3 half-mass radii \citep{hilker07}. \citet{chilingarian11} found almost all UCDs to be compatible with no DM inside. More recently, \citet[their Table~3]{mieske13} found that only the most massive UCDs require an additional mass component to compensate the elevated $M/L$ ratio, which they suggested might be massive black holes, while the lower-mass UCDs do not need any form of additional, non-luminous matter \citep[see also][]{dabringhausen09, dabringhausen10, dabringhausen12}.
\end{itemize}
Following \citet{mieske12}, who found that most UCDs are compatible with being formed in the same way as GCs, we assume that it is justified to treat UCDs, like GCs, as (very) massive SCs and assume that they formed in SC formation processes. We aim to determine the conditions under which this occurred and what it indicates about the assembly history of NGC~1399.
However, as mentioned before, even if the majority of the UCDs are compatible with being giant ancient SCs, it is very likely that some of the most massive UCDs did not form in an SC formation process. For instance, some of the UCDs exhibit extended surface brightness profiles or even tidal features \citep{richtler05, voggel16} or appear asymmetric or elongated \citep{wittmann16}. In addition, \citet{voggel16} detected for the first time the tendency of GCs to cluster around UCDs. In the Virgo galaxy cluster, a fraction of the very massive UCDs are thought to be of galaxy origin \citep[e.g.,][]{strader13, seth14, liu15a, liu15b, norris15}, while a fraction of the faintest (and thus lowest mass) UCDs might instead be related to compact SCs \citep{brodie11}. Thus, in two additional scenarios we examine how the distribution of required SFRs changes if some of the most massive UCDs in Fornax are excluded from the GC/UCD mass distribution.
\section{Aim and structure of this paper} \label{sect_aim}
We introduce the underlying theory in Sect.~\ref{sect_framework} and define there the so-called embedded cluster mass function (ECMF). The ECMF describes the stellar mass function of a population of SCs at their birth and is characterized by a power-law behavior up to an individual stellar upper mass limit, $M_{\mathrm{max}}$. The latter is determined by the star formation rate (SFR) according to the SFR-$M_{\mathrm{max}}$ relation \citep{weidner04, randria13}. In Sect.~\ref{sect_sample} we present the available data on the mass distribution of GCs/UCDs in the central Fornax galaxy cluster and construct an overall GC/UCD mass function from it.
The ECMF and the observed GC/UCD mass function are related to each other in the following way: We assume that every object of the GC/UCD sample formed in an SC formation process and is thus referred to as an SC. Each SC forms together with many other SCs of similar age in a population that is described by the ECMF. By this, we implicitly assume that each of those GC/UCD populations form in the same way as it is observed in the local Universe today \citep[e.g.,][]{fall_rees77, okazaki95, fall_zhang01, elmegreen10}. Accumulating all GC/UCD populations ever formed in different formation epochs is equivalent to a superposition of all corresponding ECMFs, which leads to their overall birth mass function. SCs are subject to changes, particularly in mass, as the SCs interact with the environment and the stars in these SCs become older. Both lead to mass loss in the course of time, which transforms the natal GC/UCD mass function to the present-day GC/UCD mass function.
To learn under which conditions the GCs/UCDs in the present-day mass function formed, two investigation steps are required: First, it is necessary to determine how aging affected each GC/UCD. We are particularly interested in quantifying how much mass each of them lost since its birth. We explain in Sect.~\ref{sect_corrections} which corrections need to be applied to the observed GC/UCD sample. This knowledge will enable us to reconstruct the natal GC/UCD mass function from their present-day mass function. Second, the natal GC/UCD mass function can then be decomposed into individual SC populations described by the ECMF. This is carried out in Sect.~\ref{sect_decomposition}. Since the ECMF implicity depends on the SFR through the upper mass limit, $M_{\mathrm{max}}$, we will be able to determine which distribution of SFRs led to the formation of such a rich sample of GCs and UCDs around NGC~1399. The determined SFR distributions are presented in Sect.~\ref{sect_sfr.distr}. We continue with a discussion of our assumptions, the results, and the implications for the formation of NGC~1399 in Sect.~\ref{sect_discussion} and conclude our investigations in Sect.~\ref{sect_concl}.
\section{Underlying framework} \label{sect_framework}
We assume that a large sample of SCs like the distibution of GCs and UCDs around NGC~1399 is the product of many individual formation epochs. The overall GCs/UCDs mass distribution function can be described by a superposition of many different ECMFs, each describing the mass distribution function of one individual GC/UCD population. The goal here is to decompose the overall GCs/UCDs mass function into separate ECMFs to reveal under which conditions each population formed.
This work is based on \citet{schulz15}. All necessary ingredients for this paper are briefly reviewed in this section. For all details, we refer to Schulz et al. (2015).
\subsection{Embedded cluster mass function (ECMF)} \label{sub_ecmf}
The ECMF describes the mass distribution of a population of newly born SCs that were formed coevally from the same parent molecular cloud during one SC formation epoch of length $\delta t$:
\begin{equation} \label{ecmf}
\xi_{\mathrm{ECMF}} (M) = \frac{\mathrm{d} N_{\mathrm{ECMF}}}{\mathrm{d} M} = k \left( \frac{M}{M_{\mathrm{max}}} \right)^{- \beta} ,
\end{equation}
\noindent with the stellar upper mass limit for SCs, $M_{\mathrm{max}}$, the normalization constant $k$, and the index $\beta$ of the ECMF, which lies typically in the range $1.6 \lesssim \beta \lesssim 2.5$. In our framework \citep[see][]{schulz15}, $k$ is determined by
\begin{equation} \label{norm_k}
k = (\beta - 1) ~ M_{\mathrm{max}}^{-1} .
\end{equation}
\noindent With this, the total number of SCs, $N_{\mathrm{ECMF}}$, and the total mass, $M_{\mathrm{ECMF}}$, of one SC population can directly be calculated from the ECMF (Eq.~(\ref{ecmf})):
\begin{equation} \label{N_ecmf}
N_{\mathrm{ECMF}} = \int^{M_{\mathrm{max}}}_{M_{\mathrm{min}}} { \xi_{\mathrm{ECMF}} (M) ~ \mathrm{d} M } = \left( \frac{M_{\mathrm{max}}}{M_{\mathrm{min}}} \right)^{\beta - 1} - 1 ,
\end{equation}
\begin{align} \label{M_ecmf}
\begin{split}
M_{\mathrm{ECMF}} & = \int^{M_{\mathrm{max}}}_{M_{\mathrm{min}}} { M ~ \xi_{\mathrm{ECMF}} (M) ~ \mathrm{d} M } \\ & =
\begin{cases}
M_{\mathrm{max}} ~ \left( \ln M_{\mathrm{max}} - \ln M_{\mathrm{min}} \right) &, \ \beta = 2 \\
M_{\mathrm{max}} ~ \left[ \frac{\beta - 1}{2 - \beta} ~ \left( 1 - \left( \frac{ M_{\mathrm{min}} }{ M_{\mathrm{max}} } \right)^{2 - \beta} \right) \right] &, \ \beta \neq 2 . \\
\end{cases}
\end{split}
\end{align}
\noindent $M_{\mathrm{min}}$ is the stellar lower mass limit for an embedded SC or a group of stars. For all following computations, we assume $M_{\mathrm{min}} = 5~M_{\odot}$ \citep[cf.][]{weidner04, schulz15}.
The length of one SC formation epoch, $\delta t$, corresponds to the timescale over which the interstellar medium forms molecular clouds from which a new population of embedded SCs emerges. This time span lies between at least a few Myr and at most a few 10 Myr \citep[e.g.,][]{fukui99, yamaguchi01, tamburro08, egusa04, egusa09} and was also determined in \citet[their Table~2]{schulz15}. During the time $\delta t$, the total mass of the SC population, $M_{\mathrm{ECMF}}$, is formed at a constant SFR,
\begin{equation} \label{mtotsfrdt}
M_{\mathrm{ECMF}} = \mathrm{SFR} \cdot \delta t .
\end{equation}
\noindent Combining Eq.~(\ref{M_ecmf}) and Eq.~(\ref{mtotsfrdt}), we obtain the following relation between the SFR and stellar upper mass limit for SCs $M_{\mathrm{max}}$:
\begin{align} \label{sfr}
\mathrm{SFR} &=
\begin{cases}
\frac{M_{\mathrm{max}}}{\delta t} ~ \left( \ln M_{\mathrm{max}} - \ln M_{\mathrm{min}} \right) &, \ \beta = 2 \\
\frac{ M_{\mathrm{max}} }{\delta t} ~ \frac{\beta - 1}{2 - \beta} ~ \left( 1 - \left( \frac{ M_{\mathrm{min}} }{ M_{\mathrm{max}} } \right)^{2 - \beta} \right) &, \ \beta \neq 2 . \\
\end{cases}
\end{align}
\noindent This describes the observational SFR-$M_{\mathrm{max}}$ relation by \citet[see also \citealt{randria13}]{weidner04} very well \citep[][their Fig.~4]{schulz15}. According to this, during high-SFR episodes SCs of higher masses are formed than at low-SFR episodes. This means in turn that high SFRs are essential for the formation of high-mass SCs. For the ECMF, this introduces an implicit dependence on the SFR since its upper limit, $M_{\mathrm{max}}$, is a function of the SFR:
\begin{equation} \label{ecmf_limits}
\xi_{\mathrm{ECMF}} (M) \equiv \xi_{\mathrm{ECMF,SFR}} ( M_{\mathrm{min}} \le M \le M_{\mathrm{max}} (\mathrm{SFR}) ) .
\end{equation}
Usually, the theoretical upper mass limit for SCs, $M_{\mathrm{max}}$, is barely known, while it is easier to determine the mass of the physically most massive SC, $M_{\mathrm{SC,max}}$. In our framework, these two quantities are related as follows:
\begin{align} \label{M_eclmax}
\begin{split}
M_{\mathrm{SC,max}} & =
\begin{cases}
~ \left( \ln 2 \right) ~ M_{\mathrm{max}} &, \ \beta = 2 \\
~ \frac{\beta - 1}{2 - \beta} ~ \left( 1 - 2^{\frac{2 - \beta}{1 - \beta}} \right) ~ M_{\mathrm{max}} &, \ \beta \neq 2 , \\
\end{cases}
\end{split}
\end{align}
\noindent so that Eq.~(\ref{sfr}) can be rewritten as a function of $M_{\mathrm{SC,max}}$.
\subsection{Concept of the integrated galactic embedded cluster mass function (IGECMF)} \label{sub_igecmf}
Star cluster formation typically continues over more than just one formation epoch, $\delta t$. In our framework, this means that for each formation epoch one fully populated ECMF is added to the already existing sample of SCs. An observed sample of SCs is thus (unless the SCs are coeval) a superposition of several SC populations, each described by the ECMF. When the star formation history (SFH) or at least the distribution of SFRs is known, an individual $M_{\mathrm{max}}$ can be determined for each formation epoch based on Eq.~(\ref{sfr}). This fully determines each ECMF (Eq.~(\ref{ecmf})) through Eq.~(\ref{norm_k}). Finally, all ECMFs have to be summed to gain the IGECMF, which is the overall mass distribution function of all SCs ever formed during the considered formation episode. A visual example of this concept is given in \citet[their Fig.~3]{schulz15}. We note that the superposition of power-law ECMFs each generated during one SC formation epoch yields IGECMFs with a Schechter-like turn-down at the high-mass end \citep[their Fig.~9]{schulz15}.
Mathematically, this summing can be expressed by an integral over all possible SFRs,
\begin{equation} \label{igecmf}
\xi_{\mathrm{IGECMF}} (M) = \int_{\mathrm{SFR_{min}}}^{\mathrm{SFR_{max}}} { \xi_{\mathrm{ECMF,SFR}} (M) ~ F(\mathrm{SFR}) ~ \mathrm{d} \mathrm{SFR} } ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where the ECMF is modulated by the distribution function of SFRs, $F(\mathrm{SFR})$. The latter reveals the number of SC formation epochs (SCFEs) $\mathrm{d} N_{\mathrm{SCFE}} (\mathrm{SFR})$ per SFR interval:
\begin{equation} \label{F}
F(\mathrm{SFR}) = \frac{\mathrm{d} N_{\mathrm{SCFE}} (\mathrm{SFR}) }{\mathrm{d} \mathrm{SFR}} .
\end{equation}
\noindent With $F(\mathrm{SFR})$, only those ECMFs are selected to contribute to the IGECMF whose $M_{\mathrm{max}}$ correspond to an SFR that appeared in the SFH.
\subsection{Optimal sampling} \label{sub_sampling}
In the following we treat SCs individually, therefore it is necessary to know their individual masses. This requires the sampling of individual SC masses from the ECMF. It is possible to interpret the ECMF as a probability density distribution function such that SC formation becomes a probabilistic or stochastic process \citep[e.g.,][]{bastian08}. However, observations suggest that the formation of SCs is self-regulated instead of probabilistic or stochastic \citep[][see also references therein]{bate09, pflamm-altenburg13, kroupa15review}: Data of young most massive SCs in galaxies with high SFRs obtained by \citet{randria13} show the dispersion of the $M_{\mathrm{max}}$ values to be significantly smaller at a given galaxy-wide SFR than the probabilistic interpretation would predict. Furthermore, \citet{pflamm-altenburg13} found that the masses of the most massive SCs in the galaxy M33 decline with galactocentric radius following the gas surface density, which is not expected from a purely probabilistic model. This is why we decided to use a deterministic sampling technique, called improved optimal sampling \citep{schulz15}.
The idea is to divide an ECMF into pieces such that each of them corresponds to one individual SC. Mathematically, this requires the two following conditions to be fulfilled:
\begin{equation} \label{cond1}
1 = \int^{m_i}_{m_{i+1}} { \xi_{\mathrm{ECMF}} (M) ~ \mathrm{d} M } ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{condM}
M_i = \int^{m_i}_{m_{i+1}} { M ~ \xi_{\mathrm{ECMF}} (M) ~ \mathrm{d} M } .
\end{equation}
\noindent Equation~(\ref{cond1}) ensures that there is exactly one SC within the integration limits, while Eq.~(\ref{condM}) determines the mass of this SC. We note that the integration limits in these two equations must be the same and within the global limits $M_{\mathrm{min}}$ and $M_{\mathrm{max}}$. The evaluation must start with $i = 1$ at the high-mass end, $m_1 = M_{\mathrm{max}}$, and must be continued toward lower masses. Thus, with increasing number $i$, the SCs become less massive.
\section{Observed GC and UCD samples in Fornax} \label{sect_sample}
Our analysis bears several challenges: the majority of GCs and UCDs in the Fornax galaxy cluster are very old (age estimates range between roughly 8 and 15~Gyr; \citealt{kundu05, hempel07, firth09, chilingarian11, francis12}). Above an age of about 5~Gyr, age measurements become less certain because isochrones lie closer to each other in line index diagrams the higher the probed age. Thus, it is impossible to tell when exactly each individual object formed. However, even if we cannot draw firm conclusions about the formation history of each and every GC/UCD, we can at least make a statistically reliable statement about the formation of the whole GC/UCD system based on the sheer number of objects: \citet{gregg09} estimated 11$\,$100 $\pm$ 2$\,$400 GCs/UCDs within 320~kpc around NGC~1399. However, only a fraction of them have been spectroscopically confirmed so far. As shown by \citet[their Fig.~3]{mieske12}, very many GCs and UCDs are confirmed within a radius of 50~kpc around NGC~1399 thanks to a high spatial coverage. At radii between 50~kpc and 100~kpc, there are fewer, while beyond 100~kpc the number of confirmed GCs/UCDs decreases strongly. This is not only caused by their decreasing radial number density profile \citep[e.g.,][their Fig.~15]{schuberth10} but also due to an incomplete spatial coverage inherent to spectroscopic surveys. Thus, it is not straightforward to obtain a statistically representative sample around NGC~1399. We try to achieve this by combining a spectroscopic and a highly confident photometric sample.
\paragraph{Spectroscopic sample ('spec' sample):}
Our first sample contains 935 of the brightest GCs/UCDs around NGC~1399. This sample is a compilation of many different studies \citep[][and Puzia \& Hilker (private communication)]{hilker99, drinkwater00, mieske02, mieske04, bergond07, mieske08, hilker07, firth07, gregg09, schuberth10, chilingarian11}. Since GCs/UCDs have roughly the same age, they probably have a comparable $M/L$-ratio, for which reason these brightest objects are also among the most massive in the central Fornax galaxy cluster. Because of their brightness, they are particularly suitable for spectroscopic analyses. The membership of these objects is confirmed by measurements of their radial velocity, extracted from their spectra. For this
reason, the spectroscopic sample offers very reliable number counts at the high-mass end of the GC/UCD mass function.
\paragraph{Photometric sample ('phot' sample):}
Our second sample contains 6268 objects, mostly GCs, around NGC~1399 and other central Fornax cluster galaxies based on HST/ACS observations, allowing resolved images of the GCs, reported by \citet{jordan07}. Since much fainter objects can be detected through photometry, GCs of much lower masses can be identified. Thus, as a result of the large number of objects and the lower mass limit, the photometric sample is statistically more reliable than the spectroscopic sample, particularly in the intermediate- and low-mass regime.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[angle=-90, width=0.488\textwidth]{used_scaling_m1+pfeff.pdf}
\caption{Cumulative mass function of the spectroscopic (orange continuous line, spec sample) and the photometric sample (purple continuous line, phot sample). In both cases, the masses were determined from SSP models by \citet{maraston05}. The scaling with the factor 3.5 was applied at $\log_{10} (M/M_{\odot}) = 6.6$ (vertical arrow) where the slopes (dashed blue lines) of the cumulative functions are almost the same, resulting in the combined cumulative GC/UCD mass function (red dotted line). For comparison, the dashed thin orange and purple lines show the cumulative mass function of the spectroscopic and the photometric sample, respectively, where the masses have been calculated based on \citet{bc03}. The black line represents the cumulative distribution of stripped nuclei as determined by \citet{pfeffer14}, while the standard deviation area is colored in gray (see Sect.~\ref{sect_decomposition}).}
\label{fig_used_scaling}
\end{figure}
The masses of the GCs/UCDs were determined as follows: for the photometric sample, the $g$- and $z$-band photometry was converted into $M_V$ and $V-I$ based on the calibration by \citet{peng06XI}. For the spectroscopic sample, $V$, $V-I$, or $C-R$ were used to obtain the latter quantities. The individual GC/UCD masses were then determined using the obtained $M_V$ and $V-I$, a Kroupa IMF \citep{kroupa01} and a mass-to-light ratio, $M/L_V$, derived from models by \citet{maraston05}, where for each GC/UCD a 13~Gyr old simple stellar population (SSP) was assumed \citep{misgeld_hilker11, mieske13, puzia14}. For comparison, the individual GC/UCD masses were also determined based on $M/L_V$ obtained from models by \citet{bc03}, also assuming a 13~Gyr old SSP and using the same $M_V$ and $V-I$, but a Chabrier IMF \citep{chabrier03}. For our analysis, we used the masses as calculated from \citet{maraston05} and show below how much these masses differ from those determined based on \citet{bc03}.
Since our investigations are focused on the surroundings of NGC~1399, we have to apply distance cuts: The objects in the spectroscopic sample are concentrated around NGC~1399, but their distribution becomes patchy beyond 85~kpc. To obtain a spatially homogeneous sample, we included only objects within that radius, which led to a selection of 801 objects. On the other hand, the photometric sample comprises objects that are located around other galaxies in the Fornax galaxy cluster more than 1~Mpc away from NGC~1399 and thus not associated with it. To obtain a statistically representative sample, we included only objects that are within a radius of 160~kpc around NGC~1399 since this region is dominated by the central giant elliptical. This led to a selection of 2326 objects in the photometric sample.
Applying these distance cuts, we show the resulting cumulative GC/UCD mass functions where the GC/UCD masses were determined from models by \citet{maraston05} with a Kroupa IMF in Fig.~\ref{fig_used_scaling} for the spectroscopic sample in orange and for the photometric sample in purple. In the same colors but with thin dashed lines, the same mass distributions are shown for the masses determined based on \citet{bc03} with a Chabrier IMF. Figure~\ref{fig_used_scaling} shows that the models by \citet{bc03} predict somewhat lower masses than models by \citet{maraston05}: On average, the objects are 20\% and 15\% less massive in the spectroscopic and photometric sample, respectively. We conclude that the uncertainty in the mass determination is around 20\% on average even if there are cases where the masses deviate by up to one third.
To obtain an accurate number distribution across the whole mass range, the two samples have to be combined. This needs to be
done in such a way that each sample covers the mass regimes where it is more reliable. Consequently, the spectroscopic sample should determine the high-mass end of the GC/UCD mass function, while the photometric sample should define the shape of the GC/UCD mass function at the intermediate- and low-mass range. To achieve this, it is necessary to scale the photometric sample such that it matches the spectroscopic sample. The scaling must be done in a mass region that is not too high, where the photometric sample is inaccurate, but not too low where the spectroscopic sample becomes incomplete. We determined this overlapping region by demanding the same slope for both mass functions. As indicated by the vertical lines in Fig.~\ref{fig_used_scaling}, we selected the interval [6.55, 6.75] for the spectroscopic sample where the corresponding cumulative mass function has a slope of 3.3 and the interval [6.4, 6.6] for the photometric sample with a similar slope of 3.4. These two slopes are included in Fig.~\ref{fig_used_scaling} with blue dashed lines. At $\log_{10} (M/M_{\odot}) = 6.6$, there are 100 objects in the spectroscopic sample, while the photometric sample contains 29 GCs, leading to a scaling factor of 100/29 $\approx$ 3.5 with an error of about 0.7 when only considering Poisson noise. When the scaling point is chosen at a lower mass of $\log_{10} (M/M_{\odot}) =$ 6.55, 6.5, or 6.45 we obtain a scaling factor of 3.2, 3.1, or 2.9, respectively, because the spectroscopic mass function flattens toward lower masses. Choosing the scaling point at $\log_{10} (M/M_{\odot}) =$ 6.65, 6.7, or 6.75 gives a scaling factor of 4.5, 5.2, or 4.7, respectively, because the mass function of the photometric sample falls off steeply above $\log_{10} (M/M_{\odot}) = 6.6$. We therefore set the requirement that the scaling be done at a mass where the slopes of the spectroscopic and photometric mass functions are similar.
We combined the two samples as follows: The high-mass part above $\log_{10} (M/M_{\odot}) = 6.6$ (indicated by a vertical arrow in Fig.~\ref{fig_used_scaling}) is defined by the spectroscopic sample, while the intermediate- and the low-mass part emerges from shifting the photometric sample upward by the factor 3.5. The similar slope of the two samples in the overlap region leads to a smooth transition. The combined cumulative mass function of GC/UCD is represented by a red dotted line in Fig.~\ref{fig_used_scaling} and consists of 8143 objects. This is well within the estimate by \citet{gregg09} because we probe a smaller region. However, based on two different approaches, \citet{dirsch03} expected $6\,100 \pm 770$ and $6\,800 \pm 950$ objects, respectively, within 83 kpc (i.e.,~almost the same spatial region). Compared to their estimates, our combined sample includes slightly more objects.
\section{Correction of the observed GC/UCD sample} \label{sect_corrections}
To determine which distribution of SFRs has led to the formation of the observed GC/UCD sample, the individual mass of each GC/UCD at the time of its birth is required. Thus, it is necessary to correct the observed mass function for all aspects that resulted in a change of the individual GC/UCD masses. The main contributors are
\begin{enumerate}
\item mass loss due to stellar evolution,
\item mass loss due to dynamical evolution,
and\item elimination of objects that are not the result of an SC formation process.
\end{enumerate}
There are many elaborate models that treat the evolution of SCs as a function of various parameters, such as the orbit of the SCs, the concentration factor, and/or the Roche-lobe filling conditions \citep[e.g.,][]{lamers10, lamers13, alexander12, alexander14, brockamp14}. However, we decided to evaluate the corrections of the first two aspects based on the relatively simple model by \citet{lamers05}. Their model appears to be very suitable for our purposes since it requires only a handful of ingredients. This is important for us because the current knowledge about the combined GC/UCD sample is limited: We have a mass estimate for all objects based on their photometric properties. Additionally, spectra have been taken for the most luminous and therefore most massive objects, from which the radial velocity and some internal properties of these objects can be deduced. From photometry and/or spectroscopy, the metallicities and the ages of the GCs/UCDs are known. Typically, they lie between $-$2 dex and $+$0.5 dex, while the metal-poor and the metal-rich sub-populations peak at rougly $-$1.5 dex and $-$0.5 dex, respectively. Moreover, the projected 2D distance to the center of NGC~1399 is known for each object.
However, external properties such as the 3D position in the galaxy cluster, the absolute velocity, or the parameters of the orbit are not known for any object of the sample. This means in turn that we cannot apply corrections regarding the internal and external dynamical evolution to each object individually without making assumptions, in particular for the lower mass tail of the combined GC/UCD sample, where number counts were extrapolated by scaling. Applying corrections based only on assumptions will lead to relatively large uncertainties that might prevent us from drawing reliable conclusions about the formation of the observed GC/UCD sample. To avoid this, we only applied corrections based on properties of the sample accessible to us.
The model by \citet{lamers05} allows us to correct for stellar evolution and the disruption of SCs in tidal fields, the two most important contributions regarding the mass loss of SCs. Using Eq.~(7) from \citet{lamers05}, we can calculate the initial mass of each SC, $M_{\mathrm{initial}}$, as a function of its present mass, $M_{\mathrm{now}}$, and its age, $t$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq.corr}
M_{\mathrm{initial}} (M_{\mathrm{now}}, t) = \left[ \left( \frac{M_{\mathrm{now}}}{M_{\odot}} \right)^{\gamma} + \frac{\gamma t}{t_0} \right]^{1/\gamma} \frac{1}{\mu_{\mathrm{ev}} (t)} .
\end{equation}
\noindent Here, $\gamma = 0.62$ and $t_0$ can be expressed as $t_0 = (t_4/660)^{1/0.967}$ , where $t_4$ is the total disruption time of an SC with an initial mass of $10^4 M_{\odot}$. These parameters carry the information related to the mass loss due to tidal disruption for an SC of any mass. The mass loss due to stellar evolution is described by $\mu_{\mathrm{ev}} (t),$ which is the mass fraction of an SC with initial mass $M_{\mathrm{initial}}$ that is still bound at age $t$. With Eqs.~3 and 2 in \citet{lamers05}, $\mu_{\mathrm{ev}} (t)$ reads
\begin{equation}
\mu_{\mathrm{ev}} (t) = 1 - 10^{(\log (t) - a_{\mathrm{ev}})^{b_{\mathrm{ev}}} + c_{\mathrm{ev}} } ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where $t > 12.5$ Myr must be fulfilled. Since we assumed the GCs/UCDs to have an age of $t = 13$~Gyr (Sect.~\ref{sect_sample}), the requirement is easily complied with. The parameters $a_{\mathrm{ev}}$, $b_{\mathrm{ev}}$, and $c_{\mathrm{ev}}$ characterize the mass loss by stellar evolution and depend on the metallicity, $Z$. The values of $a_{\mathrm{ev}}$, $b_{\mathrm{ev}}$, and $c_{\mathrm{ev}}$ can be found in Table~1 in \citet{lamers05}. We assumed the metallicity to be -0.8 dex on average for the whole GC/UCD sample, that means $10^{-0.8} Z_{\odot} = 0.00269$ with $Z_{\odot} = 0.017$ \citep[e.g.,][]{grevesse&sauval98} and $0.00212$ for a newer estimate $Z_{\odot} = 0.0134$ \citep[see also references therein]{asplund09}, respectively. According to these numbers, the closest match is $Z = 0.0040,$ for which the parameters read $a_{\mathrm{ev}} = 7.06$, $b_{\mathrm{ev}} = 0.26$, and $c_{\mathrm{ev}} = -1.80$.
\begin{table*}[tb]
\caption{Determination of the ambient density, $\rho_{\mathrm{amb}}$, based on three different mass models (R1 in Cols.~2-4, R2 in Cols.~5-7, and a10 in Cols.~8-10.) to estimate the lifetime of a $10^4~M_{\odot}$ SC, $t_4$, based on two different conversion relations (PZ in Cols.~3, 6, 9, and BM in Cols.~4, 7, 10) as a function of the radius $r$ (Col.~1).}
\label{tab_amb.den.t4}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|ccc|ccc|ccc}
\hline \hline
$r$ & $\rho_{\mathrm{amb}}^{\mathrm{R1}}$ & $t_4^{\mathrm{PZ}}$ & $t_4^{\mathrm{BM}}$ & $\rho_{\mathrm{amb}}^{\mathrm{R2}}$ & $t_4^{\mathrm{PZ}}$ & $t_4^{\mathrm{BM}}$ & $\rho_{\mathrm{amb}}^{\mathrm{a10}}$ & $t_4^{\mathrm{PZ}}$ & $t_4^{\mathrm{BM}}$ \\
{[}kpc] & [$M_{\odot} \mathrm{pc}^{-3}$] & [Gyr] & [Gyr] & [$M_{\odot} \mathrm{pc}^{-3}$] & [Gyr] & [Gyr] & [$M_{\odot} \mathrm{pc}^{-3}$] & [Gyr] & [Gyr] \\
\hline
10 & $2.95 \cdot 10^{-2}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.78}$1.84$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.78}$4.62$ & $2.26 \cdot 10^{-2}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.78}$2.11$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$5.29$ & $1.79 \cdot 10^{-2}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.78}$2.37$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$5.94$ \\
20 & $1.08 \cdot 10^{-2}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.78}$3.04$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$7.63$ & $8.29 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.78}$3.47$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$8.72$ & $5.93 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.78}$4.11$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.93}$10.31$ \\
30 & $5.53 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.78}$4.25$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.93}$10.68$ & $4.23 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.78}$4.86$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.93}$12.21$ & $2.82 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$5.96$ & $14.97$ \\
40 & $3.28 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$5.52$ & $13.87$ & $2.51 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$6.32$ & $15.86$ & $1.58 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$7.96$ & $19.99$ \\
60 & $1.46 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$8.27$ & $20.76$ & $1.12 \cdot 10^{-3}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.85}$9.45$ & $23.74$ & $6.52 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.93}$12.38$ & $31.10$ \\
80 & $7.86 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.93}$11.28$ & $28.34$ & $6.01 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & \cellcolor[gray]{0.93}$12.90$ & $32.40$ & $3.33 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & $17.34$ & $43.55$ \\
100 & $4.72 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & $14.55$ & $36.55$ & $3.61 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & $16.64$ & $41.80$ & $1.93 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & $22.78$ & $57.23$ \\
130 & $2.52 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & $19.91$ & $50.01$ & $1.93 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & $22.77$ & $57.19$ & $9.89 \cdot 10^{-5}$ & $31.79$ & $79.86$ \\
160 & $1.51 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & $25.77$ & $64.73$ & $1.15 \cdot 10^{-4}$ & $29.47$ & $74.02$ & $5.74 \cdot 10^{-5}$ & $41.73$ & $104.81$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
The only ingredient that is not determined so far is $t_0$, which can be derived from $t_4$. Which would be a good estimate for the total disruption time of a $10^{4}~M_{\odot}$ SC around the giant elliptical NGC~1399? $t_4$ has been determined for M51, M33, the solar neighborhood, and the Small Magellanic Cloud by \citet[see their Table~1]{lamers05b}. Their values for $t_4$ vary between $10^{7.8}$~yr and $10^{9.9}$~yr. Their Table~1 and their Fig.~3 show that $t_4$ decreases with increasing ambient density, $\rho_{\mathrm{amb}}$, meaning that SCs are destroyed more easily in denser environments. This relationship is also found theoretically: Based on $N$-body simulations by \citet{pz98, pz02} (PZ) and \citet{baumgardt_makino03} (BM), \citet{lamers05b} showed in their Fig.~2 the dependence of $t_4$ on $\rho_{\mathrm{amb}}$, and two predicted lines that pass through the data points of each set of simulations. These two relations can be approximated by
\begin{align}
\mathrm{PZ}: \quad \log(t_4) &= -0.5 \log(\rho_{\mathrm{amb}}) + 8.5 \label{eq_pz}\\
\mathrm{BM}: \quad \log(t_4) &= -0.5 \log(\rho_{\mathrm{amb}}) + 8.9 \label{eq_bm}.
\end{align}
\noindent We used this correlation to determine the parameter $t_4$, which requires the ambient density profile around NGC~1399. Moreover, the above two relations also allow us to estimate the uncertainty of $t_4$.
To assess the ambient density around NGC~1399, we used Fig.~22 of \citet{schuberth10} where different approximations of the cumulative mass distribution of NGC~1399 as a function of the radius are shown. We selected the three models labeled R1, R2, and a10 to investigate the effect on $t_4$. These models were selected because they represent the full range of possible solutions to the observed mass distribution \citep[see Fig.~22 in][]{schuberth10}. Their mass profiles emerge from the following model parameters:
\begin{align}
\mathrm{R1}: \quad \rho_{\mathrm{s}} &= 0.0085~M_{\odot} \mathrm{pc}^{-3}, \quad r_{\mathrm{s}} = 50~\mathrm{kpc} \label{eq_r1}, \\
\mathrm{R2}: \quad \rho_{\mathrm{s}} &= 0.0065~M_{\odot} \mathrm{pc}^{-3}, \quad r_{\mathrm{s}} = 50~\mathrm{kpc} \label{eq_r2}, \\
\mathrm{a10}: \quad \rho_{\mathrm{s}} &= 0.0088~M_{\odot} \mathrm{pc}^{-3}, \quad r_{\mathrm{s}} = 34~\mathrm{kpc} \label{eq_a10},
\end{align}
\noindent where $r_{\mathrm{s}}$ is a core radius and $\rho_{\mathrm{s}}$ the central density. The two models R1 and R2 were taken from \citet{richtler08}. For all these models, the corresponding profile of the ambient density as a function of the radius is expressed by Eq.~(10) in \citet{richtler04}, where $\zeta = 1$ was used (cf.~Eqs.~(11) and (12) in \citealt{richtler04} with Eq.~(3) in \citealt{richtler08}):
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\mathrm{amb}} = \frac{\rho_{\mathrm{s}}}{(r/r_{\mathrm{s}}) (1 + r/r_{\mathrm{s}})^2} .
\end{equation}
\noindent Using this equation, we calculated the ambient densities at different radii for the three models R1, R2, and a10 (Eqs.~(\ref{eq_r1}) - (\ref{eq_a10})) and converted the resulting ambient densities, $\rho_{\mathrm{amb}}$, into lifetimes of a $10^4~M_{\odot}$ SC, $t_4$, according to the two above relations (Eqs.~(\ref{eq_pz}) and (\ref{eq_bm})). All results can be found in Table~\ref{tab_amb.den.t4}. The underlaid gray shading of individual entries in the table shows how strongly that particular value for $t_4$ would influence the correction of the observed GC/UCD mass function: the stronger the effect, the darker the color (dark gray: $t_4 <$ 5~Gyr, medium gray: 5~Gyr $< t_4 <$ 10~Gyr, light gray: 10~Gyr $< t_4 < t_{\mathrm{Hubble}}$).
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[angle=-90, width=0.488\textwidth]{GCsUCDsmasswithcorr.pdf}
\caption{Present-day (red dashed line) and natal cumulative mass functions (continuous lines) of the combined GC/UCD sample. The latter resulted from the former based on Eq.~\ref{eq.corr} with different values for the lifetime of a $10^4~M_{\odot}$ SC, $t_4$ (blue: $t_4 = 3$~Gyr, purple: $t_4 = 6$~Gyr, orange: $t_4 = 15$~Gyr). All other parameters are described in Sect.~\ref{sect_corrections}.}
\label{fig_corr_mass_func}
\end{figure}
Table~\ref{tab_amb.den.t4} lists the resulting values for $t_4$ , which shows that it depends much on the radius, the model used
for the ambient density, and its conversion to $t_4$. First, $t_4$ increases with increasing radius, which is expected since the ambient density decreases at the same time. Second, compared to $t_4$ values of the mass model R2, the corresponding $t_4$ values of the mass model R1 are lower, while the $t_4$ values of the mass model a10 are higher. This is also expected because the mass in model R1 increases more strongly with radius than model R2, while the increase of mass with radius is weaker for model a10 (cf.~Fig.~22 in \citealt{schuberth10}). The $t_4$ values of the different models reflect that the ambient density changes with radius in the same way as the mass does. Third, the conversion relation BM generally leads to longer lifetimes of $10^4~M_{\odot}$ SCs than the relation PZ. This is caused by the larger second term in the equation (cf.~Eqs.~(\ref{eq_pz}) and (\ref{eq_bm})).
Interestingly, the conversion relations influence the resulting $t_4$ values much more strongly than the choice of the mass model: The relation BM gives values for $t_4$ more than twice as high as those from the relation PZ, while the differences in $t_4$ for the three mass models R1, R2, and a10 are on a 10\% level that slightly increases with radius, $r$. Thus, the primary influence determining the value of $t_4$ is the conversion relation and
not the mass model. The shortest survival time of a $10^4~M_{\odot}$ SC of about 2~Gyr is obtained near the center of NGC~1399 with mass model R1 and the conversion relation PZ, while a similar SC can outlast several Hubble times in the outskirts of NGC~1399.
Apparently, there is no one single value for $t_4$ that comprises all information about the dynamical evolution of the observed GCs/UCDs that have a variety of masses and distances to the center of NGC~1399. We therefore used different approximations for $t_4$ to see how much our analysis depend on that parameter. The first value we assumed was $t_4 = 15$~Gyr, which is somewhat longer than the Hubble time. In this case, the correction term (Eq.~(\ref{eq.corr})) is dominated by mass loss due to stellar evolution, making the mass loss due to dynamical evolution negligible for all our GCs/UCDs. Guided by the $t_4$ values based on the conversion relation by PZ in Table~\ref{tab_amb.den.t4}, we assumed in two comparison cases the lifetime of a $10^4~M_{\odot}$ SC to be $t_4 = 6$~Gyr and $t_4 = 3$~Gyr. In particular, $t_4 = 3$~Gyr will allow us to determine how strongly this parameter influences our analysis. In this case, the strongest effect on the combined GC/UCD mass function is expected to occur at its low-mass end.
The last aspect listed in the enumeration in the beginning of this section, the elimination of objects that did not form in a typical SC formation process such as stripped nuclei of dwarf galaxies or merged super SCs, is also a challenge. As a first approach, we assumed that all objects in our combined GC/UCD sample are genuine SCs, but we also investigated two alternatives in Sect.~\ref{sect_decomposition}.
Now, all ingredients for the mass correction are available: All parameters were chosen as described above, while for $t_4$ the values 3, 6, and 15~Gyr were assumed. The present mass of each GC/UCD in our combined sample (Fig.~\ref{fig_used_scaling}) is inserted into Eq.~(\ref{eq.corr}) to determine its initial mass. The corrected cumulative mass functions can be viewed in Fig.~\ref{fig_corr_mass_func}, where they are drawn by blue, purple, and orange continuous lines for the $t_4$ values 3, 6, and 15~Gyr, respectively, while the present-day mass function is indicated by a red dotted line. The corrected mass functions represent the mass distributions of the GCs/UCDs at their birth and were used as the starting point to determine their formation history.
As compared to the present-day mass function, the corrected mass functions are generally shifted to higher masses since SCs only lose but do not gain mass in the course of time, although under some circumstances further mass growth is possible \citep{bekki09, pflamm-altenburg09}. Apparently, the shift at the high-mass end is almost the same for all three values of $t_4$: The reason is that essentially all mass loss is caused by stellar evolution, which depends on the mass itself, while the tidal field, and thus $t_4$, has almost no influence on high-mass SCs. On the other hand, the shift at the low-mass end differs significantly among the three mass functions: As compared to high-mass SCs, SCs of lower masses are much more strongly exposed to the tidal field and thus lose a higher fraction of their mass, while the relative amount of mass lost due to stellar evolution remains the same. Thus, when correcting for mass loss, those SCs gain more mass relative to their present mass than high-mass SCs. This results in a steepening of the mass function at the low-mass end with decreasing $t_4$.
We note that this correction cannot tell how many SCs have been destroyed in the course of time: we can only trace back the mass loss of GCs that still exist, but do not have any indication of how many GCs have been destroyed over the same period of time. The number of destroyed SCs should increase with decreasing mass and decreasing $t_4$. On the other hand, the lifetime of any SC must have been longer in the past since the mass of the central elliptical NGC~1399 and the surrounding Fornax galaxy cluster increased to its present-day value, leading to longer survival times in the past. It is not obvious to which extent these two effects might counteract each other. Nevertheless, since destroyed GCs are not accounted for, this implies that in particular the number of low-mass GCs is probably underestimated.
We assume that the real natal mass function of the GC/UCD sample lies somewhat above the cumulative mass function described by $t_4 = 15$~Gyr. The latter represents the case of minimum requirement where all GC/UCD are corrected for stellar evolution while the influence of the tidal field becomes negligible. At least toward higher masses, the mass function with $t_4 = 3$~Gyr can be interpreted as a rough upper limit: for this mass function it is assumed that all objects have such a low $t_4$ value. This cleary is an overestimate since only the innermost objects have low $t_4$ values, and these objects only constitute a fraction of the whole sample. Still, at higher masses, the mass function is probably relatively accurate since the influence of $t_4$ is marginal and the complete dissolution of high-mass GCs/UCD is unlikely. However, in particular toward smaller masses, even the mass function with $t_4 = 3$~Gyr is probably an underestimate since destroyed GCs are not accounted for and low-mass GCs are particulary susceptible to dissolution \citep[e.g.,][]{fall_rees77,okazaki95, elmegreen10}. Bearing this in mind, we use all three corrected GC/UCD mass functions from Fig.~\ref{fig_corr_mass_func} in the following section to determine the variation this introduces in the distribution of necessary SFRs.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[angle=-90, width=0.488\textwidth]{decompo_sketch.pdf}
\caption{Decomposition of the observed GC/UCD cumulative mass distribution corrected for mass loss (see Sect.~\ref{sect_corrections}; red continuous line) into individual SC populations (colored areas). Here, the first three populations for an ECMF with $\beta = 1.8$ are shown. The most massive object of each population is indicated.}
\label{fig_decompo_sketch}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[angle=-90, width=\textwidth]{mass+adjust+corr_9p.pdf}
\caption{Natal GC/UCD cumulative mass functions (continuous lines) together with the replicated ones (short dashed lines) as a function of $\beta$ (green dashed lines). The color scheme is the same as in Fig.~\ref{fig_corr_mass_func}.}
\label{fig_mass}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[angle=-90, width=\textwidth]{vgl.pdf}
\caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{fig_mass}, but for $\beta = 2.0$ (green dashed lines) for the standard approach (left panel), after excluding UCD3, the most massive object in our sample (middle panel), and using the stripped nuclei sample to account for the most massive objects in our sample (right panel). The color scheme is the same as in Fig.~\ref{fig_corr_mass_func}. }
\label{fig_mass_vgl}
\end{figure*}
\section{Replication and decomposition of the GC/UCD sample} \label{sect_decomposition}
After restoring the natal cumulative mass function of our combined GC/UCD sample (Fig.~\ref{fig_corr_mass_func}), we are now able to decompose it into separate SC populations, each described by the ECMF (Eq.~(\ref{ecmf})). We make use of the fact that the most massive SCs in the combined GC/UCD sample can only be formed during epochs with a high SFR, while low-mass SCs can be formed during any SC formation epoch (Eq.~\ref{sfr}). Thus, to determine which and how many formation epochs contributed to the overall GC/UCD mass function, the replication has to start at the high-mass end:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We select the (remaining) most massive SC, $M_{\mathrm{SC,max}}$, in our combined GC/UCD sample and convert it into the theoretical upper mass limit, $M_{\mathrm{max}}$, after rearranging Eq.~(\ref{M_eclmax}). \label{step1}
\item $M_{\mathrm{max}}$ determines the required SFR through Eq.~(\ref{sfr}). \label{step2}
\item The normalization constant $k$ (Eq.~(\ref{norm_k})) depends on $M_{\mathrm{max}}$ , which is known from step~\ref{step1}, and $\beta, $ which is varied in the range [1.7, 2.5]. With $\beta$, $k$, and $M_{\mathrm{max}}$, the ECMF (Eq.~(\ref{ecmf})) is fully determined. We note that $\beta$ also sets the length of one SC formation epoch, $\delta t$ (see Cols.~2 and 3 in Table~\ref{tab_statistics}). \label{step3}
\item The derived ECMF is integrated downward to calculate the individual SC masses, $M_{i}$, of the population formed in the same epoch as the most massive SC, $M_{\mathrm{SC,max}}$, selected in step~\ref{step1}. For this, the optimal sampling technique (Sect.~\ref{sub_sampling}) is used. Since the ECMF is a pure power law, the individual SC masses can be evaluated analytically \citep[see][]{schulz15}. \label{step4}
\item All generated SCs (also from previous runs, if existing) are accumulated and sorted according to their mass. Starting at the high-mass end, the masses of the most-massive, second most-massive, third most-massive, and so on, SC of the generated and observed distributions are compared pairwise. We accept a deviation of up to five percent. The comparison stops as soon as the mass of an SC in the generated sample is less massive than tolerated, as compared to its counterpart in the observed sample. This SC in the observed sample is regarded as the remaining most massive SC in the observed GC/UCD sample. Thereafter the loop restarts. \label{step5}
\end{enumerate}
A schematic plot of this procedure is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_decompo_sketch} for an ECMF with $\beta = 1.8$: Our procedure generates a first population (lower blue colored area) of SCs based on the most massive SC, $M_{\mathrm{SC,max,}1}$, in the observed GC/UCD sample corrected for mass loss (see Sect.~\ref{sect_corrections}; red continuous line). From the mass $M_{\mathrm{SC,max,}2}$ on, the first generated sample starts to deviate from the observed distribution. Thus, this SC in the observed sample is regarded as the most massive of the second population (light blue colored area). The first and second population together start deviating from the observed sample at the SC with the mass $M_{\mathrm{SC,max,}3}$ , which is regarded as the most massive SC of the third population (upper blue colored area). This iteration process is repreated until all generated SCs together replicate the observed GC/UCD sample as precisely as possible. Based on these and all following $M_{\mathrm{SC,max,}i}$, the required SFR for each formation epoch is determined according to steps \ref{step1} and \ref{step2} in the above enumeration.
Our goal is to reproduce the overall shape of the GC/UCD mass distribution and not to generating exact matches between individual SCs. To achieve this, we allowed five percent tolerance as mentioned above. Moreover, when we compared the SCs in the generated and the observed sample pairwise from high to low masses, we kept track of the difference in mass for each SC pair. For instance, sometimes an SC in the generated sample was more massive than its counterpart in the observed sample. When this occurred, we checked whether the following SC pair could compensate for this mass difference, and then we only accepted an SC pair with a mass difference above the mentioned tolerance.
The reason for the above approach, the tolerance and taking care of the mass difference, is threefold: First, in this way, the generation of an SC population is prevented if an SC of similar but slightly lower mass is available in the generated sample. This is done to avoid an overproduction of SCs that potentially do not have an equally massive counterpart in the observed GC/UCD sample since there is no way of excluding an SC from the generated sample once it is generated. Second, this ensures that the total mass in the generated and the observed sample are similar. This enabled us to obtain a match between the generated and observed sample in terms of the shape of the GC/UCD mass distribution and the total mass in it. Third, the five percent margin introduces some tolerance since our optimized sampling distributes the masses of SCs very smoothly. However, we also tested how the choice of a margin of five percent influences our analysis. For comparison, we assumed no tolerance at all (i.e., 0 \%) and a margin of twenty percent and compared the results; in the former case slighly more, in the second case slightly fewer SCs are generated. The influence is minor but is discussed in Sect.~\ref{discuss_assump}.
As a first approach, all GCs/UCDs in our combined sample were treated as being formed in an SC formation process. The replication of the observed GC/UCD sample is shown for $\beta$ in the range between 1.7 and 2.5 in Fig.~\ref{fig_mass}. The initial GC/UCD mass distributions are represented by continuous lines (blue: $t_4 = 3$~Gyr, purple: $t_4 = 6$~Gyr, orange: $t_4 = 15$~Gyr), while the corresponding generated distributions are drawn with short dashed lines of the same color. The green dashed lines indicate the underlying ECMF. The mass distributions generated with no margin and a twenty percent margin exhibit slightly more and fewer SCs, respectively. The mass functions themselves look essentially the same apart from the fact that they are slightly shifted upward and downward at the low-mass end, respectively, but have the same slope. To avoid overcrowding the figure, they are not shown because the difference is barely visible owing to the logarithmic scale.
Overall, and in particular for lower $\beta$, the above procedure works well: The generated distributions match the observed one nearly perfectly. Only at the low-mass end do the samples of generated SCs start to deviate from the observed GCs/UCDs sample because the distribution of GCs/UCDs flattens toward the lower mass end, while the underlying ECMF (green dashed lines in Fig.~\ref{fig_mass}) has the same slope throughout. As $\beta$ increases and the parental ECMFs steepen, the deviation at the low-mass end becomes more prominent. This deviation might be due to the fact that in the observed mass distribution, the survived GCs/UCDs were corrected for stellar and dynamical evolution, but the completely dissolved GCs/UCDs were not taken into account: If the masses of SCs are distributed according to a power law, as we assumed, it was shown in various studies that low-mass SCs are destroyed more efficiently than high-mass SCs \citep[e.g.,][]{fall_rees77,okazaki95, elmegreen10}. This leads to a Gaussian mass distribution, which is indeed observed around NGC~1399 \citep[see e.g.,][their Figs.~4 and 5]{hilker09}.
Another peculiarity appears in Fig.~\ref{fig_mass}: At the high-mass end, the SCs of the generated sample become more massive than their conterparts in the observed GC/UCD sample because $\beta$ increases, therefore more SCs are drawn from the underlying ECMF. In contrast, the most massive object in the observed sample is more than 2.5 times more massive than the second most massive object, which leads to a substantial mass gap in between.
All of the above findings are independent of the choice of the parameter $t_4$. The only difference between the generated mass distributions with a certain $\beta$ is that they are slightly shifted to higher masses in the same way as the low-mass end of the initial mass distributions.
The most massive object in our combined GC/UCD sample is UCD3, which \citet{frank11} found to be fully consistent with a massive GC when surveying its internal kinematics. However, it still remains a peculiar object: It has an effective radius of almost 90~pc \citep{evstigneeva07, hilker07, frank11}, which is much larger than the effective radii of typical GCs of about 3 to 5~pc \citep[e.g.,][]{drinkwater03, jordan05}. Moreover, its surface brightness profile is best fit with a two-component model \citep{drinkwater03, evstigneeva07}, meaning that UCD3 is described best by a core that is surrounded by a halo with effective radii of around 10 and 100~pc, respectively \citep{evstigneeva07}. Such a composition of a core and a halo could be interpreted as a not fully completed stripping process of a more extended object \citep{evstigneeva08}. However, the merged star cluster scenario is a possible formation channel as well \citep{fellhauer&kroupa05}. \citet{bruens12} emphasized that a core-halo surface brightness profile may also occur after the merging of SCs based on their simulations on the formation of super SCs in \citet{bruens11}.
Since UCD3 does not seem to be a typical GC, we tested how our analysis is influenced when it is removed from our combined GC/UCD sample. We kept everything else the same and reran our above method. There was only one difference compared to the previous run: the agreement at the high-mass end was much tighter. This finding is independent of $\beta$, for which reason we only show the resulting mass distributions for $\beta = 2.0$ in the middle panel of Fig.~\ref{fig_mass_vgl}, in comparison to the first approach where UCD3 was included (left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig_mass_vgl}). The overproduction of high-mass SCs clearly disappears completely. The situation at the low-mass end, meaning the dependence on $t_4$, remains the same as before.
There are two interpretations possible for this finding: First, if it is assumed that UCD3 is a genuine SC, then this would hint at a small $\beta$ since otherwise between one and three very massive SCs of similar mass should have formed in the same formation event (cf.~the overproduction of SCs at the high-mass end for large $\beta$ in Fig.~\ref{fig_mass}). However, this is not observed. It is unlikely that these objects exist because they would be among the brighest UCDs and thus hard to miss observationally. The mass gap between the most massive and the second most massive UCD (cf.~the high-mass end of the GC/UCD sample in Fig.~\ref{fig_mass}) together with the typical values for $\beta$ of around 2.0 to 2.3 \citep[e.g.,][]{zhang_fall99, lada_lada03, weidner04, mccrady_graham07, chandar11} indicate a second possibility: As already suggested by its internal properties, UCD3 cannot be classified as a normal GC that formed in a typical SC formation process. We regard this as the more probable possibility.
We discuss the question whether UCD3 might not be the only object that does not fall into the category 'genuine GC'. Unfortunately, no predictions have been made so far regarding the SC mass function for the merged star cluster scenario. However, for the dwarf galaxy threshing scenario, \citet{pfeffer16} estimated for a galaxy similar to NGC~1399 a possible number of objects originating from stripping a nucleated dwarf galaxy. Their expected cumulative distribution within 83~kpc around the central galaxy, this means similar to the distance cut we applied, is plotted in black, while the standard deviation area is colored in gray in Fig.~\ref{fig_used_scaling} (private communication). To be consistent, the same mass correction as described in Sect.~\ref{sect_corrections} was applied to the stripped nuclei sample by \citet{pfeffer16}.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[angle=-90, width=\textwidth]{sfr_all_9p.pdf}
\caption{Cumulative number of SC formation epochs (SCFEs) as a function of the SFR for the standard approach in blue, for the GC/UCD sample after excluding UCD3 in green, and for taking into account the stripped nuclei sample in red. The thickness of the lines depends on the value of the parameter $t_4$ (thick lines for $t_4 = 3$~Gyr, medium thick lines for $t_4 = 6$~Gyr, thin lines for $t_4 = 15$~Gyr).}
\label{fig_sfr}
\end{figure*}
In a third approach, we assumed that this stripped nuclei sample represents those objects in our combined GC/UCD sample (here, the most massive object, UCD3, is included again) that did not form in an SC formation process but are nuclei whose envelope was stripped away. Figure~\ref{fig_used_scaling} shows that the distribution of stripped nuclei accounts for the four most massive objects in the observed sample, which lie within the standard deviation area of the stripped nuclei sample. Consequently, our method needs to reproduce all remaining objects so that finally, the stripped nuclei sample together with the generated sample match the observed distribution of GCs/UCDs. For this, we started with the stripped nuclei sample and proceeded as before. The result of this third approach is shown in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig_mass_vgl} where the same color scheme is used.
The behavior at the low-mass end is essentially the same as in the two cases before: While the observed GC/UCD distribution flattens toward lower masses, the distribution of generated SC continues with the same slope as the underlying ECMF. In addition, the same shift to higher masses appears for shorter $t_4$. However, at the high-mass end the situation appears to be different from the first approach and similar to the previous one where UCD3 was excluded: Since the stripped nuclei sample accounts for the four most massive objects in the observed sample, there is no overproduction of SCs at the high-mass end. Instead, for all $\beta$, our algorithm accurately replicates the remaining GCs/UCDs distribution (right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig_mass_vgl}).
\section{Distribution of necessary SFRs} \label{sect_sfr.distr}
As mentioned in Sect.~\ref{sect_framework}, each SC population is characterized by its own individual stellar upper mass limit, $M_{\mathrm{max}}$. According to the SFR-$M_{\mathrm{max}}$ relation \citep{weidner04, randria13}, this mass limit can be translated into an SFR under which that SC population formed. Since we decomposed the observed GC/UCD mass function into individual SC populations, it is possible to determine the necessary SFR for each population: For each of the three approaches and for each of the initial GC/UCD mass distributions based on the three different $t_4$, $M_{\mathrm{max}}$ of each SC population is converted into an SFR using Eq.~(\ref{sfr}). This results in nine different cumulative SFR distributions that are plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig_sfr} for the different $\beta$. These SFR distributions show in a cumulative way how many GC/UCD formation events are necessary above a certain SFR. The color coding is as follows: The resulting SFR distributions for the standard approach, where all GCs/UCDs are kept, are marked in blue. The SFR distributions of the second approach where UCD3 was excluded are drawn in green, while those of the last approach where a sample of stripped nuclei was taken into account are shown in red. Moreover, the thickness of the lines representing the SFR distributions are varied depending on the $t_4$ value of the underlying GC/UCD birth mass function: We use a thick line for $t_4 = 3$~Gyr, a medium thick line for $t_4 = 6$~Gyr, and a thin line $t_4 = 15$~Gyr.
The resulting SFR distributions are remarkably similar for each $\beta,$ regardless of the different approaches and the $t_4$ value of the underlying GC/UCD birth mass function. The similarity is particularly striking toward smaller $\beta$. The details are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The resulting SFRs increase with $\beta$ and cover a range between $\log (\mathrm{SFR}) \approx$ 0.5 and 2.5 for $\beta = 1.7$, while for $\beta = 2.5$ the SFR range lies between $\log (\mathrm{SFR}) \approx$ 2.0 and 4.5. This is mostly independent of the choice of $t_4$ but depends on the treatment of the highest mass objects (see below). At the same time, the number of required GC/UCD formation events, $N_{\mathrm{SCFE}}$, decreases with $\beta$ from a few thousand events for $\beta = 1.7$ to roughly one hundred events for $\beta = 2.5$. Consequently, the main finding is that the higher $\beta$, the higher the SFRs and the fewer formation epochs, $N_{\mathrm{SCFE}}$, are needed to build up the entire GC/UCD sample (cf.~Cols.~4, 7, and 10 in Table~\ref{tab_statistics}).
\item As mentioned above, the SFR distributions become less similar with increasing $\beta$. In addition to the somewhat broader distribution of the SFR functions toward lower SFRs, the main difference is the distribution of the highest SFRs: In particular for $\beta = 2.5$, for the standard approach (blue lines) obviously only one GC/UCD formation event with a very high SFR is needed, while the other two approaches (green and red lines) require several formation events with a range of slightly lower SFRs. Even though the latter two are treating the objects at the high-mass end differently, their resulting SFR distributions are fairly similar, independent of $\beta$.
\item The highest peak SFRs are always obtained for the standard approach (all GCs/UCDs included, blue lines), the lowest peak SFRs always in the case when the stripped nuclei sample is taken into account (red lines). When only UCD3 is excluded (green lines), the peak SFRs are somewhat higher than taking into account the stripped nuclei sample. This is expected since lower SFRs are needed if the highest mass object(s) is excluded or is accounted for by the stripped nuclei sample, respectively.
\item At the low-SFR end, the SFR distributions develop into three different tails, depending on $t_4$ (thickness of the lines) but independent of how the high-mass end is treated (color). This is particularly visible for a not too high $\beta$. It shows that the number of GC/UCD formation events at the low-SFR end is solely defined by the shape of the low-mass end of the GC/UCD mass function, which itself is determined by $t_4$, and independent of the treatment of the high-mass end of the GC/UCD mass function. The number of formation events is highest for the smallest $t_4$ (3~Gyr, thick lines) while the smallest number of formation events is obtained for the highest $t_4$ (15~Gyr, thin lines). This simply represents the slighty higher/lower masses of the low-mass objects in the observed GC/UCD sample for lower/higher $t_4$ values, respectively. However, it needs to be considered that the SFR distributions particularly at the low-SFR end only represent a lower limit: the used mass functions are not corrected for destroyed GCs/UCDs, so that more formation epochs and/or higher SFRs might be necessary. Furthermore, the choice of a five-percent margin when replicating the observed GC/UCD mass function also influences the SFR distribution, but only at the low-SFR end since mainly the low-mass end of the mass function changes. For a larger/smaller margin, slightly fewer/more formation epochs and lower/higher SFRs are required. Since the difference is rather small, the resulting SFR distributions are not shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_sfr} for clarity (but see Sect.~\ref{discuss_assump} for a discussion).
\end{enumerate}
Given that the lowest and highest $\beta$ are only rarely observed and the standard approach, meaning the assumption that even the most massive UCDs formed as a single SC, is not well justified, we obtain peak SFRs of between $\log (\mathrm{SFR}) \approx$ 2.5 and 3.5 corresponding to values between roughly 300 and 3000 $M_{\odot} \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$. The question is how reasonable these SFRs are for the formation of a rich GC/UCD system like that observed around NGC~1399. Comparing this result to other studies in the literature, we discuss in Sect.~\ref{discuss_formation} in detail what the range of SFRs tells us about the formation of NGC~1399 itself.
\begin{table*}[tb]
\caption{Total number of SC formation epochs (SCFE), $N_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$, the total SC formation time, $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$, and the total stellar mass, $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$, formed during that time for the three different approaches as a function of $t_4$ (Col.~1) and $\beta$ (Col.~2). These quantities are listed for the standard approach in Cols.~4-6, for the case when the most massive object, UCD3, is excluded in Cols.~7-9, and for an assumed distribution of stripped nuclei in Cols.~10-12. For reference, the length of one SC formation epoch, $\delta t$, is listed in Col.~3 as determined in \citet{schulz15}.}
\label{tab_statistics}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lcc||ccc|ccc|ccc}
\hline \hline
& & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{standard approach} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{UCD3 excluded} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{stripped nuclei excluded} \\
$t_4$ & $\beta$ & $\delta t$ & $N_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$ & $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$ & $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$ & $N_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$ & $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$ & $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$ & $N_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$ & $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$ & $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$ \\
& & [Myr] & & [Gyr] & [$10^{10}~M_{\odot}$] & & [Gyr] & [$10^{10}~M_{\odot}$] & & [Gyr] & [$10^{10}~M_{\odot}$] \\
\hline
3~Gyr &1.7 & 0.77 & 2168 & 1.66 & 1.98 & 2178 & 1.67 & 1.97 & 2186 & 1.67 & 1.95 \\
&1.8 & 1.11 & 1639 & 1.82 & 2.52 & 1646 & 1.82 & 2.51 & 1655 & 1.83 & 2.50 \\
&1.9 & 1.70 & 1211 & 2.06 & 3.56 & 1218 & 2.07 & 3.55 & 1226 & 2.09 & 3.53 \\
&2.0 & 2.80 & 934 & 2.61 & 5.84 & 934 & 2.61 & 5.83 & 947 & 2.65 & 5.82 \\
&2.1 & 4.94 & 671 & 3.31 & 11.11 & 669 & 3.30 & 11.08 & 688 & 3.40 & 11.12 \\
&2.2 & 9.31 & 451 & 4.20 & 24.40 & 450 & 4.19 & 24.40 & 465 & 4.33 & 24.42 \\
&2.3 & 18.57 & 323 & 6.00 & 61.94 & 321 & 5.96 & 61.86 & 332 & 6.17 & 61.83 \\
&2.4 & 38.77 & 167 & 6.47 & 166.03 & 164 & 6.36 & 165.56 & 173 & 6.71 & 165.74 \\
&2.5 & 83.77 & 121 & 10.14 & 516.62 & 126 & 10.56 & 522.28 & 133 & 11.14 & 519.83 \\
\hline
6~Gyr &1.7 & 0.77 & 1671 & 1.28 & 1.55 & 1672 & 1.28 & 1.54 & 1683 & 1.29 & 1.52 \\
&1.8 & 1.11 & 1225 & 1.36 & 1.96 & 1221 & 1.35 & 1.94 & 1239 & 1.37 & 1.93 \\
&1.9 & 1.70 & 899 & 1.53 & 2.76 & 894 & 1.52 & 2.74 & 917 & 1.56 & 2.74 \\
&2.0 & 2.80 & 651 & 1.82 & 4.48 & 652 & 1.82 & 4.47 & 661 & 1.85 & 4.45 \\
&2.1 & 4.94 & 470 & 2.32 & 8.54 & 470 & 2.32 & 8.51 & 482 & 2.38 & 8.51 \\
&2.2 & 9.31 & 287 & 2.67 & 18.55 & 294 & 2.74 & 18.62 & 309 & 2.88 & 18.65 \\
&2.3 & 18.57 & 165 & 3.06 & 46.46 & 163 & 3.03 & 46.23 & 180 & 3.34 & 46.44 \\
&2.4 & 38.77 & 135 & 5.23 & 140.82 & 134 & 5.19 & 139.86 & 139 & 5.39 & 138.43 \\
&2.5 & 83.77 & 113 & 9.47 & 448.24 & 113 & 9.47 & 446.09 & 118 & 9.89 & 440.75 \\
\hline
15~Gyr &1.7 & 0.77 & 1434 & 1.10 & 1.35 & 1436 & 1.10 & 1.34 & 1454 & 1.11 & 1.32 \\
&1.8 & 1.11 & 1025 & 1.14 & 1.69 & 1025 & 1.14 & 1.68 & 1036 & 1.15 & 1.66 \\
&1.9 & 1.70 & 741 & 1.26 & 2.38 & 746 & 1.27 & 2.37 & 753 & 1.28 & 2.35 \\
&2.0 & 2.80 & 507 & 1.42 & 3.81 & 503 & 1.41 & 3.78 & 515 & 1.44 & 3.77 \\
&2.1 & 4.94 & 339 & 1.67 & 7.19 & 336 & 1.66 & 7.16 & 347 & 1.71 & 7.16 \\
&2.2 & 9.31 & 212 & 1.97 & 15.87 & 209 & 1.95 & 15.85 & 224 & 2.08 & 15.87 \\
&2.3 & 18.57 & 146 & 2.71 & 42.34 & 144 & 2.67 & 41.96 & 149 & 2.77 & 41.60 \\
&2.4 & 38.77 & 125 & 4.85 & 127.39 & 126 & 4.88 & 127.29 & 129 & 5.00 & 125.08 \\
&2.5 & 83.77 & 102 & 8.54 & 403.35 & 105 & 8.80 & 404.42 & 110 & 9.22 & 400.12 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\section{Discussion} \label{sect_discussion}
For our investigation, we made several assumptions that we review in the first part of this section. In the second part we continue with a discussion of our results while in the third part we focus on the formation of NGC~1399 and its GC/UCD system.
\subsection{Assumptions} \label{discuss_assump}
Our main assumption is that it is possible to decompose the observed GC/UCD sample into individual SC populations that formed at the same time out of the same molecular cloud. This approach can be applied to our data because it is known that the GCs/UCDs are of similar age. However, we cannot prove that those GCs/UCDs that are assumed to form a population indeed formed together. Our sample is comprehensive, therefore this assumption is not too strong because particularly toward the low-mass end, there are many GCs with similar masses, making them exchangeable. It should be noted that our approach is of a statistical nature and not a deterministic analysis.
Even though we took into account that a part of the UCDs might not originate from an SC formation process, it is not entirely clear whether the bulk of UCDs are compatible with being massive GCs. According to \citet{gregg09}, the UCDs in the Fornax galaxy cluster form a dynamically distinct population compared to the GC system, with a higher mean velocity and a lower velocity dispersion \citep[see also][]{mieske04}. This might indicate a different formation process but does not imply in general that UCDs are not SCs since the most massive SCs have probably formed in the most intense star-forming region and may therefore have a different kinematic signature. Moreover, it has been suggested that only the fainter and less massive UCDs could be genuine GCs while the brightest and most massive ones might have formed by tidal threshing \citep{mieske04, chilingarian11}. However, \citet{mieske12} restricted the fraction of tidally stripped dwarfs to not more than 50\% of UCDs with masses above $2 \cdot 10^6~M_{\odot}$ based on statistical considerations. \citet{pfeffer14} expected roughly 12 and 20~stripped within 83~kpc and 300~kpc around NGC~1399, whereas almost 150 and 200~GCs/UCDs are observed, respectively (see their Table~2). The contribution for lower masses becomes insignificant. This is well within the constraints set by \citet{mieske12}. More recently, \citet{pfeffer16} estimated that stripped nuclei account for around 40\% of the GCs/UCDs above $10^7~M_{\odot}$ , while for masses between $10^6~M_{\odot}$ and $10^7~M_{\odot}$ the contribution drops to about 2.5\%. As the authors emphasized, this implies that not all of the objects observed at the high-mass end of the GC/UCD mass function can be explained by tidally stripped dwarf galaxies.
If most of the UCDs are indeed of SC origin and not threshed dwarfs, it is not known whether they might have formed in the merged SC scenario \citep[e.g.,][]{fellhauer&kroupa02, bruens12}. At the time of formation, the newly born massive SCs were most likely embedded in a high-density environment, allowing a part of these SCs to merge into more massive super SCs. In this case, the masses of the pristine SCs are distributed according to the ECMF (Eq.~(\ref{ecmf})), but the masses of the final SC population might be distributed fairly differently. Consequently, the observed GC/UCD mass function cannot be decomposed into SC populations that are described by the ECMF.
It is not clear whether and how the formation of SCs changes in case of very high SFRs as derived by us. The stellar IMF may become top-heavy at high SFRs or high star-forming densities \citep{guna11, weidner11} and increasing pre-GC cloud-core density \citep{marks12}. Furthermore, \citet{nara13} found that massive galaxies form the majority of their stars with a top-heavy IMF, but they may experience both top-heavy and bottom-heavy IMF phases during their life. The implications of a top-heavy IMF were studied extensively by \citet{dabringhausen09, dabringhausen10, dabringhausen12} and \citet{murray09}. Massive stars are then formed more frequently compared to a canonical IMF. They leave behind dark remnants such as neutron stars and black holes, which become visible in X-rays if they accrete matter from a low-mass companion star. \citet{dabringhausen12} found that these low-mass X-ray binaries are up to ten times more frequent in UCDs than expected for a canonical IMF.
\citet{weidner11} explored the implications of SFRs above $10^3~M_{\odot} \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ on the mass function of SCs and found that either the ECMF becomes top-heavy or no low-mass SCs are formed. If the formation of low-mass SCs is indeed suppressed, our assumption of the lower mass limit, $M_{\mathrm{min}} = 5~M_{\odot}$, would not be justified. A change in $M_{\mathrm{min}}$ would have an effect on the total mass of each SC population, $M_{\mathrm{ECMF}}$ (Eq.~(\ref{M_ecmf})), and thus also on the SFR (Eq.~(\ref{sfr})). With a higher $M_{\mathrm{min}}$, $M_{\mathrm{ECMF}}$ will become lower so that the necessary SFR will decrease as well. However, it is difficult to quantify this effect since it is not clear what a more realistic lower mass limit would be.
\subsection{Results} \label{discuss_results}
In Sect.~\ref{sect_sample} we noted that the mass determination strongly depends on the modeled $M/L$ ratio: The mass estimate of GCs and UCDs by \citet{bc03} is on average between 15\% and 20\% lower than the one by \citet{maraston05} that we used. Based on the mass determination, this translates into an uncertainty in the SFR on the same order (cf.~Eq.~(\ref{sfr})), meaning that our derived SFRs are accurate to about 20\%.
Moreover, we extracted from our analysis for each run how many SC formation epochs (SCFE), $N_{\mathrm{SCFE}}$, are necessary to reproduce the observed GC/UCD sample, the total time this takes, $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$, and the total stellar mass, $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$, formed during that time. All these values can be found in Table~\ref{tab_statistics} as a function of the parameter $t_4$ and the considered approach. The resulting values are similar, independent of the approach, and follow the same trend with increasing $\beta$ and $t_4$.
We assumed an age of 13~Gyr for our GC/UCD sample. Even though the age determination becomes more uncertain for older ages, we know from observations that the vast majority of objects in our sample formed more than 8~Gyr ago (cf.~Sect.~\ref{sect_sample}). Thus, the total SC formation time, $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}} = N_{\mathrm{SCFE}} \cdot \delta t$ (Cols.~5, 8, 11) with $\delta t$, the length of one SC formation epoch, should not exceed several Gyr. This is the case for $\beta \lesssim 2.2$ mostly independent of $t_4$ and the chosen approach, and agrees nicely with the fact that $\beta \approx 2.0$ is typically found observationally \citep[e.g.,][]{zhang_fall99, lada_lada03, mccrady_graham07, chandar11}.
However, this does not imply that $\beta \gtrsim 2.2$ is ruled out. With increasing $\beta$, the corresponding values for $\delta t$ increase strongly up to about 80~Myr (cf.~Col.~3). Observationally, the duration of one SC formation epoch is found to be a few Myr up to a few tens Myr at most \citep[e.g.,][]{fukui99, yamaguchi01, tamburro08, egusa04, egusa09}. Apparently, for large $\beta$, our estimates for $\delta t$ are too high, which implies that the total SC formation time, $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$, is an overestimate. Furthermore, calculating the total SC formation time through $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}} = N_{\mathrm{SCFE}} \cdot \delta t$ assumes that the SC populations form consecutively. However, it is conceivable that SC formation could occur at the same time but at several separated places. In this case, an individual ECMF would be populated with SCs at each of those places, but the total SC formation time would be shorter than suggested by the formula. The latter might also explain why we find formation timescales several times longer than the estimate of shorter than 0.5~Gyr according to the downsizing picture \citep[e.g.,][see Sect.~\ref{discuss_formation}]{thomas99, recchi09}.
Today, the total stellar mass of NGC~1399 amounts to $6 \cdot 10^{11}~M_{\odot}$ within 80~kpc and rises to roughly $10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ at a distance of 670~kpc \citep[][their Table~1]{richtler08}. Recently, \citet{iodice16} derived a total stellar mass of NGC~1399 and its halo of about $6.6 \cdot 10^{11}~M_{\odot}$ , while the stellar mass in the halo amounts to about $4 \cdot 10^{11}~M_{\odot}$. These estimates set a strict upper limit on the total stellar mass, $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$, that formed during the entire SC formation process.
The $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$ columns of each approach in Table~\ref{tab_statistics} show that a disagreement with the above limit occurs again for $\beta \gtrsim 2.3$ mostly independent of $t_4$ and the considered approach. Two things should be mentioned here. First, the above limit regarding the total stellar mass does not imply that this mass is still stored in the GC/UCD sample today. Apparently, only a tiny portion still is: the present-day mass of our combined GC/UCD sample is about $5 \cdot 10^{9}~M_{\odot}$, which means about 1\% of the total stellar mass of NGC~1399, but a large part of the initially formed SCs dissolved and contributed their stars to NGC~1399 and its halo. Moreover, even the surviving SCs lost part of their mass because of stellar evolution and the loss of stars in the tidal field, which also added to NGC~1399 and its surroundings. Second, the constraint on $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$ does not necessarily imply that larger $\beta$ have to be excluded: As mentioned in the previous subsection, the lower mass limit, $M_{\mathrm{min}}$, was assumed to be $5~M_{\odot}$ , which might be not well justified since very high SFRs as we derived here might prevent the formation of lower-mass SCs. If we indeed underestimate $M_{\mathrm{min}}$, then we overestimate the total mass of each SC population, $M_{\mathrm{ECMF}}$ (Eq.~(\ref{M_ecmf})), and therefore also the total mass ever formed in SCs, $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$. A higher $M_{\mathrm{min}}$ would lower all our estimates for $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$ in Table~\ref{tab_statistics}. However, the overestimation of the total mass would be highest for large $\beta$ since due to the steeper ECMF, more low-mass SCs are formed per high-mass SC.
As mentioned in Sect.~\ref{sect_decomposition}, we introduced a margin of five percent when replicating the observed GC/UCD mass distribution. For comparison, we checked how no tolerance at all and a margin of twenty percent influences the outcome: the higher the margin, the more the generated GC/UCD mass distributions is shifted downward at the low-mass end. Consequently, when the mass function contains fewer SCs, slightly fewer formation epochs and lower SFRs are required. However, since mainly the low-mass end of the GC/UCD distribution is affected but not the high-mass end, the high-SFR end of the SFR distribution does not change. The most noticable difference appears in the total mass, $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$, of all SCs ever formed: For a larger margin, slightly fewer formation epochs are necessary. Large $\beta$ are affected the most because for them, the relative number of low-mass SC, produced during every formation epoch, is higher. As compared to a margin of five percent, the difference in $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$ varies between $+$2 \% and $-$8 \% for $\beta = 1.7$ and $+$5 \% and $-$15 \% for $\beta = 2.5$ for no tolerance at all and a margin of twenty percent, respectively. To avoid underestimating the total mass, $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$, we chose a relative small margin of 5 \%.
In summary, it appears that all cases up to $\beta \approx 2.2$ are in agreement with the conditions set by NGC~1399 mostly independent of $t_4$, the considered approach, and the choice of the margin. Again, this fits the observations of young SCs well, where usually $\beta \approx 2.0$ is found. However, as already mentioned in Sect.~\ref{sect_sfr.distr}, we do not regard the standard approach as very well justified because according to it, all GCs/UCDs are assumed to be genuine SCs, even though in numbers, the derived values for $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$ and $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$ do not vary much among the different approaches (cf.~Table~\ref{tab_statistics}).
\subsection{Formation of NGC~1399 and its GC/UCD system} \label{discuss_formation}
Here, we discuss possible formation scenarios of elliptical galaxies that can explain SFRs of more than 1000~$M_{\odot} \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$. There are suggestions that a massive elliptical might be the result of a merger of two (gas-rich spiral) galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{lilly99, eser14} and subsequent accretion of additional galaxies in the course of time. This is based on the observations of so-called (ultra-/hyper-)luminous infrared galaxies ((U/H)LIRGs), which are characterized by a substantial emission in the infrared (LIRGs: $L_{\mathrm{IR}} > 10^{11} L_{\odot}$; ULIRGs: $L_{\mathrm{IR}} > 10^{12} L_{\odot}$; HLIRGs: $L_{\mathrm{IR}} > 10^{13} L_{\odot}$). The energy behind these high luminosities is produced by active galactic nuclei (AGN) and/or an intense starburst \citep[e.g.,][]{carico90, condon91} and then re-radiated in infrared wavelengths. Observations show that the relative contribution of the AGN and the starburst component to the IR emission is a function of the luminosity: LIRGs and low-luminosity ULIRGs are mostly powered by a starburst, while high-luminosity ULIRGs and HLIRGs are dominated by an AGN \citep[e.g.,][]{veilleux99, nardini10}.
In particular for ULIRGs and partly for HLIRGs, the picture emerged that they depict the merger of two gas-rich galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{genzel00, farrah02}, thereby producing an elliptical galaxy \citep[e.g.,][]{kormendy92, genzel01}. A strong encounter instead of a merger between two gas-rich galaxies may be what is observed, however (see \citealt{kroupa15review} for a discussion on mergers vs. interactions), and in this case, the ULIRGs/HLIRGs may not be progenitors of elliptical galaxies. Whether a merger or not, the interaction triggers an intense star formation with SFRs between roughly 200 and 4000 $M_{\odot} \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ \citep[e.g.,][]{farrah02, lefloch05, takata06, bastian08, ruiz13, eser14}, which matches the range of SFRs we find well. These galaxies cover a wide redshift range of up to $z \approx 3$ (i.e.,~light emission up to 11.5~Gyr ago) and show a tendency of higher SFRs with higher redshifts (e.g., cf.~\citealt{bastian08, eser14} vs.~\citealt{farrah02, takata06}, see also \citealt{rr00}), which is confirmed by studies focusing on the evolution of the SFR with redshift or over cosmic time \citep[e.g.,][]{lefloch05, schiminovich05, speagle14, mancuso16}.
Toward higher redshifts, the level of obscuration of galaxies increases: They are usually barely visible in the optical and UV, but have an enormous emission at far-IR and sub-mm wavelengths \citep[e.g.,][]{michalowski10, nara15, mancuso16}. This is why they are called sub-millimeter galaxies (SMGs) or, more generally, dusty, star-forming galaxies (DSFGs). According to their IR-luminosities, the most luminous of them fall into the regime of HLIRGs and are among the most luminous, heavily star-forming galaxies in the Universe \citep[e.g.,][]{michalowski10, hainline11, casey14}. Their SFRs are similar to those of ULIRGs/HLIRGs and typically lie between a few hundred and a few thousand $M_{\odot} \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ \citep[e.g.,][]{zadeh12, swinbank14, cunha15, simpson15}, with the tendency that SMGs with higher redshifts have higher SFRs \citep{cunha15}. It has been argued that these DSFGs are not major mergers but galaxies experiencing their highest star formation activities \citep[e.g.,][]{farrah02, nara15, mancuso16}. This matches with the fact that massive elliptical galaxies are known to be $\alpha$-element enhanced and metal-rich, such that they cannot have formed from the mergers of pre-existing comparatively metal-poor disk galaxies.
Moreover, these galaxies are extremely massive: they can be interpreted to reside in particle dark matter or in phantom dark matter halos \citep[e.g.,][]{famaey12, lueghausen15} with masses of between more than $10^{11}$ and more than $10^{13}~M_{\odot}$ \citep{hickox12, bethermin13} and have stellar masses in the range of between lower than $10^{11}$ and more than $10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ \citep[e.g.,][]{swinbank06, michalowski10, hainline11}. For halo masses around $10^{12} M_{\odot}$, star formation occurs most efficiently \citep[e.g.,][]{behroozi13, bethermin13, wang13}, which is why the progenitors of even more massive present-day halos passed through this mass quickly, and thus formed most of their stars on timescales shorter than 1-2 Gyr \citep[see left panel of their Fig.~13 in][]{behroozi13, marsan15}.
Overall, DSFGs represent a phase in massive galaxy evolution that marks the transition from cold gas-rich, heavily star-forming galaxies to passively evolving systems \citep{hickox12}. In simulations by \citet{nara15}, this active phase was accompanied by a significant build-up of stellar mass; thereafter, these galaxies are expected to evolve into massive ellipticals \citep[e.g.,][]{michalowski10, hickox12}. For instance, when passively evolving high-redshift SMGs to the present time, \citet{hainline11} found their luminosity (and therefore mass) distribution to be similar to that of massive ellipticals in the Coma galaxy cluster. The authors noted that typical SMGs cannot represent the formation phase of the very luminous cD-type galaxies observed in galaxy clusters because the baryonic mass of a typical SMG is too low. \citet{miller15} emphasized that there are better tracers for the assembly of the most massive structures in the Universe than SMGs, Lyman-break galaxy analogs, for instance.
However, it needs to be taken into account that the Coma galaxy cluster is much richer in galaxies and in mass than the Fornax galaxy cluster. The center of the Coma galaxy cluster is dominated by two giant ellipticals, NGC~4874 and NGC~4889. Measurements by \citet[with $h=0.678$ from \citealt{planck14}]{okabe10} and \citet{andrade13} resulted in halo masses of $6.7 \cdot 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ and $7.6 \cdot 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ for NGC~4874, and $11.4 \cdot 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ and $9.1 \cdot 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ for NGC~4889, respectively. In comparison, \citet[their Table~1]{richtler08} estimated a halo mass of $3.5 \cdot 10^{12}~M_{\odot}$ for NGC~1399 within a radius of 80~kpc. Clearly, NGC~1399 is several times less massive than the center of the Coma galaxy cluster and could be considered as a less massive version of it at most. Nevertheless, there are hints that NGC~1399 went through multiple interactions that left an imprint on the spatial distribution of GCs \citep{dabrusco16} and a faint stellar bridge in the intracluster region on the west side of NGC~1399 \citep{iodice16}.
Regarding the formation timescale, massive elliptical galaxies like NGC~1399 must have formed on a short timescale, while less-massive galaxies are known to have formed over longer times, which is known as downsizing \citep[e.g.,][]{cowie96, thomas99, juneau05, recchi09}. Assuming that most of the mass of NGC~1399 was formed early on, the build-up must have been completed within less than 0.5~Gyr according to Eq.~(19) in \citet[][see also their Fig.~18]{recchi09}. This allows us to estimate the SFR during the formation: to simplify matters, we can assume a constant SFR over that time, which leads to $\mathrm{SFR} = M / t \approx 5 \cdot 10^{11}~M_{\odot} / 0.5~\mathrm{Gyr} \approx 1000~M_{\odot}/\mathrm{yr}$. Since the formation timescale might be shorter and the SFR over the formation period does not have to be constant, the peak SFRs might be a few times higher than estimated in this simple calculation.
In summary, the range of SFRs we found in Sect.~\ref{sect_sfr.distr} is in very good agreement with the SFRs observed in SMGs and the simple estimate based on downsizing. Moreover, the age of the GCs/UCDs (Sect.~\ref{sect_sample}) sets a limit on the formation timescale of NGC~1399 since the central Fornax galaxy and its GC/UCD system formed probably coevally. Most of the mass was built up within a few Gyr, which matches the generally short formation timescales of massive elliptical galaxies. In that respect, it seems reasonable to assume that as a result of their extreme star formation activity, massive high-redshift SMGs might represent the progenitors of cD galaxies like NGC~1399.
\section{Conclusions} \label{sect_concl}
We combined a spectroscopic and a photometric sample of GCs/UCDs around the giant elliptical NGC~1399 in the Fornax galaxy cluster to derive their overall mass distribution (Sect.~\ref{sect_sample}) and corrected it for stellar and dynamical evolution (Sect.~\ref{sect_corrections}) to obtain their mass function at the time of formation. Then, this "natal" mass function was decomposed into individual SC populations distributed according to the ECMF (Sect.~\ref{sect_decomposition}, schematic plot in Fig.~\ref{fig_decompo_sketch}). The upper mass limit of each population, $M_{\mathrm{max}}$, was converted into an SFR according to the SFR-$M_{\mathrm{max}}$ relation \citep{weidner04} as was fit in \citet{schulz15} (Sect.~\ref{sect_sfr.distr}). The resulting SFR distributions (Fig.~\ref{fig_sfr}) reveal which SFRs are required to form the entire GCs/UCDs system around NGC~1399.
When restoring the natal GC/UCD mass function, we assumed different lifetimes of the SCs, parameterized by $t_4$, to account for the variable strength of the tidal field depending on the distance to the center of NGC~1399 (Sect.~\ref{sect_corrections}). Moreover, we used three different approaches regarding the treatment of the natal GC/UCD mass function. First, in the standard approach we assumed that all GCs/UCDs were formed in an SC formation process and are therefore ancient SCs. Second, since at least the most massive UCD in our sample, UCD3, shows hints of being a merged SC or the nucleus of a stripped dwarf galaxy, we excluded this object from our sample. Third, \citet{pfeffer14} derived a possible distribution of dwarf galaxies whose envelopes were stripped away. We assumed that all objects in our GC/UCD mass function compatible with their distribution are stripped nuclei so that only the remaining GCs/UCDs need to be replicated by our method. All these modified samples were then treated as described above, meaning that they were decomposed into individual SC populations from which a distribution of SFRs was deduced based on $M_{\mathrm{max}}$ of each population.
Although we made different assumptions regarding the lifetime of the GCs/UCDs and modified the original GC/UCD sample, the outcome was mainly determined by the index $\beta$ of the underlying ECMF, while the influence of the parameter $t_4$ or the modified sample was rather of second order. We extracted from our analysis for each combination of parameters the distribution of SFRs required to build up the observed GC/UCD sample (Fig.~\ref{fig_sfr}), the time this takes, $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$, and the total stellar mass, $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$, formed during that time (Table~\ref{tab_statistics}). We found that
\begin{itemize}
\item the results for $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$ and $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$ are well within the constraints set by the age of the GCs/UCDs and the total stellar mass of NGC~1399 for $\beta \lesssim 2.2$,
\item the favored values for $\beta$ nicely fit the observations of young SCs where usually $\beta \approx 2.0$ is measured, and
\item the peak SFRs derived by us agree well with the range of SFRs observed in massive high-redshift SMGs and also with an estimate based on downsizing.
\end{itemize}
As discussed in Sect.~\ref{sect_discussion}, our assumption for the lower mass limit of SCs, $M_{\mathrm{min}} = 5~M_{\odot}$, might be an underestimate, given that high SFRs as derived here might suppress the formation of very low-mass SCs. Moreover, the length of one SC formation epoch, $\delta t$, that we used for large $\beta$ is higher than observed in star-forming regions. Increasing $M_{\mathrm{min}}$ and, for large $\beta,$ decreasing $\delta t$ would lead to a shorter total time for SC formation, $t_{\mathrm{SCFE,tot}}$, and to a lower total stellar mass, $M_{\mathrm{tot}}$, so that even higher $\beta$ could still be in agreement with the observational constraints in NGC~1399. Additionally, we regard the standard approach, where all GCs/UCDs are assumed to be genuine SCs, as not very well justified because UCD3, the most massive object in our sample, is clearly not a typical GC. However, except for the higher peak SFRs, caused by UCD3, the outcome from the standard approach does not differ much from the other two approaches.
In conclusion, NGC~1399 might have originated from an intense starburst similar to those observed in massive SMGs in the distant Universe. During that starburst, in particular the most massive GCs/UCDs were formed along with many lower mass GCs within a few Gyr. The dissolution and tidal disruption of a part of the GCs/UCDs probably fed the build-up of NGC~1399 and its halo, while a part of the GCs/UCDs was able to survive, allowing us to observe them today.
However, here, the GC/UCD sample was analyzed in its entirety without differentiating the red and blue subsamples, that is, the metal-rich and metal-poor GCs/UCDs. In a future paper we will reapply the method described here to the two subsamples to see whether and by how much the formation conditions of the red and blue GCs/UCDs differ.
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quantum theory (QT) is in conflict with the assumption that measurement outcomes correspond to preexisting properties that are not affected by compatible measurements \cite{Specker60,Bell66,KS67}. This conflict is behind the power of quantum computation \cite{HWVE14,DGBR15,RBDOB15} and quantum secure communication \cite{Ekert91,BHK05}, and can be experimentally tested through the violation of noncontextuality (NC) inequalities \cite{Cabello08}. These NC inequalities allow the observation of different forms of contextuality that cannot be revealed through Bell's inequalities: Contextuality with qutrits \cite{KCBS08}, quantum-state-independent contextuality \cite{Cabello08,BBCP09,YO12}, contextuality needed for universal fault-tolerant quantum computation with magic states \cite{HWVE14}, and absolute maximal contextuality \cite{ATC15} are just some examples. This variety of forms of contextuality leads to the question of how we can explore them theoretically and experimentally and, more precisely, to the following questions: (i) Is there a systematic way to explore all forms of quantum contextuality? (ii) What is the simplest way to experimentally test them?
Recently, there has been great progress towards solving both problems. On one hand, it has been shown that there is a one-to-one correspondence between graphs and quantum contextuality \cite{CSW14}: The figure of merit of any NC inequality can be converted into a positive combination of correlations $S$ to which one can ascribe a graph $G$, the so-called exclusivity graph of $S$. The maximum value of $S$ for noncontextual hidden variable theories (NCHVTs) is given by a characteristic number of $G$, the independence number $\alpha(G)$. The maximum in QT (or an upper bound to it) is given by another characteristic number of $G$, the Lov\'asz number $\vartheta(G)$, which has the advantage of being easy to compute. More interestingly in connection to question (i) is that, reciprocally, for any graph $G$ there is always a quantum experiment such that its maximum for NCHVTs is $\alpha(G)$ and its tight maximum in QT is $\vartheta(G)$ \cite{CSW14}. This provides a possible approach to solve problem (i), as it shows that all possible forms of quantum contextuality are encoded in graphs, so, by systematically studying these graphs, we can study all forms of quantum contextuality. In particular, by identifying graphs with specific properties, we can single out experiments with the corresponding quantum contextuality. Furthermore, other characteristic numbers of $G$ are associated with properties such as whether the quantum violation is state independent \cite{RH14,CKB15}.
Problem (ii) is also considered in Ref.\ \cite{CSW14}, where it is proven that orthogonal unit vectors can be assigned to adjacent vertices of $G$, satisfying that $\vartheta(G)=\sum_{i} |\langle u_i | \psi \rangle|^2$, for a particular unit vector $|\psi\rangle$. The vectors $\{u_i\}$ provide a so-called Lov\'asz optimum orthonormal representation of the complement of $G$ with handle $|\psi\rangle$ \cite{CDLP13}. This representation shows that the maximum quantum value of $S$ can be achieved by preparing the system in the quantum state $|\psi\rangle$ and projecting it on the different $|u_i\rangle\langle u_i|$.
However, a nontrivial problem remains, namely, how to carry out an experiment involving only compatible measurements and revealing the contextuality given by the graph. A solution to this problem has been recently presented in Ref.\ \cite{Cabello16}. There, it is shown that, for any $G$, there is always an experiment involving only compatible observables whose noncontextual and quantum limits are equal to the corresponding characteristic numbers of $G$. The proposed solution presents an additional advantage that is connected to problem (ii): It only requires testing two-point correlations. This suggests that it is possible to develop a new generation of contextuality tests, with a higher control of the experimental imperfections, and achieve conditions much closer to the ideal ones than those achieved in previous tests based on three-point correlations \cite{KZGKGCBR09,ARBC09}.
The aim of this work is to show that we can combine the theoretical results of Refs.\ \cite{CSW14,Cabello16}, with state-of-the-art experimental techniques for preparing and measuring high-dimensional photonic quantum systems \cite{Neves05, Lima09, Lima10, Lima11, Lima13, CEGSXLC14, CAEGCXL14, Dardo15, Heptagon15} into a method capable of systematically exploring all possible forms of quantum contextuality.
\section{Maximum quantum contextuality}
The method presented here is general. However, in order to show its power, we will focus on solving a particular problem: identifying and experimentally testing the simplest scenario in which the maximum quantum contextuality is larger than in any simpler previously studied scenario.
For identifying it, we consider a specific measure of contextuality introduced in Ref.\ \cite{ATC15}, which is specially useful when using graphs, namely, the ratio $\vartheta(G)/\alpha(G)$. Then, we study all graphs with a fixed number $n$ of vertices. For each $n$, we identify the graph with the largest $\vartheta(G)/\alpha(G)$. For that, we benefit from the exhaustive database developed in Ref.\ \cite{EDLPBA12}.
We observe that, for $n=5$ (the minimum $n$ for which quantum contextuality exists), the maximum of $\vartheta(G)/\alpha(G)$ is $\sqrt{5}/2 \approx 1.118$ and corresponds to a well-studied case, the maximum quantum violation of the Klyachko-Can-Binicio\u{g}lu-Shumovsky inequality (KCBS) \cite{KCBS08}, which is the simplest NC inequality violated by qutrits. For $n=6$ and $n=7$, the maximum of $\vartheta(G)/\alpha(G)$ is still $\sqrt{5}/2$. This shows that the maximum quantum contextuality for these values of $n$ is just a variant of the one in the KCBS inequality. For $n=8$, the maximum of $\vartheta(G)/\alpha(G)$ is $2 (2 - \sqrt{2}) \approx 1.172$ and also corresponds to a well-known case, the maximum quantum violation \cite{Tsirelson80} of the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) Bell inequality \cite{CHSH69}, which has been recently reached in experiments \cite{PJCCK15}.
The fact that, by using this measure of contextuality and considering an increasing $n$, we have recovered the two most emblematic examples of quantum contextuality confirms the interest of the problem of identifying the graphs with maximum $\vartheta(G)/\alpha(G)$ for fixed $n$. As $n$ grows, the number of nonisomorphic graphs grows enormously and the exhaustive study of all of them becomes increasingly difficult. To our knowledge, such a comprehensive study of $\alpha(G)$ and $\vartheta(G)$ has been achieved only up to $n=12$ \cite{EDLPBA12}. Similar explorations suggest that this approach might be feasible up to $n=14$.
Interestingly, we have found that, for $n=9$, the maximum of $\vartheta(G)/\alpha(G)$ is already larger than the one in the CHSH inequality and that higher values of $n$ do not improve this maximum substantially \cite{EDLPBA12}. For $n=9$, this maximum is $11/9 \approx 1.222$ and only occurs for one graph, the graph in Fig.\ \ref{Fig1}. We will call this graph ``Fisher 9,'' $F_9$, since some of its properties were first pointed out in Ref.\ \cite{Fisher94}. This graph is also mentioned in Refs.\ \cite{Rubalcaba05,SU13}. However, to our knowledge, $F_9$ has not been mentioned in relation with QT.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[trim = 5.8cm 8.8cm 5.8cm 8.8cm,clip,width=5.2cm]{Fig1.pdf}
\caption{``Fisher 9,'' $F_9$, the graph corresponding to the largest quantum contextuality, measured by $\vartheta(G)/\alpha(G)$, attainable with any graph with less than ten vertices. Vertices correspond to states and adjacent vertices to orthogonal states. \label{Fig1}}
\end{figure}
To identify the minimum quantum dimension, the initial state, and the measurements needed to obtain the maximum quantum contextuality associated with $F_9$, we have to find a Lov\'asz-optimum orthonormal representation of the complement of $F_9$ with the smallest possible dimension. No such representation exists in Hilbert spaces of dimension smaller than four. We have found one which is particularly simple in dimension four and only contains states of the canonical basis and Hardy states \cite{Hardy93}. This representation is the following:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\label{loor}
\langle \psi |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(1,1,1,0),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_1 |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(1,1,0,1), \\
\langle u_2 |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(1,0,1,-1),\;\;\;\;\;\; \langle u_3 |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(0,1,1,1),\\
\langle u_4 |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(1,1,0,-1),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_5 |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(1,0,1,1),\\
\langle u_6 |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(0,1,1,-1),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_7 |= (1,0,0,0),\\
\langle u_8 |= (0,1,0,0),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_9 |= (0,0,1,0).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The next step is to identify an experimentally testable NC inequality containing only correlations among compatible measurements and such that its noncontextual bound is $\alpha(F_9)=3$ and its maximum quantum violation is $\vartheta(F_9)=11/3$, and is achievable with the state $|\psi\rangle$ and measuring the projectors $i=|u_i\rangle \langle u_i|$. For that, we use the result in Ref.\ \cite{Cabello16}, according to which one inequality with those properties is the following equation:
\begin{equation}
\label{main}
{\cal S} \equiv \sum_{i \in V(F_9)} P(1|i) - \sum_{(i,j) \in E(F_9)} P(1,1|i,j) \stackrel{\mbox{\tiny{NCHVTs}}}{\leq} 3,
\end{equation}
where $V(F_9)$ is the vertex set of $F_9$, $E(F_9)$ is the edge set of $F_9$, and $P(1,1|i,j)$ is the joint probability of obtaining outcomes $1$ and $1$ when we measure $i$ and $j$. One can check that, if we prepare the quantum state $|\psi\rangle$ and measure $i=|u_i\rangle \langle u_i|$ and $j=|u_j\rangle \langle u_j|$, then ${\cal S}=\vartheta(F_9)=11/3$.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=0.40 \textwidth]{Fig2.pdf}
\caption{Experimental setup for preparing and measuring spatial qudits encoded on the linear transverse momentum of weak coherent states. At the state preparation stage, the encoding of each state is implemented by two spatial light modulators (SLMs). The measurement is implemented using two SLMs but now combined with a pointlike single-photon detector (APD). The experimental protocol is automatically controlled by the two field programmable gate array (FPGA) electronic modules. They work synchronously, as indicated by the blue cable connecting them. See main text for details. \label{Fig2}}
\end{figure}
\section{Experimental setup}
In order to test inequality (\ref{main}), we use the linear transverse momentum of single photons. This approach has been successfully used to produce and manipulate high-dimensional photonic quantum systems \cite{Neves05,Lima09, Lima10, Lima11, Lima13, CEGSXLC14, CAEGCXL14, Dardo15, Heptagon15}. The setup used in our experiment is depicted in Fig.\ \ref{Fig2} and exploits the idea in Ref.\ \cite{Cabello16} for testing two-point correlations using quantum systems. To obtain two-point correlation probabilities needed to test inequality (\ref{main}), we first perform a measurement of $i=|u_i\rangle \langle u_i|$ on a system prepared in state $|\psi\rangle$. If the result is $1$, we then prepare a new system in the state $|u_i\rangle$ and perform the measurement of $j=|u_j\rangle \langle u_j|$. If the initial result of $|u_i\rangle \langle u_i|$ is $0$, we do not need to perform, in principle, any further measurement since we just need $P(1|i)$ and $P(1,1|i,j)$ to test inequality (\ref{main}).
However, the assumption of noncontextuality leading to inequality (\ref{main}) is legitimate insofar as the statistics of the measurement outcomes are not perturbed by previous measurements, and it is then important to test that this condition is achieved in our experiment. This test requires that one also measures $P(0,1|i,j)$. Thus, if the initial result of $|u_i\rangle \langle u_i|$ measurement is $0$, we also prepare $|u_i^\bot\rangle$ (defined next), which is the state obtained after a projective measurement of $i$ with outcome $0$ on a system initially prepared in state $|\psi\rangle$. We then measure $j$.
Consequently, our experimental setup consists of two parts: the state preparation (SP) stage and the measurement stage. At the SP stage the single-photon regime is achieved by heavily attenuating optical pulses, which are generated with an acousto-optical modulator (AOM) placed at the output of a continuous-wave laser operating at 690 nm. Well-calibrated attenuators are used to set the average number of photons per pulse to $\mu=0.16$. In this case, the probability of having non-null pulses, i.e., of having pulses containing at least one photon, is $P(\mu=0.16|n\geq1)=14.8\%$. Pulses containing only one photon are the vast majority of the non-null pulses generated and account for 92.2$\%$ of the experimental runs. The probability of multiphoton events is negligible as it is $\simeq$ 1.2$\%$. Therefore, our source can be seen as a good approximation to a nondeterministic single-photon source, which is commonly adopted in quantum key distribution \cite{Gisin}.
In order to prepare the $d$-dimensional quantum states we employ the linear transverse momentum of single photons. The generated photons are sent through diffractive apertures addressed in spatial light modulators (SLMs), and the four-dimensional state required in the experiment is defined by addressing four parallel slits in the SLMs for the photon transmission. All slits in each modulator have the same physical dimension, that is, each has a width of 96 $\mu$m and an equal center-to-center separation. In this case, the state of the transmitted photons is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{state}
|\psi_{\mathrm{expt.}}\rangle= \frac{1}{\sqrt{C}}\sum_{l=-\frac{3}{2}}^{l=\frac{3}{2}}\sqrt{t_{l}}e^{i\phi_{l}}|l\rangle,
\end{equation}
where $|l\rangle$ represents the state of a photon transmitted by the $l$th slit. $t_l$ ($\phi_l$) is the transmissivity (phase) defined for each slit and $C$ the normalization constant \cite{Neves05,Lima09}.
Two SLMs are used at each stage. In the SP stage the first SLM controls the real part of the coefficients of the generated states, while the second SLM their phases \cite{CAEGCXL14}. Sets of lenses are employed to ensure that each SLM is placed on the image plane of the next one. In the measurement stage the state projection is performed using a second pair of SLMs and a pointlike avalanche photo-detector (APD). After the last modulator, the attenuated laser beam is focused at the detection plane. The pointlike detector is constructed with a small circular pinhole (10 $\mu$m diameter), followed by a silicon single-photon avalanche photodetector (APD), which is then positioned at the center of the interference pattern. In this configuration the detection probability is proportional to $|\langle{\psi_{\mathrm{expt.}}}|k\rangle|^2$, where $|k\rangle$ is the state at the measurement stage (see Ref.\ \cite{Lima13} for details).
\section{Measurement results}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[trim = 3.9cm 7.6cm 3.5cm 7.6cm,clip,width=6.7cm]{Fig3.pdf}
\caption{Graph extending the graph in Fig.\ref{Fig1} with seven new vertices (vertices 10--16) such that each of the vertices of Fig.\ref{Fig1} with vertices 1--9 now belongs to a clique of size four (which represents an orthogonal basis of the four-dimensional Hilbert space). Adjacent vertices correspond to orthogonal states. Dashed lines indicate new orthogonalities with respect to Fig.\ref{Fig1}. \label{Fig}}
\end{figure}
To properly determine the experimental probabilities required to test inequality (\ref{main}) we have extended $F_9$ into a larger graph in which every vertex belongs to exactly one clique of size four (i.e., an orthogonal basis). The extended graph is shown in Fig.\ \ref{Fig}, and the new vertices correspond to the following states:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\langle u_{10} |= (0,0,0,1), \\
&\langle u_{11} |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(0,-1,1,1),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_{12} |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(-1,1,1,0), \\
&\langle u_{13} |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(1,0,-1,1),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_{14} |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(1,-1,1,0), \\
&\langle u_{15} |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(1,1,-1,0),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_{16} |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}(-1,1,0,1).
\end{split}
\end{equation} Notice that these states allow us to measure each observable $i$ using always the same orthogonal basis $\{i,i',i'',i'''\}$ independently of the context. For instance, the probabilities $P(1|i)$ and $P(0|i)$ are calculated from the experimental data as follows:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
P(1|i) = & \frac{N(i)}{N(i)+N(i')+N(i'')+N(i''')},\\
P(0|i) = & \frac{N(i')+N(i'')+N(i''')}{N(i)+N(i')+N(i'')+N(i''')},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $N(i)$ is the number of counts corresponding to outcome $i$ and $\{i,i',i'',i'''\}$ is an orthogonal basis.
As we mentioned above, in the SP stage we prepare the state $\langle\psi_{\mathrm{expt.}}|$ and then project it on $i=|u_i\rangle \langle u_i|$ at the measurement stage. If the outcome is 1, we prepare the state $\langle u_i|$ and now the measured projector is $j=|u_j\rangle \langle u_j|$. On the other hand, if the output is 0, the state $\langle u_i^\bot|$ is prepared and projected on $j=|u_j\rangle \langle u_j|$. The states $\langle u_i^\bot|$ are defined by
\begin{equation}
|u_i^\bot\rangle= \frac{(\openone-|u_i\rangle \langle u_i|) |\psi\rangle}{\left[\langle \psi | (\openone-|u_i\rangle \langle u_i|) |\psi\rangle \right]^{\frac{1}{2}}},
\end{equation}
where $\openone$ denotes the four-dimensional identity matrix. More specifically, in our experiment these states are given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\langle u_1^\bot |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{15}}(1,1,3,-2),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_2^\bot |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{15}}(1,3,1,2), \\
&\langle u_3^\bot |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{15}}(3,1,1,-2),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_4^\bot |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{15}}(1,1,3,2), \\
&\langle u_5^\bot |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{15}}(1,3,1,-2),\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_6^\bot |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{15}}(3,1,1,2), \\
&\langle u_7^\bot |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(0,1,1,0),\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\langle u_8^\bot |= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(1,0,1,0), \\
&\langle u_9^\bot |=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (1,1,0,0).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
During the measurement procedure, the SP and measurement stages run in an automated fashion, controlled and synchronized by the two FPGA electronic modules at a rate of 30 Hz. One module is placed at the SP stage while the other one controls the measurement stage, reads the APD output and sends the results to a personal computer for further processing.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=0.37 \textwidth]{Fig4.pdf}
\caption{Experimentally measured violation of NC inequality (\ref{main}). NC indicates the limit for NCHV theories and Q the maximum allowed by QT.} \label{Fig3}
\end{figure}
From the recorded data, we extract the probabilities to test the violation of inequality (\ref{main}) and also to verify that there is no signaling between the first measurement associated to $|u_i\rangle \langle u_i|$ and the second measurement associated to $|u_j\rangle \langle u_j|$. The experimental value of ${\cal S}$ is depicted in Fig.\ \ref{Fig3} and shows a violation of inequality (\ref{main}) by over 30 standard deviations. The maximum quantum value of ${\cal S}$ is not reached due to intrinsic experimental misalignments and the detector's dark counts that produce, e.g., nonzero values for the probabilities $P(1,1|i,j)$. Nevertheless, notice that our experimental value corresponds to a degree of contextuality that surpasses the maximum attainable through the quantum violation of the KCBS or CHSH inequalities.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[width=1 \textwidth]{Fig5.pdf}
\caption{(a), (c), and (e) Experimental values for $\epsilon_{\_,0|i,j}$ (in blue) and $\epsilon_{0,\_|i,j}$ (in black), defined in Eqs.\ (\ref{Eq9}) and (\ref{Eq10}). The notation is $i:j$. (b), (d), and (f) Experimental values for $\epsilon_{\_,1|i,j}$ (in red) and $\epsilon_{1,\_|i,j}$ (in black). As expected, the range of the error bars in blue and red is within the one of the error bars for the expected zeros (in black). The average value of both $\epsilon_{\_,0|i,j}$ and $\epsilon_{\_,1|i,j}$ is $0.006 \pm 0.011$. \label{Fig4}}
\end{figure*}
In order to test that there is no signaling between measurements $i$ and $j$, we have used
\begin{equation} \label{Eq9}
\begin{split}
\epsilon_{\_,0|i,j} \equiv & |P(0|j) - P(0,0|i,j)- P(1,0|i,j)|, \\
\epsilon_{\_,1|i,j} \equiv & |P(1|j) - P(0,1|i,j)- P(1,1|i,j)|
\end{split}
\end{equation}
to measure how the first measurement, $i$, affects the statistics of the second measurement, $j$.
Our purpose is to certify that, for all $i$ and $j$ in inequality (\ref{main}), the experimental values of $\epsilon_{\_,0|i,j}$ and $\epsilon_{\_,1|i,j}$ are compatible with zero and have the same error as the experimental quantities
\begin{equation} \label{Eq10}
\begin{split}
\epsilon_{0,\_|i,j} \equiv & |P(0|i) - P(0,0|i,j)- P(0,1|i,j)|, \\
\epsilon_{1,\_|i,j} \equiv & |P(1|i) - P(1,0|i,j)- P(1,1|i,j)|,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which, according to causality, are zero, but whose error gives the experimental precision with which we can determine a zero within our experiment. The idea of this approach is to show that in our work there is the same signaling between past and future measurements than between future and past measurements. If we assume that the latter is zero, from the obtained results we can conclude that the experimental data are compatible with the assumption that the former is zero. To obtain $\epsilon_{\_,0|i,j},
\epsilon_{\_,1|i,j}, \epsilon_{0,\_|i,j}$, and $\epsilon_{1,\_|i,j}$ we use that
\begin{equation} \label{Eq6}
\begin{split}
P(1,1|i,j) = & P(1|i)P(1|j), \\
P(0,1|i,j) = & P(0|i)P(1|j), \\
P(1,0|i,j) = & P(1|i)- P(1,1|i,j),\\
P(0,0|i,j) = & P(0|i)- P(0,1|i,j).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The experimental values for $\epsilon_{\_,0|i,j}$, $\epsilon_{\_,1|i,j}$, $\epsilon_{0,\_|i,j}$, and $\epsilon_{1,\_|i,j}$ for all pairs $(i,j)$ of measurements used to test inequality (\ref{main}) are shown in Fig.\ \ref{Fig4}. They show that in our experiment the influences of the first measurements on the second ones are negligible.
\section{Conclusions}
Being so fundamental for quantum theory, quantum computation, and quantum secure communication, it is surprising how little effort has been made to experimentally investigate quantum contextuality beyond Bell's inequalities. Here we have demonstrated a tool for exploring, theoretically and experimentally, quantum contextuality in all its forms. We have described all the steps of a method to, first, identify interesting forms of contextuality and, then, to design and perform precise experiments to reveal them. Our approach is universal and can be applied to study any form of quantum contextuality. In particular, it opens the possibility of experimentally testing the contextuality needed for quantum computation \cite{HWVE14,DGBR15,RBDOB15}. In addition, we have shown that the approach is useful in itself, since it is capable of revealing interesting cases unnoticed before. Its only limitations are our ability to explore large graphs or perform experiments requiring a large number of two-point correlations. Moreover, we have seen that this approach leads to photonic tests allowing a better control of the imperfections and higher-quality results (closer to the predictions of quantum theory under ideal conditions) than previous experiments. In particular, we have verified that it allows for experiments in which the signaling between past and future measurements is negligible. In summary, although there is still work to be done for closing loopholes \cite{G10} and improving the analysis of the experimental data \cite{Winter14,DKL15}, our results indicate that we already have powerful tools for exploring a fundamental part of quantum theory.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We thank A.\ J.\ L\'opez-Tarrida and J.\ R.\ Portillo for discussions. This work was supported by FONDECYT Grants No.\ 1160400, No.\ 11150324, No.\ 11150325, and No.\ 1150101, Milenio Grant No.\ RC130001, PIA-CONICYT Grant No.\ PFB0824, the FQXi large grant project ``The Nature of Information in Sequential Quantum Measurements,'' Project No.\ FIS2014-60843-P ``Advanced Quantum Information'' (MINECO, Spain) with FEDER funds, and the project ``Photonic Quantum Information'' (Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden). J.C.\ and J.F.B.\ acknowledge the support of CONICYT. A.C.\ thanks the CEFOP for its hospitality.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\chapter{Code Details}
\label{sec:code_details}
\tikzset{Segmentation lines/.style={gray,very thin,dashed}}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:code_introduction}
As the central tool used throughout this thesis, the code written for calculating off-diagonal elements in the matrix of the
background gas momentum operator deserves some discussion, and is provided here.
While our method of finding eigenstates of our system is novel, it is beyond the scope of this thesis, being written by
Evgeni Burovski and not the current author.
Instead this chapter discusses the process of finding the time dependent momentum contributions from a given set of
eigenstates.
We will neglect the details of encoding those equations presented in Section~\ref{sec:m&m_model} and discuss the challenges
faced when scaling to large systems, how they have been circumvented and what trade-offs have been made.
Hence this chapter contains no information on the physics or maths of the problem, focusing solely on the implementation
details of this research.
There are two main discussions in this chapter, 1) How to efficiently spread the work required over multiple processes, and
2) the benefits and disadvantages of storing different data structures, though there is no clear separation between them, as
different methods often make different compromises between these values.
Throughout this chapter we will refer to two stages, the \emph{calculation stage} and the \emph{analysis stage}, with the
assumption that the majority of the calculation is done on a larger machine, such as a computing cluster, and the analysis
done on a much smaller personal computer.
Note all judgement calls on when a data structure was too large, or took too much computation for the analysis stage, were
made to account for a personal computer with 2GB of RAM and one hyperthreaded $2.20GHz$ processor.
The most notable decision was whether calculating $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ from the amplitudes and frequencies in the RHS
of Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} should be part of the calculation stage or if it could be done during analysis.
In order to simplify the discussion, we shall compare and contrast the approaches to two different systems: one small
system (e.g. $N = 15$) accounting for $N_{s} = 400$ states, and one large system (e.g. $N = 45$) accounting for
$N_{s} = 20000$ states.
To give the reader an idea of how the time required to find $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ from the eigenstates of the system
changes with increasing system size $N$ a description of the calculation bottlenecks is required.
The bottleneck in calculating each individual amplitude from a pair of states comes from the calculation of the singular
value decomposition of an $N \times N$ matrix.
This scales with $N^{3}$, while the number of amplitudes that must be calculated in this manner scales with $N_{s}^{2}$.
The number of states $N_{s}$ here has a non-trivial but strongly increasing relationship with $N$ and this relationship is
shown in Figure~\ref{fig:states_overlap_systemsize}.
\section{Data Structures}
\label{sec:data_structures}
When working on a small system, worries about computational expense and memory usages are much lower that otherwise.
Hence most design decisions were made based on the ease of analysis once all terms on the RHS of
Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} have been found.
The data required for the analysis made in this work are the amplitude, frequency, and pair of eigenstates for each term on
the RHS of Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}, along with the system parameters (both physical and non-physical) described
in Chapter~\ref{sec:observables}.
Note however, that the form of a stored eigenstate changes throughout the process of reading from a stored cache, calculating
amplitudes, and storing with amplitudes and frequencies for a given contribution.
In order to save calculation, many values which must be calculated once for each eigenstate and used to find the amplitude of
each transition to or from that state are cached in the eigenstate structures during the calculation step.
However, in analysis, the only identification required for a state are the pseudo excitations that create it (see
Section~\ref{sec:pseudo_sea}).
This section describes the form of data structures written to disk in the calculation step for use in analysis.
In a system near our ``small'' example, $N_{s}$ is low enough that all these values can be simultaneously stored in RAM.
Because of this ability, data structures for these systems are designed with the primary objective of being easy to read and
manipulate during analysis, storing all values required in a single file, with no recalculation required (see
Figure~\ref{fig:small_data_structures}).
From this data $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ for any period of time is easily created, and any subsets can be found by
filtering contributions by the relevant eigenstate pairs, providing good flexibility in analysis within reasonable time
frames.
For a larger system size, and the correspondingly larger number of states used, such an approach is no longer viable, as the
calculation time of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ from the elements of the Fourier transform, and the space required to store
all individual contributions both become prohibitively expensive.
The consequences of these restrictions are twofold: first, the process of finding the total $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ from
all contributions must be moved into the calculation stage, and second, a method of only reading in those contributions
required for a subset analysis must be implemented.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.3\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.3]
\draw[Segmentation lines] (0,3.5) -- +(3,0);
\node (freq) at (1.5,4) [anchor=south] {Frequencies};
\draw[Segmentation lines] (0,2) -- +(3,0);
\node (amps) at (1.5,2.5) [anchor=south] {Amplitudes};
\draw[Segmentation lines] (0,0.5) -- +(3,0);
\node (pairs) at (1.5,1) [anchor=south] {State Pairs};
\draw[Segmentation lines] (2,0) -- +(0,0.5);
\node (parameters) at (0,0.25)
[rectangle,minimum width=2,minimum height=0.5,align=center,anchor=west] {Parameters};
\node (saturation) at (2.5,0) [rectangle,anchor=south] {$\varsigma$};
\draw (0,0) rectangle (3,5);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{
Small system.
}
\label{fig:small_data_structures}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.6\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[x=1cm,y=1cm]
\node[above right,rectangle,draw,minimum height=1cm,minimum width=3cm] at (0,0) {Total $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$};
\draw (0,1.8) rectangle +(2.6,5);
\node[anchor=west] (cache) at (3.5,7.4) {Original Eigenstate Store};
\draw [->,thick] (3.5,7.2) to [bend right=20] (1.25,5.5);
\draw (3.4,0) rectangle +(5.4,5.4);
\node[font=\small,anchor=west,text width=4cm,align=center] at (4.4,3.4) {Increasing\\$E_{f}$};
\node[font=\small,anchor=west,text width=4cm,align=center] at (3.2,2) {Increasing\\$E_{f^{'}}$};
\draw [->] (4.6,4.2) -- (8.2,4.2);
\draw [->] (4.2,4.0) -- (4.2,0.4);
\draw [->,thick] (5.5,6) to [bend right=20] (4.4,5);
\node[anchor=south] at (6.4,6) {Amplitude Matrix};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{
Large system.
}
\label{fig:large_system_data_structures}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{
Schematics of data structures serialised for both large and small systems.
For small systems a hash table containing all data required for analysis was directly serialised to disk and unserialised
when required.
This had the advantage of simplicity, and would not easily result in un-synchronised data, as the calculation stage
created the data in one step, and no modifications are needed in the analysis stage.
Frequencies, amplitudes, and eigenstate pairs are kept ordered by increasing energy, and can hence be matched
accordingly, this means only information required for choosing interesting states is needed in the state pairs.
When the system is large, storing all data in RAM at the same time in the analysis stage is impossible, so a different
method of reading in data was devised (see Figure~\ref{fig:multiprocessing_schematic}).
Said method centred around calculating the position in the stored amplitude matrix where each interesting eigenstate
pair will be, and only reading the data stored in those positions.
As this new method of reading those amplitudes required for partial contributions took time and required the calculation
of each eigenstates' energies, storing the frequencies associated with each amplitude became redundant, and was removed for
storage space concerns.
}
\label{fig:both_data_structures}
\end{figure}
Implementing the first of these restrictions is a simple manner, simply choosing a range of time values to plot before
calculation, and saving the momentum and time values for each of the points requested, on disk for analysis.
Moving the calculation of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ from the analysis step to the calculation one is not as much of a
hindrance as one might initially suppose as the calculation of the total $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ is rarely done more
than once.
The latter of these two consequences is implemented by storing the amplitudes on disk in a dense two dimensional array, with
each row and column corresponding to the eigenstates which create the amplitude.
As this matrix is made in order, with the eigenstate energy for each column/row increasing with increasing element index, the
amplitude for a given pair of eigenstates can be obtained by calculating the corresponding position in the array and only
reading the value in that position.
A decision to forgo storing the frequencies of each state pair was made, as the recalculation of this value is trivial, and
faster than reading a value from disk, especially after the energies for each eigenstate have been found when finding
corresponding positions in the amplitude matrix.
We also decided to keep checkpoint files for eigenstates and amplitudes separate, rather than joining them together.
This helped in parsing the data structures, reusing existing code to read eigenstates from their original structure, but
created a danger which the user must be aware of.
The two files may get out of sync if eigenstates are added to the cache which would have been accounted for in the matrix of
amplitudes.
Keeping these two sets of values separate also meant that spreading the work of calculating amplitudes across multiple
processors could be kept simple, memory mapping our matrix onto a file as will be described in
Section~\ref{sec:multiprocessing}.
The data structures saved to disk when in this large system regime, and hence those that define the majority of our codes
structure, are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:large_system_data_structures}.
These consist of a packed two-dimensional array of amplitudes, ordered by the energy of each state in the transition, an SQLite
database storing the eigenstates of the system (in the same format as delivered by the eigenstate calculation), and a numpy
named array containing the impurity's momentum and time over a predefined time period.
\section{Multiple Processors}
\label{sec:multiprocessing}
With a large system, the need to spread work over more processors becomes much greater, as the amount of computation
increases dramatically (the manner in which it increases is discussed at the start of this Chapter).
Luckily, the form of the equations solved means the bottleneck in the computation can be written in an embarrassingly parallel
manner.
Each process takes a different set of eigenstate pairs to work with, and works independently to find the background gas'
momentum contribution from that set of transitions.
They then sum these contributions with the other processes before subtracting the total from the total momentum to obtain the
momentum of the impurity.
This method, schematically shown in Figure~\ref{fig:multiprocessing_schematic}, lends itself very well to the packed data
structure of amplitudes we store on disk (see Section~\ref{sec:data_structures}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=3mm and 3mm]
\draw[gray,ultra thin,step=0.5cm] (0,0) grid (5,5);
\node at (0,0) [anchor=south west,rectangle,thick,draw,minimum width=5cm,minimum height=5cm] (ampmat) {};
\node[anchor=south west,rectangle,minimum width=5cm,minimum height=2cm] (p3data) at (0,0) {};
\node[anchor=south,rectangle,minimum width=5cm,minimum height=1.5cm] (p2data) at (p3data.north) {};
\node[anchor=south,rectangle,minimum width=5cm,minimum height=1.5cm] (p1data) at (p2data.north) {};
\foreach \x in {2,3.5} {
\draw [thick] (0,\x) -- (5,\x);
\draw [dashed] (-1.3,\x) -- (-0.3,\x);
}
\node[fill=white] at (p2data) {Units of Work};
\node[rectangle,draw,minimum width=5cm,minimum height=1cm] (states)
[above=of ampmat] {$\ket{f}$};
\node (stateslabel) [above=of states] {Increasing $E_{f}$};
\ExtractCoordinate{states.north west}
\ExtractotherCoordinate{stateslabel.west}
\draw (\XCoord,\YotherCoord) -- (stateslabel.west);
\ExtractCoordinate{states.north east}
\ExtractotherCoordinate{stateslabel.east}
\draw [->] (stateslabel.east) -- (\XCoord,\YotherCoord);
\node[rectangle,draw,minimum width=1cm,minimum height=5cm] (pstates)
[left=of ampmat] {$\ket{f^{'}}$};
\node (pstateslabel) [left=of pstates] {\rotatebox{90}{Increasing $E_{f^{'}}$}};
\ExtractCoordinate{pstates.north west}
\ExtractotherCoordinate{pstateslabel.north}
\draw (\XotherCoord,\YCoord) -- (pstateslabel.north);
\ExtractCoordinate{pstates.south east}
\ExtractotherCoordinate{pstateslabel.south}
\draw [->] (pstateslabel.south) -- (\XotherCoord,\YCoord);
\def1.3cm{1.3cm}
\node (calc1) at ([xshift=1.3cm]p1data.east) [anchor=west,rectangle,draw] {Calculate};
\node (calc2) at ([xshift=1.3cm]p2data.east) [anchor=west,rectangle,draw] {Calculate};
\node (calc3) at ([xshift=1.3cm]p3data.east) [anchor=west,rectangle,draw] {Calculate};
\draw [->] (p1data) -- (calc1);
\draw [->] (p2data) -- (calc2);
\draw [->] (p3data) -- (calc3);
\node (summation) at ([xshift=2*1.3cm]calc2.east) [anchor=west,rounded rectangle,draw] {+};
\draw [->] (calc1.east) to [bend left=20] node[sloped,above=1pt] {$\expval{P_{\uparrow}(t)}$} (summation);
\draw [->] (calc2) -- node[sloped,above=1pt] {$\expval{P_{\uparrow}(t)}$} (summation);
\draw [->] (calc3.east) to [bend right=20] node[sloped,below=1pt] {$\expval{P_{\uparrow}(t)}$} (summation);
\draw [->] (summation.east) -- node[above=1pt] {Total $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$} ([xshift=2*1.3cm]summation.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{
Schematic of how work is spread over multiple processors, in this example $3$ processors are used.
The distribution of work across multiple processors is done in a simple manner; each processor takes a block of the
amplitude matrix and calculates the contribution to the RHS of Equation~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} for a set of time
points.
Each of these contributions is then summed, and taken from the total momentum of the system $Q$ to find the momentum of
the impurity over the range in time calculated over.
}
\label{fig:multiprocessing_schematic}
\end{figure}
Each process can memory map a chunk of the file as its assigned part of the matrix, and when this chunk has been flushed to
disk the amplitudes are saved in their assigned positions.
Assigning the work in this manner means the number of processes used when the amplitude matrix was initially created is
completely opaque to the user, keeping the data structures general, and allowing a user to reuse the amplitude matrix over a
different number of processes without manual intervention.
The lower level spreading of processes has been implemented in two different ways, one uses the built in Python
multiprocessing module, and the other uses mpi4py~\cite{mpi4py}.
Dual implementations are maintained as the default multiprocessing module in Python can not spread load over more than
one node in a cluster, but we see less of an overhead when using it to manage different processes on a single node.
We observe a near-linear scaling from 1 to 64 processes used, calculating $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ for $1000$ points in
time of our large system, greater numbers of processes have not been investigated as the wait for job scheduling becomes a
limiting factor.
\section{Improvements}
\label{sec:code_improvements}
While the current formulation of this code has been proved useful and reliable when working through this project, there are a
few improvements which should have noticeable benefits, yet have not been made due to time constraints.
The simplest of these is to save the packed matrix of amplitudes ordered by eigenstate overlap
$\abs{\braket{FS|f_Q}}^{2}$ rather than energy.
This different ordering would help when inspecting how the system changes with differing $\varsigma$ saturation.
When a set of amplitudes has been calculated for a saturation of e.g. $\varsigma = 0.999$, the higher overlap eigenstates
from this set that provide a saturation of $\varsigma = 0.9$ could be read from the original data file in the simple manner
shown in Figure~\ref{fig:overlap_ordered_amplitudes}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=3mm and 3mm]
\node at (0,0) [anchor=south west,rectangle,thick,draw,minimum width=6cm,minimum height=6cm] (ampmat) {};
\node[rectangle,draw,minimum width=6cm,minimum height=1cm] (states)
[above=of ampmat] {$\ket{f}$};
\node (stateslabel) [above=of states] {Decreasing $\abs{\braket{FS|f}}^{2}$};
\ExtractCoordinate{states.north west}
\ExtractotherCoordinate{stateslabel.west}
\draw (\XCoord,\YotherCoord) -- (stateslabel.west);
\ExtractCoordinate{states.north east}
\ExtractotherCoordinate{stateslabel.east}
\draw [->] (stateslabel.east) -- (\XCoord,\YotherCoord);
\node[rectangle,draw,minimum width=1cm,minimum height=6cm] (pstates)
[left=of ampmat] {$\ket{f^{'}}$};
\node (pstateslabel) [left=of pstates] {\rotatebox{90}{Decreasing $\abs{\braket{FS|f^{'}}}^{2}$}};
\ExtractCoordinate{pstates.north west}
\ExtractotherCoordinate{pstateslabel.north}
\draw (\XotherCoord,\YCoord) -- (pstateslabel.north);
\ExtractCoordinate{pstates.south east}
\ExtractotherCoordinate{pstateslabel.south}
\draw [->] (pstateslabel.south) -- (\XotherCoord,\YCoord);
\node at (ampmat.north west)
[anchor=north west,align=center,rectangle,draw,minimum width=1.5cm,minimum height=1.5cm]
(minor1) {$\varsigma = 0.9$};
\node at (ampmat.north west)
[anchor=north west,align=center,rectangle,draw,minimum width=3.5cm,minimum height=3.5cm]
(minor2) {};
\node at (minor1.south east)
[anchor=north west,align=center,rectangle,minimum width=1.5cm,minimum height=1.5cm]
{$\varsigma = 0.99$};
\node at (minor2.south east)
[anchor=north west,align=center,rectangle,minimum width=2.5cm,minimum height=2.5cm]
{$\varsigma = 0.999$};
\foreach \x in {1.5cm,3.5cm} {
\draw [dashed] ([yshift=-\x]pstates.north west) -- ([yshift=-\x]pstates.north east);
\draw [dashed] ([xshift=\x]states.north west) -- ([xshift=\x]states.south west);
}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Alternate order of amplitude matrix.
Currently amplitudes of contributions are stored ordered by the energy of the eigenstates in each transition shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:multiprocessing_schematic}.
If the matrix were ordered by $\abs{\braket{FS|f}}^{2}$ instead, then finding the amplitudes for a smaller subset of
eigenstates, taken in this order, would be much simpler.
This would mean finding the contribution from a smaller set of eigenstates could be done without recalculation of their
amplitudes.
}
\label{fig:overlap_ordered_amplitudes}
\end{figure}
Currently, calculating the contribution from a smaller set requires saving another matrix of amplitudes in a separate file
that simply contains a subset of the information in the original: this results in needless duplication.
Storing the amplitude matrix ordered by energy has no inherent benefit, but the amount of programmatic complexity in order to
realise the benefits of an alternate order has so far delayed this change.
Another possible yet unimplemented feature is the filtering of eigenstate pairs in the initial computational run.
The trade-off on using this hypothetical feature would be sacrificing future flexibility in analysis for a shorter initial
computational run.
Thus certain contributions would not be calculated initially on the assumption that they will never be needed in the analysis
stage.
While the results presented in Chapter~\ref{sec:subsets} suggest that such restrictions can be made when looking at specific
features of the momentum evolution, the focus of this work never moved to using these statements, and this feature was hence
not implemented.
One final compromise which a future researcher may wish to reverse has been made to sacrifice close to a factor of $2$ in
program speed for code simplicity.
As the amplitude matrix is symmetric, the direction of transition not affecting the value, there is no reason to find every
possible transition as is currently done.
Finding the amplitudes of all off-diagonal transitions in a given order and doubling the contribution would decrease both
the required RAM and CPU time dramatically.
An equivalent optimisation is already implemented in the code for subset analysis, but it is not accounted for when
calculating the total amplitudes.
The decision has been done solely for the sake of code clarity and speed of development, and as such is a strong candidate
for change in the future.
Furthermore, in obtaining this factor of $2$ speedup, it is highly likely that a quirk in implementation can be removed,
reducing the RAM required by yet another factor of $3$.
The details of this are discussed in the code comments and are based around the use of the \texttt{numpy.frompyfunc}
command.
Overall the structure of the current program makes what the author believes to be reasonable compromises between flexibility
of analysis and computational resources, scaling well with multiple processors yet still allowing for easy selection of
transition subsets by the researcher during analysis.
There are some obvious possible improvements which the author sincerely hopes are made, and anyone wishing to use this code
is encouraged to contact the author with any questions.
\chapter{Concluding Remarks}
\label{sec:concluding_remarks}
\section{Results}
\label{sec:conclusion_results}
To conclude, this work has discussed the momentum evolution of an impurity quenched into a one dimensional Tonks-Girardeau
liquid.
We find agreement with the statements made in reference~\cite{Mathy2012} on the momentum evolution of the impurity,
reproducing all progressions in the plateau and quantum flutter.
Section~\ref{sec:revivals} presented progressions in the momentum revivals that come from finite size effects, and show that
for a large initial momentum they can be qualitatively described using a classical argument based on the momentum imparted to
the background gas by the impurity.
Though useful, this argument cannot be complete as it fails to describe the equivalency in the change to
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ that comes from modifying $\gamma$ via either the density of the background gas or the
interaction strength between the background gas and the impurity.
The relationship between the momentum plateau and the theoretical infinite time value obtained from time averaging
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ was explored in Section~\ref{sec:inf_time}, and it was shown that while the momentum
plateau is constant with changing system size, $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ starts out much higher and decreases towards
the value of the plateau, the difference decreasing with a power law relation.
Chapter~\ref{sec:subsets} described patterns observed in the eigenstates and eigenstate pair contributions to the momentum of
the impurity, and used them to explain why different features of the momentum evolution saturate at a different accuracy as
measured by $\varsigma$.
We find that the overall shape of the evolution is determined by eigenstate transitions within the same branch of
Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}, with those in the main branch contributing the most, though the contribution from this
branch becomes less representative with large systems.
These contributions can be normalised using Equation~\eqref{eqn:renormalisation}, to account for the difference in $\varsigma$
between subsets of states used and the total.
This shows that the states in the main branch are representative of the total in setting the momentum plateau, but contribute
more to the momentum revivals than their $\varsigma$ would suggest.
The quantum flutter which is the main topic of references~\cite{Mathy2012,Knap2014} was shown to come from inter-branch
transitions, which demonstrates that the contribution from those states with more than one pseudo excitation is negligible.
While the entire flutter requires all inter-branch transitions, the frequency at about a quarter of the amplitude can be
obtained from just looking at those transitions between states excited from the negative edge of the pseudo sea and those in
other branches, under the condition that both states share a pseudo particle.
This can provide an intuitive explanation for how the numerics describes the loss of flutter when the initial momentum drops
below the Fermi momentum, as the structure of the Bethe Ansatz inhibit any states excited from the negative edge when
$Q < k_{F}$.
These patterns can explain the stability of each feature once $\varsigma$ has passed a given point.
Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} shows that states from the main branch have a much greater contribution to $\varsigma$ than
others, and hence are counted first.
Similarly, states with more than one pseudo excitation are accounted for much later when stepping up $\varsigma$.
Because transitions between states in the main branch define the general shape of the momentum evolution, and more concretely,
define the frequency of the momentum revivals, these features stabilise much earlier than the exact value of the momentum
plateau and the flutter around it.
The inter-branch transitions that define the frequency of the flutter require the lesser contributing branches to be
accounted for, this naturally results in a greater value of $\varsigma$ before the feature has been fully described.
However as all eigenstates of the system contribute to the momentum plateau, that value shows no saturation at $\varsigma < 1$.
Finally, the distribution of the singly excited eigenstates in the momentum was shown in Chapter~\ref{sec:other},
demonstrating no significant pattern around the thermal value of the impurity's momentum.
In the same chapter, the contribution to $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ from the main branch of
Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} is shown to decrease relative to the total $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ as the system
size increases.
While this doesn't necessarily mean the momentum plateau from the normalised main branch contribution decreases relative to
the total plateau, it has been found elsewhere that this is the case~\cite{Sasha_told_me_so}, so the representative nature of
the main families contribution to the momentum plateau found in Section~\ref{sec:general_shape} is only valid in finite
systems.
\section{Limitations and Further Work}
\label{sec:conclusion_limitations}
The current work only directly applies to the integrable case in the Tonks-Girardeau regime, and much of the results are on
the structure of the Bethe Ansatz solution to the system, without a known physical interpretation.
Despite this limitation it is hoped that these results can allow others to probe this regime with much less computational
expense, from which more physical results can be found.
The ubiquitous nature of the Bethe Ansatz in integrable one-dimensional systems also lends credibility to a hope that such
patterns may occur in different models, both on a lattice and in the continuum.
An alternate direction of further study might be into the case of an attractive potential between the impurity and background
gas.
While requiring changing the code which solves the Bethe Ansatz to account for complex Bethe roots~\cite{McGuire1966} this
route should not require changing the code which finds the impurity's momentum.
Overall we have presented novel research in this system, writing code and discovering relations that can aid any research of
others in this area.
\chapter{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction_introduction}
When introduced to a new phenomenon, a natural tendency is to attempt to find the simplest system in which it is
exhibited, and use said system as a playground to explore the phenomenon's features without unnecessary complexity.
An ever-present danger in this methodology is that a simple system may show qualitatively different features to more complex
ones, for example, because features in the complex system are emergent from some complexity not in the smaller system, or
because the limitation on the degrees of freedom in the smaller system prohibit the phenomenon.
Upon encountering this, the investigator must decide whether to add complications piecemeal to their original description,
focus on those features which are shared by the model and observations, or start from scratch with a different model.
It is a rare, but happy, event when the features of said simple model opens up a new and exciting area of research, from
which novel features are found with regularity.
The physics of strongly correlated one-dimensional quantum systems is one such field, revealing numerous phenomena not
present in higher dimensions, both in their mathematical descriptions and their observable nature.
While initially thought of more as a testing ground for methods to apply to the ``real'' 3 dimensional world (see the
introductions of references~\cite{Lenard1964,Calogero1971} for examples), experimental progress creating 1D systems (both
quasi and true) has given these ``toy models'' new-found experimental relevance
\cite{Scheunemann2000,Morsch2001,Moritz2003,Fallani2004,Tolra2004,Paredes2004,Stoferle2004,Kinoshita2004,Kohl2004,Kinoshita2005,Fertig2005,Kinoshita2006,Ryu2007,Hofferberth2007,Olson2007,VanAmerongen2008,Du2008,Palzer2009,Haller2009,Chen2011,Whitlock2011,Trotzky2011,Catani2012,Fukuhara2013,Meinert2013},
that has significantly increased the interest in the field.
One of the most important aspects of one-dimensional physics is the Luttinger liquid universality class.
While many different microscopic models have been used in 1D, for both fermions and bosons, and across a wide range of
interaction types and potentials,
\cite{Tomonaga1950,Luttinger1963,Mattis1965}
\cite{Calogero1969,Calogero1971,Sutherland1971}
\cite{Lieb1963,Lieb1963a,Yang1969}
\cite{Yang1967,Sutherland1968,Sutherland1971}
\cite{Lieb1968}
most one dimensional models share common features at low energy, and from this, a low energy universality class, called a
``Luttinger Liquid'', has been formed, which is in some ways a replacement for the Fermi liquid theory in one
dimension~\cite{Haldane1981,Gogolin1999,Giamarchi2003}.
In one dimension the limitation in dimensionality imposes an inherently collective nature on the excitations of a liquid, as
in order for one particle to move, another must make space.
This breaks the fermionic quasiparticle approximation of a Fermi liquid, and in its place a bosonic quasiparticle of
collective excitations is created.
Non-interacting bosonic quasiparticles are formed by assuming a linear excitation dispersion of the fermionic
particles~\cite{Luttinger1963}, and a small non-linearity can be accounted for by adding interactions between
them~\cite{Haldane1981}.
Initially formulated to describe fermions, the generality of this description has extended to gases of
bosons~\cite{Cazalilla2011}, creating a general description of low energy one-dimensional systems.
Despite the success of this Luttinger liquid theory,
the analogy does not carry over to higher energy excitations, which
allow excitations too far from the approximately linear dispersion to be accounted for.
Given such a widely encompassing description of the low energy physics in one-dimensional systems,
an interest in systems outside the Luttinger liquid paradigm has emerged, focusing on systems at a higher energy, or with
some other feature breaking the linear approximation of the dispersion
relation~\cite{Pustilnik2006,Fiete2007,Zvonarev2007,Imambekov2008,Imambekov2009a,Imambekov2012}.
One method of probing these regimes, is by going back to the microscopic models that have been formed, and finding how they
behave as excitations move them away from the Luttinger liquid paradigm.
It is one of the miracles of one dimension that many of these models can be solved exactly using the ansatz proposed by
Bethe, initially in order to find a solution of the Heisenberg spin-1/2 chain~\cite{Bethe1931}.
This ansatz gives exact eigenstates of the systems, and enables numerical calculation of their energy and
momentum~\cite{Gaudin1983,Giamarchi2003}.
This thesis works on one particular system of this type, modelling the dynamics of a high energy spin impurity quenched in a
spin polarised fermionic gas, presenting a discussion on the features of the impurity's momentum evolution, and the patterns
in the eigenstate transitions that describe individual features.
An impurity in one-dimensional systems has been an active area of research for some
time~\cite{Neto1995,Castella1996,Palzer2009,Lamacraft2009,Girardeau2009,Punk2009,Giraud2009,Giraud2010,Goold2010,Ovchinnikov2010,Johnson2011,Catani2012,Spethmann2012,Recher2012,Windpassinger2013,Astrakharchik2013,Fukuhara2013,Massel2013,Doggen2013,Doggen2014,Massignan2014},
and modelling how a system behaves with a high energy impurity, taking it far away from the Luttinger liquid paradigm
is an interesting variation on a theme that has already provided qualitatively new phenomena~\cite{Mathy2012,Knap2014}.
The interaction between our impurity and background particles is described by a delta function potential, and hence the
system is modelled by the fermionic Yang-Gaudin model~\cite{Yang1967,Gaudin1967,Guan2013} spin polarised but for a single
impurity, as used in references~\cite{McGuire1964,McGuire1990,Edwards1990,Castella1993,Mathy2012,Gamayun2015}.
As a consequence of yet another quirk of a single dimension, this system behaves similarly whether the particles are
free fermions or infinitely repulsive bosons, and hence could also be described with the Lieb-Liniger model~\cite{Lieb1963}
of interacting bosons in the limit of infinite potential and with added terms for an impurity.
This fermionisation of bosons has been directly observed in references~\cite{Kinoshita2004,Kinoshita2005}, and while no
exact realisation of this system has been created as yet, reference~\cite{Palzer2009} has demonstrated many necessary
ingredients, measuring the velocity of a single impurity accelerated with a constant force, using time-of-flight
measurements.
The rest of this thesis is structured in the following way: Chapter~\ref{sec:model_and_method} describes the model used to
probe the system and its solutions, some terminology for different equations, and the difficulties faced when calculating
the impurity's momentum.
The time dependent features of this momentum are presented in Chapter~\ref{sec:observables}, which adds to the existing
literature with a deeper analysis of the momentum revivals in the system.
Further original work is presented in Chapter~\ref{sec:subsets}, which attributes each momentum feature to a subset of
eigenstate transitions, and Chapter~\ref{sec:other} which presents the results of a preliminary look at the structure
inherent in the eigenstates themselves.
Finally, Chapter~\ref{sec:concluding_remarks} summarises the main results of this work and presents some proposed topics of
further work.
A discussion on the technical aspects of the code written for this work is presented in Appendix~\ref{sec:code_details}.
\chapter*{Declaration}
Except where stated otherwise, this Thesis is a result of the author's original work and has not been
submitted in whole or in part for the award of a higher degree elsewhere.
\chapter*{Acknowledgements}
I would like to thank Evgeni Burovski, my supervisor for introducing me to the power of computers in research, it has
become the catalyst what is now my overriding interest.
Furthermore, I thank Vadim Cheianov, Oleksandr Gamayun, Mikhail Zvonarev and Oleg Lychkovskiy for
interesting discussions that have provided new avenues of research.
\thispagestyle{empty}
\clearpage
\begin{abstract}
A discussion on the momentum evolution of an impurity interacting via a finite delta potential repulsion with a
non-interacting fermionic background gas is presented.
It has recently been shown that the momentum evolution of this system displays two interesting features, namely a non-zero
thermalised value and a long-lived quantum mechanical oscillation around this plateau named ``quantum
flutter'' [Mathy, Zvonarev, Demler, \textit{Nat. Phys.} \textbf{2012}].
We discuss revivals in the momentum of the impurity, which have been seen before but not yet thoroughly investigated.
Subsequently it is shown the quantum flutter and revivals are caused by disjoint sets of eigenstate transitions, and this
fact is used to interpret some of their aspects.
This attribution of momentum features to different eigenstate subsets allows quantitative reproduction of these features
with much less computational expense than has so far been possible.
Finally some results on the distribution of the momentum of eigenstates and their relation to the momentum of the impurity
once the system has been thermalised are presented along with a discussion on the time averaged infinite time value of the
momentum and its comparison to different eigenstate subsets.
\end{abstract}
\tableofcontents
\listoffigures
\include{introduction}
\include{model_and_method}
\include{observables}
\include{subgroups}
\include{other}
\include{final_remarks}
\begin{appendices}
\include{code_details}
\end{appendices}
\printbibliography
\end{document}
\section{Method and Model}
\label{sec:model_and_method}
\subsection{Model}
\label{sec:m&m_model}
The system we work within has two valid representations: one of hard-core bosons, and one of free fermions.
In the bosonic case, our Hamiltonian, in units of $\hbar = 1$ and $m = m_{\uparrow} = m_{\downarrow} = 0.5$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:general_boson_hamiltonian}
H = \hat{P_{\downarrow}}^{2} +
\sum_{i=1}^{N}\hat{P_{i}}^{2} +
g \sum_{i=1}^{N}\delta (x_{i} - x_{\downarrow}) +
a \sum_{i,j = 1}^{N}\delta (x_{i} - x_{j})
\end{equation}
where $\hat{P_{\downarrow}}$ is the momentum operator of the impurity, the sums are over all particles in the background gas,
$\hat{P_{i}}$ is the momentum operator for a single background gas particle, $g$ defines the interaction strength between the
impurity and the background gas, and $a$ sets the interaction strength between two particles of the background gas.
For the specific case of our system, $a = \infty$, and it is this infinite potential which is the root cause of the
equivalence between representations.
While we are using a delta potential interaction, the correspondence holds for a gas of bosons with any interaction, as long
as the interaction has an impenetrable core, forcing a constant order on the particles~\cite{Girardeau1960}.
Essentially, the correspondence comes from the fact that multiplying a fermionic wavefunction by the unit anti-symmetric function
\begin{equation}
\prod_{j > l} \sign (x_{j} - x_{l})
\end{equation}
produces an eigenfunction of the Hamiltonian that obeys bosonic anti-commutation relations and can be made to satisfy the
same boundary conditions (depending on the parity of the number of particles).
The Pauli exclusion principle, and discontinuities in the anti-symmetric function above do not cause a problem when satisfying
regularity conditions because of the stipulated hard-core interactions between bosons, which require the wavefunction to be
$0$ when two particles share a position.
Both representations share many observables (including the energy of the system), with the determining factor whether the
unit anti-symmetric function above commutes with the corresponding operator.
This argument can be extended to the case of a gas with a single distinguishable impurity, as the impurity puts no extra
constraints on the symmetry of the wavefunction~\cite{Mathy2012sup}.
Recent experiments have managed to record gases in this regime~\cite{Kinoshita2004,Paredes2004,Tolra2004}, called a
Tonks-Girardeau gas, and have even observed the transition between a bosonic state and the Tonks-Girardeau gas with
increasing interaction strength~\cite{Kinoshita2005}.
Of these two representations, we use the fermionic one (called the Yang-Gaudin model) throughout.
This fermionic description gives us some important values, like the Fermi momentum, which is useful in the phenomenological
description of the impurity's momentum, and Fermi time, useful to describe the motion of the impurity in a manner independent
of the system size.
In this case, there is no interaction between pairs of similar particles, only between the single impurity and each particle
in the background gas, so the Hamiltonian is
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:our_hamiltonian}
H = \hat{P_{\downarrow}}^{2} +
\sum_{i=1}^{N}\hat{P_{i}}^{2} +
g \sum_{i=1}^{N}\delta (x_{i} - x_{\downarrow}).
\end{equation}
A \emph{dimensionless} interaction strength parameter $\gamma = \nicefrac{g}{2n}$ (where $n=\nicefrac{N}{L}$ is the density of
particles in the system) can be defined to use in place of $g$, which gives a more physically relevant parameter to inspect in
Chapter~\ref{sec:observables}.
This model is integrable, and exactly solvable via the Bethe Ansatz~\cite{McGuire1964,McGuire1965}, we use an alternate
formalism presented in ref~\cite{Edwards1990} which has been previously used to good effect in calculating the spectral
properties of the system~\cite{Castella1993} and the momentum of the impurity and background gas in the
system~\cite{Mathy2012}.
\subsubsection{Bethe Ansatz}
\label{sec:m&m_BA}
Soon after the formulation of quantum mechanics, Hans Bethe discovered a method to find the exact eigenstates and eigenvalues
of the Heisenberg model for one-dimensional chain of spin-1/2 fermions~\cite{Bethe1931}.
As this model only accounts for interactions between neighbouring particles, he noted that when no two down spins were next
to each other the eigenstate must be a linear combination of single down spin wavefunctions.
He used this observation to propose an Ansatz for the form of the eigenstates of the system, and showed that when this
wavefunction satisfies a set of equations now known as the Bethe equations, his Ansatz indeed solves the
Hamiltonian~\cite{Bethe1931}.
Bethe's paper showed that the many-particle problem of the Heisenberg chain reduced to solving how two spin-down
quasiparticles interact when upon neighbouring sites~\cite{Bethe1931}.
This fact allows all interactions to be interpreted as multiple two-body interactions, which has been suggested as a
criterion for integrability~\cite{Sutherland2004}.
Hence the Bethe Ansatz is intrinsically tied with integrability, and indeed almost all integrable systems can be solved in
terms of the Bethe Ansatz~\cite{Batchelor2007}.
While this statement holds, the applicability of the Bethe Ansatz to most integrable systems was not initially seen, and
required slightly different forms to be realised.
The first alternate use came in the 1960's when Bethe's hypothesis was applied to the continuum case of a 1D model of
interacting bosons~\cite{Lieb1963a,Lieb1963,McGuire1964,Yang1967}.
This use, known as the coordinate Bethe Ansatz, is the form used for the current work and is such described in more detail
in Section~\ref{sec:m&m_BA_solution}.
The coordinate Bethe Ansatz draws a parallel between the down spin quasiparticles of Bethe's original work and the physical
bosons in the 1D gas that Lieb and Liniger studied.
After that more applications and generalisations appeared.
The more complicated \emph{nested} Bethe Ansatz was used to account for the additional spin degree of freedom in the
non-polarised fermionic 1D gas~\cite{Flicker1967,Gaudin1967,Yang1967,Sutherland1968}.
For an non-polarised gas, the symmetry between all orderings of particles is broken so there are many different orderings,
the number depending on number of each spin.
Because of this extra degree of complexity a generalised Bethe Ansatz is used and solved using a set of conditions distinct
yet still related to those in Eqn~\eqref{eqn:BA_kvalues}.
Finally an alternate derivation of the Bethe equations called the \emph{algebraic} Bethe Ansatz was found applicable to integrable
systems of quasiparticles above some reference state~\cite{Takhtadzhan1979,Sklyanin1991,Korepin1993,Faddeev1996}.
While we use a fermionic gas system, the nested Bethe Ansatz is not used, as gas is polarised apart from the single impurity.
Since it's inception, the Bethe Ansatz has been found useful in many situations, but as one author notes~\cite{Belliard2008}
``numerous publications have been dedicated to the subject, so that it is becoming difficult to make exhaustive citations''.
Instead we provide the reader with some previously collated references in the introduction of Reference~\cite{Franchini2011}.
\subsubsection{Bethe Ansatz Solution}
\label{sec:m&m_BA_solution}
For a description of how the Bethe Ansatz is used in our system, we first present a work-through of the coordinate Bethe Ansatz for a
two-body example of our system then state the generalisation with a more simple representation used in
references~\cite{Edwards1990,Castella1993,Mathy2012}.
Finally we work through the computationally efficient matrix equations developed in~\cite{Mathy2012} to calculate the
momentum of the impurity.
In essence, the coordinate Bethe Ansatz uses the fact that given a suitable inter-particle potential, the wavefunction of the
system in the asymptotic limit can be described by the wavefunction of free particles when said particles are far enough
apart.
For example, for two particles, at positions $x_{1}, x_{2}$ the wavefunction when they are far enough apart from each other
is
\begin{equation}
\Psi(x_{1}, x_{2})_{asymptotic} = \alpha e^{i(k_{1}x_{1} + k_{2}x_{2})} + \beta e^{i(k_{2}x_{1} + k_{1}x_{2})}
\end{equation}
where $x_{i}, k_{i}$ are the position and momentum respectively of particle $i$, and the energy of this wavefunction is
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:BA_energy}
E = k_{1}^{2} + k_{2}^{2}.
\end{equation}
Within this assumption, any interaction must be accounted for in the coefficients $\alpha$ and $\beta$, which are found using
restrictions imposed by the inter-particle potential and boundary conditions.
While this ansatz is clear in the two-body case, it has also been found correct when generalising to many particles for
multiple two body potentials, as in one-dimension, interactions between multiple particles can be shown to be
non-diffractive.
This non-diffractive nature is the criterion as mentioned above for the Bethe Ansatz where the interaction between multiple
particles can be described as a set of subsequent two-body scattering events.
Reference~\cite{McGuire1964} used a more general form of this ansatz to find the exact eigenstates for the system that we are
using, asserting the asymptotic wavefunction in all configurations where the impurity does not share a position with any
particle in the background gas.
Here we follow that method for a two body system, that is one impurity at position $x_{1}$ and one background fermion at
position $x_{2}$.
In this system, there are two different regions in which the wavefunction must have its asymptotic form, one where
$x_{1} < x_{2}$ and one where $x_{1} > x_{2}$, hence
\begin{equation}
\Psi(x_{1}, x_{2}) = \Psi_{1}(x_{1}, x_{2}) + \Psi_{2}(x_{1}, x_{2})
\end{equation}
where $\Psi_{1}, \Psi_{2}$ describe the wavefunction in their respective region, and are of the same form as before.
Due to periodic boundary conditions on $x_{2}$, we know the wavefunction when $x_{2} = L$ must be the same as when
$x_{2} = 0$, hence
\begin{gather*}
\Psi_{1}(x_{1}, L) = \Psi_{2}(x_{1}, 0)
\implies
\alpha_{1} e^{i(k_{1}x_{1} + k_{2}L)} + \beta_{1} e^{i(k_{2}x_{1} + k_{1}L)} =
\alpha_{2} e^{ik_{1}x_{1}} + \beta_{2} e^{ik_{2}x_{1}} \\
\implies \\
\alpha_{1}e^{ik_{2}L} = \alpha_{2} \numberthis \label{eqn:x2_pbcs} \\
\beta_{1}e^{ik_{1}L} = \beta_{2}
\end{gather*}
similarly, applying the same boundary conditions to $x_{1}$ we have the conditions
\begin{gather*}
\Psi_{1}(0, x_{2}) = \Psi_{2}(L, x_{2}) \\
\implies \\
\alpha_{1} = \alpha_{2} e^{ik_{1}L} \numberthis \label{eqn:x1_pbcs} \\
\beta_{1} = \beta_{2} e^{ik_{1}L}
\end{gather*}
which together imply that
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:BA_momentum}
k_{1} + k_{2} = \frac{2 \pi n}{L} , \qquad n \in \mathbb{N}
\end{equation}
where the value $\frac{2 \pi n}{L}$ is hence the total momentum of the system.
To account for the delta function interaction potential, we assert the condition~\cite{McGuire1964}
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2} \bigg[{(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}} - \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})}_{x_{1} - x_{2} = 0^{+}} -
{(\frac{\partial }{ \partial x_{1}} - \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}})}_{x_{1} - x_{2} = 0^{-}}\bigg] \Psi
=
g \Psi
\end{equation}
which, using the split of $\Psi$ depending on the relative positions of each particle, implies the following
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:delta_potential_restriction}
\bigg(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}} - \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}}\bigg) \Psi_{1}(x_{1}, x_{2}) -
\bigg(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}} - \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{2}}\bigg) \Psi_{2}(x_{1}, x_{2})
=
2 g \Psi
\end{equation}
where $g$ is the interaction strength from Equation~\eqref{eqn:our_hamiltonian}.
We can combine the requirements found in Equations~\eqref{eqn:x2_pbcs} and \eqref{eqn:x1_pbcs} with the one above
to form the combined requirement below.
\begin{equation}
{
\begin{pmatrix}
e^{ik_{2}L}\alpha \\ e^{ik_{1}L}\beta
\end{pmatrix}
}_{1}
=
{
\begin{pmatrix}
\alpha \\ \beta
\end{pmatrix}
}_{2}
=
\begin{pmatrix}
1 + \nicefrac{g}{i(k_{1} - k_{2})} & \nicefrac{g}{i(k_{1} - k_{2})} \\
%
-\nicefrac{g}{i(k_{1} - k_{2})} & 1 - \nicefrac{g}{i(k_{1} - k_{2})}
\end{pmatrix}
{
\begin{pmatrix}
\alpha \\ \beta
\end{pmatrix}
}_{1}
\end{equation}
which requires for self-consistency that
\begin{equation}
\begin{vmatrix}
1 + \nicefrac{g}{i(k_{1} - k_{2})} - e^{ik_{2}L} & \nicefrac{g}{i(k_{1} - k_{2})} \\
%
- \nicefrac{g}{i(k_{1} - k_{2})} & 1 - \nicefrac{g}{i(k_{1} - k_{2})} - e^{ik_{1}L}
\end{vmatrix}
= 0.
\end{equation}
In order to satisfy the above condition, it is sufficient to require that
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:BA_kvalues}
\begin{split}
\cot(\frac{k_{1}L}{2}) &= \frac{2k_{1}}{g} - const \\
\cot(\frac{k_{2}L}{2}) &= \frac{2k_{2}}{g} - const
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $const$ is some arbitrary value.
Finding an eigenstate of the system is hence reduced to finding $2$ values $k_{1}, k_{2}$ which satisfy the equations
\eqref{eqn:BA_kvalues}, and \eqref{eqn:BA_momentum}, where the energy of the state is given by \eqref{eqn:BA_energy}.
This solution can be generalised to any number of background particles using the assertion that when no background particle
shares a position with the impurity, the wavefunction of the system is a linear combination of free
particles and accounting for interactions in the way described above~\cite{McGuire1964}.
In this more general solution, with a background gas of $N$ particles, the eigenstates of the system are defined by the
$N + 1$ values $k_{1}, k_{2}, ... , k_{N+1}$ satisfying the more generalised versions of Equations~\eqref{eqn:BA_kvalues},
and~\eqref{eqn:BA_momentum} presented alongside the energy of these states below
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:Full_BA_eqns}
\begin{split}
\sum_{i=1}^{N+1}k_{i} &= \frac{2 \pi n}{L} = Q, \qquad n \in \mathbb{N} \\
\cot(\frac{L}{2}k_{i}) &= \frac{2k_{i}}{g} - const \\
E &= \sum_{i=1}^{N + 1} k_{i}^{2}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for all $i \in 1,2,..,N+1$, and with $N$ representing the number of particles in the background gas.
These values $k_{1}, k_{2}, ... , k_{N+1}$ are known as the Bethe momenta of the equation and in our case (with a repulsive
potential) they are real.
While this solves the system exactly, it results in a very complicated wavefunction, with many different amplitudes to
calculate.
Reference~\cite{Edwards1990} found the same wavefunctions were reproduced in an easier format, by forming them in the
reference frame of the impurity.
In this alternate reference frame, an ansatz is taken to be
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:BA_final_ansatz}
f(y_{2}, ... , y_{N + 1}) = \detn_{N}(\Phi_{j}(y_{l}))
\end{equation}
where $y_{i}$ are the coordinates of each background gas particle in this new frame of reference, and $\Phi_{j}$ are
functions dependent on an individual coordinate.
Coordinates of this wavefunction span from $y_{2}$ onward as the dependence of the function on the position of the impurity
has been factored out when switching reference frame.
This new ansatz can be shown~\cite{Edwards1990} to solve the system when each $\Phi_{j}(y)$ is described as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:phi_constraint}
\Phi_{j}(y) =
\sum_{t=1}^{N+1} a_{j}^{t} e^{ik_{t}y}
\end{equation}
where the $N + 1$ $k_{t}$ values satisfy the conditions in Equation~\eqref{eqn:Full_BA_eqns}, and the $N(N+ 1)$ coefficients
$a_{j}^{t}$ satisfy the equations
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\sum_{t=1}^{N+1} a_{j}^{t}(1-e^{ik_{t}L}) = 0, \qquad j=1,...,N \\
\sum_{t=1}^{N+1} a_{j}^{t}[ik_{t}(1-e^{ik_{t}L}) - g] = 0, \qquad j=1,...,N
\end{split}
\end{equation}
to ensure the wavefunction satisfies restrictions from the periodic boundary conditions and the delta potential in the
Schr\"{o}dinger equation respectively.
This is the form of eigenstates used throughout the current work.
\subsubsection{Equations for Momentum}
\label{sec:m&m_momentum_equations}
This work focuses on the time evolution of the impurity's momentum, which we calculate using the computationally
efficient equations described in~\cite{Mathy2012sup}.
That reference describes in detail both the derivation of equations to find the impurity's momentum in terms of matrix
elements, and a manner to calculate said matrix elements.
Here we state the equations which define the impurity's momentum in order to set the scene for the discussion on
separation of contributions in Chapter~\ref{sec:subsets}.
The expectation value of the impurity's momentum can be found with the equation
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:momentum_against_time}
\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)} = Q -
\sum_{f_{Q},f_{Q}^{'}} e^{i t (E_{f} - E_{f^{'}})} \braket{FS|f_{Q}}\matrixel{f_{Q}}{P_{\uparrow}}{f_{Q}^{'}}\braket{f_{Q}^{'}|FS}.
\end{equation}
Here the sum is over all eigenstates $f$ described above, which have been given a subscript of $Q$ to highlight the fact
that they depend on the total momentum of the system.
This total momentum is equal to the initial momentum of the impurity as the system has evolved from an initial state
consisting of the impurity at said momentum and a Fermi sea at $0K$.
The fermionic gas state alone is represented as $\ket{FS}$ in the above equation.
The energy $E_{f}$ of the system is for each different eigenstate, and can be found with the equation given in
\eqref{eqn:Full_BA_eqns} for each eigenstate $f_{Q}$.
In the limit $t \to \infty$, the dependence of Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} on $E_{f}$ is removed through time
averaging, becoming
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:inf_time_theoretical_momentum}
\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)} = Q - \sum_{f_{Q}}\braket{FS|f_{Q}}\expval{P_{\uparrow}}{f_{Q}}\braket{f_{Q}|FS}
\end{equation}
which finds the infinite time momentum of the impurity by only having to calculate a single sum over eigenstates, instead of
the double one required for Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}.
Within this equaution there are two non-trivial values to calculate.
The first is the overlap of the eigenstate with the original Fermi sea, the
other is the matrix element of the background gas momentum operator between the
two Bethe eigenstates.
For this work, the overlap values and diagonal matrix elements of the
background gas momentum operator were calculated using a pre-existing
program~\cite{ZhenyaMCBA}, which uses the equations found in
references~\cite{Castella1993,Mathy2012sup} that we describe below.
The code to calculate off-diagonal matrix elements was written by the author,
and combined with the above code into the repo~\cite{MyMCBA}.
In order to calculate either values numerically, a normalisation constant for the eigenstates in
Equation~\eqref{eqn:BA_final_ansatz} must be found.
This is done first finding the dot product of an eigenstate with itself
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:self_dot_product}
\braket{f_{Q}|f_{Q}}
=
\frac{Y_{f_{Q}} Y_{f_{Q}}}{N !}
\int_{0}^{L} \, dx_{1} \, \cdots \, dx_{N}
\detn_{N}(\overline{\Phi_{j}}(x_{l}))
\detn_{N}(\Phi_{j}(x_{l}))
\end{equation}
where $Y_{f_{Q}}$ is the normalisation constant of the eigenstate $f_{Q}$.
Using the identity
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:magic_identity}
\frac{1}{N!} \int_{0}^{L} dx_{1} \cdots dx_{N} \,\detn_{N}\big[\psi_{j}(x_{l})\big] \detn_{N}\big[\Phi_{j}(x_{l})\big] \\
= \quad
\detn_{N}\bigg[\int_{0}^{L} \,dy \, \psi_{j}(y) \Phi_{l}(y) \bigg]
\end{multline}
valid for any functions $\Phi_{j}, \psi_{j}$, Equation~\eqref{eqn:self_dot_product} can be written
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:neat_dot_product}
\braket{f_{Q}|f_{Q}}
=
Y_{f_{Q}} Y_{f_{Q}} \detn_{N} \bigg[ \int_{0}^{L} dx \, \overline{\Phi_{j}}(x) \Phi_{l}(x) \bigg].
\end{equation}
Using the same choice of $a_{j}^{t}$ for Eqn~\eqref{eqn:phi_constraint} as references~\cite{Castella1993,Mathy2012},
$\Phi_{j}(x)$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:full_phi}
\Phi_{j}(x)
=
\frac{1}{\sqrt{L}}
\bigg[
e^{i\big(k_{j}x + \delta_{j} \big)} -
\frac{\theta_{j}}{\Theta}
\sum_{t=1}^{N+1} e^{i\big(k_{t}x + \delta_{t}\big)}
\bigg]
.
\end{equation}
Inserting equation~\eqref{eqn:full_phi} into equation~\eqref{eqn:self_dot_product} and solving for $Y_{f_{Q}}$, we get
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:final_normalisation}
\lvert Y_{f_{Q}} \rvert^{-2}
=
\frac{1}{\Theta^{2}} \big( \sum_{t=1}^{N+1} \frac{\theta_{t}^{2}}{1 + \theta_{t}^{2}} \big)
\prod_{t=1}^{N+1} (1 + \theta_{t}^{2}).
\end{equation}
Where the conveniance variables $\theta, \Theta$ are defined below
\begin{gather}
\label{eqn:theta_variables}
\frac{L}{2} k_{j}
=
n_{j} \pi - \delta_{j} \\
\theta_{j} = \sqrt{\frac{8}{gL}} \sin(\delta_{j}) \\
\Theta = \sum_{t=1}^{N+1} \theta_{t}.
\end{gather}
For singular eigenstates, where $\delta_{j} = 0, \qquad j = 1, \ldots, N$, we have the relation
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:inf_theta_limit}
\lim_{c \to -\infty} \frac{\theta}{\Theta}
=
\frac{1}{N+1}
\end{equation}
which implies
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:final_normalisation_singular}
Y_{f_{Q}}
=
\sqrt{N+1}.
\end{equation}
The equation to calculate the overlaps $\braket{FS|f_{Q}}$ in
Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} is taken from
reference~\cite{Mathy2012sup}, and restated below
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:S52}
\braket{FS|f_Q}
=
Y_{f_Q} \detn_{N} \chi
\end{equation}
where $\chi$ is an $N \times N$ matrix whose elements are defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:S53}
\chi_{j}^{l}
=
\frac{\theta_{l}}{\sqrt{a}} \bigg[\frac{1}{u_{j} - \frac{L}{2} k_{l}} -
\frac{1}{\Theta} \sum_{t=1}^{N + 1} \frac{\theta_{t}}{u_{j} - \frac{L}{2} k_{t}} \bigg],
\qquad j,l = 1,\ldots,N.
\end{equation}
In the singular case, equation~\eqref{eqn:S52} has an easier representation, using
Equation~\eqref{eqn:final_normalisation_singular} and the alternate equation for the determinant in
Eqn~\eqref{eqn:S52} below.
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:final_overlap_singular}
\detn_{N} \chi =
\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{N+1}, & u_{j} = \frac{L}{2} k_{j} \\
\frac{-1}{N+1}, & u_{j} = \frac{L}{2} k_{j+1} \\
0, & otherwise
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The matrix elements of Equation~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}
$\matrixel{f_{Q}}{P_{\uparrow}}{f_{Q}^{'}}$ are given in
Reference~\cite{Mathy2012sup} as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:S56}
\matrixel{f_{Q}}{P_{\uparrow}}{f_{Q}^{'}}
=
Y_{f_{Q}}Y_{f_{Q}^{'}} \frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \bigg(\detn_{N} \big(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z} \big) \bigg) \rvert_{\lambda = 0}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:final_Y}
\mathcal{Y}_{j}^{l}
=
\int_{0}^{L} dy \, \overline{\Phi_{j}} (x) \Phi_{l}^{'}(y) \\
=
K(k_{l}^{'}, k_{j})
-
\frac{\theta_{j}}{\Theta} \sum_{t=1}^{N+1} K(k_{l}^{'}, k_{t}) \\
-
\frac{\theta_{l}^{'}}{\Theta^{'}} \sum_{t=1}^{N+1} K(k_{l}^{'}, k_{j})
+
\frac{\theta_{j} \theta_{l}^{'}}{\Theta \Theta^{'}} \sum_{t,t^{'}=1}^{N+1} K(k_{t}^{'}, k_{t})
\end{multline}
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:final_Z}
\mathcal{Z}_{j}^{l}
=
\int_{0}^{L} dy \, \overline{\Phi_{j}} (x) \partial_{y} \Phi_{l}^{'}(y) \\
=
k_{l}^{'}K(k_{l}^{'}, k_{j})
-
k_{l}^{'} \frac{\theta_{j}}{\Theta} \sum_{t=1}^{N+1} K(k_{l}^{'}, k_{t}) \\
-
\frac{\theta_{l}^{'}}{\Theta^{'}} \sum_{t=1}^{N+1} k_{t}^{'} K(k_{t}^{'}, k_{j})
+
\frac{\theta_{j} \theta_{l}^{'}}{\Theta \Theta^{'}} \sum_{t,t^{'}=1}^{N+1} k_{t^{'}}^{'}K(k_{t^{'}}^{'}, k_{t})
\end{multline}
\begin{equation}
K(k^{'}, k)
=
\begin{cases}
1, & if \quad k^{'} = k \\
\frac{e^{i(k^{'} - k)L} - 1}{i(k^{'} - k)L} e^{i(\delta^{'} - \delta)}, & otherwise
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Note that since $K$ is real
\begin{multline}
K(k^{'}, k)
=
\frac{e^{i(k^{'} - k)L} - 1}{i(k^{'} - k)L} e^{i(\delta^{'} - \delta)} \\
=
\frac{e^{2\pi i(n^{'} - n)}e^{-2i(\delta^{'} - \delta)} - 1}{i(k^{'} - k)L} e^{i(\delta^{'} - \delta)}
=
\frac{e^{-i(\delta^{'} - \delta)} - e^{i(\delta^{'} - \delta)}}{i(k^{'} - k)L} \\
=
\frac{2i \sin(\delta^{'} - \delta)}{i(k^{'} - k)L}
=
\frac{2\sin(\delta^{'} - \delta)}{(k^{'} - k)L}
\end{multline}
then so are $\mathcal{Y}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$.
We look at this formula seperately for when $\ket{f_{Q}^{'}} = \ket{f_{Q}}$ and $\ket{f_{Q}^{'}} \neq \ket{f_{Q}}$.
First, for the diagonal matrix elements, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:final_diagonal}
\matrixel{f_{Q}}{P_{\uparrow}}{f_{Q}}
=
q
- \big(
\sum_{t=1}^{N+1} \frac{\theta_{t}^{2}}{(1 + \theta_{t}^{2})} k_{t}
\big)
\big(
\sum_{t=1}^{N+1} \frac{\theta_{t}^{2}}{(1 + \theta_{t}^{2})}
\big)^{-1}.
\end{equation}
which, when $f_{Q}$ is singular, becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:final_diagonal_singular}
q \big( 1 - \frac{1}{N+1} \big).
\end{equation}
To find a computationally efficient manner to calculate the off-diagonal case, we take equation~\eqref{eqn:S56} and
manipulate it in two different ways.
First we separate it out into two different determinants
\begin{align}
\detn(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z})
= \detn \big[ \mathcal{Y}(\mathbb{1} + \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \lambda \mathcal{Z})
\big] \\
= \detn(\mathcal{Y}) \detn(\mathbb{1} + \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \\
\end{align}
and second we use the identity~\eqref{eqn:sherman_morrison} to transform the more complicated determinant into a trace
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:sherman_morrison}
\ln \big( \detn(X) \big)
=
\tr \big( \ln(X) \big)
\end{equation}
\begin{multline}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \detn(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z})
= \frac{\detn(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z})}{\detn(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z})}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \detn(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \\
= \detn(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z})
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} ln \big( \detn(\mathcal{Y}) \detn(\mathbb{1} + \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \big)
\end{multline}
\begin{multline}
\label{eqn:use_sherman_morrison}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \ln \big( \detn(\mathcal{Y}) \detn(\mathbb{1} + \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \big) \\
=
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \ln \big( \det(\mathcal{Y}) \big) \rvert_{\lambda = 0}
+ \frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \ln \big( \det(\mathbb{1} + \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \big) \rvert_{\lambda = 0} \\
=
0
+
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \tr \big( \ln(\mathbb{1} + \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \big) \rvert_{\lambda = 0} \\
=
\tr \frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \big( \ln(\mathbb{1} + \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \big) \rvert_{\lambda = 0}
\end{multline}
Next the logarithmic expansion is taken from the last form of equation~\eqref{eqn:use_sherman_morrison}, and we again use the
position the derivative is taken at to simplify the form
\begin{multline}
\ln (\mathbb{1} + \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \lambda \mathcal{Z})
=
\lambda \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \mathcal{Z} + \frac{\big(\lambda \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \mathcal{Z}\big)^{2}}{2} + \ldots \\
\implies
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \big( \ln (\mathbb{1} + \mathcal{Y}^{-1} \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \big) \rvert_{\lambda = 0}
=
\mathcal{Y}^{-1} \mathcal{Z} \\
\implies
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \ln \big( \detn(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \big) \rvert_{\lambda = 0}
=
\tr(\mathcal{Y}^{-1} \mathcal{Z}) \\
\implies
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \detn(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z}) \rvert_{\lambda = 0}
=
\tr(\mathcal{Y}^{-1} \mathcal{Z}) \detn(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z})
\end{multline}
where we have taken advantage of the fact that the derivative is taken at $\lambda = 0$.
In order to solve the above equation we split the definition of $\mathcal{Y}^{-1}$ via singular value decomposition (SVD)
\begin{equation}
\tr(\mathcal{Y}^{-1}\mathcal{Z})
=
\tr \big((\mathcal{U} \Sigma_{Y}\mathcal{V}^{*})^{-1} \mathcal{Z}\big)
=
\tr (\mathcal{V}^{*^{-1}} \Sigma_{Y}^{-1} \mathcal{U}^{-1} \mathcal{Z})
\end{equation}
which, using the fact that $\mathcal{Y}$ is real, and hence $\mathcal{V}$ and $\mathcal{U}$ are both unitary and real, can be
represented as
\begin{equation}
\tr \big( \Sigma_{Y}^{-1} (\mathcal{U}^{T} \mathcal{Z} \mathcal{V}) \big).
\end{equation}
Using the fact $\Sigma$ is diagonal, and that $\detn (\Sigma_{Y} ) = \detn (\mathcal{Y})$, we can write
\begin{multline}
\tr \big( \Sigma_{Y}^{-1} (\mathcal{U}^{T} \mathcal{Z} \mathcal{V}) \big) \detn(\Sigma_{Y})
=
\diag (\Sigma_{Y}^{-1}) \cdot \diag (\mathcal{U}^{T} \mathcal{Z} \mathcal{V}) \cdot \detn(\Sigma_{Y}) \\
=
\bigg[
\frac{1}{\Sigma_{2}},
\frac{1}{\Sigma_{3}},
\cdots,
\frac{1}{\Sigma_{N+1}}
\bigg]
\diag (\mathcal{U}^{T} \mathcal{Z} \mathcal{V})
\prod_{n=2}^{N+1} \Sigma_{n} \\
=
\bigg[
\frac{\prod_{n=2}^{N+1} \Sigma_{n}}{\Sigma_{2}},
\frac{\prod_{n=2}^{N+1} \Sigma_{n}}{\Sigma_{3}},
\cdots,
\frac{\prod_{n=2}^{N+1} \Sigma_{n}}{\Sigma_{N+1}}
\bigg]
\diag (\mathcal{U}^{T} \mathcal{Z} \mathcal{V}) \\
=
\bigg[
\prod_{n \neq 2}^{N+1} \Sigma_{n},
\prod_{n \neq 3}^{N+1} \Sigma_{n},
\cdots,
\prod_{n=2}^{N} \Sigma_{n}
\bigg]
\diag (\mathcal{U}^{T} \mathcal{Z} \mathcal{V}).
\end{multline}
Finally, using the fact that the definition of $\mathcal{Y}$ is the same as the
matrix used in the dot product of eigenstates~\eqref{eqn:neat_dot_product} we
know that $\detn(\mathcal{Y}) = 0$ for off-diagonal states.
This means that one value of $\Sigma_{n}$ must be zero.
Without loss of generality we can set this to be the element $N$, so we have the computationally efficient representation
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:final_off_diagonal}
\matrixel{f_{Q}}{P_{\uparrow}}{f_{Q}^{'}}
=
Y_{f_{Q}} Y_{f_{Q}^{'}} \frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} \bigg(\detn_{N} \big(\mathcal{Y} + \lambda \mathcal{Z} \big) \bigg) \rvert_{\lambda = 0}
=
Y_{f_{Q}} Y_{f_{Q}^{'}} \prod_{n=2}^{N}\Sigma_{n} \cdot (\mathcal{U}^{T}\mathcal{Z}\mathcal{V})_{NN}
\end{equation}
where $(\mathcal{U}^{T}\mathcal{Z}\mathcal{V})_{NN}$ is the final element of the $N \times N$ matrix $\mathcal{U}^{T}\mathcal{Z}\mathcal{V}$.
This equation is only valid for off-diagonal elements, so the diagonal elements must be calculated with
Equation~\eqref{eqn:final_diagonal}.
For the special case of $c = - \infty$ calculating the matrix elements requires accounting for the singularities in the
$\mathcal{Y}$ and $\mathcal{Z}$ matrices.
This is done by using equation~\eqref{eqn:inf_theta_limit} for the singular roots in equations~\eqref{eqn:final_Z} and
\eqref{eqn:final_Y}.
The equations~(\ref{eqn:final_diagonal},\ref{eqn:final_normalisation},\ref{eqn:S52}), and their special case equivalents for
singular Bethe roots~(\ref{eqn:final_diagonal_singular},\ref{eqn:final_overlap_singular},\ref{eqn:final_normalisation_singular}) were
already encoded into reference~\cite{ZhenyaMCBA}.
This work required implementing equation~\eqref{eqn:final_off_diagonal} in a distributed manner, which allowed calculating the full momentum against
time evolution of the impurity via Equation~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}.
As there are an infinite number of eigenstates on the RHS of Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}, some subset must be taken
for a numerical calculation of the momentum.
Given that this will inevitably introduce some error in the momentum calculated, we need some way to ensure the subset of
states we are using reproduces the actual value of Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} close enough for quantitative results.
A quantitative bound on the error in momentum has been derived in reference~\cite{Mathy2012sup}, which depends on a bound in
the absolute value of the matrix element $\bar{P} = \sup(\abs{\matrixel{f_{Q}}{P_\downarrow}{f_{Q}^{'}}})$, and the saturation of
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:saturation_value}
\varsigma = \sum_{i=1}^{N} \abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q,i}}}^{2}.
\end{equation}
This value $\varsigma$ must approach $1$ as $N \to \infty$ due to the completeness of the Bethe
eigenstates~\cite{Mathy2012sup}.
It is noteworthy that this bound on the error,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:error_bound}
\sqrt{\bar{P}^{2}(2\varsigma(1 - \varsigma) + 2(1 - \varsigma)^{2})}
\end{equation}
is independent of time, which allows us to plot the impurity's momentum for large time with the same accuracy as any other
point.
We will use this attribute heavily when inspecting the momentum revivals of the system in Section~\ref{sec:revivals}, which
can happen on a time scale of $t \approx 140t_{F}$.
Throughout the text we talk of the saturation of the sum rule $\varsigma$ instead of the bound on the error in the momentum.
This is done to keep the relation between the number of states counted, and the value of $\abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}^{2}$ for
those states clear.
We wish to maintain the connection between these values, as while the time dependent momentum evolution has been studied
before~\cite{Mathy2012,Knap2014}, the isolation of eigenstate pairs responsible for each feature of the momentum in
Chapter~\ref{sec:subsets} is wholly novel work and can be better understood in these terms.
\subsection{Method}
\label{sec:m&m_method}
Despite these pre-existing solutions and methods, the evaluation of Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}, is still difficult,
as when the system is highly excited, a reliable calculation has to account for the contribution of a large number of
eigenstates~\cite{Mathy2012sup}.
In order to calculate states and choose which states to use, we use a program written in the Python programming
language~\cite{Python} with the Scipy and Numpy~\cite{Scipy,Numpy} external libraries.
The program uses a stochastic sampling algorithm to find and choose a smaller subset than in~\cite{Mathy2012}, that will
still reliably reproduce observables, the discovered states are then accumulated with the greatest $\abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}$
first.
This program has been used in work before~\cite{Burovski2014}, is freely available online~\cite{ZhenyaMCBA}, and provides not
only the overlap value for every state used, but the diagonal matrix elements of the momentum operator.
To this program, we add the functionality to calculate the off-diagonal matrix elements of the momentum operator
$\matrixel{f_{Q}}{P_{\uparrow}}{f_{Q}^{'}}$ for $f_{Q} \ne f_{Q}^{'}$ (see Equation~\eqref{eqn:final_off_diagonal}, and hence
the impurity's time-dependent momentum evolution.
This additional code is also freely available, an overview of its structure is given in Appendix~\ref{sec:code_details}, and
the source code can be found at~\cite{MyMCBA}.
\chapter{Observables of the System}
\label{sec:observables}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:mom_features}
This chapter details the difference in $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ with differing parameters of the system.
The three physical parameters we can change within the restrictions of our model are the system size, the initial momentum
of the impurity, and the dimensionless interaction strength parameter $\gamma$.
Note the only dependency of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ on the density of the background gas $n = \nicefrac{N}{L}$ or the
interaction strength $g$ is via the dependency on $\gamma$ and not on the values themselves.
While the momentum against time of the impurity has been discussed in other work~\cite{Mathy2012,Mathy2012sup,Knap2014}, we
look further into the revivals of the impurity's momentum that come from finite size effects in Section~\ref{sec:revivals}.
We then present comparisons between $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ as calculated from
Eqn~\eqref{eqn:inf_time_theoretical_momentum} and the momentum plateau obtained when plotting the full evolution of
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ in Section~\ref{sec:inf_time}.
We also discuss the variation of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ with $\varsigma$ (see Section~\ref{sec:m&m_method}), which will
provide grounding for the discussion on separating contributions provided in Chapter~\ref{sec:subsets}.
Where this chapter overlaps with~\cite{Mathy2012,Knap2014}, there is consistent agreement, corroborating their results and
increasing the confidence that both our programs give the correct numerical value for the solution of this model.
\section{Justification}
\label{sec:justification}
As mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:m&m_model}, when calculating $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, a large number of states must be
accounted for in the sum of Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}.
Reaching a high saturation of $\varsigma$ is easier said than done, as while $1 - \varsigma$ decreases linearly with the
log of the number of states (see Fig~\ref{fig:overlap_vs_numstates}), this relation only happens until $\varsigma
\approx 0.96$, and the number of states required for a given $\varsigma$ strongly increases with system size, as seen in
Fig~\ref{fig:states_overlap_systemsize}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/overlap_vs_numstates.png}
\caption{\label{fig:overlap_vs_numstates}
The number of states required for a range of saturation values for $\varsigma$.
We show the semi-log plot of how $\varsigma$ changes with the number of states.
The progression is linear until a $\varsigma \approx 0.96$, at which point many more states are required to provide
further accuracy.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/states_overlap_systemsize.png}
\caption{\label{fig:states_overlap_systemsize}
The number of states required for a range of saturation values for $\varsigma$.
We show the semi-log plot of how the number of states required for a given $\varsigma$ changes with increasing system
size, the progression is not linear, so this is not an exponential relation, but the plot does show a large increase in
the number of states required as larger systems are used.
}
\end{figure}
Because of the computational restrictions on the number of states used and the system size (see
Appendix~\ref{sec:code_details}),
calculating the impurity's momentum against time is prohibitively expensive for a number of states $ N_{s} > 20000 $ and a
system size of $ N = 99 $, which gives an overlap of $\varsigma \approx 0.97$ which is not a large enough $\varsigma$ for
confidence in our results from the saturation itself.
This is a problem, as for those systems where we can reach $\varsigma = 0.99$ some of the more interesting features of the
system are hidden by finite size effects (see Sections~\ref{sec:revivals}~\ref{sec:inf_time})
Fortunately, we find evidence in these smaller systems that a missing sum rule contribution this small does not change the
general shape of the momentum evolution, but rather introduces some minor variances, and a total downwards shift in the
momentum of the impurity as seen in Fig~\ref{fig:downwards_shift}.
While the normalisation in this manner has no rigorous mathematical backing, it is a useful approximation for values of
the plateau in a wider range of parameters than otherwise available.
Fig~\ref{fig:changing_overlap} provides more details on how a change in $\varsigma$ affects $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.9\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/small_N_changing_overlap_unnormalised.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:downwards_shift}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.9\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/small_N_changing_overlap.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:normalised_overlap}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{
\subref{fig:downwards_shift}) As $\varsigma$ is increased past $0.9$ to $0.999$, the main observable change in
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ is a downwards shift over the entire time range.
\subref{fig:normalised_overlap}) This downwards shift can be normalised out by the value of $\varsigma$ to provide
approximate results when the number of states required for a satisfactory $\varsigma$ value is too high.
}
\label{fig:overlap_shift}
\end{figure}
As our main focus in this chapter is on the momentum revivals, which are the feature least investigated in reference
\cite{Mathy2012}, the fact that these are stable once $\varsigma$ has passed $\varsigma \approx 0.9$ puts good confidence behind our
results.
As shown in Fig~\ref{fig:normalised_overlap}, normalising $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ by the sum rule saturation we have
reached goes some way to accounting for the difference in the plateau of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$.
This normalisation is done with the equation
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:renormalisation}
\widetilde{\expval{P_\downarrow(t)}} = Q -
\frac{\sum_{f_{Q},f_{Q}^{'}} e^{i t (E_{f} - E_{f^{'}})} \braket{FS|f_{Q}}\matrixel{f_{Q}}{P_\downarrow}{f_{Q}^{'}}\braket{f_{Q}^{'}|FS}}
{\sum_{f_{Q}} \abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}^{2}}
\end{equation}
which would provide the total and correct $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ if the set of states accounted for provided a fully representative evolution.
This extends the range of system sizes we can investigate to 99 particles, beyond what has been seen previously
\cite{Mathy2012,Knap2014}.
The additional range lets us view the evolution of the system for a much longer time without the intrusion of
finite size effects (discussed in detail in later chapters).
However, the normalisation is not sufficiently effective to allow the approach to be used for investigating systems that
contain more than about $99$ particles.
The dependence of the properties of the momentum on $\varsigma$ is further explored in Sections~\ref{sec:inf_time} and \ref{sec:flutter}.
\section{Overall Momentum}
\label{sec:overall_momentum}
With the previous justification, we can access a wide range of system parameters, and view how the impurity's momentum
evolution changes within this extended parameter space.
We reiterate that within our model we have three physical parameters: the system size $N$, the initial momentum of the
impurity $Q$, and the dimensionless interaction strength $\gamma$.
The difference in the impurity's momentum evolution when changing each of these parameters can be seen in
Figures \ref{fig:changing_syssize}, \ref{fig:changing_initmom} and \ref{fig:changing_gamma} respectively.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, keepaspectratio]{./pictures/changing_syssize.png}
\caption{
Impurity momentum evolution for multiple system sizes.
Plots showing $\widetilde{\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}}$ over systems of $21$, $45$, and $99$ particles with constant
$\gamma = 3$ and constant initial momentum of $Q = \frac{4}{3}k_{F}$.
Until the revival in the impurity's momentum, the evolution of the impurity is identical for all system sizes, the
revivals increase in period with a linear progression on the system size (see Fig~\ref{fig:revivals_vs_syssize}), and
they are the only finite size effect apparent here.
The consistency of the flutter and plateau is in agreement with~\protect\cite{Mathy2012}.
In this plot we ensure $\varsigma$ is consistent for $N=21$ and $N=45$, however we were unable to match the $\varsigma$ for
$N=99$, so we plot all data once appropriately normalised.
When not normalised by the value of $\varsigma$, the only noticeable difference is a total shift downwards in the entire
plot for $N=99$.
}
\label{fig:changing_syssize}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.9\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/change_initmom_high.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:change_initmom_high}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.9\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/change_initmom_crossover.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:change_initmom_crossover}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ over multiple values of $Q$, with a fixed system size $N = 45$ and interaction strength $\gamma = 3$.
\subref{fig:change_initmom_high}) While $Q > k_{F}$, increasing $Q$ decreases both the plateau and time to the momentum
revival (see Sections~\ref{sec:revivals} and \ref{sec:inf_time}).
\subref{fig:change_initmom_crossover}) As $Q$ decreases past $k_F$, the flutter goes away, which is a central feature of
reference~\protect\cite{Mathy2012}.\\
}
\label{fig:changing_initmom}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/changing_gamma.png}
\caption{
Change in $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ with $\gamma$ for fixed system size $N = 45$ and $Q = \frac{4}{3}k_{F}$.
As $\gamma$ increases, the revival period decreases, the plateau in the momentum decreases, and the flutter frequency
increases.
The change in the revival periods and the plateau can be qualitatively interpreted as an increase in the momentum
transfer to the background gas, while the flutter follows the progression described in
Equation~\eqref{eqn:flutter_equation}, formed from the argument presented in~\protect\cite{Mathy2012,Knap2014}.
}
\label{fig:changing_gamma}
\end{figure}
While there are many changes throughout the parameter space, there are consistently three main features of the momentum
evolution: the regular revivals, a period of non-zero relatively constant momentum, and the small scale oscillations in
this region (dubbed ``quantum flutter'' in previous work~\cite{Mathy2012}).
These features were described in reference~\cite{Mathy2012}, and the same work thoroughly discussed both the phenomenology of the
plateau and quantum flutter, and gave an argument for the physical cause of the features.
Though previous work has thoroughly investigated two of these features, we will discuss each of them in turn over the following
sections to provide a full description of the system as a setting for future chapters.
The next section will discuss the momentum revivals, being the least investigated feature of the system, the
plateau and flutter are discussed after in Sections~\ref{sec:inf_time}, and \ref{sec:flutter}.
Within these sections, we also show the change in $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ over the non-physical parameter $\varsigma$ (of which the general shape is
shown in Figures \ref{fig:changing_overlap_unnormalised} and \ref{fig:changing_overlap}) where relevant.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/changing_overlap_unnormalised.png}
\caption{\label{fig:changing_overlap_unnormalised}
The change in $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ over $\varsigma$ with fixed $N = 99$, $\gamma = 3$ and $Q = \frac{4}{3}k_F$.
Here a larger system size than previous is used, as the features which differ with changing overlap are sometimes
obscured by finite size effects.
As $\varsigma$ increases, the revival period is constant, the flutter frequency increases, and the plateau decreases.
The flutter frequency increases with increasing overlap, but reaches a constant value at a $\varsigma$ of about $0.95$,
while the plateau tends to some value, but has not saturated in the $\varsigma$ range shown.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/changing_overlap.png}
\caption{\label{fig:changing_overlap}
The change in $\widetilde{\expval{P_\downarrow(t)}}$ with $\varsigma$ with fixed $N = 99$, $\gamma = 3$ and $Q = \frac{4}{3}k_F$.
Of the two features that change with $\varsigma$, the plateau change can be almost factored out with normalisation.
}
\end{figure}
While the change in the momentum evolution with $\varsigma$ is not a physical property of the system, but a property of the solution
we are using for this model, it is still important to know how $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ changes with $\varsigma$, both in
order to gain insight into how the solution behaves, and because it is not always possible to reach large enough $\varsigma$
for a strong limit on the maximum error.
Knowing how $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ changes with $\varsigma$ means we can investigate larger systems with an
understanding of what errors we are letting into our results.
As can be seen in Figures~\ref{fig:changing_overlap_unnormalised}, and~\ref{fig:changing_overlap}, the revival period is independent of the last $0.1$ in the $\varsigma$, though both
the flutter and plateau undergo changes.
While some of the change in the plateau can be normalised out by using $\widetilde{\expval{P_\downarrow(t)}}$ in place of
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ as described in Section~\ref{sec:justification}, we have no way to convert the flutter of an
under-saturated $\varsigma$ to what would occur with perfect saturation.
\clearpage
\section{Momentum Revivals}
\label{sec:revivals}
Of the three main features in $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, the momentum plateau and the flutter are features present in the
thermodynamic limit of $N \to \infty$ with constant $\nicefrac{N}{L}$, while the revivals in the momentum are finite size effects
which can only be seen in systems small enough for the given parameters and time range.
While these revivals would not be present in a macroscopic scale gas, they're relevant in experiment, which often use
gases of the same order of magnitude $N$ as we can numerically probe~\cite{Kinoshita2005,Fertig2005,Palzer2009,Trotzky2011}.
The momentum revivals can be problematic, as they can mask the evolution of the other momentum features for smaller system
sizes, but they are an interesting feature themselves which have not yet been thoroughly investigated.
From a semi-classical argument, we can attribute the cause of the momentum revivals to the finite size of the system, with the
momentum packet put into the background gas by the impurity moving through the gas until it reaches and excites the impurity
again.
Were there hard boundaries in the system, the time this effect should appear would be influenced by the initial position of
the impurity; however in our model, the periodic boundary conditions give us translational invariance, which means the time
period of the momentum revivals is only determined by the physical parameters of the system that we have previously
discussed. If we take the revival period as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:revival_estimate}
t_{rev} \approx \frac{L}{2 p_{relative}}
\end{equation}
where $t_{rev}$ is the revival period, $L$ is the length of the system, and $p_{relative} = Q - 2p$ (for $p$ representing the
value of the plateau seen) is the momentum in the packet put into the background gas relative to that of the impurity's
plateau, we can see this predicts a linear change in revival period with increasing system size, which matches what we
see in Figure~\ref{fig:changing_syssize}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/revivals_vs_syssize.png}
\caption{\label{fig:revivals_vs_syssize}
The progression of the revival period $t_{rev}$ with changing system size $N$ increases linearly, which is in good
agreement with Eqn~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate}, and shows how the revivals are a finite size effect, diverging as
$N \to \infty$.
This plot was created with $Q = \nicefrac{4 k_{F}}{3}, \gamma = 3$, but the particulars of how $\gamma$ is set to its
value are important for the prediction of Equation~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate}.
We find empirically, that fixing $\nicefrac{L}{N} = 2, g = 3$ gives the best predictions for
Eqn~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate}, but for $\nicefrac{L}{N} = 3, g = 2$ (as an example) the estimations are further off.
}
\end{figure}
A similar increase in revival period and qualitative argument for the increase with system size was presented in
\cite{Mathy2012sup}, but was not fully explored.
When this equation is applied to describe the change in the revivals over initial momentum $Q$ and the interaction strength
$\gamma$ it qualitatively matches what we see, the change in momentum passed to the background gas contains most of the
non-linearity of these changes.
Though it qualitatively reproduces changes for most parameters this prediction is far from perfect, completely neglecting the
fact that $\gamma$ can change with both $g$ and $L$, and failing to even qualitatively predict the progression for a low initial
momentum $Q > k_{F}$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:revivals_vs_initmom}).
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/revivals_vs_initmom.png}
\caption{\label{fig:revivals_vs_initmom}
The change with $Q$ of the revival period $t_{rev}$ progresses in a non-trivial manner, mostly following the progression
of the momentum plateau (to be shown in Section~\ref{sec:inf_time}, see Figure~\ref{fig:infmom_vs_initmom}).
For a low initial momentum $Q < k_{F}$, the approximation in Eqn~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate} is very poor, failing to
even qualitatively reproduce the progression, but as the initial momentum becomes greater than the Fermi momentum it
gives a better prediction.
Note the estimated revival periods for $Q = \frac{38}{45}k_{F}$ are not shown as they are greater than $1000t_{F}$, once again
demonstrating this estimate is not useful for a low initial momentum.
As with Figures~\ref{fig:revivals_vs_syssize} and~\ref{fig:revivals_vs_gamma}, the choice of how to set $\gamma$ is
important for this prediction.
The current plot was created with $\nicefrac{L}{N} = 2$ for the red points, and $\nicefrac{L}{N} = 3$ for the blue ones.
While in Figures~\ref{fig:revivals_vs_syssize} and ~\ref{fig:revivals_vs_gamma}, the choice of $\nicefrac{L}{N} = 2$ has
been shown to be the most accurate for $Q = \frac{4}{3}k_{F}$, this plot demonstrates a dependence of the optimum
choice on the initial momentum $Q$, though the exact relation is currently unknown.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/revivals_vs_gamma.png}
\caption{\label{fig:revivals_vs_gamma}
The change in revival period $t_{rev}$ with respect to $\gamma$, shows that Eqn~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate} qualitatively
reproduces the progression of the momentum revivals.
It should be noted that the revival period plotted for $\gamma = 1$ is highly suspect as the revival is not nearly
as clear as other points, having a relative peak spanning $100t_{F}$, we chose the highest point of this peak, which was
near its end.
Like in Fig~\ref{fig:revivals_vs_syssize} and \ref{fig:revivals_vs_initmom} the way $\gamma$ is set has a strong
influence on the accuracy of Eqn~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate}, with two example data sets shown, we fix $\nicefrac{L}{N}$,
at $2$ for the red points, and $3$ for the blue ones.
}
\end{figure}
In Figures \ref{fig:revivals_vs_initmom}, \ref{fig:revivals_vs_syssize}, and \ref{fig:revivals_vs_gamma} we show how the
choice of $\nicefrac{L}{N}$ and $g$ for a fixed $\gamma$ affects the prediction of Eqn~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate}.
The progression with $Q$ indicates Eqn~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate} should have some dependence on the initial momentum,
possibly defining the ratio of $g$ to $L$ with which $\gamma$ is formed.
The fact this prediction is dependent on the ratio of $g$ to $L$, while the actual momentum is only dependent on their
product shows the limitations of the simple interpretation that leads to Eqn~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate}.
Nevertheless the equation remains useful for systems with high initial momentum to show the qualitative progression when this
particular fault is sidestepped.
Figure~\ref{fig:medium_term_momentum_evolution} shows a longer term evolution of the momentum, demonstrating an initial
decoherence of the revivals with increasing time.
Despite this apparent progression in the short term, a plot of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ for $t \gg t_{rev}$ shows no
point where they have been fully dispelled (see Fig~\ref{fig:long_term_evolution}), with some ranges of $t$ still showing quite
strong revivals.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.9\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/medium_term_momentum_evolution.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:medium_term_momentum_evolution}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.9\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/long_term_momentum_evolution.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:long_term_momentum_evolution}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{
\subref{fig:medium_term_momentum_evolution}) A plot of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ for many revivals shows how the momentum
revivals initially decohere with increasing time, but the plot of very long $t \gg t_{rev}$ in
\subref{fig:long_term_momentum_evolution}) shows that despite this, the momentum at very long term values is not
completely stable.
}
\label{fig:long_term_evolution}
\end{figure}
From this information, we can see that for a finite system, the impurity never reaches a fully thermalised state, only ever
reaching the plateau before finite size effects set in.
As the period of the revivals is constant after a very low value of $\varsigma$ as seen in
figure~\ref{fig:changing_overlap}, we can infer the major contribution to this feature comes from states with among the
greatest $\abs{\braket{FS|f_Q}}$, as will be demonstrated alongside a thorough exploration into attributing eigenstate pairs
to each feature in $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ in Chapter~\ref{sec:subsets}.
\section{Infinite Time}
\label{sec:inf_time}
The fact the impurity's saturation momentum is non-zero is an interesting phenomenon.
While a non-zero infinite time momentum inevitably draws comparisons to a superfluid, it must be stressed that typical
superfluidity, like the Bose Einstein condensate, does not in general survive the transition to one
dimension~\cite{Buchler2001,Sykes2009,Cherny2012}, and what aspects do cross over are strongly dependent on the particulars of
the system~\cite{Astrakharchik2004,Brand2005,Cherny2009,Ovchinnikov2010}.
A non-zero saturation momentum has previously been predicted via ballistic transport, through an argument based on
the dynamical conductivity in a system very similar system to this~\cite{Castella1995,Zotos2002}, but the current feature is
different.
The discovery of non-zero infinite time momentum in the current system~\cite{Mathy2012} has been of immediate interest,
receiving further investigation and generalisation in
references~\cite{Knap2014,Burovski2014,Gamayun2014,Gamayun2014b,Lychkovskiy2014}.
This section provides results corroborating what was seen in reference~\cite{Mathy2012} and also discusses how the plateau
found and the theoretical infinite time value $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ relate to each other over a wide range of
changing system parameters.
We describe the change in both the apparent saturation momentum of the impurity, given by the plateau in
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ before the momentum revival takes place, and the theoretical saturation momentum of the
impurity from summing the time-independent contributions in Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}.
The time-independent contributions are all elements in the sum where $\ket{f_{Q}} = \ket{f_{Q}^{'}}$, as these state pairs
are the only ones where the difference in energy is identically $0$, and hence the exponential in
Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} is constant over all time $t$.
Particular care must be taken when measuring the plateau, as this is the feature of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ that most
strongly depends on the value of $\varsigma$ reached for the simulation as can be seen in Figures~\ref{fig:changing_overlap}
and \ref{fig:infmom_vs_overlap}, to mitigate this, we reach $\varsigma \ge 0.99$ where feasible, and for this section
we always normalise by $\varsigma$ achieved, in the manner described in Section~\ref{sec:justification} unless otherwise
specified.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/infmom_vs_overlap.png}
\caption{\label{fig:infmom_vs_overlap}
Both saturation measures have a near linear dependence on the value of $\varsigma$ reached in the calculation,
which can be normalised out to find the limit that would be reached for $N_{s} = \infty$.
The gradient of this progression changes with different parameters, but once the overlap is large enough,
$\varsigma \gtrsim 0.95$ then the linearity has always been seen to exist.
This graph has been plotted for $N=45$, $\gamma = 3$, and $Q = \frac{4}{3}k_{F}$ and does not normalise the results
by $\varsigma$.
}
\end{figure}
In an infinite system, the plateau would have the same value as $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$, but we find there is a
difference, which decreases with the size of the system $N$.
This difference decreases with increasing system size with a power law relation
as can be seen in Fig~\ref{fig:infmom_vs_syssize}, so the values would be equal in the thermodynamic limit as might be
expected.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/infmom_vs_syssize.png}
\caption{\label{fig:infmom_vs_syssize}
Changing time-independent and momentum plateau values with system size for constant $\gamma = 3$ and
$Q = \frac{4}{3}k_{F}$.
While the plateau value in the momentum momentum stays constant with system size, the theoretical value is initially much
greater than the plateau, and decreases towards it with a power law relation as $N \to \infty$.
Hence, while the momentum of the impurity is not the same as its theoretical thermalised value, this is a finite size
effect, and disappears as the system moves into the thermal regime.
This fact could be used to obtain an approximate value for the saturation momentum in a thermalised system by finding the
plateau of a much smaller system, using less computational resources than otherwise, but measuring the plateau is
intrinsically imprecise due to the flutter around it, so this is only useful as an approximation.
}
\end{figure}
From these differences, we have two different, yet reasonable, values for the infinite time momentum for those system
parameters our program can access, which means wherever we inspect this value we have two options to choose from.
Where there is a significant difference between the two values, we will mention both in the remaining text.
As noted in Section~\ref{sec:revivals}, the saturation value of the impurity's momentum changes with both $Q$ and $\gamma$
(see Figures~\ref{fig:changing_initmom}, \ref{fig:changing_gamma}, \ref{fig:infmom_vs_gamma}, and
\ref{fig:infmom_vs_initmom}), for both progressions the relation of the plateau matches what is described
in Reference~\cite{Mathy2012sup}, but while the progression of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ is qualitatively the same
with changing $\gamma$, it is noticeably different with the increase of $N$ and the change in $Q$.
As $Q$ increases, the progression of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ matches that of the plateau for $Q < k_{F}$, but is
very different once $Q > k_{F}$, where $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ increases with increasing initial momentum, and the
plateau decreases (Figure~\ref{fig:infmom_vs_initmom}).
This is another demonstration of how the behaviour of the system is different when $Q$ is above the Fermi momentum.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/infmom_vs_gamma.png}
\caption{\label{fig:infmom_vs_gamma}
How the saturation values are modified by interaction strength $\gamma$.
As $\gamma$ diverges, the saturation values both converge to a non-zero value, and to each other.
The progression of the theoretical infinite time value was discussed in reference~\protect\cite{Mathy2012sup}, and the current
plot shows the same progression.
While the plateau is independent of the way $\gamma$ is chosen, $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$, like Eqn~\eqref{eqn:revival_estimate} in
Section~\ref{sec:revivals}, does depend on how $\gamma$ is formed, with the current plot formed for $\nicefrac{L}{N} = 2$.
For $\nicefrac{L}{N} = 3$ the values of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ follow a progression of the same shape, but
between those shown in this figure.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/infmom_vs_initmom.png}
\caption{\label{fig:infmom_vs_initmom}
The change with $Q$ of both $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ and the momentum plateau.
Once the initial momentum is above $k_F$, the plateau decreases with increasing $Q$, while $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ increases.
There is a maximum in the momentum plateau for an initial momentum some point below $k_F$ as seen in~\protect\cite{Mathy2012}.
The difference between $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ and the momentum plateau increases with initial momentum, showing how the interplay between
states becomes more important for the impurity's momentum as the initial momentum goes above $k_{F}$.
The progression of the plateau matches what is seen in~\cite{Mathy2012sup}, the progression of
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ was not mentioned there.
This plot was created fixing $\gamma = 3$ and $N = 45$.
}
\end{figure}
While these two momentum saturation values can be drastically different for a chosen system size, as seen in
Figure~\ref{fig:infmom_vs_syssize}, they do tend to each other in the thermodynamic limit.
The manner in which the two values converge, the plateau staying constant as $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ decreases to meet it, is an interesting
characteristic, as it implies $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ for an infinite system will eventually reach the consistent
value of the plateau, and hence can be found by looking at the plateau for a smaller system.
This method can only provide an approximate value for $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$, as which point in the quantum
flutter corresponds to the limit of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ is not well defined, making selection of the plateau by
eye intrinsically imprecise.
\clearpage
\section{Quantum Flutter}
\label{sec:flutter}
Like the non-zero infinite time value, an oscillation in the momentum of an impurity is an effect that has been
discussed in other one-dimensional systems, usually from Bloch oscillations in periodic structures~\cite{Morsch2001,Zotos2010}.
References~\cite{Gangardt2009,Schecter2012,Schecter2012a} predicted via quantum hydrodynamics arguments based on the impurity's
dispersion relation, that application of a constant external force to an impurity would create Bloch oscillations in a 1D gas
without a periodic potential, though recently the range of parameters for which this result is applicable to a
Tonks-Girardeau gas has been under discussion~\cite{Gamayun2014,Schecter2014,Gamayun2014a}.
In contrast to Bloch oscillations, quantum flutter is present in a system with no external potential acting on the impurity.
Rather than an external potential, it has so far been attributed to the superposition of plasmon and magnon states with the
impurity at momentum $Q \approx k_F$ having lost any excess momentum to the background gas~\cite{Mathy2012,Knap2014}.
This physical argument results in an exact equation for the frequency of the flutter in this model~\cite{MishaEquation}.
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:flutter_equation}
\omega_{flutter} = 2k_{F}^{2}( \frac{1}{2} -
\frac{\gamma^{2}(\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma} +
\arctan(\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma}) +
\frac{4 \pi^{2} \arctan(\frac{2 \pi}{\gamma})}{\gamma^{2}})}
{4 \pi^{3}})
\end{equation}
Notably, the frequency is only dependent on one of the physical parameters we can change, so there should be no change with
system size and with initial momentum.
We show quantitative agreement with Eqn~\eqref{eqn:flutter_equation} to within the accuracy of our measurements in
Fig~\ref{fig:flutter_freq_vs_gamma}, and see the predicted independence on system size and initial momentum.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/flutter_freq_vs_gamma.png}
\caption{\label{fig:flutter_freq_vs_gamma}
The flutter frequency we see matches what is predicted from Eqn~\eqref{eqn:flutter_equation}, to a high accuracy, the
error bars on the period seen show the maximum and minimum value measured for the flutter, which come from finite
size effects obscuring the flutter.
Note there is no ``plotted'' point for $\gamma = 1$ as the oscillation was completely obscured by the revival (as can be
seen in Figure~\ref{fig:changing_gamma}).
Despite these difficulties, the flutter period we see closely follows the prediction from~\protect\cite{MishaEquation}.
}
\end{figure}
The dependence of the flutter on the non-physical parameter $\varsigma$ is between the dependence of the revivals in
Section~\ref{sec:revivals}, and the momentum saturation measures in Section~\ref{sec:inf_time}.
While the revivals reach a stable value for a relatively small $\varsigma$, and the saturation momentum requires the
$\varsigma$ to be very high (without using the normalisation from Section~\ref{sec:inf_time}), the frequency and amplitude of
the flutter both increase until they reach saturation at a $\varsigma$ value that is between those required for the other two
features (see Fig~\ref{fig:changing_overlap}).
As the flutter saturates before the values of the plateau and $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$, this implies there is a
subset of state pairs that are the cause of the feature.
From the fact the $\varsigma$ required for the flutter to saturate is much higher than what is required to see the momentum revivals,
we might guess the eigenstate pairs that cause of the flutter have a lower overlap than those determining the revivals.
This hypothesis shall be explored in detail in Chapter~\ref{sec:subsets}.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:observables_conclusion}
The features of the momentum evolution for our system are discussed and plotted for a range of system parameters.
Agreement is found for all statements in references~\cite{Mathy2012,Knap2014}, and a further discussion has been made on both the
momentum revivals and the change with the non-physical parameter $\varsigma$.
We push the limits of our program to system sizes of $N = 99$ (larger than seen before~\cite{Mathy2012,Knap2014}), showing
the quantum flutter and momentum plateau without interference from the revivals.
At this system size, we are feasibly restricted to $\varsigma \approx 0.97$ which is not large enough to provide confidence
in our results by itself.
For further confidence, we present an observation based justification in Section~\ref{sec:justification}, where we show that
for the systems investigated, the frequency of the momentum revivals reaches a stable point at a very low value of
$\varsigma$, while the flutter requires greater, but still achievable $\varsigma$ to stabilise.
Furthermore, while the plateau in the momentum requires a very large $\varsigma$ to stabilise, the consistency of how it changes
allows a normalisation for a reasonably accurate prediction of the plateau for systems with a low $\varsigma$.
The time between revivals in the momentum of the impurity is shown to be qualitatively predicted by a semi-classical argument
based on the momentum passed to the background gas and the size of the system, and though the revivals initially disperse, there
is no time where they have completely gone away.
\chapter{Other Investigations}
\label{sec:other}
\section{Thermalisation}
\label{sec:thermalisation}
The question of if and how a one-dimensional system thermalises from its initially excited state is interesting and
open~\cite{Kollar2008,Faribault2009,Polkovnikov2011,Banuls2011,Polkovnikov2011,Caux2012}.
Experimental data has shown that such systems do not always relax into a thermalised state~\cite{Kinoshita2006,Gring2012}, and
theoretical work on the subject has shown there can be a non-thermal steady state that a system can relax
into~\cite{Cazalilla2006,Rigol2007,Manmana2007,Kollath2007,Kollar2008,Eckstein2008,Mossel2012,Nessi2013}, while other work
has inspected the locality of this state and how looking at a wider scope affects conclusions~\cite{Gangardt2008,Cramer2008}.
Within this area the effects of dimensionality and whether a system is closed or integrable seem to be
strong~\cite{Rigol2007,Manmana2007,Barthel2008,Rigol2009,Mossel2010,Rigol2014}
Recently it has been argued~\cite{Caux2013} that in the thermodynamic limit, the expectation value of an operator
$\mathcal{O}$ which is local in space can be found using the projection of the ground state onto a single eigenstate of the
system $\Phi_{s}$ (see Eqn~\eqref{eqn:thermalised_timedep}).
Also that as $t \to \infty$ expectation values of observables in the system can be found from the expectation of that single
state~\cite{Caux2013} as shown in Eqn~\eqref{eqn:thermalised_inftime}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:thermalised_timedep}
\lim_{N \to \infty} \expval{\mathcal{O}(t)} =
\lim_{N \to \infty} \bigg[\frac{\matrixel{\Psi}{\mathcal{O}(t)}{\Phi_{s}}}{2 \braket{\Psi|\Phi_{s}}}
+ \Phi_{s} \leftrightarrow \Psi\bigg]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:thermalised_inftime}
\lim_{t \to \infty} \lim_{N \to \infty} \expval{\mathcal{O}(t)} =
\lim_{N \to \infty} \frac{\expval{\mathcal{O}}{\Phi_{s}}}{\braket{\Phi_{s}|\Phi_{s}}}.
\end{equation}
Here the item $\Phi_{s} \leftrightarrow \Psi$ denotes the previous term in the equation with terms $\Phi_{s}$ and $\Psi$
swapped.
The current system, being integrable, one-dimensional, and evolving from an initial state far from equilibrium, is a good
example of those that have been of such interest.
Though Eqn~\eqref{eqn:thermalised_inftime} was derived under assumptions that don't hold in our system, we can make some
numerical observations about whether it may hold for the momentum operator here, providing complementary information in a
similar system.
The first steps of such an analysis have been made, and our limited results are presented below.
While no claim has been made of the relative import of $\Phi_{s}$ one might guess that it is a state with a large
contribution to the momentum of the impurity, so looking only at those states with a single pseudo excitation seems a
reasonable starting point.
Plotting $\expval{P_{\uparrow}}{\Phi_{s}}$ against $\abs{\braket{FS|f_Q}}$ for each such eigenstate found in the system
gives the graph shown in Fig~\ref{fig:thermalisation_scatter_graph}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/thermalisation_scatter_graph.png}
\caption{\label{fig:thermalisation_scatter_graph}
Distribution of each state's momentum contribution, and the weight that contribution has.
This plot is limited to states that are singly excited for clarity, as the structure in states with extra excitations
can't be seen at this scale.
The red line shows the time-independent contribution of all states, and the green line denotes the plateau seen in the
momentum.
While there are states that have the momentum which would occur at infinite time (whichever of the two definitions we
use), there is no obvious feature in the distribution around this point.
}
\end{figure}
While there clearly are states whose momenta are near the two values for infinite time momentum we have (the plateau on our
plots and the theoretical $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$), none have a particularly notable $\abs{\braket{FS|f_Q}}$, and
there is no obvious feature leading to some state we can take as an initial guess for $\Phi{s}$.
Though these plots don't provide any conclusive data on the thermalisation hypothesis, they do give some more information
about the structure of the singly excited eigenstates.
We can see the states in this subset are bounded in momentum, and those states where the impurity has a positive
momentum (i.e. the impurity is travelling in the same direction as it was initially going) have a greater
$\abs{\braket{FS|f_Q}}^{2}$ on average than those where it is negative.
This asymmetry can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:thermalisation_histogram_sum}, which shows a much stronger directionality than
is obvious in Figure~\ref{fig:thermalisation_scatter_graph}, Figure~\ref{fig:thermalisation_histogram_sum} shows the import
of each range of momentum, plotting a histogram showing the value of the equation
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:histogram_sum}
\sigma = \sum_{f_{Q}} \expval{P_{\uparrow}}{f_{Q}} |\braket{FS|f_{Q}}|^{2}
\end{equation}
for each bucket, where the sum is over those $\ket{f_{Q}}$ whose momentum is within the bucket's range.
Not only does this figure show a very strong directionality, but it also demonstrates two separate progressions in $\sigma$:
one that follows the contribution of the main branch, and another from all states in different branches of
Fig~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/thermalisation_histogram_sum.png}
\caption{\label{fig:thermalisation_histogram_sum}
Contribution to infinite time momentum from singly excited states.
Each bar is the sum of the $\abs{\braket{FS|f_Q}}^{2}$ for the states in that region, the red vertical line denotes the
infinite time contributions from all states, and the green line denotes the position of the plateau seen when the total
momentum against time is plotted.
While the contributions increase markedly near the upper bound on the momentum, the peak is slightly beforehand.
There are two apparent contributions: one from the progression of the most important family, and one from others, but
both have a peak at the same point.
}
\end{figure}
While there is a much stronger positive contribution to the impurity's momentum seen by accounting for the importance of each
state there are actually more eigenstates where the impurity has a negative momentum than otherwise.
We show this in Figure~\ref{fig:thermalisation_count_histogram}, which plots the number of states over the same buckets as
used for Figure~\ref{fig:thermalisation_histogram_sum}.
It can be seen in this figure that while there are peaks in the number of states at both bounds in the momentum, the number
of states near the negative bound is much larger than at the positive one.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/thermalisation_count_histogram.png}
\caption{\label{fig:thermalisation_count_histogram}
Distribution of the singly excited states across their expectation values of the impurity's momentum.
Each bar represents the number of states within that region of momentum, the red vertical line denotes the infinite
time contributions, and the green line denotes the position of the plateau when the total momentum
against time is plotted.
The momentum of these states is bounded in both directions, and there are more states near these bounds than elsewhere.
While the number of states with negative momentum is greater than those with positive momentum, the
$\abs{\braket{FS|f_Q}}^{2}$ weights mean the contribution from positive momentum states is much greater
(see Fig~\ref{fig:thermalisation_histogram_sum}).
}
\end{figure}
\section{Asymptotic $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$}
\label{sec:pinf_vs_p1st_thermalised}
The discussion presented in section~\ref{sec:general_shape} on the representative nature of the contribution from the main
parametric branch (seen in Fig~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}) is necessarily restricted to the range of parameters our code can
reach.
Naturally, the question of whether this behaviour persists to the thermal regime of $N \to \infty$ has been raised.
As the computational expense of calculating the full $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ for a large system is prohibitively expensive
for system sizes greater than $N \approx 99$, we looked at how representative the infinite time contribution of the main
branch $\expval{P_{\downarrow}^{1}(\infty)}$ is of the total value as the system grows larger.
While the normalised values of the main branch seem to tend towards $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ for the range of system
sizes we can calculate the momentum evolution for, as we progress into larger systems, $\expval{P_{\downarrow}^{1}(\infty)}$
continues to decrease, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:pinf_and_p1st_vs_syssize}.
An analytical approach made by Oleksandr Gamayun~\cite{Sasha_told_me_so} has shown this is how they behave as the system
moves into the thermal regime $N \to \infty$, with the contribution of the main branch continually
decreasing, and eventually disappearing $\expval{P_{\downarrow}^{1}(\infty)} \to 0$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/pinf_p1st_vs_syssize.png}
\caption{\label{fig:pinf_and_p1st_vs_syssize}
How the normalised time-independent contributions to the momentum from the main family compare with the total as the system
size changes.
For those systems which we can plot the time evolution of the momentum (with $N < 100$), the infinite time contributions
of the main branch are almost representative of the total, and their representative nature increases with increasing
system size.
For larger systems, outside of this calculable range, the infinite time contribution of the main branch decreases further,
away from the total.
An analytical analysis shows that this progression continues, and as the system size diverges, the main branch's
contribution tends to zero~\protect\cite{Sasha_told_me_so}.
}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:thermalisation_conclusion}
While we have no conclusive results on the thermalisation hypothesis in our system, the code we have should provide an
adequate platform for research into the area.
Initial plots show that if some representative eigenstate $\Phi_{s}$ exists, it does not have a standout value of
$\braket{FS|f_Q}$, and the distribution of states does not show any standout feature near where it should be.
The plots created in order to find $\Phi_{s}$ shed some light on the infinite time momentum of the impurity, while there are
actually more states with a negative momentum, the impurity's directionality comes from the strong asymmetry in the
contribution to $\varsigma$.
The discovery in Section~\ref{sec:general_shape}, that the main family is representative of the total momentum contribution
without the flutter, should only be relevant to finite systems, as its infinite time contribution does not stay
representative.
As $N \to \infty$, then $P_{1}(\infty) \to 0$, but this progression is slow and can be discounted for the systems
investigable by our program.
\chapter{Eigenstates Responsible For Momentum Features}
\label{sec:subsets}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:subgroups_introduction}
In the previous chapter, we discussed how the impurity's momentum evolution changes with different system parameters, both
physical and non-physical.
It was seen that the non-physical parameter $\varsigma$ changed the three different momentum features in different ways.
The momentum revivals were determined at a low $\varsigma$, without any noticeable change for $\varsigma > 0.9$, the quantum
flutter was determined at a higher value, only settling at $\varsigma > 0.95$, while the position of the momentum plateau did
not show any signs of saturation while $\varsigma$ progressed to its asymptotic value.
This chapter presents an attribution of state pair subsets to $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ features, demonstrating how
different eigenstate subsets can be described, and showing which subsets cause which features of the momentum evolution.
Through this attribution of subsets to features, we will see why the different $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ features reach
stability at different values of $\varsigma$.
For this chapter we use a large system ($N=99$) for all graphs, keeping the initial momentum constant at
$Q = \frac{3}{2} k_{F}$, and the interaction strength constant at $\gamma = 3$.
A system size this large shows the patterns we will discuss much more clearly, as the number of states contained is limited
by the size of the system in all subgroups we identify.
Despite the varying clarity, all patterns shown in this chapter were seen across the range of parameters we can access with
our program, with the exception of low initial momentum $Q < k_{F}$ where some broke down, again showing the qualitative
difference between systems with large and small initial momentum.
We hence limit all discussions in this chapter to systems where the impurity has been injected with initial momentum greater
than the Fermi momentum, which is where the quantum flutter has been predicted.
\section{The Pseudo Sea}
\label{sec:pseudo_sea}
We now describe a concept called the \emph{pseudo Fermi sea} that we will use throughout the rest of the current work to
categorise eigenstates.
The concept comes from a representation of the Bethe roots, related to the Bethe momenta of Equation~\eqref{eqn:Full_BA_eqns}
by
\begin{equation}
z_{i} = \frac{L}{2} k_{i}.
\end{equation}
These roots can be represented as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:bethe_rapidities}
z_{i} = \pi n_{i} - \delta_{i}, \qquad i = 1, 2, \ldots, N+1
\end{equation}
where $n_{i}$ are a unique set of integers, and $\delta_{i}$ are bound within $0$ and $-\pi$.
Using this representation, the Bethe eigenstates are uniquely determined by the $N$ integers $n_{i}$, and as the energy of a
state is determined by the sum of the squares of $z_{i}$, the ground state has the integers
$n_{i} = \{-(N+1) / 2, \ldots, (N-1) / 2\}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/bethe_roots_solutions.png}
\caption{\label{fig:bethe_roots_solutions}
The graphical solutions of the Bethe root equations in Eqn~\eqref{eqn:Full_BA_eqns} shows the validity of the
representation for the Bethe roots given in Equation~\eqref{eqn:bethe_rapidities}.
Each root can be distinguished by the range it is in, and as the gradient of the green line here is fixed by the
physical parameters of the system, then the set of ranges in which roots are found uniquely determine the roots
themselves.
}
\end{figure}
An analogy can be drawn between this set of integers and the Fermi sea, as you cannot have two identical integers
in the set $n_{i}$, and the ground state's set fills all the lowest magnitude integer values.
We hence refer to this ground set of integers as the \emph{pseudo Fermi sea}.
Following this analogy, any excited state must have a number of pseudo particle/hole pairs, where a \emph{pseudo hole} is
defined as an integer in the pseudo sea but absent in $n_{i}$, and a \emph{pseudo particle} is an integer in $n_{i}$, but
absent in the pseudo sea.
This analogy and terminology is not new~\cite{Caux2009,Mathy2012sup}, but provides some very fitting terms to define the
eigenstate pair patterns that make up the bulk of this chapter.
\section{Eigenstate Families}
\label{sec:state_families}
The plot of energy against $\log_{10}(\abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}^{2})$ of each eigenstate shown in Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}
shows some clear branches, with a few having a much greater contribution to $\varsigma$ than others~\cite{Burovski2014}.
In Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}, (which shows the same type of plot as seen in~\cite{Burovski2014}) each branch consists
of two parametric families, consisting of states sharing a pseudo hole.
When the pseudo hole of an eigenstate is $\nicefrac{(N-1)}{2}$, it is in the branch with the greatest average overlap.
If the pseudo hole is $\nicefrac{(N-1)}{2} - 1$ then the eigenstate is in the second most important branch, and this pattern
continues for all positive pseudo holes.
The other family in each branch is given by those states with a matching \emph{negative} pseudo hole, so states with a pseudo
hole of $\nicefrac{-(N + 1)}{2}$ are in the same branch as those with a pseudo hole of $\nicefrac{(N-1)}{2}$, and similarly for
the two families of pseudo holes $\nicefrac{(N-1)}{2} - 1$ and $\nicefrac{-(N + 1)}{2} + 1$.
Eigenstates with negative pseudo holes tend to have a much lower overlap than those with positive pseudo holes, with all bar
one family of these states below the cut off in $\abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}$ used for Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}.
The exceptional family consists of those states with a pseudo hole from the negative edge of the pseudo sea, at
$\nicefrac{-(N + 1)}{2}$, sharing its branch with the $\nicefrac{(N-1)}{2}$ family, which is the greatest branch in
Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/zhenya_parametric_families.png}
\caption{\label{fig:zhenya_families}
The plot of eigenstate energy against importance shows some distinct branches.
These branches are comprised of parametric families defined by the pseudo hole each related state shares.
For all branches other than the main one (at the top of the figure), the branch is composed of a single parametric
family, where all related states have the same pseudo hole.
The main branch consists of two families, one where the pseudo hole is on the positive edge of the pseudo sea,
$n_{hole} = \nicefrac{(N - 1)}{2}$, and one where the pseudo hole is on the negative edge,
$n_{hole} = \nicefrac{-(N + 1)}{2}$.
Each successive branch consists of states from a single family, whose pseudo hole is further inside the pseudo sea the
less the average $\abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}^{2}$, as schematically shown in the top left hand corner.
%
The most important states shown here have a single pseudo excitation, and as a single parametric family is followed from
left to right, the pseudo particle is increased by one for each element, the energy of each state being the sum of the
squares of Bethe roots $z_{i}$ where $ 0 \leq n_{i} - z_{i} \leq 1$.
}
\end{figure}
For example, if the pseudo sea spans the integers $\{-50, -49, ..., 0, ..., 48, 49\}$ then the main branch evident
in Fig~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} would consist of all states whose pseudo hole is either $49$ or $-50$, which corresponds to
two parametric families, one with the pseudo hole $49$, another with the hole $-50$.
Note that this graph demonstrates the individual states which contribute most to $\varsigma$ have a single pseudo excitation.
This is a particular case of a ``rule of thumb'' in the literature~\cite{Caux2009,Mathy2012sup} where the contribution to $\varsigma$
from states with a small number of particle/hole pairs is dominant.
These branches and families have been noted before, and it has been shown that in the asymptotic limit of
$\gamma^{2} \log N \to 0$ and $\gamma^{2}N \to \infty$ the states from just the main family saturate
$\varsigma$~\cite{Burovski2014}.
As we know a subset of states can determine the momentum of the impurity at infinite time, and there is a strong pattern in
the description of these states within the pseudo particle/hole terminology, a natural question to ask is whether there is a
subset within the transitions between these states, and description of that subset, that determine features in the time
evolution of the momentum.
We shall show how there are in fact two separate (though related) subsets of transitions between eigenstates that together
describe the momentum features of the system.
One of these subsets describes the overall shape of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, including the plateau at non-zero momentum
and the revivals in momentum, while the other describes the flutter that occurs on top of the plateau.
It is the separation of these subsets, and particulars of the state pairs in each, that cause the saturation of these
different features to happen at different values of $\varsigma$, as seen in Chapter~\ref{sec:observables}.
\section{General Shape}
\label{sec:general_shape}
When deconstructing the individual contributions to the momentum of a system, it is natural to investigate the Fourier
transform.
The particulars of the method we are using make this a trivial task, as it is the Fourier transform we start with, and the
momentum is calculated from there (see Equation~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}).
This also means that each point in the Fourier transform corresponds to a transition between a specific pair of eigenstates
which may then be inspected for any pattern in the pseudo particle/hole pairs that describe them.
A typical Fourier transform of our impurity's momentum is shown in Fig~\ref{fig:fourier_subgroups}, which has two
obvious features to the casual observer.
The first is the strong peak at $\omega = 0$ that comes from all contributions in Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} where
$\ket{f_{Q}} = \ket{f_{Q}^{'}}$, and determines $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ by contributing a time-independent shift in
the impurity's momentum.
The other is the series of negative amplitude peaks that occur at integer multiples of the revival frequency, with
decreasing amplitude as the multiple increases.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/ft_peaks_and_subsets.png}
\caption{\label{fig:fourier_subgroups}
The Fourier transform of the impurity's momentum with inset showing which state pairs cause each small peak.
The main plot shows the Fourier transform of the impurity's momentum against time.
Each point here is a contribution from a single state pair to the total $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$.
There are two strong features, the large peak at $\omega = 0$ and the set of negative amplitude peaks around each
integer multiple of the revival frequency.
Inset shows all states with a single pseudo excitation on the same axis as Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} (more clearly
showing the branches discussed previously), the coloured arrows show example state pairs for some of the coloured peaks
in the main plot.
In all state pairs from the coloured peaks, both states are in the main family (those not coloured grey), with a pseudo
hole of $\nicefrac{(N-1)}{2}$, so the difference between state pairs is only in the difference between the pseudo particles
of each state in the pair.
Transitions which give the contributions in the first negative peak of the Fourier transform are between states whose
pseudo particles differ by one, while transitions causing the second peak are between states whose pseudo
particles differ by two.
This pattern continues for all the different peaks.
}
\end{figure}
As the states in the peak at $\omega = 0$ have been discussed in other works~\cite{Burovski2014}, and we have presented our
own observations on these states in Section~\ref{sec:inf_time}, we now discuss the set of negative amplitude peaks and the
state pairs that make them up.
Each point on the Fourier transform comes from a pair of eigenstates.
Upon inspection of the state pairs that form these peaks, a simple pattern in the pseudo particle/hole representation can be
found.
All states, in all state pairs of these notable peaks, come from the main family in Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}, so they
all share with each other $N$ integers in the set $n_{i}$ and differ in the pseudo particle they have from their excitation.
Furthermore, each peak is formed by taking all possible pairs from this subset subject to the constraint that the pseudo
particles of the two states are a fixed number apart, where this fixed number corresponds to the integer multiple of the
revival frequency that the current peak will contribute.
For example, the first peak, coloured red in Fig~\ref{fig:fourier_subgroups}, consists of all state pairs where both
states come from the main family (i.e. whose pseudo hole is $\nicefrac{(N-1)}{2}$), and where the pseudo particles of the two
states differ by one.
Hence the pair of sets $\{n_{i}^{1}, n_{i}^{2}\}, \quad i = 1, 2, \ldots, N+1$ that enumerate each individual contribution to
the momentum in Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} and Fig~\ref{fig:fourier_subgroups}, are of the form
$\{n_{i}^{base} \cup \{p\}, n_{i}^{base} \cup \{p + n\}\}$ where $p$ is some integer outside the pseudo sea, $n_{i}^{base}$
is a shared set of integers, and $n$ is an integer defining which peak this pair is in.
This relation is diagrammatically shown in the inset of Figure~\ref{fig:fourier_subgroups}.
An initial analysis of the effect these peaks in the Fourier transform have can be done by viewing the contribution to
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ that each peak makes in turn.
These contributions can be seen in Fig~\ref{fig:fourier_contributions} and show that each peak combines to add a remarkably
smooth wave of period close to some integer multiple of the revival period.
Though the contributions have very good alignment for the first few revivals, it is apparent that they become misaligned as
time increases.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/ft_peaks_and_contributions.png}
\caption{\label{fig:fourier_contributions}
The contribution to $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ from each negative amplitude peak in the Fourier transform.
The main plot shows the Fourier transform of the momentum, highlighting each negative amplitude peak, while
the inset compares the contribution of each of these peaks to the total momentum evolution of the impurity.
The colour of each contribution in the inset correlates with the corresponding colour of the peak in the Fourier
transform, and these contributions are plotted on an axis of the same scale, but shifted for clarity.
Each peak adds a wave almost harmonic to the revival frequency, and Figure~\ref{fig:main_vs_total} shows that their
superposition describes both the plateau and the revivals.
Figure~\ref{fig:main_vs_total} shows this superposition of all peaks describes the general shape of the total
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, but does not describe the flutter.
Figure~\ref{fig:main_normalised_vs_total} demonstrates the contribution from these peaks to the plateau value of the
total momentum is proportional to the $\varsigma$ value reached when just accounting for the eigenstates whose
transitions form these peaks.
}
\end{figure}
Combined, the state pairs in all of these peaks plus each diagonal element from the main family (which make up the majority of
the peak at $\omega = 0$), constitute all combinations of states selected only from the main family.
This contribution is what is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:main_vs_total}, reproducing the general shape of
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, but not the flutter or the exact momentum of the plateau.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/main_vs_total.png}
\caption{\label{fig:main_vs_total}
Comparison of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ to the contribution from all transitions between states in the main parametric
family, which is equivalent to the contribution from all peaks seen in the Fourier transform.
This comparison shows how this limited number of transitions describes the majority of features in
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, their contribution provides the majority of the revival amplitude, and there is a non-zero
plateau in the momentum.
There are notable differences though: the plateau is not at the same momentum as the plateau of the total momentum, and
there is no quantum flutter around it.
}
\end{figure}
Because this subset of pairs forms all transitions between a subset of states, we can apply the normalisation from
Equation~\eqref{eqn:renormalisation} to see what momentum would occur were $\varsigma$ saturated by the main family alone.
When this is done, we see that the normalisation does not account for the difference in the momentum plateau, with a notable
gap between the normalised plateau and that of the total momentum, showing that this main family does not contribute
proportionally to the momentum plateau of the impurity.
While the main family does not accurately represent the total, the main branch in the graph of
Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} consists of two parametric families, one from either edge of the pseudo sea.
When both these families are accounted for, i.e. the entire branch is taken into account, the momentum plateau is much better
approximated, matching to within the variation from quantum flutter.
In both normalised contributions, the revivals have a greater amplitude than the total $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, which
implies that the main family/branch contributes relatively more to the momentum revivals than other states.
The fact the revivals are determined mainly by the transitions between states in the main branch, and hence states that have
a large $\abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}^{2}$, explains why the revivals are determined from a low $\varsigma$ onward, as was seen
in Section~\ref{sec:revivals}.
These states are the first to be accounted for, which means the momentum revivals have been found at a very early stage in
the saturation of $\varsigma$.
The effects of this normalisation, and hence the representative nature of the main branch, can be seen in
Figure~\ref{fig:main_normalised_vs_total}.
We talk of how ``representative'' a momentum contribution from a set of states is to refer to how well it recreates the total
momentum once normalised using Equation~\eqref{eqn:renormalisation}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/full_main_normalised_vs_total.png}
\caption{\label{fig:main_normalised_vs_total}
Comparison between the normalised contributions of the main parametric family, main branch in
Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}, and all states calculated for a typical system.
The normalised branch reproduces the plateau of the entire $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ quite well, while the
main parametric family does not. Both the normalised contributions from the main family and main branch have a greater
revival amplitude than the actual $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, demonstrating that they contribute relatively more to the
momentum revivals than other states.
}
\end{figure}
The representative nature of the main branch contribution to the momentum plateau is a useful feature, allowing one to find
the value of the momentum plateau only accounting for small subset of states whose description is known beforehand, meaning
the calculation time required would be less than the square root of what it would be otherwise.
Unfortunately, this feature is limited in scope.
While it exists for all system parameters we can probe with this program, in the thermodynamic limit of $N \to \infty$ with
constant $\frac{N}{L}$, the infinite time contribution of the main family tends to $0$ while the total
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(\infty)}$ does not (see Section~\ref{sec:pinf_vs_p1st_thermalised}).
It is of interest to note that the contributions from all the parametric families and branches seen in
Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} are similar, reproducing the general shape of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, however, the
amplitude of each contribution decreases with the importance of the states, and the resulting contributions are less
representative of the total.
The contribution of each branch normalised by Eqn~\eqref{eqn:renormalisation} is compared to the total momentum in
Figure~\ref{fig:normalised_branches_vs_total}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/normalised_branches_vs_total.png}
\caption{\label{fig:normalised_branches_vs_total}
Comparison between the normalised contributions of each branch from Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} and the total
momentum contribution.
Each contributes a similar shape to the momentum, though without the normalisation of each branch the shape of most would
not be visible here.
The gradual increase in the revival period can be attributed to the fact that the less important branches seen in
Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} have points closer together on the energy axis.
}
\end{figure}
While the general shape stays constant, there are notable differences.
The period of the revivals is slightly larger for lesser families, the normalised amplitude of the revivals decreases, and
the momentum plateau of the normalised contribution is further from the total.
This shows that these families with lower $\abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}^{2}$ not only contribute less overall that the main one,
but they also contribute less proportional to their contribution to the $\varsigma$ saturation.
I.e. when normalised by Equation~\eqref{eqn:renormalisation} their contribution to the total momentum is still less than the
similarly normalised contribution of the main family.
When combined, the contributions from all intra-branch pairs in the parametric families create a better
approximation of the momentum plateau than the main branch alone, but the normalisation applied previously cannot be applied
again as this contribution does not come from all transitions within a subset of states.
The good results obtained by normalising the contribution of states in the main branch of Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}
using Equation~\eqref{eqn:renormalisation} neglect the contribution coming from the majority of states.
Using the numerical observation that the value of $\matrixel{f_{Q}}{P_{\uparrow}}{f_{Q}^{'}}$ for a given state $\ket{f_{Q}}$
is greater when $\ket{f_{Q}^{'}} = \ket{f_{Q}}$ than otherwise, a better approximation of the total momentum can be obtained.
This approximation is made by taking the full contribution of the same subgroup of transitions as before, but rather that
normalising this contribution using Equation~\eqref{eqn:renormalisation}, other states are accounted for using just their
time-independent contribution.
While accounting for these extra contributions is much more time-intenstive, it produces a better approximation of the total
momentum evolution, especially near the momentum revivals.
This can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:shifted_approximation}, which compares the two approximations with the total, and again
in Figure~\ref{fig:singly_excited_shifted} where the same type of approximation is used.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/full_main_shifted_vs_full_main_normalised_vs_total.png}
\caption{\label{fig:shifted_approximation}
Comparison of the approximations gotten from normalising the main branch contribution via
Equation~\eqref{eqn:renormalisation} to that of adding the time-independent contribution of other states to the full
contribution of the main branch.
Accounting for the time-independent contributions of all states provides a better approximation around the momentum
revivals.
}
\end{figure}
This alternate approximation provides a better estimate of the momentum plateau at lower initial momenta $Q$, as shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:compare_infmom_approximations}, where various plateau approximations are presented for a range of different
$Q$.
\section{Flutter}
\label{sec:flutter_groups}
The last section showed that the overall shape of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ comes from all transitions where both states
come from the same branch of Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}.
This section will demonstrate that the oscillation dubbed ``quantum flutter'' is a feature resulting from pairs of states
where each is in a different branch.
While the Fourier transform highlighted the states most culpable for the general shape, we found no feature around the
quantum flutter frequency in any relation we looked at.
This is because the eigenstates from the branches discussed in the previous section dominated the structure of any plots
taking into account all eigenstates.
It can be reasoned, given that eigenstates with a single pseudo excitation are the greatest contributors to
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ and transitions between states in the same branch from Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} describe
the general shape of the impurity's momentum without the flutter, that the flutter may come from transitions between states
in different branches of Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}.
This conjecture is borne out in Figure~\ref{fig:all_inter_branch}, where the contribution of the inter-branch transitions can
be seen to match the flutter of the total $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$, barely contributing any overall shift of the impurity
from the initial momentum of $\frac{4}{3}k_{F}$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/all_inter_branch.png}
\caption{\label{fig:all_inter_branch}
Plot comparing the quantum flutter in the total momentum evolution with the contributions to the momentum from transitions
between state branches, and contributions from transitions between states in different branches, but sharing a pseudo
particle as highlighted in Figure~\ref{fig:flutter_states}.
The total quantum flutter is reproduced by all inter-branch transitions, and the restricted set of transitions between
states sharing a pseudo particle reproduces the frequency, and most of the amplitude of the flutter.
}
\end{figure}
The fact that flutter comes from these inter-branch transitions can be used to explain the observation that the quantum
flutter saturates at a $\varsigma$ of about 0.95.
The phenomenon of quantum flutter requires including many of the parametric families from Fig~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}, but
does not depend on any states that have more than a single pseudo excitation.
This means that a large number of states must be accounted for to describe the flutter, but these are states that are
accounted for first by the sampling algorithm of our code.
While this identification of the contribution to the flutter as the inter-branch transitions between singly excited states
does cut the computational resources required to investigate this feature, this is still a large subset compared to that
which we found was representative of the general shape in Section~\ref{sec:general_shape}.
We can find a much smaller group that still reproduces the flutter frequency using an analogy to the parametric families
discussed in Section~\ref{sec:state_families}, whose intra-branch transitions were shown to determine the general shape of
the impurity's momentum evolution in Section~\ref{sec:general_shape}.
Those representative families were defined by the set of states that share their only pseudo hole, and we find that
transitions between states which share their only pseudo particle (and have different pseudo holes) determine the flutter
around the momentum plateau.
Hence, the transitions which cause the majority of the flutter are between pairs of states that can be represented as
$\left \{\big(n^{ground} \setminus \{h\}\big) \cup \{p\}, \big(n^{ground} \setminus \{k\}\big) \cup \{p\}\right \}$, where
$n^{ground}$ is the set of integers defining the ground state, $h$ and $k$ are integers defining the pseudo hole missing in
each state, and $p$ is the integer defining the pseudo particle that both states share.
In this representation, all three of $h$, $k$, and $p$ can change while the state pair is still in the set of contributing
transitions.
Examples of these sets are highlighted in Figure~\ref{fig:flutter_states}, which shows the same plot as
Fig~\ref{fig:zhenya_families}, but filters out states with more than one pseudo particle/hole excitation, and is cut off at a
lower $\abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}^{2}$.
While we could normalise the contribution from one of these sets, the combination of all transitions from each of these sets
is not normalisable, hence we show the unnormalised contribution to $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ from intra-set
transitions in black, and compare it to the unnormalised total $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ in
Figure~\ref{fig:all_inter_branch}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/flutter_state_diagram.png}
\caption{\label{fig:flutter_states}
All singly excited states with a $\abs{\braket{FS|f_{Q}}}^{2}$ above a certain threshold.
Some parametric families different to the type discussed before are highlighted in colours other than dark blue.
In these parametric families, related states share a pseudo particle and have different pseudo holes.
To avoid confusion, we will not refer to these sets as parametric families in the text.
Intra-family transitions from these families create the major contribution to the quantum flutter in
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$.
While one family of the type described in Figure~\ref{fig:zhenya_families} clearly contributes more to
$\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ than others, the contributions of the families shown here are relatively similar, and we
cannot isolate a single one as providing the main contribution to the flutter.
%
}
\end{figure}
The contribution from those state pairs whose pseudo particles differ by one, two, or more has the same oscillation as shown
in Figure~\ref{fig:flutter_states}, but with an ever decreasing amplitude as the pseudo particles are further apart.
When looking for patterns in the individual contributions before, the Fourier transform highlighted some contributions which
could be used to describe the general shape of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$.
Using the same technique on those contributions identified as the main contributions to the flutter is not as helpful, as
the largest contributions in the subset we have identified are not at the flutter frequency.
A more effective visualisation of these state pairs is to plot the real and imaginary parts of each term on the RHS of
Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} that comes from state pairs sharing a pseudo particle for a fixed time $t = 1$.
This plot is effectively a polar plot, with the radius of each point determined by the amplitude of the term, and the
angle anticlockwise from the positive real axis determined by the term's frequency.
Two examples of such plots are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:polar_plots}, one from a system with a high initial momentum
$Q > k_{F}$ and one with $Q < k_{F}$.
Note that in Figure~\ref{fig:polar_plots} we have limited the contributions to those with positive frequency for clarity in
the graphs.
This is done without loss of information, as each contribution is symmetric with respect to the order of the eigenstates,
having equal amplitude and opposite sign frequency.
These plots show another form of branch, and again, each branch consists of all entries in some parametric family.
Each family of state pairs in these plots share an eigenstate, and since in every contribution shown, the states share
their pseudo particle, moving along the family only changes the pseudo hole of the transitions second state.
The greatest amplitude families come from the greatest amplitude individual states, and all have a frequency that is less
than $\nicefrac{\pi}{4}$, so the visible states with positive imaginary and real parts all have positive amplitude and those
with negative imaginary and real parts have negative amplitude.
In Figure~\ref{fig:polar_plot_highmom}, we see how, despite the greatest amplitude contributions coming from states with a
much smaller frequency than the flutter, there is a large, negative amplitude peak around the flutter frequency.
This peak consists of those families whose fixed state has a pseudo hole on the negative edge of the pseudo sea,
i.e. the fixed state defining the new branch is in the negative edge parametric family of type described in
Section~\ref{sec:state_families}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.9\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/polar_plot_highmom.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:polar_plot_highmom}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.9\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/polar_plot_lowmom.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:polar_plot_lowmom}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{
The plot of the imaginary and real parts of the terms in Eqn~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time} for those state pairs found to be
major flutter contributors.
\subref{fig:polar_plot_highmom}) While the contributions with the greatest amplitude are far from the flutter
frequency, there is a strong peak around that frequency coming from state pairs where one state is excited from the
negative edge of the pseudo sea.
\subref{fig:polar_plot_lowmom}) For a small initial momentum $Q < k_{F}$, the structure of the Bethe Ansatz means states excited from the negative edge
with a positive particle can't exist, so the branches are lost.
In both plots, the red radial line denotes the flutter frequency.
}
\label{fig:polar_plots}
\end{figure}
Using the insight given to us by Figure~\ref{fig:polar_plots} where the greatest amplitude states with a frequency near that
of the flutter observed come from an even smaller subset of those state pairs identified previously, we plot the sum of the
contributions from transitions in this peak.
Figure~\ref{fig:negative_edge_flutter_states} shows just taking those state pairs where one of the states has a pseudo hole
on the negative edge of the Fermi sea doesn't actually decrease the flutter contribution further from that obtained when
limiting the state pairs to those sharing a pseudo particle.
With this final filter we have found a subset of state pair contributions that describe the flutter, at a lower
amplitude to the total, yet require accounting for a much smaller number of contributions in
Equation~\eqref{eqn:momentum_against_time}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/negative_edge_main_flutter_states.png}
\caption{\label{fig:negative_edge_flutter_states}
Comparison of the contribution from all state pairs sharing a pseudo particle, to the further subset of these state pairs
where one of the states has its pseudo hole as the negative edge of the pseudo sea.
The oscillation that relates to the flutter is the same between these two subsets, sharing both the amplitude and
frequency.
This shows how the state pairs contributing to the flutter in the subset of state pairs who share a pseudo particle all
have one state from the negative edge of the pseudo sea.
}
\end{figure}
It should be stressed that though this small subset of transitions reproduces the flutter frequency, there are other
contributors within the larger subset of inter-branch transitions that increase the amplitude of said oscillation.
When the initial momentum is only slightly greater than the Fermi momentum, these states contribute more to the amplitude
than otherwise, and though the transitions to and from states on the negative edge between others with the same pseudo
particle still reproduce the frequency, the proportion of the flutter observed is less.
In the previous sections we have shown that the main contribution to both time-dependent features of the system come from
transitions between states which only have a single pseudo excitation.
In order to stress this point, Figure~\ref{fig:singly_excited_shifted} compares the total momentum evolution of the system to
what occurs when assuming the time-dependent contribution of all states with more than a single pseudo excitation is $0$.
This is done by taking all transitions between singly excited states, and adding to that the time-independent contribution of
all other states.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/singly_excited.png}
\caption{Comparison of the unnormalised total momentum evolution of the impurity to the momentum evolution that
comes from assuming the only time-dependent contributions come from transitions between states with a single pseudo
excitation.
While the plateau of the approximation is not as level as the total, the majority of all features are shown, with both
the flutter and revivals presenting good approximation in both amplitude and frequency.}
\label{fig:singly_excited_shifted}
\end{figure}
The approximations presented in this section are generally only useful in the regime where $Q > k_{F}$.
The shape of the momentum evolution and the plateau obtained using the normalisation approach become unacceptably inaccurate
when $Q < k_{F}$.
However, the plateau approximation from discarding the time-dependent contribution of states outside the two main subgroups
identified here is still reasonably accurate, as demonstrated in Figure~\ref{fig:compare_infmom_approximations}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/compare_infmom_approximations.png}
\caption{\label{fig:compare_infmom_approximations}
The plateau values of different approximations and their progression with the initial momentum $Q$.
We can see that the approximation from normalising a subgroup defined via pseudo excitation patterns becomes
progressively less accurate as the initial momentum of the impurity decreases.
On the other hand, the approximations from taking account of the time-independent contributions of all states still
provides a reasonable plateau value.
Moreover, normalising the contribution found from only obtaining a saturation of $\varsigma = 0.95$ also provides a
reasonable plateau over all initial momenta $Q$.
}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:subgroup_conclusion}
While reference~\cite{Burovski2014} showed that in the limit $\gamma^{2} \log{N} \to 0$ and $\gamma^{2} N \to \infty$, states
in the main family saturate the sum rule, we demonstrate that for those system parameters reachable by our program,
transitions within these states describe the overall shape of the impurities momentum.
More generally, we show transitions between states in a branch contribute to the general shape of the momentum evolution and
transitions between states in different branches contribute to the flutter, with their combination describing the
non-negligible contributions to the time dependent motion of the impurity.
I.e., the set of contributions from intra-branch transitions, where a branch is defined by the pseudo hole of an excitation,
determines the overall $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ shape, while the contributions from inter-branch transitions determine
the flutter.
Within those transitions causing the flutter, the main contribution comes from transitions between state pairs where one state
has its pseudo hole on the negative edge of the pseudo sea, and both states have the same pseudo particle.
Similarly, the main contribution to the general shape can be found from those state pairs where both states are in the main
family.
A final decomposition can be made, as the revival frequency is seen from contributions between states in the main
family which differ by a nearest-neighbour displacement of one pseudo particle.
These observations can be used to approximate any individual feature of the momentum evolution with a much smaller
computational expense than has previously been possible, paving the way to more research on the physics of the system without
as much focus on how said physics must be calculated.
From the approximately ${N^{2} \choose 2}$ state pairs that come from all states with a single pseudo excitation, we have
identified two distinct subsets of approximately $N^{2}$ states which can be used to find each of the different features of
the impurity's momentum evolution.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./pictures/approximated_full.png}
\caption{\label{fig:total_approximation}
Comparison of $\expval{P_{\downarrow}(t)}$ to the sum over transitions between the two main state pair contributors
identified.
The inclusion of all transitions between states in the main branch matches the overall shape of the momentum evolution,
while the inclusion of those transitions between states excited from the negative edge of the pseudo sea and those which
share a pseudo particle with them, add flutter to the plot.
The approximate flutter does not reproduce the same amplitude as the total, and the value of the momentum plateau is not
matched, but the frequency of the revivals and flutter are accurately reproduced.
In this graph, the total plot required calculating 400000000 state pairs, while the approximate value required
calculating only 11865 state pairs, a computational speedup of about 4 orders of magnitude.
}
\end{figure}
|
\section{Introduction}
In a previous paper \cite{HR14}, we initiated a recursive scheme for constructing joint eigenfunctions $J_N(a_+,a_-,b;x,y)$ of the commuting analytic difference operators (henceforth A$\Delta$Os) associated with the integrable $N$-particle quantum systems of hyperbolic relativistic Calogero-Moser type. As mentioned in the introduction of that paper, the possible existence of such a recursive scheme was suggested by earlier work on related integrable quantum systems, including the non-relativistic Calogero-Moser systems and the Toda systems of non-relativistic and relativistic type. (In~\cite{HR12} we detailed the connections between these systems and their associated kernel functions.) Accordingly, our starting point owes much to this pioneering work. It includes various papers by Gerasimov, Kharchev, Lebedev, Oblezin and Semenov-Tian-Shansky; the work of this group of authors can be traced back from what appears to be the most recent paper~\cite{GLO14}. (The first recursive construction for the Jack polynomials seems to occur in Section~5 of~\cite{S97}; the author informed us that it dates back to his 1989 PhD thesis. Recently, we also learned about a recursive construction of eigenfunctions for the rational Calogero-Moser system due to Guhr and Kohler \cite{GK02}.)
In our previous paper we established holomorphy domains and uniform decay bounds that were sufficient for proving that the scheme provides well-defined functions $J_N$ that satisfy the expected joint eigenvalue equations. We also presented an introduction to the general setting at issue, and information on the hyperbolic gamma function and related functions that enter in the recursive scheme. We shall make use of this information without further ado, referring back to sections and equations in \cite{HR14} by using a prefix~I.
As outlined in I Section 7, numerous aspects of the recursive scheme, associated with conjectured features of the joint eigenfunctions $J_N$, remain to be investigated. In the present paper, we deduce a rather comprehensive picture of the joint eigenfunctions in the $N=2$ and $N=3$ cases. Indeed, we establish global meromorphy, a number of invariance properties and a duality relation, and undertake a detailed study of their asymptotic behavior. For the $N=2$ case, nearly all of the results were already obtained in~\cite{R11}. The point of rederiving them here is not only to render them more accessible in the present context, but also to switch from the flow chart of~\cite{R11} to methods and arguments that allow a generalization to $N>2$.
We proceed to sketch the main results and organization of this paper in more detail. With a view towards making it more self-contained, we briefly recall some key constructions and results from I as we go along.
Throughout the paper we take $a_+,a_-\in (0,\infty)$, use further parameters
\begin{equation}\label{aconv}
\alpha\equiv 2\pi/a_+a_-,\ \ \ \ a\equiv (a_++a_-)/2,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{asl}
a_s\equiv\min (a_+,a_-),\ \ \ a_l\equiv\max (a_+,a_-),
\end{equation}
and work with $b$-values in the strip
\begin{equation}
S_a\equiv \{b\in{\mathbb C} \mid {\rm Re}\, b\in (0,2a)\}.
\end{equation}
Section \ref{Sec2} is devoted to the step from $N=1$ to $N=2$. From I Section 4, we recall that the first step $J_1\to J_2$ of the recursive scheme yields the representation
\begin{equation}\label{J2}
J_2(b;x,y) = \exp(i\alpha y_2(x_1+x_2))\int_{\mathbb R} dz I_2(b;x,y,z),\ \ \ b\in S_a,\ x,y\in{\mathbb R}^2,
\end{equation}
with integrand
\begin{equation}\label{I2}
I_2(b;x,y,z)\equiv J_1(z,y_1-y_2){\cal S}^\sharp_2(b;x,z)=\exp(i\alpha z(y_1-y_2))\prod_{j=1}^2\frac{G(x_j-z-ib/2)}{G(x_j-z+ib/2)},
\end{equation}
where $G(z)\equiv G(a_+,a_-;z)$ denotes the hyperbolic gamma function, reviewed in I Appendix A. (Here and below, we suppress the dependence on the parameters $a_+$, $a_-$, whenever this is not likely to cause ambiguities; the dependence on $b$ is often omitted as well.)
Taking $z\to z+(x_1+x_2)/2$ in the integral on the right-hand side of~\eqref{J2} and using the reflection equation I~(A.6) (viz., $G(-z)=1/G(z)$), we obtain another revealing representation, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{J2cm}
\begin{split}
J_2(b;x,y)=&\exp(i\alpha (x_1+x_2)(y_1+y_2)/2)\\
&\times \int_{\mathbb R} dz \exp(i\alpha z(y_1-y_2))\prod_{\delta_1,\delta_2=+,-}G(\delta_1z+\delta_2(x_1-x_2)/2-ib/2).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Next, we note that the integrand $I_2$~\eqref{I2} can be written as a product of two factors, each of which involves only two hyperbolic gamma functions. Using the Plancherel relation and an explicit Fourier transform formula for factors of this type from \cite{R11}, we deduce a further representation for $J_2$ in Subsection \ref{Sec21}, which is related to the defining representation \eqref{J2} by the involution $(b,x,y)\mapsto (2a-b,y,x)$. As a consequence, we obtain a corresponding duality relation for $J_2(b;x,y)$, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{J2drel}
J_2(b;x,y)=G(ia-ib)^2 J_2(2a-b;y,x).
\end{equation}
Since $J_2$ has $S_2$-invariance in the variable~$x$ (as is clear from~\eqref{J2} and \eqref{I2}), this duality relation entails that $J_2$ is also $S_2$-symmetric in the variable~$y$ (which is at face value not clear from~\eqref{J2} and\eqref{I2}):
\begin{equation}\label{J2sym}
J_2(b;x,y)=J_2(b;\sigma x,\tau y),\ \ \ (\sigma,\tau)\in S_2\times S_2.
\end{equation}
(Alternatively, the $y$-symmetry can be seen from~\eqref{J2cm}.)
Subsection~2.2 is devoted to global holomorphy and meromorphy features. We recall that a simple contour shift procedure reveals that for $y\in{\mathbb R}^2$ the function $J_2(b;x,y)$ is holomorphic in $(b,x)$ on the domain
\begin{equation}\label{D2}
D_2\equiv \{(b,x)\in S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\mid |{\rm Im}\, (x_1-x_2)|<2a-{\rm Re}\, b\},
\end{equation}
cf.~I~Proposition~4.1. Moreover, starting from the representation~\eqref{J2cm}, we concluded that $J_2$ has an analytic continuation to all $y\in{\mathbb C}^2$ satisfying $|{\rm Im}\, (y_1-y_2)|<{\rm Re}\, b$, thus arriving at the holomorphy domain
\begin{equation}\label{cD2}
{\cal D}_2\equiv \{(b,x,y)\in S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb C}^2\mid (b,x)\in D_2, |{\rm Im}\, (y_1-y_2)|<{\rm Re}\, b\}.
\end{equation}
In Subsection \ref{Sec22} we improve these results by showing that the function $J_2(b;x,y)$ has a meromorphic extension to $S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb C}^2$, and we also determine the locations of its poles and bounds on their orders.
To this end, we make use of the entire function $E(z)\equiv E(a_+,a_-;z)$, reviewed in Appendix~A. Specifically, introducing
\begin{equation}\label{cP2}
{\cal P}_2(b;x,y)\equiv J_2(b;x,y)\prod_{\delta=+,-}E(\delta(x_1-x_2)+ib-ia)E(\delta(y_1-y_2)+ia-ib),
\end{equation}
we show that the product function ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ has a holomorphic continuation to all $(b,x,y)\in S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb C}^2$. Since the zero locations and orders of~$E(z)$ are explicitly known, this yields the information on the polar divisor of $J_2$ just mentioned.
Now in Appendix~B of~\cite{R99} a quite general result was obtained, from which these holomorphy results can also be derived. In fact, it has the stronger consequence that ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ is entire in~$b$ as well, and holomorphic for $a_+$ and~$a_-$ varying over the (open) right half plane. (The link to \cite{R99} can be gleaned from Section~3 in~\cite{R11}.) However, the methods used in~\cite{R99} give rise to insurmountable difficulties for the multi-variable case.
By contrast, our present method of proof does extend to $N>2$. It involves some simple key ideas that are at risk of getting obscured by the inevitable technicalities required for their implementation. At this point it is therefore expedient to digress and isolate these ideas. (The reader may wish to skip to \eqref{c} at first reading and refer back to the following when the need arises.)
A key ingredient is Bochner's theorem on analytic completion of tube domains. (See Chapter~5 of the monograph~\cite{BM48} for a detailed account of Bochner's original proof in~\cite{B38}.)
For convenience we use the definition that a tube ${\cal T}\subset{\mathbb C}^M$, $M\geq 1$, is any set of points $z=(z_1,\ldots,z_M)$, that can be represented in the form
\begin{equation}\label{trep}
({\rm Im}\, z_1,\ldots,{\rm Im}\, z_M)\in {\cal B},\ \ \ {\rm Re}\, z_j\in{\mathbb R},\ \ j=1,\ldots,M,
\end{equation}
for some subset ${\cal B}\subset{\mathbb R}^M$, called the base of ${\cal T}$. In the mathematical literature it is customary to have the imaginary rather than the real parts of the complex variables vary over all of~${\mathbb R}$, but this is clearly just a matter of convention; we actually need the latter convention for the dependence on the coupling parameter~$b$. We shall make use of Bochner's theorem in the following form.
\begin{theorem}[Bochner \cite{B38}]\label{BThm}
Every function that is holomorphic in a tube ${\cal T}$ with an open, connected base~${\cal B}$ has a holomorphic continuation to the tube ${\cal T}_c$ whose base~${\cal B}_c$ is the convex hull of~${\cal B}$.
\end{theorem}
We proceed to sketch how we use this theorem to deduce holomorphy of~${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ in $S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb C}^2$, restricting attention to those steps in the reasoning that have counterparts for $N>2$. This will enable us to shorten our account for the case $N=3$ in Subsection~3.2, and show what needs to be supplied for $N>3$.
First, we point out that the domain~${\cal D}_2$~\eqref{cD2} is a tube with respect to the variables $(ib,x,y)$, with an open, connected base
\begin{equation}\label{cB2}
{\cal B}_2\equiv \{({\rm Re}\, b, {\rm Im}\, x,{\rm Im}\, y)\in (0,2a)\times{\mathbb R}^2\times {\mathbb R}^2\mid |{\rm Im}\, (x_1-x_2)|< 2a-{\rm Re}\, b,|{\rm Im}\, (y_1-y_2)|< {\rm Re}\, b\}.
\end{equation}
Let us now assume that ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ has a holomorphic continuation to the tube with base
\begin{equation}\label{cBep2}
{\cal B}_2(\epsilon_2)\equiv \{({\rm Re}\, b, {\rm Im}\, x,{\rm Im}\, y)\in (0,\epsilon_2)\times{\mathbb R}^2\times {\mathbb R}^2\mid |{\rm Im}\, (y_1-y_2)|< {\rm Re}\, b\},\ \ \ \epsilon_2\in(0,a).
\end{equation}
Then it follows from the definition \eqref{cP2} of ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ and the duality relation~\eqref{J2drel}
that ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ also has a holomorphic continuation to the tube with base
\begin{equation}\label{hcBep2}
\hat{{\cal B}}_2(\epsilon_2)\equiv \{({\rm Re}\, b, {\rm Im}\, x,{\rm Im}\, y)\in (2a-\epsilon_2,2a)\times{\mathbb R}^2\times {\mathbb R}^2\mid |{\rm Im}\, (x_1-x_2)|<2a- {\rm Re}\, b\}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, the map $(b,x,y)\mapsto (2a-b,y,x)$ yields a bijection between ${\cal B}_2(\epsilon_2)$ and~$\hat{{\cal B}}_2(\epsilon_2)$, and both sets have a non-empty intersection with ${\cal B}_2$.
We can now invoke Bochner's theorem applied to the tube with open, connected base
\begin{equation}\label{cBunion}
{\cal B}_2^u\equiv {\cal B}_2\cup {\cal B}_2(\epsilon_2)\cup \hat{{\cal B}}_2(\epsilon_2).
\end{equation}
This yields holomorphy of ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ in the tube whose base is the convex hull of the union~${\cal B}_2^u$.
It is not hard to see that the latter base is given by
\begin{equation}\label{cB2h}
{\cal B}_2^h
\equiv \{({\rm Re}\, b, {\rm Im}\, x,{\rm Im}\, y)\in (0,2a)\times{\mathbb R}^2\times {\mathbb R}^2\},
\end{equation}
so that this tube is the holomorphy domain~$S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb C}^2$ announced above.
Specifically, for each $b\in S_a$, there clearly exist $\lambda\in(0,1)$, $b_-$ with ${\rm Re}\, b_-\in(0,\epsilon_2)$, and~$b_+$ with ${\rm Re}\, b_+\in(2a-\epsilon_2,2a)$
such that
\begin{equation}
b=\lambda b_-+(1-\lambda)b_+ .
\end{equation}
As required, we can therefore write any $(b,x,y)\in S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb C}^2$ as a convex combination
\begin{equation}\label{bcon}
(b,x,y)=\lambda\big(b_-,\lambda^{-1}x,0\big)+(1-\lambda)\big(b_+,0,(1-\lambda)^{-1}y\big).
\end{equation}
It remains to prove our assumption (above~\eqref{cBep2}) that ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ is entire in~$x$ for ${\rm Re}\, b$ sufficiently small and $|{\rm Im}\, (y_1-y_2)|< {\rm Re}\, b$. We do so by exploiting one of the A$\Delta$Es satisfied by $J_2(b;x,y)$, cf.~I Proposition 4.2. This involves a similarity transformation to the corresponding A$\Delta$E for ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$, which leads to coefficients involving the (rational) gamma function, cf.~Lemma~\ref{Lemma:cP2eigeeq}.
In Subsection~2.3 we collect results concerning the asymptotic behavior of a function ${\rm E}_2(b;x,y)$ that is another similarity transform of~$J_2(b;x,y)$. To sketch these results, we first recall the generalized Harish-Chandra $c$-function
\begin{equation}\label{c}
c(b;z)\equiv \frac{G(z+ia-ib)}{G(z+ia)},
\end{equation}
and its multivariate version
\begin{equation}\label{CN}
C_N(b;x)\equiv \prod_{1\leq j<k\leq N}c(b;x_j-x_k),\ \ \ N\geq 2.
\end{equation}
Introducing the phase function
\begin{equation}\label{phi}
\phi(b)\equiv \exp(i\alpha b(b-2a)/4),
\end{equation}
the pertinent $J_2$-cousin is given by
\begin{equation}\label{rE2}
{\rm E}_2(b;x,y)\equiv \frac{\phi(b)G(ib-ia)}{\sqrt{a_+a_-}}\frac{J_2(b;x,y)}{C_2(b;x)C_2(2a-b;y)}.
\end{equation}
This function is particularly suitable for Hilbert space purposes. We deduce its dominant asymptotics for $y_1-y_2\to\infty$, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{rE2as}
{\rm E}_2(b;x,y)\sim {\rm E}_2^{{\rm as}}(b;x,y)\equiv \exp(i\alpha(x_1y_1+x_2y_2))-u(b;x_2-x_1)\exp(i\alpha(x_2y_1+x_1y_2)),
\end{equation}
where $u$ is the scattering function,
\begin{equation}\label{u}
u(b;z)\equiv -\frac{c(b;z)}{c(b;-z)}=-\prod_{\delta=+,-}\frac{G(z+\delta i(a-b))}{G(z+\delta ia)},
\end{equation}
and we obtain a bound on the remainder, cf.~Proposition~\ref{Prop:rE2as}. In Proposition~\ref{Prop:rE2b} we also establish a uniform bound on ${\rm E}_2(b;x,y)$ for $(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb R}^2$ satisfying ${\rm Im}\, (x_1-x_2)\in(-a_s,0]$ and $y_1-y_2\geq 0$, which is needed to handle the $N=3$ case.
Section \ref{Sec3} is concerned with the step from $N = 2$ to $N = 3$. It is structured in parallel with Section~2, but several new ingredients and technical difficulties arise.
To begin with, we recall that to construct $J_3$ from~$J_2$ in I Section 5, we started from the integrand
\begin{equation}\label{I3}
I_3(b;x,y,z)\equiv {\cal S}^\sharp_3(b;x,z)W_2(b;z)J_2(b;z,(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3)),
\end{equation}
with weight function
\begin{equation}\label{W2}
W_2(b;z)\equiv 1/C_2(b;z)C_2(b;-z),
\end{equation}
and kernel function
\begin{equation}\label{cS3}
{\cal S}^\sharp_3(b;x,z)\equiv\prod_{j=1}^3\prod_{k=1}^2\frac{G(x_j-z_k-ib/2)}{G(x_j-z_k+ib/2)}.
\end{equation}
More precisely, from I (5.6) we have the representation
\begin{equation}\label{J3}
J_3(b;x,y) = \exp(i\alpha y_3(x_1+x_2+x_3))\int_{G_2} dz\, I_3(b;x,y,z),\ \ \ b\in S_a,\ x,y\in{\mathbb R}^3,
\end{equation}
where we have introduced the `Weyl chamber',
\begin{equation}
G_2\equiv \{z\in{\mathbb R}^2\mid z_2<z_1\}.
\end{equation}
To derive the counterpart of~\eqref{J2cm} (and for later purposes), we define
\begin{equation}\label{XY}
X_3\equiv \frac13\sum_{j=1}^3x_j,\ \ Y_3\equiv \frac13\sum_{j=1}^3y_j,\ \ \tilde{x}_j\equiv x_j-X_3,\ \ \ \tilde{y}_j\equiv y_j-Y_3,\ \ \ j=1,2,3.
\end{equation}
Taking $z\to z+X_3$ in the integral on the right-hand side of~\eqref{J3}, and then using~\eqref{J2cm}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{J3cm}
\begin{split}
J_3(b;x,y)=&\exp(3i\alpha X_3Y_3)\\
& \times \int_{G_2} dz\, {\cal S}^\sharp_3(b;\tilde{x},z)W_2(b;z)J_2(b;z,(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3)).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Note that the integral yields a function that depends only on the differences $x_j-x_k$ and $y_j-y_k$, $j,k=1,2,3$.
As a principal result of Subsection \ref{Sec31}, we deduce a novel representation for $J_3$, related to \eqref{J3} by taking $(b,x,y)\mapsto (2a-b,y,x)$. To generalize our approach in the $N=2$ case, we rely on results from our recent joint paper \cite{HR15} on product formulas for conical functions. Specifically, starting from the Plancherel relation for a generalized Fourier transform, we make use of the remarkable fact that $J_2(b;z,y)$ is an eigenfunction of the integral operator whose kernel is the product of the function
\begin{equation}\label{cS2}
{\cal S}_2(b;x,z)\equiv \prod_{j,k=1}^2\frac{G(x_j-z_k-ib/2)}{G(x_j-z_k+ib/2)},
\end{equation}
and the weight function $W_2(b;z)$, with the eigenvalue given explicitly by a product of $y$-dependent $G$-functions. (This can be viewed as the $N=2$ counterpart of the Fourier transform formula used for $N=1$.) We also need to invoke the closely related explicit generalized eigenfunction expansion for the integral operator on $L^2(G_2,dx)$ with kernel $W_2(b;x)^{1/2}{\cal S}_2(b;x,y)W_2(b;y)^{1/2}$ from~\cite{HR15}.
Once the new representation for $J_3$ has been established, the $N=3$ counterparts of~\eqref{J2drel} and~\eqref{J2sym} readily follow. Specifically, they read
\begin{equation}\label{J3drel}
J_3(b;x,y)=G(ia-ib)^6 J_3(2a-b;y,x),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{J3sym}
J_3(b;x,y)=J_3(b;\sigma x,\tau y),\ \ \ (\sigma,\tau)\in S_3\times S_3.
\end{equation}
(Note that in this case the $y$-symmetry is not at all clear from the `center-of-mass' representation~\eqref{J3cm}.)
Turning to Subsection~3.2, we recall that in I Proposition 5.1 we proved, by shifting the two contours in \eqref{J3} simultaneously, that $J_3(b;x,y)$ (with $y\in{\mathbb R}^3$ fixed) is holomorphic in
\begin{equation}\label{D3}
D_3\equiv\Big\{(b,x)\in S_a\times{\mathbb C}^3\mid \max_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}|{\rm Im}\, (x_j-x_k)|<2a-{\rm Re}\, b\Big\}.
\end{equation}
To conclude analytic continuation to $y\in{\mathbb C}^3$ such that $|{\rm Im}\, (y_j-y_k)|<{\rm Re}\, b$, $1\leq j<k\leq 3$, we arrived at a subdomain of $D_3$ for the dependence on $(b,x)$. Specifically, using the notation~\eqref{XY},
we needed the restricted domain
\begin{equation}\label{D3r}
D_3^r\equiv \{ (b,x)\in S_a\times {\mathbb C}^3 \mid |{\rm Im}\, \tilde{x}_j|<a-{\rm Re}\, b/2,\ \ j=1,2,3 \}\subset D_3.
\end{equation}
In I Proposition 5.4 we then showed that $J_3(b;x,y)$ is holomorphic in the domain
\begin{equation}\label{cD3}
{\cal D}_3\equiv \Big\{ (b,x,y)\in D_3^r\times {\mathbb C}^3 \mid \max_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}|{\rm Im}\, (y_j-y_k)|<{\rm Re}\, b \Big\}.
\end{equation}
With these preliminaries in place, we can follow the $N=2$ flow chart. Defining the counterpart
\begin{equation}\label{cP3}
{\cal P}_3(b;x,y)\equiv J_3(b;x,y)\prod_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}\, \prod_{\delta=+,-}E(\delta(x_j-x_k)+ib-ia)E(\delta(y_j-y_k)+ia-ib),
\end{equation}
of~\eqref{cP2}, this leads to the conclusion that the functions ${\cal P}_3(b;x,y)$/$J_3(b;x,y)$ extend from~${\cal D}_3$ to holomorphic/meromorphic functions on all of $S_a\times{\mathbb C}^3\times{\mathbb C}^3$, yielding as a corollary the locations of the $J_3$-poles and bounds on their orders. More specifically, there are natural $N=3$ analogs of the bases~\eqref{cB2}--\eqref{cB2h}, and the role of the $J_2$-duality relation~\eqref{J2drel} in the $N=2$ reasoning is played by~\eqref{J3drel}.
In order to prove the critical assumption that ${\cal P}_3(b;x,y)$ is entire in~$x$ for ${\rm Re}\, b$ sufficiently small, however, it is necessary to supplement the consideration of the pertinent ${\cal P}_3$-A$\Delta$E by a further inductive reasoning, exploiting once more Bochner's Theorem~1.1. (We intend to generalize this part of the argument to arbitrary~$N$ in the next paper of this series.)
In Subsection \ref{Sec33} we consider the asymptotic behavior of the function
\begin{equation}\label{rE3}
{\rm E}_3(b;x,y)\equiv \left(\frac{\phi(b)G(ib-ia)}{\sqrt{a_+a_-}}\right)^3\frac{J_3(b;x,y)}{C_3(b;x)C_3(2a-b;y)}.
\end{equation}
This involves considerable technicalities, with an important auxiliary result relegated to Lemma~\ref{Lem:aux3}. A highlight is that Theorem~\ref{Thm:rE3as} implies an explicit formula for the dominant asymptotics as $y_1-y_2,y_2-y_3\to\infty$, viz.,
\begin{equation}\label{E3sc}
{\rm E}_3(b;x,y)\sim {\rm E}_3^{{\rm as}}(b;x,y)\equiv \sum_{\sigma\in S_3}\prod_{\substack{j<k\\\sigma^{-1}(j)>\sigma^{-1}(k)}}(-u(b;x_k-x_j))\cdot\exp\Big(i\alpha \sum_{j=1}^3 x_{\sigma(j)}y_j\Big).
\end{equation}
Indeed, this formula amounts to the factorized scattering conjectured in~I~(7.6).
With a view towards generalizing our results concerning asymptotics to $N>3$, we also derive a uniform bound on ${\rm E}_3(b;x,y)$ for suitably restricted $(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^3\times{\mathbb R}^3$, cf.~Theorem~\ref{Thm:ubound}.
\section{The step from $N=1$ to $N=2$}\label{Sec2}
\subsection{Invariance properties and a duality relation}\label{Sec21}
We begin this subsection by collecting some invariance properties for $J_2$, which we have occasion to invoke below.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:J2sym}
For all $(b,x,y)\in{\cal D}_2$~\eqref{cD2} and $\eta\in{\mathbb C}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{J2ri}
J_2(b;x,y)=J_2(b;-x,-y),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{J2hom}
\begin{split}
J_2(b;x,y)=& \exp(-i\alpha\eta(y_1+y_2))J_2(b;(x_1+\eta,x_2+\eta),y)\\
& =\exp(-i\alpha\eta(x_1+x_2))J_2(b;x,(y_1+\eta,y_2+\eta)) .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
To begin with, we assume $x,y\in{\mathbb R}^2$.
It is clear from the reflection equation I (A.6) for $G(z)$ (namely, $G(-z)=1/G(z)$) that the integrand $I_2$~\eqref{I2} satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{I2ri}
I_2(-x,-y,-z)=I_2(x,y,z).
\end{equation}
Taking $z\to -z$ in the defining representation \eqref{J2}, the invariance property \eqref{J2ri} is immediate from \eqref{I2ri}. Assuming also $\eta\in{\mathbb R}$, we obtain~\eqref{J2hom} from the alternative representation~\eqref{J2cm}. Clearly, \eqref{J2ri}--\eqref{J2hom} are preserved under analytic continuation, and so the proposition follows.
\end{proof}
We proceed to deduce a new representation for $J_2$, which is related to \eqref{J2} by the involution $(b,x,y)\mapsto (2a-b,y,x)$. We start from the Plancherel relation
\begin{equation}\label{Plancherel}
\int_{\mathbb R} dz f(z)g(z)=\int_{\mathbb R} dp \hat{f}(p)\hat{g}(-p),\ \ \ f,g\in L^2({\mathbb R})\cap L^1({\mathbb R}),
\end{equation}
with the Fourier transform defined by
\begin{equation}\label{Ftrans}
\hat{h}(p)=\left(\frac{\alpha}{2\pi}\right)^{1/2}\int_{\mathbb R} dz\exp(i\alpha pz)h(z),\ \ \ h=f,g.
\end{equation}
Choosing
\begin{equation}\label{fg}
f(z)=\frac{G(x_1-z-ib/2)}{G(x_1-z+ib/2)},\ \ g(z)=\exp\big(i\alpha (y_2(x_1+x_2)+ z(y_1-y_2))\big)\frac{G(x_2-z-ib/2)}{G(x_2-z+ib/2)},
\end{equation}
the left-hand side of \eqref{Plancherel} coincides with the $J_2$-representation \eqref{J2}. We can calculate the Fourier transforms of these two functions by using the Fourier transform formula \eqref{Fform}. Indeed, setting $\mu=x_1-ib/2$ and $\nu=x_1+ib/2$, and invoking the reflection equation I (A.6), we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{ftr}
\hat{f}(p)=G(ia-ib)\exp(i\alpha x_1 p)\prod_{\delta=+,-}G(\delta p-ia+ib/2).
\end{equation}
Swapping~$x_1$ and~$x_2$, and taking $p\to p+y_1-y_2$, we deduce
\begin{equation}
\hat{g}(-p)=G(ia-ib)\exp(i\alpha (x_2y_1-x_1y_2-x_2 p))\prod_{\delta=+,-}G(\delta(y_1-y_2-p)-ia+ib/2).
\end{equation}
Substituting these expressions in the right-hand side of \eqref{Plancherel} and taking $p\to p-y_2$, we get the new representation
\begin{equation}\label{J2d}
J_2(b;x,y)=G(ia-ib)^2 \exp(i\alpha x_2(y_1+y_2))\int_{\mathbb R} dp I_2(2a-b;y,x,p).
\end{equation}
We are now prepared for the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:J2prop}
Letting $b\in S_a$ and $x,y\in{\mathbb R}^2$, the duality relation~\eqref{J2drel} and symmetry relation~\eqref{J2sym} hold true.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Comparing \eqref{J2d} to the defining representation~\eqref{J2}, we obtain~\eqref{J2drel}. Now $S_2$-symmetry in~$x$ is immediate from~\eqref{J2}, so $S_2$-symmetry in~$y$ then follows from the dual representation \eqref{J2d} or directly from~\eqref{J2cm}.
\end{proof}
For completeness, we add that $J_2$ has a further duality property, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{J2sd}
J_2(b;y,x)=J_2(b;x,y)\prod_{\delta=+,-}G(\delta(x_1-x_2)-ia+ib)G(\delta(y_1-y_2)+ia-ib).
\end{equation}
It can be derived from~\eqref{Fform} in the same way as before, by starting from~\eqref{fg} with the denominators swapped. Indeed, this yields yet another $J_2$-representation. Taking $p\to p+(y_1-y_2)/2$ in the latter, it becomes
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
J_2(b;x,y)=& \exp(i\alpha (x_1+x_2)(y_1+y_2)/2)\prod_{\delta=+,-}G(\delta (x_2-x_2)+ia-ib)
\\
& \times \int_{{\mathbb R}} dp\, \prod_{\delta=+,-}\frac{G(p+\delta (x_d-y_d)/2-ia+ib/2)}{G(p+\delta (x_d+y_d)/2+ia-ib/2)},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with $x_d\equiv x_1-x_2$ and $y_d\equiv y_1-y_2$. (The function defined by the integral is manifestly invariant under swapping~$x_d$ and~$y_d$\,; it is a multiple of the relativistic conical function ${\cal R}(2a-b;x_d,y_d)$, cf.~Eq.~(1.3) in~\cite{R11}.) Formula~\eqref{J2sd} easily follows from this representation.
The additional duality feature~\eqref{J2sd} entails that the function~$E_2(b;x,y)$ given by~\eqref{rE2} is invariant under $x\leftrightarrow y$. We believe that this self-duality feature also holds for the $N=3$ counterpart $E_3(b;x,y)$~\eqref{rE3}, but so far a proof of this conjecture has not materialized.
\subsection{Global meromorphy}\label{Sec22}
In this subsection we show that the product function~${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$~\eqref{cP2} has a holomorphic continuation from the domain~${\cal D}_2$~\eqref{cD2} to~$S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb C}^2$. To do so, we follow the flow chart outlined below~\eqref{cP2}.
We begin by noting that as a corollary of Propositions~\ref{Prop:J2sym} and~\ref{Prop:J2prop} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{cP2ref}
{\cal P}_2(b;x,y)={\cal P}_2(b;-x,-y), \ \ \ \mathrm{(reflection~invariance)},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cP2d}
{\cal P}_2(b;x,y)=G(ia-ib)^2{\cal P}_2(2a-b;y,x),\ \ \ \mathrm{(duality)},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cP2pi}
{\cal P}_2(b;x,y)={\cal P}_2(b;\sigma x,\tau y),\ \ \ (\sigma,\tau)\in S_2\times S_2,\ \ \ \mathrm{(permutation~invariance)}.
\end{equation}
Indeed, the $E$-function product in \eqref{cP2} is invariant under the reflections $z\mapsto-z$, $z=x,y$, the map $(b,x,y)\mapsto(2a-b,y,x)$, as well as each of the four permutations $(x,y)\mapsto(\sigma x,\tau y)$, $(\sigma,\tau)\in S_2\times S_2$.
From the second $J_2$-duality feature~\eqref{J2sd} it also follows that we have
\begin{equation}\label{cP2sd}
{\cal P}_2(b;x,y)= {\cal P}_2(b;y,x),\ \ \ {\rm (self-duality)}.
\end{equation}
However, we shall avoid the use of this property, since we are so far unable to prove the expected self-duality for ${\cal P}_3(b;x,y)$.
Next, as announced below~\eqref{bcon}, we are going to replace one of the eigenvalue equations for~$J_2$ in I~Proposition~4.2 by the corresponding eigenvalue equation for ${\cal P}_2$. Specifically, we focus on the A$\Delta$E obtained by setting $k=1$ and choosing $\delta\in\{+,-\}$ such that $a_{-\delta}=a_s$ (recall~\eqref{asl}). Using henceforth the notation
\begin{equation}
e_l(z)\equiv\exp(\pi z/a_l),\ \ \ s_l(z)\equiv\sinh(\pi z/a_l),
\end{equation}
this equation reads
\begin{multline}\label{J2eigeq}
V_2(b;x)J_2(b;x+ia_se_1,y)+V_2(b;\sigma_{12}x)J_2(b;x+ia_se_2,y)
\\
=\big(e_l(-2y_1)+e_l(-2y_2)\big)J_2(b;x,y).
\end{multline}
Here, we have $e_1\equiv (1,0),e_2\equiv (0,1)$, the map $\sigma_{12}$ swaps $x_1$ and~$x_2$, and the coefficient function is given by
\begin{equation}
V_2(b;x)\equiv \frac{s_l(x_2-x_1-ib)}{s_l(x_2-x_1)}.
\end{equation}
(To be quite precise, we have taken $(x,y)\to (-x,-y)$ in I~(4.10) with $k=1$ and used the reflection invariance~\eqref{J2ri}; cf.~also I~(1.21) and I~(1.9).)
We need to ensure that the $x_j$-shifts do not move the $J_2$-argument out of ${\cal D}_2$~\eqref{cD2}. To this end and also for later purposes (in particular, to complete the definition of the base~${\cal B}_2(\epsilon_2)$~\eqref{cBep2}), we introduce the number
\begin{equation}\label{ep2}
\epsilon_2\equiv a_l/2,
\end{equation}
the strip $S(\epsilon_2)$, where
\begin{equation}\label{Sep}
S(\epsilon)\equiv \{ b\in S_a\mid {\rm Re}\, b <\epsilon\}, \ \ \ \epsilon\in (0,a),
\end{equation}
and the domains
\begin{equation}\label{cA2}
{\cal A}_2\equiv \{ x\in{\mathbb C}^2\mid v_1-v_2>-{\rm Re}\, b\},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cA2n}
{\cal A}_2^{(n)}\equiv
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\{ x\in{\mathbb C}^2\mid |v_1-v_2|<a_s+{\rm Re}\, b\} , & n=1 , \\
\{ x\in{\cal A}_2\mid v_1-v_2<na_s+{\rm Re}\, b\}, & n=0,2,3,\ldots .
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
Here and from now on, we use the notation
\begin{equation}
v\equiv {\rm Im}\, x,\ \ \ x\in{\mathbb C}^M.
\end{equation}
Next, we introduce
\begin{equation}\label{D2p}
D_2^{(+)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x)\in S(\epsilon_2)\times{\mathbb C}^2\mid x\in{\cal A}_2\big\}, \end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{D2n}
D_2^{(n)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x)\in S(\epsilon_2)\times{\mathbb C}^2\mid x\in{\cal A}_2^{(n)}\big\},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cD2p}
{\cal D}_2^{(+)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x,y)\in D_2^{(+)}\times{\mathbb C}^2\mid |{\rm Im}\, (y_1-y_2)|<{\rm Re}\, b\big\},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cD2n}
{\cal D}_2^{(n)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x,y)\in D_2^{(n)}\times{\mathbb C}^2\mid |{\rm Im}\, (y_1-y_2)|<{\rm Re}\, b\big\},
\end{equation}
and note that we have inclusions
\begin{equation}\label{inclu}
D_2^{(1)}\subset D_2,\ \ \ {\cal D}_2^{(1)}\subset {\cal D}_2.
\end{equation}
(Indeed, since $b$ belongs to $S(\epsilon_2)$, we have $a_s+{\rm Re}\, b< a_s+a_l-{\rm Re}\, b$.)
We are now prepared for the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:cP2eigeeq}
Letting $(b,x,y)\in{\cal D}_2^{(0)}$, we have the eigenvalue equation
\begin{multline}\label{cP2eigeq}
{\cal V}_2(b;x){\cal P}_2(b;x+ia_se_1,y)+{\cal V}_2(b;\sigma_{12}x){\cal P}_2(b;x+ia_se_2,y)
\\
=\big(e_l(-2y_1)+e_l(-2y_2)\big){\cal P}_2(b;x,y),
\end{multline}
where the coefficient function is given by
\begin{equation}\label{cV}
\begin{split}
{\cal V}_2(b;x) &\equiv- i\pi\frac{\exp(i(2x_2-2x_1-ia_s)K_l)}{s_l(x_2-x_1)}\\
&\quad\times\left[\Gamma\left(\frac{i}{a_l}(x_2-x_1-ib)\right)\Gamma\left(\frac{i}{a_l}(x_2-x_1+ib-2ia)\right)\right]^{-1},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{slKl}
K_l\equiv \frac{1}{2a_l}\ln\left(\frac{a_s}{a_l}\right).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note first that for $(b,x,y)\in{\cal D}_2^{(0)}$ the three arguments of~$J_2$ occurring in \eqref{J2eigeq} belong to ${\cal D}_2^{(1)}$, and thus to the holomorphy domain~${\cal D}_2$, cf.~\eqref{inclu}.
Next, using the pertinent A$\Delta$E \eqref{EADE} satisfied by $E(z)$ and the reflection equation for $\Gamma(z)$, we compute
\begin{equation}\label{EpADE}
\begin{split}
\prod_{\delta=+,-}\frac{E(\delta t+ib-ia)}{E(\delta t+ib-ia+\delta ia_s)}&=i\pi\frac{\exp(i(-2t-ia_s)K_l)}{s_l(t+ib)}\\
&\quad\times\left[\Gamma\left(\frac{i}{a_l}(-t-ib)\right)\Gamma\left(\frac{i}{a_l}(-t+ib-2ia)\right)\right]^{-1}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Using this, the A$\Delta$E \eqref{cP2eigeq} readily follows from~\eqref{J2eigeq}.
\end{proof}
Now we are ready for the proof of the main result of this subsection.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:cP2ext}
The product function ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$~\eqref{cP2} admits a holomorphic continuation from~${\cal D}_2$~\eqref{cD2} to $S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb C}^2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We begin by proving holomorphic continuation to~${\cal D}_2^{(+)}$~\eqref{cD2p}. To this end,
we assume inductively that ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ is holomorphic in~${\cal D}_2^{(n)}$ with $n\geq 1$. (For $n=1$ the validity of the assumption follows from the inclusion~\eqref{inclu}.)
To establish holomorphic continuation to~${\cal D}_2^{(n+1)}$, we rewrite the eigenvalue equation~\eqref{cP2eigeq} in a more convenient form. Letting
\begin{equation}
\hat{{\cal V}}_2(b;x)\equiv s_l(x_2-x_1){\cal V}_2(b;x) ,
\end{equation}
multiplying \eqref{cP2eigeq} by $s_l(x_2-x_1)$, and rearranging, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{cP2id}
\begin{split}
\hat{{\cal V}}_2(b;x){\cal P}_2(b;x+ia_se_1,y)= &\hat{{\cal V}}_2(b;\sigma_{12}x){\cal P}_2(b;x+ia_se_2,y)
\\
&+s_l(x_2-x_1)\big(e_l(-2y_1)+e_l(-2y_2)\big){\cal P}_2(b;x,y).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Now $1/\Gamma(z)$ is an entire function with zeros at $z=-k,k\in{\mathbb N}$, so the function $\hat{{\cal V}}_2(b;x)$ is entire as well, with zeros located at
\begin{equation}\label{gamzeros}
x_1-x_2=-ib-ika_l,\ \ x_1-x_2=-2ia+ib-ika_l,\ \ \ k\in{\mathbb N}.
\end{equation}
This implies, in particular, that $\hat{{\cal V}}_2(b;x)$ is nonzero on $D^{(+)}_2$~\eqref{D2p}.
We now assert that it is enough to prove that the function $R_2(b;x,y)$ given by the right-hand side of \eqref{cP2id} is holomorphic for all points $(b,x,y)\in{\cal D}_2^{(n)}$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{vres2}
v_1-v_2\in ((n-1)a_s-{\rm Re}\, b,na_s+{\rm Re}\, b).
\end{equation}
Indeed, this restriction yields a subdomain
\begin{equation}
{\cal D}_{2,r}^{(n)}\subset{\cal D}_2^{(n)},
\end{equation}
whose $x$-translation over $ia_se_1$ equals~${\cal D}_{2,r}^{(n+1)}$, and~${\cal D}_{2,r}^{(n+1)}$ meets~${\cal D}_2^{(n)}$ for all points with~$
v_1-v_2\in (na_s-{\rm Re}\, b,na_s+{\rm Re}\, b)$. Thus we obtain a holomorphic continuation to all of~${\cal D}_2^{(n+1)}$, as announced.
To verify that $R_2(b;x,y)$ is indeed holomorphic in~${\cal D}_{2,r}^{(n)}$, we need only note that for $n=1$ both terms ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ and ${\cal P}_2(b;x+ia_se_2,y)$ in $R_2(b;x,y)$ are holomorphic in~${\cal D}_{2,r}^{(1)}$ by virtue of \eqref{inclu}, while for $n>1$ they are holomorphic in~${\cal D}_{2,r}^{(n)}$ thanks to the induction assumption. This completes the induction argument, so it follows that ${\cal P}_2(b;x,y)$ has a holomorphic continuation to~${\cal D}_2^{(+)}$.
Finally, we invoke the reflection invariance~\eqref{cP2ref} to deduce holomorphic continuation to the tube with base ${\cal B}_2(\epsilon_2)$~\eqref{cBep2}. We can then follow the reasoning detailed below~\eqref{cBep2} to complete the proof of the proposition.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Asymptotics}\label{Sec23}
In this subsection we undertake a detailed study of the asymptotic behavior of the function ${\rm E}_2(b;x,y)$ \eqref{rE2}.
To begin with, we note that the phase function~\eqref{phi} and scattering function~\eqref{u} satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{phuinv}
\phi(2a-b)=\phi(b),\ \ \ u(2a-b;z)=u(b;z),
\end{equation}
whereas the $c$-function~\eqref{c} and its multivariate version $C_N$~\eqref{CN} are not invariant under this $b$-involution.
Next, we invoke the $G$-function asymptotics I (A.14)--(A.16) to deduce the asymptotics of the $c$-function, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{cas}
|\phi(b)^{\mp 1}\exp(\pm\alpha bz/2)c(b;z)-1| \le C_1(\rho,b,{\rm Im}\, z)\exp(-\alpha\rho|{\rm Re}\, z|),\ \ \ {\rm Re}\, z\to\pm\infty.
\end{equation}
Here the decay rate $\rho$ can be chosen in $[a_s/2,a_s)$, and $C_1$ is continuous on $[a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a\times {\mathbb R}$.
It follows that the $u$-function satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{uas}
|u(b;z)\phi(b)^{\mp 2}+1|
\le C_2(\rho,b,{\rm Im}\, z)\exp(-\alpha\rho|{\rm Re}\, z|),\ \ \ {\rm Re}\, z\to\pm\infty,
\end{equation}
with $C_2$ continuous on $[a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a\times {\mathbb R}$.
Moreover, from \eqref{u} it is clear that
\begin{equation}\label{urefl}
u(b;z)u(b;-z)=1,
\end{equation}
and, by the reflection equation I (A.6) and the conjugation relation I (A.9), we have
\begin{equation}\label{umod}
|u(b;z)|=1,\ \ \ b,z\in{\mathbb R}.
\end{equation}
From \eqref{c}--\eqref{CN}, Proposition \ref{Prop:cP2ext}, and \eqref{GE}--\eqref{pkl}, we deduce that ${\rm E}_2(b;x,y)$ is meromorphic in $x$ and $y$, with $b$-independent pole locations
\begin{equation}\label{rE2ps1}
z_1-z_2=-2ia-ip_{kl},\ \ \ z=x,y,\ \ \ k,l\in{\mathbb N},
\end{equation}
and $b$-dependent poles located at
\begin{equation}\label{rE2ps2}
z_1-z_2=ib+ip_{kl},\ \ z_1-z_2=2ia-ib+ip_{kl},\ \ \ z=x,y,\ \ \ k,l\in{\mathbb N}.
\end{equation}
We collect further useful properties of ${\rm E}_2$ in the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:rE2prop}
For all $(b,x,y)\in S_a\times{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb C}^2$ and $\eta\in{\mathbb C}$, the function ${\rm E}_2(b;x,y)$~\eqref{rE2} satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{rE2ri}
{\rm E}_2(b;-x,-y)=u(b;x_1-x_2)u(b;y_1-y_2){\rm E}_2(b;x,y),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{rE2hom}
\begin{split}
{\rm E}_2(b;x,y)=& \exp(-i\alpha\eta(y_1+y_2)){\rm E}_2(b;(x_1+\eta,x_2+\eta),y)\\
& =\exp(-i\alpha\eta(x_1+x_2)){\rm E}_2(b;x,(y_1+\eta,y_2+\eta)),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{rE2d}
{\rm E}_2(b;x,y)={\rm E}_2(2a-b;y,x),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{rE2p}
{\rm E}_2(b;\sigma x,\tau y)=(-u(b;x_1-x_2))^{|\sigma|}(-u(b;y_1-y_2))^{|\tau|}{\rm E}_2(b;x,y),\ \ \ (\sigma,\tau)\in S_2\times S_2,
\end{equation}
where $|\sigma|=0$ for $\sigma={\rm id}$ and $|\sigma|=1$ for~$\sigma=\sigma_{12}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By global meromorphy, we need only check these features for $(b,x,y)\in (0,2a)\times{\mathbb R}^2\times{\mathbb R}^2$. The first two then readily follow from Proposition~\ref{Prop:J2sym}, using also \eqref{c}, \eqref{CN}, \eqref{u} and \eqref{phuinv}. Likewise, the last two follow from Proposition~\ref{Prop:J2prop}.
\end{proof}
In fact, as mentioned at the end of Subsection~2.1, we also have
\begin{equation}\label{E2sd}
{\rm E}_2(b;x,y)={\rm E}_2(b;y,x),
\end{equation}
but we shall not invoke this self-duality feature.
Thanks to these symmetry properties, we need only establish the $y_1-y_2\to\infty$ asymptotics of ${\rm E}_2$ to obtain a detailed picture of its asymptotic behavior. Indeed, from \eqref{rE2p} and the $u$-asymptotics \eqref{uas} the $y_1-y_2\to-\infty$ asymptotics easily follows, and the $x_1-x_2\to\pm\infty$ asymptotics can then be found via \eqref{rE2d}.
Recalling from I (2.11) the kernel function
\begin{equation}\label{cK2}
{\cal K}_2^\sharp(b;x,z)\equiv C_2(b;x)^{-1}{\cal S}_2^\sharp(b;x,z),
\end{equation}
it is readily seen that \eqref{J2}--\eqref{I2} and \eqref{rE2} yield the representation
\begin{equation}\label{rE2rep}
{\rm E}_2(b;x,y)=\frac{\phi(b)G(ib-ia)}{\sqrt{a_+a_-}}\frac{\exp(i\alpha y_2(x_1+x_2))}{C_2(2a-b;y)}\int_{\mathbb R} dz {\rm I}_2(b;x,y,z),\ \ \ b\in S_a,\ x,y\in{\mathbb R}^2,
\end{equation}
with integrand
\begin{equation}\label{rI2}
{\rm I}_2(b;x,y,z)\equiv\exp(i\alpha z(y_1-y_2)){\cal K}_2^\sharp(b;x,z).
\end{equation}
Assuming $x_1\ne x_2$ until further notice, we now shift the contour ${\mathbb R}$ up by $a-{\rm Re}\, b/2+r$, $r\in(0,a_s)$, so that we only meet the simple poles at
\begin{equation}\label{rI2ps}
z=x_m+ia-ib/2,\ \ \ m=1,2.
\end{equation}
(The bound I (4.5) ensures that the shift causes no problems at the contour tails.)
Introducing the multiplier
\begin{equation}\label{M2def}
M_2(b;y)\equiv \frac{\phi(b)}{c(2a-b;y_1-y_2)}\rho_2(b;y),
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\rho_2(b;y)\equiv \exp(-\alpha(a-b/2)(y_1-y_2)),
\end{equation}
and the contour
\begin{equation}\label{Cb}
C_b\equiv {\mathbb R}+i(a-{\rm Re}\, b/2),
\end{equation}
we are prepared for the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem:aux2}
Letting $(r,b)\in(0,a_s)\times S_a$ and $x,y\in{\mathbb R}^2$ with $x_1\ne x_2$, we have
\begin{multline}\label{rE2rep2}
\frac{{\rm E}_2(b;x,y)}{M_2(b;y)}\exp(-i\alpha y_2(x_1+x_2))
=\frac{1}{\rho_2(b;y)}\frac{G(ib-ia)}{\sqrt{a_+a_-}}\int_{C_b+ir} dz\,{\rm I}_2(b;x,y,z)
\\
+\exp(i\alpha x_1(y_1-y_2))-u(b;x_2-x_1)\exp(i\alpha x_2(y_1-y_2)).
\end{multline}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As just detailed, we shift contours in~\eqref{rE2rep}.
Using the formula I~(A.13) for the residue of $G(z)$ at its simple pole $z=-ia$, we obtain\begin{multline}
2\pi i\, {\rm Res}\ {\rm I}_2(x,y,z)\arrowvert_{z=x_m+ia-ib/2}\\
=\rho_2(b;y)\frac{\sqrt{a_+a_-}}{G(ib-ia)}\prod_{j<m}(-u(x_m-x_j))\cdot\exp(i\alpha x_m(y_1-y_2)).
\end{multline}
From this we easily get~\eqref{rE2rep2}.
\end{proof}
Even though we derived the representation~\eqref{rE2rep2} for $x_1\ne x_2$,
it is clearly valid for~$x_1=x_2$, too.
In point of fact, both ${\rm E}_2(b;x,y)$ and ${\rm E}_2^{{\rm as}}(b;x,y)$ (given by~\eqref{rE2as}) vanish for $x_1=x_2$. Indeed, recalling~\eqref{c} and~\eqref{u}, together with the simple zero/pole of $G(z)$ for $z=ia$/$z=-ia$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
1/c(b;0)=0,\ \ \ u(b;0)=1,\ \ \ b\in S_a,
\end{equation}
from which this zero feature is plain.
For $z$ on the contour $C_b+ir$, the integrand ${\rm I}_2$~\eqref{rI2} decays exponentially with rate $\alpha(a-{\rm Re}\, b/2+r)$ as $y_1-y_2\to\infty$. Moreover, from~\eqref{phuinv} and~\eqref{cas} we get
\begin{equation}\label{M2as}
M_2(b;y)=1+O(\exp(-\alpha \rho (y_1-y_2))),\ \ \ \rho\in [a_s/2,a_s),\ \ \ y_2-y_2\to\infty.
\end{equation}
Combining these two observations with the representation \eqref{rE2rep2}, we are led to expect that the dominant asymptotics of ${\rm E}_2$ for $y_1-y_2\to\infty$ is given by the function~${\rm E}_2^{{\rm as}}$ defined in~\eqref{rE2as}. This expectation is borne out and improved by the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:rE2as}
Letting $(r,b)\in[a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{EEas}
\left|\left({\rm E}_2-{\rm E}_2^{{\rm as}}\right)(b;x,y)\right|< C(r,b)(1+|x_1-x_2|)\exp(-\alpha r(y_1-y_2)),\ \ x,y\in{\mathbb R}^2,\ \ y_1-y_2\geq 0,
\end{equation}
where $C$ is continuous on $[a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
In view of Lemma~\ref{Lem:aux2} and~\eqref{M2as}, it suffices to show
\begin{equation}\label{db}
\left|\int_{C_b+ir}dz{\rm I}_2(b;x,y,z)\right|\le C'(r,b)|\rho_2(b;y)||x_1-x_2|\exp(-\alpha r(y_1-y_2)),
\end{equation}
for all $x,y\in{\mathbb R}^2$ and $y_1-y_2\geq 0$, where $C'$ is continuous on $[a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a$. (Indeed, combining~\eqref{rE2as}, \eqref{u} and~\eqref{uas}, it is clear that~$|{\rm E}_2^{{\rm as}}
(b;x,y)|$ is majorized by a continuous function~$c(b)$ for all $(b,x,y)\in S_a\times {\mathbb R}^2\times{\mathbb R}^2$.) Changing variables $z\to z+i(a-b/2+r)$, we rewrite the integral as
\begin{multline}
\rho_2(b;y)\exp(-\alpha r(y_1-y_2))C_2(b;x)^{-1}\\
\times\int_{\mathbb R} dz\exp(i\alpha z(y_1-y_2))\prod_{j=1}^2\frac{G(z+ir-x_j+ia-ib)}{G(z+ir-x_j+ia)}.
\end{multline}
Note that we do not encounter the poles of the $G$-ratios so long as $r\in(0,a_s)$. Furthermore, from \eqref{c} and \eqref{cas} we obtain the estimate
\begin{equation}\label{Gratb}
\left|\frac{G(p+ir+ia-ib)}{G(p+ir+ia)}\right|\leq c(r,b)/\cosh(\gamma p),\ \ \ (p,r,b)\in{\mathbb R}\times (0,a_s)\times S_a,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{gam}
\gamma\equiv \alpha {\rm Re}\, b/2=\frac{\pi{\rm Re}\, b}{a_{+}a_-},
\end{equation}
and where $c(r,b)$ is continuous on $(0,a_s)\times S_a$. It follows that we have
\begin{equation}\label{rI2est}
\begin{split}
\left|\int_{C_b+ir}dz\,{\rm I}_2(b;x,y,z)\right|&\leq c(r,b)^2|\rho_2(b;y)|\exp(-\alpha r(y_1-y_2))\\
&\quad\times |C_2(b;x)|^{-1}\int_{\mathbb R} \frac{dz}{\prod_{j=1}^2\cosh(\gamma(z-x_j))}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By a standard residue calculation, we find that the latter integral equals
\begin{equation}\label{hypint}
2\frac{x_1-x_2}{\sinh(\gamma(x_1-x_2))}.
\end{equation}
(Alternatively, this evaluation can be deduced from I~Lemma C.1 with $N=1$.) Combining the simple zero of $C_2(x)^{-1}$ along $x_1=x_2$ with the $c$-function asymptotics \eqref{cas}, this yields a bound $|C_2(x)^{-1}/\sinh(\gamma(x_1-x_2))|\leq c_1(b)$, with $c_1$ continuous on $S_a$. Hence the desired majorization~\eqref{db} results.
\end{proof}
In order to generalize the above line of reasoning to the $N=3$ case, we need to obtain a uniform bound on ${\rm E}_2(x,y)$ for $(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb R}^2$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{xyres}
v_1-v_2\in(-a_s,0],\ \ \ y_1-y_2\geq 0,\ \ \ \ v={\rm Im}\, x.
\end{equation}
From the pole locations \eqref{rE2ps1}--\eqref{rE2ps2}, it is clear that such a bound is compatible with the poles of ${\rm E}_2(x,y)$.
In fact, since ${\rm E}_2(x,y)$ has no pole for $v_1-v_2\in (-2a,0]$, one might expect $a_s\to 2a$ in~\eqref{xyres}. However, we are unable to obtain a bound for this larger interval.
The most obvious starting point would seem to be the representation \eqref{rE2rep}. Now \eqref{CN} and \eqref{cas} entail that the factor $C_2(2a-b;y)^{-1}$ is $O(\exp(\alpha(a-{\rm Re}\, b/2)(y_1-y_2))$ as $y_1-y_2\to\infty$. In order to retain boundedness, we need a corresponding damping factor coming from the integral in \eqref{rE2rep}. This can be obtained by shifting the contour ${\mathbb R}$ up to~$C_b$. However, such a shift is only allowed as long as no poles are met. We have already observed that the nearest poles of~${\rm I}_2$ are located at \eqref{rI2ps}, so this is never the case. As a consequence, we cannot obtain the desired decay factor in any `simple' way.
As it turns out, the representation \eqref{rE2rep2} yields a much better starting point, even though we then have one more term to bound.
It is clear from \eqref{u} and the locations of the $G$-poles I (A.11) that $u(b;x_2-x_1)$ is holomorphic for $-a_s<v_1-v_2<m({\rm Re}\, b)$, where
\begin{equation}\label{mas}
m(d)\equiv \min(2a-d,d),\ \ \ d\in(0,2a).
\end{equation}
Using also \eqref{uas} and \eqref{M2as}, we deduce that for all $(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb R}^2$ satisfying \eqref{xyres} we have
\begin{equation}\label{MEb}
|M_2(b;y){\rm E}_2^{as}(b;x,y)|\leq c(v_1-v_2,b)\exp(-\alpha(y_1v_1+y_2v_2)),
\end{equation}
where $c$ is continuous on $(-a_s,0]\times S_a$.
Note that $c(v_1-v_2,b)\to\infty$ as $v_1-v_2\downarrow -a_s$, since we then approach the pole of $u(b;x_2-x_1)$ at $x_1-x_2=-ia_s$. Because we prove the bound~\eqref{rE2vb} in the following proposition by using the representation~\eqref{rE2rep2}, we cannot handle the interval $v_1-v_2\in (-2a,-a_s]$.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:rE2b}
Letting $(\delta,b)\in (0,a_s]\times S_a$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{rE2vb}
|{\rm E}_2(b;x,y)|<C(\delta,b)(1+|{\rm Re}\, (x_1-x_2)|)\exp(-\alpha(y_1v_1+y_2v_2))
\end{equation}
for all $(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^2\times{\mathbb R}^2$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{N2xyas}
v_1-v_2\in[-a_s+\delta,0],\ \ \ y_1-y_2\geq 0,\ \ \ v={\rm Im}\, x,
\end{equation}
where $C$ is continuous on $(0,a_s]\times S_a$. Furthermore, for all $(b,x,y)\in S_a\times {\mathbb R}^2\times {\mathbb R}^2$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{rE2bex}
|{\rm E}_2(b;x,y)|\le c(b)|x_1-x_2|(1+|y_1-y_2|),
\end{equation}
where $c$ is continuous on $S_a$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Choosing first $x\in{\mathbb R}^2$, we begin by rewriting the integral of ${\rm I}_2$ along the $z$-contour $C_b+ir$ in~\eqref{rE2rep2}. Letting $z\to z+x_1+i(a-b/2+r)$, we arrive at
\begin{multline}
\label{rI2int}
\int_{C_b+ir}dz\,{\rm I}_2(x,y,z)=\rho_2(y)\exp(-\alpha(r-ix_1)(y_1-y_2))C_2(x)^{-1}\\
\times\int_{\mathbb R} dz\exp(i\alpha z(y_1-y_2))\frac{G(z+ir+ia-ib)}{G(z+ir+ia)}\frac{G(z+ir+x_1-x_2+ia-ib)}{G(z+ir+x_1-x_2+ia)}.
\end{multline}
As long as $r\in(0,a_s)$, we stay clear of the poles of the two $G$-ratios. However, when allowing $v_1-v_2< 0$, we must also ensure
\begin{equation}
0<r+v_1-v_2<a_s,
\end{equation}
so as not to encounter the poles of the right $G$-ratio for $z+ir+x_1-x_2=0,a_s$. In particular, we can allow any $x\in{\mathbb C}^2$ satisfying $v_1-v_2\in(-a_s,0]$ when we choose (say)
\begin{equation}
v_1-v_2=-a_s+\delta,\ \ \ r=a_s-\delta/2,\ \ \ \delta\in(0,a_s] .
\end{equation}
The most straightforward way to bound the integral on the right-hand side of \eqref{rI2int} is to estimate the $y$-dependent exponential factor away. Invoking the bound \eqref{Gratb}, this readily yields the estimate
\begin{multline}\label{rI2intest1}
\left|\int_{C_b+ir}dz{\rm I}_2(x,y,z)\right|\leq c_1(\delta,b)^2|\rho_2(y)|\exp(-\alpha(r+v_1)(y_1-y_2)) \\
\times |c(b;x_1-x_2)|^{-1}\int_{\mathbb R} \frac{dz}{\cosh(\gamma z)\cosh(\gamma(z+{\rm Re}\, (x_1-x_2)))},
\end{multline}
with $c_1(\delta,b)$ continuous on $(0,a_s]\times S_a$. We met the latter integral before, cf.~\eqref{rI2est} and~\eqref{hypint}, whence we infer it equals
\begin{equation}
2\frac{{\rm Re}\, (x_1-x_2)}{\sinh(\gamma{\rm Re}\, (x_1-x_2))}.
\end{equation}
Now $c(b;x_1-x_2)^{-1}$ is regular for $-2a<v_1-v_2<{\rm Re}\, b$, vanishes for $x_1-x_2=0$, and has asymptotics
\begin{equation}\label{crepest}
|c(b;x_1-x_2)^{-1}|\sim C(b)\exp(\gamma |{\rm Re}\, (x_1-x_2)|),\ \ \ |{\rm Re}\, (x_1-x_2)|\to\infty,
\end{equation}
with $C(b)$ continuous on $S_a$, cf.~\eqref{cas}. Hence we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{rI2intest2}
\left|\int_{C_b+ir}dz{\rm I}_2(x,y,z)\right|\leq C_1(\delta,b)|\rho_2(y)|(1+|{\rm Re}\, (x_1-x_2)|)\exp(-\alpha(r+v_1)(y_1-y_2)).
\end{equation}
Combining this with~Lemma~\ref{Lem:aux2}, \eqref{M2as} and \eqref{MEb}, the first assertion now follows.
To prove the second one, we may restrict attention to the case $y_1-y_2\ge 0$. (Indeed, we can invoke~\eqref{rE2ri} and boundedness of $u(b;z)$ for $(b,z)\in S_a\times{\mathbb R}$ to handle $y_1-y_2<0$.) We can now proceed as before, with $v_1=v_2=0$. Then we also get ${\rm Re}\, (x_1-x_2)\to x_1-x_2$ in~\eqref{rI2intest1}--\eqref{crepest}, so in~\eqref{rI2intest2} we may replace the factor $1+|{\rm Re}\, (x_1-x_2)|$ by $|x_1-x_2|$. Hence it suffices to prove (cf.~\eqref{rE2rep2})
\begin{equation}\label{MEest}
|M_2(b;y){\rm E}_2^{{\rm as}}(b;x,y)|\le c_1(b)(x_1-x_2)(y_1-y_2),\ \ \ x_1-x_2\ge 0,\ \ y_1-y_2\ge 0.
\end{equation}
Recalling \eqref{M2def} and \eqref{rE2as}, we see that \eqref{MEest} amounts to a bound of the form
\begin{equation}\label{bF}
\Big| \frac{\exp(-\alpha (a-b/2)p)}{c(2a-b;p)}F(b;q,p)\Big| \le c_2(b)qp,\ \ \ q,p\ge 0,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{Fdef}
F(b;q,p)\equiv \exp(i\alpha qp/2)-u(b;-q)\exp(-i\alpha qp/2).
\end{equation}
Now from \eqref{cas} we have
\begin{equation}\label{thest}
\Big| \frac{\exp(-\alpha (a-b/2)p)}{c(2a-b;p)}\Big|\le c_3(b)\tanh (p),\ \ \ p\ge 0.
\end{equation}
Also, from $u(b;0)=1$ and the mean value theorem we infer
\begin{equation}
{\rm Re}\, F(q,p)=q(\partial_q{\rm Re}\, F)(\theta_1(q),p),\ \ {\rm Im}\, F(q,p)=q(\partial_q{\rm Im}\, F)(\theta_2(q),p), \end{equation}
where $\theta_j(q)\in [0,q]$, $ j=1,2$.
This readily yields an estimate
\begin{equation}
|F(b;q,p)|\le c_4(b)q(1+p),\ \ q,p\ge 0.
\end{equation}
Combining it with \eqref{thest}, we obtain~\eqref{bF}, so that~\eqref{rE2bex} follows.
\end{proof}
The reader may well ask whether the factor $(y_1-y_2)$ in~\eqref{MEest} is necessary, since $F(q,p)$ is obviously bounded. Its necessity can be gleaned from the special cases
\begin{equation}
F(a_{\delta};q,p) =2i \sin(\alpha qp/2), \ \ \delta=+,-.
\end{equation}
More precisely, we need the factor $|x_1-x_2|$ in the bound~\eqref{rE2bex} to push through the proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm:rE3as}, so we cannot bound the left-hand side of~\eqref{MEest} simply by a constant, cf.~\eqref{conest}. (To be sure, we believe that ${\rm E}_2(b;x,y)$ with $b\in S_a$ fixed is bounded on ${\mathbb R}^2\times{\mathbb R}^2$, but we have not proved this.)
\section{The step from $N=2$ to $N=3$}\label{Sec3}
\subsection{Invariance properties and a duality relation}\label{Sec31}
We begin this subsection by obtaining the counterpart of Proposition \ref{Prop:J2sym}.
\begin{proposition}\label{Prop:J3sym}
For all $(b,x,y)\in{\cal D}_3$~\eqref{cD3} and $\eta\in{\mathbb C}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{J3ri}
J_3(b;x,y)=J_3(b;-x,-y),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{J3hom}
\begin{split}
J_3(b;x,y)=& \exp(-i\alpha\eta(y_1+y_2+y_3))J_3(b;(x_1+\eta,x_2+\eta,x_3+\eta),y)\\
& =\exp(-i\alpha\eta(x_1+x_2+x_3))J_3(b;x,(y_1+\eta,y_2+\eta,y_3+\eta)) .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Following the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:J2sym}, we obtain, using \eqref{I3}--\eqref{cS3}, \eqref{J2ri} and the reflection equation I~(A.6),
\begin{equation}
I_3(-x,-y,-z)=I_3(x,y,z).
\end{equation}
Hence \eqref{J3ri} follows as before. The alternative representation~\eqref{J3cm} entails~\eqref{J3hom}.
\end{proof}
We continue by deducing a new representation for $J_3$ that is related to \eqref{J3} by the involution $(b,x,y)\mapsto(2a-b,y,x)$. Aiming to follow the flow chart of Subsection \ref{Sec21}, we first need a suitable generalization of the Plancherel relation \eqref{Plancherel}. This involves a generalized Fourier transform with kernel
\begin{multline}\label{rF2}
{\rm F}_2(b;x,y)\equiv (a_+a_-)^{-1/2}G(ib-ia)W_2(b;x)^{1/2}J_2(b;x,y)W_2(2a-b;y)^{1/2},\\
b\in(0,2a),\ \ x,y\in G_2.
\end{multline}
(Here and below, we choose positive square roots.) For future reference, we note the symmetry properties
\begin{equation}\label{rF2s}
{\rm F}_2(b;-x,-y)={\rm F}_2(b;x,y),\ \ \ {\rm F}_2(b;x,y)={\rm F}_2(2a-b;y,x),
\end{equation}
cf.~Propositions \ref{Prop:J2sym}--\ref{Prop:J2prop}. (Actually ${\rm F}_2(b;x,y)$ is self-dual, too; this can be readily checked by using~\eqref{J2sd}.)
By specialization of results in \cite{R03} (cf.~also Subsection 2.2 in \cite{R11}), we inferred in Section 3 of \cite{HR15} that the operator
\begin{equation}
{\cal F}_2(b): {\cal C}_2\equiv C_0^\infty(G_2)\subset L^2(G_2)\to L^2(G_2),\ \ \ b\in(0,2a),
\end{equation}
defined by
\begin{equation}
({\cal F}_2(b)\psi)(x)\equiv \frac{1}{a_+a_-}\int_{G_2}{\rm F}_2(b;x,y)\psi(y)dy,\ \ \ \psi\in{\cal C}_2,\ \ x\in G_2,
\end{equation}
extends to a unitary operator. Observing that (cf.~I (A.6), (A.9))
\begin{equation}\label{rF2conj}
\overline{{\rm F}_2(b;x,y)}={\rm F}_2(b;x,-y),\ \ \ b\in(0,2a),\ \ x,y\in G_2,
\end{equation}
we thus arrive at the generalized Plancherel relation
\begin{equation}\label{cF2plan}
\int_{G_2}dzf(z)g(z)=\int_{G_2}dp ({\cal F}_2 f)(p)({\cal F}_2 g)(-p),\ \ \ f,g\in L^2(G_2)\cap L^1(G_2).
\end{equation}
Restriction attention to $b\in(0,2a)$ at first, we choose
\begin{equation}
f(z)={\cal S}_2(b;(x_1,x_2),(z_1,z_2))W_2(b;z)^{1/2},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g(z)&=(a_+a_-)^{1/2}G(ia-ib)\exp(i\alpha y_3(x_1+x_2+x_3))\\
&\quad \times W_2(2a-b;(y_1,y_2))^{-1/2}{\rm F}_2(b;z,(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3))\prod_{k=1}^2\frac{G(x_3-z_k-ib/2)}{G(x_3-z_k+ib/2)},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
cf.~\eqref{cS2}. Then it follows from \eqref{J3} and \eqref{rF2} that $J_3(b;x,y)$ is given by the left-hand side of \eqref{cF2plan}. The crux is now that the ${\cal F}_2$-transforms of the functions $f$ and $g$ chosen above can be readily computed by using results from \cite{HR15}. We proceed to embark on this.
From Eq.~(3.18) in \cite{HR15} we recall the integral equation
\begin{equation}
\int_{G_2}dzW_2(b;t)^{1/2}{\cal S}_2(b;t,z)W_2(b;z)^{1/2}{\rm F}_2(b;z,p)=\mu(b;p){\rm F}_2(b;t,p),\ \ \ t,p\in G_2,
\end{equation}
with eigenvalue
\begin{equation}
\mu(b;p)\equiv a_+a_-G(ia-ib)^2\prod_{j=1}^2\prod_{\delta=+,-}G(\delta p_j-ia+ib/2).
\end{equation}
(This result can be regarded as the $N=2$ counterpart of the $N=1$ formula~\eqref{ftr}.)
Clearly, this implies
\begin{equation}\label{cF2f}
({\cal F}_2 f)(p)=(a_+a_-)^{-1}W_2(b;(x_1,x_2))^{-1/2}\mu(b;p){\rm F}_2(b;(x_1,x_2),p).
\end{equation}
Using the reflection equation I (A.6), we find
\begin{equation}
\prod_{k=1}^2\frac{G(x_3-z_k-ib/2)}{G(x_3-z_k+ib/2)}=(a_+a_-)^{-1}G(ia-ib)^2 \mu(2a-b;(z_1-x_3,z_2-x_3)),
\end{equation}
which yields
\begin{multline}
({\cal F}_2 g)(-p)=(a_+a_-)^{-3/2}G(ia-ib)^3\exp(i\alpha y_3(x_1+x_2+x_3))W_2(2a-b;(y_1,y_2))^{-1/2}\\
\times \int_{G_2}dz\mu(2a-b;(z_1-x_3,z_2-x_3)){\rm F}_2(b;z,(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3)){\rm F}_2(b;z,-p).
\end{multline}
Taking $z_k\to z_k+x_3$, we deduce from \eqref{rF2} and Proposition \ref{Prop:J2sym} that the integral on the right-hand side can be rewritten as
\begin{multline}
\exp(i\alpha x_3(y_1+y_2-2y_3-p_1-p_2))\\
\times \int_{G_2}dz\mu(2a-b;z){\rm F}_2(b;z,(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3)){\rm F}_2(b;z,-p).
\end{multline}
Keeping in mind \eqref{rF2s} and \eqref{rF2conj}, we infer from Eq.~(3.24) in \cite{HR15} the generalized eigenfunction expansion
\begin{multline}
W_2(2a-b;q)^{1/2}{\cal S}_2(2a-b;q,p)W_2(2a-b;p)^{1/2}\\
=\frac{1}{(a_+a_-)^2}\int_{G_2}dz\mu(2a-b;z){\rm F}_2(b;z,q){\rm F}_2(b;z,-p),\ \ \ q,p\in G_2.
\end{multline}
Hence we arrive at the generalized Fourier transform formula
\begin{multline}\label{cF2g}
({\cal F}_2 g)(-p)=(a_+a_-)^{1/2}G(ia-ib)^3\exp(i\alpha x_3(y_1+y_2+y_3))\\
\times\exp\big(i\alpha[y_3(x_1+x_2)-x_3(2y_3+p_1+p_2)]\big)\\
\times W_2(2a-b;p)^{1/2}{\cal S}_2(2a-b;(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3),p).
\end{multline}
Substituting \eqref{cF2f} and \eqref{cF2g} in the right-hand side of \eqref{cF2plan}, taking $p_k\to p_k-y_3$ and rewriting the resulting integral in terms of $J_2$ by using~\eqref{rF2}, we obtain
\begin{multline}
J_3(b;x,y)=G(ia-ib)^4\exp(i\alpha x_3(y_1+y_2+y_3))\exp(i\alpha y_3(x_1+x_2))
\\
\times\int_{G_2}dp\, S_3^{\sharp}(2a-b;y,p)W_2(2a-b;p)\exp(-i\alpha x_3(p_1+p_2))J_2(b;x,(p_1-y_3,p_2-y_3)).
\end{multline}
Using now the $J_2$-duality relation~\eqref{J2drel} and invariance property~\eqref{J2hom}, we deduce the representation
\begin{equation}\label{J3d}
J_3(b;x,y)= G(ia-ib)^6\exp(i\alpha x_3(y_1+y_2+y_3))\int_{G_2}dp\, I_3(2a-b;y,x,p).
\end{equation}
We note that this formula is valid for all $b\in S_a$ and $x,y\in{\mathbb R}^3$. We are now prepared for the $N=3$ analog of Proposition \ref{Prop:J2prop}. By contrast to the latter, the following theorem amounts to a substantial novel result, proving some of the conjectures in I~Section~7 for the case $N=3$.
\begin{theorem}\label{Thm:J3prop}
Letting $b\in S_a$ and $x,y\in{\mathbb R}^3$, the duality property~\eqref{J3drel} and symmetry property~\eqref{J3sym} hold true.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We obtain \eqref{J3drel} upon comparing the representations \eqref{J3} and \eqref{J3d}.
Just as in the $N=2$ case, we then infer invariance under permutations of the variables $(y_1,y_2,y_3)$ by combining \eqref{J3drel} with the manifest invariance under permutations of the variables $ (x_1,x_2,x_3)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Global meromorphy}\label{Sec32}
We proceed to establish global meromorphy for $J_3(b;x,y)$, following the line of reasoning in Subsection \ref{Sec22} as far as possible. Thus we need again a number of preliminaries.
First, from Proposition \ref{Prop:J3sym} and Theorem \ref{Thm:J3prop} the following invariance properties of ${\cal P}_3$ are readily inferred:
\begin{equation}\label{cP3ri}
{\cal P}_3(b;-x,-y)={\cal P}_3(b;x,y), \ \ \ \mathrm{(reflection~invariance)},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cP3d}
{\cal P}_3(b;x,y)=G(ia-ib)^6{\cal P}_3(2a-b;y,x),\ \ \ \mathrm{(duality)},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cP3pi}
{\cal P}_3(b;x,y)={\cal P}_3(b;\sigma x,\tau y),\ \ \ (\sigma,\tau)\in S_3\times S_3,\ \ \ \mathrm{(permutation~invariance)}.
\end{equation}
Second, just as in the $N=2$ case, a key ingredient is an eigenvalue equation for ${\cal P}_3$. It corresponds to the $k=1$ eigenvalue equation I (5.13) for $J_3$, with $\delta\in\{+,-\}$ chosen such that $a_{-\delta}=a_s$, and with $x,y\to -x,-y$. Invoking the reflection invariance~\eqref{J3ri}, the latter A$\Delta$E is given by
\begin{equation}\label{J3ev}
\sum_{j=1}^3V_3(b;\sigma_{1j}x)J_3(b;x+ia_se_j,y)=\sum_{j=1}^3 e_l(-2y_j)J_3(b;x,y),
\end{equation}
where $e_j$, $j=1,2,3$, and
$\sigma_{kl}$, $k,l=1,2,3$, denote the standard basis elements in ${\mathbb C}^3$ and the reflection that acts on $x\equiv (x_1,x_2,x_3)$ by interchanging $x_k$ and $x_l$, resp.; moreover, the coefficient function reads
\begin{equation}
V_3(b;x)\equiv \prod_{m=2,3}\frac{s_l(x_m-x_1-ib)}{s_l(x_m-x_1)}.
\end{equation}
Third, we define counterparts of~\eqref{ep2}--\eqref{cD2n}:
\begin{equation}\label{ep3}
\epsilon_3\equiv a_l/4,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cA3}
{\cal A}_3\equiv \{ x\in{\mathbb C}^3\mid v_j -v_k>-{\rm Re}\, b,\ \ 1\le j<k\le 3\},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cA3n}
{\cal A}_3^{(n)}\equiv
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\{ x\in{\mathbb C}^3\mid |v_j-v_k|<a_s+{\rm Re}\, b, \ \ 1\le j<k\le 3\}, & n=1 , \\
\{ x\in{\cal A}_3\mid v_j-v_k<na_s+{\rm Re}\, b, \ \ 1\le j<k\le 3\}, & n=0,2,3,\ldots ,
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{D3p}
D_3^{(+)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x)\in S(\epsilon_3)\times{\mathbb C}^3\mid x\in{\cal A}_3\big\}, \end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{D3n}
D_3^{(n)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x)\in S(\epsilon_3)\times{\mathbb C}^3\mid x\in{\cal A}_3^{(n)}\big\},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cD3p}
{\cal D}_3^{(+)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x,y)\in D_3^{(+)}\times{\mathbb C}^3\mid \max_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}|{\rm Im}\, (y_j-y_k)|<{\rm Re}\, b\big\},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cD3n}
{\cal D}_3^{(n)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x,y)\in D_3^{(n)}\times{\mathbb C}^3\mid \max_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}|{\rm Im}\, (y_j-y_k)|<{\rm Re}\, b\big\}.
\end{equation}
Then the counterpart of~\eqref{inclu} is
\begin{equation}\label{inclu3}
D_3^{(1)}\subset D^r_3,\ \ \ {\cal D}_3^{(1)}\subset {\cal D}_3,
\end{equation}
cf.~\eqref{D3}--\eqref{cD3}. To verify these inclusions, we need only note
\begin{equation}
|{\rm Im}\, \tilde{x}_j|\le \frac{1}{3}|v_j-v_k|+\frac{1}{3}|v_j-v_l|,\ \ \ \{j,k,l\}=\{1,2,3\},
\end{equation}
and use
\begin{equation}
\frac{2}{3}(a_s+{\rm Re}\, b)< a-\frac{1}{2}{\rm Re}\, b,\ \ \ b\in S(\epsilon_3).
\end{equation}
Now we have the following analog of Lemma \ref{Lemma:cP2eigeeq}.
\begin{lemma}
Letting $(b,x,y)\in{\cal D}_3^{(0)}$, we have the eigenvalue equation
\begin{equation}\label{cP3eigeq}
\sum_{j=1}^3{\cal V}_3(b;\sigma_{1j}x){\cal P}_3(b;x+ia_se_j,y)=\sum_{j=1}^3 e_l(-2y_j){\cal P}_3(b;x,y),
\end{equation}
where the coefficient function is given by
\begin{equation}\label{cVN3}
\begin{split}
{\cal V}_3(b;x) &\equiv -\pi^2\prod_{m=2,3}\frac{\exp(i(2x_m-2x_1-ia_s)K_l)}{s_l(x_m-x_1)}\\
&\quad\times\left[\Gamma\left(\frac{i}{a_l}(x_m-x_1-ib)\right)\Gamma\left(\frac{i}{a_l}(x_m-x_1+ib-2ia)\right)\right]^{-1},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with $K_l$ defined by \eqref{slKl}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The restriction to~${\cal D}_3^{(0)}$ implies that the four arguments of~$J_3$ occurring in \eqref{J3ev} belong to ${\cal D}_3^{(1)}$, and thus to the holomorphy domain~${\cal D}_3$, cf.~\eqref{inclu3}. Hence the A$\Delta$E is well defined. Its similarity transform~\eqref{cP3eigeq} follows from a computation paralleling the one in the proof of Lemma \ref{Lemma:cP2eigeeq}.
\end{proof}
We are now prepared for
the following counterpart of Proposition \ref{Prop:cP2ext}, which again proves a conjecture made in I~Section~7.
\begin{theorem}\label{Thm:cP3ext}
The product function ${\cal P}_3(b;x,y)$~\eqref{cP3} admits a holomorphic continuation from ${\cal D}_3$~\eqref{cD3} to $ S_a\times{\mathbb C}^3\times{\mathbb C}^3$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} For transparency, we follow the reasoning in the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop:cP2ext} as far as possible, even though we need to enlarge on it shortly. Thus,
we first aim to prove holomorphic continuation to~${\cal D}_3^{(+)}$~\eqref{cD3p}. Accordingly,
we assume inductively that ${\cal P}_3(b;x,y)$ is holomorphic in~${\cal D}_3^{(n)}$ with $n\geq 1$. (This is true for $n=1$, cf.~\eqref{inclu3}.)
To handle the holomorphic continuation to~${\cal D}_3^{(n+1)}$,
we begin by rewriting~\eqref{cP3eigeq}.
First, we introduce
\begin{equation}\label{cVfact}
\hat{{\cal V}}_3(b;x)={\cal V}_3(b;x)\prod_{m=2,3}s_l(x_m-x_1).
\end{equation}
Then we multiply \eqref{cP3eigeq} by the two $s_l$-functions, rearrange the terms, and invoke the permutation invariance \eqref{cP3pi} to obtain
\begin{multline}\label{cP3id}
\hat{{\cal V}}_3(b;x){\cal P}_3(b;x+ia_s e_1 ,y)=s_l(x_2-x_1)s_l(x_3-x_1) \sum_{j=1}^3 e_l(-2y_j){\cal P}_3(b;x,y)\\
+\frac{1}{s_l(x_3-x_2)}\Big[s_l(x_3-x_1)\hat{{\cal V}}_3(b;\sigma_{12}x){\cal P}_3(b;x+ia_s e_2,y)\\
-s_l(x_2-x_1)\hat{{\cal V}}_3(b;\sigma_{13}x){\cal P}_3(b;\sigma_{23}(x+ia_s e_3),y)\Big].
\end{multline}
It now follows as before that the multiplier~$\hat{{\cal V}}_3(b;x)$ on the left-hand side is nonzero on~$D_3^{(+)}$, cf.~\eqref{gamzeros}.
It is at this point, however, that we can no longer proceed as in the $N=2$ case. For one thing, the zero of the denominator function $s_l(x_3-x_2)$ in~\eqref{cP3id} for $x_3=x_2$ is innocuous (as the bracketed function then vanishes, too), but we need to steer clear of the remaining zeros.
We can avoid this snag (and other ones) as follows. First, we define domains
\begin{equation}\label{cA31}
{\cal A}_{3,1}^{(n)}\equiv \{ x\in{\cal A}_3^{(n)}\mid |v_2-v_3|<{\rm Re}\, b\},\ \ \ n\ge 1,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{D31n}
D_{3,1}^{(n)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x)\in S(\epsilon_3)\times{\mathbb C}^3\mid x\in{\cal A}_{3,1}^{(n)}\big\},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cD31n}
{\cal D}_{3,1}^{(n)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x,y)\in D_{3,1}^{(n)}\times{\mathbb C}^3\mid \max_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}|{\rm Im}\, (y_j-y_k)|<{\rm Re}\, b\big\}.
\end{equation}
Second, we consider the function~$R_3(b;x,y)$ on the right-hand side of~\eqref{cP3id} for all points $(b,x,y)\in {\cal D}_{3,1}^{(n)}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{vres3}
v_1-v_2, v_1-v_3\in ((n-1)a_s-{\rm Re}\, b,na_s+{\rm Re}\, b).
\end{equation}
This yields a domain ${\cal D}_{3,1,r}^{(n)}\subset{\cal D}_{3,1}^{(n)}$ on which $R_3(b;x,y)$ is holomorphic for $n=1$. Using the induction assumption, we also infer holomorphy for $n>1$. (Note that we need the interchange $\sigma_{23}$ for this to follow.) The $x$-translation of~${\cal D}_{3,1,r}^{(n)}$ over $ia_s e_1$ equals ${\cal D}_{3,1,r}^{(n+1)}$, and the latter domain meets~${\cal D}_3^{(n)}$ for all points with
\begin{equation}
v_1-v_2, v_1-v_3\in (na_s-{\rm Re}\, b,na_s+{\rm Re}\, b),\ \ \ |v_2-v_3|<{\rm Re}\, b.
\end{equation}
As a result, we obtain a holomorphic continuation of ${\cal P}_3(b;x,y)$ to all of~${\cal D}_{3,1}^{(n+1)}$. However, this is a proper subdomain of~${\cal D}_3^{(n+1)}$, so we need yet another enlargement.
This consists in further domains
\begin{equation}\label{cA33}
{\cal A}_{3,3}^{(n)}\equiv \{ x\in{\cal A}_3^{(n)}\mid |v_1-v_2|<{\rm Re}\, b\},\ \ \ n\ge 1,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{D33n}
D_{3,3}^{(n)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x)\in S(\epsilon_3)\times{\mathbb C}^3\mid x\in{\cal A}_{3,3}^{(n)}\big\},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{cD33n}
{\cal D}_{3,3}^{(n)}\equiv \big\{ (b,x,y)\in D_{3,3}^{(n)}\times{\mathbb C}^3\mid \max_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}|{\rm Im}\, (y_j-y_k)|<{\rm Re}\, b\big\}.
\end{equation}
Consider now the involution
\begin{equation}
\varphi: {\mathbb C}^3\to {\mathbb C}^3,\ \ \ x\mapsto -\sigma_{13}x.
\end{equation}
It is easy to check
\begin{equation}
\varphi ({\cal A}_3^{(n)})={\cal A}_3^{(n)},\ \ \ \varphi ({\cal A}_{3,1}^{(n)})={\cal A}_{3,3}^{(n)},\ \ \ n\ge 1,
\end{equation}
so it gives rise to a bijection between the domains~\eqref{cA33}--\eqref{cD33n} and~\eqref{cA31}--\eqref{cD31n}.
The point is that the invariance properties \eqref{cP3ri}--\eqref{cP3pi} are preserved under analytic continuation, so that we have
\begin{equation}
{\cal P}_3(b;x,y)={\cal P}_3(b;\varphi(x),-y),\ \ \ x\in{\cal D}_{3,3}^{(n)}.
\end{equation}
As a consequence, the function ${\cal P}_3(b;x,y)$ has a holomorphic continuation to~${\cal D}_{3,1}^{(n+1)}$ as well as to~${\cal D}_{3,3}^{(n+1)}$.
The latter two domains are tube domains with open, connected bases, and the two bases have a nontrivial intersection. By Bochner's Theorem~1.1 it then follows that ${\cal P}_3(b;x,y)$ has a holomorphic continuation to the tube whose base is the convex hull of the latter two bases. We claim that this tube equals~${\cal D}_3^{(n+1)}$. Taking this claim for granted, we have completed the induction argument, so it follows that~${\cal P}_3$ continues to~${\cal D}_3^{(+)}$.
Now we need only invoke $S_3$-symmetry in~$x$ to obtain holomorphy of ${\cal P}_3(b;x,y)$ in the tube with base
\begin{equation}\label{cBep3}
{\cal B}_3(\epsilon_3)\equiv \{({\rm Re}\, b, {\rm Im}\, x,{\rm Im}\, y)\in (0,\epsilon_3)\times{\mathbb R}^3\times {\mathbb R}^3\mid \max_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}|{\rm Im}\, (y_j-y_k)|< {\rm Re}\, b\} .
\end{equation}
Then we are in the position to follow again the reasoning for the $N=2$ case, with the equations~\eqref{cB2}--\eqref{cB2h} all having $N=3$ counterparts that will be clear upon comparing~\eqref{cBep3} with~\eqref{cBep2}.
To conclude the proof of the theorem, it remains to prove the claim. We can reduce this to a claim for a set $U$ of two real numbers $u_1\equiv v_1-v_2 , u_2\equiv v_2-v_3$ satisfying
\begin{equation}
u_1,u_2,u_1+u_2\in(-c,d),\ \ 0<c<d.
\end{equation}
Specifically, the claim now amounts to the convex set $U$ being equal to the convex hull of its two convex subsets
\begin{equation}
U_j\equiv \{ (u_1,u_2)\in U\mid u_j\in (-c,c)\},\ \ j=1,2.
\end{equation}
Rephrased this way, a moment's thought suffices to establish the validity of the claim. (Any $u\in U$ that is not in $U_1\cup U_2$ belongs to the interior of the triangle with corners $(0,0), (d,0), (0,d)$, and $(d,0)$/$(0,d)$ belongs to the closure of $U_2/U_1$.) Hence the theorem follows.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Asymptotics}\label{Sec33}
Introducing the function
\begin{equation}\label{defd}
d_3(y)\equiv\min_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}(y_j-y_k),\ \ \ y\in{\mathbb R}^3,
\end{equation}
we proceed to elucidate the asymptotic behavior of the function ${\rm E}_3(b;x,y)$ \eqref{rE3} for $d_3(y)\to\infty$.
Combining \eqref{c}--\eqref{CN} with \eqref{GE} and Theorem \ref{Thm:cP3ext}, we find that ${\rm E}_3(b;x,y)$, $b\in S_a$, is meromorphic in $x$ and $y$, with $b$-independent poles located at
\begin{equation}
z_j-z_k=-2ia-ip_{mn},\ \ \ z=x,y,\ \ 1\leq j<k\leq 3,\ \ m,n\in{\mathbb N},
\end{equation}
and $b$-dependent pole locations
\begin{equation}
z_j-z_k=ib+ip_{mn},\ \ z_j-z_k=2ia-ib+ip_{mn},\ \ \ z=x,y,\ \ 1\leq j<k\leq 3,\ \ m,n\in{\mathbb N}.
\end{equation}
Just as in the $N=2$ case, we now assemble further features in a lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma:rE3prop}
For all $(b,x,y)\in S_a\times{\mathbb C}^3\times{\mathbb C}^3$ and $\eta\in{\mathbb C}$, the function ${\rm E}_3(b;x,y)$~\eqref{rE3} satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{rE3ri}
{\rm E}_3(b;-x,-y)={\rm E}_3(b;x,y)\prod_{1\le j<k\le 3}u(b;x_j-x_k)u(b;y_j-y_k),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{rE3hom}
\begin{split}
{\rm E}_3(b;x,y)=& \exp(-i\alpha\eta(y_1+y_2+y_3)){\rm E}_2(b;(x_1+\eta,x_2+\eta,x_3+\eta),y)\\
& =\exp(-i\alpha\eta(x_1+x_2+x_3)){\rm E}_2(b;(x,(y_1+\eta,y_2+\eta,y_3+\eta)),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{rE3d}
{\rm E}_3(b;x,y)={\rm E}_3(2a-b;y,x),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{rE3p}
{\rm E}_3(\sigma x,\tau y)={\rm E}_3(x,y)\prod_{\substack{j<k\\ \sigma^{-1}(j)>\sigma^{-1}(k)}}(-u(x_j-x_k))\prod_{\substack{j<k\\ \tau^{-1}(j)>\tau^{-1}(k)}}(-u(y_j-y_k)),\ \ \ (\sigma,\tau)\in S_3\times S_3,
\end{equation}
where, e.~g., $(\sigma x)_j\equiv x_{\sigma(j)},\ j=1,2,3$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Like in the $N=2$ case, these properties are easily derived from the corresponding features of~$J_3(b;x,y)$ in Proposition~\ref{Prop:J3sym} and Theorem~\ref{Thm:J3prop}.
\end{proof}
Recalling from I (2.11) the kernel function
\begin{equation}\label{cK3}
{\cal K}_3^\sharp(b;x,z)\equiv [C_3(b;x)C_2(b;-z)]^{-1}{\cal S}_3^\sharp(b;x,z),
\end{equation}
we infer from \eqref{rE2}--\eqref{J3} and \eqref{rE3} the representation
\begin{multline}\label{rE3rep}
{\rm E}_3(b;x,y)=\frac{(\phi(b)G(ib-ia))^2}{2a_+a_-}\\
\times\frac{\exp(i\alpha y_3(x_1+x_2+x_3))}{\prod_{n=1}^2c(2a-b;y_n-y_3)}\int_{{\mathbb R}^2}dz\,{\rm I}_3(b;x,y,z),\ \ \ b\in S_a,\ \ x,y\in{\mathbb R}^3,
\end{multline}
where the integrand is given by
\begin{equation}\label{rI3}
{\rm I}_3(b;x,y,z)={\cal K}_3^\sharp(b;x,z){\rm E}_2(b;z,(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3)).
\end{equation}
Indeed, since the integrand~$I_3$ in~\eqref{J3} is clearly invariant under the interchange $z_1\leftrightarrow z_2$, we can replace the integration over the Weyl chamber~$G_2$ in~\eqref{J3} by integration over~${\mathbb R}^2$ times 1/2.
Following the $N=2$ case, we deduce the dominant asymptotics of $E_3$ by shifting the $z_k$-contours ${\mathbb R}$ in \eqref{rE3rep} up past the poles of ${\rm I}_3$ located at
\begin{equation}\label{ps}
z_k=x_j+ia-ib/2,\ \ \ k=1,2,\ \ j=1,2,3.
\end{equation}
Recalling the $G$-zeros \eqref{Ezs}, we infer from \eqref{rE3} and \eqref{c}--\eqref{CN} that ${\rm E}_3$ vanishes along the hyperplanes $x_j=x_k$, $1\leq j<k\leq 3$. Hence we may as well require
\begin{equation}\label{diffx}
x_j\neq x_k,\ \ \ 1\leq j<k\leq 3,
\end{equation}
so that the poles \eqref{ps} are simple.
In order to keep track of the residues appearing, we need to shift the two contours separately. Assuming first ${\rm Im}\, (z_1-z_2)\in(-a_s,0]$, we note that Proposition \ref{Prop:rE2b} and the bounds \eqref{cas}, I (B.6) entail that the integrand ${\rm I}_3$ has exponential decay for $|{\rm Re}\, z_k|\to\infty$. Moreover, from invariance of ${\rm I}_3$ under $z_1\leftrightarrow z_2$ it follows that ${\rm I}_3$ has the same decay for ${\rm Im}\, (z_1-z_2)\in[0,a_s)$. Hence, as long as the contours are separated by a distance less than $a_s$, we encounter no problems with the contour tails. We must, however, take care to avoid the $x_j$-independent poles of~${\rm I}_3$, which are due either to zeros of $C_2(-z)$ or poles of $E_2(z,(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3))$. The former are located at
\begin{equation}
z_1-z_2=2ia+ip_{kl},\ \ z_1-z_2=-ib-ip_{kl},\ \ \ k,l\in{\mathbb N},
\end{equation}
whereas the locations of the latter are given by \eqref{rE2ps1}--\eqref{rE2ps2}. Recalling the function $m(d)$ \eqref{mas}, we thus see that
the poles in question are not met for $|{\rm Im}\, (z_1-z_2)|<m({\rm Re}\, b)$.
Next, we let $x(\nu)$, $\nu=1,2,3$, denote the variables obtained by removing $x_\nu$ from $x\equiv (x_1,x_2,x_3)$:
\begin{equation}
x(1)=(x_2,x_3),\ \ \ x(2)=(x_1,x_3),\ \ \ x(3)=(x_1,x_2).
\end{equation}
Introducing the functions
\begin{equation}\label{M3}
M_3(b;y)\equiv \frac{\phi(b)^2}{\prod_{n=1}^2c(2a-b;y_n-y_3)}\rho_3(b;y),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\rho_3(b;y)\equiv \exp(-\alpha(a-b/2)(y_1+y_2-2y_3)),
\end{equation}
we are prepared for the following counterpart of Lemma~\ref{Lem:aux2}.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem:aux3}
Letting $(r,b)\in(0,a_s)\times S_a$ and $x,y\in{\mathbb R}^3$ with the $x$-restriction \eqref{diffx} in effect, we have
\begin{multline}\label{rE3rep2}
\frac{{\rm E}_3(x,y)}{M_3(y)}\exp(-i\alpha y_3(x_1+x_2+x_3))\\
=\frac{1}{\rho_3(b;y)} \Bigg[\frac{G(ib-ia)^2}{2a_+a_-}\int_{(C_b+ir)^2}dz\,{\rm I}_3(x,y,z)\\
+\frac{G(ib-ia)}{\sqrt{a_+a_-}}\sum_{\nu=1}^3\prod_{j<\nu}(-u(x_\nu-x_j))\cdot \int_{C_b+ir}dt\,\hat{{\rm I}}_{3,\nu}(x,y,t)\Bigg]\\
+\sum_{\nu=1}^3\frac{C_3(x(\nu),x_\nu)}{C_3(x)}{\rm E}_2(x(\nu),(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3)),
\end{multline}
with
\begin{equation}\label{hI3}
\hat{{\rm I}}_{3,\nu}(b;x,y,t)\equiv {\cal K}_2^\sharp(b;x(\nu),t){\rm E}_2(b;(x_\nu+ia-ib/2,t),(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3)),
\end{equation}
where ${\cal K}_2^\sharp$ is given by~\eqref{cK2} and $C_b$ by~\eqref{Cb}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we note that by \eqref{rE3rep}--\eqref{rI3} and \eqref{M3} the left-hand side of \eqref{rE3rep2} equals
\begin{equation}\label{rE3repLHS}
\frac{{\cal G}^2}{2\rho_3(y)}\int_{{\mathbb R}^2}dz\, {\cal K}_3^\sharp(x,z){\rm E}_2(z,\hat{y}),
\end{equation}
where we have introduced
\begin{equation}
\hat{y}\equiv (y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3),\ \ \ {\cal G}\equiv \frac{G(ib-ia)}{\sqrt{a_+a_-}}.
\end{equation}
When determining the effect of the pertinent contour shifts, we find it convenient to work with $J_2(z,(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3))$, since it is invariant under the interchange $z_1\leftrightarrow z_2$. Therefore, we use \eqref{rE2} and \eqref{cK3} to rewrite \eqref{rE3repLHS} as
\begin{equation}\label{rE3repLHS2}
\frac{\phi(b){\cal G}^3}{2\rho_3(b;y)}\frac{{\cal L}_3(b;x,y)}{C_3(b;x)C_2(2a-b;\hat{y})},
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
{\cal L}_3(b;x,y)\equiv \int_{{\mathbb R}^2}dz\, W_2(b;z){\cal S}^\sharp_3(b;x,z)J_2(b;z,\hat{y}).
\end{equation}
Letting
\begin{equation}
0<\epsilon<\min(m({\rm Re}\, b)/2,a_s/2),
\end{equation}
we move the two contours ${\mathbb R}$ simultaneously up to $C_b-i\epsilon$ without meeting poles. Moreover, shifting the $z_1$-contour up by a further amount $2\epsilon$, we only encounter the three simple poles \eqref{ps} with $k=1$. These poles are due to the factor $G(x_j-z_1-ib/2)$ in ${\cal S}_3^\sharp(x,z)$ \eqref{cS3}, and the $G$-residue I (A.13) entails
\begin{equation}
\lim_{z_1\to x_j+ia-ib/2}(z_1-x_j-ia+ib/2)G(x_j-z_1-ib/2)=\lim_{z_1\to -ia}(-z-ia)G(z)=\frac{\sqrt{a_+a_-}}{2\pi i}.
\end{equation}
Observing that
\begin{equation}
2\pi i\, {\rm Res}\frac{G(x_j-z_1-ib/2)}{G(x_j-z_1+ib/2)}\Big\arrowvert_{z_1=x_j+ia-ib/2}=\frac{\sqrt{a_+a_-}}{G(ib-ia)}={\cal G}^{-1},
\end{equation}
we thus deduce
\begin{multline}\label{cL3Expr}
{\cal L}_3(x,y)=\int_{C_b+i\epsilon}dz_1\int_{C_b-i\epsilon}dz_2\, W_2(z){\cal S}^\sharp_3(x,z)J_2(z,\hat{y})\\
+{\cal G}^{-1}\int_{C_b-i\epsilon}dz_2\, \sum_{\nu=1}^3{\cal R}_\nu(x,z_2)J_2((x_\nu+ia-ib/2,z_2),\hat{y}),
\end{multline}
with remainder residue (cf.~\eqref{c})
\begin{equation}\label{Rnu}
\begin{split}
{\cal R}_\nu(x,z_2) &= \frac{1}{c(x_\nu-z_2+ia-ib/2)c(z_2-x_\nu-ia+ib/2)}\\
&\quad \times \prod_{j=1}^3 c(z_2-x_j-ia+ib/2)\cdot \prod_{\substack{j=1\\ j\neq\nu}}^3 c(x_\nu-x_j)\\
&= \prod_{\substack{j=1\\ j\neq\nu}}^3 c(z_2-x_j-ia+ib/2)\cdot \frac{\prod_{\substack{j=1\\ j\neq\nu}}^3 c(x_\nu-x_j)}{c(x_\nu-z_2+ia-ib/2)}\\
&= {\cal S}_2^\sharp(x(\nu),z_2)\frac{\prod_{\substack{j=1\\ j\neq\nu}}^3 c(x_\nu-x_j)}{c(x_\nu-z_2+ia-ib/2)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Now shifting the $z_2$-contours in \eqref{cL3Expr} up by $2\epsilon$, we only encounter the poles \eqref{ps} with $k=2$. In the residues spawned by the first integral we perform the interchange $z_1\leftrightarrow z_2$ and use the corresponding invariance of $J_2(z,\hat{y})$ to get
\begin{equation}\label{IntSum}
\int_{(C_b+i\epsilon)^2}dz\, W_2(z){\cal S}_3^\sharp(x,z)J_2(z,\hat{y})+{\cal G}^{-1}\int_{C_b+i\epsilon}dz_2\, \sum_{\nu=1}^3{\cal R}_\nu(x,z_2)J_2((x_\nu+ia-ib/2,z_2),\hat{y}).
\end{equation}
The second integral in \eqref{cL3Expr} yields a copy of the second integral in \eqref{IntSum} plus the residue term
\begin{equation}
{\cal G}^{-2}\sum_{\substack{\nu_1,\nu_2=1\\ \nu_1\neq\nu_2}}^3 {\cal R}_{\nu_1,\nu_2}(x)J_2((x_{\nu_1}+ia-ib/2,x_{\nu_2}+ia-ib/2),\hat{y}),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
{\cal R}_{\nu_1,\nu_2}(x)=\prod_{\ell=1}^2c(x_{\nu_\ell}-x_{\nu_3}),\ \ \ \{\nu_1,\nu_2,\nu_3\}=\{1,2,3\}.
\end{equation}
Hence, using invariance under the interchange $x_{\nu_1}\leftrightarrow x_{\nu_2}$, we obtain
\begin{multline}\label{cL3Expr2}
{\cal L}_3(x,y)=\int_{(C_b+i\epsilon)^2}dz\, W_2(z){\cal S}_3^\sharp(x,z)J_2(z,\hat{y})\\
+2{\cal G}^{-1}\int_{C_b+i\epsilon}dt\, \sum_{\nu=1}^3{\cal R}_\nu(x,t)J_2((x_\nu+ia-ib/2,t),\hat{y})\\
+2{\cal G}^{-2}\sum_{1\leq \nu_1<\nu_2\leq 3} {\cal R}_{\nu_1,\nu_2}(x)J_2((x_{\nu_1}+ia-ib/2,x_{\nu_2}+ia-ib/2),\hat{y}).
\end{multline}
Shifting all contours up to $C_b+ir$ without encountering further poles, we proceed to reformulate the resulting expression in terms of ${\rm E}_2$. From \eqref{Rnu}, \eqref{cK2} and \eqref{rE2}, we infer
\begin{equation}\label{ratio}
\begin{split}
\frac{{\cal R}_\nu(x,t)J_2((x_\nu+ia-ib/2,t),\hat{y})}{C_2(2a-b;\hat{y})}&=(\phi(b){\cal G})^{-1}{\rm E}_2((x_\nu+ia-ib/2,t),\hat{y})\\
&\quad \times {\cal K}_2^\sharp(x(\nu),t)C_2(x(\nu))\prod_{\substack{j=1\\ j\neq\nu}}^3 c(x_\nu-x_j).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Multiplying \eqref{cL3Expr2} by the prefactors in \eqref{rE3repLHS2}, writing
\begin{equation}
C_3(x)=C_2(x(\nu))\prod_{j<\nu}c(x_j-x_\nu)\cdot \prod_{j>\nu}c(x_\nu-x_j)
\end{equation}
and using \eqref{ratio}, \eqref{u} and \eqref{rE2hom}, we arrive at the right-hand side of \eqref{rE3rep2}.
\end{proof}
Multiplying \eqref{rE3rep2} by $M_3(y)\exp(i\alpha y_3(x_1+x_2+x_3))$, we continue by analyzing the last sum in the resulting expression, anticipating that it yields the dominant asymptotics of ${\rm E}_3$. Using~\eqref{phuinv} and~\eqref{cas}, we readily deduce
\begin{equation}\label{M3as}
|M_3(b;y)-1|\le c(b, \rho)\exp(-\alpha\rho d_3(y)),\ \ \ (b, y,\rho)\in S_a\times {\mathbb R}^3\times [a_s/2,a_s),\ \ \ d_3(y)\ge 0,
\end{equation}
where $c(b, \rho)$ is continuous on $S_a\times [a_s/2,a_s)$.
Moreover, observing that the function ${\rm E}_2^{\rm as}(z,w)$ \eqref{rE2as} can be rewritten
\begin{equation}
{\rm E}_2^{\rm as}(z,w)=\sum_{\tau\in S_2}\frac{C_2(z_\tau)}{C_2(z)}\exp(i\alpha z_\tau\cdot w),
\end{equation}
we infer from Proposition \ref{Prop:rE2as} that
\begin{multline}
\exp(i\alpha y_3(x_1+x_2+x_3)){\rm E}_2(x(\nu),(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3))\\
=\sum_{\substack{\sigma\in S_3\\ \sigma(3)=\nu}}\frac{C_2(x_{\sigma(1)},x_{\sigma(2)})}{C_2(x(\nu))}\exp(i\alpha x_\sigma\cdot y)+R_\nu(x,y),
\end{multline}
with the remainder satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{Rnub}
|R_\nu(b;x,y)|\le C(r,b)(1+|x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2|)\exp(-\alpha r(y_1-y_2)),
\end{equation}
for all $(b,x,y)\in S_a\times {\mathbb R}^3\times {\mathbb R}^3$ with~$y_1-y_2\ge 0$. Due to the identity
\begin{equation}
\frac{C_3(x(\nu),x_\nu)C_2(x_{\sigma(1)},x_{\sigma(2)})}{C_2(x(\nu))}=c(x_{\sigma(1)}-x_{\sigma(2)})\prod_{\substack{j=1\\ j\neq\nu}}^3 c(x_j-x_{\sigma(3)})=C_3(x_\sigma),
\end{equation}
we thus have
\begin{multline}\label{rE3Exp}
\exp(i\alpha y_3(x_1+x_2+x_3))\sum_{\nu=1}^3\frac{C_3(x(\nu),x_\nu)}{C_3(x)}{\rm E}_2(x(\nu),(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3))\\
=\sum_{\sigma\in S_3}\frac{C_3(x_\sigma)}{C_3(x)}\exp(i\alpha x_\sigma\cdot y)+R(x,y)={\rm E}_3^{\rm as}(b;x,y)+R(x,y),
\end{multline}
with remainder
\begin{equation}
R(b;x,y)=\sum_{\nu=1}^3\frac{C_3(x(\nu),x_\nu)}{C_3(x)}R_\nu(b;x,y).
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{CN} and the $c$-function asymptotics \eqref{cas} with the bound \eqref{Rnub}, we obtain the majorization
\begin{equation}\label{Rb}
|R(b;x,y)|\leq C(r,b)\sum_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}(1+|x_j-x_k|)\cdot \exp(-\alpha r(y_1-y_2)),
\end{equation}
valid for all $(b,x,y)\in S_a\times {\mathbb R}^3\times {\mathbb R}^3$ with~$y_1-y_2\ge 0$, and with $C$ continuous on $[a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a$.
Our considerations thus far suggest that the dominant asymptotics of ${\rm E}_3$ is given by \eqref{E3sc}. The following counterpart of Proposition \ref{Prop:rE2as} substantiates this, together with a crucial remainder estimate.
\begin{theorem}\label{Thm:rE3as}
Letting $(r,b)\in [a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a$, we have
\begin{equation}
\left|\left({\rm E}_3-{\rm E}_3^{{\rm as}}\right)(b;x,y)\right|<C(r,b)\prod_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}(1+|x_j-x_k|)\cdot\exp(-\alpha rd_3(y)),
\end{equation}
for all $x,y\in {\mathbb R}^3$ with $d_3(y)> 0$; here, $C$ is continuous on $ [a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
It follows from Lemma~\ref{Lem:aux3} and \eqref{M3as}, \eqref{rE3Exp} and \eqref{Rb} that it suffices to prove the bounds
\begin{equation}\label{rI3bou}
\Big|\int_{(C_b+ir')^2}dz\,{\rm I}_3(x,y,z)\Big|<C_0(r,b)|\rho_3(b;y)|\prod_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}|x_j-x_k|\cdot\exp(-\alpha rd_3(y)),
\end{equation}
\begin{multline}\label{rI3mbou}
\Big| \int_{C_b+ir'}dt\,\hat{{\rm I}}_{3,\nu}(x,y,t)\Big|<C_\nu(r,b)|\rho_3(b;y)|\\ \times\big(1+|x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2|\big)\Big(1+\sum_{j=1}^2|x_\nu-x(\nu)_j|\Big)\exp(-\alpha rd_3(y)),\ \ \ \nu=1,2,3,
\end{multline}
for all $x,y\in{\mathbb R}^3$ with $d_3(y)> 0$. Here we have introduced
\begin{equation}\label{rp}
r'\equiv (r+a_s)/2\in(r,a_s),
\end{equation}
and the functions $C_0,\ldots,C_3$ are continuous on $ [a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a$.
Taking $z_k\to z_k+i(a-b/2+r')$, we use the identity \eqref{rE2hom} to deduce
\begin{multline}\label{rI3Expr}
\int_{(C_b+ir')^2}dz\,{\rm I}_3(x,y,z)= \rho_3(b;y)\exp(-\alpha r'(y_1+y_2-2y_3))\\
\times C_3(b;x)^{-1}\int_{{\mathbb R}^2}dz\, \frac{{\rm E}_2(b;z,(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3))}{c(b;z_2-z_1)}\prod_{j=1}^3\prod_{k=1}^2\frac{G(z_k+ir'-x_j+ia-ib)}{G(z_k+ir'-x_j+ia)}.
\end{multline}
Next, we note that \eqref{c} and \eqref{cas} imply
\begin{equation}\label{crepb}
|c(b;z)^{-1}|\le C(b)|\sinh(\gamma z)|,\ \ (b,z)\in S_a\times {\mathbb R},\ \ \gamma=\alpha {\rm Re}\, b/2,
\end{equation}
with $C$ continuous on $S_a$. Combining this with the estimates~\eqref{rE2bex} and \eqref{Gratb}, we deduce
\begin{multline}\label{conest}
\left|\int_{(C_b+ir')^2}dz\,{\rm I}_3(x,y,z)\right|\leq c_2(r,b)|\rho_3(b;y)|\exp(-\alpha r'(y_1+y_2-2y_3))(1+y_1-y_2)\\
\times |C_3(b;x)|^{-1}\int_{{\mathbb R}^2}dz\,\frac{(z_1-z_2)\sinh(\gamma(z_1-z_2))}{\prod_{j=1}^3\prod_{k=1}^2\cosh(\gamma(x_j-z_k))},\ \ x,y\in{\mathbb R}^3,\ \ d_3(y)>0,
\end{multline}
for some $c_2$ continuous on $[a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a$. An explicit evaluation of the integral on the right-hand side can be obtained from the $N=2$ case of I Lemma C.2, which yields
\begin{equation}\label{intEval}
\int_{{\mathbb R}^2}dz\,\frac{(z_1-z_2)\sinh(\gamma(z_1-z_2))}{\prod_{j=1}^3\prod_{k=1}^2\cosh(\gamma(x_j-z_k))}=4\gamma^{-3}\prod_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}\frac{\gamma(x_j-x_k)}{\sinh(\gamma(x_j-x_k))}.
\end{equation}
Now we use~\eqref{crepb} once more to obtain
\begin{equation}
\Big|C_3(b;x)^{-1}\Big/\prod_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}\sinh(\gamma(x_j-x_k))\Big|\leq c_3(b),
\end{equation}
with $c_3$ continuous on $S_a$. Finally, since we assume $d_3(y)$~\eqref{defd} is positive, we have
\begin{multline}
(y_1-y_2)\exp(-\alpha r'(y_1+y_2-2y_3))
<(y_1-y_3)\exp(-\alpha r'((y_1-y_3)+(y_2-y_3)))\\ <C(r)\exp(-\alpha r((y_1-y_3)+(y_2-y_3)))<C(r)\exp(-\alpha rd_3(y)),
\end{multline}
with $C$ continuous on $[a_s/2,a_s)$. Putting the pieces together, the desired majorization~\eqref{rI3bou} easily follows.
We continue by proving~\eqref{rI3mbou}. Taking $t\to t+i(a-b/2+r')$ and appealing once more to \eqref{rE2hom}, we arrive at
\begin{multline}\label{rI3mExpr}
\int_{C_b+ir'}dt\,\hat{{\rm I}}_{3,\nu}(x,y,t)= \rho_3(b;y)C_2(b;x(\nu))^{-1}\\
\times \int_{\mathbb R} dt\,{\rm E}_2(b;(x_\nu,t+ir'),(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3))\prod_{j\neq\nu}\frac{G(t+ir'-x_j+ia-ib)}{G(t+ir'-x_j+ia)}.
\end{multline}
Using Proposition \ref{Prop:rE2b} and the bounds \eqref{cas}, \eqref{Gratb}, we now deduce
\begin{multline}\label{hI3b}
\left|\int_{C_b+ir'}dt\,\hat{{\rm I}}_{3,\nu}(x,y,t)\right|\leq c_4(r,b)|\rho_3(b;y)|\exp(-\alpha r'(y_2-y_3))\\
\times \exp(\gamma|x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2|)\int_{\mathbb R} dt\,(1+|x_\nu-t|)\exp\Big(-\gamma\sum_{j=1}^2|x(\nu)_j-t|\Big),
\end{multline}
with $c_4$ continuous on $[a_s/2,a_s)\times S_a$. To bound the remaining integral, we note that the integrand is invariant under the interchange $x(\nu)_1\leftrightarrow x(\nu)_2$, so that no generality is lost by assuming $x(\nu)_2\leq x(\nu)_1$. Then we can write the integral as a sum of three integrals
\begin{equation}
I_n\equiv \int_{x(\nu)_n}^{x(\nu)_{n-1}}dt\,(1+|x_\nu-t|)\exp\Big(-\gamma\sum_{j=1}^2|x(\nu)_j-t|\Big),\ \ \ n=1,2,3,
\end{equation}
where $x(\nu)_0\equiv\infty$ and $x(\nu)_3\equiv-\infty$. For $I_1$, we have
\begin{multline}\label{I1b}
\exp(\gamma|x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2|) I_1\\
=\exp(\gamma(x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2))\int_{x(\nu)_1}^{\infty} dt\,(1+|x_\nu-t|)\exp(-\gamma(2t-x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2))\\
=\int_0^\infty dt\,(1+|x_\nu-x(\nu)_1-t|)\exp(-2\gamma t)\\
\leq\int_0^\infty dt\,(1+t+|x_\nu-x(\nu)_1|)\exp(-2\gamma t)<C(1+|x_\nu-x(\nu)_1|),
\end{multline}
where we can take $C=(1+1/2\gamma)/2\gamma$. Similarly, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{I3b}
\exp(\gamma|x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2|)I_3<C(1+|x_\nu-x(\nu)_2|).
\end{equation}
In the case of $I_2$, we have
\begin{multline}\label{I2b}
\exp(\gamma|x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2|) I_2=\int_{x(\nu)_2}^{x(\nu)_1}dt\,(1+|x_\nu-t|)\\
<\int_{x(\nu)_2}^{x(\nu)_1}dt\,\Big(1+\sum_{j=1}^2|x_\nu-x(\nu)_j|\Big)=(x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2)\Big(1+\sum_{j=1}^2|x_\nu-x(\nu)_j|\Big).
\end{multline}
Combining the bounds \eqref{hI3b} and \eqref{I1b}--\eqref{I2b}, we readily infer the majorization \eqref{rI3mbou}.
\end{proof}
We conclude this section by deriving a uniform bound on ${\rm E}_3(x,y)$, which is the counterpart of Prop.~\ref{Prop:rE2b}.
\begin{theorem}\label{Thm:ubound}
Letting $(\delta,b)\in (0,a_s]\times S_a$, we have
\begin{equation}
|{\rm E}_3(b;x,y)|<C(\delta,b)\prod_{1\leq j<k\leq 3} \big(1+|{\rm Re}\, (x_j-x_k)|\big)\cdot\exp\Big(-\alpha\sum_{j=1}^3y_jv_j\Big),
\end{equation}
for all $(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^3\times{\mathbb R}^3$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{N3xyas}
v_j-v_k\in[-a_s+\delta,0] ,\ \ \ 1\leq j<k\leq 3,\ \ d_3(y)>0,\ \ \ v={\rm Im}\, x,
\end{equation}
where $C$ is a continuous function on $(0,a_s]\times S_a$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We exploit once more the representation for ${\rm E}_3$ given by \eqref{rE3rep2}. Focusing first on the last sum, we begin by noting that the regularity of $u(b;x_k-x_j)$ for $-a_s<v_j-v_k<m({\rm Re}\, b)$ and the $u$-asymptotics \eqref{uas} entail
\begin{equation}\label{ubo}
|u(b;-z)|\le c(b,{\rm Im}\, z),\ \ \ \ (b,{\rm Im}\, z)\in S_a\times (-a_s,0],
\end{equation}
where $c(b,{\rm Im}\, z)$ is continuous on $S_a\times (-a_s,0]$. Next, Prop.~\ref{Prop:rE2b} implies an estimate
\begin{eqnarray}\label{E2bo}
|{\rm E}_2(x(\nu),(y_1-y_3,y_2-y_3))| & < & C(\delta,b)(1+ |{\rm Re}\, (x(\nu)_1- x(\nu)_2)|)
\nonumber \\
& \times & \exp\Big(-\alpha\sum_{k=1}^2(y_k-y_3){\rm Im}\, x(\nu)_k\Big).
\end{eqnarray}
Moreover, from \eqref{M3} and \eqref{crepb}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
|M_3(b;y)\exp(iy_3(x_1+x_2+x_3))|\leq c(b)\exp\Big(-\alpha\sum_{j=1}^3y_jv_j\Big)\exp\Big(\alpha\sum_{k=1}^2(y_k-y_3)v_k\Big),
\end{equation}
for all $(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^3\times{\mathbb R}^3$, where $c$ is continuous on $S_a$.
When we now take the product of the functions at hand and use
\begin{multline}
\exp\Big(\alpha\sum_{k=1}^2(y_k-y_3)v_k\Big) \exp\Big(-\alpha\sum_{k=1}^2(y_k-y_3){\rm Im}\, x(\nu)_k\Big)\\
=\exp\Big(\alpha\sum_{k=\nu }^2(y_k-y_3)(v_k-v_{k+1})\Big)\le 1, \ \ \ d_3(y)>0, \ v_k-v_{k+1}\le 0 ,\ k=1,2,
\end{multline}
then the desired bound for this contribution to~${\rm E}_3(b;x,y)$ easily follows.
As a consequence, it suffices to show that the
integrals appearing on the right-hand side of \eqref{rE3rep2} are bounded by
\begin{equation}\label{major}
C(\delta,b)|\rho_3(b;y)|\exp\Big(-\alpha\sum_{k=1}^2(y_k-y_3)v_k\Big)\prod_{1\leq j<k\leq 3}(1+|{\rm Re}\, (x_j-x_k)|),
\end{equation}
for all $(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^3\times{\mathbb R}^2$ satisfying \eqref{N3xyas}.
Specializing the first equality in \eqref{rE3hom} to $\eta=-v_1$, it becomes clear that we may restrict attention to
\begin{equation}
0\leq v_1\leq v_2\leq v_3\leq a_s-\delta.
\end{equation}
Requiring at first $x\in{\mathbb R}^3$, we begin by considering the integral of ${\rm I}_3$ along the $z_k$-contours $C_b+ir$. Taking $z_k\to z_k+i(a- b/2+r)$ and making use of the identity \eqref{rE2hom}, we obtain again \eqref{rI3Expr}, but now with $r^\prime\to r$. Allowing next $v_j\neq 0$, we require
\begin{equation}
\delta^\prime\leq r-v_j\leq a_s-\delta^\prime,\ \ \ \delta^\prime\in(0,a_s/2],\ \ j=1,2,3,
\end{equation}
in order to stay clear of the poles of the $G$-ratios for $z_k+ir-v_j=0,a_s$. By setting
\begin{equation}\label{rde}
r=a_s-\delta/2,\ \ \ \delta^\prime=\delta/2,
\end{equation}
we can admit any $x\in{\mathbb C}^3$ satisfying the conditions in \eqref{N3xyas}. Using the bounds \eqref{rE2bex}, \eqref{crepb} and \eqref{Gratb}, we now infer
\begin{multline}
\left|\int_{(C_b+ir)^2}dz\,{\rm I}_3(x,y,z)\right|\leq c_2(\delta,b)|\rho_3(y)|\exp(-\alpha r(y_1+y_2-2y_3))(1+y_1-y_2)\\
\times |C_3(b;x)|^{-1}\int_{{\mathbb R}^2}dz\,\frac{(z_1-z_2)\sinh(\gamma(z_1-z_2))}{\prod_{j=1}^3\prod_{k=1}^2\cosh(\gamma({\rm Re}\, x_j-z_k))},
\end{multline}
with $c_2$ continuous on $(0,a_s]\times S_a$.
Recalling the $c$-asymptotics~\eqref{cas} and the integral evaluation~\eqref{intEval}, we see that for the majorization~\eqref{major} to hold, it suffices to show that
\begin{equation}
B\equiv \exp(-\alpha (r+v_1-v_2)(y_2-y_3)-\alpha r (y_1-y_3))(1+y_1-y_2)
\end{equation}
is bounded. Now since $d_3(y)>0$ by assumption, we have
\begin{equation}
B<\exp (-\alpha \delta (y_2-y_3)/2-\alpha a_s(y_1-y_3)/2)(1+y_1-y_3)<C,
\end{equation}
so this is indeed the case.
It remains to bound the integral of $\hat{{\rm I}}_{3,\nu}$ along the $t$-contour $C_b+ir$. Taking $t\to t+i(a- b/2+r)$ and using once more the identity \eqref{rE2hom}, we obtain \eqref{rI3mExpr} with $r^\prime\to r$. It follows from~\eqref{rE2vb} and the bounds \eqref{cas}, \eqref{Gratb} that we have
\begin{multline}
\left|\int_{C_b+ir}dt\,\hat{{\rm I}}_{3,\nu}(x,y,t)\right|\leq c_3(\delta,b)|\rho_3(y)|\exp\big(-\alpha[v_\nu(y_1-y_3)+r(y_2-y_3)]\big)\\
\times \exp(\gamma|{\rm Re}\, (x(\nu)_1-x(\nu)_2)|)\int_{\mathbb R} dt\big(1+|{\rm Re}\, x_\nu-t|\big)\exp\big(-\gamma|t-{\rm Re}\, x(\nu)_1|-\gamma|t-{\rm Re}\, x(\nu)_2|\big),
\end{multline}
where $c_3$ is continuous on $(0,a_s]\times S_a$.
Finally, it follows from $v_\nu\geq v_1$ and $r>v_2$ that
$$
\exp\big(-\alpha[v_\nu(y_1-y_3)+r(y_2-y_3)]\big)<\exp\Big(-\alpha\sum_{k=1}^2(y_k-y_3)v_k\Big),
$$
and to bound the remaining integral, we can proceed as in the proof of Theorem \ref{Thm:rE3as}. Indeed, since the integrand is $x(\nu)_1\leftrightarrow x(\nu)_2$ invariant, we may assume ${\rm Re}\, x(\nu)_2\leq {\rm Re}\, x(\nu)_1$. Then writing ${\mathbb R}=(-\infty,{\rm Re}\, x(\nu)_2)\cup[{\rm Re}\, x(\nu)_2,{\rm Re}\, x(\nu)_1)\cup[{\rm Re}\, x(\nu)_1,\infty)$ and estimating the corresponding three integrals separately, we obtain the desired bound.
\end{proof}
\begin{appendix}
\section{The hyperbolic gamma function revisited}\label{AppA}
In the main text we need a few properties of the hyperbolic gamma function that were not mentioned in I Appendix A. They are collected in this appendix.
First, from Appendix A in \cite{R99} we recall that the hyperbolic gamma function can be written as a ratio of entire functions,
\begin{equation}\label{GE}
G(a_+,a_-;z)=E(a_+,a_-;z)/E(a_+,a_-;-z),
\end{equation}
with the zeros of $E(a_+,a_-;z)$ located at
\begin{equation}\label{Ezs}
z=ia+ip_{kl},\ \ \ k,l\in{\mathbb N},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{pkl}
p_{kl}\equiv ka_++la_-.
\end{equation}
The order of these zeros equals the number of distinct pairs $(m,n)\in{\mathbb N}^2$ such that $p_{mn}=p_{kl}$. In particular, for $a_+/a_-\notin{\mathbb Q}$ all zeros are simple.
The function $E(z)\equiv E(a_+,a_-;z)$ from~\cite{R99} we employ in this paper is a cousin of Barnes' double gamma function. It has no zeros for $z$ in the half plane
\begin{equation}
\Lambda\equiv \{z\in{\mathbb C}\mid {\rm Im}\, z<a\},
\end{equation}
so it can be written as
\begin{equation}
E(z)=\exp(e(z)),\ \ \ z\in \Lambda,
\end{equation}
with $e(z)$ holomorphic in $\Lambda$. Explicitly, $e(z)$ has the integral representation
\begin{equation}
e(a_+,a_-;z)=\frac{1}{4}\int_0^\infty \frac{dy}{y}\left(\frac{1-e^{-2iyz}}{{\rm sh} a_+y~{\rm sh} a_-y}-\frac{2iz}{a_+a_-y}-\frac{z^2}{a_+a_-}(e^{-2a_+y}+e^{-2a_-y})\right).
\end{equation}
A distinguishing feature of this $E$-function is that it satisfies the two A$\Delta$Es
\begin{equation}\label{EADE}
\frac{E(z+ia_{-\delta}/2)}{E(z-ia_{-\delta}/2)}=\frac{\sqrt{2\pi}}{\Gamma(iz/a_{\delta}+1/2)}\exp(izK_\delta),\ \ \ \delta=+,-,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
K_\delta\equiv \frac{1}{2a_{\delta}}\ln\left(\frac{a_{-\delta}}{a_{\delta}}\right).
\end{equation}
We need one of these A$\Delta$Es in Subsections \ref{Sec22} and \ref{Sec32}.
Finally, we have occasion to make use of the Fourier transform formula from Proposition C.1 in \cite{R11}. Specifically, let $\mu,\nu\in{\mathbb C}$ be such that
\begin{equation}
-a<{\rm Im}\, \mu<{\rm Im}\, \nu<a,
\end{equation}
and assume that $y\in{\mathbb C}$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
|{\rm Im}\, y|<{\rm Im}\, (\nu-\mu)/2.
\end{equation}
Then the pertinent formula can be written
\begin{multline}\label{Fform}
\left(\frac{\alpha}{2\pi}\right)^{1/2}\int_{\mathbb R} dz\exp(i\alpha pz)\frac{G(z-\nu)}{G(z-\mu)}\\
=\exp(i\alpha p(\mu+\nu)/2)G(ia+\mu-\nu)\prod_{\delta=+,-}G(\delta p-ia+(\nu-\mu)/2).
\end{multline}
\end{appendix}
\bibliographystyle{amsalpha}
|
\section{First order approximation of spiral transform}
$A_0$, $A_1$ and $A_{-1}$ designate the random wavefields obtained without phase mask, with a $+1$ spiral phase (${\rm SP}^{+1}$) mask and with a $-1$ spiral phase (${\rm SP}^{-1}$) mask, respectively. Here we derive $A_1$ from $A_0$. $A_{-1}$ can then be deduced by changing the sign of the charge. Provided that $A_1$ is obtained by multiplying the wavefront at infinity by $e^{i\Theta}$ ($\Theta$ being the azimuthal coordinate in the far field), it can be expressed as a function of $A_0$ as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:convolution}
A_1 ({\bf r}) & = & S_1 \ast A_0 \ ({\bf r})\\
& = & \int{ S_1 ({\bf r^\prime}) A_0 ({\bf r}-{\bf r^\prime}) ds^\prime}
\end{eqnarray}
where $S_1({\bf r})={\cal F}(T)$ is the amplitude point spread function of an spiral transform given
by the Fourier transform of the transmission coefficient $T=\Pi({\bf k})e^{i\Theta}$. $\Pi$ stands for the pupil profile and ${\bf k}$ for the spatial vector in the pupil plane.
$T$ can then be projected on the Laguerre-Gaussian (LG) functions which form a complete basis. Since LG modes are eigenfunctions of the Fourier transform~\cite{Liu_IEEE_12}, the decomposition of $S_1$ directly arises from the decomposition of $T$. For a pupil function with circular symmetry, the decomposition of $T$ (and $S_1$) over LG functions only involves function with orbital number $l=1$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pupil_summation}
\Pi({\bf k})e^{i\Theta}=\displaystyle{\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}a_n{\rm LG_n^1}}
\end{equation}
In this expression, the coefficient $a_0$ can be maximized by properly choosing the waist $w_k$ of the ${\rm LG}$ functions in the Fourier plane, thus allowing to approximate $T$ by $a_0.{\rm LG_0^1}$. For instance, for a disk-shaped pupil $\Pi$ with radius $k_{max}=2\pi \frac{NA}{\lambda}$, where $NA$ is the numerical aperture of the beam and $\lambda$ the illuminating wavelength, it can be easily shown numerically that $a_0=0.93$ for $w_k=k_{max}/2.137$, meaning that ${\rm LG_0^1}$ weights for $|a_0|^2=87\%$ of total energy in the summation in Eq.~\eqref{eq:pupil_summation}.
For the more general case of a pupil support $\Pi$ with circular symmetry and centered energy distribution, $S_1$ is thus a function mainly described by the ${\rm LG_0^1}$ function.
Since $S_1$ is a function peaked in the vicinity of the origin, a first order Taylor expansion for $A_0$ can be performed:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:taylor}
A_0({\bf r}-{\bf r^\prime}) = A_0({\bf r})-\nabla_\perp A_0({\bf r}) \cdot {\bf r^\prime}+\mathcal{O}(\|r^\prime\|^2)
\end{equation}
Inserting this approximation in Eq.~\eqref{eq:convolution} yields for $A_1$ an expression proportional to the gradient of $A_0$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:first_order}
A_1^{(1)}({\bf r}) = -\nabla_\perp A_0({\bf r}) \cdot {\bf K_1}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf K_1}$ is a constant vector given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:S1a}
{\bf K_1} = \int {{\bf r^\prime} S_1^\ast({\bf r^\prime}) ds^\prime}
\end{equation}
If we assume that $S_1$ has circular symmetry, then:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:S1b}
{\bf K_1} = K\sigma_-
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_-=({\bf e_x}-i{\bf e_y})/\sqrt{2}$ and where $K$ depends on $S_1$.
We note that the end result of this decomposition consists in approximating a spiral transform by the gradient of the field. In the Fourier domain, a spiral transform is obtained multiplying by $\Pi({\bf k})e^{i\Theta}$ while the derivative in Eq.\eqref{eq:first_order} is obtained multiplying ${\cal F}(A_0)$ by $k_x+ik_y$.
To estimate $K$, a good criterion can be to consider that energy should be conserved when adding a phase mask at infinity. Therefore, we have $\left<|A_0|^2\right>=\left<|A_1|^2\right>$. Moreover $A_0$ varies with typical spatial scales of $\lambda/NA$. Therefore the gradient of $A_0$ is of the order of $A_0 \times NA/\lambda$, and according to Eq.~\eqref{eq:first_order}, it is estimated that ${\bf K_1}$ is of the order of $\lambda/NA$.
Equivalently, since $A_0$ can be obtained from $A_1$ by placing the complementary spiral phase mask $e^{-i\Theta}$, we may write at first order:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:first_order_b}
A_0^{(1)}({\bf r}) = -\nabla_\perp A_1({\bf r}) \cdot {\bf K_{-1}}
\end{equation}
with:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf K_{-1}} & = & \int{ {\bf r^\prime} S_{-1}^*({\bf r^\prime}) ds^\prime}\\
& = & {\bf -K_1^\ast}
\end{eqnarray}
where $S_{-1}=-(S_1)^*$ is the coherent spiral point spread function corresponding to a $e^{-i\Theta}$ phase mask.
To summarize, the main hypotheses enabling the derivation of Eq.~\eqref{eq:first_order} and Eq.~\eqref{eq:first_order_b} are that the incident beam has a circular symmetry and the Fourier transform of the transmission coefficient corresponds mainly to the Laguerre-Gaussian mode ${\rm LG_0^1}$.
A numerical illustration of the accuracy of the first order development of Eq.~\eqref{eq:first_order} is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:first_order}. The scalar wavefield $A_0$ was obtained here considering a top-hat circular incident beam on which random phases are imprinted, as described in the next section but on a smaller image grid. Maxima and vortices of charge $+1$ of $A^{(1)}_1$ and $A_1$ are marked and demonstrate a high spatial correlation.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure_S121.pdf}
\caption{Illustrative validation of the first order approximation given by Eq.~\eqref{eq:first_order}. Intensity (a,b) and phase (c,d) of the complementary random wavefield $A_1$. Patterns obtained from exact numerical simulation of a spiral transform (a,c) are compared with those obtained from Eq.~\eqref{eq:first_order}, the first order approximation (b,d). Intensity maxima of (a) and (b) are materialized by x-crosses and diamonds, respectively. Spiral phase singularities of charge $+1$ in (c) and (d) are materialized by plain and hollow circles, respectively.}
\label{fig:first_order}
\end{figure}
\section{Numerical simulations of Gaussian scalar random wavefields}
Numerical simulations of Gaussian scalar random wavefields were performed to have sample sizes sufficient to estimate statistical behaviors. The far-field of a uniformly-illuminated circular disk comprised of random phases was computed, without and with a ${\rm SP}^{\pm 1}$ mask, to simulate $A_0$, $A_1$ and $A_{-1}$, respectively. The transverse coherence length, i.e. the speckle grain size (FWHM), was set to $\lambda/(2.NA)= 37$ pixels where NA is the numerical aperture, and a square grid of 64 mega pixels was computed. These parameters lead to a count of critical points per generated wavefields of: $\sim 1.0 \times 10^4$ vortices of each sign, $\sim 1.58 \times 10^4$ intensity maxima and $\sim 3.29 \times 10^4$ intensity saddle points. The pixel-precise location of the points were determined using the topology of each pixel neighborhood. The radial probability function of the distance between pairs of points was normalized to account for the discretization of the images in square pixels.
\section{Correlation between critical points of $I_0$ and $I_{-1}-I_1$ }
Writing $A_0=\xi+i\eta$ (with $\xi$ and $\eta$ the real and imaginary part of $A_0$, respectively), the charge of an optical vortex is given by the sign of the vorticity vector $\omega$ projected on the propagation axis \cite{Berry_PRSLA_2000}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:omega_def}
\omega\cdot {\bf e_z}=\partial_x\xi \partial_y\eta-\partial_y\xi \partial_x\eta
\end{equation}
From Eq.~\eqref{eq:first_order}, it is straightforward to show that :
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:omega}
I_{-1}^{(1)}-I_1^{(1)} = \frac{K^2}{2}\omega\cdot{\bf e_z}
\end{equation}
Another remarkable correlation can be deduced from Eq.~\eqref{eq:omega} between $I_{-1}-I_1$ and non-zero stationary points of $I_0$. At these latter locations, we have $\nabla I_0={\bf 0}$. Excluding zero solutions from this vector equation yields $\partial_x\xi \partial_y\eta-\partial_y\xi \partial_x\eta=0$, meaning that these points lie on nodal lines (or surface in three dimensions) of $\omega\cdot {\bf e_z}\propto I_{-1}^{(1)}-I_1^{(1)}$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:distance_lignes}a illustrates form experimental data that $M_0$ and $S_0$ are in the close vicinity of the nodal lines $I_{-1}-I_1=0$. Numerical simulations (Fig.~\ref{fig:distance_lignes}b) demonstrate that maxima $M_0$ and saddle points $S_0$ of $I_0$ statistically lie closer to nodal lines than maxima and saddle points of a non-correlated speckle pattern.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure_S3.pdf}
\caption{Correlation between critical points of $I_0$ and $I_{-1}-I_1$. From experimental data shown in Fig.1, $I_{-1}-I_1$ is shown as a binary map where positive values are in white and negative ones are in black. The nodal lines $I_{-1}-I_1=0$ (borders of white areas) coincide with maxima $M_0$ (square) and saddle points $S_0$ (cross) of $I_0$ (a). From numerical simulations, the radial probability density functions (RPDFs) of the distance from the maxima $M_0$ and saddle points $S_0$ to the nodal lines (b). For comparison, the RPDFs of the distance from the maxima $M_{rand}$ and saddle points $S_{rand}$ of a non-correlated speckle pattern to the nodal lines $I_{-1}-I_1=0$ is displayed. The RPDFs show that $M_0$ and $S_0$ are closer to the nodal lines. The abscissa unit is $\lambda/(2.{\rm NA})$.}
\label{fig:distance_lignes}
\end{figure}
\section{Complementary speckle generation through a ${\rm 700\mu m}$-thick slice of chicken breast}
Fig.~\ref{fig:chicken} illustrates speckle patterns recorded behind a ${\rm 700\mu m}$-thick slice of chicken breast tissue. Speckle patterns presented in the right column result from the depolarized laser beam. Therefore, the obtained speckle patterns can be interpreted as the incoherent summation of two non-correlated speckle patterns, each corresponding to an orthogonal transverse polarization respectively. Despite the depolarization, the autocorrelation functions of the sums $I_0 + I_1 $ and $I_0 + I_1 + I_{-1}$ exhibit an enlargement of the FWHM by factors $\sqrt{2}$ and $\sqrt{3}$, respectively. Speckle patterns presented in the left column correspond to scattered wavefields linearly polarized (arbitrary orientation) behind the scattering medium, and are identical to speckle patterns obtained through a ground glass diffuser.
Gray scale images of the sums $I_0 + I_1 + I_{-1}$ (second row) enable to visually assess the synthetic enlargement of the correlation area.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Figure_S2.pdf}
\caption{Speckle generated behind a chicken breast slice of $700\mu m$ illuminated with a polarized laser beam, without (right column) and when adding a polarizer behind the slice (left column). Single speckle pattern (top row) and numerical incoherent addition of the three complementary speckle patterns (middle row). The autocorrelation functions of these speckle patterns are plotted (bottom row) and demonstrate that each polarization component exhibit exactly the same enlargement of the speckle grain size. This result demonstrate that complementary speckle generation also works for the polarization component arising from depolarization by the tissue.}
\label{fig:chicken}
\end{figure}
\section{Sum and fluctuation of complementary speckle patterns enhance low spatial frequencies}
Fig.~\ref{fig:FFT} compares the sum of complementary speckle patterns $I_0+I_1+I_{-1}$ and the per-pixel standard deviation of $I_0$, $I_1$ and $I_{-1}$ obtained from numerical simulation (first column), as well as the magnitude of their 2D Fourier transform (second column), to the sum and per-pixel standard deviation of three non-correlated speckle patterns.
The Fourier transform of the sum of the complementary speckle patterns shows an enhancement of the low spatial frequencies in comparison with a single speckle pattern. This result corresponds to the enlargement of the auto-correlation function observed experimentally, and was therefore expected.
The standard deviation quantifies the per-pixel fluctuation across $I_0$, $I_1$ and $I_{-1}$. The exchange between intensity maxima and zeros and the finite correlation length in speckle patterns lead to fluctuations similar on a local scale, thus enhancing the low spatial frequency components in the standard deviation image.
While the sum of non-correlated speckle patterns leads to the same spectral support as a single speckle pattern (bounded to the circle of unity), the standard deviation contain higher spatial frequencies. For complementary speckle patterns, a similar enlargement of the support is observed, but it is dominated by an building up of low spatial frequency.
The speckle images illustrate the synthetic reinforcement of low spacial frequency for the sum and fluctuation of complementary speckle pattens in comparison to random speckle patterns.
\begin{figure*}[b]
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.8\paperwidth]{Figure_S51.png}
\caption{From numerical simulation, intensity maps (first column) and magnitude of the Fourier transform (second column) of $I_0$, the sum $I_0+I_1+I_{-1}$, and the per-pixel standard deviation of $I_0$, $I_1$ and $I_{-1}$, respectively. For comparison, intensity maps (third column) and magnitude of the Fourier transform (forth column) are displayed for the sum and per-pixel standard deviation of three non-correlated speckle patterns. For the sake of visibility, the mean value was substracted to the intensity maps before computing the Fourier transform. The length unit is $\lambda / (2{\rm NA})$, and the frequency unit is $(2{\rm NA}) / \lambda$. Dashed white circles mark the unit circle.}
\label{fig:FFT}
\end{figure*}
|
\section*{Introduction}
For many classical groups $G$, we show that each element is a product of two involutions.
The involutions belong to a group $\widetilde{G}$ containing $G$ such that $[\widetilde{G}:G] \leq 2$.
We also prove a similar factorization for elements of the corresponding similitude groups.
Our interest in such factorizations stems from an application to the representation theory of reductive groups over
non-archimedean local fields. We are interested in involutary automorphisms of such groups that take each irreducible smooth representation to its dual. Echoing \cite{Ad}, we call these {\it dualizing} involutions. They do not always exist in our setting (we give an example in \S\ref{non-existence}). They do exist, however, for many classical $p$-adic groups by a result of M{\oe}glin, Vign\'{e}ras and Waldspurger
(\cite{MoViWa87} Chap.~IV \S~II). We re-prove this result and slightly extend its scope as explained below.
To make more precise statements, we need to define the classical and similitude groups we consider.
Let $E/F$ be a field extension with $E=F$ or $[E:F]=2$. We assume in the quadratic case that $E/F$ is a Galois extension. In all cases
we write $\tau$ for the generator of ${\rm Gal} (E/F)$, so that $\tau$ has order two when $[E:F] = 2$ and $\tau = 1$ when $E=F$.
Let $V$ be a finite dimensional vector space over $E$ with a non-degenerate $\epsilon$-hermitian form $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ ($\epsilon = \pm 1$)
which we take to be linear in the first variable. Thus
\[
\langle \alpha u + \beta v, w \rangle = \alpha \langle u, w \rangle + \beta \langle v,w \rangle \,\,\,\text{and} \,\,\,
\langle v, w \rangle = \epsilon \, \tau ( \langle w, v \rangle )
\]
for all $\alpha, \beta \in E$ and $ u, v, w \in V$. It follows that $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ is $\tau$-linear in the second variable:
\[
\langle u, \alpha v + \beta w \rangle = \tau(\alpha) \langle u, v \rangle + \tau(\beta) \langle u , w \rangle.
\]
In the case $\text{char} \,F = 2$ and $E=F$ we assume also that
$\langle v, v \rangle = 0$ for all $v \in V$, that is, $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ is symplectic.
We write ${\rm U}(V)$ for the isometry group (or unitary group) of $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$
and
${\rm GU}(V)$ for the corresponding similitude group. That is,
\begin{align*}
{\rm U}(V) &= \{ g \in {\rm Aut}_E (V) : \langle g v, g v' \rangle = \langle v, v' \rangle, \,\,\, \forall \,\, v, v' \in V \}, \\
{\rm GU}(V) &= \{ g \in {\rm Aut}_E (V) : \langle g v, g v' \rangle = \beta \langle v, v' \rangle, \, \text{for some scalar $\beta$},
\, \forall \,\, v, v' \in V \}.
\end{align*}
For $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$, applying $\tau$ to both sides of $ \langle g v, g v' \rangle = \beta \langle v, v' \rangle$ gives $\tau(\beta) = \beta$, so that
$\beta \in F^\times$.
We write $\mu(g) = \beta$. It is called the {\it multiplier} of $g$ and the resulting
homomorphism $\mu:{\rm GU}(V) \to F^\times$ is the {\it multiplier} map.
\begin{Def}
{\rm Let $h \in {\rm Aut}_F(V)$.
We say that $h$ is {\it anti-unitary} if
\[
\langle h v, h v' \rangle = \langle v', v \rangle, \quad \quad \forall \,\, v, v' \in V.
\]
}
\end{Def}
\noindent
When $E=F$ and $\text{char} \,F \neq 2$, the form $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ is orthogonal ($\epsilon = 1$) or symplectic ($\epsilon = -1$).
In the orthogonal case, an anti-unitary map is simply an orthogonal transformation.
In the symplectic case, an anti-unitary map is a skew-symplectic transformation
($\langle h v , h v' \rangle = - \langle v, v' \rangle$).
We also need the corresponding notion for similitude groups.
\begin{Def}
{\rm Let $h \in {\rm Aut}_F(V)$.
We say also that $h$ is an {\it anti-unitary similitude} if, for some scalar $\beta$,
\[
\langle h v, h v' \rangle = \beta \langle v', v \rangle, \quad \quad \forall \,\, v, v' \in V.
\]
}
\end{Def}
\noindent
Thus an anti-unitary map is an anti-unitary similitude for which $\beta = 1$.
We can now state our factorization result.
\begin{ThmA}
Let $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$ with $\mu(g) = \beta$. Then there is an anti-unitary involution $h_1$
and an anti-unitary similitude $h_2$ with $h_2^2 = \beta$ such that $g = h_1 h_2$.
In particular, for any $g \in {\rm U}(V)$, there exist anti-unitary
elements $h_i$ with $h_i^2 = 1$ (for $i=1,2$) such that $g = h_1 h_2$.
\end{ThmA}
For example, Theorem~A says that any orthogonal transformation is a product of two orthogonal involutions and that
any symplectic transformation is a product of two skew-symplectic involutions. This was
originally proved by Wonenburger \cite{Wo} (under the assumption $\text{char}\,F \neq 2$).
While we ultimately obtain a new proof of her results, we borrow heavily from her approach.
In particular, the arguments in \S \ref{Case II} below are in essence those of \cite{Wo} but rephrased in the language of modules.
For $E=F$ and $\text{char}\,F \neq 2$, Theorem~A is due in the case of similitude groups to Vinroot \cite{ryan-gsp, ryan-go}
(by an adaptation of Wonenburger's arguments).
Our framework does not accommodate orthogonal groups in even characteristic
(defined as the stabilizers of suitably non-degenerate quadratic forms) or the corresponding
similitude groups. If $F$ is perfect, then it follows readily from work of Gow \cite{Gow} or Ellers and Nolte \cite{EN} that
Theorem~A continues to hold in this setting.
Suppose now that $F$ is a non-archimedean local field and that $G$ is the
group of $F$-points of a reductive $F$-group. Let $\pi$ be an
irreducible smooth representation of $G$. For any continuous automorphism $\alpha$ of $G$,
we write $\pi^{\alpha}$ for the (smooth) representation of $G$ given by $\pi^{\alpha} (g) = \pi ({}^{\alpha} g)$ for $g \in G$.
We write $\pi^{\vee}$ for the smooth dual or contragredient of $\pi$.
\begin{Def}
{\rm Let $\iota$ be a continuous automorphism of $G$ of order at most two. We say that
$\iota$ a {\it dualizing involution}
of $G$ if $\pi^{\iota} \cong \pi^{\vee}$ for all irreducible smooth representations $\pi$ of $G$.}
\end{Def}
We fix an anti-unitary involution $h \in {\rm Aut}_F(V)$ and set ${}^{\iota} g = \mu(g)^{-1} hgh^{-1}$ for $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$. Then $\iota$ defines a continuous
automorphism of ${\rm GU}(V)$ of order two. Further $\iota |_{ {\rm U}(V)}$ gives the automorphism $g \mapsto hgh^{-1}$ of ${\rm U}(V)$
which for simplicity we again denote by $\iota$. Our application of Theorem~A hinges on the following immediate consequence.
\begin{Cor}
For any $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$, the elements ${}^{\iota} g$ and $g^{-1}$ are conjugate by an element of ${\rm U}(V)$.
\end{Cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $a \in {\rm GU}(V)$ with $\mu(g) = \beta$.
By Theorem~A, we have $g = h_1 h_2$ for an anti-unitary involution $h_1$ and an anti-unitary similitude $h_2$ with $h_2^2 = \beta$.
Thus $h_2^{-1} = \beta^{-1} h_2$ and $g^{-1} = \beta^{-1} h_2 h_1$. Hence
\begin{align*}
(h_1 h )\, {}^{\iota} g \, (h_1 h)^{-1} &= h_1 h \, ( \beta^{-1} h (h_1 h_2) \, h^{-1} ) \, h h_1 \\
&= \beta^{-1} h_2 h_1 \\
&= g^{-1}.
\end{align*}
That is, ${}^{\iota} g$ and $g^{-1}$ are conjugate by $h_1 h \in {\rm U}(V)$.
\end{proof}
For the classical groups ${\rm U}(V)$, this is part of \cite{MoViWa87} Chap.\,4 Prop.\,I.2 and the early part of our proof of Theorem~A mirrors the
corresponding part of the proof in {\it loc.~cit.} Our overall proof, on the other hand, can easily be adapted to give an alternative route to the full statement in {\it loc.~cit.}
Our main result is the following.
\begin{ThmB}
The maps $\iota:{\rm U}(V) \to {\rm U}(V)$ and $\iota:{\rm GU}(V) \to {\rm GU}(V)$ are dualizing involutions.
\end{ThmB}
In the case of the classical groups ${\rm U}(V)$, this is essentially \cite{MoViWa87} Chap.~IV Th\'{e}or\`{e}me~II.1.
Given Harish-Chandra's theory of characters \cite{H-C, Ad-Kor} as recalled in \S\ref{main result}, Theorem~B is an immediate consequence
of the Corollary.
The argument in \cite{MoViWa87} does not rely on existence of characters. Instead it adapts a geometric method used by
Gelfand and Kazhdan to show that transpose-inverse is a dualizing involution of ${\rm GL}_n(F)$ \cite{GK}. As above,
Gelfand and Kazhdan's result follows immediately from the existence of characters. Indeed, by elementary linear algebra,
any square matrix is conjugate to its transpose. It follows that if ${}^{\theta} g = {}^{\top} g^{-1}$ for $g \in {\rm GL}_n(F)$ then,
for any irreducible smooth representation $\pi$, the characters of $\pi^{\theta}$ and $\pi^{\vee}$ are equal, whence $\pi^{\theta} \cong \pi^{\vee}$.
Tupan found a clever and completely elementary proof of Gelfand and Kazhdan's result \cite{Tupan}.
We will report in a sequel on a similarly elementary proof of Theorem~B that builds on
Tupan's approach \cite{RV}.
Finally, let $G$ be the isometry group of a non-degenerate hermitian or anti-hermitian form over a $p$-adic quaternion algebra.
By \cite{LinSunTan}, there is no automorphism $\theta$ of $G$ such that ${}^{\theta} g$ is
conjugate to $g^{-1}$ for all $g \in G$. Thus the Corollary above is false in this setting which means surely that
Theorem~B does not extend to classical groups over $p$-adic quaternion algebras. In this spirit, let $D$ be a central (finite-dimensional)
division algebra over $F$.
By a straightforward argument involving only central characters, due to the first-named author and Steven Spallone,
the group $\mathrm{GL}_n(D)$ can admit an
automorphism that takes each irreducible smooth representation to its dual only in the known cases $D=F$ and when $D$ is a quaternion
algebra over $F$ \cite{MS, Ragh}. In particular, in contrast to the case of connected reductive groups over the reals
\cite{Ad}, dualizing involutions in our sense do not always exist.
{\it Organization.} The proof of Theorem~A takes up \S\S1 through 5. We record some special cases and applications in \S6.
In \S7 we briefly recall some character theory and prove Theorem~B. Finally in \S8 we show that the unit groups of
(finite-dimensional) central simple algebras over $F$ do not admit dualizing involutions except in the two cases noted above.
\section{Proof of Theorem~A: Initial Setup and First Reduction}
\noindent
{\it Notation.} Let $R$ be a ring with identity. We write $R^\times$ for the group of units of $R$.
For any $R$-module $M$ (which for us is always a unital left $R$-module), we write $\text{ann}_R \,M$ for the annihilator of $M$. That is,
\[
\text{ann}_R \, M = \{ r \in R : r m = 0, \,\,\, \forall \,\, m \in M \}.
\]
For $m \in M$, we also write $\text{ann}_R \, m = \{ r \in R : r m = 0 \}$.
Thus $\text{ann}_R \,M = \bigcap_{m \in M} \text{ann}_R \, m$.
Note that $\text{ann}_R \, m$ is the kernel of the surjective $R$-module homomorphism
$r \mapsto r m: R \to Rm$, so that $ R/ \text{ann}_R \, m \cong Rm$ as $R$-modules.
\subsection{}
Let $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$ with $\mu(g) = \beta$. The space $V$ is a module over the polynomial ring
$E[T]$ via $f(T) v = f(g) v$. Let $p = p(T)$ denote the minimal polynomial of $g$. We have
\[
p = p_1^{e_1} \cdots p_n^{e_n}
\]
for distinct monic irreducible elements $p_1, \ldots, p_n \in E[T]$ and positive integers $e_1, \ldots, e_n$.
We set $\mathcal{A} = E[T] / (p)$. The ideal $(p)$ is simply the annihilator of $V$ as an $E[T]$-module. In particular,
$V$ carries an induced $\mathcal{A}$-module structure.
The Chinese Remainder Theorem gives a canonical isomorphism of $E$-algebras
\[
E[T]/ (p) \cong E[T]/(p_1^{e_1}) \oplus \cdots \oplus E[T] / (p_n^{e_n}).
\]
Thus
\[
\mathcal{A} = \mathcal{A}_1 \oplus \cdots \oplus \mathcal{A}_n,
\]
for ideals $\mathcal{A}_i$ in $\mathcal{A}$ with $\mathcal{A}_i \cong E[T]/ (p_i^{e_i})$ ($i=1, \ldots, n$). Setting $V_i = \mathcal{A}_i V$ ($i=1, \ldots, n$),
we have
\begin{equation} \label{primary-decomp}
V = V_1 \oplus \cdots \oplus V_n.
\end{equation}
Each $V_i$ is an $E[T]$-submodule and as such has annihilator $(p_i^{e_i})$. More concretely, each $V_i$ is $g$-stable
and the minimal polynomial of $g$ on $V_i$ is $p_i^{e_i}$.
\subsection{}
As $g$ is invertible, the $E[T]$-module structure on $V$ extends to a module structure over the ring of Laurent polynomials
$E[T,T^{-1}]$. It follows that each $V_i$ in (\ref{primary-decomp}) is an $E[T,T^{-1}]$-submodule.
We have
\[
\text{ann}_{E[T,T^{-1}]} \,V = p\,E[T,T^{-1}] \,\,\, \text{and} \,\,\, \text{ann}_{E[T,T^{-1}]} \,V_i = p_i^{e_i}\,E[T,T^{-1}] \hspace{12pt} (i=1, \ldots, n).
\]
The inclusion $E[T] \subset E[T,T^{-1}]$ induces canonical $E$-algebra isomorphisms
\[
E[T] / (p) \cong E[T,T^{-1}] / p \, E[T,T^{-1}] \,\,\, \text{and} \,\,\, E[T]/ (p_i^{e_i}) \cong E[T,T^{-1}] / p_i^{e_i} \, E[T,T^{-1}] \hspace{12pt} (i=1, \ldots, n).
\]
We use these to identify $\mathcal{A}$ with $E[T,T^{-1}] / p \, E[T,T^{-1}]$ and each $\mathcal{A}_i$ with $E[T,T^{-1}] / p_i^{e_i} \, E[T,T^{-1}]$.
The $F$-automorphism $\tau$ of $E$ extends to an involution
\[
\sum_i a_i T^i \longmapsto \sum_i \tau (a_i) \beta^i T^{-i}
\]
on $E[T,T^{-1}]$ which we continue to denote by $\tau$. This satisfies the adjoint relation
\begin{equation} \label{adjoint-tau}
\langle v, f w \rangle = \langle \tau(f) v, w \rangle, \quad \quad \forall \,\, v, w \in V, \,\,\,\forall \,\, f \in E[T,T^{-1}].
\end{equation}
It follows that $\tau ( p \,E[T,T^{-1}] ) = p \,E[T,T^{-1}]$. Hence there is a $u \in E[T,T^{-1}]^\times$
such that $ \tau (p) = u p$ and thus $\tau$ induces an involution on $\mathcal{A}$.
Further, for $i= 1, \ldots, n$,
\[
({\rm I} ) \,\,\, \tau(p_i) = u_i p_{i'} \,\,\,\text{for} \,\,\, i' \neq \, i \quad \text{or} \quad ({\rm II}) \,\, \, \tau(p_i) = u_i p_i
\]
with each $u_i \in E[T,T^{-1}]^\times$. In case $({\rm I})$ $ \tau$ induces an isomorphism $\mathcal{A}_i \cong \mathcal{A}_{i'}$ while in case $({\rm II})$ it induces an involution on $\mathcal{A}_i$.
By (\ref{adjoint-tau}),
\begin{equation} \label{perp}
V_k \perp V_l \,\,\, \text{unless} \,\,\, \tau (p_k) = u p_l \,\,\,\text{for some} \,\,\,u \in E[T,T^{-1}]^\times.
\end{equation}
It follows that
\[
V = W_1 \oplus \cdots \oplus W_m
\]
where for a given $W_j$ we have $W_j = V_i \oplus V_{i'}$ for some $i$ and $i'$ as in $({\rm I})$ above or $W_j = V_i$
with $i$ as in $({\rm II})$. In particular, each $W_j$ is an $E[T,T^{-1}]$-submodule and
the restriction of $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ to each $W_j$ is non-degenerate. Thus $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$ decomposes as
$g = g_1 \oplus \cdots \oplus g_m$ with $g_j \in GU(W_j)$ for $j= 1,\ldots, m$. It suffices to prove the result for each
$g_j$. This means we are reduced to two basic cases.
\smallskip
{\bf Case I.} The minimal polynomial of $g$ is $ p_1^e p_2^e$ for some positive integer $e$ and monic irreducible polynomials $p_1, p_2 \in E[T]$ such that $\tau(p_1) = u p_2$ for some $u \in E[T,T^{-1}]^\times$. We have $\mathcal{A} = \mathcal{A}_1 \oplus \mathcal{A}_2$ with
\[
\mathcal{A}_i = E[T] / (p_i^e) = E[T,T^{-1}] / \, p_i^e \, E[T,T^{-1}] \quad \quad (i=1,2).
\]
The space $V$ decomposes as $V = V_1 \oplus V_2$ where $V_i = \mathcal{A}_i V$ ($i=1,2$).
Moreover, by (\ref{perp}), each $V_i$ is a totally
isotropic subspace of $V$.
\smallskip
{\bf Case II.} The minimal polynomial of $g$ is $p^e$ for some positive integer $e$ and some monic irreducible element
$p \in E[T]$ such that $\tau(p) = u p$ for some $u \in E[T,T^{-1}]^\times$. In this case,
\[
\mathcal{A} = E[T] / (p^e) = E[T,T^{-1}] / \, p^e\,E[T,T^{-1}].
\]
\section{Proof of Theorem~A: Case I}
\subsection{} \label{twist}
As $V=V_1 \oplus V_2$ is non-degenerate and each $V_i$ is totally isotropic, it follows that $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ induces an isomorphism
between $V_1$ and the conjugate dual of $V_2$. That is, if we write $V_2^\tau$ for the vector space structure on $V_2$ obtained by
twisting by $\tau$ so that $V_2^\tau = V_2$ as abelian groups and scalar multiplication on $V_2^\tau$
is given by $a.v = \tau(a) v$ (for $a \in E$ and $v \in V_2$), then
\[
v \mapsto \langle v, - \rangle: V_1 \longrightarrow \text{Hom}_E(V_2^\tau, E)
\]
is an isomorphism of $E$-vector spaces.
Let $e_1, \ldots, e_n$ be any basis of $V_1$. By the preceding paragraph, $V_2$ (or $V_2^\tau$) admits a
dual basis $f_1, \ldots, f_n$ such that
\[
\langle e_i, f_j \rangle = \begin{cases}
1, \,\,\,\text{if} \,\, i = j, \\
0, \,\,\,\text{if} \,\, i \neq j.
\end{cases}
\]
Thus with respect to the basis $e_1, \ldots, e_n, f_1, \ldots, f_n$, the matrix of $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ is given in block form by
\[
J = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & \epsilon I_n \\
I_n & 0
\end{bmatrix}.
\]
For any matrix $a = [a_{ij}]$ with entries in $E$, we set $\tau(a) = [\tau(a_{ij})]$ and write ${}^{\top} a$ for the transpose of $a$.
Below we often view $E$-linear maps on $V$ as (block) matrices with respect to the
basis $e_1, \ldots, e_n, f_1, \ldots, f_n$.
Consider the $F$-linear map $c:V \to V$ given by
\[
\sum_{i=1}^n a_i e_i + \sum_{j=1}^n b_j f_j \overset{c}{\longmapsto}
\sum_{i=1}^n \epsilon \, \tau(a_i) e_i + \sum_{j=1}^n \tau(b_j) f_j.
\]
Setting $a = \begin{bmatrix}
a_1 \\
\vdots \\
a_n
\end{bmatrix}$
and
$b = \begin{bmatrix}
b_1 \\
\vdots \\
b_n
\end{bmatrix}$,
we can write $c$ in matrix form as
$ \begin{bmatrix}
a \\
b
\end{bmatrix}
\overset{c}{\longmapsto}
\begin{bmatrix}
\epsilon\, \tau(a) \\
\tau(b)
\end{bmatrix} $.
The map $c$ is anti-unitary (that is, $\langle c(v) , c(v') \rangle = \langle v',v \rangle$, for all $v, v' \in V$) and $c^2 = 1$.
Any anti-unitary $h_1 \in {\rm Aut}_F(V)$ can be written as $h_1 = s_1 c$ with $s_1 \in U(V)$.
Now $h_1 = s_1c $ is an involution if and only if $s_1 \,{}^{c}s_1 = 1$ where
${}^{c}s_1 = c s_1 c^{-1}$.
Similarly, an anti-unitary similitude $h_2$ can be written as $h_2 = c s_2$ with $s_2 \in {\rm GU}(V)$. Again
$h_2^2 = \beta$ if and only if $s_2 \,{}^{c}s_2 = \beta$ with ${}^{c} s_2 = c s_2 c^{-1}$.
In this notation, we have $h_1 h_2 = s_1 s_2$ (as $c^2 =1$).
It follows that Theorem~A in Case~I is equivalent to the following:
\begin{enumerate}[$(\ast)$]
\item
if $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$ with $\mu(g) = \beta$ then $g = s_1 s_2$ for elements $s_1 \in U(V)$ and $s_2 \in {\rm GU}(V)$ such that $s_1 \,{}^{c}s_1 = 1$
and $s_2 \,{}^{c}s_2 = \beta$.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{} \label{frob}
We now prove $(\ast)$.
Since $g$ preserves $V_1$ and $V_2$, we have
$g = \begin{bmatrix}
a & 0 \\
0 & b
\end{bmatrix}$.
The condition $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$ says ${}^{\top} g J \tau(g) = \beta J$ with $\beta = \mu(g)$.
A short matrix calculation shows that this means $b = \beta \, {}^{\top} \tau(a)^{-1}$, so
that
\[
g = \begin{bmatrix}
a & 0 \\
0 & \beta \, {}^{\top} \tau(a)^{-1}
\end{bmatrix}.
\]
We set
\[
s_1 = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & d_1 \\
\epsilon\, {}^{\top} \tau(d_1)^{\,-1} & 0
\end{bmatrix}, \,\,\,
s_2 = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & \epsilon\,\beta \, {}^{\top} \tau(d_2)^{-1} \\
d_2 & 0
\end{bmatrix},
\]
for elements $d_1, d_2 \in {\rm GL}_n(E)$. It is routine to check that
${}^{\top} s_1 J \tau(s_1) = J$ and ${}^{\top} s_2 J \tau(s_2) = \beta \, J$. Thus $s_1 \in {\rm U}(V)$ and $s_2 \in {\rm GU}(V)$.
To calculate ${}^c s_1$, note that for all column vectors
$ \begin{bmatrix}
x \\
y
\end{bmatrix}$ as above, we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{bmatrix}
x \\
y
\end{bmatrix} \overset{c}{\longmapsto}
\begin{bmatrix}
\epsilon \,\tau(x) \\
\tau(y)
\end{bmatrix} \overset{s_1}{\longmapsto}
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & d_1 \\
\epsilon\, {}^{\top} \tau(d_1)^{\,-1} & 0
\end{bmatrix} \,
\begin{bmatrix}
\epsilon \,\tau(x) \\
\tau(y)
\end{bmatrix} &=
\begin{bmatrix}
d_1 \, \tau(y) \\
{}^{\top} \tau(d_1)^{\,-1} \, \tau(x)
\end{bmatrix} \\
& \overset{c}{\longmapsto}
\begin{bmatrix}
\epsilon\,\tau(d_1) \, y \\
{}^{\top} d_1^{\,-1} \, x
\end{bmatrix}
= \begin{bmatrix}
0 & \epsilon\,\tau(d_1) \\
{}^{\top} d_1^{\,-1} & 0
\end{bmatrix} \,
\begin{bmatrix}
x \\
y
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{align*}
That is,
\[
{}^c s_1 = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & \epsilon\,\tau(d_1) \\
{}^{\top} d_1^{\,-1} & 0
\end{bmatrix} = \epsilon \,\tau(s_1).
\]
A similar computation gives
\[
{}^c s_2 = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & \beta \, {}^{\top} d_2^{\,-1} \\
\epsilon \, \tau (d_2) & 0
\end{bmatrix} = \epsilon \,\tau(s_2).
\]
By direct matrix calculations, the conditions $s_1 \, {}^{c}s_1 = 1$ and $s_1 \, {}^{c}s_1 = \beta$
are equivalent to
\[
d_1 \,{}^{\top} d_1^{\,-1} = I_n \,\,\,\text{and} \,\,\, d_2 \,{}^{\top} d_2^{\,-1} = I_n,
\]
that is, $d_1$ and $d_2$ are symmetric.
Since $g = s_1 s_2$ is equivalent to $a = d_1 d_2$, we are reduced to the matrix statement:
\begin{enumerate}[$(\ast)'$]
\item
For any (invertible) $n \times n$ matrix $a$ (with entries in $E$),
there exist (invertible) symmetric $n \times n$ matrices $d_1$ and $d_2$
(with entries in $E$) such that
$
a = d_1 d_2.
$
\end{enumerate}
Now it is well-known that any square matrix is conjugate to its transpose by a symmetric matrix (see, for example, \cite{Kap} page~76).
Thus
\[
d^{\,-1} a d = {}^{\top} a
\]
with $d \in {\rm GL}_n(E)$ symmetric.
This means $d^{\,-1} \, a = {}^{\top} a \, d^{\,-1}$, so ${}^{\top} (d^{\,-1} \, a) = {}^{\top} a \,d^{\,-1} = d^{\,-1} \,a$.
Therefore
\[
a = d \cdot d^{\,-1} a
\]
expresses $a$ as product of symmetric matrices (with entries in $E$). This completes the proof of Theorem~A in Case~I.
\section{Proof of Theorem~A: Case II and Second Reduction} \label{Case II}
In this case, the minimal polynomial of $g$ is $p^e$ (for some positive integer $e$)
where $p$ is irreducible and $\tau(p) = up$ for some $u \in E[T,T^{-1}]^\times$.
Let $\mathcal{A} = E[T,T^{-1}] / p^e E[T,T^{-1}]$. As $\text{ann}_{E[T,T^{-1}]} \,V = p^e\,E[T,T^{-1}]$,
the space $V$ is naturally an $\mathcal{A}$-module and as such is faithful, that is,
$\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}} \,V = \{ 0 \}$. Note that $\mathcal{A}$
is a local ring with unique maximal ideal
$\mathfrak{p} = p E[T,T^{-1}] / p^e E[T,T^{-1}]$.
More strongly, the ideals in $\mathcal{A}$ form a chain
\[
\mathcal{A} \supsetneqq \mathfrak{p} \supsetneqq \cdots \supsetneqq \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} \supsetneqq \mathfrak{p}^e = \{ 0 \}.
\]
\subsection{} \label{non-deg criterion}
As $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}} \,V = \{ 0 \}$, there is some $v \in V$ such that
$\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}} \,v = \{ 0 \}$.
Below we will need to consider the restriction of $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ to the submodule $\mathcal{A} v$
generated by such an element and will make use of the following non-degeneracy criterion.
\begin{Lem}
Let $v \in V$ with $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}} \, v = \{ 0 \}$ (equivalently, $\text{ann}_{E[T,T^{-1}]} \, v = p^e \,E[T,T^{-1}]$). The cyclic submodule
$\mathcal{A} v$ is non-degenerate
if and only if $\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} v, v \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$.
\end{Lem}
\begin{proof}
$(\Rightarrow)$ Suppose $\mathcal{A} v $ is non-degenerate. By hypothesis, $p^{e-1}v \neq 0$. Thus there is an $f \in E[T,T^{-1}]$ such that
$ \langle p^{e-1} v, f v \rangle \neq 0$, so that $\langle \tau(f) \, p^{e-1} v, v \rangle \neq 0$ and hence
$\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} v, v \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$.
$(\Leftarrow)$ Suppose now that $\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} v, v \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$.
We write $\text{rad} \,\mathcal{A} v$ for the radical of $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ on restriction to $\mathcal{A} v$. It is immediate that
$\text{rad} \,\mathcal{A} v$ is an $\mathcal{A}$-submodule. The map $a \mapsto av:\mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{A} v$ is an isomorphism of $\mathcal{A}$-modules. It follows that
$\text{rad} \,\mathcal{A} v = \mathfrak{p}^c v$ for some non-negative integer $c$ (as the only ideals in $\mathcal{A}$ are the powers of $\mathfrak{p}$).
Our assumption $\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} v, v \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$ implies that $c > e-1$. Thus
$\text{rad} \,\mathcal{A} v = \{ 0 \}$, that is, $\mathcal{A} v$ is non-degenerate.
\end{proof}
\subsection{} \label{x and y}
Let $x \in V$ with $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}} \, x = \{ 0 \}$ (equivalently, $\text{ann}_{E[T,T^{-1}]} \,x = p^e \, E[T,T^{-1}]$) and set $X = \mathcal{A} x$.
Now $p^{e-1} x \neq 0$, so there is a $y \in V$ with $\langle p^{e-1} x, y \rangle \neq 0$.
Assume that the subspace $X$ is degenerate, so that $y \notin X$ (by Lemma~\ref{non-deg criterion}).
Setting $Y = \mathcal{A} y$, we claim that if $X \cap Y \neq \{ 0 \}$ then $Y$ is non-degenerate.
To prove this, let $z \in X \cap Y$. We have
\[
z = p^c g x = p^{c'} g' y
\]
for integers $c$ and $c'$ with $0 \leq c < e,\, 0 \leq c' < e$ and elements $g, g' \in E[T]$ that are prime to $p$.
Thus
\[
\text{ann}_{E[T]} \, z = ( p^{e-c}) = (p^{e-c'})
\]
and so $c = c'$.
Now there are elements $a, b \in E[T]$ such that $a g + b p^e = 1$. Hence
\begin{align*}
p^{e-c-1} az &= p^{e-c-1} a ( p^c g x) \\
&= p^{e-1} ag x \\
&= p^{e-1} ( 1- bp^e) x \\
&= p^{e-1} x \quad (\text{as}\,\,p^e x = 0).
\end{align*}
In addition,
\begin{align*}
p^{e-c-1} az &= p^{e-c-1} a ( p^c g' y) \\
&= p^{e-1} a g' y,
\end{align*}
so that
\[
p^{e-1} x = p^{e-1} a g' y.
\]
As $\langle p^{e-1} x, y \rangle \neq 0$, it follows that $\langle p^{e-1} a g' y, y \rangle \neq 0$. Therefore
$\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1}y, y \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$. Hence, by Lemma~\ref{non-deg criterion}, $Y = \mathcal{A} y$ is non-degenerate
\subsection{} \label{non-cyclic}
We now show that if $V$ does not admit a non-degenerate cyclic submodule (generated by
an element $v$ such that $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}} \, v = \{ 0 \}$) then it must contain a non-degenerate non-cyclic submodule of
a very special kind.
\begin{Lem}
Suppose that for any $v \in V$ such that $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}}\,v = \{ 0 \}$ the submodule $\mathcal{A} v$ is degenerate. Then there exist
$x$ and $y$ in $V$ such that $\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x, y \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$. We have $\mathcal{A} x \cap \mathcal{A} y = \{ 0 \}$ and the submodule
$\mathcal{A} x \oplus \mathcal{A} y$ is non-degenerate.
\end{Lem}
\begin{proof}
As in \S\ref{x and y}, we choose $x$ and $y$ in $V$ such that $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}} \,x = \{ 0 \}$ and $\langle p^{e-1}x,y \rangle \neq 0$.
It follows that $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}}\,y = \{ 0 \}$.
As above, we set $X = \mathcal{A} x$ and $Y = \mathcal{A} y$. By hypothesis, $X$ and $Y$ are degenerate,
so Lemma~\ref{non-deg criterion} gives
\[
\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x, x \rangle = \langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} y, y \rangle = \{ 0 \}.
\]
Further, by the argument in \S\ref{x and y},
$X \cap Y = \{0 \}$.
We need to show that $X \oplus Y$ is non-degenerate.
Any non-zero element $z \in X \oplus Y$ can be written as $z = p^c g x + p^{c'} g' y$
for integers $c$ and $c'$ with $0 \leq c < e,\, 0 \leq c' < e$ and elements $g, g' \in E[T]$ that are prime to $p$.
Switching the roles of $x$ and $y$ if necessary, we may assume that $c' \leq c$.
To prove non-degeneracy of $X \oplus Y$, we will show that $ \langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-c-1} x, z \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$.
Writing $\Bar{f}$ for the image of $f \in E[T,T^{-1}]$ under the canonical quotient map from $E[T,T^{-1}]$ to $\mathcal{A} = E[T,T^{-1}] / \,p^e\,E[T,T^{-1}]$, we have
\[
\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-c-1} x, z \rangle = \langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-c-1}x, \Bar{p}^c \Bar{g} x + \Bar{p}^{c'} \Bar{g}' y \rangle.
\]
Now $\Bar{p}^c \, \mathfrak{p}^{e-c-1} = \mathfrak{p}^{e-1}$ and $\Bar{g} \in \mathcal{A}^\times$, so
\begin{align*}
\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-c-1}x, \Bar{p}^c \Bar{g} x \rangle &= \langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x, x \rangle \\
&= \{ 0 \}.
\end{align*}
Thus
\begin{align*}
\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-c-1} x, z \rangle &= \langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-c - 1}x, \Bar{p}^{c'} \Bar{g}'y \rangle \\
&= \langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-c+c'-1}x, y \rangle \quad(\text{using}\,\,\Bar{g}' \in \mathcal{A}^\times) \\
&\supset \langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x, y \rangle
\quad (\text{as} \,\, c' \leq c, \, \text{so} \,\, e-c+c'-1 \leq e-1) \\
& \neq \{ 0 \}.
\end{align*}
In particular, $ \langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-c-1} x, z \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$, as claimed.
\end{proof}
\subsection{}
We have established that $V$ contains an $\mathcal{A}$-submodule of one of the following types:
\begin{enumerate}[(A)]
\item
a non-degenerate $\mathcal{A}$-submodule
$\mathcal{A} v$ with $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}}\,v = \{ 0 \}$;
\item
a non-degenerate $\mathcal{A}$-submodule as in Lemma~\ref{non-cyclic}.
\end{enumerate}
Now if $W$ is any non-degenerate
$\mathcal{A}$-submodule of $V$ then $V = W \oplus W^\perp$ as $\mathcal{A}$-modules.
Moreover $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}} \,W^\perp = \mathfrak{p}^c$ for some non-negative integer $c \leq e$.
If Theorem~A holds for $W$ and $W^\perp$ then it also holds for $V$.
Thus we can complete the proof in Case~II by induction on $\dim_E V$ provided we can establish the result in the two
special cases (A) and (B).
\section{Proof of Theorem~A: Case II-A} \label{case II-A}
\subsection{}
This is the cyclic case in which $V = \mathcal{A} v$ with $\text{ann}_{\mathcal{A}}\,v = \{ 0 \}$. That is, the map
\begin{equation} \label{one}
a \mapsto av: \mathcal{A} \to V
\end{equation}
is an isomorphism of $\mathcal{A}$-modules. We'll show that there is an anti-unitary involution
$t:V \to V$ such that, for all $a \in \mathcal{A}$,
\begin{equation} \label{two}
t \, a = \tau(a) \, t
\end{equation}
as elements of $\text{End}_F \,V$. Now the element $T \in E[T]$, and so also its image in $\mathcal{A}$, acts on $V$ via $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$.
Thus if we take $a$ to be the image of $T$ in $\mathcal{A}$, then (\ref{two}) gives $t g = \beta g^{-1} t$, or $(tg)^2 = \beta$.
Hence
\[
g = t \cdot t g
\]
gives the requisite factorization.
\subsection{} \label{anti-unitary}
To establish (\ref{two}), we define $t:V \to V$ by
\[
t( a v ) = \tau (a) v, \quad \quad \forall \,\, a \in \mathcal{A}.
\]
Thus $t$ is simply the involution $\tau$ of $\mathcal{A}$ transported to $V$ via the isomorphism (\ref{one}).
It is therefore immediate that $t$ is an involution and that (\ref{two}) holds. To check that $t$ is anti-unitary,
let $a, b \in \mathcal{A}$. By (\ref{adjoint-tau}),
\begin{align*}
\langle t(av), t(bv) \rangle &= \langle \tau(a) v , \tau(b) v \rangle \\
&= \langle b \tau (a) v, v \rangle \\
&= \langle b v, a v \rangle.
\end{align*}
\section{Proof of Theorem~A: Case II-B}
We have $V = \mathcal{A} x \oplus \mathcal{A} y$ with $\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x , y \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$. Further, $\mathcal{A} x$ and $\mathcal{A} y$ are both degenerate,
so Lemma~\ref{non-deg criterion} gives
\[
\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x , x \rangle = \langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} y, y \rangle = \{ 0 \}.
\]
This case requires a more elaborate argument.
\subsection{} \label{ss-duality}
We observe first that the subspaces $\mathcal{A} x$ and $\mathcal{A} y$ are in duality via $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$. That is, the map
\begin{equation} \label{duality}
a y \mapsto ( a' x \mapsto \langle a' x, a y \rangle ): \mathcal{A} y \to \text{Hom}_E( \mathcal{A} x, E)
\end{equation}
is a bijection. More precisely, if as in \S\ref{twist}
we write $(\mathcal{A} y)^\tau$ for the $E$-vector space structure on $\mathcal{A} y$ obtained by twisting by $\tau$, then (\ref{duality})
is an isomorphism of $E$-vector spaces between $(\mathcal{A} y)^\tau$ and $ \text{Hom}_E( \mathcal{A} x, E)$.
To prove this, note that the kernel of the given map is an $\mathcal{A}$-submodule and so equals $\mathfrak{p}^c y$ for some non-negative integer
$c$. Now $\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x , y \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$ and hence $c > e-1$. As $\mathfrak{p}^e = \{ 0 \}$, the kernel must be trivial and
thus (\ref{duality}) is injective. Since $\dim_E \mathcal{A} x = \dim_E \mathcal{A} y \,\, (= \dim_E \mathcal{A})$, the map is also surjective.
\subsection{}
The map $a x \mapsto \langle y, \tau(a) x \rangle = \langle a y, x \rangle $ belongs to $\text{Hom}_E( \mathcal{A} x, E)$.
Thus by \S\ref{ss-duality}, there is a unique $\gamma \in \mathcal{A}$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{key}
\langle a y , x \rangle = \langle a x, \gamma y \rangle, \quad \quad \forall \,\, a \in \mathcal{A}.
\end{equation}
We claim that $\gamma \in \mathcal{A}^\times$. Indeed, $\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x , y \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$ and $\tau(\mathfrak{p}) = \mathfrak{p}$, so
$\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} y, x \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$. It follows that $\langle \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x, \gamma y \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$, or equivalently
$\langle \tau ( \gamma) \mathfrak{p}^{e-1} x, y \rangle \neq \{ 0 \}$. As $\mathfrak{p}^e = \{ 0 \}$, we see that $\tau (\gamma) \notin \mathfrak{p}$. Therefore
$\tau(\gamma) \in \mathcal{A}^\times$, whence also $\gamma \in \mathcal{A}^\times$.
\subsection{}
We claim next that $ \gamma \, \tau (\gamma) = 1$. Rewriting (\ref{key}) as
\[
\langle x, a \gamma y \rangle = \langle y, a x \rangle,
\]
we have
\begin{align*}
\langle x, a \gamma y \rangle &= \epsilon\, \tau ( \langle a x , y \rangle ) \\
&= \epsilon\, \tau ( \langle a x, \gamma^{-1} \gamma y \rangle ) \\
&= \epsilon \, \tau ( \langle \tau(\gamma^{-1} ) a x, \gamma y ) \\
&= \epsilon \, \tau ( \langle \tau(\gamma^{-1} a y, x \rangle ) \quad (\text{by} \,\, (\ref{key})) \\
&= \langle x, \tau (\gamma^{-1}) a y \rangle, \qquad \forall \,\, a \in \mathcal{A}.
\end{align*}
It follows that
\[
\langle a x, \gamma y \rangle = \langle a x, \tau(\gamma^{-1}) y \rangle, \quad \quad \forall \,\, a \in \mathcal{A}.
\]
By bijectivity of (\ref{duality}), $\tau(\gamma^{-1}) y = \gamma y$, whence $\tau (\gamma^{-1} ) = \gamma$, that is,
$\gamma \, \tau(\gamma) = 1$.
\subsection{}
Define $t: \mathcal{A} x \oplus \mathcal{A} y \to \mathcal{A} x \oplus \mathcal{A} y$ by
\[
t( ax + by) = \tau(a) u + \tau (b) \gamma y, \qquad \forall \,\,a, b \in \mathcal{A}.
\]
We claim that $t$ is an anti-unitary involution such that, for all $a \in \mathcal{A}$,
\begin{equation} \label{three}
t \, a = \tau(a) \, t
\end{equation}
as elements of $\text{End}_F (\mathcal{A} x \oplus \mathcal{A} y)$.
Once this is established, we can complete the argument exactly as in \S\ref{case II-A}.
That is, $(tg)^2 = \beta$, and thus as above
$g = t \cdot tg$ gives the requisite factorization.
Applying $t$ twice, we obtain
\begin{align*}
ax + by &\overset{t}{\longmapsto} \tau(a) x + \tau (b) \gamma y \\
&\overset{t}{\longmapsto} a x + b \tau( \gamma) \,\gamma y
= a x + by \quad (\text{as}\,\, \tau(\gamma) \, \gamma = 1),
\end{align*}
and so $t$ is an involution.
The identity (\ref{three}) is immediate. In detail, for all $a, a', b' \in \mathcal{A}$,
\begin{align*}
t a ( a'x + b'y) &= t( a a' x + a b' y) \\
&= \tau(a) \tau(a') x + \tau(a) \tau (b') \gamma y \\
&= \tau (a) t ( a'x + b'y).
\end{align*}
Finally, to show that $t$ is anti-unitary, it suffices to verify the following four identities (for all $a, b \in \mathcal{A}$):
\begin{align*}
(1) \,\, \langle t( ax) , t(bx) \rangle &= \langle bx, ax \rangle; \\
(2) \,\, \langle t( ay) , t(by) \rangle &= \langle by, ay \rangle; \\
(3) \,\, \langle t(ax), t(by) \rangle &= \langle by, ax \rangle; \\
(4) \,\, \langle t(by), t( ax) \rangle &= \langle ax, by \rangle.
\end{align*}
Applying $\tau$ to both sides of $(3)$ gives $(4)$, so it's enough to check (1), (2), (3).
We can verify (1) directly as in \S\ref{anti-unitary}. The argument for (2) is similarly
straightforward using $\gamma \, \tau(\gamma) = 1$.
To check (3), note
\begin{align*}
\langle t( ax), t(by) \rangle &= \langle \tau(a) x, \tau (b) \gamma y \rangle \\
&= \langle b \tau(a) x, \gamma y \rangle \\
&= \langle b \tau(a) y, x \rangle \quad (\text{using} \,\, (\ref{key}) )\\
&= \langle by, ax \rangle.
\end{align*}
This completes the proof in Case~II-B and so concludes the proof of Theorem~A.
\qed
\section{Some Examples and Applications} \label{apps}
\subsection{} Suppose that $E=F$ and $\epsilon = -1$, so that ${\rm U}(V) = \mathrm{Sp}(V)$ and $\mathrm{GU}(V) = \mathrm{GSp}(V)$.
Assume also that $\mathrm{char}(F) \neq 2$. As noted in the introduction, Theorem~A for the symplectic group $\mathrm{Sp}(V)$ was proved by
Wonenburger \cite{Wo} and the case of the similitude group $\mathrm{GSp}(V)$ was treated in \cite{ryan-gsp}.
Assume now that $\mathrm{char}(F) = 2$. Then the case of symplectic groups was proved by Gow \cite{Gow} and Ellers and Nolte \cite{EN}.
If $F$ is perfect, the similitude case follows readily (as every element of $F$ is a square). The similitude case for $\mathrm{char}(F) = 2$ and
$F$ imperfect appears to be new.
\subsection{} Suppose now that $[E:F]=2$ and $\epsilon = 1$.
Let $V = E^n$ and view the elements of $V$ as column vectors.
Consider the non-degenerate hermitian form
$\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ on $V$ given by $\langle x, y \rangle = {^\top x} \, \tau(y)$. Here, as in \S2.1,
$\tau(y)$ is obtained by applying the automorphism $\tau$ to each coordinate of $y$. Similarly,
for any matrix $a = [a_{ij}]$ with entries in $E$, we set $\tau(a) = [\tau(a_{ij})]$.
We write $\mathrm{U}(n)$ for the isometry group of $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$. Thus
\[
\mathrm{U}(n) = \{ g \in \mathrm{GL}_n(E) : {^\top g} \, \tau(g) = 1 \}.
\]
The map $x \overset{c}{\longmapsto} \tau(x):V \to V$ is an anti-unitary involution for $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$.
For any $a \in M_n(E)$ (viewed an an $E$-linear map on $V$ via left multiplication), we have ${}^{c} a = c ac^{-1} = \tau(a)$.
The calculation that gave ($\ast$) of \S2.1 shows that Theorem~A for $\mathrm{U}(n)$ is equivalent to the statement:
\begin{enumerate}[$(\ast\ast)$]
\item
if $g \in \mathrm{U}(n)$ then $g = s_1 s_2$ for elements $s_i \in {\rm U}(V)$ such that $s_i \,{}^{c}s_i = 1$ for $i=1, 2$.
\end{enumerate}
\smallskip
From $s_i \,{}^{c}s_i = 1$ and $s_i \in \mathrm{U}(n)$, we see that
$$s_i^{-1} = {^c s_i} = \tau(s_i) = {^\top s_i^{-1}}.$$
Thus each $s_i \in \mathrm{U}(n)$ is symmetric as an element of $\mathrm{GL}_n(E)$. Hence ${^\top g} = {^\top s_2} {^\top s_1} = s_2 s_1$
and
\[
s_1^{-1} g \, s_{\mathstrut 1} = {^\top g}.
\]
In particular, we obtain the following unitary group version of the result of Frobenius (used in \S\ref{frob}) that any matrix is conjugate to its transpose by a symmetric matrix.
\begin{Cor}
For any $g \in \mathrm{U}(n)$, there exists a symmetric matrix $s \in \mathrm{U}(n)$ such that $s g s^{-1} = {^\top g}$.
\end{Cor}
When $E/F = \mathbb{C}/\mathbb{R}$, the Corollary follows immediately from the fact that any unitary matrix is unitarily diagonalizable.
In the case that $E/F$ is an extension of finite fields,
the Corollary is proved in Lemma 5.2 of \cite{GowVin}.
\subsection{} \label{GOdet} Let $E=F = \mathbb{F}_q$ be a finite field with $q$ elements with $q$ odd and let $\epsilon = 1$, so that
$\mathrm{GU}(V)$ is a finite group of orthogonal similitudes. We restrict attention to the case that $\mathrm{dim}(V)=2m$ is even. In this
setting there are two equivalence classes of non-degenerate symmetric forms on $V$, giving two distinct finite orthogonal similitude groups. We denote these groups by $\mathrm{GO}^{\pm}(2m, \mathbb{F}_q)$, and write $\mathrm{O}^{\pm}(2m, \mathbb{F}_q)$ for the
corresponding orthogonal groups. For ${\rm U}(V) = \mathrm{O}^{\pm} (2m, \mathbb{F}_q)$, the element $h_1$ in Theorem~A can be chosen so that
$\mathrm{det}(h_1) = (-1)^m$ (see Lemma 4.7 of \cite{SFV}). For use in later work, we now extend this observation to the case
${\rm GU}(V) = \mathrm{GO}^{\pm}(2m, \mathbb{F}_q)$.
\begin{Prop} Let $G = \mathrm{GO}^{\pm}(2m, \mathbb{F}_q)$ with $q$ odd and let $g \in G$ with $\mu(g) = \beta$. Then there exist $h_1, h_2 \in G$ such that $g = h_1 h_2$, $\mu(h_1) = 1$, $\mu(h_2) = \beta$, $h_1^2 = 1$, $h_2^2 = \beta$, and $\det(h_1) = (-1)^m$.
\end{Prop}
\begin{proof} The case $\mu(g) = 1$ is implied by Lemma 4.7 of \cite{SFV}. If $\mu(g) = \beta$ is a square in $\mathbb{F}_q$, say $\beta = \gamma^2$, then $g' = \gamma^{-1} g$ satisfies $\mu(g') = 1$, so we may write $g' = h_1 h'$ with $h_1$ and $h'$ orthogonal involutions, and $\det(h_1) = (-1)^m$. Now let $h_2 = \gamma h'$, so that $g = h_1 h_2$ satisfies the desired conditions. We now assume that $\mu(g) = \beta$ with $\beta$ a non-square in $\mathbb{F}_q$.
We proceed by considering Cases I, II-A, and II-B, as in the main result proved above. In Case I, we have $V = V_1 \oplus V_2$, where $\mathrm{dim}(V_1) = \mathrm{dim}(V_2) = m$. In this scenario, we have $E=F$ and $\epsilon = 1$, and in 2.2, the element $s_1$ satisfies $\det(s_1) = (-1)^m$ since $d_1$ is symmetric. Taking $s_1 = h_1$ and $s_2 = h_2$ gives the desired factorization in this case.
To handle Case II, we appeal to the description of conjugacy classes in $\mathrm{GO}^{\pm}(2m, \mathbb{F}_q)$, as described by Shinoda in Section 1 of \cite{Shinoda}. In particular, it is proven there that Case II-B occurs if and only if the minimal polynomial $p(T)^e$ of $g$ on $V$ is of the form $(T^2 - \beta)^e$ where $e = 2k-1$ is an odd positive integer. This statement is contained in (1.18.2) of \cite{Shinoda}. Note that Wonenburger makes mention of the parallel exceptional cases which occur for the $\beta = 1$ case in Remark I of \cite{Wo}.
We now apply some calculations made in \cite{ryan-gsp, ryan-go}. Consider first Case II-A, where we have $V = \mathcal{A} v$ is cyclic, and the minimal polynomial for $g$ on $V$ is of the form $p(T)^e$, and which is not of the form $(T^2 - \beta)^{2k-1}$. In particular, it follows from the fact that $\tau(p) = up$ for some $u \in F[T, T^{-1}]^{\times}$ that $p(T)$ has even degree, and let $2m = e \, \mathrm{deg}(p) = \mathrm{dim}(V)$. Now define
$$ P = \mathrm{span} \{ (g^i + \beta^i g^{-i})v \, \mid \, 0 \leq i < m \}, \quad \text{ and } \quad Q = \mathrm{span} \{ (g^i - \beta^i g^{-i})v \, \mid \, 0 < i \leq m \}.$$
In Proposition 3(i) of \cite{ryan-gsp} and in Theorem 1 of \cite{ryan-go}, it is shown that $V = P \oplus Q$, and if we define $h_1$ to have $+1$-eigenspace $P$ and $-1$-eigenspace $Q$ and $h_2 = h_1 g$, then we have $h_1, h_2 \in G$ with $\mu(h_1) = 1$, $\mu(h_2) = \beta$, $h_1^2 = 1$, and $h_2^2 = \beta$. Since $\mathrm{dim}(Q) = (-1)^m = \det(h_1)$, this gives the desired factorization.
Finally, consider Case II-B, where we have $V = \mathcal{A}x \oplus \mathcal{A}y$, and as mentioned above, the minimal polynomial for $g$ must be of the form $(T^2 - \beta)^{2k-1}$. In this case, we have $\mathrm{dim}(V) = 2m$, where $m = 4k-2$. Define
$$ P_x = \mathrm{span} \{ (g^i + \beta^i g^{-i})x \, \mid \, 0 \leq i \leq 2k-1 \} \quad \text{ and } \quad Q_x = \mathrm{span} \{ (g^i - \beta^i g^{-i})x \, \mid \, 0 < i < 2k-1 \},$$
and define $P_y$ and $Q_y$ analogously. In Proposition 3(i) and (iii) of \cite{ryan-gsp} and in Theorem 1 of \cite{ryan-go}, it is shown that if $P = P_x \oplus Q_y$ and $Q = Q_x \oplus P_y$, and we define $h_1$ to have $+1$-eigenspace $P$ and $-1$-eigenspace $Q$ and $h_2 = h_1 g$, then we again have $h_1, h_2 \in G$ with $\mu(h_1) = 1$, $\mu(h_2) = \beta$, $h_1^2 = 1$, and $h_2^2 = \beta$. Since $\mathrm{dim}(P_y) = 2k$ and $\mathrm{dim}(Q_x) = 2k-2$, then $\mathrm{dim}(Q) = 4k-2 = m$, so $\det(h_1) = (-1)^m$.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem~B} \label{main result}
Recall that $h \in {\rm Aut}_F(V)$ is an anti-unitary involution and that ${}^{\iota} g = \mu(g)^{-1} hgh^{-1}$ for $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$.
Thus $\iota$ is a continuous automorphism of ${\rm GU}(V)$ of order two.
The restriction $\iota |_{ {\rm U}(V)}$ gives the automorphism $g \mapsto hgh^{-1}$ of ${\rm U}(V)$
which we again denote by $\iota$. We restate our main result.
\begin{ThmB}
The maps $\iota:{\rm U}(V) \to {\rm U}(V)$ and $\iota:{\rm GU}(V) \to {\rm GU}(V)$ are dualizing involutions.
\end{ThmB}
We recall some character theory in \S\ref{chars}. Using this, we will see in \S\ref{conjugacy} that Theorem~B follows almost immediately from
Theorem~A.
\subsection{} \label{chars}
Let $G$ be the $F$-points of a reductive algebraic $F$-group. As usual, we write
$C_c^\infty(G)$ for the space of complex-valued functions on $G$ that are locally constant and of compact support.
Let $(\pi, V)$ be a smooth representation of $G$. For $f \in C_c^\infty(G)$, the operator $\pi(f):V \to V$ is given by
\[
\pi(f)v = \int_G f(g) \pi(g) v \, dg, \quad \quad v \in V,
\]
where the integral is with respect to a Haar measure on $G$ which we fix once and for all.
Assume now that $(\pi,V)$ is irreducible. It is well-known that $(\pi,V)$ is then
{\it admissible} \cite{Jac}, that is, the space $V^K$ of $K$-fixed vectors has finite dimension for any open subgroup $K$ of $G$. It follows
that the image of $\pi(f)$ has finite dimension and thus $\pi(f)$ has a well-defined trace. The resulting linear functional $f \mapsto {\rm tr} \, \pi(f): C_c^\infty(G) \to \mathbb{C}$ is called the {\it distribution character} of $\pi$. It determines the irreducible representation $\pi$ up to equivalence (\cite{BZ} 2.20).
It is straightforward to check that $ {\rm tr} \, \pi^{\vee}(f) = {\rm tr} \, \pi(f^{\vee})$ where $f^{\vee}(g) = f(g^{-1})$ for $g \in G$.
Let $G_{\rm reg}$ denote the set of regular semisimple elements in $G$. By \cite{H-C, Ad-Kor},
the distribution character of $\pi$ is represented by a locally constant function $\Theta_\pi$
on $G_{\rm reg}$ called the {\it character} of $\pi$. That is,
\begin{equation} \label{H-C-char}
{\rm tr} \, \pi(f) = \int_G f(g) \,\Theta_\pi (g) \, dg, \quad \quad f \in C_c^\infty(G).
\end{equation}
\begin{Rmk}
Existence of $\Theta_\pi$ is established in \cite{H-C} for arbitrary connected reductive $F$-groups based on the submersion principle of its title.
Harish-Chandra, however, only gave a proof of the principle in characteristic zero with a comment that a general proof was known.
A full proof (due to G.~Prasad) appears in Appendix~B to \cite{Ad-DeB}. In \cite{Ad-Kor} \S13, Adler and Korman explain how to extend
Harish-Chandra's and Prasad's arguments to non-connected reductive $F$-groups.
\end{Rmk}
By (\ref{H-C-char}), the function $\Theta_\pi$ determines the distribution character of $\pi$ and thus $\pi$ is determined up to equivalence
by $\Theta_\pi$. In the same way, $\Theta_\pi$ is constant on (regular semisimple) conjugacy classes.
From ${\rm tr} \, \pi^{\vee} (f) = {\rm tr} \, \pi (f^\vee)$ for $f \in C_c^\infty(G)$, we also have
$
\Theta_{\pi^{\vee}}(g) = \Theta_\pi(g^{-1})
$
for $g \in G_{\rm reg}$, again by (\ref{H-C-char}).
\subsection{} \label{conjugacy}
For $\pi$ a smooth representation of $G$ and $\alpha$ a continuous automorphism of $G$, we write $\pi^{\alpha}$
for the smooth representation given by $\pi^{\alpha}(g) = \pi ({}^{\alpha} g)$ for $g \in G$.
For any $g \in {\rm GU}(V)$, we noted in the introduction that the elements ${}^{\iota} g$ and $g^{-1}$ are conjugate by an element of ${\rm U}(V)$.
To prove Theorem~B, it suffices therefore to observe the following.
\begin{Lem}
Let $\alpha$ be a continuous automorphism of $G$ such that ${}^{\alpha} g$ is conjugate to $g^{-1}$ for any $g \in G$.
Then $\pi^{\alpha} \cong \pi^{\vee}$ for any irreducible smooth representation $\pi$ of $G$.
\end{Lem}
\begin{proof}
The main detail to check is that a continuous automorphism $\gamma$ of $G$ preserves the Haar measure $\mu_G$ on $G$.
We have $\mu_G \circ \gamma = c_\gamma \,\mu_G$ for some $c_\gamma > 0$.
Writing ${\rm Aut}_{\rm c}(G)$ for the group of continuous automorphisms of $G$ and $\mathbb{R}^\times_{\rm pos}$
for the multiplicative group of positive real numbers, the assignment
$\gamma \mapsto c_\gamma: {\rm Aut}_{\rm c}(G) \to \mathbb{R}^\times_{\rm pos}$ is a homomorphism.
Let $K$ be a compact subgroup of $G$ of maximal volume. (Note $K$ exists as $G$ has a finite non-zero number of
conjugacy classes of maximal compact subgroups.)
For any $\gamma \in {\rm Aut}_{\rm c}(G)$, we have $\mu_G(\gamma(K)) = c_\gamma \,\mu_G(K)$, so that
$c_\gamma \leq 1$. Similarly $c_{\gamma^{-1}} = c_\gamma^{-1} \leq 1$. Hence $c_\gamma = 1$, as required.
In particular, $\alpha$ preserves the Haar measure on $G$. Thus, for any irreducible smooth representation $\pi$ of $G$,
\begin{align*}
\pi^{\alpha} (f) &= \int_G f(g) \, \pi ({}^{\alpha} g) \,dg \\
&= \int_G f({}^{\alpha^{-1}} g ) \, \pi (g) \, dg, \quad \quad f \in C_c^\infty(G).
\end{align*}
That is, $\pi^{\alpha}(f) = \pi({}^{\alpha} f)$ for $f \in C_c^\infty(G)$ where ${}^{\alpha} f(g) = f({}^{\alpha^{-1}}g)$. It follows that
${\rm tr} \,\pi^{\alpha}(f) = {\rm tr} \, \pi({}^{\alpha} f)$, so that
\begin{align*}
\int_G f(g) \, \Theta_{\pi^{\alpha}} (g) \,dg &= \int_G f({}^{\alpha^{-1}} g ) \, \Theta_\pi(g) \, dg \\
&= \int_G f(g) \, \Theta_\pi ({}^{\alpha} g) \,dg, \quad \forall \,\, f \in C_c^\infty(G).
\end{align*}
Therefore $ \Theta_{\pi^{\alpha}} (g) = \Theta_\pi ({}^{\alpha} g)$ for $g \in G_{\rm reg}$. As characters are constant on conjugacy classes, it follows that
$\Theta_{\pi^{\alpha}}(g) = \Theta_\pi(g^{-1})$ for $g \in G_{\rm reg}$. Thus $\Theta_{\pi^{\alpha}} = \Theta_{\pi^{\vee}}$ and $\pi^{\alpha} \cong \pi^{\vee}$.
\end{proof}
\iffalse
\subsection{}
{\it Proof of Theorem~B}.
Let $a \in {\rm GU}(V)$ with $\mu(g) = \beta$.
By Theorem~A, we have $g = h_1 h_2$ for an anti-unitary involution $h_1$ and an anti-unitary similitude $h_2$ with $h_2^2 = \beta$.
Thus $h_2^{-1} = \beta^{-1} h_2$ and $g^{-1} = \beta^{-1} h_2 h_1$. Conjugating ${}^{\iota} g$ by $h_1 h \in {\rm U}(V)$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
(h_1 h )\, {}^{\iota} g \, (h_1 h)^{-1} &= h_1 h \, ( \beta^{-1} h (h_1 h_2) \, h^{-1} ) \, h h_1 \\
&= \beta^{-1} h_2 h_1 \\
&= g^{-1}.
\end{align*}
In particular, ${}^{\iota} g$ and $g^{-1}$ are conjugate by an element of ${\rm U}(V)$. The result now follows from Lemma~\ref{chars}. extra space
\qed
\fi
\subsection{}
We record a direct consequence of Theorem~B, well-known to experts (see, for example, \cite{DP} page 305).
Suppose $E=F$ so that $\langle\mspace{7mu},\mspace{7mu}\rangle$ is orthogonal or symplectic. We change notation slightly and write
${\rm O}(V)$ and ${\rm GO}(V)$ or ${\rm Sp}_{2n}(F)$ and ${\rm GSp}_{2n}(F)$
(where $\dim_F V = 2n$) for the resulting isometry and similitude groups.
The center of each similitude group consists of scalar transformations. Dividing by this center gives the corresponding
projective groups ${\rm PGO} (V)$ and ${\rm PGSp}_{2n}(F)$.
\begin{Cor}
\begin{enumerate}[a.]
\item
Every irreducible smooth representation of ${\rm O(V)}$ is self-dual.
\item
If $-1 \in (F^\times)^2$ then every irreducible smooth representation of ${\rm Sp}_{2n}(F)$ is self-dual.
\item
For any irreducible smooth representation $\pi$ of ${\rm GO(V)}$ or ${\rm GSp}_{2n}(F)$,
$\pi^{\vee} \cong \pi \otimes \omega_\pi \circ \mu^{-1} $ where $\omega_\pi$ denotes the central character of $\pi$.
In particular, every irreducible smooth representation of ${\rm PGO(V)}$ or ${\rm PGSp}_{2n}(F)$ is self-dual.
\end{enumerate}
\end{Cor}
\begin{proof}
Part~a is immediate as $h \in {\rm O}(V)$, so $\iota:{\rm O}(V) \to {\rm O}(V)$ is inner.
For part~b, it suffices to note that
$\iota(g) = h g h^{-1}$ defines an inner automorphism of ${\rm Sp}_{2n}(F)$ for any
anti-unitary (i.e., skew-symplectic) $h \in {\rm GSp}_{2n}(F)$. Given $i \in F^\times$ with $i^2 = -1$,
the homothety $i$ satisfies $\mu(i) = i^2 = -1$ and thus $i h \in {\rm Sp}_{2n}(F)$.
Since ${}^{\iota} g = (i h) g (i h)^{-1}$ for $g \in {\rm Sp}_{2n}(F)$, we see that $\iota$ is inner.
For part~c, observe that $g \mapsto \mu(g)^{-1} g$ defines a dualizing involution of each similitude group.
\end{proof}
\section{Dualizing involutions do not always exist} \label{non-existence}
Let $D$ be a central $F$-division algebra of dimension $m^2$ over $F$. Let $n$ be a positive integer and set $G = {\rm GL}_n(D)$.
We show that $G$ can admit an automorphism that takes each irreducible smooth representation to its dual only in the known cases
$m=1$ \cite{GK, Tupan} and $m=2$ \cite{MS, Ragh}. Thus it is only in these two cases that
$G$ can admit an automorphism $\theta$ such that ${}^{\theta} g$ is conjugate to $g^{-1}$ for all $g \in G$, an observation also made by
Lin, Sun and Tan (\cite{LinSunTan} Remark (c) page 83). In fact, the two statements
-- non-existence of automorphisms that take each irreducible smooth representation to its dual and non-existence of automorphisms that invert each conjugacy class -- must surely be equivalent.
\begin{Prop}
Suppose there exists an automorphism $\theta$ of $G$ such that $\pi^{\theta} \simeq \pi^{\vee}$ for all irreducible smooth representations $\pi$ of $G$.
Then $D = F$ or $D$ is a quaternion algebra over $F$ (equivalently, $m = 1$ or $2$).
\end{Prop}
\subsection{} \label{conts}
We need a preliminary observation.
Let $\mathfrak{o}_F$ denote the valuation ring in $F$ and $\mathfrak{p}_F$ the unique maximal ideal in $\mathfrak{o}_F$.
\begin{Lem} \label{prelim}
Any field automorphism of $F$ preserves $\mathfrak{p}_F$. In particular, field automorphisms of $F$ are automatically continuous.
\end{Lem}
\begin{proof}
Write $q$ for the cardinality of the residue field
$\mathfrak{o}_F / \mathfrak{p}_F$ and $v_F$ for the normalized valuation on $F$.
The ideals $\mathfrak{p}_F^k$ (for $k$ a positive integer) form a neighborhood basis of $0 \in F$.
Thus an automorphism that preserves $\mathfrak{p}_F$ is continuous.
Writing $p$ for the residual characteristic of $F$, the set $1+\mathfrak{p}_F$ can be characterized algebraically as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[]
$x \in 1+\mathfrak{p}_F$ if and only if $x$ admits an $n$-th root (i.e., there is a $y \in F^\times$ with $y^n = x$) for any $n$ such that $p \nmid n$ .
\end{itemize}
Indeed, using Hensel's Lemma or simply that $1+\mathfrak{p}_F$ is a pro-$p$-group, one sees
that each element of $1+\mathfrak{p}_F$ admits an $n$-th root for any $n$ such that $p \nmid n$.
In the other direction, suppose $x$ has this property.
Then $n$ divides $v_F(x)$ for infinitely many integers $n$, whence $v_F(x) = 0$, i.e., $x \in \mathfrak{o}_F^\times$.
Let $y$ be a $(q-1)$-th root of $x$. Then $y \in \mathfrak{o}_F^\times$ and the relation $y^{q-1} =x$ implies $x \in 1+\mathfrak{p}_F$.
It follows that any field automorphism of $F$ preserves $1+\mathfrak{p}_F$ and so also $\mathfrak{p}_F$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{}
{\it Proof of Proposition.}
We use the isomorphism $x \mapsto x 1_n:F^\times \to Z(G)$
to view the central character $\omega_\pi$ of any smooth irreducible representation $\pi$ of $G$ as a smooth character of $F^\times$.
Suppose first that $D$ is not isomorphic to its opposite $D^{\texttt{o}}$. We appeal to Dieudonn\'{e}'s description of the automorphism groups
of general linear groups over division algebras \cite{D}. In the case at hand, this gives a) a homomorphism $\eta:G \to F^\times$,
b) an automorphism $\sigma$ of $D$ acting on $G$ via ${}^{\sigma}(a_{ij}) = ({}^{\sigma}a_{ij})$ and c) an element $h \in G$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{aut}
{}^{\theta} g = \eta(g) \, h \, {}^{\sigma}g \, h^{-1}, \quad \,\,\, g \in G.
\end{equation}
(See \cite{D} Theorems 1 and 3 for the case $n \geq 3$ and the end of \emph{ibid.} \S12 for the case $n=2$.)
As $\pi^{\theta} \simeq \pi^{\vee}$, we have $\omega_\pi \circ \theta= \omega_\pi^{-1}$ (for all smooth irreducible representations $\pi$). It follows that
\[
{}^{\theta} a = a^{-1}, \quad \,\,\, a \in F^\times.
\]
Thus, by (\ref{aut}),
\[
a^{-1} = \eta(a) \, {}^{\sigma}a, \quad \,\,\, a \in F^\times.
\]
We have $G/(G,G) \simeq D^\times / (D^\times,D^\times)$ via Dieudonn\'{e}'s non-commutative determinant $\text{Det}$.
Further, the reduced norm ${\rm Nrd}$ from $D$ to $F$ induces an isomorphism $D^\times / (D^\times,D^\times) \simeq F^\times$. Thus there is
a character $\eta_1:F^\times \to F^\times$ such that $\eta(g) = \eta_1({\rm Nrd} \circ \text{Det} \,g )$, for $g \in G$.
Using $\text{Det} \, a = a^n (D^\times,D^\times)$ and ${\rm Nrd} \,a = a^m$, for $a \in F^\times$, it follows that
\[
a^{-1} = \eta_1(a)^{mn} \, {}^{\sigma}a, \quad \,\,\, a \in F^\times.
\]
Taking $a= \varpi$, a uniformizer in $F$, and applying $v_F$, we obtain
\[
-1 = mn v_F(\eta_1(\varpi)) + v_F({}^{\sigma}\varpi)
\]
By Lemma~\ref{conts}, $ v_F({}^{\sigma}\varpi) = 1$, and hence $m \mid 2$. Thus $D = F$ or $D$ is a quaternion algebra over $F$ which
contradicts our assumption that $D$ is not isomorphic to $D^{\texttt{o}}$.
It follows that there is an isomorphism $\alpha:D \to D^{\texttt{o}}$. If $\alpha$ is $F$-linear, then $D$
represents an element of order at most two in the Brauer group of $F$. As the only such elements are the class of $F$ and the class of the unique quaternion division algebra over $F$, the result follows. In general, however, we can only say that $\alpha$ preserves the center $F$ of $D$.
By Lemma~\ref{prelim}, it must also preserve $\mathfrak{o}_F$. The ring $D$ contains a unique maximal $\mathfrak{o}_F$-order $\mathfrak{O}$ consisting of
the elements of $D$ that are integral over $\mathfrak{o}_F$. From this description, we see that $\alpha$ preserves $\mathfrak{O}$. Thus $\alpha$ also
preserves the unique maximal (left or right) ideal $\mathfrak{q}$ in $\mathfrak{O}$, and hence induces an automorphism of the quotient $\mathfrak{O} / \mathfrak{q}$,
a finite field of order $q^m$. Let $\varpi_D$ be a generator of $\mathfrak{q}$, i.e.,
$\mathfrak{q} = \varpi_D \, \mathfrak{O} = \mathfrak{O} \, \varpi_D$. Then, for $D \neq F$, there is a unique integer $r$ with $1 < r < m$ and $(r,m) = 1$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{Hasse}
\varpi_D \, x \, \varpi_D{}^{-1} \equiv x^{q^r} \pmod{\mathfrak{q}}, \quad \,\,\, x \in \mathfrak{O}.
\end{equation}
Moreover the congruence is independent of the choice of generator $\varpi_D$. (This all follows, for example, from \cite{Re} 14.5.)
Applying $\alpha$ to (\ref{Hasse}) and rearranging (and using the fact that $\mathfrak{O} / \mathfrak{q}$ has order $q^m$), we obtain
\[
\alpha(\varpi_D) \, x \, \alpha(\varpi_D)^{-1} \equiv x^{q^{m-r}} \pmod{\mathfrak{q}}, \quad \,\,\, x \in \mathfrak{O}.
\]
Since (\ref{Hasse}) holds for all generators of $\mathfrak{q}$, we deduce that $r = m-r$ or $2r = m$, whence $r=1$ and $m=2$. Thus
$D$ is a quaternion algebra over $F$ and we have completed the proof.
\qed
|
\section{Introduction}
The Maximum Coverage (MC) problem is one of the classic combinatorial optimization problems which is well studied due to its wealth of applications.
Let $U$ be a set of ground elements, $\mathcal{F}\subseteq 2^{U}$ be a family of subsets of $U$ and $k$ be a positive integer. The \textsc{Maximum Coverage} (MC) problem asks for a $k$-subset $\mathcal{F}'$ of $\mathcal{F}$ such that the number $|\bigcup\mathcal{F}'|$ of ground elements covered by $\mathcal{F}'$ is maximized.
Many real life problems arising from banking~\cite{CornuejolsNW80}, social networks,
transportation network~\cite{Mecke}, databases~\cite{HarinarayanRU96}, information
retrieval, sensor placement, security (and others) can be framed as an instance of
MC problem. For example, the following are easily seen as MC problems: placing $k$
sensors to maximize the number of covered customers, finding a set of $k$ documents
satisfying the information needs of as many users as possible~\cite{badanidiyuru12-geometric-mc},
and placing $k$ security personnel in a terrain to maximize the number of secured regions is secured.
From the result of Cornu{\'{e}}jols~\cite{CornuejolsNW80}, it is
well known that greedy algorithm is a $1-1/e$
approximation algorithm for the MC problem. Due to wide applicability of the
problem, whether one can achieve an approximation factor better than
$(1-\frac{1}{e})$ was subject of research for a long period of time.
From the result of Feige~\cite{Feige98}, it is known that if there
exists a polynomial-time algorithm that approximates maximum
coverage within a ratio of $(1 - \frac{1}{e} + \epsilon)$ for some
$\epsilon > 0$ then P = NP. Better results can however be
obtained for special cases of MC. For example, Ageev and Sviridenko
\cite{ageevS04-pipage-rounding} show in their seminal work that
their pipage rounding approach gives a factor $1-(1-1/r)^r$ for
instances of MC where every element occurs in at most $r$ sets. For
constant $r$ this is a strict improvement on $1-1/e$ but this bound
is approached if $r$ is unbounded. For example, pipage rounding
gives a $3/4$-approximation algorithm for \textsc{Maximum Vertex
Cover} (MVC), which asks for a $k$-subset of nodes of a given
graph that maximizes the number of edges incident on at least one of
the selected nodes. Petrank~\cite{Patrank94} showed that this
special case of MC is APX-hard.
In this paper, we study the approximability of MC in \emph{geometric} settings where elements and sets are represented by geometric objects. Such problems have been considered before and have applications, for example, in information retrieval~\cite{badanidiyuru12-geometric-mc} and in wireless networks~\cite{Erlebach08-geometric-coverage}.
MC is related to the \textsc{Set Cover} problem (SC). For a given set $U$ of ground elements and a family $\mathcal{F}\subseteq 2^{U}$ of subsets of $U$, this problem asks for a minimum cardinality subset of $\mathcal{F}$ which covers all the ground elements of $U$. This problem plays a central role in combinatorial optimization and in particular in the study of approximation algorithms. The best known approximation algorithm has a ratio of $\ln n$, which is essentially the best possible \cite{Feige98} under a plausibly complexity-theoretic assumption. A lot of work has been devoted to beat the logarithmic barrier in the context of geometric set cover problems\cite{BronnimannG95-geometric-setcover,Varada,Chan,Ray}. Mustafa and Ray~\cite{MustafaR09} introduced a powerful tool which can be used to show that a \emph{local search} approach provides a PTAS for various geometric SC problems. Their result applies if a naturally defined ``exchange graph'' (whose nodes are the sets in two feasible solutions) is planar and is based on subdividing this graph via a planar separator theorem due to Frederickson~\cite{Frederickson87}.
In the same paper~\cite{MustafaR09}, they applied this approach to provide a PTAS for the SC problem when the family $\mathcal{F}$ consists of either a set of half spaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$, or a set of disks in $\mathbb{R}^2$.
Many results have been obtained using this technique for different problems in geometric settings~\cite{ChanH12,DeL16,GibsonP10,KrohnGKV14}. Some of these works extend to cases where the underlying exchange graph is not planar but admits a small-size separator~\cite{AschnerKMY13,GovindarajanRRR16,Har-PeledQ15}.
Beyond the context of SC, local search has also turned out to be a very
powerful tool for other geometric problems but the analysis of
such algorithms is usually non-trivial and highly tailored to the
specific setting. Examples are the Euclidean TSP, Euclidean Steiner
tree, facility location, $k$-median~\cite{Cohen-AddadM15}. In some very
recent breakthroughs, PTASs for $k$-means problem in finite
Euclidean dimension (and more general cases) via local search have
been announced
\cite{cohen-addad-local-search-k-means,friggstad-etal-local-search-k-means}.
In this paper, we study the effectiveness of local search for geometric MC problems. In the general case, $b$-swap local search is known to yield a tight approximation ratio of $1/2$ \cite{KerkkampA16-localsearch-maxcoverage}. However, for special cases such as geometric MC problems local search is a promising candidate for beating the barrier $1-1/e$. It seems, however, non-trivial to obtain such results using the technique of Mustafa and Ray~\cite{MustafaR09}. In their analysis, each part of the subdivided planar exchange graph (see above) corresponds to a feasible candidate swap that replaces some sets of the local optimum with some sets of the global optimum and it is ensured that every element stays covered due to the construction of the exchange graph. It is moreover argued that if the global optimum is sufficiently smaller than the local optimum then one of the considered candidate swaps would actually reduce the size of the solution.
It is possible to construct the same exchange graphs also for the case
of MC. However, the hard cardinality constraint given by input
parameter $k$ poses an obstacle. In particular, when considering a
swap corresponding to a part of the subdivision, this swap might
be infeasible as it may contain (substantially) more sets from the
global optimum than from the local optimum. Another issue is that MC
has a different objective function than SC. Namely, the goal is to maximize the
number of covered elements rather than minimizing the number of used
sets. Finally, while for SC all elements are covered by both
solutions, in MC we additionally have elements that are covered by
none or only one of the two solutions requiring a more detailed distinction of several types of elements.
In fact, subsequent to the work of Mustafa and Ray on
SC~\cite{MustafaR09}, Badanidiyuru, Kleinberg, and
Lee~\cite{badanidiyuru12-geometric-mc} studied geometric MC.
They obtained fixed-parameter approximation schemes for MC instances for
the very general case where the family $\mathcal{F}$ consists of
objects with bounded VC dimension, but the running times are
exponential in the cardinality bound $k$. They further provided APX-hardness for each of the
following cases: set systems of VC-dimension 2, halfspaces in $\mathbb{R}^4$,
and axis-parallel rectangles in $\mathbb{R}^2$.
Interestingly, while they have shown that for MC instances where
$\mathcal{F}$ consists of halfspaces in $\mathbb{R}^2$ local search can be
used to provide a PTAS, they only conjecture that local search will provide
a PTAS for when $\mathcal{F}$ consists of half spaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$.
This underlines the observation that it seems non-trivial to apply the approach of Mustafa and Ray to geometric MC
problems as at that point a PTAS for halfspaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$ for SC was already
known via the approach of Mustafa and Ray.
The difficulty of analyzing local search under the presence of a cardinality constraint is also known in other settings. For example, one of the main technical contributions of the recent breakthrough for the Euclidean $k$-means problem \cite{cohen-addad-local-search-k-means,friggstad-etal-local-search-k-means} is that the authors are able to handle the hard cardinality constraint by the concept of so-called isolated pairs \cite{cohen-addad-local-search-k-means}. Prior to these works approximation schemes have only been known for bicriteria variants where the cardinality constraint may be violated or where there is no constraint but---analogously to SC---the cardinality contributes to the objective function~\cite{BandyapadhyayV16-kmeans-clustering}.
\subsection{Our Contribution}
In this paper, we show a way how to cope with the above-mentioned
issue with a cardinality constraint. We are able to achieve a PTAS
for many geometric MC problems. At a high level we follow the
framework of Mustafa and Ray defining a planar (or more generally
$f$-separable) exchange graph and subdividing it into a number of
small parts each of them corresponding to a candidate swap. As each
part may be (substantially) imbalanced in terms of the number of sets
of the global optimum and local optimum, respectively, a natural idea
seems to swap in only a sufficiently small subset of the globally
optimal sets. This idea alone is, however, not sufficient. Consider,
for example, the case where each part contains either only sets from
the local or only sets from the global optimum making it impossible to
retrieve any feasible swap from the considering the single parts. To
overcome this difficulty, we prove in a first step a
\emph{color-balanced} version of the planar separator theorem
(Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}). In this theorem, the input is a
planar (or more generally \emph{$f$-separable}) graph whose nodes are
two-colored arbitrarily. The distinctions of our separator theorem
from the prior work, are that our separator theorem guarantees that
all parts have roughly the same size (rather than simply an upper
limit on their size) and that the two colors are represented in each
part in roughly the same ratio as in the whole graph. This balancing
property allows us to address the issue of the above-mentioned
infeasible swaps. In a second step, we are able to employ the only
roughly color-balanced subdivision to establish a set of perfectly
balanced candidate swaps. We prove by a careful analysis (which turns
out more intricate than for the SC case) that local search also yields
a PTAS for the wide class \emph{$f$-separable} MC problems (see
Theorem~\ref{thm:main-thm}). As an immediate consequence, we obtain
PTASs for essentially all cases of geometric MC problems where the
corresponding SC problem can be tackled via the approach of Mustafa
and Ray (Theorem~\ref{thm:Application}). In particular, this confirms
the conjecture of Badanidiyuru, Kleinberg, and
Lee~\cite{badanidiyuru12-geometric-mc} regarding halfspaces in
$\mathbb{R}^3$. We also immediately obtain PTASs for \textsc{Maximum
Dominating Set} and \textsc{Maximum Vertex Cover} on $f$-separable
and minor-closed graph classes (see section~\ref{sec:Application}),
which, to the best of our knowledge, were not known before. We feel
that our approach has the potential to find further applications in
similar cardinality constrained settings.
\section{Color Balanced Divisions}
\label{sec:tools}
In this section we provide the main tool used to prove our main result (i.e.,
Theorem~\ref{thm:main-thm}).
We first describe a new subtle specialization (see
Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform-(r,f)-division}) of the standard division theorem
on $f$-separable graph classes (see Theorem~\ref{thm:(r,f)-division}).
This builds on the concept of $(r,f(r))$-divisions (in the sense of
Henzinger et al.~\cite{HenzingerKRS97}) of graphs in an $f$-separable graph
class. We then extend this specialized division lemma by suitably aggregating
the pieces of the partition to obtain a \emph{two-color balanced} version (see
Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}).
This result generalizes to more than two colors.
However, as our applications stem from the two-colored version, we defer the
generalization to the appendix (see Appendix~\ref{app:separators}).
For a number $n$, we use $[n]$ to denote the set $\{1,\dots,n\}$.
For a graph $G$, a subset $S$ of $V(G)$ is an \emph{$\alpha$-balanced separator}
when its removal breaks $G$ into two collections of connected components
such that each collection contains at most an $\alpha$ fraction of
$V(G)$ where $\alpha \in [\frac{1}{2},1)$ and $\alpha$ is a constant.
The size of a separator $S$ is simply the number of vertices it contains.
For a non-decreasing sublinear function $f$, a class of graphs that is closed under taking subgraphs is said to be \emph{$f$-separable}
if there is an $\alpha \in [\frac{1}{2},1)$ such that for any $n>2$, an $n$-vertex graph in the class has a $\alpha$-balanced separator whose size is at most $f(n)$.
Note that, by the Lipton-Tarjan separator theorem~\cite{lipton1979separator},
planar graphs are a subclass of the $\sqrt{n}$-separable graphs. More generally,
Alon, Seymour, and Thomas~\cite{alonST1990minorclosed} have shown that every
graph class characterized by a finite set of forbidden minors is also a subclass
of the $(c\cdot\sqrt{n})$-separable graphs (here, the constant $c$ depends on the size
of the largest forbidden minor). In particular, from the graph minors
theorem~\cite{robertson2004graph}, every non-trivial minor closed graph class is
a subclass of the $(c\cdot\sqrt{n})$-separable graphs (for some constant $c$).
Note that when we discuss $f$-separable graph classes we assume the function $f$ has the
form $f(x) = x^{1-\delta}$ for some $\delta >0$, i.e., it is both non-decreasing and
strongly sublinear.
Frederickson~\cite{Frederickson87} introduced the notion of an
\emph{$r$-division} of an $n$-vertex graph $G$, namely, a cover
of $V(G)$ by $\Theta(\frac{n}{r})$ sets each of size $O(r)$ where each set
has $O(\sqrt{r})$ \emph{boundary} vertices, i.e., $O(\sqrt{r})$ vertices in
common with the other sets. Frederickson
showed that, for any $r$, every planar graph $G$ has an $r$-division and
that one can be computed in $O(n \log n)$ time. This result follows from
a recursive application of the Lipton-Tarjan planar separator
theorem~\cite{lipton1979separator}. This notion was further generalized by
Henzinger et al.~\cite{HenzingerKRS97} to $(r,f(r))$-divisions\footnote{They
use a more general notion of $(r,s)$-division but we need the restricted
version as described here.} where
$f$ is a function in $o(r)$ and each set has at most $f(r)$ vertices in
common with the other sets. They noted that Frederickson's proof can
easily be adapted to obtain an $(r,c \cdot f(r))$-division of any graph $G$
from a subgraph closed $f$-separable graph class -- as formalized in
Theorem~\ref{thm:(r,f)-division}).
Note that we use an equivalent but slightly different notation than
Frederickson and Henzinger et al. in that we consider the ``boundary'' vertices
as a single separate set apart from the non-boundary vertices in each ``region'',
i.e., our \emph{divisions} are actually partitions of the vertex set.
This allows us to carefully describe the number of vertices inside each ``region''.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Frederickson87,HenzingerKRS97}]
\label{thm:(r,f)-division}
For any subgraph closed $f$-separable
class of graphs $\mathcal{G}$, there are constants $c_1,c_2$ such that every
graph $G$ in the class has an \emph{$(r, c_1 \cdot f(r))$-division} for any $r$.
Namely, for any $r\geq 1$, there is an integer $t \in \Theta(\frac{n}{r})$
such that $V$ can be partitioned into $t+1$ sets $\ensuremath\mathcal{X}, V_1, \ldots, V_t$
where the following properties hold.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $N(V_i) \cap V_j= \emptyset$ for each $i\neq j$,
\item $|V_i \cup N(V_i)| \leq r$ for each $i$,
\item $|N(V_i) \cap \ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \leq c_1 \cdot f(r)$ for each $i$
(thus, $|\ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \leq \sum_{i=1}^t |\ensuremath\mathcal{X} \cap N(V_i)| \leq
c_2 \cdot \frac{f(r) \cdot n}{r}$).
\end{enumerate}
Moreover, such a partition can be found in $O(g(n) \log n)$ time where
$g(n)$ is the time required to find an $f$-separation in $\mathcal{G}$.
\end{theorem}
We specialize the notion of $(r,f(r))$-divisions first to \emph{uniform}
$(r,f(r))$-divisions, and then generalize to \emph{two-color uniform
$(r,f(r))$-divisions} of a two-colored graph (note: the coloring need not be
proper in the usual sense).
A \emph{uniform $(r,f(r))$-division} is an $(r,f(r)$-division where
the $\Theta(\frac{n}{r})$ sets have a \emph{uniform} (i.e., $\Theta(r)$)
amount of \textbf{internal} vertices.
A \emph{two-color uniform $(r,f(r))$-division} of a two-colored graph is a
uniform $(r,f(r))$-division where each set additionally has the ``same''
proportion of each color class (this is formalized in
Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}).
It is important to note that while this uniformity condition (i.e., that each
region is not \emph{too small}) has not been needed in the
past\footnote{E.g., to analyse local search for SC
problems~\cite{MustafaR09}, or for fast algorithms to find shortest
paths~\cite{HenzingerKRS97}.}, it is essential for our analysis of local
search as applied to MC problems in the next section.
Moreover, to the best of our knowledge, neither Frederickson's construction
nor more modern constructions (e.g.~\cite{KleinMS13}) of an $r$-division
explicitly guarantee that the resulting $r$-division is uniform.
To be specific, Frederickson's approach consists of two steps. The first step
recursively applies the separator theorem until each region together with its
boundary is ``small enough''. In the second step, each
region where the boundary is ``too large'' is further divided. This is
accomplished applying the separator theorem to a weighted version of each
such region where the boundary vertices are uniformly weighted and the non-
boundary vertices are zero-weighted.
Clearly, even a single application of this latter step may result in regions
with $o(r)$ interior vertices.
Modern approaches (e.g.~\cite{KleinMS13}) similarly involve applying the separator theorem to weighted regions where boundary vertices are uniformly weighted and interior vertices are zero-weighted, i.e., regions which are \emph{too small} are not explicitly avoided.
The remainder of this section is outlined as follows.
We will first show for every $f$-separable graph class $\mathcal{G}$ there is
a constant $c$ such that every graph in $\mathcal{G}$
has a uniform $(r, c \cdot f(r))$-division (see Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform-(r,f)-division}).
We then use this result to show that for every $f$-separable graph class
$\mathcal{G}$ there is a constant $c'$ such that every two-colored graph in
$\mathcal{G}$ has a two-color uniform $(rq, c' \cdot q \cdot
f(r))$-division for any $q$ -- see Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}.
Our proofs are constructive and lead to efficient algorithms which produce
such divisions when there is a corresponding efficient algorithm to compute
an $f$-separation.
To prove the first result, we start from a given $(r,f(r))$-division and
``group'' the sets carefully so that we obtain the desired uniformity. For
the two-colored version, we start from a uniform $(r,f(r))$-division and again regroup the sets via a reformulation of the problem as a partitioning
problem on two-dimensional vectors. Namely, we leverage Lemma~\ref{lem:partitioning_easy} to perform the regrouping.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:uniform-(r,f)-division}
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a $f$-separable graph class and $G=(V,E)$ be a sufficiently large
$n$-vertex graph in $\mathcal{G}$. There are constants $r_0, x_0$ (depending only on $f$) such that for any $r \in [r_0, \frac{n}{x_0}]$ there is an integer
$t \in \Theta(\frac{n}{r})$
such that $V$ can be partitioned into $t+1$ sets
$\ensuremath\mathcal{X}, V_1, \ldots, V_t$ where $c_1,c_2$ are constants independent
of $r$ and the following properties are satisfied.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $N(V_i) \cap V_j= \emptyset$ for each $i\neq j$,
\item $|V_i| \in [\frac{r}{2},2r]$ for each $i$,
\item $|N(V_i) \cap \ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \leq c_1 \cdot f(r)$ for each $i$
(thus, $|\ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \leq \sum_{i=1}^t|\ensuremath\mathcal{X} \cap N(V_i)| \leq \frac{c_2 \cdot f(r) \cdot n}{r}$).
\end{enumerate}
Moreover, such a partition can be found in $O(h(n) + n)$ time where $h(n)$ is
the amount of time required to produce an $(r,f(r))$-division of $G$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We start from an $(\lfloor \frac{r}{8}\rfloor, c_1 \cdot f(\lfloor \frac{r}{8}\rfloor ))$-division
$\mathcal{U} = (\ensuremath\mathcal{X}, U_1, \dots, U_\ell)$ as given by
Theorem~\ref{thm:(r,f)-division}
where $\ell = c_\ell \cdot \frac{8\cdot n}{r}$. We then partition $[\ell]$
into $t$ sets $I_1, \dots, I_t$ such that $(\ensuremath\mathcal{X}, V_1, \dots, V_t)$ is a
uniform $(r, c \cdot f(r))$-division $\ensuremath\mathcal{X}, V_1, \dots, V_t$ where
$V_i = \bigcup_{j \in I_i} U_j$. In order to describe the partitioning, we
first observe some useful properties of $U_1, \dots, U_\ell$ where,
without loss of generality, $|U_1| \geq \dots \geq |U_\ell|$.
Let $n^* = \sum_{j=1}^{\ell} |U_j|$, and set $t = \lceil\frac{n^*}{r}\rceil$. Note that:
\begin{equation}
n^* = \sum_{j=1}^{\ell} |U_j| = n - |\ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \geq
n \cdot \left(1 - \frac{c_2 \cdot f(\lfloor\frac{r}{8}\rfloor)}{\lfloor\frac{r}{8}\rfloor}\right).
\end{equation}
From our choice of $t$, the average size of the sets $V_i$ is $\frac{n^*}{t} \in (\frac{r}{1+\frac{r}{n^*}}, r]$.
Pick $r_0$ such that it is divisible by 8 and $c^* = 1 - c_2 \cdot f(\frac{r_0}{8})\cdot (\frac{r_0}{8})^{-1}>0$ and assume $r\geq r_0$ in what follows.
Then $n^* \geq c^* \cdot n$, i.e., $c^* \leq \frac{n^*}{n}$. Now pick $x_0 =
\frac{3}{c^*}$. Thus, we have $r \leq \frac{n}{x_0} \leq \frac{n^*}{3}$. In
particular, the average size of our sets $|V_i|$ is in $[\frac{3r}{4},r]$.
Notice that $\frac{\ell}{t} \leq c_\ell \cdot \frac{8\cdot n}{r} \cdot (\frac{n^*}{r})^{-1}
\leq \frac{8 c_\ell}{c^*}$.
We build the sets $I_i$ such that $|I_i| \leq 40 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$.
This provides $|N(V_i) \cap \ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \leq 40\cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*} \cdot
c_1 f(\lfloor \frac{r}{8} \rfloor) \in O(f(r))$.
We build the sets $I_i$ in two steps.
In the first step we greedily fill the sets $I_i$ according to the largest
unassigned set $U_j$ (formalized as follows).
For each $j^*$ from $1$ to $\ell$, we consider an index $i^* \in [t]$ where
$|I_{i^*}| < 32 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$ and $|V_{i^*}|$ is minimized.
If $|V_{i^*}| \leq \frac{n^*}{t}$, then we place $j^*$ into $I_{i^*}$, that is,
we replace $V_{i^*}$ with $V_{i^*} \cup U_{j^*}$. Otherwise (there is no such index $i^*$),
we proceed to step two (below). Before discussing step two, we first
consider the state of the sets $V_i$ at the moment when this greedy
placement finishes. To this end, let $j^*$ be the index of the first
(i.e., the largest) $U_j$ which has not been placed.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Claim 1:} \textit{If $|V_i| \leq \frac{n^*}{t}$ for every $i$,
then all each set $U_j$ has been merged into some $V_i$ and the $V_i$'s satisfy the conditions of the lemma.} \\
First, suppose there is an unallocated set $U_j$.
Since $|V_i| \leq \frac{n^*}{t}$ for each $i \in [t]$, our greedy procedure
stopped due to having $|I_i| = 32 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$ for each $i \in [t]$.
This contradicts the average size of the $I_i$'s being at most $8 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$.
So, every set $U_j$ must have been merged into some $V_i$. Thus, since
$|V_i| \leq \frac{n^*}{t}$ and the average of the $|V_i|$'s is $\frac{n^*}{t}$,
we have that for every $i \in [t]$, $|V_i| = \frac{n^*}{t}$. Moreover, for each $i \in [t]$,
$|I_i| \leq 8\frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$. Thus the $V_i$'s satisfy the lemma.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Claim 2:} \textit{For every $i \in [t]$, $|V_{i'}| \geq \frac{r}{2}$.} \\
Suppose some index $i$ has $|V_{i}| < \frac{r}{2}$. Notice that, if
$|I_i| < 32 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$, then for every $i' \in [t]$,
$|V_{i'}| \leq |V_i| + \frac{r}{8} \leq \frac{3r}{4} \leq \frac{n^*}{t}$, i.e.,
contradicting Claim~1. Thus, $|I_i| = 32 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$ for each
$i \in [t]$ where $|V_i| < \frac{r}{2}$.
For each $i'\in [t], j'\in[\ell]$, let $I_{i'}^{j'}$ and $V^{j'}_{i'}$ be the
states of $I_{i'}$ and $V_{i'}$(respectively) directly after index $j'$ has
been added to some set $I_{i''}$ by the greedy algorithm.
We now let $\hat{j}$ be the largest index in $I_i$, and assume (without loss of
generality) that for every $i' \in [t] \setminus \{i\}$,
if $|V^{\hat{j}}_{i'}| < \frac{r}{2}$, then $I^{\hat{j}}_{i'} < 32 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$.
Intuitively, $i$ is the ``first'' index which attains $|I_i| = 32 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$
while still having $|V_i| < \frac{r}{2}$.
Now, since $|I^{\hat{j}}_i| = 32 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$, and $|V^{\hat{j}}_i| < \frac{r}{2}$,
we have $|U_{\hat{j}}| < r \cdot \frac{c^*}{64c_\ell}$.
Thus, for every iteration $j> \hat{j}$, we have $|U_j| < r \cdot \frac{c^*}{64c_\ell}$.
This means that after iteration $\hat{j}$, the number of unallocated vertices is strictly less than:
\begin{center}
$\sum_{j=\hat{j}}^\ell U_j < \ell \cdot r \cdot \frac{c^*}{64c_\ell}
\leq t\cdot 8 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*} \cdot r \cdot \frac{c^*}{64c_\ell} = \frac{tr}{8}$.
\end{center}
In particular, this means that on average each set $V_i$ can grow by less than $\frac{r}{8}$.
However, due to our choice of $i$, we see that for every $i' \in [t]\setminus \{i\}$,
$|V^{\hat{j}}_{i'}| \leq |V^{\hat{j}}_{i}| + \frac{r}{8}< \frac{r}{2} + \frac{r}{8}$.
This means that even if we allocate all the remaining vertices, the average size of our
sets $V_i$ will be strictly less than $\frac{3r}{4}$ $\leq \frac{n^*}{t}$, i.e., providing
a contradiction and proving Claim~2.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Claim 3:} \textit{If every $j \in [\ell]$ is placed into
some $I_i$, the $V_i$'s satisfy the conditions of the lemma.} \\
First, note that $|I_i|$ is at most $32\cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$, i.e., $|N(V_i) \cap
\ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \in O(f(r))$. By Claim~2, we see that $|V_i| \geq \frac{n}{2}$ for each $i \in [t]$.
Additionally, from the greedy construction, we have that $|V_i| \leq \frac{n^*}{t} + \frac{r}{8}$.
Thus, $|V_i| \in [\frac{r}{2},\frac{9r}{8}] \subset [\frac{r}{2},2r]$.
\smallskip
We now describe the second step. By Claim~3, we assume there are unassigned sets $U_j$.
By Claim~2, for every $i \in [t]$, $|V_i| \geq \frac{r}{2}$.
Finally, by Claim~1, there is an index $i'$ where $|V_{i'}| > \frac{n^*}{t}$.
Thus, since we have $t=\lceil\frac{n^*}{r}\rceil$ sets which partition
at most $n^*$ elements, there must be some index $i''$ where $|V_{i''}| \leq \frac{n^*}{t}$ and
$|I_{i''}| = 32\cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$,
i.e., $|U_{j^*}| \leq \frac{n^*}{t} \cdot (32\cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*})^{-1} \leq \frac{r\cdot c^*}{32\cdot c_\ell}$ where
$U_{j^*}$ is the largest unassigned set.
Notice that there are at most $\ell \leq t \cdot 8 \cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$
indices which can be assigned and all the remaining sets contain at most $|U_{j^*}|$
vertices. If we spread these remaining $U_j$'s uniformly throughout our $V_i$'s,
we will place at most $8\cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*} \cdot |U_{j^*}| \leq \frac{r}{4}$ vertices into each $V_i$.
Thus, for each $i \in [t]$, we have $|V_i| \leq \frac{n^*}{t} + \frac{r}{8} + \frac{r}{4} \leq 2r$.
So, by uniformly assigning these remaining indices, we have
$|I_i| \leq 40\cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*}$, $|V_i| \in [\frac{r}{2},2r]$,
and $|N(V_i) \cap \ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \leq 40\cdot \frac{c_\ell}{c^*} \cdot
c_1 f(\lfloor \frac{r}{8} \rfloor) \in O(f(r))$, as needed.
We conclude with a brief discussion of the time complexity. First, we generate
the $(\lfloor \frac{r}{8} \rfloor, c_1 f(\lfloor \frac{r}{8} \rfloor))$-division
in $h(n)$ time. We then sort the sets $|U_1| \geq \ldots \geq |U_\ell|$ (this can
be done in $O(n)$ time via bucket sort). In the next step we greedily fill the
index sets -- this takes $O(n)$ time. Finally, we place the remaining ``small''
sets uniformly throughout the $V_i$'s -- taking again $O(n)$ time. Thus,
we have $O(h(n) + n)$ time in total.
\end{proof}
We now prove a technical lemma which, together with the previous
lemma regarding uniform divisions, provides our uniform two-color balanced
divisions (see Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}) as discussed following this lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:partitioning_easy}
Let $c$ and $c'$ be positive constants, and $A=\{(a_1,b_1),\dots,(a_n,b_n)\}
\subseteq (\mathbb{Q}\cap[0,\infty))^2$ be a set of $2$-dimensional vectors where
$a_i+b_i \in [c',c]$ for each $i \in [n]$, and $\alpha \in [0,1]$ such that
$\sum_{i=1}^n a_i = \alpha\cdot \sum_{i=1}^n b_i$.
There is a permutation $p_1, \ldots, p_n$ of $[n]$ such that for any $1 \leq i \leq i' \leq n$, $|\sum_{j=i}^{i'} a_{p_j} - \alpha \cdot b_{p_j}| \leq 2\cdot c$.
Thus for any positive integer $q$, when $n$ is sufficiently larger than $q$,
there exist numbers $k\leq n$ and $q' \in [q,2q-1]$ and a partitioning of
$[n]$ into subsets $I_1,\dots,I_k$ such that for each $j\in [k]$ we have:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\itemsep=0pt
\item $|I_j| \in \{q',q'+1\}$ (thus, $\sum_{i \in I_j} a_i+b_i \in [q'\cdot c', (q'+1)\cdot c]$), and
\item $|\sum_{i \in I_j} a_i - \alpha \cdot b_i| \leq 2\cdot c$.
\end{enumerate}
\noindent Moreover, the permutation $p_1, \ldots, p_n$ and partition can be computed in $O(n)$ time.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we partition $[n]$ into three sets $A_{> 0}$, $A_{<0}$, and $A_{=0}$
according to whether the \emph{weighted}
difference $d_i = a_i - \alpha\cdot b_i$ is positive, negative, or 0
(respectively). Note that, $\sum_{i=1}^{n} d_i = 0$ and for each $i \in [n]$, $|d_i| \leq c$.
We will pick indices one at a time from the sets $A_{> 0}$, $A_{< 0}$, $A_{=0}$ to form the desired permutation.
We now construct a permutation $p_1, \ldots, p_n$ on the indices $[n]$ so that any
consecutive subsequence $S$ has $|\sum_{i \in S} d_{p_i}| \leq 2\cdot c$.
For notational convenience, for each $j \in [n]$, we use $\delta_{<j}$ to denote $\sum_{i=1}^{j-1} d_{p_i}$. We now pick the $p_i$'s so that for each $j$, $|\delta_{<j}| \leq c$. We initialize $\delta_{<1}=0$.
For each $j$ from $1$ to $n$ we proceed as follows. Assume that
$|\delta_{<j}| \leq c$. We further assume that any index
$i \in \{p_1, \ldots, p_{j-1}\}$ has been removed from the sets $A_{>0}$,
$A_{<0}$, and $A_{=0}$.
If $\delta_{<j}$ is negative, $A_{> 0}$ must contain some index $j^*$ since $\sum_{i \in [n]} d_i =0$. Moreover, if we set $p_j= j^*$, we have $|\delta_{< j+1}| \leq c$ as needed (we also remove the index $j^*$ from $A_{>0}$ at this point).
Similarly, if $\delta_{<j}$ is positive, we pick any index $j^*$ from $A_{<0}$,
remove it from $A_{<0}$, and set $p_j = j^*$.
Finally, when $\delta_{<j}=0$), we simply take any index $j^*$ from $A_{>0} \cup A_{<0} \cup A_{=0}$, remove it from $A_{>0} \cup A_{<0} \cup A_{=0}$, and set $p_j=j^*$.
Thus, in all cases we have $|\delta_{<j+1}| \leq c$.
Notice that, for any $1\leq j \leq j' \leq n$, we have $|\sum_{i=j}^{j'} d_{p_i}| = |\delta_{<j} - \delta_{<j'+1}|$ $\leq$ $|\delta_{<j}| + |\delta_{<j'+1}|$ $\leq 2 \cdot c$ (as needed for the first part of the lemma).
It remains to partition $[n]$ to form the sets $I_1, \ldots, I_k$.
This is accomplished
by splitting $p_1, \ldots, p_n$ into $t$ consecutive subsequences of almost equal size.
Namely, we pick $k = \lfloor \frac{n}{q} \rfloor$. We further let $z = n \mod q$, and $w = \lfloor \frac{z}{k} \rfloor$, $p = n - (q+w)\cdot k$.
From these integers, we make the sets $I_1,$ $\ldots,$ $I_{p}$ with
$q+w+1$ indices each and the sets $I_{p+1}, \ldots, I_k$ with $q+w$ indices each
by partitioning $\pi$ into these sets in order. A simple calculation shows that
these sets satisfy the conditions of the lemma. Moreover, this construction
is clearly performed in $O(n)$ time.
\end{proof}
We will now use Lemmas~\ref{lem:uniform-(r,f)-division}~and~\ref{lem:partitioning_easy} to prove Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}. In particular, for a given two-colored graph $G$ where $G$ belongs to an $f$-separable graph class, we first construct a uniform $(r,c\cdot f(r))$-division $(\ensuremath\mathcal{X}, V_1, \ldots, V_t)$ of $G$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:uniform-(r,f)-division}. From this division we can again carefully combine the $V_i$'s to make new sets $W_j$
where each $W_j$ has roughly the same size and contains roughly the same proportion of each color class as occurring in $G$. This follows by simply imagining each region $V_i$ of the uniform $(r,c\cdot f(r))$-division as a two-dimensional vector (according to its coloring) and then applying Lemma~\ref{lem:partitioning_easy}.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:2color-uniform}
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be an $f$-separable graph class and $G=(V,E)$ be a
2-colored $n$-vertex graph in $\mathcal{G}$ with color classes $\Gamma_1,
\Gamma_2$ such that $|\Gamma_2| \geq |\Gamma_1|$. For any $q$ and $r \ll n$ where $r$ is suitably large, there
is an integer $t \in \Theta(\frac{n}{q\cdot r})$
such that $V$ can be partitioned into $t+1$ sets
$\ensuremath\mathcal{X}, V_1, \ldots, V_t$ where $c_1,c_2$ are constants independent
of our parameters $n,r,q$ and there is an integer $q' \in [q,2q-1]$ all satisfying
the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item\label{item:sep-property} $N(V_i) \cap V_j = \emptyset$ for each $i\neq j$,
\item\label{item:size-part} $|V_i| \in [\frac{q'\cdot r}{2},2\cdot (q'+1)\cdot r]$ for each $i$,
\item\label{item:small-sep} $|N(V_i) \cap \ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \leq c_1 \cdot q \cdot f(r)$ for each $i$
(thus, $|\ensuremath\mathcal{X}| \leq \sum_{i=1}^t|\ensuremath\mathcal{X} \cap N(V_i)| \leq \frac{c_2 \cdot f(r) \cdot n}{r}$).
\item\label{item:balanced-part} $\left| |V_i \cap \Gamma_1| - \frac{|\Gamma_1|}{|\Gamma_2|} \cdot |V_i \cap \Gamma_2| \right| \leq 2\cdot r$
\end{enumerate}
Moreover, such a partition can be found in $O(h(n) + n)$ time where $h(n)$
is the amount of time required to produce a uniform $(r,c\cdot f(r))$-division of
$G$.
\end{theorem}
\section{PTAS for $f$-Separable Maximum Coverage}\label{AnalysisPTAS}
In this section we formalize the notion of $f$-separable instances of the MC problem and prove our main result -- see Theorem~\ref{thm:main-thm}.
\begin{definition}\label{def:planarizable}
A class $\mathcal{C}$ of instances of MC is called \emph{$f$-separable} if for any two disjoint feasible solutions $\mathcal{F}$ and $\mathcal{F}'$ of any instance in $\mathcal{C}$ there exists an $f$-separable graph $G$ with node set $\mathcal{F}\cup\mathcal{F}'$ with the following \emph{exchange} property. If there is a ground element $u\in U$ that is covered both by $\mathcal{F}$ and $\mathcal{F}'$ then there exists an edge $(S,S')$ in $G$ with $S\in\mathcal{F}$ and $S'\in \mathcal{F}'$ with $u\in S\cap S'$.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main-thm}
Let $f\in o(n)$ be non-decreasing sublinear function. Then, any $f$-separable class of instances of MC that is closed under removing elements and sets admits a PTAS.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Our algorithm is based on local search. We fix a positive constant integer
$b\geq 1$. Given an $f$-separable instance of MC, we pick an arbitrary
initial solution $\mathcal{A}$. We check if it is possible to replace
$b$ sets in $\mathcal{A}$ with $b$ sets from $\mathcal{F}$ so that the
total number of elements covered is increased. We perform such a
replacement (swap) as long as there is one. We stop if there is no
profitable swap and output the resulting solution.
In what follows, we show that for sufficiently large $b$ the
above algorithm yields a $(1-28c_1c_2f(b)/b)$-approximate
solution and that it runs in polynomial time (for
constant $b$). Here, $c_1$ and $c_2$ are the constants from
Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}. This will prove the claim of
Theorem~\ref{thm:main-thm} by letting $b$ sufficiently large.
Note that, if $c_1 < 1$, then we see that Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}
also holds for $c_1 = 1$. Similarly, if $c_2 < 1$, then Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}
also holds for $c_2 = 1$. Thus, we can safely assume that $c_1,c_2 \geq 1$.
Since each step increases the number of covered elements, the number
of iterations of the above algorithm is at most $|U|$. Each iteration
takes $O(k^b|\mathcal{F}|^{b})$ time. Therefore, the total running
time of the algorithm is polynomial for constant $b$.
We now analyze the performance guarantee of the algorithm. To this
end, let $\mathcal{O}$ be an optimum solution to the instance and let
$\mathcal{A}$ be the (locally optimal) solution output by the
algorithm. Let $\opt$, $\alg$ denote the number of elements covered
by $\mathcal{O}$, $\mathcal{A}$, respectively.
Suppose that $\alg<\left(1-\frac{28c_1c_2f(b)}{b}\right)\opt$. We want
to show that this would imply that there is a profitable swap as
this would contradict the local optimality of $\mathcal{A}$ and
hence complete the proof.
We claim that it suffices to consider the case when $\mathcal{O},\mathcal{A}$ are disjoint, which is justified as follows. Assume that $\mathcal{O}\cap\mathcal{A}\neq\emptyset$. We remove the sets in $\mathcal{O}\cap\mathcal{A}$ from $\mathcal{F}$ and all the elements covered by these sets from $U$. Moreover, we decrease $k$ by $|\mathcal{O}\cap\mathcal{A}|$ and replace $\mathcal{O}$ with $\mathcal{O}\setminus\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{A}$ with $\mathcal{A}\setminus\mathcal{O}$. Since our class of instances is closed under removing sets and elements the resulting instance is still contained in the class. Moreover, $|\bigcup\mathcal{A}|<\left(1-\frac{28c_1c_2f(b)}{b}\right)|\bigcup\mathcal{O}|$. Finally, if we are able to show that there exists a feasible and profitable swap in the reduced instance then the same swap is also feasible and profitable in the original instance (with original solutions $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{O}$).
Therefore, we assume from now on that $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{O}$ are disjoint. Since our instance is $f$-separable, there exists an $f$-separable graph $G$
with precisely $2k$ nodes for the two feasible solutions $\mathcal{O}$
and $\mathcal{A}$ with the properties stated in
Definition~\ref{def:planarizable}.
We now apply our two colored separator theorem (Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}) to
$G$ with color classes $\Gamma_1=\mathcal{O}$ and $\Gamma_2=\mathcal{A}$ and
with parameters $r=b$ and $q=b$.
Since $|\mathcal{O}|=|\mathcal{A}|=k$, the two color classes in $G$
are perfectly balanced. Let $\mathcal{A}_i=\mathcal{A}\cap V_i$,
$\mathcal{O}_i=\mathcal{O}\cap V_i$,
$N_i^{\mathcal{O}}=N(V_i)\cap\ensuremath\mathcal{X}\cap\mathcal{O}$ and
$\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i=\mathcal{O}_i\cup N_i^{\mathcal{O}}$ for any part
$V_i$ with $i\in[t]$ of the resulting subdivision of $G$.
We can assume that every set in $\mathcal{O}$ is contained in $\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$
for some $i\in [t]$. This can be achieved by suitably adding edges to $G$ while
maintaining the necessary properties of the uniform colored subdivision. More
precisely, for every of the at most $c_2\cdot f(b)\cdot \frac{n}{b}$ many sets in
$\mathcal{X}\cap\mathcal{O}$ we add an edge to a set in $\mathcal{A}_i$
for some
$i\in[t]$. By Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}, we have $|V_i|\leq 4b^2$ and $|N(V_i)\cap\mathcal{X}|\leq c_1bf(b)\leq c_1b^2$ for each $i\in[t]$. Hence, we have that $t\geq \frac{n}{4c_1b^2}$.
Therefore, we can insert edges between the sets in $\mathcal{X}\cap\mathcal{O}$ and sets in $\mathcal{A}_i$, $i\in[t]$ so that
the neighborhood $N(V_i)\cap\mathcal{X}$ receives at most $4c_1c_2 f(b)b$ many
additional nodes for each $i\in [t]$. Note that the exchange property of
Definition~\ref{def:planarizable}
still holds as we only added edges. Also the
properties of Theorem \ref{thm:2color-uniform} are still valid except that the
bound on the boundary size $|N(V_i)\cap\mathcal{X}|$ in
Property~(\ref{item:small-sep}) has increased to at most
$5c_1c_2\cdot b\cdot f(b)$ since $c_2\geq 1$.
The idea of the analysis is to consider for each $i\in [t]$ a feasible \emph{candidate
swap} (called candidate swap $i$) that replaces in $\mathcal{A}$ the
sets $\mathcal{A}_i$ with some suitably chosen sets from
$\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$. We will show that if
$\alg<\left(1-\frac{28c_1c_2f(b)}{b}\right)\opt$ then at least one of the
candidate swaps is profitable leading to a contradiction.
To accomplish this, we will first show that there exists a profitable swap that replaces $\mathcal{A}_i$ with $\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$. This swap may be infeasible as $|\mathcal{A}_i|$ may be strictly smaller than $|\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i|$. We will, however, show that a feasible and profitable swap can be constructed by adding only some of the sets in $\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$.
For technical reasons we are going to define a set $Z$ of elements that we (temporarily) disregard from our calculations because they will remain covered and thus should not impact our decision which of the sets in $\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$ we will pick for the feasible swap. More precisely, let $Z=\{\,u\in A\cap B\mid A\in \mathcal{A}_i, B\in\mathcal{A}\setminus\mathcal{A}_i,i\in[t] \,\}$ be the set of elements that are covered by some $\mathcal{A}_i$ but that remain covered even if $\mathcal{A}_i$ is removed from $\mathcal{A}$.
Let $L_i=\bigcup\mathcal{A}_i\setminus Z$ be the set of elements that are ``lost'' when removing the $\mathcal{A}_i$ from $\mathcal{A}$. Moreover, let $W_i=\bigcup \bar{\mathcal{O}}_i\setminus \bigcup (\mathcal{A}\setminus\mathcal{A}_i)$ be the set of elements that are ``won'' when we add all the sets of $\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$ after removing $\mathcal{A}_i$.
We claim that $\sum_{i=1}^t |L_i|\leq\alg-|Z|$. To this end, note that $Z\subseteq \bigcup\mathcal{A}$ and that the family $\{L_i\}_{i\in [t]}$ contains pairwise disjoint sets because all elements that are not exclusively covered by a single $\mathcal{A}_i$ are contained in $Z$ and thus removed. On the other hand, we claim that $\sum_{i=1}^t|W_i|\geq\opt-|Z|$. To see this, note first that every element in $Z$ contributes 0 to the left hand side and 0 or -1 to the right hand side.
Every element covered by $\mathcal{O}$ but not by $\mathcal{A}$ contributes at
least 1 to the left (because every set in $\mathcal{O}$ lies in some
$\bar{\mathcal{O}_i}$ by our extension of the exchange graph) hand side and
precisely 1 to the right hand side.
Finally, consider an element $u$ that is
covered both by $\mathcal{A}$ and by $\mathcal{O}$ but does not lie in $Z$.
This element lies in a set $S\in\mathcal{A}_i$ for some $i\in[t]$. Because of
the definition of the exchange graph $G$ there is some set $T\in\mathcal{O}$
with $u\in T$ and some set $S'\in\mathcal{A}$ with $u\in S'$ such that $S'$
and $T$ are adjacent in $G$. We have that $S'\in\mathcal{A}_i$, for, otherwise
$u\in Z$. Because of the separator property of $\ensuremath\mathcal{X}$ (see
Property~(\ref{item:sep-property}) of Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}) we must
have $T\in\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$. Moreover $u$ lies in $W_i$ because it is not
contained in $Z$ but is covered by $\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$. Hence $u$
contributes at least 1 to the left hand side and precisely 1 to the right hand
side of $\sum_{i=1}^t|W_i|\geq\opt-|Z|$, which shows the claim.
We have $\opt>|Z|$ and hence
\begin{displaymath}
\min_{\substack{i\in[t]\\ |W_i|>0}}\frac{|L_i|}{|W_i|}\leq\frac{\sum_{i=1}^t|L_i|}{\sum_{i=1}^t|W_i|}\leq\frac{\alg-|Z|}{\opt-|Z|}\leq\frac{\alg}{\opt}<1-\frac{28c_1c_2f(b)}{b}\,.
\end{displaymath}
Hence, we can pick $i\in[t]$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gain-infeas-swap}
\frac{|L_i|}{|W_i|}<1-\frac{28c_1c_2f(b)}{b}\,.
\end{equation}
Recall that $c_1\geq 1$ and assume that $b$ is large enough so that $f(b)\geq 1$.
Then by Properties~(\ref{item:balanced-part}),~(\ref{item:size-part}), and the (due the addition of edges to $G$) modified Property~(\ref{item:small-sep}) of
Theorem~\ref{thm:2color-uniform}, we have that $||\mathcal{A}_i|-|\mathcal{O}_i||\leq 2b$, $|N(V_i)\cap\ensuremath\mathcal{X}|\leq 5c_1c_2\cdot b\cdot f(b)$, and $|V_i|\geq b^2/2$. Because of $|\mathcal{A}_i|+|\mathcal{O}_i|=|V_i|$ this implies
$|\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i|\leq\frac12|V_i|+b+5c_1c_2b\cdot f(b)$ and $|\mathcal{A}_i|\geq\frac12|V_i|-b$. Hence
\begin{align}\label{eq:swap-cardinalities}
\begin{split}
\frac{|\mathcal{A}_i|}{|\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i|} & \geq \frac{\frac12|V_i|-b}{\frac12|V_i|+b+5c_1c_2b\cdot f(b)} \\
& \geq \frac{(\frac12|V_i|+b+5c_1c_2b\cdot f(b))-2b-5c_1c_2b\cdot f(b)}{\frac12|V_i|+b+5c_1c_2b\cdot f(b)} \\
& \stackrel{|V_i|\geq b^2/2}{\geq} 1-\frac{28c_1c_2f(b)}{b}\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\noindent We are now ready to construct our feasible and profitable swap.
To this end let $Z_i=\bigcup(\mathcal{A}\setminus\mathcal{A}_i)$. We inductively define
an order $S_1,\dots,S_{|\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i|}$ on the sets in $\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$ where we
require that
\begin{displaymath}
S_j=\arg\max_{S\in\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i}\left|S\setminus\left(Z_i\cup\bigcup_{\ell=1}^{j-1}S_\ell\right)\right|
\end{displaymath}
for any $j=1,\dots,|\bar{\mathcal{O}_i}|$ where $S_1$ maximizes
$|S\setminus Z_i|$.
Consider the following process of iteratively building a set $W'$ starting with $W'=\emptyset$. Suppose
that we add to $W'$ the sets $(S_1\setminus Z_i),\dots,(S_{|\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i|}\setminus Z_i)$ in this order ending up with $W'=W_i$.
In doing so, the incremental gain is monotonically decreasing due to the definition of the order on $\mathcal{O}_i$ and due to the submodularity of the objective function. Hence, for any prefix
of the first $j$ sets we have that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:prefix-gain}
\left|\left(\bigcup_{\ell=1}^jS_\ell\right)\setminus Z_i\right|\geq\frac{j\cdot|W_i|}{|\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i|}\,.
\end{equation}
Suppose that $|\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i|>|\mathcal{A}_i|$ (otherwise we can just add all sets in $\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$). Consider the swap where we replace the
$|\mathcal{A}_i|\leq b$ many sets $\mathcal{A}_i$ from the local
optimum $\mathcal{A}$ with at most $|\mathcal{A}_i|$ many sets
$\{S_1,\dots,S_{|\mathcal{A}_i|}\}$
from~$\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i$.
We now analyze how this swap affects the objective function value. By removing the sets in $\mathcal{A}_i$ the objective function value drops by
\begin{align*}
|L_i| & \stackrel{\mathrm{(\ref{eq:gain-infeas-swap})}}{<} \left(1-\frac{28c_1c_2f(b)}{b}\right)\cdot |W_i|\\
& \stackrel{\mathrm{~(\ref{eq:prefix-gain})}}{\leq} \left(1-\frac{28c_1c_2f(b)}{b}\right)\frac{|\bar{\mathcal{O}}_i|}{|\mathcal{A}_i|}\left|\left(\bigcup_{\ell=1}^{|\mathcal{A}_i|}S_\ell\right)\setminus Z_i\right|\\
& \stackrel{\mathrm{~(\ref{eq:swap-cardinalities})}}{\leq} \left|\left(\bigcup_{\ell=1}^{|\mathcal{A}_i|}S_\ell\right)\setminus Z_i\right|\,.
\end{align*}
The right hand side of this inequality is the increase of the objective function due to adding the sets $\{S_1,\dots,S_{|\mathcal{A}_i|}\}$ after removing the sets in $\mathcal{A}_i$.
Therefore the above described swap is feasible and also profitable and thus $\mathcal{A}$ is not a local optimum leading to a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\section{Applications}\label{sec:Application}
In this section we describe several problems which are special instances of the MC problem.
We then describe how a PTAS for each of these problems can be obtained from our analysis
of local search (see Theorem~\ref{thm:Application}).
\begin{problem}
Let $H$ be a set of ground elements, $\mathcal{S}\subseteq 2^{H}$ be a set of ranges and $k$ be a positive integer.
A range $S\in \mathcal{S}$ is hit by a subset $H'$ of $H$ if $S\cap H'\neq\emptyset$. The \textsc{Maximum Hitting} (MH) problem asks for a $k$-subset $H'$ of $H$ such that the number of ranges hit by $H'$ is maximized.
\end{problem}
\begin{problem}
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph and $k$ be a positive integer. A vertex $v\in V$
dominates all the vertices adjacent to $v$ including $v$. The \textsc{Maximum
Dominating} (MD) problem asks for a $k$-subset $V'$ of $V$ such that
the number of vertices dominated by $V'$ is maximized.
\end{problem}
\begin{problem}
Let $T$ be a 1.5D terrain which is an $x$-monotone polygonal chain in the plane consisting of a set of vertices $\{v_1,v_2,\ldots,v_m\}$ sorted in increasing order of their $x$-coordinate, and $v_i$ and $v_{i+1}$ are connected by an edge for all $i\in[m-1]$. For any two points $x,y\in T$, we say that $y$ guards $x$ if each point in $\overline{xy}$ lies above or on the terrain. Given finite sets $X,Y\subseteq T$ and a positive integer $k$, the \textsc{Maximum Terrain Guarding} (MTG) problem asks for a $k$-subset $Y'$ of $Y$ such that the number of points of $X$ guarded by $Y'$ is maximized.
\end{problem}
Let $r$ be an even, positive integer. A set of regions in $\mathbb{R}^2$, where each region is bounded by a closed Jordan curve, is called \emph{$r$-admissible} if for any two such regions $q_1,q_2$, the curves bounding them cross $s\leq r$ times for some even $s$ and $q_1\setminus q_2$ and $q_2\setminus q_1$ are connected regions. A set of regions are called \emph{pseudo-disks} if is $2$-admissible. For example each set of disks (of arbitrary size) and each set of squares (of arbitrary size) is a 2-admissible set and, as such, can be called pseudo-disks.
We now state the following theorem summarizing several consequences of Theorem~\ref{thm:main-thm}.
These results follow either from the corresponding SC problem being known to be \emph{planarizable} (that is, we can define an exchange graph as in Definition~\ref{def:planarizable} that is planar and thus $\sqrt{n}$-separable) or in case of claim $(D_2)$ and $(V)$ by construction the exchange graph as a minor of the input graph.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:Application}
Local search gives a PTAS for the following classes of MC problems:
\begin{itemize}
\item[($C_1$)] the set of ground elements is a set of points in $\mathbb{R}^3$, and the family of subsets is induced by a set of half spaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$
\item[($C_2$)] the set of ground elements is a set of points in $\mathbb{R}^2$, and the family of subsets is induced by a set of convex pseudodisks (a set of convex objects where any two objects can have at most two intersections in their boundary).
\end{itemize}
Local search gives a PTAS for the following MH problems:
\begin{itemize}
\item[($H_1$)] the set of ground elements is a set of points in $\mathbb{R}^2$, and the set of ranges is induced by a set of $r$-admissible regions (this includes
pseudodisks, same-height axis-parallel rectangles, circular disks,
translates of convex objects).
\item[($H_2$)] the set of ground elements is a set of points in $\mathbb{R}^3$, and the set of ranges is induced by a set of half spaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$.
\end{itemize}
Local search gives a PTAS for MD problems in each of the following graph classes:
\begin{itemize}
\item[($D_1$)] intersection graphs of homothetic copies of convex objects (which includes
arbitrary squares, regular k-gons, translated and scaled copies
of a convex object).
\item[($D_2$)] non-trivial minor-closed graph classes.
\end{itemize}
Additionally, the following problems admit a PTAS via local search
\begin{itemize}
\item[(V)] the MVC problem on $f$-separable and subgraph-closed graph classes,
\item[(T)] the MTG problem.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:Application}]
In what follows, we refer to several known results for SC where the
respective instances are planarizable. This always also implies
that the corresponding MC problem is planarizable. By the result of
Mustafa and Ray~\cite{MustafaR09}, we know that the MC instance is
planarizable when the family $\mathcal{F}$ is a set of half spaces
in $\mathbb{R}^3$, or a set of disks in $\mathbb{R}^2$. Recently, De and
Lahiri~\cite{DeL16} showed that when the objects are convex
pseudodisks, then the corresponding SC (and thus MC) instance is
planarizable. Thus, as a consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:main-thm},
we have ($C_1$) and ($C_2$).
Note that MH problem is a special instance of MC problem, where the
set $\mathcal{S}$ of ranges plays the role of $U$, and the set $H$
plays the role of $\mathcal{F}$, where each set $h \in H$ contains
all the range $S \in \mathcal{S}$ such that $S\cap h\neq \emptyset$.
On the other hand, It follows from the result of Mustafa and
Ray~\cite{MustafaR09} that an MH instance is planarizable when the
set of ranges are (i) a set of $r$-admissible regions, (ii) set of half spaces in
$\mathbb{R}^3$. Thus, Theorem~\ref{thm:main-thm} implies that an MH problem
admits PTAS when the ranges are a set of $r$-admissible region or half
spaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$. Thus, we have ($H_1$) and ($H_2$).
Observe that MD is a special instance of MC, where the set $V$ of
vertices plays the role of the set $U$ of ground elements , and the
family $\mathcal{F}$ consists of $|V|$ subsets of $V$ where each
subset is corresponding to the set of vertices dominated by each
vertex $v\in V$. On the other hand, from the result of De and
Lahiri~\cite{DeL16}, we know that corresponding instance of MD is
planarizable when the graph $G$ is an geometric intersection graph
induced by homothetic set of convex objects. Thus, as a consequence of
Theorem~\ref{thm:main-thm}, we have ($D_1$).
To prove ($D_2$), we claim that these MC instances are $f$-separable
according to Definition~\ref{def:planarizable}. As noted before, each
non-trivial minor-closed graph class is
$(c\cdot\sqrt{n})$-separable~\cite{alonST1990minorclosed,robertson2004graph}
(for a suitable constant $c$).
Let $D, D'$ be two disjoint feasible solutions. We now construct an
auxiliary graph $H$ as in Definition~\ref{def:planarizable}.
We start with the node set
$D\cup D'$ and an empty edge set. Let $u\in V$ be node that is
dominated by $D$ and by $D'$. If $u\in D$ then there is a neighbor
$v\in D'$ of $u$. We add edge $uv$ to $H$. The case $u\in D'$ is
handled symmetrically. If $u\notin D$ and $u\notin D'$ then there
are neighbors $v\in D$ and $v'\in D'$ of $u$. In this case we add
$u$ and the two edges $uv$ and $uv'$ to $H$. Note that the
resulting graph is a subgraph of $G$. Now, we perform the following
operation on $H$ as long as $H$ contains a node that is not in
$D\cup D'$. If such a node $u$ exists it must have precisely two
neighbors $v\in D$ and $v'\in D'$ by construction of $H$. We
contract the edge $uv$ and identify the resulting node with $v$
(lying in $D$). As a result we obtain a minor $H$ of $G$ with node
set $D\cup D'$. It is easy to check that this graph satisfies the
requirements of Definition~\ref{def:planarizable}. Moreover,
because $H$ is a minor of $G$, $H$ is also $(c\cdot\sqrt{n})$-separable.
Thus, the $MD$ problem admits a PTAS on such graph classes.
The proof of ($V$) is even simpler than the one of ($D_2$). Let
$D, D'$ be two disjoint feasible solutions. We are going to
construct an auxiliary graph $H$ as in
Definition~\ref{def:planarizable}. We start with the node set
$D\cup D'$ and an empty edge set. For any edge $uu'$ that is
covered by both $D$ and $D'$ we may assume $u\in D$ and $u'\in D'$.
We add edge $uu'$ to $H$. Note that the graph $H$ is a subgraph of
$G$, and it fulfils the requirement of
Definition~\ref{def:planarizable}. Moreover, because $G$ is
contained in a subgraph-closed, $f$-separable graph class we know
that $H$ is $f$-separable and we obtain that $MVC$ problem admits a
PTAS on such graph classes.
It is easy to observe that MTG is a special instance of MC, where
the set $X$ plays the role of $U$, and the set $Y$ plays the role of
family $\mathcal{F}$ of subsets, where each $y\in Y$ contains all
elements of $X$ which can be guarded by $y$. On the other hand, we
know from the result of Krohn et al.~\cite[Lem.\S 2]{KrohnGKV14}
that MTG is planarizable. Thus, we have ($T$).
\end{proof}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $\Omega\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{n}$ be a bounded connected domain. In this
paper we consider the semilinear heat equation\begin{equation}
u_{t}-\Delta u+|u|^{p}u=0
\label{eqn:neumann}
\end{equation}
with homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions on $\partial \Omega$.
The asymptotic behavior of solutions, and in particular their decay
rate and asymptotic profile as $t\to +\infty$, has been investigated
in the last decade by the third author and collaborators. The
starting observation is that the Neumann Laplacian, namely the linear
operator associated to (\ref{eqn:neumann}), has a nontrivial kernel
consisting of all constant functions. This leads to the
coexistence of solutions with different decay rates. In particular,
all nonzero solutions to (\ref{eqn:neumann}) are either \emph{fast
solutions} that decay exponentially, or \emph{slow solutions} with a
decay rate proportional to $t^{-1/p}$. This is the so-called
null-slow-fast alternative, and was observed for the first time
in~\cite{ben-arbi} (see also~\cite{bah-sing}). Similar results have
been obtained in~\cite{bah-d,hjk} for solutions to semilinear heat
equations such as $$ u_{t}-\Delta u+|u|^{p}u- \lambda_1 u=0$$
with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions. In the concrete model
(\ref{eqn:neumann}), as well as in the Dirichlet case, it has been
shown earlier in \cite{ben-arbi, bah-d,hjk} that all positive
solutions are slow. In this paper we limit ourselves to the model
(\ref{eqn:neumann}), and we investigate more completely the sets of
initial data giving rise to slow/fast solutions. We provide two
results.
\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{(\arabic{enumi})}
\item In Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow} we characterize fast
solutions as those solutions which assume both positive and
negative values for every $t\geq 0$. What we actually prove is
the contrapositive, namely that slow solutions are either
eventually positive or eventually negative. This motivates us to
introduce the notion of \emph{positive-slow} and
\emph{negative-slow} solutions.
\item In Theorem~\ref{thm:main-neumann} we describe the set of
initial data giving rise to slow/fast solutions. We show that in
the phase space $L^{2}(\Omega)$ there are two nonempty open sets
of initial data originating positive-slow and negative
slow-solutions, respectively. These two open sets are separated
by the graph of a continuous function, and all initial data in
this graph give rise to a fast (or null) solution.
\end{enumerate}
Our characterization of slow/fast solutions in terms of their sign
follows from comparison principles and the
construction of suitable subsolutions and supersolutions.
The characterization of Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow} is the fundamental tool
in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main-neumann}. Indeed it implies
that ``being the initial datum of a positive/negative slow solution''
is an open condition. At this point a simple connectedness argument
implies that something different should exist in between, and by the
null-slow-fast alternative the only remaining option is a fast or null
solution.
\medskip
This paper is organized as follows. In order to make the presentation
as self-contained as possible, in section~\ref{sec:well-known} we
collect all we need concerning existence, regularity and decay for
solutions to (\ref{eqn:neumann}). In section~\ref{sec:statements} we
state our main results. In section~\ref{sec:proof} we provide the proofs.
The final section~\ref{sec:rem} is devoted to some comments on
possible extensions of the results.
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\section{Basic tools and previous results}\label{sec:well-known}
Equation (\ref{eqn:neumann}) has been deeply investigated in
mathematical literature. For the convenience of the reader, we
collect in this section the results that are needed in the sequel.
To begin with, we observe that (\ref{eqn:neumann}) can be interpreted
as the gradient flow in $L^{2}(\Omega)$ of the convex functional
defined by
$$F_{p}(u):=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u(x)|^{2}\,dx+
\frac{1}{p+2}\int_{\Omega}|u(x)|^{p+2}\,dx\quad &
\mbox{if }u\in H^1(\Omega)\cap L^{p+2}(\Omega), \\
\noalign{\vspace{2ex}}
+\infty & \mbox{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.
$$
Assuming that the boundary of $\Omega$ is $C^2$, the subdifferential
$B$ of $F_{p}$ is the operator defined by
$Bu := -\Delta u + |u|^{p}u$ in the domain
$$D(B) := \left\{u\in H^{2}(\Omega)\cap
L^{2p+2}(\Omega): \partial u/\partial n = 0
\mbox{ on }\partial \Omega \right\}.$$
As a consequence of \cite{OMM}, the operator $B$ generates a
contraction semigroup on $L^{2}(\Omega)$. This provides existence,
uniqueness, and continuous dependence on initial conditions of a weak
solution $u \in C^{0}\left([0,+\infty),L^{2}(\Omega)\right)$ of
(\ref{eqn:neumann}) for any initial condition $u_0\in L^{2}(\Omega)$.
In the next statements we collect some well-known properties which
shall be used in the proofs of our main results.
\begin{thmbibl}[Regularity]\label{thmbibl:big}
Let $\Omega\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{n}$ be a bounded open set with boundary
of class $C^{2}$, and let $p$ be a positive real number. Let
$u(t,x)$ be the unique solution to equation~(\ref{eqn:neumann})
with homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions and initial datum
$u_{0}\in L^{2}(\Omega)$, as defined previously.
Then it turns out that
\begin{equation}
u\in W^{1, \infty}\left([\delta,+\infty),L^{2}(\Omega)\right)\cap
L^{\infty}\left([\delta,+\infty),
H^{2}(\Omega)\cap C(\overline{\Omega})\right)
\quad\quad
\forall\delta>0.
\label{space:reg}
\end{equation}
Moreover, the solution satisfies the homogeneous Neumann boundary
conditions in the classical sense for every $t>0$.
\end{thmbibl}
The second result concerns the comparison between two solutions with
different initial data. From the general semigroup theory we know
that solutions depend continuously on initial data in $L^{2}(\Omega)$.
Here we need more, namely that the semigroup preserves the order, and
that one can estimate the norm in $L^{\infty}(\Omega)$ of the
difference between two solutions at positive times in terms of the
norm in $L^{2}(\Omega)$ of the difference between initial data.
\begin{thmbibl}[Comparison between two solutions]\label{thmbibl:comparison}
Let $\Omega$ and $p$ be as in Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:big}.
Let $u(t,x)$ and $v(t,x)$ be two solutions to (\ref{eqn:neumann})
with homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions and initial data
$u_{0}$ and $v_{0}$, respectively.
Then the following statements hold true.
\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{(\arabic{enumi})}
\item \emph{(Order preservation)} If $u_{0}(x)\geq v_{0}(x)$
for almost every $x\in\Omega$, then $u(t,x)\geq v(t,x)$ for
every $t>0$ and every $x\in\overline{\Omega}$.
\item \emph{(Continuous dependence $L^{2}(\Omega)\to
L^{\infty}(\Omega)$)} There exists a function
$M_{1}:(0,+\infty)\to(0,+\infty)$ such that
\begin{equation}
|u(t,x)-v(t,x)|\leq
M_{1}(t)\|u_{0}-v_{0}\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}
\quad\quad
\forall t>0,\ \forall x\in\overline{\Omega}.
\label{th:appl-l2-xd}
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\end{thmbibl}
Although the estimate (\ref{th:appl-l2-xd}) is rather classical and
variants have been used in various contexts, for the sake of
completeness we provide a sketch of proof under the sole assumption
that a Sobolev-like imbedding $H^1(\Omega)\subseteq L^q(\Omega)$ is
satisfied for some $q>2$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:moser}
Let us assume that there exists $q>2$ such that
$H^1(\Omega)\subseteq L^q(\Omega) $ with continuous embedding,
namely there exists a constant $K_{0}$ such that
\begin{equation}
\|w\| _{ L^q(\Omega)} \le K_{0}\|w\|_{H^1(\Omega)}
\quad\quad
\forall w\in H^1(\Omega).
\label{hp:moser-q}
\end{equation}
Let $T\in(0,1)$, let $c\in L^\infty((0,T)\times\Omega)$ be a
nonnegative function, and let
$$z \in W^{1, \infty}\left((0,T),L^2(\Omega)\right)\cap
L^\infty\left((0,T),H^2(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)\right)$$
be a solution of
\begin{equation}
z_{t}-\Delta z+c(t,x)z=0
\label{eqn:moser-z}
\end{equation}
with homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions.
Then, setting $\beta:=q/(2q-4)$, it turns out that
\begin{equation}
\| z(t,x) \|_{L^\infty(\Omega)} \leq
\frac{4^{\beta^{2}}\cdot K_{0}^{2\beta}}{t^{\beta}}
\|z(0,x)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}
\quad\quad
\forall t\in(0,T].
\label{th:lemma-moser}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\paragraph{\textmd{\emph{Proof}}}
Let $r$ be any nonnegative real number. Let us multiply
(\ref{eqn:moser-z}) by $|z|^{2r}z$ and let us integrate over
$\Omega$. After integrating by parts the term $|z|^{2r}z\Delta z$,
and recalling that $c(t,x)$ is nonnegative, we obtain that
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2r+2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega}|z|^{2r+2}\,dx+
(2r+1)\int_{\Omega}|z|^{2r}|\nabla z|^{2}\,dx=
-\int_{\Omega}c(t,x)|z|^{2r+2}\,dx\leq 0.
\label{est:deriv-moser}
\end{equation}
This implies in particular that
\begin{equation}
\mbox{the function }t\to\|z(t,x)\|_{L^{\alpha}(\Omega)}\mbox{ is
nonincreasing for every $\alpha\geq 2$.}
\label{est:monot-moser}
\end{equation}
Now we introduce the function $\psi_{r}(\sigma):=|\sigma|^{r}\sigma$,
and we observe that
$$\nabla[\psi_{r}(z)]=(r+1)|z|^{r}\nabla z.$$
As a consequence, (\ref{est:deriv-moser}) can be rewritten as
$$\frac{1}{2r+2}\frac{d}{dt}\left(
\|z\|_{L^{2r+2}(\Omega)}^{2r+2}\right)+
\frac{2r+1}{(r+1)^{2}}
\|\nabla[\psi_{r}(z)]\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}^{2}\leq 0.$$
Given any $\tau\in(0,T]$, integrating in $[0,\tau]$ we deduce that
\begin{equation}
\int_{0}^{\tau}
\|\nabla[\psi_{r}(z(s,x))]\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}^{2}\,ds\leq
\frac{1}{2}\|z(0,x)\|_{L^{2r+2}(\Omega)}^{2r+2}.
\label{est:psi-1}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, from (\ref{est:monot-moser}) with $\alpha:=2r+2$,
we obtain also that
\begin{equation}
\int_{0}^{\tau}
\|\psi_{r}(z(s,x))\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}^{2}\,ds\leq
\tau\|z(0,x)\|_{L^{2r+2}(\Omega)}^{2r+2}.
\label{est:psi-2}
\end{equation}
Adding (\ref{est:psi-1}) and (\ref{est:psi-2}) we conclude that
\begin{equation}
\int_{0}^{\tau}
\|\psi_{r}(z(s,x))\|_{H^{1}(\Omega)}^{2}\,ds\leq
\left(\tau+\frac{1}{2}\right)
\|z(0,x)\|_{L^{2r+2}(\Omega)}^{2r+2}
\quad\quad
\forall\tau\in(0,T].
\label{est:moser-int}
\end{equation}
Now we exploit the continuous imbedding (\ref{hp:moser-q}). From
(\ref{est:monot-moser}) with $\alpha:=(r+1)q$ we obtain that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tau\|\psi_{r}(z(\tau,x))\|_{L^{q}(\Omega)}^{2} & \leq &
\int_{0}^{\tau}
\|\psi_{r}(z(s,x))\|_{L^{q}(\Omega)}^{2}\,ds \\
& \leq & K_{0}^{2}\int_{0}^{\tau}
\|\psi_{r}(z(s,x))\|_{H^{1}(\Omega)}^{2}\,ds\\
& \leq & K_{0}^{2}\left(\tau+\frac{1}{2}\right)
\|z(0,x)\|_{L^{2r+2}(\Omega)}^{2r+2},
\end{eqnarray*}
and hence
$$\|\psi_{r}(z(\tau,x))\|_{L^{q}(\Omega)}^{2}\leq
K_{0}^{2}\left(1+\frac{1}{2\tau}\right)
\|z(0,x)\|_{L^{2r+2}(\Omega)}^{2r+2}
\quad\quad
\forall\tau\in(0,T].$$
Setting $\alpha:=2r+2$ and $\lambda:=q/2$, this can be written in the
more suggestive form
$$\|z(\tau,x)\|_{L^{\lambda\alpha}(\Omega)}\leq
\left[K_{0}^{2}\left(1+\frac{1}{2\tau}\right)\right]^{1/\alpha}
\|z(0,x)\|_{L^{\alpha}(\Omega)}
\quad\quad
\forall\tau\in(0,T].$$
Due to the time-translation invariance, this implies also that
\begin{equation}
\|z(\theta+\tau,x)\|_{L^{\lambda\alpha}(\Omega)}\leq
\left[K_{0}^{2}\left(1+\frac{1}{2\tau}\right)\right]^{1/\alpha}
\|z(\theta,x)\|_{L^{\alpha}(\Omega)}
\label{est:moser-norm}
\end{equation}
whenever $0\leq\theta<\theta+\tau\leq T$.
This is the starting point of a classical iteration procedure. Given
any $t\in(0,T]$, for every $n\in\mathbb{N}$ we set
$$t_{n}:=\left(1-\frac{1}{2^{n}}\right)t,
\hspace{4em}
\lambda_{n}:=2\lambda^{n},$$
and from (\ref{est:moser-norm}) with $\theta:=t_{n}$,
$\tau:=t_{n+1}-t_{n}$, and $\alpha:=\lambda_{n}$ we deduce that
$$\|z(t_{n+1},x)\|_{L^{\lambda_{n+1}}(\Omega)}\leq
\left[K_{0}^{2}\left(1+\frac{2^{n}}{t}\right)\right]^{1/\lambda_{n}}
\|z(t_{n},x)\|_{L^{\lambda_{n}}(\Omega)}
\quad\quad
\forall n\in\mathbb{N}.$$
Since $t\leq 1$, this implies the simpler formula
$$\|z(t_{n+1},x)\|_{L^{\lambda_{n+1}}(\Omega)}\leq
\left[\frac{K_{0}^{2}\cdot 2^{n+1}}{t}\right]^{1/\lambda_{n}}
\|z(t_{n},x)\|_{L^{\lambda_{n}}(\Omega)}
\quad\quad
\forall n\in\mathbb{N}.$$
At this point an easy induction yields
\begin{equation}
\|z(t_{n},x)\|_{L^{\lambda_{n}}(\Omega)}\leq
2^{\gamma_{n}}\left[\frac{K_{0}^{2}}{t}\right]^{\beta_{n}}
\|z(0,x)\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}
\quad\quad
\forall n\in\mathbb{N},
\label{est:moser-n}
\end{equation}
where
$$\beta_{n}:=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{1}{\lambda_{k}}\leq
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{1}{2\lambda^{k}}=
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\lambda}{\lambda-1}=\frac{q}{2(q-2)}$$
and
$$\gamma_{n}:=\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\frac{k+1}{\lambda_{k}}\leq
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{k+1}{2\lambda^{k}}=
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\lambda^{2}}{(\lambda-1)^{2}}=
\frac{q^{2}}{2(q-2)^{2}}.$$
Letting $n\to+\infty$ in (\ref{est:moser-n}), we obtain
(\ref{th:lemma-moser}).\qed
\bigskip
We are now ready to prove estimate (\ref{th:appl-l2-xd}). We consider
first the case where $u_{0}$ and $v_{0}$ are of class $C^2$ with compact
support in $\Omega$. In this case $u$, $v$ and $z := u-v$ are bounded on
$(0,t) $ with values in $H^2(\Omega)\cap L^\infty(\Omega)$, and $z$
satisfies (\ref{eqn:moser-z}) with
$$ c(t, x) : = \frac{|u|^{p}u- |v|^{p}v}{u-v}\ge 0 $$
with the convention that the quotient is $0$ whenever the denominator
vanishes. Moreover, the continuous embedding $H^1(\Omega)\subseteq
L^q(\Omega)$ holds true with any $q\geq 2$ if $n\leq 2$, and with
$q=2^{*}:=2n/(n-2)$ if $n\geq 3$. Therefore, we are in a position to
apply Lemma~\ref{lemma:moser}, from which we obtain
(\ref{th:appl-l2-xd}) with a function $M_{1}(t)$ independent of the
initial data. At this point, the result for general initial data
follows from a density argument.\qed
\bigskip
The next statement describes all possible decay rates and
asymptotic profiles for solutions to (\ref{eqn:neumann}). We refer
to~\cite[Theorem~1.3]{ben-arbi} and~\cite[Theorem~4.4]{ggh:casc-parab}
for further details and proofs.
\begin{thmbibl}[Classification of decay rates]\label{thmbibl:n-classification}
Let $\Omega$ and $p$ be as in Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:big} and
assume, in addition, that $\Omega$ is connected. Let $u(t,x)$ be
any solution to (\ref{eqn:neumann}) with homogeneous Neumann
boundary conditions and initial datum in $L^{2}(\Omega)$.
Then
one and only one of the following statements apply to $u(t,x)$.
\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{(\arabic{enumi})}
\item \emph{(Null solution)} The solution is the null solution
$u(t,x)\equiv 0$.
\item \emph{(Slow solutions)} There exist $t_{0}>0$ and
$M_{2}\geq 0$ such that
$$\left||u(t,x)|-\frac{1}{(pt)^{1/p}}\right|\leq
\frac{M_{2}}{t^{1+1/p}}
\quad\quad
\forall t\geq t_{0},\ \forall x\in\overline{\Omega}.$$
\item \emph{(Spectral fast solutions)} There exist an
eigenvalue $\lambda>0$ of the Neumann Laplacian, and a
corresponding eigenfunction $\varphi_{\lambda}(x)$, such that
$$\lim_{t\to+\infty}
\left\|u(t,x)-\varphi_{\lambda}(x)e^{-\lambda t}\right\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}
e^{\gamma t}=0$$
for some $\gamma>\lambda$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thmbibl}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\section{Statements}\label{sec:statements}
In the first result of this paper we characterize slow solutions in
terms of sign.
\begin{thm}[Characterization of slow solutions]\label{prop:n-char-slow}
Let $n$ be a positive integer, let $\Omega\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{n}$ be a
bounded connected open set with $C^2$ boundary, and
let $p$ be a positive real number. Let $u(t,x)$ be a solution to
equation (\ref{eqn:neumann}) with homogeneous Neumann boundary
conditions.
Then the following three statements are equivalent.
\begin{enumerate}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{(\roman{enumi})}
\item There exist $t_{0}> 0$ and $M_{3}\geq 0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\left||u(t,x)|-\frac{1}{(pt)^{1/p}}\right|\leq
\frac{M_{3}}{t^{1+1/p}}
\quad\quad
\forall t\geq t_{0},\, \,\forall x\in\overline{\Omega}.
\label{th:n-slow}
\end{equation}
\item There exist $t_{0}> 0$ and
$m:[t_{0},+\infty)\to(0,+\infty)$ such that
\begin{equation}
|u(t,x)|\geq m(t)
\quad\quad
\forall t\geq t_{0},\, \, \forall x\in\overline{\Omega}.
\label{th:n-slow-2}
\end{equation}
\item There exists $t_{0}\geq 0$ such that either
$u(t_{0},x)\geq 0$ for almost every $x\in\Omega$ or
$u(t_{0},x)\leq 0$ for almost every $x\in\Omega$, but
$u(t_{0},x)$ is not identically~0 in $\Omega$ (in the almost
everywhere sense).
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow} above implies that there are only two
types of slow solutions:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{positive-slow solutions}, which are
eventually positive and decay as $(pt)^{-1/p}$,
\item \emph{negative-slow solutions}, which are eventually
negative and decay as $-(pt)^{-1/p}$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, statement~(iii) implies that fast solutions are
necessarily sign changing functions for every $t\geq 0$.
\bigskip
The main result of this paper concerns the structure of slow/fast
solutions. We show that, in the phase space $L^{2}(\Omega)$,
positive-slow and negative-slow solutions are separated by a manifold
of codimension one consisting of fast solutions. As a consequence,
the set of initial data generating slow solutions is open and dense in
$L^{2}(\Omega)$. The separating manifold is the graph of a continuous
function $\Phi$ defined in subspace $N^{\perp}$ orthogonal to constant
functions (which are the kernel of the Neumann Laplacian). The
function $\Phi$ turns out to be Lipschitz continuous when restricted
to $L^{\infty}(\Omega)$.
\begin{thm}[Structure of slow/fast solutions]\label{thm:main-neumann}
Let $\Omega$ and $p$ be as in Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow}. Let
us consider the space
$$N^{\perp}:=\left\{w\in L^{2}(\Omega):
\int_{\Omega}w(x)\,dx=0\right\}.$$
Then there exists a continuous function $\Phi:N^{\perp}\to\mathbb{R}$ with the
following property. For every $w_{0}\in N^{\perp}$, the solution
$u(t,x)$ to equation (\ref{eqn:neumann}) with homogeneous Neumann
boundary conditions and initial datum $u(0,x)=w_{0}(x)+k$ is
\begin{itemize}
\item positive-slow if $k>\Phi(w_{0})$,
\item fast if $k=\Phi(w_{0})$ (or null if $w_{0}=0$, in
which case also $\Phi(w_{0})=0$),
\item negative-slow if $k<\Phi(w_{0})$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, the function $\Phi$ is 1-Lipschitz continuous if
restricted to $L^{\infty}(\Omega)$, namely
$$|\Phi(w_{1})-\Phi(w_{2})|\leq\|w_{1}-w_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}(\Omega)}
\quad\quad
\forall (w_{1},w_{2})\in
\left[N^{\perp}\cap L^{\infty}(\Omega)\right]^{2}.$$
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}
\begin{em}
The projections of a function $u_{0}\in L^{2}(\Omega)$ on the
kernel of the Neumann Laplacian and on the orthogonal space
$N^{\perp}$ are given, respectively, by
$$\int_{\Omega}u_{0}(x)\,dx,
\hspace{4em}
u_{0}(x)-\int_{\Omega}u_{0}(x)\,dx.$$
Therefore, the result of Theorem~\ref{thm:main-neumann} above
can be rephrased by saying that the solution to
(\ref{eqn:neumann}) with some initial datum $u_{0}\neq 0$ is
positive-slow, fast, or negative-slow according to the sign of
$$\int_{\Omega}u_{0}(x)\,dx-\Phi\left(
u_{0}(x)-\int_{\Omega}u_{0}(x)\,dx\right).$$
\end{em}
\end{rmk}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\section{Proofs}\label{sec:proof}
To begin with, we recall that for every $p>0$ there exists a constant
$K_{p}$ such that
\begin{equation}
\left||a+b|^{p}(a+b)-|a|^{p}a\strut\right|\leq
K_{p}\left(|a|^{p}+|b|^{p}\right)|b|
\quad\quad
\forall(a,b)\in\mathbb{R}^{2}.
\label{ineq:p-classic}
\end{equation}
This inequality follows from the mean value theorem applied to
the function $|x|^{p}x$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:n-slow}
Let $n$, $\Omega$, and $p$ be as in
Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow}. Let $v_{0}$ and $w_{0}$ be two
functions in $L^{2}(\Omega)$ such that $v_{0}(x)\geq w_{0}(x)$ for
almost every $x\in\Omega$, and $v_{0}(x)>w_{0}(x)$ on a set of
positive measure. Let $v$ and $w$ be the solutions to equation
(\ref{eqn:neumann}) with homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions
and initial data $v_{0}$ and $w_{0}$, respectively.
Let us assume that $w$ is a fast or null solution in the sense of
Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:n-classification}.
Then $v$ is a slow solution in the sense of
Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:n-classification}.
\end{lemma}
\paragraph{\textmd{\emph{Proof}}}
Let $z(t,x):=v(t,x)-w(t,x)$ denote the difference, which is a
nonnegative function because of statement~(1) of
Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:comparison}, and satisfies
$$z_{t}=\Delta z-\left(|w+z|^{p}(w+z)-|w|^{p}w\strut\right).$$
Applying inequality (\ref{ineq:p-classic}) with $a:=w(t,x)$ and
$b:=z(t,x)$, we can estimate the nonlinear term in the right-hand
side, and obtain that
$$z_{t}\geq \Delta z-K_{p}\left(|z|^{p}+|w|^{p}\right)z.$$
Let us consider now the function $I:[0,+\infty)\to[0,+\infty)$
defined by
$$I(t):=\int_{\Omega}z(t,x)\,dx
\quad\quad
\forall t\geq 0.$$
Our assumption on $v_{0}$ and $w_{0}$ implies that $I(0)>0$. Since
the function $I(t)$ is continuous in $[0,+\infty)$ (due to the
continuity of $v$ and $w$ with values in $L^{2}(\Omega)$), there
exists $\delta>0$ such that $I(\delta)>0$.
Now we argue by contradiction. Let us assume that $v$, as well as
$w$, is not a slow solution. By
Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:n-classification}, this implies that $z$ decays
exponentially to 0 in $L^{2}(\Omega)$, and hence also in
$L^{\infty}(\Omega)$ because of statement~(2) of
Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:comparison}, and therefore there exist constants
$\nu>0$ and $C_{\delta}>0$ such that $$z_{t}\geq \Delta
z-C_{\delta}e^{-\nu t}z \quad\quad
\forall (t,x)\in[\delta,+\infty)\times\Omega.$$
Integrating over $\Omega$ we find that
$$I'(t)\geq -C_{\delta}e^{-\nu t}I(t)
\quad\quad
\forall t\geq \delta,$$
and hence
$$I(t)\geq I(\delta)
\exp\left(-C_{\delta}\int_{\delta}^{+\infty}e^{-\nu s}\,ds\right)
\geq I(\delta)\exp(-C_{\delta}/\nu)
\quad\quad
\forall t\geq\delta.$$
This contradicts the fact that $z$ tends to 0 in $L^{2}(\Omega)$.\qed
\subsection*{Proof of Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow}}
Implications $(i)\Rightarrow(ii)\Rightarrow(iii)$ are almost trivial.
As for $(iii)\Rightarrow(i)$, assuming
for instance the positive sign, it is enough to apply
Lemma~\ref{lemma:n-slow} with $ w(t,x):=0$ and
$v(t,x):=u(t+t_{0},x)$.\qed
\subsection*{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main-neumann}}
In this proof we deal with many different initial conditions. For this
reason we adopt the semigroup notation, namely we write
$S_{t}(v_{0})$ or $[S_{t}(v_{0})](x)$ in order to denote the solution
at time $t$ which has $v_{0}$ as initial condition.
\subsubsection*{Existence and uniqueness}
For every $w_{0}\in L^{2}(\Omega)$, let $\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$
denote the set of real numbers $k$ for which the solution with initial
datum $w_{0}(x)+k$ is positive-slow, and let $\mathcal{K}^{-}(w_{0})$
denote the set of real numbers $k$ for which the solution is
negative-slow.
The main point is proving that $\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$ and
$\mathcal{K}^{-}(w_{0})$ are, respectively, an open right half-line
and an open left half-line, and this two half-lines are separated by a
unique element. When $w_{0}\in N^{\perp}$, this separator is the
value $\Phi(w_{0})$ that we are looking for. We prove these claims
through several steps.
\subparagraph{\textmd{\textit{Step 1}}}
We prove that $\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$ and $\mathcal{K}^{-}(w_{0})$
are nonempty for every $w_{0}\in L^{2}(\Omega)$.
To this end, we concentrate on $\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$, since the
argument for $\mathcal{K}^{-}(w_{0})$ is symmetric. Let us choose two
positive constants $m_{0}$ and $t_{0}$, and let us set
$$m_{1}:=\frac{m_{0}}{2\left(1+pm_{0}^{p}t_{0}\right)^{1/p}},
\hspace{4em}
\delta:=\frac{m_{1}}{M_{1}(t_{0})},$$
where $M_{1}(t_{0})$ is the constant which appears in inequality
(\ref{th:appl-l2-xd}).
Let us choose $v_{0}\in C^{0}(\overline{\Omega})$ such that
$\|w_{0}-v_{0}\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}\leq\delta$ (this is possible because
$C^{0}(\overline{\Omega})$ is dense in $L^{2}(\Omega)$). Due to
boundedness of $v_{0}$, there exists $k_{0}\in\mathbb{R}$ such that
$$v_{0}(x)+k_{0}\geq m_{0}
\quad\quad
\forall x\in\overline{\Omega}.$$
Now we claim that
$$\left[S_{t}(v_{0}+k_{0})\right](x)\geq
\frac{m_{0}}{\left(1+pm_{0}^{p}t\right)^{1/p}}
\quad\quad
\forall t\geq 0,\ \forall x\in\overline{\Omega}.$$
This inequality follows from the usual comparison principle because it
is true when $t=0$, and in addition both the left-hand and the
right-hand side are solutions to (\ref{eqn:neumann}) with homogeneous
Neumann boundary conditions. Setting $t=t_{0}$, and recalling our
definition of $m_{1}$, we obtain that
\begin{equation}
\left[S_{t_{0}}(v_{0}+k_{0})\right](x)\geq 2m_{1}
\quad\quad
\forall x\in\overline{\Omega}.
\label{est:d1}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, statement~(2) of Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:comparison}
applied to initial data $w_{0}+k_{0}$ and $v_{0}+k_{0}$
implies that
\begin{equation}
|\left[S_{t_{0}}(w_{0}+k_{0})\right](x)-
\left[S_{t_{0}}(v_{0}+k_{0})\right](x)|\leq
M_{1}(t_{0})\|w_{0}-v_{0}\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}\leq
m_{1}
\label{est:d2}
\end{equation}
for every $x\in\overline{\Omega}$. From (\ref{est:d1}) and
(\ref{est:d2}) it follows that
$$\left[S_{t_{0}}(w_{0}+k_{0})\right](x)\geq m_{1} \quad\quad
\forall x\in\overline{\Omega}.$$
Thanks to Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow}, this is enough to
conclude that the solution with initial condition
$w_{0}(x)+k_{0}$ is positive-slow, and hence
$k_{0}\in\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$.
\subparagraph{\textmd{\textit{Step 2}}}
We prove that $\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$ is an open right half-line, and
analogously $\mathcal{K}^{-}(w_{0})$ is an open left half-line.
Let us consider $\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$ (the argument for
$\mathcal{K}^{-}(w_{0})$ is symmetric). It is a right half-line
because, if $w_{0}(x)+k_{0}$ gives rise to a positive-slow solution
$u(t,x)$, then every solution with initial datum $w_{0}(x)+k$ with
$k>k_{0}$ is greater than $u(t,x)$, and hence it is positive-slow as
well.
It remains to show that $\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$ is an open set. Let
us assume that $k_{0}\in\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$, so that the solution
$u(t,x)$ with initial datum $w_{0}(x)+k_{0}$ is positive-slow.
Due to Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow}, it turns out that
$$\left[S_{t_{0}}(w_{0}+k_{0})\right](x)\geq
m_{0}
\quad\quad
\forall x\in\overline{\Omega}$$
for suitable constants $t_{0}> 0$ and $m_{0}>0$. Applying
statement~(2) of Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:comparison} as in the previous step, we
obtain that
$$\left[S_{t_{0}}(w_{0}+k)\right](x)\geq
\frac{m_{0}}{2}
\quad\quad
\forall x\in\overline{\Omega}$$
provided that $k$ is close enough to $k_{0}$. Applying
Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow} once again, we can conclude that
all these neighboring solutions are positive-slow as well.
\subparagraph{\textmd{\textit{Step 3}}}
The structure of $\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$ and $\mathcal{K}^{-}(w_{0})$
implies that
\begin{equation}
\sup\mathcal{K}^{-}(w_{0})\leq\inf\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0}),
\label{sup-inf}
\end{equation}
and any $k$ in between (endpoints included) lies neither in
$\mathcal{K}^{-}(w_{0})$ nor in $\mathcal{K}^{+}(w_{0})$. Due to the
null-slow-fast alternative of Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:n-classification},
the corresponding solutions are necessarily fast or null. Finally,
as a consequence of Lemma ~\ref{lemma:n-slow}, we do have equality in
(\ref{sup-inf}), and hence for every $w_{0}\in L^{2}(\Omega)$ there
exists a unique $k$ such that $w_{0}(x)+k$ generates a fast (or null)
solution.
\subsubsection*{Continuity}
We show that the map $w_{0}\to\Phi(w_{0})$ is continuous with respect
to the norm of $L^{2}(\Omega)$, namely for every $w_{0}\in N^{\perp}$
and every $\varepsilon>0$ there exists $\delta>0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\Phi(w_{0})-\varepsilon\leq\Phi(v_{0})\leq\Phi(w_{0})+\varepsilon
\label{est:Phi-cont}
\end{equation}
for every $v_{0}\in N^{\perp}$ with
$\|v_{0}-w_{0}\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}\leq\delta$.
Let us consider the solution with initial condition
$w_{0}(x)+(\Phi(w_{0})+\varepsilon)$. It is positive-slow, and hence
from Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow} we know that
$$\left[S_{t_{0}}(w_{0}+(\Phi(w_{0})+\varepsilon))\right](x)\geq
m_{0}
\quad\quad
\forall x\in\overline{\Omega}$$
for suitable constants $t_{0}> 0$ and $m_{0}>0$. Applying
statement~(2) of Theorem~\ref{thmbibl:comparison} as in the existence
part, we deduce that
$$\left[S_{t_{0}}(v_{0}+(\Phi(w_{0})+\varepsilon))\right](x)\geq
\frac{m_{0}}{2}
\quad\quad
\forall x\in\overline{\Omega}$$
provided that $\|v_{0}-w_{0}\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}$ is small enough.
Applying Theorem~\ref{prop:n-char-slow} once again, we deduce that
the solution with initial condition
$v_{0}(x)+(\Phi(w_{0})+\varepsilon)$ is positive-slow as well. It follows that
$\Phi(w_{0})+\varepsilon\in\mathcal{K}^{+}(v_{0})$, and therefore
$\Phi(v_{0})\leq\Phi(w_{0})+\varepsilon$.
This proves that the inequality on the right in (\ref{est:Phi-cont})
holds true for every $v_{0}\in N^{\perp}$ which is close enough to
$w_{0}$ with respect to the norm of $L^{2}(\Omega)$. A symmetric
argument applies to the inequality on the left.
\subsubsection*{Lipschitz continuity with respect to the uniform norm}
We show that the map $w_{1}\to\Phi(w_{1})$ restricted to
$L^{\infty}(\Omega)$ is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant
equal to~1. To this end, we take any $w_{1}$ and $w_{2}$ in $N^{\perp}\cap
L^{\infty}(\Omega)$, and from the definition of $L^{\infty}(\Omega)$
we deduce that
$$w_{1}(x)+(\Phi(w_{1})+\varepsilon)\leq w_{2}(x)+
\left(\|w_{1}-w_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}(\Omega)}+\Phi(w_{1})+\varepsilon\right)$$
for every $\varepsilon>0$ and almost every $x\in\Omega$. Since the solution
with initial datum equal to the left-hand side is positive-slow, the
solution with initial datum equal to the right-hand side is
positive-slow as well, which proves that
$$\|w_{1}-w_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}(\Omega)}+\Phi(w_{1})+
\varepsilon\in\mathcal{K^{+}}(w_{2}).$$
In an analogous way we obtain that
$$-\|w_{1}-w_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}(\Omega)}+\Phi(w_{1})-
\varepsilon\in\mathcal{K^{-}}(w_{2}).$$
Since $\Phi(w_{2})$ separates $\mathcal{K^{-}}(w_{2})$ and
$\mathcal{K^{+}}(w_{2})$, letting $\varepsilon\to 0^{+}$ we conclude
that
$$\Phi(w_{1})-\|w_{1}-w_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}(\Omega)}
\leq\Phi(w_{2})\leq
\Phi(w_{1})+\|w_{1}-w_{2}\|_{L^{\infty}(\Omega)},$$
which completes the proof.\qed
\section{Additional results and possible extensions}\label{sec:rem}
In this section we describe some additional properties and research
directions.
\paragraph{Strong positivity}
Under the $C^2$ regularity assumption on $\partial\Omega$ which
allowed us to set properly the problem, more can be said about the
behavior of solutions. Actually, an application of the strong minimum
principle gives that for any non-negative initial value $u_0\in
L^2(\Omega)$ which is positive on a set of positive measure, the
solution of (\ref{eqn:neumann}) is uniformly (with respect to $x\in
\Omega $) positive for all positive times. This of course means that
right after the first time at which a slow solution has a constant
sign, it becomes strictly above a positive (time depending) constant
or strictly below a time depending negative constant.
\paragraph{Relaxed regularity }
In principle, in order for (\ref{eqn:neumann}) to be properly set in a
reasonable sense (for instance variational or distributional), a $C^1$
or even Lipschitz regularity assumption on $\partial\Omega$ seems to
be enough. In such a case, the Sobolev embedding theorem would be
applicable, the difficulty might be that the solution does not need to
be continuous up to the boundary for $t>0$. The relevant regularity
class for solutions would then be
$$W^{1,\infty}\left([\delta,+\infty),L^{2}(\Omega)\right)\cap
L^{\infty}\left([\delta,+\infty), H^{1}(\Omega)\cap L^\infty
({\Omega})\cap C({\Omega})\right),$$
since interior regularity is always true. This is enough to state
properly, mutatis mutandis, our various results.
\paragraph{More general nonlinearities}
For the sake of simplicity, we presented our results for the equation
with the model nonlinearity $|u|^{p}u$. Nevertheless, the theory can
be extended with little effort to more general nonlinear terms
$f(u(t))$. The essential assumption here is that $f:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$ is an
increasing function such that $f(x)\sim|x|^{p}x$ and
$f'(x)\sim(p+1)|x|^{p}$ as $x\to 0$. One can even assume monotonicity
just in a neighborhood of the origin, but of course in that case one
obtains a description of solutions only for initial data whose norm in
$L^{\infty}(\Omega)$ is small enough.
\paragraph{The Dirichlet case}
Many results for concrete models have been unified
in~\cite{ggh:casc-parab} by developing an abstract theory for
evolution inequalities of the form
\begin{equation}
|u'(t)+Au(t)|_{H}\leq
K_{0}\left(|u(t)|_{H}^{1+p}+|A^{1/2}u(t)|_{H}^{1+q}\right)
\quad\quad \forall t\geq 0,
\label{pbm:diff-ineq}
\end{equation}
where $A$ is a self-adjoint nonnegative operator with discrete
spectrum in a Hilbert space $H$, and $K_{0}$, $p$, $q$ are positive
real numbers. A full description of possible decay rates was
provided, showing that all nonzero solutions to (\ref{pbm:diff-ineq})
that decay to~0 are either exponentially fast as solutions to the
linearized equation $u'(t)+Au(t)=0$, or slow as solutions to the
ordinary differential inequality $|u'(t)|\leq K_{0}|u(t)|^{1+p}$. By
relying on this kind of general techniques, it will be possible to
extend this theory to more general parabolic partial differential
equations whose linear part has a nontrivial kernel, for instance the
problem ``at resonance''
$$ u_{t}-\Delta u+|u|^{p}u- \lambda_1 u=0$$
with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions. In the present paper
we decided to limit ourselves to the model example (\ref{eqn:neumann})
in which some of the arguments appear simpler. The other cases will
be studied elsewhere.
\paragraph{Second order equations} It might be interesting to look
for a concrete realization of the slow-fast alternative for second
order evolution equations with dissipative terms, in the same way as
the results of~\cite{ggh:casc-parab} were extended
in~\cite{ggh:jems,ggh:casc-hyperb}. However this would require
completely new ideas, since both the regularizing effect and the
comparison principles are specific to parabolic problems and even in
the simple case of the ordinary differential equation
$$ u''+u'+u^3 = 0 $$
the set of fast solutions has already a rather complicated shape.
Moreover, in that case, all non-trivial solutions (including
exponentially decaying ones) are asymptotically signed, so that even
for the hyperbolic problem $$ u_{tt}+u_{t}-\Delta u +u^3 = 0 $$ with
Neumann homogeneous boundary conditions, the slow character is not
equivalent to the existence of a constant sign for $t$ large.
|
\section{Introduction}
Objects trapped in a 1:1 mean motion resonance with a host (planetary or not) are classified as co-orbitals of the host, independently
of the shape and orientation of their paths (Morais \& Morbidelli 2002); in other words, to be classed as co-orbitals their orbits do
not have to resemble that of the host as long as the ratio of their orbital periods equates to almost exactly one. In general,
co-orbital configurations are not identified observationally but as a result of the statistical analysis of large sets of numerical
integrations. There is, however, a potential exception to this standard approach; a particular type of co-orbital configuration that
can be confirmed observationally, the quasi-satellite dynamical state.
Here, we study the apparent motion in host-centric equatorial coordinates of known quasi-satellites to show that they trace an
analemmatic curve in the sky as observed from the host in a manner similar to that found for geosynchronous orbits. This paper is
organized as follows. Section~2 discusses the so-called analemma criterion for quasi-satellites and it includes an extensive
exploration of the known quasi-satellite population. The particular case of 15810 (1994~JR$_1$), a putative accidental quasi-satellite
of Pluto, is analysed in Section~3 to show that according to the analemma criterion it is a true transient quasi-satellite of Pluto.
Results are discussed in Section~4 and conclusions are summarized in Section~5.
\section{The analemma criterion}
Minor bodies are confirmed as co-orbitals after statistical analysis of their simulated orbital evolution. Here, we show that there is
a particular type of co-orbital configuration that may be confirmed observationally: the quasi-satellite state.
\subsection{Quasi-satellites: a short review and a lost specimen}
Minor bodies engaged in quasi-satellite behaviour with a host move near the host for the duration of the quasi-satellite episode
although each pair minor-body--host is not gravitationally bound. In the Solar system and from a frame of reference centred at the
Sun but corotating with the host, the quasi-satellite appears to go around the host like a regular retrograde satellite but the
physical distance between the two bodies is always greater than the radius of the Hill sphere of the host (see e.g. fig. 1 in
Mikkola et al. 2004). The quasi-satellite state is one of the dynamical epitomes of the 1:1 mean motion or co-orbital resonance, the
other two being the Trojan or tadpole and the horseshoe resonant states (see e.g. Murray \& Dermott 1999; Mikkola et al. 2006).
Dynamical classification within the 1:1 mean motion resonance is based on the study of a critical angle, the relative mean
longitude, $\lambda_{\rm r}$, or difference between the mean longitude of the object and that of its host. If $\lambda_{\rm r}$
librates or oscillates over time, then the object under study is a co-orbital. In principle, this can only be confirmed via $N$-body
simulations. Quasi-satellites exhibit libration of $\lambda_{\rm r}$ about 0\degr (for additional details, see e.g. Mikkola et al.
2006; de la Fuente Marcos \& de la Fuente Marcos 2014, 2016a,b).
The existence of quasi-satellites was predicted more than a century ago (Jackson 1913), but the first bona fide quasi-satellite
was not identified until much later ---2002~VE$_{68}$ was confirmed as quasi-satellite of Venus by Mikkola et al. (2004). However,
the first quasi-satellite may have been identified in 1973 although it was apparently lost shortly after. Using numerical
integrations, Chebotarev (1974)\footnote{Originally published in Russian, Astron. Zh., 50, 1071-1075 (1973 September--October).}
showed that the so-called minor planet 7617 (see his fig. 5 and table 5) was a quasi-satellite of Jupiter although he regarded this
object as a distant Jovian satellite. This minor planet 7617 is clearly (see table 5 in Chebotarev 1974) not asteroid 7617
(1996~VF$_{30}$), as Chebotarev (1974) followed the numbering scheme in van Houten et al. (1970). The orbital elements (1950
equinox) of the mysterious minor planet 7617 in van Houten et al. (1970) ---$a=5.0785$~au, $e=0.6179$, $i=4\fdg080$,
$\Omega=68\fdg81$ and $\omega=209\fdg23$--- do not match those of any known asteroid or comet; therefore, it is pressumed lost.
\subsection{Theoretical expectations}
When observed from a celestial object (planetary or not) true satellites (not following synchronous orbits), co-orbitals of the
Trojan or horseshoe type, and passing objects describe roughly sinusoidal paths in the sky over a sidereal orbital period. In sharp
contrast, quasi-satellites appear to orbit the host when viewed in a heliocentric frame of reference that rotates with the host. As
their orbital periods are very close to the sidereal period of the host, the standard sinusoidal trace becomes compressed
longitudinally turning into an analemmatic curve.
The analemma or analemmatic curve ---the figure-eight loop--- has been traditionally linked to graphic depictions of the changing of
the seasons and the equation of time (see e.g. Heath 1923; Raisz 1942; Oliver 1972; di Cicco 1979; Irvine 2001; Holbrow 2013). In
addition, the trajectories of geosynchronous satellites as observed from the ground have the appearance of an analemma (Chalmers
1987). From the host, the apparent motion of a quasi-satellite during a sidereal orbital period is not too different from that of
true satellites moving in synchronous orbits.
In order to show that a given quasi-satellite traces an analemmatic curve, we proceed as follows. We perform full $N$-body
simulations in ecliptic coordinates; at time $t$, for a given host of coordinates, $(x_{\rm h}, y_{\rm h}, z_{\rm h})$, and axial
tilt or obliquity, $\epsilon$, and a certain quasi-satellite located at $(x_{\rm qs}, y_{\rm qs}, z_{\rm qs})$ we can define the
host-centric equatorial coordinates, $(\alpha^{*}, \delta^{*})$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
r \cos\alpha^{*}\ \cos\delta^{*} & = x_{\rm qs} - x_{\rm h} \\
r \sin\alpha^{*}\ \cos\delta^{*} & = (y_{\rm qs} - y_{\rm h})\cos\epsilon - (z_{\rm qs} - z_{\rm h})\sin\epsilon \\
r \sin\delta^{*} & = (y_{\rm qs} - y_{\rm h})\sin\epsilon + (z_{\rm qs} - z_{\rm h})\cos\epsilon \,,
\label{eqnconv}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $r$ is the distance between host and quasi-satellite at time $t$. For the particular case of the Earth, $(\alpha^{*},
\delta^{*})$ become $(\alpha, \delta)$, the usual geocentric equatorial coordinates. Over one sidereal period, there is a
north-south oscillation of $\delta^{*}$ that is responsible for the lengthwise extension of the analemma pattern. Such libration is
induced by the fact that the orbital plane of the quasi-satellite and the celestial equator at the host are, in general, tilted by a
certain amount. In addition, the relative motion of a quasi-satellite with respect to its host is not uniform because, in a typical
case, their orbital eccentricities are different although their semimajor axes are nearly equal and this tends to distort the
analemma. The observed apparent motion results from the interplay between the two effects; when both have comparable strengths, the
familiar figure-eight is obtained. In the particular case of the Earth and for an ideal quasi-satellite bright enough to be observed
year-round with standard ground-based telescopes, regular astrometric observations should make it possible to plot the associated
analemmatic curve without any help from numerical computations. Unfortunately, no such quasi-satellite is known to exist and
$N$-body simulations are needed to produce synthetic astrometry to confirm the theoretical expectations.
The apparent motion of the objects studied here and plotted in Figs \ref{qs} and \ref{Pqs} has been computed using the Hermite
scheme (Makino 1991; Aarseth 2003).\footnote{http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/$\sim$sverre/web/pages/nbody.htm} The Cartesian state vectors
of the integrated bodies at the epoch 2457600.5 JD TDB (2016-July-31.0) have been retrieved from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory's
(JPL) \textsc{horizons}\footnote{http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/?horizons} system (Giorgini et al. 1996); this epoch is the $t$ = 0 instant
in the simulations. Full details of these calculations can be found in de la Fuente Marcos \& de la Fuente Marcos (2012b, 2014,
2016a,b).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{fQSradecV.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{fQSradecE.eps} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{fQSradecC.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{fQSradecJ.eps} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{fQSradecS.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{fQSradecN.eps} \\
\caption{Apparent motion in host-centric equatorial coordinates of known quasi-satellites. Asteroid 2002~VE$_{68}$ from Venus (top
left-hand panel), 164207 (2004~GU$_{9}$), 277810 (2006~FV$_{35}$), 2013~LX$_{28}$, 2014~OL$_{339}$ and 469219
(2016~HO$_{3}$) from the Earth (top right-hand panel), 76146 (2000~EU$_{16}$) from Ceres (middle left-hand panel), comet
295P/LINEAR (2002~AR$_{2}$), 241944 (2002~CU$_{147}$) and 2004~AE$_{9}$ from Jupiter (middle right-hand panel), 63252
(2001~BL$_{41}$) from Saturn (bottom left-hand panel), and 309239 (2007~RW$_{10}$) from Neptune (bottom right-hand panel).
}
\label{qs}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{The case of Venus}
Asteroid 2002~VE$_{68}$ was confirmed as quasi-satellite of Venus by Mikkola et al. (2004). The orbital evolution of this object was
further studied in de la Fuente Marcos \& de la Fuente Marcos (2012b). Its orbit is quite eccentric ($e=0.4103$) and moderately
inclined ($i=9\fdg0070$). Fig. \ref{qs}, top left-hand panel, shows the results of equations (\ref{eqnconv}) from $t=0$ until 10 yr
later, i.e. over 16 orbital sidereal periods of Venus. Over 16 analemmatic loops are displayed and, consistent with its significant
eccentricity, one of the lobes of the analemma is very small, each loop resembling an inverted teardrop.
\subsection{The case of the Earth}
Our calculations show that our planet hosts the largest known population of quasi-satellites in the Solar system; however, their
dynamical origin appears to be rather heterogeneous (de la Fuente Marcos \& de la Fuente Marcos 2014, 2016a,b). There are five
confirmed quasi-satellites of the Earth: 164207 (2004~GU$_{9}$) (Connors et al. 2004; Mikkola et al. 2006; Wajer 2010), 277810
(2006~FV$_{35}$) (Wiegert et al. 2008; Wajer 2010), 2013~LX$_{28}$ (Connors 2014), 2014~OL$_{339}$ (de la Fuente Marcos \& de la
Fuente Marcos 2014, 2016a) and 469219 (2016~HO$_{3}$)\footnote{http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=6537} (de la Fuente
Marcos \& de la Fuente Marcos 2016b). Fig. \ref{qs}, top right-hand panel, shows the apparent motion of these five objects over 10
sidereal periods; a wide range of behaviours, from a very symmetric figure-eight to very distorted teardrop shapes, is observed.
Asteroid 164207 (purple) has both moderate eccentricity ($e=0.1362$) and inclination ($i=13\fdg6491$), and it traces a somewhat
symmetric figure-eight that slowly shifts, keeping the position of the node almost fixed. Asteroid 277810 (gold) has significant
eccentricity ($e=0.3776$), but low orbital inclination ($i=7\fdg1041$); consistently, its apparent motion describes a very distorted
teardrop as the effect of the eccentricity dominates. Asteroid 2013~LX$_{28}$ (green) follows a quite eccentric ($e=0.4520$) and
very inclined ($i=49\fdg9754$) path that translates into an apparent motion that traces an elongated teardrop-shaped curve. Asteroid
2014~OL$_{339}$ (blue) describes a somewhat elliptic analemma which suggests that one of the effects is nearly negligible;
consistently, it follows a very eccentric ($e=0.4608$) but moderately inclined ($i=10\fdg1868$) orbit. Finally, the orbit pursued by
469219 (red) has both low eccentricity ($e=0.1041$) and inclination ($i=7\fdg77140$); consistently, the analemma described in the
sky resembles that of 164207 with a rather symmetric shifting figure-eight.
\subsection{The case of Ceres}
Planets are not the only possible hosts of quasi-satellite bodies, dwarf planet Ceres also has one of these interesting companions
(Christou 2000; Christou \& Wiegert 2012), 76146 (2000~EU$_{16}$). Fig. \ref{qs}, middle left-hand panel, shows the results of
nearly 11 sidereal periods. Asteroid 76146 follows a low-eccentricity ($e=0.1674$), low-inclination ($i=8\fdg8475$) orbit;
surprisingly, its relatively low eccentricity is high enough to induce a rather distorted teardrop shape to the resulting analemma.
\subsection{The case of Jupiter}
Jupiter is often regarded as the host of the largest known population of quasi-satellites with at least six, including asteroids and
comets (Kinoshita \& Nakai 2007; Wajer \& Kr\'olikowska 2012). However, we failed to confirm several of the proposed candidates as
present-day quasi-satellites of Jupiter. We have found three confirmed quasi-satellites of Jupiter: comet 295P/LINEAR (2002~AR$_{2}$)
(Kinoshita \& Nakai 2007; Wajer \& Kr\'olikowska 2012), 241944 (2002~CU$_{147}$) (Wajer \& Kr\'olikowska 2012) and 2004~AE$_{9}$
(Kinoshita \& Nakai 2007; Wajer \& Kr\'olikowska 2012). Fig. \ref{qs}, middle right-hand panel, shows the results of 8.4 sidereal
periods of apparent motion for these objects. Comet 295P/LINEAR (red) follows a very eccentric orbit ($e=0.6460$) that is
only moderately inclined ($i=14\fdg6912$); consistently, a rather asymmetric figure-eight is observed. This object is unlikely to be
the mysterious minor planet 7617 in van Houten et al. (1970), the angular elements being too different. Asteroid 241944 (blue)
pursues a relatively eccentric orbit ($e=0.3136$) that is also quite inclined ($i=32\fdg8906$); the relatively rapidly shifting
analemma exhibits somewhat symmetric lobes. In sharp contrast, 2004~AE$_{9}$ follows a very eccentric ($e=0.6459$) but nearly
ecliptic ($i=1\fdg6521$) orbit and its apparent motion as seen from Jupiter traces a very squashed teardrop. Again, the angular
elements of 2004~AE$_{9}$ are very different from those of the mysterious minor planet 7617.
\subsection{The case of Saturn}
Gallardo (2006) indicated that 15504 (1999~RG$_{33}$) could be a quasi-satellite of Saturn. Our calculations show that it is indeed
a transient co-orbital of Saturn, but not a quasi-satellite like the objects previously discussed. Its apparent motion somewhat
resembles that of Molniya-type artificial satellites of the Earth (the apocentre of the very eccentric orbits occurs at a large
declination). However, 63252 (2001~BL$_{41}$) that was discovered by Gehrels et al. (2001) is currently a short-lived
quasi-satellite of Saturn that will change its current dynamical status in about 130 yr from now. Asteroid 63252 follows an
eccentric ($e=0.2948$) but moderately inclined ($i=12\fdg5163$) orbit. Fig. \ref{qs}, bottom left-hand panel, shows the apparent
motion of this object as seen from Saturn for about 4.4 sidereal periods, prior to leaving its current quasi-satellite state. The
analemmatic loops described by this object are very distorted as a result of its unstable dynamical behaviour and the lobes have
somewhat different sizes because the effect derived from eccentricity is stronger than that of inclination. Although its orbital
evolution is rather chaotic, 63252 ---an organic rich D-type asteroid (Doressoundiram et al. 2003)--- has been pre-selected by NASA
for an in situ exploration mission (Ryan et al. 2009).
\subsection{The case of Neptune}
Asteroid 309239 (2007~RW$_{10}$) is so far the only confirmed quasi-satellite of Neptune (de la Fuente Marcos \& de la Fuente Marcos
2012a) and it is one of the largest known co-orbital companions in the Solar system with a diameter of about 250 km. It follows an
eccentric ($e=0.3004$) and rather inclined ($i=36\fdg1755$) orbit. Fig. \ref{qs}, bottom right-hand panel, shows 7.3 sidereal
periods of a very regular analemma of the figure-eight type with both lobes of nearly the same size which confirms that the effects
derived from eccentricity and inclination have very similar strength in this case.
\section{Accidental quasi-satellites: the case of Plutino 15810 (1994 JR$_1$)}
Quasi-satellites are not exclusive of planetary hosts as the case of 76146 (2000~EU$_{16}$) and Ceres confirms. Yu \& Tremaine (1999)
and Tiscareno \& Malhotra (2009) used numerical simulations to predict the existence of minor bodies experiencing quasi-satellite
behaviour with respect to dwarf planet Pluto. Plutino 15810 (1994 JR$_1$) was identified as an accidental quasi-satellite of Pluto
by de la Fuente Marcos \& de la Fuente Marcos (2012c). It was termed accidental because, for this object, $\lambda_{\rm r}$ circulates
with a superimposed libration resulting from the oscillation of the orbital period induced by the 2:3 mean motion resonance with
Neptune. Such libration plays a role in triggering and terminating the quasi-satellite phase. Porter et al. (2016) have used astrometry
acquired by NASA's New Horizons spacecraft to improve the already robust orbital solution available for this object (see Appendix A)
and revisit its quasi-satellite status. The new data have been used to argue that the quasi-satellite nature of 15810 must be
rejected.\footnote{http://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-horizons-collects-first-science-on-a-post-pluto-object}
Fig. \ref{Pqs} clearly shows that although the orbital solution of 15810 has been indeed greatly improved using New Horizons data (see
Appendix A), its orbital evolution still matches the one described in de la Fuente Marcos \& de la Fuente Marcos (2012c). In black, we
have the apparent motion resulting from the latest orbit available for 15810 (third orbital solution in Table \ref{orb}). The figure
displays the time interval of interest ---the one showing analemmatic behaviour--- that goes from 1200 years prior to $t=0$ to 200
years afterwards or about 5.6 sidereal orbital periods of Pluto. The analemma shifts rapidly and it is quite distorted because the
orbits of both Pluto and 15810 are eccentric and there is a chaotic interaction between the two bodies. Within the context of the
analemma criterion, the behaviour observed in Fig. \ref{Pqs} is not very different from that of some of the objects in Fig. \ref{qs}.
The apparent motion of 15810 closely resembles that of comet 295P/LINEAR (2002~AR$_{2}$) or 63252 (2001~BL$_{41}$). If the pre-NASA's
New Horizons distant encounter orbit (second orbital solution in Table \ref{orb}) is used (green curve), the differences are minimal.
Porter et al. (2016) argue that, for 15810, instead of transient quasi-satellite behaviour we should speak of periodic (every 2.4 Myr)
scattering conjunctions; however, Fig. \ref{Pqs} suggests that 15810 is not different from comet 295P or 63252 in dynamical terms when
the analemma criterion is applied during one of its encounters with Pluto. Therefore, Pluto has at least one present-day (transient and
recurrent) quasi-satellite, 15810.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fQSradecP.eps}
\caption{Apparent motion in Pluto-centric equatorial coordinates of 15810 (1994~JR$_1$). The black curve shows the shifting analemma
resulting from the dynamical evolution of the latest version of the orbit that includes data from NASA's New Horizons
spacecraft (third orbital solution in Table \ref{orb}). The green curve is equivalent to the black one but using the second
orbital solution in Table \ref{orb}.
}
\label{Pqs}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
Our analysis so far argues in favour of a conjecture: objects that follow a quasi-satellite path with respect to a host trace an
analemmatic curve in the sky as observed from the host over a sidereal orbital period. Conversely, any object tracing an analemmatic
curve in the sky as observed from the host over a sidereal year must be a quasi-satellite of the host. Unfortunately, a rigorous
mathematical or even a numerical proof of the assumed theorem and its inverse is out of the scope of this work because (1) a complete
theory of quasi-satellite motion still remains elusive (see e.g. Mikkola et al. 2006) and (2) the relevant volume of the orbital
parameter space to be explored is simply too large. Intuitively, the truthfulness of our conjecture can hardly be argued. The position
of the quasi-satellite as seen from the host is subjected to two periodic librations. At some point during the sidereal year, the
quasi-satellite is east of the host, very nearly half an orbital period later it is west from the host. As the quasi-satellite
bean-shaped loop (see e.g. fig. 1 in Mikkola et al. 2004) drifts back and forth, the peri-host shifts from eastwards to westwards from
the host (this causes the loop drift). This behaviour is mainly the result of the difference in eccentricity between host and
quasi-satellite and drives the oscillation in host-centric right ascension. The relative inclination between the equatorial plane of
the host and the orbital plane of the quasi-satellite drives the oscillation in host-centric declination. These two oscillations have
(nearly) commensurable frequencies because host and quasi-satellite have very similar orbital periods and generate the analemma.
Co-orbitals have been traditionally classified as such after the statistical analysis of numerical simulations. However, an algorithm
to decide whether an object is a quasi-satellite of a given host, not based on $N$-body simulations, is described in detail in section
4 of Mikkola et al. (2006). The analemmas or analemmata in Figs \ref{qs} and \ref{Pqs} show that, in the particular case of
quasi-satellites, astrometry can be readily used to perform a reliable classification. Figs \ref{qs} and \ref{Pqs} also show that both
very regular ---164207 (2004~GU$_{9}$), 469219 (2016~HO$_{3}$) or 309239 (2007~RW$_{10}$)--- and rather irregular ---comet 295P/LINEAR
(2002~AR$_{2}$), 63252 (2001~BL$_{41}$) or 15810 (1994~JR$_1$)--- short-term evolutions are possible. The analemma traced by the
quasi-satellite encodes relevant orbital information. Distorted, rapidly shifting analemmas are characteristic of quasi-satellites
moving in strongly perturbed orbits.
Our calculations show that, if a suitable quasi-satellite is found, it can be used as a permanent platform to install instrumentation
that may be used to monitor permanently the host body and enable a relatively stable communications relay for subsequent missions (e.
g. landing quasi-autonomous vehicles on the host) at zero fuel cost because the quasi-satellite behaves like a geosynchronous satellite
from the point of view of the host body. For this task, the smaller its average distance from the host the better (see e.g. the case of
469219 as discussed in de la Fuente Marcos \& de la Fuente Marcos 2016b). Artificial quasi-satellites are also possible (see e.g. Kogan
1989 for the Phobos mission). For quasi-satellites sufficiently close to a host, substantial parallax may occur; therefore, and
depending on the location of the observer on the surface of the host, different analemmas may be observed. This issue together with the
shift of the analemma loop induced by orbital evolution requires robotic tracking of the quasi-satellite yearly movement around its
analemma. The use of quasi-satellite trajectories in astrodynamics has been frequently discussed (see e.g. Kogan 1989; Lidov \&
Vashkov'yak 1993, 1994; Mikkola \& Prioroc 2016). It could be the case that the analemmatic behaviour described here had been found
before within the context of astrodynamical studies (see e.g. Kogan 1989).
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, we have explored a new criterion to identify quasi-satellites. In sharp contrast with the numerical strategies
customarily applied in the study of co-orbital bodies, the criterion described here can make direct use of observational astrometric
data. Our conclusions can be summarized as follows.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item Bona fide quasi-satellites trace paths in the sky which repeat every sidereal period when observed from their hosts. These
paths can be described as analemmatic curves similar to those found for geosynchronous orbits. The analemma shifts as the
orbit of the quasi-satellite changes over time.
\item The existence of this analemmatic behaviour turns quasi-satellites, natural or artificial, into potentially interesting
platforms for the future of space exploration.
\item The Earth has the largest known number of present-day quasi-satellites, five. Jupiter comes in second place with three.
Venus, Saturn, Neptune and dwarf planet Ceres have one each.
\item Applying the analemma criterion, Plutino 15810 (1994 JR$_1$) is as good a quasi-satellite as it may get. Therefore, dwarf
planet Pluto hosts at least one quasi-satellite at present.
\item Asteroid 63252 (2001~BL$_{41}$) is a present-day transient quasi-satellite of Saturn.
\item Historically, the first object identified as quasi-satellite (in this case of Jupiter) was an asteroid moving in a comet-like
orbit. Unfortunately, this object appears to have been lost since its announcement back in 1973.
\end{enumerate}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank the referee, S. Mikkola, for his prompt reports, S.~J. Aarseth for providing the code used in this research, and S.~B. Porter
for discussing the results of his group with us prior to publication. In preparation of this paper, we made use of the NASA
Astrophysics Data System, the ASTRO-PH e-print server, and the MPC data server.
|
\section{Introduction}
Scientific progress greatly benefits from the development of theoretical and computational methods that complement new experimental techniques. Recent
developments in the study of electron dynamics on the sub-femtosecond timescale
\cite{Sansone2010,Schultze2013,Schiffrin2013,Popmintchev2012} have enhanced the
need for the development of computational models able to obtain a time-dependent description
of ultrafast multi-electron processes. In the present manuscript, we demonstrate a new
time-dependent ab-initio
computational method for the study of electron spatial and spin dynamics through its application to
electron-He impact processes in the S-wave model (known as the Temkin-Poet model when applied to
electron-hydrogen scattering \cite{temkin1961,Poet1978}). We choose this particular model as it provides a simple atomic process which contains both spin and
spatial dynamics, and for which benchmark data for comparison is readily available
\cite{Bartlett2010,Bartlett2010II}.
Electron-impact processes for He in the S-wave model were investigated through application of the
time-dependent Close-Coupling (TDCC) approach \cite{Pindzola1999}. Since then, a range of other
advanced approaches have been applied to investigate this problem, including the convergent
close-coupling approach \cite{Fursa1995, plottke2002,plottke2004} and the exterior-complex-scaling
approach (ECS) \cite{Horner2005,Bartlett2010,Bartlett2010II}. We note that this description of a
three-electron system bears great similarity to the time-dependent calculation of Li processes in
\cite{Ruiz2005}, since the restriction in angular momentum corresponds to a 1D description for each
electron.
In this report, we build upon the R-Matrix with Time-dependence (RMT) theory
\cite{Lysaght2012,Nikolopoulos2008}. This approach
combines the R-matrix division of configuration space with time propagation to model
attosecond processes in many-electron
atoms. RMT has recently provided valuable insights into high-harmonic generation \cite{Hassouneh2014},
and experimental attosecond transient absorption spectroscopy
data \cite{Ding2016}. The RMT approach has
been extended to model dynamics in atomic systems where two electrons
are ejected from the core, demonstrated with an application to
double photoionisation from a Helium atom \cite{Wragg2015}.
We use RMT theory to consider ultra-fast dynamics that occur
within electron-impact excitation,
ionisation, and in particular ionisation-excitation processes. Whereas previous application of RMT theory for
two electron ejection considered systems with a single double-ejection threshold, the present study
investigated the numerical accuracy of the approach for systems with multiple
thresholds. The present process provides an opportunity to robustly assess the numerical techniques in the RMT approach through quantitative comparison with present data for electron-impact of He in the S-wave model
\cite{plottke2002,plottke2004,Horner2005,Bartlett2010,Bartlett2010II}.
The treatment of this particular problem provides a stepping stone towards the development of an RMT approach for the full treatment of double ionisation in general atomic systems. The backbone of the treatment would be formed by states consisting of a double ionisation threshold two or more free electrons. The electron-He scattering process can be regarded as the simplest of such systems. The RMT approach for this scattering process thus offers a clear development path towards a general atomic code for the treatment of double ionisation. In addition to this, the time-dependent nature of the RMT treatment can provide dynamical insight into the scattering processes. For example, whereas the excitation of
autoionizing states in this scattering process has been considered previously \cite{Horner2005},
a time-dependent treatment can reveal clear signatures of dynamics within these states. Furthermore, a time-dependent method, such as RMT also allows the spin coupling between the electrons to be traced
during the scattering process.
Throughout this paper, we use atomic units unless otherwise stated.
\section{Theory}
In RMT, the three-electron S-wave Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}=\sum_{n=1}^{3}\left(-\frac{1}{2}\frac{d^{2}}{dr_{n}^{2}}-\frac{2}{r_{n}}\right)+
\frac{1}{r^{>}_{12}}+\frac{1}{r^{>}_{13}}+\frac{1}{r^{>}_{23}} ,
\label{fullham}
\end{equation}
is used within the Schr\"odinger equation
\begin{equation}
i\frac{d}{dt}\Psi(\vec{R},\chi,t)=\hat{H}\Psi(\vec{R},\chi,t)
\end{equation}
where $\vec{R}$ is the position vector $(r_{1},r_{2},r_{3})$, and $r_{n}$ is the radial coordinate of electron $n$. $r^{>}_{n'n''}$
is the greater of $r_{n'}$ and $r_{n''}$. $\Psi(\vec{R},\chi,t)$ is the time-dependent wavefunction where $\chi$ indicates the spin coupling of the electrons.
Three regions of configuration space are defined within RMT for two-electron ejection \cite{Wragg2015}: region (I) with $r_{1},r_{2},r_{3}<b$, where $b$ is the size of the
so-called inner region, region (II) where $r_{1},r_{2}<b$ and $r_{3}>b$, and region (III)
where $r_{1}<b$ and $r_{2},r_{3}>b$. The RMT wavefunction in each region is described
in terms of a time-dependent coefficient and a time-independent basis as
\begin{eqnarray}
&\text{(I) } & \Psi(\vec{R},\chi,t)= \sum_{j}C^{\mathrm{(I)}}_{j}(t)\psi^{\mathrm{(I)}}_{j}(r_{1},r_{2},r_{3},\chi) \\
&\text{(II) } & \Psi(\vec{R},\chi,t)= \sum_{k}C^{\mathrm{(II)}}_{k}(r_{3},t)\psi^{\mathrm{(II)}}_{k}(r_{1},r_{2},\chi) \\
&\text{(III) } & \Psi(\vec{R},\chi,t)= \sum_{m}C^{\mathrm{(III)}}_{m}(r_{2},r_{3},t)\psi^{\mathrm{(III)}}_{m}(r_{1},\chi)
\end{eqnarray}
where the coefficients $C^{\mathrm{(II)}}_{k}(r_{3},t)$, and $C^{\mathrm{(III)}}_{m}(r_{2},r_{3},t)$ are
defined at FD grid points across $r_{3} >b$, and $r_{2},r_{3}>b$ respectively. $k$ and $m$
correspond to single- and two-electron channels in regions (II) and (III) respectively, $j$ indicates
a region (I) eigenstate. Three-electron escape corresponding to $r_{1},r_{2},r_{3}>b$ is not
considered.
Configuration space not covered in regions (I), (II) and (III) is included via antisymmetrisation
of the wavefunction.
The basis functions $\psi^{\mathrm{(N)}}$ are
expanded in terms of a further basis of functions, $\zeta^{\mathrm{(N)}}_{k}$ (for (N) = (I), (II), and (III)), and appropriate
spin functions. These $\zeta^{\mathrm{(N)}}_{k}$ functions are in turn constructed from antisymmetrised products
of hydrogenic eigenfunctions $\zeta^{\text{+}}_{n}(r_{i})$, corresponding to the
$n^{\rm th}$ eigenvalue of the operator
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}^{+}_{i} = -\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathrm{d}^{2}}{\mathrm{d}r_{i}^{2}}-\frac{2}{r_{i}}+L_b,
\label{Ham+}
\end{equation}
where $L_b$ is the Bloch operator \cite{burke2011}, written as
\begin{equation}
L_b=\frac{1}{2}\delta(r_i-b)\frac{d}{dr_i}.
\end{equation}
To minimise the number of basis functions, at least one of the electrons within the inner region $(r_i<b)$ is
restricted to the lowest three eigenstates.
This ``core" electron is thus restricted to
the 1s, 2s and 3s orbitals. We obtain eigenfunctions for the inner-region $(r_i<b)$ aspect
of the wavefunction in each of the three regions through diagonalisation
of the following Hamiltonians:
\begin{eqnarray}
& {\mathrm{(I)}} & \hspace{5pt} \hat{H}^{+}_{1}+ \hat{H}^{+}_{2} + \hat{H}^{+}_{3} +
\frac{1}{r^{>}_{12}} + \frac{1}{r^{>}_{23}} +\frac{1}{r^{>}_{13}} \nonumber \\
& {\mathrm{(II)}} &\hspace{5pt} \hat{H}^{+}_{1}+ \hat{H}^{+}_{2} + \frac{1}{r^{>}_{12}} \label{operators} \\
& {\mathrm{(III)}} &\hspace{5pt} \hat{H}^{+}_{1}
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
$\hat{H}^{+}_{i}$ is the hydrogenic Hamiltonian given in equation \ref{Ham+}.
As with previous RMT implementations, the wavefunction is propagated in time from an initial state at
$t=t_{0}$.
This initial state contains two electrons in the He ground state, and an incoming $s$ electron, described by a Gaussian wavepacket of $\text{root-mean-square width}=10\ a_{0}$ centred on $r_{3}=75\ a_{0}$.
In this study, we use a 6$^{\rm th}$ order Taylor series propagator.
The kinetic-energy operations on the coefficients defined across FD grids $\big($$-\frac{1}{2}\frac{d^{2}}{dr_{3}^{2}}$ in region (II) and $-\frac{1}{2}\frac{d^{2}}{dr_{2}^{2}},-\frac{1}{2}\frac{d^{2}}{dr_{3}^{2}}$ in region (III)$\big)$ are evaluated using FD operators.
Near the inner boundary of regions (II) and (III), the FD grids contain insufficient grid points
to complete the centre difference FD operation. The missing data points are hence obtained from the
wavefunction in region (I) or region (II), respectively.
Additionally, propagation using the physical three-electron Hamiltonian in equation (\ref{fullham})
requires cancellation of the Bloch
operator terms contained within $\hat{H}_{3}^+$ (region I) and $\hat{H}_{2}^+$ (region II), as defined
in equation (\ref{operators}). This is achieved through the evaluation of an FD first
derivative operation on the wavefunction at the region (I)/region (II) boundary, and the region (II)/region (III) boundary,
as implemented in \cite{Wragg2015}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,angle=0]{plot-crop.pdf}
\caption{Electron-impact cross sections for He in the S-wave model for impact energies between
25 and 225 eV as obtained in the RMT approach. Cross sections for
electron-impact excitation to 1s2s, and 2s2s, electron-impact ionisation, leaving He$^+$ in 1s, and
electron-impact ionisation with excitation of He$^+$ to 2s. All cross sections are compared with
benchmark data (calculated using the PECS method) from \cite{Bartlett2010,Bartlett2010II}.}
\label{CSPlot1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The initial wavefunction is propagated in time until the scattered electron has moved well away from
the residual atom or ion. Electron-impact excitation yields are then obtained
from the total population in the relevant region (II) channel.
Electron-impact ionisation yields are obtained from the total population in region (III) associated with a
particular residual He$^+$ state (1s, 2s or 3s).
These yields are then transformed into electron-impact scattering cross sections.
\section{Results}
Figure \ref{CSPlot1} shows impact excitation and ionisation cross sections for He in the
S-wave model over the electron-impact energy range between 25 and 225 eV. For all processes shown, we observe good agreement with the benchmark data. The
largest difference (25\%) is seen at large impact energies for electron-impact ionisation with excitation of the
residual ion to the 2s state, where the restriction of the core electron to 1s, 2s or 3s
could have a more significant effect on the modelling. We also note a more pronounced difference near the
threshold for electron-impact ionisation. In this energy range, the main difficulty lies in
distinguishing two-electron ejection from the excitation of high-lying excited states
(a similar challenge was encountered in \cite{Wragg2015}). Overall, the cross sections for electron-impact scattering
show excellent agreement with those obtained in \cite{Bartlett2010}, and demonstrate the accuracy
of the present approach.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,angle=0]{plotAuto-crop.pdf}
\caption{Yield of 2s2s state in region (II). Light red data points indicate a yield obtained before the excited wavepacket has entered region (II), and dark red data points indicate a yield obtained after the wavepacket has entered region (II). The blue line indicates an exponential decay fit of the dark red points.}
\label{2s2s}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Following excitation, the population of the 2s2s state decreases over time as the state
autoionises. In figure \ref{2s2s}, the population of the channel associated with the 2s2s state in region (II) is shown as the calculation propagates in time. We note that the sharp increase in yield (light red points) corresponds not to the excitation of the 2s2s state, but rather to the flow of the scattered electron in the 2s2s channel from region (I) into region (II). The exponential decay of the 2s2s state is then seen in figure \ref{2s2s} (dark red points). The light blue line is fit of the exponential decay function $A\exp(-\gamma t)$ to the dark red points. From this fit, a 2s2s decay rate of $\gamma=1.10 \times 10^{14}$ s$^{-1}$ is obtained, which agrees to within 10\% with the decay rate given in \cite{Bartlett2010}. The earliest dark red point is taken as the yield for the 2s2s state, from which the value for the 2s2s cross sections shown in figure \ref{CSPlot1} are calculated. The moment of collision in the calculation shown in figure \ref{2s2s} is estimated to happen approximately $1.1$ fs after the beginning of the calculation, with the first reliable 2s2s yield obtained approximately $0.5$ fs later. We estimate that this lack of access to an immediate 2s2s yield introduces an uncertainty of approximately 10\% to the RMT 2s2s cross section.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth,angle=0]{N118wl.pdf}
\caption{Probability density of finding electrons 2 and 3 at position $r_{2}$ and $r_{3}$ when
the residual He$^+$ ion in the S-wave model is left in the 1s state. The density
shown is obtained after 11.96 fs for an incoming electron wavepacket of 76 eV, initially centred at
75 $a_0$. The red line at $r_{3}=535 a_{0}$ indicates data shown in figure \ref{Model},
associated with autoionisation of the 2sns states.}
\label{AutoIonisationPlot}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Previous studies have shown the theoretical time-dependent description of autoionisation to be an interesting challenge \cite{Schultz1994,Mitnik2004,Hu2005}. We can identify such autoionisation dynamics within the RMT model of the scattering process. We show in figure \ref{AutoIonisationPlot} the probability density
associated with a residual He$^+$ ion in the 1s state at 11.96 fs after the beginning of the model. The direct electron-impact-ionisation wavepacket
can be seen as an arc from $\sqrt{r_{2}^{2}+r_{3}^{2}}\approx 750$ $a_0$ to
$\sqrt{r_{2}^{2}+r_{3}^{2}}\approx 1050$ $a_0$. In addition to this arc, a series of six peaks is seen along
along $r_{3}\approx 535 a_{0}$ and $r_{2}\approx 535 a_{0}$. These peaks signify
dynamics associated with doubly excited 2sns states and their autoionisation. The different nature of the two processes is reflected in the strong inteference where this series and arc overlap. We consider that the distance along coordinate $r_3$ at time $t$ corresponds to the momentum of a scattered electron after excitation of a doubly-excited 2sns state, i.e. $r_{3}=(t-t_{c})/k_{i_{n}}$. Here $t_{c}$ is value of $t$ at the moment of collision, and $k_{i_{n}}$ is the momentum of the impact electron after exciting the atom to the 2sns autoionising state.
Some time after the moment of collision, the 2sns state autoionizes, leading to emission of an
electron associated with the $r_2$ radial coordinate. Since this autoionised electron has a well-defined momentum,
$r_2$ and $t$ can be mapped to the moment of autoionisation $\tau_{n}(r_2,t)$ from state 2s$n$s as
\begin{equation}
\tau_{n}(r_2,t)=t - t_{c} - r_2/\sqrt{2 E_n}.
\end{equation}
such that the autoionised electron has travelled from $r=0$ at time of emission $\tau_{n}(r_2,t)$ to $r=r_{2}$ at time $t$. Interference between autoionisation contributions from 2s2s and higher 2sns states then gives a time-dependent autoionisation rate for the
doubly excited He atom, which is reflected in the series of peaks in figure \ref{AutoIonisationPlot}.
\begin{figure}[t!
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Lines.pdf}
\caption{Wavefunction density along the lines $r_3=704 a_0, 535 a_0, 375 a_0, 217 a_0$ at times 15.29 fs, 11.96 fs, 8.64 fs, and 5.32 fs after the start of the model respectively. The 11.96 fs data corresponds to the data shown in figure \ref{AutoIonisationPlot}.
The RMT density (blue) is compared to model data (red), obtained as described in the text. The variations in
the density correspond to time variation in the autoionisation rate of a superposition of 2sns states.}
\label{Model}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{Model} shows the probability density along the autoionisation wavepacket (as described by the red line in figure \ref{AutoIonisationPlot}) at four moments during the calculation along with a model
of the autoionisation arising from the 2sns states. The
wavepacket along $r_2$ is modelled by considering the
autoionisation of the 2s2s, 2s3s and 2s4s states:
\begin{equation}
P(r_2,t) = C \left|\sum_{n=2}^4 \sqrt{\sigma_n \gamma_n e^{- \gamma_n \tau_{n}(r_2,t)}}
\exp {\left( i(k_{n}r_{2}-E_{n}t)\right)} \right|^2
\end{equation}
In these equations, $E_n$ is the energy of the 2sns state, $\gamma_n$ its autoionisation rate, and
$\sigma_n$ its cross section.
These quantities are obtained from \cite{Bartlett2010}. It is possible to obtain initial estimates for the normalisation constant $C$ from the shape of the R-Matrix wavepacket. However, for the sake of avoiding unnecessary complication, we obtain $C$ by a fit to each RMT dataset. Figure \ref{Model} shows
close agreement between the model and the RMT density. The rapid oscillations in figure \ref{Model} with a wavelength of $\approx 55a_{0}$ are related to interference between autoionisation from 2s2s and from the superposition of 2s3s and 2s4s. The modulation of these oscillations with a wavelength of $\approx 270 a_{0}$ are associated with the interference between autoionisation from 2s3s and 2s4s. Hence the sequence of peaks follows the time-varying
autoionisation of the doubly excited residual He atom.
We now turn to a demonstration of the capability of the RMT approach to describe spin dynamics as
well as spatial
dynamics. We note that RMT does not currently directly solve the relativistic Pauli or Dirac
equations as the regimes of interest here are non-relativistic. Rather, the changes in spin
coupling within the three electron system are inferred from the anti-symmetry that is imposed on
the wavefunction.
To illustrate how this kind of spin dynamics can manifest itself, we consider a simple thought
experiment of sequential double photoionisation of a spin-polarised three electron system (such
as atomic Li). An incoming high-energy photon can eject a 1s electron from the spin-polarised Li
1s$^{2}$2s ground state. The resulting 1s2s state will be in a superposition of 1s2s $^{1}$S and
1s2s $^{3}$S. The $m_S=\pm1$ components of this state can only be formed by the 1s2s $^3$S state.
However, the $m_{S}=0$ component of this state created by photoionization consists of a coherent
superposition of the $^1$S and $^3$S states. This superposition will now change over time between
$\left|1s\uparrow 2s\downarrow \right>$ and $\left|1s \downarrow 2s \uparrow \right>$, due to the
energy gap between the $^{1}$S and $^{3}$S states. Subsequent photoionisation of the 2s electron
by a short time-delayed pulse will then result in an observable time variation in the spin
polarisation of the ejected electron, signifying spin dynamics.
The RMT approach offers the
capability to investigate such spin dynamics effects in an ab-initio manner.
This is demonstrated in
figure \ref{SpinDynamics}, which shows the fraction of the three-electron wavefunction in which the innermost
two electrons are coupled to triplet spin symmetry as a function of time
for different electron-impact energies. Before the collision occurs, the innermost electrons are coupled to a singlet as the He atom is in the initial 1s$^2$ ground state.
During the collision, the incoming electron partially penetrates the ground state atom, becoming one of the innermost electrons. The coupling between impact electron and the other inner electron is partially described by a triplet coupling, causing the triplet spin fraction of the inner electrons to increase. After the collision, there is a notable probability for the impact electron to leave the atom, causing the original atomic electrons to return to being the inner electrons. This explains the later increase in singlet coupling.
Figure \ref{SpinDynamics} suggests that, for our particular choice of initial wavepacket, the main spin
dynamics in this scattering process occurs on a timescale that is dependent on the impact energy.
We note that access to the full time-dependent wavefunction enables the use of different recoupling
schemes, so it is possible to investigate the full range of dynamics in spin coupling between
electrons. This may be of particular interest when more complex atoms with different residual-ion states,
e.g. Ne$^{2+}$, are investigated.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth,angle=0]{spinplot2.pdf}
\caption{The fraction of the wavefunction in which the two innermost electrons are coupled
to a triplet state as a function of time for different impact energies in electron
scattering off He in the S-wave model. }
\label{SpinDynamics}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
In summary, the RMT approach has been successfully applied to study dynamics on the attosecond timescale for three-electron
systems from first principles. We have demonstrated that the RMT approach can reliably describe impact ionisation
processes involving double continua associated with different ionisation thresholds. This includes processes where the incoming electron electron excites a superposition of doubly excited states, which leads to ultra-fast dynamics
in the subsequent autoionisation. The autoionisation rates in region (II) are in excellent agreement with benchmark calculations. With RMT, it is possible to extract both spin and spatial dynamics from a single calculation. The RMT codes hence provide a foundation for the investigation of intense-field multiple ionisation processes
in three electron systems, as a stepping stone for our long-term aim to study such processes in general atoms.
This research was sponsored by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (UK) under grant
ref. no. G/055416/1. This work also used the ARCHER UK National Supercomputing service (http://www.archer.ac.uk).
Data from figure 1 to figure 5 can be accessed via http://pure.qub.ac.uk/portal/en/datasets/search.html
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
Space-time curvature of four-dimension is hard to conceive. Specially,
the curvature of strong gravity is too far from our common sence to percieve.
Embedded diagram method\cite{R1,R2,R3} is one of the ways to bypass these difficult.
Mathematically, embedded diagrams are two-dimensional conformal mapped surfaces embedded in three-dimensional
Euclidean space. Generally, embedded diagram represents for intrinsic geometry of the equatorial plane around black hole at constant time. The effects of parameters like mass $M$, charge $Q$ and angular momentum $J$ (or spin parameter $a = J/Mc$) of black holes are explicitly visualized in the two-dimensional curvatures of embedded diagrams and the influences are qualitatively understood very well.\cite{R2,R3}
By the no-hair theorem, neutral black holes are uniquely characterized by their masses and spins. Kerr black hole is characterized by mass $M$ and spin $a$. Thus, the metric of Kerr black hole has the stationary, axisymmetric, and asymptotically flat space-time. But, the Kerr metrics have lacked the direct experiment evidences. Several experiments of the electromagnetic wave\cite{R4,R5,R6,R7,R8} and gravitational wave\cite{R9,R10,R11,R12,R13,R14,R15} show the deviation from the Kerr metrics.
A deformed Kerr-like metric for strong gravitation in an alternative theory of general relativity has been proposed by Johannsen and Psalitis \cite{R16}.
The non-Kerr metric has the deformation parameter $\epsilon$ in addition to mass $M$ and spin $a$. They applied the Newman-Janis transformation \cite{R17} and constructed a Kerr-like metric. For positive parameter $\epsilon$, the black hole is more prolate than spherical black hole. For negative $\epsilon$, the black hole is more oblate. When the deformation parameter $\epsilon$ vanish, the metric reduces to the Kerr metric. There were many interesting properties in the non-Kerr black hole
that some researchers have reported so far. For positive $\epsilon$, there are naked singularity region for some values of $\left|a\right|/M$ \cite{R16}. For negative $\epsilon$, the event horizons always exist for any values of $\left|a\right|/M$ and the horizons are in the shape of toroidal \cite{R18, R19}. The properties of ergosphere and energetic processes of non-Kerr black holes have been investigated in the paper \cite{R20}.
In this paper, we investigate the behavior of non-Kerr black holes (BH) compared with Kerr BHs in the parameter space of ($a$,$\epsilon$) using embedded diagrams. Specially, the event horizons and the region of naked singularity of non-Kerr BHs are studied in detail.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig1.eps}
\caption{Embedded diagrams of Kerr BH in cylindrical coordinates ($r,\phi,z$) for spin $a=0.98$. The gap between the surfaces is
boundary of the inner and outer event horizons.}
\label{fig.1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{EMBEDDED DIAGRAM AND NON-KERR METRIC}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig2.eps}
\caption{Embedded diagrams of Kerr BH and non-Kerr BH. Three different values of deformation parameter $\epsilon$ for the same value of spin $a=0.98$ are plotted. We can find that the small deviation($\epsilon=\pm0.01$) of Kerr BH($\epsilon=0$) makes notable differences. }
\label{fig.2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Embedded Diagram}
Static rotating axially symmetric metric is
\begin{equation}
ds^{2}= g_{tt}dt^{2}+g_{rr}dr^{2}+g_{\theta\theta}d\theta^{2}+g_{\phi\phi}d\phi^{2}
+ 2g_{t\phi}dtd\phi.
\end{equation}
At constant time and equatorial plane ($\theta = \pi/2$), the metric becomes
\begin{equation}
ds^{2}= g_{rr}dr^{2} + g_{\phi\phi}d\phi^{2}.
\end{equation}
We denote the embedded diagram of the metric in cylindrical coordinates as
\begin{equation}
ds^{2}=dR^{2}+R^{2}d\phi^{2}+dz^{2}.
\end{equation}
We can find a surface $z$ = $z$($R$) that is isometric to two dimensional equatorial plane ($\theta = \pi/2$). The conformal metric is thus rewritten the surface,
\begin{equation}
dl^{2}=\Bigg[\Big(\frac{dR}{dr}\Big)^{2}+\Big(\frac{dz}{dr}\Big)^{2}\Bigg]dr^{2}+R^{2}d\phi^{2}.
\end{equation}
We require that the line element (4) should be to equal to the metric (2), therefore the following equation must be satisfied
\begin{equation}
g_{rr}=\Big(\frac{dR}{dr}\Big)^{2}+\Big(\frac{dz}{dr}\Big)^{2}, \qquad g_{\phi\phi}=R^{2}
\end{equation}
and so we constructed
\begin{equation}
\frac{dz}{dr} = \pm\sqrt{g_{rr} - \Big(\frac{dR}{dr}\Big)^{2}}.
\end{equation}
For the reason that above the expression is beyond compute by hand, we numerically calculate to find the slope that demonstrates the curvature of space-time geometry. Eq. (6) must be real number, thus so called embedded condition
\begin{equation}
g_{rr} > \Big(\frac{dR}{dr}\Big)^{2}
\end{equation}
must be satisfied.
\subsection{Non-Kerr Metric }
In the Boyer-Lindquist coordinates and in the geometric unit ($c=1, G=1$), the metric becomes \cite{R16,R20}
\begin{equation}
ds^{2} =
g_{tt}dt^{2}+g_{rr}dr^{2}+g_{\theta\theta}d\theta^{2}+g_{\phi\phi}d\phi^{2}+2g_{t\phi}dtd\phi,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq1}
\begin{split}
g_{tt} = -\Big(1-\frac{2Mr}{\rho^{2}}\Big)(1+h),
g_{t\phi} = -\frac{2aMr\sin^{2}\theta}{\rho^{2}}(1+h),\\
\\
g_{rr} = \frac{\rho(1+h)}{\triangle+a^{2}h\sin^{2}\theta}, \quad
g_{\theta\theta} = \rho^{2},\\
\\
g_{\phi\phi} =
\sin^{2}\theta\Bigg[\rho^{2}+\frac{a^2(\rho^{2}+2Mr)\sin^2\theta}{\rho^{2}}(1+h)\Bigg],
\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\rho^2 = r^2+a^2\cos^2\theta, \quad \triangle = r^2-2Mr+a^2, \quad h = \frac{\epsilon M^3
r}{\rho^4}.
\end{equation}
\\
The metric has the deformation parameter $\epsilon$ that represents the degree of variation that
the black hole is more prolate ($\epsilon$ $>$ 0) or oblate($\epsilon$ $<$ 0) than the
kerr black hole. Kerr metric is restored when $\epsilon$ is zero.\\
The event horizon of a black hole is described by \cite{R3}
\begin{equation}
\Delta+ a^2 h \sin^{2}\theta = 0.
\end{equation}
The radii of event horizons of non-Kerr black hole depend on $\theta$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{fig3.eps}
\caption{Four different phases in embedded diagrams of the non-Kerr BH in parameter space ($a, \epsilon$) ; (a) the phase of single event horizon (EH), (b) two EHs, (c) three EHs, and (d) no EH (naked singularity). EHs are noted by the small broken-lined circles. Spin $a=0.87$ for all plots. }
\label{fig.3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Non-Kerr Black Holes in Parameter Space}
\subsection{Comparison Kerr BH with non-Kerr BH}
We use $M=1$ from now on. We draw the embedded diagrams at constant time and equatorial plane ($\theta = \pi/2$). There are many interesting features in non-Kerr BH compared with Kerr BHs. Even the small value of deformation parameter $\epsilon$ makes notable difference in behaviors of BH. We can find the aspects in the embedded diagram in Fig. 1 and 2.
Kerr BHs has two event horizons (inner and outer event horizon) for $a<1$ and naked singularity for $a>1$.
In general, there are four different phases in embedded diagrams of the non-Kerr BH in parameter space ($a, \epsilon$); the phase of single event horizon (EH), two EHs, three EHs, and no EH(naked singularity)(see Fig 3). We will discuss these in detail in the section C.
The difference $\Delta r$ of inner event horizon $r_{-}$ and outer horizon $r_{+}$ is plotted in Fig. 4 ($\Delta r$ vs. $a$). In case of Kerr BHs, $\Delta r$ is propotional to $\sqrt{1-a^{2}}$. However, in case of non-Kerr BHs, it's dependence is deviated from that as shown in Fig. 4.
In case of Kerr BH, there is no naked singularity in $a < 1$. In case of non-Kerr BH, there are naked singularities for any value of $a$ . Following section, we will discuss about naked singularity of non-Kerr BH in detail.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig4.eps}
\caption{The difference $\Delta r$ of inner event horizon $r_{-}$ and outer horizon $r_{+}$ for Kerr BH and non-Kerr BH. In case of Kerr BHs (black thick line), $\Delta r$ is propotional to $\sqrt{1-a^{2}}$. However, in case of non-Kerr BHs, it's dependence is deviated from that as shown in figure.}
\label{fig.4}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig5.eps}
\caption{Four phases of EH of non-Kerr BHs; the phase of single EH, two (inner and outer) EHs, three EHs, and no EH (naked singularity). Four phases is displayed in the parameter space ($a, \epsilon$). The region of three EHs is very narrow and small ($0>\epsilon> -10^{-2}$) in values of parameter $\epsilon$.}
\label{fig.5}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Naked Singularity of non-Kerr BH}
In case of Kerr BH, the condition for the existence of the naked singularity is only $a>1$.
The condition for the existence of the naked singularity for non-Kerr BH is $\epsilon \geq 0$ \cite{R16,R19}. There is no naked singularity in negative $\epsilon$. There is no restriction of value of spin $a$ for having naked singularity. In Fig.5(a), for the region of naked singularity, one can see $a\rightarrow 1^{-}$ as $\epsilon \rightarrow 0^{+}$. Less prolate BH is, faster spin $a$ is \cite{R19}. But, in nature, the possibility of existence of BH with $a \simeq 1$ is not high because of its unphysically high angular momentum. Non-Kerr BHs with $a<1$ having naked singularity may be existed in nature. But, in case of $\epsilon > 0$, the BH is prolate one that also is unlikely created in nature because of its high centrifugal force. Thus, we conclude that, at least in case of non-Kerr BH, there is no possibility for existence of naked singularity BH. In this context, the assumption of the Weak Cosmic Censorship Conjecture (WCCC) could be satisfied.
In embedded diagram, the slope ($dz/dr$) of starting positions of naked singularity for Kerr or non-Kerr BHs are almost zero, i.e. ($dz/dr \simeq 0$) while the slope of BHs at the event horizons are infinity ($dz/dr = \infty$) at their starting points (see the Fig. 3).
\subsection{Event Horizons of non-Kerr BH}
The variety of non-Kerr BHs emerges in aspect of event horizon.
There are four phases for EHs of non-Kerr BHs; the phase of single EH, two (inner and outer) EHs, three EHs, and no EH (naked singularity. The four phases are described in Fig. 5.
In case of single EH, the non-Kerr BH acts like Schwarzschild BH.
In case of two EHs, the non-Kerr BH acts like Kerr BH.
In case of three EHs, an event horizon (EH) in addition to inner and outer horizons exists in special region of parameter space ($a$,$\epsilon$). The region is very narrow and small ($0>\epsilon> -10^{-2}$) in values of parameter $\epsilon$ shown in Fig. 5b.
The third EH is deep in the inner EH of the non-Kerr BH as shown in Fig. 6. We can see from Fig. 6 that EH points are located at $g_{rr} = \infty$ and there are three EHs. In this case, embedded diagram shows the slope of $dz/dr$ is always infinity at the point of EH.
But, for even small $|\epsilon|$ ($0>\epsilon> - 10^{-3}$), the third EH is not shown in the embedded diagram because the embedded condition Eq.(7) is not satisfied .
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig6.eps}
\caption{The third EH of deep in the BH. This figure is the case of Fig. 3(c). (b) shows the enlargement of inset of (a). We can see that EH points are located at $g_{rr} = \infty$ and there are three EHs (inner EH $r_{-}$, outer EH $r^{+}$ and third EH $r_{3}$). In this case, embedded diagram shows the slope of $dz/dr$ is infinity at the point of EH. }
\label{fig.6}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{CONCLUSIONS}
We have investigated event horizons(EHs) and naked singularities of non-Kerr BHs compared with Kerr BHs.
Kerr BHs have not naked singularities for $a<1$.
Non-Kerr BH have naked singularities for $a<1$ because of deformation parameter $\epsilon$.
However, naked singularity of non-Kerr BHs with $a<1$ and $\epsilon > 0$ may not be existed in nature because the BH with $\epsilon > 0$ is prolate one that is unlikely created in nature. Thus, in this context, the assumption of the Weak Cosmic Censorship Conjecture (WCCC) could be satisfied.
There are four phases for EHs of non-Kerr BHs; the phase of single EH, two (inner and outer) EHs, three EHs, and no EH (naked singularity).
In case of single EH, the non-Kerr BH acts like Schwarzschild BH.
In case of two EHs, the non-Kerr BH acts like Kerr BH.
In case of three EHs, an event horizon in addition to inner and outer horizons exists.
This third EH is new aspect of BH physics.
We have investigated only in case of $\theta = \pi/2$. The investigation for arbitrary $\theta$ might provide more variety of non-Kerr BH \cite{R19,R20}.
|
\section{Introduction}
Random sequential adsorption (RSA) is one of numerical protocols that allow to generate random packing of any objects~\cite{feder1980,evans1993}. It is based on the iteration of two simple steps:
\begin{description}
\item[-] a virtual particle is created. Its position and orientation within a packing is selected randomly.
\item[-] the virtual particle is tested for overlaps with any of the other particles in the packing. If no overlap is found, it is added to the packing and holds its position and orientation until the end of simulations. Otherwise, the virtual particle is removed from the packing and abandoned.
\end{description}
A random packing is saturated when there is no possibility to place another particle in it.
The name of RSA is related to irreversible adsorption processes where particles are randomly placed on a surface or interface \cite{dabrowski2001,adamczyk2012,kujda2016} -- one iteration of RSA algorithm corresponds to one adsorption attempt of a single particle. However, RSA applications are much wider including soft matter~\cite{torquato2010}, telecommunication~\cite{hastings2005}, information theory~\cite{coffman1998} and mathematics~\cite{zong2014}.
The main problem of RSA is its efficiency when packing is almost saturated. For such packings the probability of placing another particle is very small. Therefore, a large number of iterations is needed to add a particle and packing's growth becomes very slow. According to Feder's law, density of particles in an infinite packing changes with the number of adsorption attempts according to the following relation~\cite{pomeau1980,swendsen1981,hinrichsen1986,cadilhe2007}:
\begin{equation}
\rho(t) = \rho - A t^{-1/d}.
\label{eq:fl}
\end{equation}
Here, $\rho$~is the density of particles in a saturated packing, $\rho(t)$~is the density of particles in a packing after time $t$, $A$~is a positive constant and $d$ equals to packing dimension in case of spherically symmetric shapes (line segments in one dimension, disks in two dimensions, spheres in three dimensions, etc.).
The time $t$ equals to the number of attempts of adding a particle per unit length for one dimensional packings, area for two dimensional packings, volume for three dimensional packings, etc.
The relation (\ref{eq:fl}) was tested numerically to be valid for large enough, but finite packings~\cite{feder1980,torquato2006,ciesla2012,ciesla2013}. It is commonly used to estimate the number of particles at jamming, however it does not give any hints related to the number of RSA iterations needed to saturate a packing.
Recently, Zhang et al. have improved RSA algorithm, and showed that it is possible to generate saturated random packings of spherically symmetric particles in a reasonable simulation time \cite{zhang2013}. The algorithm is based on tracking the area where placing subsequent particles is possible. The idea comes from earlier works concerning RSA on discrete lattices~\cite{nord1991} and deposition of oriented squares on a continuous surface \cite{brosilow1991}. When particle is added to the packing this available area decreases. When it vanishes completely the packing is saturated. Because a single sampling of a particle centre from the available area of size $s$ is equivalent to $S/s$ samplings from the whole packing, this method makes it possible to determine number of RSA iterations in original protocol needed to saturate finite packing.
The aim of this paper is to analyse properties of this number as a random variable. In particular, it is interesting to investigate how it depends on packing size, since a recent study suggests that its median scales according to the power-law with an exponent equal to packing dimension \cite{ciesla2016}.
\section{Details of numerical simulations}
Saturated random packing were generated using method described in detail in~\cite{zhang2013}. Line segments, disks and spheres, were packed onto a large line segment, square, and cube, respectively. In all these cases, periodic boundary conditions were used. The size (length, area or volume depending on a packing dimension) of packings varied from $10^4$ to $4 \times 10^7$ and a single shape had a unit volume. For each particular set-up at least $100$ of independent packings were created. For each of the saturated packings, the value of $t$ was recorded at the moment when the last particle was added.
\section{Results and discussion}
\subsection{Distribution of simulation time}
Example of distributions of time needed to get saturated packings of line segments, disks, and spheres obtained from RSA simulations are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:histogram}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace{0.5in}
\centerline{%
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{histogram}
}
\caption{Histograms of RSA iterations per unit area needed to saturate $d$-dimensional packings.
Dots represent numerical data obtained from numerically generated $10^4$ packings of size $S=10^6$ for $d=1$ and $d=2$, and $S=10^5$ for $d=3$. Lines correspond to power fits: $2.23 \times 10^{15} \cdot t^{-2}$, $2.41 \times 10^{21} \cdot t^{-1.5}$ and $1.06 \times 10^{24} \cdot t^{-1.333}$ for $d=1$, $2$, and $3$, respectively.}
\label{fig:histogram}
\end{figure}
To study the time after which simulation ends lets focus on the probability of placing a particle in the packing, as the inverse of this probability is proportional to the expected number of iterations needed to find a large enough place for that particle. This probability has already been studied by Pomeau \cite{pomeau1980} and Swendsen \cite{swendsen1981}. For sufficiently long times, in a non-saturated packing, there are separate regions where subsequent particles can be placed (see Fig. \ref{fig:region})
\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace{0.5in}
\centerline{%
\includegraphics[width=0.4\columnwidth]{disks}
\hspace{0.05\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\columnwidth]{region}
}
\caption{Fragment of a non-saturated two-dimensional packing of disks with regions (the black triangle-like areas) where centres of subsequent disks can be placed. On the right the magnification of one such region. The diameter of red circles is twice as large as the diameter of red disks.}
\label{fig:region}
\end{figure}
Swendsen assumed that independently of packing dimension, the linear size of such regions is uniformly distributed \cite{swendsen1981}, which has been recently confirmed in numerical experiments for two dimensional random packings \cite{ciesla2016}. This assumption leads to the following distribution of regions sizes:
\begin{equation}
p_\mathrm{s}(x) = \frac{x^{-\frac{d - 1}{d}}}{d \, {s_{0}}^\frac{1}{d}}
\label{eq:ps}
\end{equation}
where $s$ is a random variable denoting the volume of a region, $s_0$ is the volume of the largest region, and
\begin{equation}
p_\mathrm{s}(x) \equiv \lim_{dx\to 0} \frac{Prob(x < s < x+dx)}{dx}
\end{equation}
To saturate a packing all such regions should be filled. Probability of placing a centre of a particle inside a region is proportional to its area. Because these regions are well separated, placing a subsequent disk in one region does not affect the probability of filling any other region. This means that, statistically, smaller regions will be filled later than larger ones; thus, the last region to be filled should be the smallest one. Therefore, the distribution of iterations needed to generate saturated packing is directly related to the distribution of the sizes of the smallest region. As the cumulative distribution function of region area size is
\begin{equation}
F_\mathrm{s}(x) \equiv Prob(s<x) = \int_0^x p_\mathrm{s}(t) dt = \left( \frac{x}{s_{0}} \right)^{\frac{1}{d}}.
\end{equation}
The probability that a random variable $s_\mathrm{min}$, being the minimum of $n$ independent random variables $s$ is smaller than a given value x is:
\begin{eqnarray}
Prob(s_\mathrm{min}<x) & = & 1 - \underbrace{Prob(s>x)\cdot Prob(s>x) \cdot \dots \cdot Prob(s>x)}_{n \,\,\mathrm{ times}} \nonumber \\
& = & 1 - \left[ 1 - Prob(s<x) \right]^n.
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, the cumulative distribution function of the $s_\mathrm{min}$, is equal to:
\begin{equation}
F_\mathrm{s_\mathrm{min}}(x) = 1 - \left[ 1 - F_\mathrm{s}(x) \right]^n = 1 - \left[ 1 - \left( \frac{x}{s_{0}} \right)^{\frac{1}{d}} \right]^n,
\label{eq:fsmin}
\end{equation}
and the probability distribution function of $s_\mathrm{min}$ is
\begin{equation}
p_\mathrm{s_\mathrm{min}}(x) = \frac{n}{d {s_0}^{\frac{1}{d}}} \, x^{\frac{1}{d}-1} \left[ 1 - \left(\frac{x}{s_0}\right)^\frac{1}{d}\right]^{n-1}.
\label{eq:psmin}
\end{equation}
Note that asymptotically for $x \ll s_0$, the expression in square brackets is practically equal to $1$, thus, $p_\mathrm{s_\mathrm{min}}(x) \sim x^{1/d - 1}$.
As noted previously, the number of iterations $t_\mathrm{max}$ needed to create saturated packing is inversely proportional to $s_\mathrm{min}$: $t_\mathrm{max} \sim 1 / s_\mathrm{min}$. Thus, taking into account the above relation, asymptotically
\begin{equation}
p_\mathrm{t_\mathrm{max}}(x) \sim x^{-1-\frac{1}{d}},
\label{eq:ptmax}
\end{equation}
which is in a quite good agreement with numerical experiments (see Fig.\ref{fig:histogram}).
\subsection{Median of simulation time}
To explain recently observed scaling of the median of $t_\mathrm{max}$ with packing size \cite{ciesla2016}, it is necessary to move back to Eq.(\ref{eq:fsmin}) and solve the equation $F_\mathrm{s_\mathrm{min}}(x) = 1/2$, which gives the median of $s_\mathrm{min}$.
\begin{equation}
M[s_\mathrm{min}] = s_0 \left[1 - \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{n}} \right]^d
\end{equation}
Again, as $t_\mathrm{max} \sim 1 / s_\mathrm{min}$, which is monotonic, then $M[t_\mathrm{max}] \sim 1 / M[s_\mathrm{min}]$, thus
\begin{equation}
M[t_\mathrm{max}] \sim \left[1 - \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{\frac{1}{n}} \right]^{-d}
\end{equation}
Number of regions $n$ that have to be filled scales linearly with packing size $S$. Moreover, the expression in square brackets may be expanded in the series $[1 - (1/2)^{1/n}] = \ln 2 / n - 1/2 (\ln 2 / n)^2 + o(1/n^2)$. Thus, asymptotically for large S (and small $1/n$):
\begin{equation}
M[t_\mathrm{max}] \sim \left[ \frac{\ln 2}{S} \right]^{-d} \sim S^d
\label{eq:Mtmax}
\end{equation}
Numerical confirmation of this result is shown in Fig.\ref{fig:median}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\vspace{0.5in}
\centerline{%
\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{median}
}
\caption{The dependence of the median of dimensionless time needed to obtain saturated packing on packing size for segments ($d=1$), disks ($d=2$), and spheres ($d=3$). Dots represent data obtained from numerical analysis of $10^2$ packings of size $S \in [10^4, 4 \times 10^8]$. Lines corresponds to fits: $0.474587 \cdot S$, $0.214991 \cdot S^2$ and $0.0320608 \cdot S^3$ for $d=1$, $2$, and $3$, respectively.}
\label{fig:median}
\end{figure}
It is rather obvious that generating larger packings needs more computational time. But, the plot also shows that RSA in higher dimensions may be extremely time consuming as the time needed to generate a packing of the same size grows with dimension, as well as it scales with packing size with higher exponent. Moreover, packing fraction decreases with the growth of packing dimension \cite{zhang2013,torquato2006}, which additionally spoils statistics in numerical simulations. Additionally, it is worth noting that Feder's law (\ref{eq:fl}) seems to be valid also for fractional packing's dimensions \cite{ciesla2012,ciesla2013}. As its derivation bases on the same assumption as made here, namely (\ref{eq:ps}), presented results should be valid also for fractional $d$'s. At last, the relation (\ref{eq:fl}) works also for anisotropic shapes \cite{viot1992,ciesla2016shapes}, with parameter $d$ denoting a number of degrees of freedom of adsorbed particle instead of packing dimension \cite{ciesla2013}. Therefore, the question arises if relations (\ref{eq:ptmax}) and (\ref{eq:Mtmax}) are valid for anisotropic particles. But to answer it, the algorithm that generates saturated random packing in reasonable computational time is needed.
\section{Conclusions}
The number of RSA iterations needed to generate finite saturated random packing of spherically symmetric objects seems to subject to Pareto distribution with an exponent $-(1+1/d)$ where $d$ is packing dimension. The median of this distribution scales with packing size according to the power-law characterized by exponent $d$. Obtained results can be used to optimize and control time complexity of RSA simulations. In particular, together with results described in \cite{ciesla2016}, they allow to design an RSA simulation that gives possibly the most accurate results within existing time limits.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
I would like to thank Grzegorz Paj\c{a}k for inspiring and fruitful discussions and Robert~M.~Ziff for comments on the paper. Part of numerical simulations was carried out with the support of the Interdisciplinary Centre for Mathematical and Computational Modeling (ICM) at University of Warsaw under grant no.\ G-27-8.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Deep neural networks trained with some version of Stochastic Gradient Descent have been shown to substantially outperform previous approaches on various supervised learning tasks in computer vision \citep{krizhevsky2012imagenet} and speech processing \citep{hinton2012deep}. But state-of-the-art deep neural networks often require many days of training. It is possible to speed-up the learning by computing gradients for different subsets of the training cases on different machines or splitting the neural network itself over many machines \citep{dean2012large}, but this can require a lot of communication and complex software. It also tends to lead to rapidly diminishing returns as the degree of parallelization increases. An orthogonal approach is to modify the computations performed in the forward pass of the neural net to make learning easier. Recently, batch normalization \citep{ioffe2015batch} has been proposed to reduce training time by including additional normalization stages in deep neural networks. The normalization standardizes each summed input using its mean and its standard deviation across the training data. Feedforward neural networks trained using batch normalization converge faster even with simple SGD. In addition to training time improvement, the stochasticity from the batch statistics serves as a regularizer during training.
Despite its simplicity, batch normalization requires running averages of the summed input statistics. In feed-forward networks with fixed depth, it is straightforward to store the statistics separately for each hidden layer. However, the summed inputs to the recurrent neurons in a recurrent neural network (RNN) often vary with the length of the sequence so applying batch normalization to RNNs appears to require different statistics for different time-steps. Furthermore, batch normalization cannot be applied to online learning tasks or to extremely large distributed models where the minibatches have to be small.
This paper introduces layer normalization, a simple normalization method to improve the training speed for various neural network models. Unlike batch normalization, the proposed method directly estimates the normalization statistics from the summed inputs to the neurons within a hidden layer so the normalization does not introduce any new dependencies between training cases. We show that layer normalization works well for RNNs and improves both the training time and the generalization performance of several existing RNN models.
\section{Background}
\label{sec:model}
A feed-forward neural network is a non-linear mapping from a input pattern ${\bold x}$ to an output vector $y$. Consider the $l^{th}$ hidden layer in a deep feed-forward, neural network, and let ${a}^l$ be the vector representation of the summed inputs to the neurons in that layer. The summed inputs are computed through a linear projection with the weight matrix ${W}^l$ and the bottom-up inputs ${h}^l$ given as follows:
\begin{equation}
{a}^l_i = {{w}^l_i}^\top {h}^l
\qquad
{h}^{l+1}_i = {f}({a}^l_i + {b}^l_i)
\end{equation}
where ${f}(\cdot)$ is an element-wise non-linear function and ${w}^l_i$ is the incoming weights to the $i^{th}$ hidden units and ${b}^l_i$ is the scalar bias parameter. The parameters in the neural network are learnt using gradient-based optimization algorithms with the gradients being computed by back-propagation.
One of the challenges of deep learning is that the gradients with respect to the weights in one layer are highly dependent on the outputs of the neurons in the previous layer especially if these outputs change in a highly correlated way.
Batch normalization \citep{ioffe2015batch} was proposed to reduce such undesirable ``covariate shift''. The method normalizes the summed inputs to each hidden unit over the training cases. Specifically, for the $i^{th}$ summed input in the $l^{th}$ layer, the batch normalization method rescales the summed inputs according to their variances under the distribution of the data
\begin{equation}
\bar{{a}}^l_i = {{g}^l_i\over\sigma^l_i}\left({a}^l_i - \mu^l_i \right)
\qquad
\mu^l_i = \mathop{\mathbb{E}}_{{\bold x} \sim P({\bold x})} \left[ {a}^l_i \right]
\qquad
\sigma^l_i = \sqrt{\mathop{\mathbb{E}}_{{\bold x} \sim P({\bold x})} \left[\left( {a}^l_i - \mu^l_i \right)^2\right]}
\label{eq:bn}
\end{equation}
where $\bar{{a}}^l_i$ is normalized summed inputs to the $i^{th}$ hidden unit in the $l^{th}$ layer and $g_i$ is a gain parameter scaling the normalized activation before the non-linear activation function. Note the expectation is under the whole training data distribution. It is typically impractical to compute the expectations in Eq. (2) exactly, since it would require forward passes through the whole training dataset with the current set of weights. Instead, $\mu$ and $\sigma$ are estimated using the empirical samples from the current mini-batch. This puts constraints on the size of a mini-batch and it is hard to apply to recurrent neural networks.
\section{Layer normalization}
We now consider the layer normalization method which is designed to overcome the drawbacks of batch normalization.
Notice that changes in the output of one layer will tend to cause highly correlated changes in the summed inputs to the next layer, especially with ReLU units whose outputs can change by a lot.
This suggests the ``covariate shift'' problem can be reduced by fixing the mean and the variance of the summed inputs within each layer. We, thus, compute the layer normalization statistics over all the hidden units in the same layer as follows:
\begin{equation}
\mu^l = \frac{1}{H}\sum_{i = 1}^H {a}^l_i
\qquad
\sigma^l = \sqrt{\frac{1}{H}\sum_{i = 1}^H \left( {a}^l_i - \mu^l \right)^2}
\label{eq:ln}
\end{equation}
where $H$ denotes the number of hidden units in a layer. The difference between Eq. (2) and Eq. (3) is that under layer normalization, all the hidden units in a layer share the same normalization terms $\mu$ and $\sigma$, but different training cases have different normalization terms.
Unlike batch normalization, layer normaliztion does not impose any constraint on the size of a mini-batch and it can be used in the pure online regime with batch size 1.
\subsection{Layer normalized recurrent neural networks}
The recent sequence to sequence models \citep{sutskever2014sequence} utilize compact recurrent neural networks to solve sequential prediction problems in natural language processing. It is common among the NLP tasks to have different sentence lengths for different training cases. This is easy to deal with in an RNN because the same weights are used at every time-step. But when we apply batch normalization to an RNN in the obvious way, we need to to compute and store separate statistics for each time step in a sequence. This is problematic if a test sequence is longer than any of the training sequences. Layer normalization does not have such problem because its normalization terms depend only on the summed inputs to a layer at the current time-step. It also has only one set of gain and bias parameters shared over all time-steps.
In a standard RNN, the summed inputs in the recurrent layer are computed from the current input ${\bold x}^t$ and previous vector of hidden states ${\bold h}^{t-1}$ which are computed as ${\bold a}^t = {W}_{hh} {h}^{t-1} + {W}_{xh} {\bold x}^t$. The layer normalized recurrent layer re-centers and re-scales its activations using the extra normalization terms similar to Eq. (3):
\begin{equation}
{\bold h}^t = {f}\left[{{\bold g}\over\sigma^t}\odot\left({\bold a}^t - \mu^t\right) + {\bold b} \right]
\qquad
\mu^t = \frac{1}{H}\sum_{i = 1}^H {a_i^t}
\qquad
\sigma^t = \sqrt{\frac{1}{H}\sum_{i = 1}^H \left( {a_i^t} - \mu^t \right)^2}
\end{equation}
where ${W}_{hh}$ is the recurrent hidden to hidden weights and ${W}_{xh}$ are the bottom up input to hidden weights. $\odot$ is the element-wise multiplication between two vectors. ${\bold b}$ and ${\bold g}$ are defined as the bias and gain parameters of the same dimension as ${\bold h}^t$.
In a standard RNN, there is a tendency for the average magnitude of the summed inputs to the recurrent units to either grow or shrink at every time-step, leading to exploding or vanishing gradients. In a layer normalized RNN, the normalization terms make it invariant to re-scaling all of the summed inputs to a layer, which results in much more stable hidden-to-hidden dynamics.
\section{Related work}
Batch normalization has been previously extended to recurrent neural networks \citep{laurent2015batch, amodei2015deep, cooijmans2016recurrent}. The previous work \citep{cooijmans2016recurrent} suggests the best performance of recurrent batch normalization is obtained by keeping independent normalization statistics for each time-step. The authors show that initializing the gain parameter in the recurrent batch normalization layer to 0.1 makes significant difference in the final performance of the model. Our work is also related to weight normalization \citep{salimans2016weight}. In weight normalization, instead of the variance, the L2 norm of the incoming weights is used to normalize the summed inputs to a neuron. Applying either weight normalization or batch normalization using expected statistics is equivalent to have a different parameterization of the original feed-forward neural network. Re-parameterization in the ReLU network was studied in the Path-normalized SGD \citep{neyshabur2015path}. Our proposed layer normalization method, however, is not a re-parameterization of the original neural network. The layer normalized model, thus, has different invariance properties than the other methods, that we will study in the following section.
\section{Analysis}
\label{sec:analysis}
In this section, we investigate the invariance properties of different normalization schemes.
\subsection{Invariance under weights and data transformations}
The proposed layer normalization is related to batch normalization and weight normalization. Although, their normalization scalars are computed differently, these methods can be summarized as normalizing the summed inputs $a_i$ to a neuron through the two scalars $\mu$ and $\sigma$. They also learn an adaptive bias $b$ and gain $g$ for each neuron after the normalization.
\bea
h_i = f({{g}_i\over\sigma_i}\left(a_i - \mu_i \right) + b_i)
\eea
Note that for layer normalization and batch normalization, $\mu$ and $\sigma$ is computed according to Eq. \ref{eq:bn} and \ref{eq:ln}. In weight normalization, $\mu$ is 0, and $\sigma = \|{w}\|_2$.
Table \ref{tab:inv} highlights the following invariance results for three normalization methods.
\begin{table}
\scriptsize
\centering
\vspace{-0.2in}
\begin{tabulary}{\linewidth}{L|C|C|C|C|C|C}
\hline
& {Weight matrix}& {Weight matrix} & {Weight vector} & {Dataset} & {Dataset} & {Single training case}\\
& {re-scaling} & {re-centering} & {re-scaling} & {re-scaling} & {re-centering} & {re-scaling}\\
\hline
\hline
Batch norm & Invariant & No & Invariant & Invariant & Invariant & No\\
Weight norm & Invariant & No & Invariant & No & No & No\\
Layer norm & Invariant & Invariant & No & Invariant & No & Invariant\\
\hline
\end{tabulary}
\caption{Invariance properties under the normalization methods. \vspace{-0.1in}}
\label{tab:inv}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{table}
{\textbf{Weight re-scaling and re-centering:}} First, observe that under batch normalization and weight normalization, any re-scaling to the incoming weights ${w}_i$ of a single neuron has no effect on the normalized summed inputs to a neuron. To be precise, under batch and weight normalization, if the weight vector is scaled by $\delta$, the two scalar $\mu$ and $\sigma$ will also be scaled by $\delta$. The normalized summed inputs stays the same before and after scaling. So the batch and weight normalization are invariant to the re-scaling of the weights. Layer normalization, on the other hand, is not invariant to the individual scaling of the single weight vectors. Instead, layer normalization is invariant to scaling of the entire weight matrix and invariant to a shift to all of the incoming weights in the weight matrix. Let there be two sets of model parameters $\theta$, $\theta'$ whose weight matrices $W$ and $W'$ differ by a scaling factor $\delta$ and all of the incoming weights in $W'$ are also shifted by a constant vector $\bm\gamma$, that is $W' = \delta W + {\bf 1}{\bm{\gamma}}^\top$. Under layer normalization, the two models effectively compute the same output:
\bea
{\bold h}' =& f({{\bold g}\over\sigma'}\left(W'{\bold x} - \mu' \right) + {\bold b}) = f({{\bold g}\over\sigma'}\left((\delta W + {\bf 1}{\bm{\gamma}}^\top){\bold x} - \mu' \right) + {\bold b}) \nonumber \\
=& f({{\bold g}\over\sigma}\left(W{\bold x} - \mu \right) + {\bold b}) = {\bold h}.
\eea
Notice that if normalization is only applied to the input before the weights, the model will not be invariant to re-scaling and re-centering of the weights.
{\textbf{Data re-scaling and re-centering:}} We can show that all the normalization methods are invariant to re-scaling the dataset by verifying that the summed inputs of neurons stays constant under the changes. Furthermore, layer normalization is invariant to re-scaling of individual training cases, because the normalization scalars $\mu$ and $\sigma$ in Eq. (3) only depend on the current input data. Let ${\bold x}'$ be a new data point obtained by re-scaling ${\bold x}$ by $\delta$. Then we have,
\bea
{h}_i' =& f({{g}_i\over\sigma'}\left(w_i^\top{\bold x}' - \mu' \right) + {b}_i)
= f({{g}_i\over{\delta\sigma}}\left(\delta w_i^\top{\bold x} - \delta\mu \right) + {b}_i) = {h}_i.
\eea
It is easy to see re-scaling individual data points does not change the model's prediction under layer normalization. Similar to the re-centering of the weight matrix in layer normalization, we can also show that batch normalization is invariant to re-centering of the dataset.
\subsection{Geometry of parameter space during learning}
We have investigated the invariance of the model's prediction under re-centering and re-scaling of the parameters. Learning, however, can behave very differently under different parameterizations, even though the models express the same underlying function. In this section, we analyze learning behavior through the geometry and the manifold of the parameter space. We show that the normalization scalar $\sigma$ can implicitly reduce learning rate and makes learning more stable.
\subsubsection{Riemannian metric}
The learnable parameters in a statistical model form a smooth manifold that consists of all possible input-output relations of the model. For models whose output is a probability distribution, a natural way to measure the separation of two points on this manifold is the Kullback-Leibler divergence between their model output distributions. Under the KL divergence metric, the parameter space is a Riemannian manifold.
The curvature of a Riemannian manifold is entirely captured by its Riemannian metric, whose quadratic form is denoted as $ds^2$. That is the infinitesimal distance in the tangent space at a point in the parameter space. Intuitively, it measures the changes in the model output from the parameter space along a tangent direction. The Riemannian metric under KL was previously studied \citep{amari1998natural} and was shown to be well approximated under second order Taylor expansion using the Fisher information matrix:
\bea
ds^2 &= \mathrm{D}_{\rm KL}\big[P(y \,|\, {\bold x};\ \theta)\| P(y \,|\, {\bold x} ;\ \theta+\delta)\big] \approx \frac{1}{2} \delta^\top {F}(\theta) \delta, \\
{F}(\theta) &= \mathop{\mathbb{E}}_{{\bold x} \sim P({\bold x}), y \sim P(y\,|\,{\bold x})}\left[{\partial \log P(y \,|\, {\bold x} ;\ \theta) \over \partial \theta}{\partial \log P(y \,|\, {\bold x} ;\ \theta) \over \partial \theta}^\top\right],
\eea
where, $\delta$ is a small change to the parameters. The Riemannian metric above presents a geometric view of parameter spaces. The following analysis of the Riemannian metric provides some insight into how normalization methods could help in training neural networks.
\subsubsection{The geometry of normalized generalized linear models}
We focus our geometric analysis on the generalized linear model. The results from the following analysis can be easily applied to understand deep neural networks with block-diagonal approximation to the Fisher information matrix, where each block corresponds to the parameters for a single neuron.
A generalized linear model (GLM) can be regarded as parameterizing an output distribution from the exponential family using a weight vector $w$ and bias scalar $b$. To be consistent with the previous sections, the log likelihood of the GLM can be written using the summed inputs $a$ as the following:
\bea
\log P(y \,|\, {\bold x} ;\ w, b) &= \frac{({a}+b) y - \eta({a}+b)}{\phi} + c(y, \phi),\\
\mathop{\mathbb{E}}[y \,|\, {\bold x}] = f({a} + b) &= f({w}^\top {\bold x} + b), \ \ \text{Var}[y \,|\, {\bold x}] = \phi f'({a} + b),
\eea
where, $f(\cdot)$ is the transfer function that is the analog of the non-linearity in neural networks, $f'(\cdot)$ is the derivative of the transfer function, $\eta(\cdot)$ is a real valued function and $c(\cdot)$ is the log partition function. $\phi$ is a constant that scales the output variance.
Assume a $H$-dimensional output vector ${\bold y} = [y_1, y_2, \cdots, y_H]$ is modeled using $H$ independent GLMs and $\log P({\bold y} \,|\, {\bold x} ;\ W, {\bold b}) = \sum_{i=1}^H \log P(y_i \,|\, {\bold x} ;\ w_i, b_i) $. Let $W$ be the weight matrix whose rows are the weight vectors of the individual GLMs, ${\bold b}$ denote the bias vector of length $H$ and $\vecop(\cdot)$ denote the Kronecker vector operator.
The Fisher information matrix for the multi-dimensional GLM with respect to its parameters $\theta=[{w}_1^\top, {b}_1,\cdots,{w}_H^\top, {b}_H]^\top = \vecop([W, {\bold b}]^\top)$ is simply the expected Kronecker product of the data features and the output covariance matrix:
\bea
{F}(\theta) &= \mathop{\mathbb{E}}_{{\bold x} \sim P({\bold x})}\left[\frac{\text{Cov}[{\bold y} \,|\, {\bold x}]}{\phi^2}\otimes\begin{bmatrix}{\bold x}\data^\top & {\bold x} \\ {\bold x}^\top & 1\end{bmatrix}\right].
\eea
We obtain normalized GLMs by applying the normalization methods to the summed inputs $a$ in the original model through $\mu$ and $\sigma$. Without loss of generality, we denote $\bar{{F}}$ as the Fisher information matrix under the normalized multi-dimensional GLM with the additional gain parameters $\theta=\vecop([W, {\bold b}, {\bold g}]^\top)$:
\bea
\bar{{F}}(\theta) = \begin{bmatrix}[1.5] \bar{{F}}_{11} & \cdots & \bar{{F}}_{1H} \\ \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\\bar{{F}}_{H1} &\cdots & \bar{{F}}_{HH} \end{bmatrix},
\quad
\bar{{F}}_{ij} &= \mathop{\mathbb{E}}_{{\bold x} \sim P({\bold x})}\left[\frac{\text{Cov}[y_i, \ y_j \ \,|\,{\bold x}]}{\phi^2}\begin{bmatrix}[1.5]\frac{{g}_i{g}_j}{\sigma_i\sigma_j}{\chi}_i{\chi}_j^\top & {\chi}_i\frac{{g}_i}{\sigma_i} & {\chi}_i\frac{{g}_i({a}_j-\mu_j)}{\sigma_i\sigma_j} \\ {\chi}_j^\top\frac{{g}_j}{\sigma_j} & 1 & \frac{{a}_j-\mu_j}{\sigma_j} \\{\chi}_j^\top\frac{{g}_j({a}_i-\mu_i)}{\sigma_i\sigma_j} &\frac{{a}_i-\mu_i}{\sigma_i} & \frac{({a}_i-\mu_i)({a}_j-\mu_j)}{\sigma_i\sigma_j}\end{bmatrix}\right] \label{eq:nfisher}\\
{\chi}_i &= {\bold x} - \frac{\partial{\mu_i}}{\partial{{w}_i}} - \frac{{a}_i-\mu_i}{\sigma_i}\frac{\partial{\sigma_i}}{\partial{{w}_i}}.
\eea
{\textbf{Implicit learning rate reduction through the growth of the weight vector:}}
Notice that, comparing to standard GLM, the block $\bar{{F}}_{ij}$ along the weight vector $w_i$ direction is scaled by the gain parameters and the normalization scalar $\sigma_i$. If the norm of the weight vector $w_i$ grows twice as large, even though the model's output remains the same, the Fisher information matrix will be different. The curvature along the $w_i$ direction will change by a factor of $\frac{1}{2}$ because the $\sigma_i$ will also be twice as large. As a result, for the same parameter update in the normalized model, the norm of the weight vector effectively controls the learning rate for the weight vector. During learning, it is harder to change the orientation of the weight vector with large norm. The normalization methods, therefore, have an implicit ``early stopping'' effect on the weight vectors and help to stabilize learning towards convergence.
{\textbf{Learning the magnitude of incoming weights:}}
In normalized models, the magnitude of the incoming weights is explicitly parameterized by the gain parameters. We compare how the model output changes between updating the gain parameters in the normalized GLM and updating the magnitude of the equivalent weights under original parameterization during learning. The direction along the gain parameters in $\bar{{F}}$ captures the geometry for the magnitude of the incoming weights. We show that Riemannian metric along the magnitude of the incoming weights for the standard GLM is scaled by the norm of its input, whereas learning the gain parameters for the batch normalized and layer normalized models depends only on the magnitude of the prediction error. Learning the magnitude of incoming weights in the normalized model is therefore, more robust to the scaling of the input and its parameters than in the standard model. See Appendix for detailed derivations. \cut{The magnitude of the weights are explicitly parameterized using the gain parameter in the normalized model. We project the gradient updates to the weight vector for the normal GLM.}
\cut{
\subsection{Regularization through sample statistics}
In additional to helping optimization, normalization techniques that use sample statistics also introduce regularization effects due to the sampling noise, as previously observed for batch normalization. We first analyze such regularization behavior and then show how it can be applied to other models.
Consider substituting the expectation in Eq. \ref{eq:bn} with the sample mean and the sample variance. We will use $\tilde{\ }$ to denote the terms computed from a mini-batch. Let $\tilde{a}_i^l$ denote the normalized summed inputs using sample statistics, whereas $\bar{a}_i^l$ is defined in Eq. \ref{eq:bn} using expectation. We can rewrite $\tilde{a}_i^l$ in terms of the normalized activation during inference $\bar{a}_i^l$ and the difference of the statistics:
\bea
\tilde{{a}}^l_i &= {{g}_i\over\tilde{\sigma}^l_i}\left({a}^l_i - \tilde{\mu}^l_i \right) \\
&= \left[\bar{a}^l_i + {{g}_i \over \sigma^l_i}(\mu_i^l - \tilde{\mu}_i^l)\right]{\sigma^l_i \over \tilde{\sigma}^l_i}
\eea
The sample activation $\tilde{{a}}^l_i$, therefore, can be approximated by two noise terms: additive noise from the sample mean and multiplicative noise from the sample standard deviation. Under mild conditions, such as when sample size is larger than 50, the sample variance can be well approximated using a Gaussian distribution, see \citep{box2005statistics}. Given large hidden layers in the neural networks, the summed inputs $a_i^l$ are almost Gaussianly distributed, so we can further simplify the approximation by sample mean and sample standard deviation to be independent Gaussian noise:
\bea
&\tilde{{a}}^l_i \approx \left[\bar{a}^l_i + {{g}_i}{\xi}_\mu\right]{1 \over \sqrt{|1 + {\xi}_\sigma|}} \label{eq:bn_gaussian}\\
&{\xi}_\mu, {\xi}_\sigma \sim \mathcal{N}\left(0, \frac{1}{N}\right)
\eea
where, ${N}$ is the sample size and is the size of the mini-batch in batch normalization. From Bishop \citep{bishop2006pattern}, training with independent noise is equivalent to Tikhonov regularization under the Taylor expansion. Intuitively, the stochastic noise regularizes the gain parameter by favoring smaller weights. Furthermore, the Gaussian approximation in Eq.(\ref{eq:bn_gaussian}) yields new insight to decouple the size of the mini-batch and the strength of the regularization, which is controlled by the hyper-parameter $N$. It also suggests a simple way to add regularization via noise method to layer normalization.
\section{Related work}
\label{sec:related}
}
\section{Experimental results}
\label{sec:exp}
We perform experiments with layer normalization on 6 tasks, with a focus on recurrent neural networks: image-sentence ranking, question-answering, contextual language modelling, generative modelling, handwriting sequence generation and MNIST classification. Unless otherwise noted, the default initialization of layer normalization is to set the adaptive gains to $1$ and the biases to $0$ in the experiments.
\subsection{Order embeddings of images and language}
\begin{figure}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\centering
\mbox{
\subfigure[Recall@1]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figures/r1i}
\subfigure[Recall@5]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figures/r5i}
\subfigure[Recall@10]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figures/r10i}}\quad
}
\caption{Recall@K curves using order-embeddings with and without layer normalization.
\vspace{-0.05in}
}
\label{fig:orderemb}
~\\[-.1in]
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\footnotesize
\centering
\begin{tabulary}{\linewidth}{L|CCCC|CCCC}
\hline
\multicolumn{9}{c}{\textbf{MSCOCO}} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{Caption Retrieval} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Image Retrieval} \\
\textbf{Model} & \textbf{R@1} & \textbf{R@5} & \textbf{R@10} & \textbf{Mean} \it{r} & \textbf{R@1} & \textbf{R@5} & \textbf{R@10} & \textbf{Mean} \it{r} \\
\hline
\hline
Sym \citep{vendrov2015order} & 45.4 & & 88.7 & 5.8 & 36.3 & & 85.8 & 9.0 \\
OE \citep{vendrov2015order} & 46.7 & & 88.9 & 5.7 & 37.9 & & 85.9 & 8.1 \\
OE (ours) & 46.6 & 79.3 & 89.1 & 5.2 & 37.8 & 73.6 & 85.7 & 7.9 \\
OE + LN & {\bf 48.5} & {\bf 80.6} & {\bf 89.8} & {\bf 5.1} & {\bf 38.9} & {\bf 74.3} & {\bf 86.3} & {\bf 7.6} \\
\hline
\end{tabulary}
\caption{Average results across 5 test splits for caption and image retrieval. \textbf{R@K} is Recall@K
(high is good). \textbf{Mean} {\it r} is the mean rank (low is good). Sym corresponds to the symmetric baseline while OE indicates order-embeddings.
\vspace{-0.15in}
}
\label{table:coco}
\end{table}
In this experiment, we apply layer normalization to the recently proposed order-embeddings model of \citet{vendrov2015order} for learning a joint embedding space of images and sentences. We follow the same experimental protocol as \citet{vendrov2015order} and modify their publicly available code to incorporate layer normalization \footnote{\url{https://github.com/ivendrov/order-embedding}} which utilizes Theano \citep{team2016theano}. Images and sentences from the Microsoft COCO dataset \citep{lin2014microsoft} are embedded into a common vector space, where a GRU \citep{cho2014learning} is used to encode sentences and the outputs of a pre-trained VGG ConvNet \citep{simonyan2014very} (10-crop) are used to encode images. The order-embedding model represents images and sentences as a 2-level partial ordering and replaces the cosine similarity scoring function used in \citet{kiros2014unifying} with an asymmetric one.
We trained two models: the baseline order-embedding model as well as the same model with layer normalization applied to the GRU. After every 300 iterations, we compute Recall@K (R@K) values on a held out validation set and save the model whenever R@K improves. The best performing models are then evaluated on 5 separate test sets, each containing 1000 images and 5000 captions, for which the mean results are reported. Both models use Adam \citep{adam} with the same initial hyperparameters and both models are trained using the same architectural choices as used in \citet{vendrov2015order}. We refer the reader to the appendix for a description of how layer normalization is applied to GRU.
Figure $\ref{fig:orderemb}$ illustrates the validation curves of the models, with and without layer normalization. We plot R@1, R@5 and R@10 for the image retrieval task. We observe that layer normalization offers a per-iteration speedup across all metrics and converges to its best validation model in 60\% of the time it takes the baseline model to do so. In Table $\ref{table:coco}$, the test set results are reported from which we observe that layer normalization also results in improved generalization over the original model. The results we report are state-of-the-art for RNN embedding models, with only the structure-preserving model of \citet{wang2015learning} reporting better results on this task. However, they evaluate under different conditions (1 test set instead of the mean over 5) and are thus not directly comparable.
\subsection{Teaching machines to read and comprehend}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\vspace{-0.3in}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{figures/dar}
\caption{Validation curves for the attentive reader model. BN results are taken from \citep{cooijmans2016recurrent}.
\vspace{-0.15in}
}
\label{fig:attread}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\end{figure}
In order to compare layer normalization to the recently proposed recurrent batch normalization \citep{cooijmans2016recurrent}, we train an unidirectional attentive reader model on the CNN corpus both introduced by \citet{hermann2015teaching}. This is a question-answering task where a query description about a passage must be answered by filling in a blank. The data is anonymized such that entities are given randomized tokens to prevent degenerate solutions, which are consistently permuted during training and evaluation. We follow the same experimental protocol as \citet{cooijmans2016recurrent} and modify their public code to incorporate layer normalization \footnote{\url{https://github.com/cooijmanstim/Attentive_reader/tree/bn}} which uses Theano \citep{team2016theano}. We obtained the pre-processed dataset used by \citet{cooijmans2016recurrent} which differs from the original experiments of \citet{hermann2015teaching} in that each passage is limited to 4 sentences. In \citet{cooijmans2016recurrent}, two variants of recurrent batch normalization are used: one where BN is only applied to the LSTM while the other applies BN everywhere throughout the model. In our experiment, we only apply layer normalization within the LSTM.
The results of this experiment are shown in Figure $\ref{fig:attread}$. We observe that layer normalization not only trains faster but converges to a better validation result over both the baseline and BN variants. In \citet{cooijmans2016recurrent}, it is argued that the scale parameter in BN must be carefully chosen and is set to 0.1 in their experiments. We experimented with layer normalization for both 1.0 and 0.1 scale initialization and found that the former model performed significantly better. This demonstrates that layer normalization is not sensitive to the initial scale in the same way that recurrent BN is. \footnote{We only produce results on the validation set, as in the case of \citet{cooijmans2016recurrent}}
\subsection{Skip-thought vectors}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\vspace{-0.5in}
\mbox{
\subfigure[SICK($r$)]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figures/sr}
\subfigure[SICK(MSE)]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figures/sre}
\subfigure[MR]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figures/mr}}\quad
}
~\\[-.15in]
\mbox{
\subfigure[CR]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figures/cr}
\subfigure[SUBJ]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figures/subj}
\subfigure[MPQA]{\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figures/mpqa}}\quad
}
\caption{Performance of skip-thought vectors with and without layer normalization on downstream tasks as a function of training iterations. The original lines are the reported results in \citep{kiros2015skip}. Plots with error use 10-fold cross validation. Best seen in color.}
\label{fig:skipthoughts}
\end{figure}
Skip-thoughts \citep{kiros2015skip} is a generalization of the skip-gram model \citep{mikolov2013efficient} for learning unsupervised distributed sentence representations. Given contiguous text, a sentence is encoded with a encoder RNN and decoder RNNs are used to predict the surrounding sentences. \citet{kiros2015skip} showed that this model could produce generic sentence representations that perform well on several tasks without being fine-tuned. However, training this model is time-consuming, requiring several days of training in order to produce meaningful results.
\begin{table}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccccccc}
\toprule \bf Method & \bf SICK($r$) & \bf SICK($\rho$) & {\bf SICK(}MSE{\bf)} & \bf MR & \bf CR & \bf SUBJ & \bf MPQA \\ \midrule
Original \citep{kiros2015skip} & 0.848 & 0.778 & 0.287 & 75.5 & 79.3 & 92.1 & 86.9 \\ \midrule
Ours & 0.842 & 0.767 & 0.298 & 77.3 & 81.8 & 92.6 & 87.9 \\
Ours + LN & 0.854 & 0.785 & 0.277 & {\bf 79.5} & 82.6 & 93.4 & 89.0 \\
Ours + LN $\dagger$ & {\bf 0.858} & {\bf 0.788} & {\bf 0.270} & 79.4 & {\bf 83.1} & {\bf 93.7} & {\bf 89.3} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
~\\[-.05in]
\caption{Skip-thoughts results. The first two evaluation columns indicate Pearson and Spearman correlation, the third is mean squared error and the remaining indicate classification accuracy. Higher is better for all evaluations except MSE. Our models were trained for 1M iterations with the exception of ($\dagger$) which was trained for 1 month (approximately 1.7M iterations)}
\label{tab:skipthoughts}
\end{table}
In this experiment we determine to what effect layer normalization can speed up training. Using the publicly available code of \citet{kiros2015skip} \footnote{\url{https://github.com/ryankiros/skip-thoughts}}, we train two models on the BookCorpus dataset \citep{zhu2015aligning}: one with and one without layer normalization. These experiments are performed with Theano \citep{team2016theano}. We adhere to the experimental setup used in \citet{kiros2015skip}, training a 2400-dimensional sentence encoder with the same hyperparameters. Given the size of the states used, it is conceivable layer normalization would produce slower per-iteration updates than without. However, we found that provided CNMeM \footnote{\url{https://github.com/NVIDIA/cnmem}} is used, there was no significant difference between the two models. We checkpoint both models after every 50,000 iterations and evaluate their performance on five tasks: semantic-relatedness (SICK) \citep{marelli2014semeval}, movie review sentiment (MR) \citep{pang2005seeing}, customer product reviews (CR) \citep{hu2004mining}, subjectivity/objectivity classification (SUBJ) \citep{pang2004sentimental} and opinion polarity (MPQA) \citep{wiebe2005annotating}. We plot the performance of both models for each checkpoint on all tasks to determine whether the performance rate can be improved with LN.
The experimental results are illustrated in Figure $~\ref{fig:skipthoughts}$. We observe that applying layer normalization results both in speedup over the baseline as well as better final results after 1M iterations are performed as shown in Table $~\ref{tab:skipthoughts}$. We also let the model with layer normalization train for a total of a month, resulting in further performance gains across all but one task. We note that the performance differences between the original reported results and ours are likely due to the fact that the publicly available code does not condition at each timestep of the decoder, where the original model does.
\subsection{Modeling binarized MNIST using DRAW}
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{5cm}
\vspace{-0.25in}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{figures/draw}
\caption{DRAW model test negative log likelihood with and without layer normalization.
\vspace{-0.15in}
}
\label{fig:draw}
\end{wrapfigure}
We also experimented with the generative modeling on the MNIST
dataset. Deep Recurrent Attention Writer (DRAW) \citep{draw} has
previously achieved the state-of-the-art performance on modeling the
distribution of MNIST digits. The model uses a differential attention
mechanism and a recurrent neural network to sequentially generate
pieces of an image. We evaluate the effect of layer normalization
on a DRAW model using 64 glimpses and 256 LSTM hidden units. The
model is trained with the default setting of Adam \citep{adam}
optimizer and the minibatch size of 128. Previous publications on
binarized MNIST have used various training protocols to generate
their datasets. In this experiment, we used the fixed binarization
from \citet{hugobmnist}. The dataset has been split into 50,000
training, 10,000 validation and 10,000 test images.
Figure \ref{fig:draw} shows the test variational bound for the first 100 epoch. It highlights the speedup benefit of applying layer normalization that the layer normalized DRAW converges
almost twice as fast than the baseline model. After 200 epoches, the baseline model converges
to a variational log likelihood of 82.36 nats on the test data and
the layer normalization model obtains 82.09 nats.
\subsection{Handwriting sequence generation}
\begin{figure}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{figures/seqgen_ex.pdf}
\caption{Handwriting sequence generation model negative log likelihood with and without layer normalization. The models are trained with mini-batch size of 8 and sequence length of 500,
\vspace{-0.15in}
}
\label{fig:seqgen}
\vspace{-0.05in}
\end{figure}
The previous experiments mostly examine RNNs on NLP tasks whose lengths are in the range of 10 to 40. To show the effectiveness of layer normalization on longer sequences, we performed handwriting generation tasks using the IAM Online Handwriting Database \citep{liwicki2005iam}. IAM-OnDB consists of handwritten lines collected from 221 different writers. When given the input character string, the goal is to predict a sequence of x and y pen co-ordinates of the corresponding handwriting line on the whiteboard. There are, in total, 12179 handwriting line sequences. The input string is typically more than 25 characters and the average handwriting line has a length around 700.
We used the same model architecture as in Section (5.2) of \citet{graves2013generating}. The model architecture consists of three hidden layers
of 400 LSTM cells, which produce 20 bivariate Gaussian mixture components at the output layer, and a size 3 input layer. The character sequence was encoded with one-hot vectors, and hence the window vectors were size 57. A mixture of 10 Gaussian functions was used for the window parameters, requiring a size 30 parameter vector. The total number of weights was increased to approximately 3.7M. The model is trained using mini-batches of size 8 and the Adam \citep{adam} optimizer.
The combination of small mini-batch size and very long sequences makes it important to have very stable hidden dynamics. Figure \ref{fig:seqgen} shows that layer normalization converges to a comparable log likelihood as the baseline model but is much faster.
\subsection{Permutation invariant MNIST}
In addition to RNNs, we investigated layer normalization in feed-forward networks. We show how layer normalization compares with batch normalization on the well-studied permutation invariant MNIST classification problem. From the previous analysis, layer normalization is invariant to input re-scaling which is desirable for the internal hidden layers. But this is unnecessary for the logit outputs where the prediction confidence is determined by the scale of the logits. We only apply layer normalization to the fully-connected hidden layers that excludes the last softmax layer.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{-0.6in}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{figures/mnist_ln2.pdf}
\caption{Permutation invariant MNIST 784-1000-1000-10 model negative log likelihood and test error with layer normalization and batch normalization. (Left) The models are trained with batch-size of 128. (Right) The models are trained with batch-size of 4.
\vspace{-0.15in}
}
\label{fig:mnist}
\vspace{-0.05in}
\end{figure}
All the models were trained using 55000 training data points and the Adam \citep{adam} optimizer. For the smaller batch-size, the variance term for batch normalization is computed using the unbiased estimator.
The experimental results from Figure \ref{fig:mnist} highlight that layer normalization is robust to the batch-sizes and exhibits a faster training convergence comparing to batch normalization that is applied to all layers.
\subsection{Convolutional Networks}
\label{sec:convnets}
We have also experimented with convolutional neural networks. In our preliminary experiments, we observed that layer normalization offers a speedup over the baseline model without normalization, but batch normalization outperforms the other methods. With fully connected layers, all the hidden units in a layer tend to make similar contributions to the final prediction and re-centering and re-scaling the summed inputs to a layer works well. However, the assumption of similar contributions is no longer true for convolutional neural networks. The large number of the hidden units whose receptive fields lie near the boundary of the image are rarely turned on and thus have very different statistics from the rest of the hidden units within the same layer. We think further research is needed to make layer normalization work well in ConvNets.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:discussion}
In this paper, we introduced layer normalization to speed-up the training of neural networks. We provided a theoretical analysis that compared the invariance properties of layer normalization with batch normalization and weight normalization. We showed that layer normalization is invariant to per training-case feature shifting and scaling.
Empirically, we showed that recurrent neural networks benefit the most from the proposed method especially for long sequences and small mini-batches.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\vspace{-0.1in}
This research was funded by grants from NSERC, CFI, and Google.
\pagebreak
\setlength{\bibsep}{5pt plus 0.3ex}
\begin{small}
\vspace{-0.1in}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{ho16b-sec1}
Galaxy emission-line spectroscopy has always been a powerful tool for the analysis of the dynamical, physical and chemical properties of galaxies. Traditionally, spectroscopy of galaxies has been obtained by dispersing the light either across a slit (sacrificing one spatial dimension) or from a fibre (producing a single integrated spectrum). Active development of modern integral field spectroscopy (IFS) has made capturing 3-dimensional structures of galaxies very efficient, revolutionising the way we observe and study galaxies.
The complex and perhaps stochastic nature of different physical processes governing galaxy evolution has inspired large galaxy surveys. In recent decades, large fibre and slit spectroscopic surveys such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep[SDSS;][]{York:2000qe}, the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey \citep[][]{Colless:1999kl}, and the Deep Extragalactic Evolutionary Probe 2 survey \citep[DEEP2;][]{Davis:2003lr} have drastically improved our understanding of the global (unresolved) properties of galaxy populations at different epochs of the Universe. Integral field spectroscopic surveys have recently become feasible, providing access simultaneously to both spectral and kinematic information of large numbers of galaxies. Two pioneering IFS surveys, the SAURON survey \citep{Bacon:2001rt} and its extension the $\mathrm{ATLAS^{3D}}$ survey \citep{Cappellari:2011ys}, studied about 260 early type galaxies in the local Universe ($z<0.01$). Surveys targeting both the blue and red galaxy populations, such as the Calar Alto Legacy Integral Field Area (CALIFA) survey \citep{Sanchez:2012fj}, the Sydney-Australian-astronomical-observatory Multi-object Integral-field spectrograph (SAMI) Galaxy Survey \citep{Croom:2012qy,Bryant:2015bh}, and the Mapping Nearby Galaxies at Apache Point Observatory survey \citep[MaNGA;][]{Bundy:2015kx}, are currently underway. These IFS surveys will provide critical information to bridge the knowledge gaps resulting from the limited spatial and kinematic information delivered by previous single-fibre and slit spectroscopic surveys.
The sample sizes and data flows of these modern IFS surveys are substantial. With each data cube containing typically one to two thousand spectra, the CALIFA survey plans to observe about 600 galaxies in the local Universe ($0.005<z<0.03$); the SAMI Galaxy Survey will reach a sample size of 3,400 galaxies at $z<0.12$; and the MaNGA survey will build up a sample of 10,000 galaxies at a similar redshift to the SAMI Galaxy Survey. Future surveys using high-multiplex integral field unit (IFU) instrument such as HECTOR on the Anglo-Australian Telescope will observe on the order of 100,000 galaxies \citep{Lawrence:2012fk,Bland-Hawthorn:2015dn}. Current and forthcoming wide-field IFU instruments are also delivering large quantity of high quality data, such as the Wide Field Spectrograph (WiFeS) on the Australian National University 2.3-m telescope \citep{Dopita:2007kx,Dopita:2010yq}, the new Multi Unit Spectroscopic Explorer (MUSE) on the Very Large Telescope \citep{Bacon:2010ph}, the SITELLE instrument on the Canada France Hawaii Telescope \citep{Grandmont:2012sp}, the Keck Cosmic Web Imager at the W. M. Keck Observatory \citep{Martin:2010th,Morrissey:2012ij}.
Significant efforts have been placed in developing corresponding tools for analysing large volume of spectroscopic data. The stellar continuum contains valuable information about the stellar kinematics, chemistry and star formation history of galaxies. Packages such as the STEllar Content via Maximum A Posteriori \citep[{\scshape stecmap};][]{Ocvirk:2006fj} package, the penalized pixel-fitting \citep[\ppxf;][]{Cappellari:2004uq} routine and the {\scshape starlight} package \citep{Cid-Fernandes:2005fk} can perform spectral template fitting and extract various stellar properties. For investigating gas physics, the emission lines fitting tools such as the Gas AND Absorption Line Fitting code \citep[{\scshape gandalf};][]{Sarzi:2006lr}, the {\scshape fit3d} package (\citealt{Sanchez:2006uq,Sanchez:2007qy}; and the successor {\scshape pipe3d}; \citealt{Sanchez:2016fk,Sanchez:2016lr}), and the Peak ANalysis utility \citep[{\scshape pan}\footnote{{\scshape pan} was subsequently adapted and modified by Mark Westmoquette for astronomical requirements. See \url{http://ifs.wikidot.com/pan}. };][]{dimeo2005} are commonly adopted to measure emission line fluxes and kinematics.
As the spectral resolution of the instruments continue to improve, the intrinsic non-Gaussian line profile complicates the emission line analysis. When the spectral resolution is high ($\rm R > 3000 $), galaxies with active gas dynamics, such as winds, outflows or AGN, usually present skewed line profiles that require fitting multiple, assumed Gaussian, components to separate the different kinematic components overlapping in the line-of-sight direction (also referred as ``spectral decomposition''). Performing spectral decomposition on large datasets is non-trivial as significant human input is usually required. Here, we present our emission line fitting pipeline LaZy-IFU\footnote{The framework of the \lzifu\ stems from {\scshape uhspecfit}, a tool developed at the University of Hawai\textquoteright i and employed in several previous spectroscopic studies on gas abundances and outflows \citep[e.g.,][]{Zahid:2011fj,Rupke:2010fk,Rich:2010yq,Rich:2012oq,Rupke:2011fk}.} (\lzifu; written in the Interactive Data Language [{\idl}]), which is designed to eliminate the need for individual treatment of each of many thousands of spectra across an IFS galaxy survey (such as CALIFA, SAMI or MaNGA).
The main objective of \lzifu\ is to extract 2-dimensional emission line flux maps and kinematic maps useful for investigating gas physics in galaxies. \lzifu\ has already been adopted in various publications using data from multiple instruments and surveys, including MUSE \citep[][]{Kreckel:2016zl}, SAMI \citep[e.g.][]{Ho:2014uq,Richards:2014lr,Allen:2015dk,Ho:2016rf}, CALIFA \citep{Davies:2014fy,Ho:2015hl}, WiFeS \citep{Ho:2015hl,Dopita:2015lq,Dopita:2015eu,Vogt:2015ec,Medling:2015eu}, and SPIRAL on the Anglo-Australian Telescope \citep{McElroy:2015ve}. The following characteristics were considered carefully while developing \lzifu. First, the pipeline must perform spectral decomposition automatically without needing repeated human instructions. Second, the pipeline needs to be scriptable for batch reduction, such that when necessary the same results can be reproduced by re-executing the same scripts. Third, the pipeline must be flexible and generalised so that data from most modern IFS instruments can be accepted without major restructuring of the inputs. Finally, the calculation speed must be optimised and the pipeline has to take advantage of parallel processing because of 1) the huge data flow from multiplexed IFS surveys, and 2) the possibility of fitting the same datasets multiple times for various experimental purposes.
The focus of this paper is to present the core structure of \lzifu\ (Section~\ref{ho16b-sec2}), and examine the errors produced by the pipeline (Section~\ref{ho16b-sec4}). We also show examples of applying \lzifu\ on the CALIFA survey and SAMI Galaxy survey (Section~\ref{ho16b-sec3}). Finally, the code will be continuously maintained and made available to the public through github (\url{https://github.com/hoiting/LZIFU/releases}). We discuss future plans for the code in Section~\ref{ho16b-sec5}.
\section{\lzifu: The spectral fitting toolkit}\label{ho16b-sec2}
\subsection{Overview}\label{ho16b-sec2.1}
To arrive at 2D maps of line fluxes, velocity and velocity dispersion, \lzifu\ first removes the continuum before modelling user-assigned emission line(s) on a spaxel-to-spaxel basis. If tailored continuum models already exist, users have the option of directly subtracting the continuum by feeding \lzifu\ the continuum models in Flexible Image Transport System (FITS) format. The subsequent emission line fitting follows the Levenberg-Marquardt least-square method to find the most probable models (with maximum likelihood) describing the emission line spectra. Each emission line can be modelled by up to 3 Gaussians describing (potentially) different kinematic components. The final products delivered by \lzifu\ are continuum cubes, emission line cubes, emission line flux (and corresponding error) maps, and kinematic (and corresponding error) maps stored in multi-extension FITS files.
For historical reasons, \lzifu\ was originally designed for two-sided IFS data with each object having one blue and one red data cube. The two data cubes can have different spectral resolutions, but are required to cover {\it non-overlapping} spectral ranges. Such an instrumental setup is common in instrument designs and large area IFS surveys because one can achieve a trade-off between spectral coverage and spectral resolution, given that the numbers of CCD pixels are always limited. To generalise the application of \lzifu, the pipeline was modified later to accept one-sided IFS data by disabling procedures related to the blue data. Below, we elaborate on the continuum fitting and emission line fitting procedures based on two-sided data.
\subsection{Continuum fitting}\label{ho16b-sec2.2}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{figures/fig1.pdf}
\caption{An example of \ppxf\ continuum fitting using data from the SAMI Galaxy Survey. Channels not included in the continuum fitting are masked by grey bands (i.e., bad pixels, cosmic rays, poorly-subtracted sky emission lines, and nebular emission lines). Continuum subtracted data (lower blue and red lines) are subsequently used to perform emission line fitting. }\label{ho16b-fig1}
\end{figure*}
When pre-determined continuum models are not provided by the users, \lzifu\ models the continuum using the penalised pixel-fitting routine \citep[\ppxf;][]{Cappellari:2004uq} that performs fits the underlying absorption continuum using a series of input spectral templates from stars or modeled simple stellar populations (SSPs) convolved with a parameterized velocity distribution. The \ppxf\ routine is wrapped in \lzifu\ as the default continuum fitting method. In our implementation, the data and spectral templates are first aligned and rectified to the same spectral characteristics (i.e. wavelength coverage, spectral resolution, and channel width) before fitting the continuum. A combined spectrum (of the blue and red data) is formed for each spaxel by convolving the data to a common spectral resolution, and resampling the data onto a common spectral grid. The data cube with poorer spectral resolution determines the spectral resolution and channel width of the combined spectrum. Various SSP templates collected from the literature are included in \lzifu\ as \idl\ .sav files, so the users can directly select the preferred library of SSP models. The selected SSP templates are redshifted, spectrally trimmed, and spectrally convolved to match the combined spectrum. To fit the underlying absorption-line spectrum, \ppxf\ compares linear combinations of the SSP models with the combined spectrum in a least-square sense, during which the stellar velocity dispersion, stellar velocity, and reddening are constrained simultaneously. Channels contaminated by night sky emission lines and nebular emission lines from the galaxy are masked out prior to the fitting. Poorly-subtracted sky emission lines, with other defect channels, can be masked by providing external masks that specify the wavelength intervals to ignore. Users are also required to specify the emission lines and the width around the emission lines that should be excluded from the continuum fit. Our custom implementation of \ppxf\ allows the users to control critical \ppxf\ keywords directly from a \lzifu\ setup file. Other hardwired functionalities of \ppxf\ can be adapted for different applications by modifying the \lzifu\ source code. After the best solution of spectral fitting is found, the continuum models are reconstructed separately for both sides of the data at their native resolutions. The advantage of this implementation is twofold: we utilise the largest possible spectral coverage to constrain the spectral fitting solution, and the reconstructed continuum models retain the original spectral resolution of the data.
\bigskip
Systematic errors in SSP models, residual calibration errors, and potential power law continuum from non-stellar components often cause spectral fitting routines to fail to achieve a perfect description of a spectrum, which would be characterised by a reduced-$\chi^2$ ($\chi_{\nu}^2$) of approximately 1. To account for these systematic errors and possible non-stellar contributions, a polynomial term can be implemented. In \ppxf, additive or multiplicative Legendre polynomials can be included and fit simultaneously with the spectral templates. These options are also maintained and passed on to \ppxf. In some situations, the users may wish not to fit polynomials simultaneously with the spectral templates to avoid the continuum fit becoming highly degenerate. In these cases, the continuum subtracted-spectra may not be flat, which can affect the subsequent line flux measurements. To further flatten the continuum-subtracted spectra, \lzifu\ provides an extra option of fitting Legendre polynomials separately to the continuum-subtracted blue and red spectra. Here, the least-square fitting is performed using the {\scshape bvls} (bounded-value least-square) algorithm developed by \citet{Lawson:1974vn} and implemented in \idl\ by Michele Cappellari.
The principal objective of the custom implementation of \ppxf\ is to correct for stellar absorption features affecting predominately the Balmer lines, and to remove the stellar continuum, such that gas physics can be derived from fitting emission lines to continuum-free spectra. The goal is not to constrain stellar parameters such as the stellar population, age and metallicity, which are known to be highly degenerate and require careful investigation of numerous local minima in the $\chi^2$ space \citep[e.g.,][]{Cid-Fernandes:2014qy}.
In Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig1}, we show an example of the continuum fit of one spectrum from the SAMI Galaxy Survey. The blue and red data have $1\sigma$ spectral resolutions of 1.15 and 0.72~\AA, respectively; and we use the SSP spectral libraries constructed by \citet{Gonzalez-Delgado:2005lr} with an additional Legendre polynomial of up to 12 order of Legendre polynomials to fit the continuum. Channels affected by bad pixels, cosmic rays, strong sky lines, or nebular emission lines are masked by grey bands, and are not considered in the continuum fit.
\subsection{Emission line fitting}\label{ho16b-sec2.3}
\begin{figure}[!hb]
\centering
\plotone{figures/fig2.pdf}
\caption{A schematic illustrating the definition of the two sets of parameters $(f_{A12}, \Delta v_{12}, \Delta\sigma_{12})$ and $(f_{A13}, \Delta v_{13}, \Delta\sigma_{13})$ controlling the initial guesses of the second {\it c2} (intermediate) and the third {\it c3} (broad) kinematic component relative to the first (narrow) kinematic component {\it c1}. }\label{ho16b-fig2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{figures/fig3.pdf}
\caption{Demonstration of the importance of using multiple initial guesses to reject local minima. The data (thick black lines; from \citealt{{Ho:2014uq}}) are fit with three different initial guesses to perform 3-component fitting to the {[\ion{N}{ii}]~$\lambda\lambda$6548,83} and H$\alpha$ lines. The three different initial guesses are shown in the upper right panel (see Section~\ref{ho16b-sec2.3.1}). The best-fits are shown in the other three panels, with the resulting reduced-$\chi^2$ ($\chi_{\nu}^2$) labeled in each panel. The first and the second initial guesses yield very similar fits and $\chi_{\nu}^2$, but the third initial guess arrives a very different solution with much worse $\chi_{\nu}^2$ (clearly visible from the residuals shown as thin black lines).
}\label{ho16b-fig3}
\end{figure*}
Emission lines are fit in the continuum subtracted spectra. The lines are assumed to be gaussian in shape and are fit as Gaussians using the Levenberg-Marquardt least-square method implemented in {\scshape idl} \citep[{\scshape mpfit};][]{Markwardt:2009lr}. Users have the option of fitting the emission lines using multiple Gaussian components, with this currently limited to a maximum of 3 components. All the lines are fit simultaneously with each kinematic component constrained to share the same velocity and velocity dispersion. When more than 1 component is fit, \lzifu\ sorts and groups the fitting results based on either velocity dispersions, velocities or line fluxes, and produces 2D maps of fluxes, velocity, and velocity dispersions separately for different components. Which reference value is adopted to group and sort the different components is determined by the users, and we encourage the users to consider carefully what sorting methods are best for their specific science goals. In the rest of the paper, we sort and group the components based on velocity dispersion. That is: the first component ({\it c1}) is the Gaussian fit with the narrowest velocity dispersion, and the second ({\it c2}) and third ({\it c3}) components have increasing velocity dispersions.
\subsubsection{Establishing initial guesses}\label{ho16b-sec2.3.1}
Establishing proper initial guesses for the model parameters is critical when using the Levenberg-Marquardt least-square algorithm, because the initial guesses serve as starting points for the algorithm to explore the {\it n}-dimensional $\chi^2$ space along its negative gradients.
In \lzifu, initial guesses are established automatically by means of an internal algorithm (for the first component {\it c1}) and several external parameters determined by the user (for the second {\it c2} and third {\it c3} components). The internal algorithm searches for peak S/N in the spectrum to determine the central wavelengths and amplitudes of the first kinematic components. The redshift of the galaxy input by the user allows \lzifu\ to estimate the rough locations of the emission lines. The locations are updated if sensible stellar velocity and velocity dispersion can be obtained from the stellar continuum fit. Channels around $\rm\pm300~km~s^{-1}$ from the fiducial location of each emission line are inspected, and the channel with the highest signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) determines the amplitude guess of the first Gaussian component. When fitting multiple emission lines, the line with the best S/N anchors the initial wavelength guess of the first Gaussian component. The width of the first Gaussian component is provided by the user. For the SAMI Galaxy Survey data we typically adopt a width of $\rm 50~km~s^{-1}$.
When fitting more than one component, how and where to place the second (and third) kinematic components are determined by a set of parameters specified by the user. We use three parameters $(f_A, \Delta v, \Delta\sigma)$ to describe the relationship between the second (or third) Gaussian component(s) and the first component. Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig2} illustrates the definitions of the parameters. The two sets of parameters $(f_{A12}, \Delta v_{12}, \Delta\sigma_{12})$ and $(f_{A13}, \Delta v_{13}, \Delta\sigma_{13})$ control the initial guesses of the second and third component, respectively. The combined profile (grey curve in Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig2}) is normalised to the peak value of the data before proceeding to solve the least-square problem.
Fitting multiple components can sometimes be sensitive to the choice of initial guesses, particularly when the S/N is poor or the spectrum is only marginally resolved. As a result, \lzifu\ allows multiple initial guesses to be generated by providing arrays of possible $f_A$, $\Delta v$ and $\Delta \sigma$ values. All possible combinations of initial guesses are solved for least-square solutions with {\scshape mpfit}, and the fit with the best minimum $\chi_{\nu}^2$ is kept as the final solution.
We demonstrate the importance of using multiple initial guesses to reject local minima in Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig3}. Different initial guesses are adopted to model the {[\ion{N}{ii}]~$\lambda\lambda$6548,83} and H$\alpha$ lines. The spectrum comes from a galaxy observed by the SAMI Galaxy Survey and presented in \citet{Ho:2014uq}. In the upper-left panel, three different initial guesses (color-coded lines) are generated. The second components are characterised by $f_{A12} = 1$, $\Delta\sigma_{12} = 60\rm~km~s^{-1}$, and $\Delta v_{12}$ with three possible values of $150$, $30$, and $ -150\rm~km~s^{-1}$. The initial guesses of the third component are all the same of $f_{A13} = 0.2$, $\Delta\sigma_{13} = 200\rm~km~s^{-1}$, and $\Delta v_{13} =\rm -10~km~s^{-1}$. The first component has an initial velocity dispersion of $50\rm~km~s^{-1}$. After applying the Levenberg-Marquardt least-square algorithm, the first and second initial guesses arrive at solutions virtually indistinguishable with very similar $\chi_{\nu}^2$ of 1.51 and 1.52, respectively. The third initial guess, however, arrives at a very different solution with much higher $\chi_{\nu}^2$ of 3.28. A careful visual inspection of neighbouring spaxels reveals that there are indeed three separate kinematic components in this galaxy, but as the first and second kinematic components are spectrally close to each other in this spaxel, fitting the two narrow peaks with a single Gaussian yields a local minimum (the bottom right panel). This local minimum can be rejected by fitting with different initial guesses.
Our implementation of multiple initial guesses has several advantages. Empirical understanding of the physical characteristics of the second and third components can be incorporated directly into guiding the fits by providing proper sets of parameters ($f_A$, $\Delta v$ and $\Delta \sigma$). In principle, the {\it n-}dimensional $\chi^2$ space will be explored thoroughly if a chain of initial guesses is carefully chosen. Our algorithm trades computational expense against sensitivity to local minima. This makes the analysis of extended data sets tractable.
\subsubsection{Optional refit with smoothed initial guesses}\label{ho16b-sec2.3.2}
Optional refits are possible after fitting the data with the default initial guesses. In the refitting process, results from the
first-pass fit to the full data cube are spatially median-smoothed to produce initial guesses to refit the data. The refitting process can be repeated multiple times.
The reasoning behind the refitting process is that flux, velocity and velocity dispersion usually vary smoothly across the spatial dimensions, a direct result of the intrinsic properties of galaxies and the finite spatial resolution of the data. Therefore, the best fits of neighbouring spaxels contain information useful for establishing a proper initial guess. Our experience shows that the refitting process is useful for rejecting some bad results caused by ill-chosen initial guesses in the previous fits, and those poor fits triggered by the presence of local defects in the spectra (poor sky-line subtraction, uncleaned cosmic ray residuals, etc.) which force the initial guess solution into a local minima of limited relevance.
\subsection{Output}
The final products delivered by \lzifu\ are stored in multi-extension FITS files. For a more detailed description of the output data structure, the readers are directed to the readme file included in the code release package. In brief, \lzifu\ generates 3-dimensional model cubes and 2-dimensional maps from the fitting. The model cubes include both the continuum models and emission line models. All the model cubes have the same spatial and spectral dimensions as the input data cubes. These model cubes are not only useful for visualising the fits, but also for removing emission lines or continuum from the data cubes (i.e. for generating line-free or continuum-free data cubes). Emission line fluxes, velocities, and velocity dispersions (and corresponding errors) are stored in 2-dimensional maps. These 2-dimensional maps have the same spatial dimensions as the input data cubes. These maps are most useful for subsequent scientific analysis, e.g. converting line fluxes to star formation rates or extinction, producing emission line ratio maps, fitting disk models to the velocity field, etc.
\section{Applications on Survey Data}\label{ho16b-sec3}
We present three examples of flux and kinematic maps generated by \lzifu\ using public data from the CALIFA survey and the SAMI Galaxy Survey. The examples are chosen to demonstrate the use of \lzifu\ in different types of data and galaxies. The simple single component analysis is useful for dynamically stable systems or when the spectral resolution is insufficient to resolve the kinematic structures. The more complicated double and triple component analyses are required when the line profiles are skewed due to either complex gas kinematics or beam smearing.
Although the examples below make use of CALIFA and SAMI data, \lzifu\ is not limited to these two surveys and can be adopted for any IFS data with similar characteristics, i.e. spectral coverage and resolution. Indeed, \lzifu\ has already been applied to data from multiple IFU instruments for various science cases related to gas physics. Data from the WiFeS instrument on the Australian National University 2.3-m telescope have been tested extensively with \lzifu\ \citep{Ho:2015hl,Dopita:2015lq,Dopita:2015eu,Vogt:2015ec,Medling:2015eu}. Recently, \lzifu\ has also been adopted to analyse data from MUSE (\citealt{Kreckel:2016zl}; Juneau et al. in preparation) and SPIRAL on the Anglo-Australian Telescope \citep{McElroy:2015ve}. The reader is referred to corresponding publications for more examples.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{figures/fig4.pdf}
\caption{Demonstration of applying a 1-component fit to NGC0776 using the first data release of the CALIFA survey. The SDSS {\it g,r,i} composite image, \lzifu\ H$\alpha$ and gas velocity images are shown left to right in the top row. The spectra and corresponding best-fit (continuum + line) models of the two example spaxels marked in the H$\alpha$ map are shown in the bottom two panels. We use the V1200 data (blue lines) at wavelengths smaller than 4500\AA\ and the V500 data (red lines) at wavelengths larger than 4500\AA. }\label{ho16b-fig4}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Simple single component analysis}\label{ho16b-sec3.1}
We demonstrate 1-component fitting using data from the CALIFA survey \citep[i.e., the first data release; ][]{Husemann:2013yq}. Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig4} shows the NGC0776 SDSS {\it g,r,i} colour composite image, H$\alpha$ map, gas velocity map, and two example spectra from the integral field data. Here, we adopt the MIUSCAT SSP libraries \citep{Vazdekis:2012yq} of solar metallicity to model the continuum. After subtracting the continuum, the line profiles appear to be simple across the entire galaxy and therefore only single component Gaussians are required to model the emission lines. The emission line maps and kinematic maps delivered by \lzifu\ are directly ready for various studies such as gas dynamics and chemical abundance.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\plotone{figures/fig5.pdf}
\caption{Demonstration of multiple component fitting for a galaxy from the early data release of the SAMI Galaxy Survey (\citealt{Allen:2015lq}; GAMA ID: 594906). The SDSS {\it g,r,i} image in the upper left panel shows the circular field of view of the SAMI instrument (red circle; 15\arcsec\ in diameter). The H$\alpha$ flux and gas velocity maps of the first (narrowest component) {\it c1} and the second component {\it c2} are shown in the middle and right panels. The sum of H$\alpha$ for all components is shown in the bottom left panel (total H$\alpha$). Very few spaxels in this galaxy require the third component so the corresponding maps are not shown. The fits of the three spaxels marked in the total H$\alpha$ map are shown in Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig6}. }\label{ho16b-fig5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\plotone{figures/fig6.pdf}
\caption{Examples of the {[\ion{N}{ii}]~$\lambda\lambda$6548,83} + H$\alpha$ (left column) and {[\ion{S}{ii}]~$\lambda\lambda$6716,31} (right column) fits of the three spaxels marked in Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig5} (in lower left `total H$\alpha$' panel). The continuum-subtracted data and best-fit models are shown as solid lines. In the lower plot of each panel, we show the residuals as black lines, and the $\pm1\sigma$ measurement errors as grey shading. }\label{ho16b-fig6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\plotone{figures/fig7.pdf}
\caption{Demonstration of multiple component fitting for a normal star-forming galaxy presented in \citet[GAMA ID: 209807]{Ho:2014uq}. The SDSS {\it g,r,i} image in the upper left panel shows the circular field of view of the SAMI instrument (red circle; 15\arcsec\ in diameter). The H$\alpha$ flux and gas velocity maps of the first (narrowest component) {\it c1}, the second component {\it c2}, and the third component {\it c3} are shown in the middle and right panels. The sum of H$\alpha$ for all components is shown in the middle left panel (total H$\alpha$). The fits of the three spaxels marked in the total H$\alpha$ map are shown in Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig6}.}\label{ho16b-fig7}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\plotone{figures/fig8.pdf}
\caption{Examples of the {[\ion{N}{ii}]~$\lambda\lambda$6548,83} + H$\alpha$ (left column) and {[\ion{S}{ii}]~$\lambda\lambda$6716,31} (right column) fits of the three spaxels marked in Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig7} (in middle left `total H$\alpha$' panel). The continuum-subtracted data and best-fit models are shown as solid lines. In the lower plot of each panel, we show the residuals as black lines, and the $\pm1\sigma$ measurement errors as grey shading. }\label{ho16b-fig8}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Double component fitting and beam smearing}\label{ho16b-sec3.2}
Multiple-component fitting is sometimes required when the spectral resolution is high enough to resolve the intrinsic line profiles. Fitting multiple Gaussian components to an emission line can more accurately constrain its total flux (than fitting a single component Gaussian), and shed light on the possible complex dynamics of the gas traced by the emission line. The number of components required to properly describe the line profile depends on the spectral resolution of the instrument, the signal-to-noise of the data, and the gas dynamics. Typically, one performs 1, 2, and 3-component fitting on every spaxel, and uses both statistical and empirical tests to determine a posteriori the most appropriate numbers of components required to describe the data. The number of components required frequently changes from spaxel to spaxel within a single galaxy.
In Figures~\ref{ho16b-fig5} and \ref{ho16b-fig6}, we show an example of spectral decomposition using data from the early data release of the SAMI Galaxy Survey \citep{Allen:2015lq}. After subtracting the continuum, the galaxy (GAMA ID: 594906) presents skewed line profiles changing with position in the galaxy (Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig6}). We perform 1, 2, and 3-component fitting, and determine the number of components required based on the likelihood ratio test and empirical constraints described in detail in Appendix~\ref{ho16b-appendix}. We show flux and velocity maps of the first and second components in Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig5}. Only a few spaxels require fitting the third component so we do not show the corresponding maps. In Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig5}, the first component presents a regular rotation pattern tracing the galactic disk. The second component shows a velocity gradient in the same sense as the first component. Both components have similar emission line ratios. We believe that the skewed line profiles are a direct result of beam smearing, which is known to induce non-Gaussian line profiles particularly at the centre of the galaxy where the velocity gradient is steep \citep[e.g.,][]{Green:2014ys}. Such non-Gaussian line profiles will not present in high spatial resolution or low spectral resolution observations.
\subsection{Triple component fitting and kinematics}\label{ho16b-sec3.3}
In more complex, dynamically active systems such as galaxies hosting galactic winds, AGNs, or mergers, more components are required to capture the activities of the gas. We present an example of multiple-component fitting by \citet{Ho:2014uq} using data from the SAMI Galaxy Survey. As in GAMA~594906, \citet{Ho:2014uq} performed 1, 2, and 3-component fitting, and determined the number of components required based on the likelihood ratio test. The normal star-forming galaxy (GAMA ID: 209807) analysed by \citet{Ho:2014uq} hosts large scale galactic winds. Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig7} shows the H$\alpha$ maps and velocity maps of the three different kinematic components, and Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig8} shows some example spectra requiring different numbers of components. Similarly, the velocity field of the first component shows a regular rotation pattern tracing the galactic disk. \citet{Ho:2014uq} showed that the first component has line ratio consistent with photoionisation originating from star forming regions on the disk. The third component has line ratios consistent with pure shock excitation, indicating the presence of fast winds driven by a central starburst. The second kinematic component is excited by both photoionisation and shock excitation. The clear velocity gradient of the third component nearly aligned with the minor axis of the galaxy (bottom-right and top-left panel of Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig7}) traces the large scale, bipolar galactic winds in the galaxy.
\section{Error Analysis with Monte Carlo Simulations}\label{ho16b-sec4}
\lzifu\ reports 1$\sigma$ errors of the measured fluxes, velocities and velocity dispersions of the emission lines calculated with the Levenberg-Marquardt least-square method from {\scshape mpfit}. To investigate the reliability of these quantities, we perform simple Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. In these simulations, we create different MC realisations (i.e. mock data cubes) by injecting Gaussian noise into model cubes based on the variance of the data. For each test galaxy (selected from the SAMI Galaxy Survey), 500 sets of mock data cubes are generated, and the mock data cubes are each fit with \lzifu. Each fit yields measurements of flux, velocity, and velocity dispersion maps and their corresponding error maps. To quantify the reliability of \lzifu\ errors, we compare the $1\sigma$ spread of the 500 measurements to the median of their errors.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{figures/fig9.pdf}
\caption{Comparison between errors reported by \lzifu\ ($\sigma_{LZ}$) and errors derived from Monte Carlo simulations ($\sigma_{MC}$). The simulations are performed using 1-component fitting assuming the data have no continuum. Details about the simulations are provided in Section~\ref{ho16b-sec4.1}. Different color points correspond to three different galaxies selected from the SAMI Galaxy Survey, with their GAMA IDs shown in the legend. The fractional differences between $\sigma_{LZ}$ and $\sigma_{MC}$ are $2\pm4\%$, $1\pm3\%$, $3\pm6\%$, and $4\pm6\%$ (median $\pm$ standard deviation) for H$\alpha$, {[\ion{O}{iii}]~$\lambda$5007}, velocity and velocity dispersion, respectively. }\label{ho16b-fig9}
\end{figure*}
Two types of simulations are performed. Firstly, we inject noise into the best-fit emission line models to test only the emission line fitting codes. The mock data cubes are continuum-free so no continuum subtraction is performed. Secondly, we inject noise into cubes of emission models plus continuum models. The purpose of this test is to explore errors caused by modelling and subtracting the continuum. The goal of these simulations is to study whether \lzifu\ can faithfully propagate the random errors in mock data cubes to the final measured quantities.
\subsection{Line-fitting simulations}\label{ho16b-sec4.1}
In Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig9}, we compare the errors derived from MC simulations ($\sigma_{MC}$) to the errors reported by \lzifu\ ($\sigma_{LZ}$). In these MC simulations, we fit 1-component models to three SAMI galaxies, and we derive $\sigma_{MC}$ using resistant estimates of the dispersions of the distributions (using the {\scshape robust\_sigma} routine in \idl). For $\sigma_{LZ}$, we take the median errors of the 500 MC simulations. We do not include the error in the median calculation when the S/N of velocity dispersion is less than 3. In Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig9}, we show spaxels with H$\alpha$ flux S/N $>$ 3 in the H$\alpha$, velocity and velocity dispersion panels, and spaxels with {[\ion{O}{iii}]~$\lambda$5007} flux S/N $>$ 3 in the {[\ion{O}{iii}]~$\lambda$5007} panel. Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig9} demonstrates that the flux, velocity and velocity dispersion errors reported by \lzifu\ agree well with the errors derived from our MC simulations. Typically, the differences between $\sigma_{LZ}$ and $\sigma_{MC}$ are consistent with zero (i.e., median $\pm$ standard deviation of $2\pm4\%$, $1\pm3\%$, $3\pm6\%$, and $4\pm6\%$ for H$\alpha$, {[\ion{O}{iii}]~$\lambda$5007}, velocity and velocity dispersion, respectively). The results of this test indicate that the line-fitting codes faithfully propagate errors in the data cubes to the final measurement errors.
In Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig10}, similar comparisons are conducted for a 2-component fit using the SAMI wind galaxy studied by \citet{Ho:2014uq}. Only spaxels requiring 2-component fits determined by the authors are considered. We find that the flux, velocity and velocity dispersion errors reported by \lzifu\ are good representations of the true errors derived from MC simulations. On average, the differences between $\sigma_{LZ}$ and $\sigma_{MC}$ for H$\alpha$, {[\ion{O}{iii}]~$\lambda$5007}, velocity, and velocity dispersion are $13\pm13\%$, $2\pm9\%$, $9\pm12\%$, and $17\pm11\%$ (median $\pm$ standard deviation), respectively. The differences are larger than those in the 1-component cases with \lzifu\ typically underestimating the errors by 10\% to 20\%.
The differences between $\sigma_{MC}$ and $\sigma_{LZ}$ arise from the assumptions involved in deriving errors of the fit parameters using the least-square technique. The Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm approximates the $\chi^2$ surface at minimum by an {\it n-}dimensional quadratic function (see e.g. \citealt{Bevington:1992uq}). This approximation is a result of the Taylor expansion at the minimum $\chi^2$ where the first order term is zero; the second order term then becomes important for evaluating the increase in $\chi^2$. With this assumption, fast computation of the errors of the fit parameters becomes possible because only the second derivative of the $\chi^2$ surface at its minimum is required. The second derivative is directly linked to the Jacobian of the model, which is trivial to calculate. While the approximation works well in linear models, the non-linearity of our Gaussian line model can cause the assumption to break down. For example, the Jacobian matrix of velocity dispersion approaches zero at zero velocity dispersion, implying that the $\chi^2$ surface approaches a flat surface and the 1$\sigma$ error of velocity dispersion is infinity. When a Jacobian approaches zero, higher ($>$ third) order Taylor terms become important. Unfortunately, higher order terms are non-trivial to calculate. Exploring the $\chi^2$ space by random walk using techniques such as the MCMC method should be adopted if precise estimates of errors (i.e. better than $\sim10\%$) are required. The Levenberg-Marquardt technique adopted here provides errors accurate to a few tens percent level in a computationally-economical way.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{figures/fig10.pdf}
\caption{Comparison between errors reported by \lzifu\ ($\sigma_{LZ}$) and errors derived from Monte Carlo simulations ($\sigma_{MC}$). The simulations are performed on spaxels in \citet{Ho:2014uq} that require 2-component fitting. There is no continuum in the simulations. Details are provided in Section~\ref{ho16b-sec4.1}. On average, the fractional differences between $\sigma_{LZ}$ and $\sigma_{MC}$ for H$\alpha$, {[\ion{O}{iii}]~$\lambda$5007}, velocity, and velocity dispersion are $13\pm13\%$, $2\pm9\%$, $9\pm12\%$, and $17\pm11\%$ (median $\pm$ standard deviation), respectively.}\label{ho16b-fig10}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Continuum- and line-fitting simulations}\label{ho16b-sec4.2}
While the line-fitting algorithm can robustly estimate the flux, velocity, and velocity dispersion errors, these errors do not contain errors of modelling (and subtracting) the continuum. To investigate the impact of modelling continuum on the measured emission line fluxes, we perform MC simulations by injecting noise into the best-fit models that comprise both continuum and emission line models. We first fit the real data from three SAMI galaxies to obtain their best-fit continuum and line models. For the \ppxf\ continuum fit, we adopt the theoretical SSP libraries from \citet{Gonzalez-Delgado:2005lr}. After noise is injected into the models to produce mock data cubes, the same stellar libraries are used to fit the realisations.
In the top row of Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig11}, we compare the errors of the line fluxes as in the line-fitting simulations. The fractional differences between $\sigma_{MC}$ and $\sigma_{LZ}$ are $7\pm4\%, 6\pm4\%,$ and $2\pm3\%$ (median $\pm$ standard deviation) for H$\alpha$, H$\beta$ and {[\ion{O}{iii}]~$\lambda$5007}, respectively. Comparing these results with those performed without considering the continuum (see Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig9}), the fractional difference of errors for {[\ion{O}{iii}]~$\lambda$5007} is comparable to the line-fitting simulations, but those for H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$ (i.e., Balmer lines) are about a factor of 2 -- 3 larger.
The fundamental reason behind this discrepancy is that the errors in the best-fit continuum models are unknown, so the errors are not propagated to the continuum-subtracted spectrum. Essentially, the best-fit continuum models are assumed to be noise-free. While this assumption could be true for some emission lines, those lines at similar wavelengths to strong stellar absorption features can be affected by the continuum errors. As equivalent widths of Balmer lines are strong functions of stellar age (and weakly dependent on metallicity), when a different set of solutions (age and metallicity) is derived from the SSP fit to each realisation, different Balmer corrections (for absorption of Balmer lines from stellar atmosphere) to the emission-line result in different Balmer emission-line fluxes.
To confirm the role that stellar Balmer correction plays in the line flux errors, we compare the fractional differences between $\sigma_{MC}$ and $\sigma_{LZ}$ to the importance of errors in the Balmer correction relative to the line flux errors (i.e. $\sigma_{BC}/\sigma_{LZ}$) as shown in the bottom row of Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig11}. Here, we define $\sigma_{BC}$ as the standard deviation of the Balmer corrections in the 500 MC simulations. The Balmer corrections are calculated over the on-line/off-line windows defined in \citet{Gonzalez-Delgado:2005lr}. When $\sigma_{BC}/\sigma_{LZ}$ is large, the differences of Balmer correction in different realisations are substantial compared to the nominal flux errors ($\sigma_{LZ}$) so one would expect that the nominal flux errors ($\sigma_{LZ}$) underestimate the real errors ($\sigma_{MC}$). We observe this behaviour in the bottom row of Figure~\ref{ho16b-fig11}. Both H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$ show positive correlations between the fractional differences in errors (y-axis) and the importance of Balmer correction (x-axis), confirming that the continuum fitting largely causes the discrepancies in the errors.
Obtaining proper errors for the continuum models has been a long-standing problem in spectral fitting \citep[e.g.,][]{Koleva:2008qy,Koleva:2009rt,Tojeiro:2007yq,MacArthur:2009kx,Walcher:2011lr,Yoachim:2012qy,Cid-Fernandes:2014qy}. The difficulties come from the fact that continuum fitting is a non-linear multi-variable least-square problem with typically multiple local minima $\chi^2$. Quantifying the errors requires performing MC simulations that can be computationally very expensive and perhaps only feasible on small-scale simulations applied to a handful of galaxies. In the context of constraining the contamination from Balmer correction, the degree of contamination is likely to depend on the spectral coverage and the spectral resolution of the data, because those factors determines the accuracy of the stellar ages and stellar metallicities from SSP fitting.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{figures/fig11.pdf}
\caption{Comparison between errors reported by \lzifu\ ($\sigma_{LZ}$) and errors derived from Monte Carlo simulations ($\sigma_{MC}$). The simulations include both line and continuum fitting. The emission lines are 1-component and we assume no systematic errors in the continuum models. Details about the simulations are provided in Section~\ref{ho16b-sec4.2}. Different color points correspond to different galaxies from the SAMI Galaxy Survey, as shown in the legend their GAMA IDs. In the top three panels, we compare the differences between $\sigma_{MC}$ and $\sigma_{LZ}$ with line fluxes; the fractional differences between $\sigma_{MC}$ and $\sigma_{LZ}$ are $7\pm4\%, 6\pm4\%,$ and $2\pm3\%$ (median $\pm$ standard deviation) for H$\alpha$, H$\beta$ and {[\ion{O}{iii}]~$\lambda$5007}, respectively. In the bottom two panels, we compare the fractional differences between $\sigma_{MC}$ and $\sigma_{LZ}$ to the importance of errors in Balmer correction relative to line flux errors, i.e. $\sigma_{BC}/\sigma_{LZ}$. The positive correlations demonstrate that continuum fitting could impact the Balmer line errors when $\sigma_{BC}/\sigma_{LZ}$ is large. }\label{ho16b-fig11}
\end{figure*}
In all our MC simulations, the underlying models of the mock data are known a priori so we are only studying the propagation of statistical errors. We did not consider systematic errors, such as non-Gaussian line profiles and various uncertainties associated with the synthesis of the SSP spectral models (e.g., stellar evolutionary track, binary star, TP-AGB star, etc.), and therefore the discrepancies between nominal and real errors are lower limits. Systematic errors can be important in many applications of spectral fitting, particularly the errors between different SSP models. \citet{Cid-Fernandes:2014qy} analysed the uncertainties of stellar mass, age, metallicity, and extinction derived with data from the CALIFA survey using the {\scshape starlight} spectral fitting package. They found that the dominant uncertainties come from the choice of SSP models. For emission line fitting, the equivalent widths of Balmer lines between different models can disagree on the level of a few tens of percent \citep[see figure~1 in ][]{Groves:2012lr}, which can cause systematic errors on the weak, high order Balmer lines. These errors are particularly important when the continuum is strong relative to the emission lines. Dedicated studies are required to explore the different systematic effects involved in fitting the continuum.
\section{Summary and Conclusion}\label{ho16b-sec5}
We have presented \lzifu, an \idl\ toolkit for fitting multiple emission lines and constructing emission line flux maps and kinematic maps from IFS data. We outlined the structure of \lzifu, and described in detail how the code performs spectral fitting and decomposition. We have also conducted simulations to examine the errors estimated by \lzifu\ and discussed the its limitations.
We have demonstrated how \lzifu\ can be adopted to analyse data from the CALIFA survey and the SAMI Galaxy Survey. In some applications, single component fitting is adequate to capture the dominant kinematic component (typically from \ion{H}{ii} regions tracing disk rotation) and can produce flux and kinematic maps useful for various studies of gas physics. In cases where the line profiles are more sophisticated due to either active physical environments (e.g., AGN or galactic wind) or observational effects (e.g., beam smearing), multiple component fitting can better constrain the total line fluxes and provide more insight into the various physical processes. Although only examples from CALIFA and SAMI were presented in the paper, \lzifu\ is by no mean limited to these two datasets. Data from world-class IFS instruments with distinct structures (i.e. fibre-based, image-splitting), sizes and spatial resolutions have already been processed by \lzifu, including MUSE, WiFeS and SPIRAL. The \lzifu\ products and scientific results extracted from these can be found in \citet{Ho:2015hl,Dopita:2015eu,McElroy:2015ve,Vogt:2015ec,Kreckel:2016zl}. Further data from these instruments, and surveys from other IFS instruments are currently being analysed, with a wealth of scientific results from \lzifu\ products expected to be published in the coming years.
While this paper outlines the official release version of \lzifu, future improvements to the pipeline will be implemented. For example, in a soon-to-be available upgrade we will include the option of fitting binned data. Spatially binning data can significantly improve the detection of faint emission lines at large galactic radii. Different binning schemes such as contour binning \citep{Sanders:2006lr} and Voronoi tessellations \citep{Cappellari:2003yq} have established the usefulness of binning imaging and IFS data. On longer timescales, we plan to incorporate a full Bayesian analysis such that the parameter space can be explored more thoroughly and more accurate errors can be reported. It is also possible to analyse mock 3D data cubes from numerical simulations parallel to observational data cubes to directly compare similar parameter maps.
\acknowledgment
We thank the referee for constructive comments that improve the quality of this work. LJK gratefully acknowledges the support of an ARC Future Fellowship, and ARC Discovery Project DP130103925. SMC acknowledges the support of an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (FT100100457). The SAMI Galaxy Survey is based on observations made at the Anglo-Australian Telescope. The Sydney-AAO Multi-object Integral field spectrograph was developed jointly by the University of Sydney and the Australian Astronomical Observatory. The SAMI input catalogue is based on data taken from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, the GAMA Survey and the VST ATLAS Survey. The SAMI Galaxy Survey is funded by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for All-sky Astrophysics, through project number CE110001020, and other participating institutions. The SAMI Galaxy Survey website is \url{http://sami-survey.org/}.
This study makes uses of the data provided by the Calar Alto Legacy Integral Field Area (CALIFA) survey (\url{http://califa.caha.es/}). Based on observations collected at the Centro Astron\'{o}mico Hispano Alem\'{a}n (CAHA) at Calar Alto, operated jointly by the Max-Planck-Institut f\"{u}r Astronomie and the Instituto de Astrofisica de Andalucia (CSIC).
|
\section{Introduction}
Crowdfunding platforms have successfully connected millions of individual crowdfunding backers to a variety of new ventures and projects, and these backers have spent over a billion dollars on these ventures and projects \cite{Gerber:2013}. From reward-based crowdfunding platforms like Kickstarter, Indiegogo, and RocketHub, to donation-based crowdfunding platforms like GoFundMe and GiveForwad, to equity-based crowdfunding platforms like CrowdCube, EarlyShares and Seedrs - these platforms have shown the effectiveness of funding projects from millions of individual users. The US Congress has encouraged crowdfunding as a source of capital for new ventures via the JOBS Act \cite{jumpstart}.
An example of successfully funded projects is E-paper watch project. The E-paper watch project for smartphones on a crowdfunding platform was created by Pebble Technology corporation on April 2012 in Kickstarter, expecting \$100,000 investment. Surprisingly, in 2 hours right after launching the project, pledged money was already exceeding \$100,000. In the end of the project period (about 5 weeks), the company was able to get investment over 10 million dollars \cite{pebble}. This example shows the power of collective investment and a crowdfunding platform, and a new way to raise funding from the crowds.
Even though the number of projects and amount of pledged funds on crowdfunding platforms has dramatically grown in the past few years, success rate of projects at large has been decreasing. Besides, little is known about dynamics of crowdfunding platforms and strategies to make a project successful. To fill the gap, in this manuscript we are interested to (i) analyze Kickstarter, the most popular crowdfunding platform and the 524th most popular site as of March 2016 \cite{alexa};(ii) propose statistical approaches to predict not only whether a project will be successful, but also how much a project will get invested; (iii) understand What reactions project creators made when their projects failed; and (iv) find successful project groups, and understand how they are different. Kickstarter has an All-or-Nothing policy. If a project reaches pledged money lower than its goal, its creator will receive nothing. Predicting a range of expected pledged money is an important research problem.
Specifically, we analyze behaviors of users on Kickstarter by answering following research questions: Are users only interested in creating and launching their own projects? or Do they support other projects? Has the number of newly joined users increased over time? Have experienced users achieved a higher project success rate? Then, we analyze characteristics of projects by answering following research questions: How many projects have been created over time? What percent of project has been successfully funded? Can we observe distinguishing characteristics between successful projects and failed projects? Based on the analysis and study, we answer following research questions: Can we build predictive models which can predict not only whether a project will be successful, but also a range of expected pledged money of the project? By adding a project's temporal data (e.g., daily pledged money and daily increased number of backers) and a project creator's social media information, can we even improve performance of the predicative models further? Other interesting questions are: What reactions did project creators make when project failed? If they re-launched the failed projects with some improvements, what efforts did they make for success of the projects? By clustering successful projects, can we understand how we can even further increase pledged money based on understanding properties of more successful projects with higher pledged moneys?
Toward answering these questions, we make the following contributions in this manuscript:
\begin{itemize}
\item We collected the largest datasets, consisting of all Kickstarter project pages, user pages, each project's temporal data and each user's Twitter account information, and then conducted comprehensive analysis to understand behaviors of Kickstarter users and characteristics of projects.
\item Based on the analysis, we proposed and extracted four types of features toward developing project success predictors and pledged money range predictors. To our knowledge, this is the first work to study how to predict a range of expected pledged money of a project.
\item We developed predictive models and thoroughly evaluated performance of these models. Our experimental results show that these models can effectively predict whether a project will be successful and a range of expected pledged money.
\item We analyzed what reactions project creators had when project failed. If they re-launched the failed projects with some improvements and made them successful, what efforts they would make.
\item Finally, we clustered successful projects toward understanding how these clusters are different and revealing what strategy projects creators should use to increase pledged money.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work}
In this section we summarize crowdfunding research work in four categories: (i) analysis of crowdfunding platforms; (ii) analysis of crowdfunding activities and backers on social media sites; (iii) project success prediction; and (iv) classification of backers or projects.
Researchers have analyzed crowdfunding platforms \cite{Belleflamme:2012,Gerber:2013,gerber2012crowdfunding,hui2014understanding}. For example, Kuppuswamy and Bayus \cite{Kuppuswamy} examined the backer dynamics over the project funding cycle. Mollick \cite{mollick:2014} studied the dynamics of crowdfunding, and found that personal networks and underlying project quality were associated with the success of crowdfunding efforts. Xu et al. \cite{Xu:2014} analyzed the content and usage patterns of a large corpus of project updates on Kickstarter. Joenssen et al. \cite{joenssen2014link} found that timing and communication (by posting updates) were key factors to make project successful. Joenssen and M{\"u}llerleile \cite{joenssen2016limitless} analyzed 42,996 Indiegogo projects, and found that scarcity management was problematic at
best and reduced the chances of projects to successfully achieve their target funding. Althoff and Leskovec \cite{althoff2015donor} presented various factors impacting investor's retention, and identified various types of investors. The researchers found that investors are more likely to return if they had a positive interaction with the receiver of the funds.
In another research direction, researchers have studied social media activities during running project campaigns on crowdfunding platforms. Lu et al. \cite{lu:2014} studied how fundraising activities and promotional activities on social media simultaneously evolved over time, and how the promotion campaigns influenced the final outcomes. \citeN{Rakesh:2015} used a promoter network on Twitter to show the success of projects depended on the connectivity between the promoters. They developed backer recommender which recommends a set of backers to Kickstarter projects. Lu et al. \cite{lu2014identifying} analyzed the hidden connections between the fundraising results of projects on crowdfunding websites and the corresponding promotion campaigns in social media. An et al. \cite{an2014recommending} proposed different ways of recommending investors by using hypothesis-driven analyses. Naroditskiy et al. \cite{naroditskiy2014referral} investigated whether viral marketing with incentive mechanisms would increase the marketing and found that providing high level of incentives resulted in a statistically significant increase.
Predicting the success of a project is one of important research problems, so researchers have studied how to predict whether a project will be successful or not. Greenberg et al. \cite{Greenberg:2013} collected 13,000 project pages on Kickstarter and extracted 13 features from each project page. They developed classifiers to predict project success. Their approach achieved 68\% accuracy. Etter et al. \cite{Etter:2013} extracted pledged money based time series features, and project and backer graph features from 16,000 Kickstarter projects. Then, they measured how prediction rate has been changed over time. Mitra et al. \cite{Mitra:2014} focused on text features of project pages to predict project success. They extracted phrases and some meta features from 45,810 project pages, and then showed that using phrases features reduced prediction error rates. Xu et al. \cite{Xu:2014} investigated how updates influence the outcome of a project and showed the type of updates that had a positive impact in every stage of a project. Solomon et al. \cite{solomon2015don} found that making an early donation was usually a better strategy for donors because the amount of donations made early in a project's campaign was often the only difference between that project being funded or not.
Other researchers have classified backers and projects to various types. Kuppuswamy and Bayus \cite{kuppuswamy2015crowdfunding} classified backers into three categories -- immediate backers, delayed backers and serial backers. Hemer \cite{hemer2011snapshot} classified crowdfunding projects into for-profit or not-for-profit projects. Haas et al. \cite{haas2014empirical} also classified projects into hedonistic or altruistic projects using a clustering algorithm from a business standpoint.
Compared with the previous research work, we collected the largest datasets consisting of all Kickstarter project pages, corresponding user pages, each project's temporal data and each user's social media profiles, and conducted comprehensive analysis of users and projects. Then, we proposed and extracted comprehensive feature sets (e.g., project features, user features, temporal features and Twitter features) toward building project success predictors and pledged money range predictors. To our knowledge, we are the first to study how to predict a range of expected pledged money of a project. Since the success of a project depends on a project goal and the amount of actually pledged money, studying the prediction is very important. In addition, we analyzed when project failed what efforts project creators made for success of the projects. Finally, by using a Gaussian mixture model based clustering algorithm, we clustered successful projects to understand how these clusters were different and how project creators increase pledged money. Our research will complement the existing research base.
\section{Datasets}
\label{sec:dataset}
To analyze projects and users on crowdfunding platforms, and understand whether adding social media information would improve project success prediction and pledged money prediction rates, what kind of successful project groups we could find, first we collected data from Kickstarter, the most popular crowdfunding platform, and Twitter, one of the most popular social media sites. The following subsections present our data collection strategy and datasets.
\subsection{Kickstarter Dataset}
Kickstarter is a popular crowdfunding platform where users create and back projects. As of March 2016, it is the 524th most visited site in the world according to Alexa \cite{alexa}.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Static Data.} Our Kickstarter data collection goal was to collect all Kickstarter pages and corresponding user pages, but Kickstarter site only shows currently active projects and some of the most funded projects. Fortunately, Kicktraq site\footnote{\url{http://www.kicktraq.com/archive/}} has archived all project page URLs of Kickstarter. Given a Kicktraq project URL\footnote{\url{http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/fpa/launch-the-first-person-arts-podcast/}}, by replacing Kicktraq hostname (i.e, \url{www.kicktraq.com}) of the project URL with Kickstarter hostname (i.e., \url{www.kickstarter.com}), we were able to obtain the Kickstarter project page URL\footnote{\url{https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/fpa/launch-the-first-person-arts-podcast/}}.
Specifically, our data collection approach was to collect all project pages on Kicktraq, extract each project URL, and replace its hostname with Kickstarter hostname. Then we collected each Kickstarter project page and corresponding user page. Note that even though Kickstarter do not reveal an old project page (i.e., a project's campaign duration was ended), if we know the project URL, we can still access the project page on Kickstarter.
Finally, we collected 168,851 project pages which were created between 2009 and September 2014. Note that Kickstarter site was launched in 2009. A project page consists of a project duration, funding goal, project description, rewards description and so on. We also collected corresponding 146,721 distinct user pages each of which consists of bio, account longevity, location information, the number of backed projects, the number of created projects, and so on. Among 168,851 project pages, we filtered 17,243 projects which have been either canceled or suspended, or in which the project creator's account has been canceled or suspended. Among 146,721 user pages, we filtered corresponding 14,435 user pages. Finally, 151,608 project pages and 132,286 user pages presented in Table~\ref{table:dataset}, have been used in the rest of this manuscript.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Temporal Data.} To analyze and understand how much each project has been pledged/invested daily and how many backers each project has attracted daily, whether incorporating these temporal data (i.e., daily pledged money and daily increased number of backers during a project duration) can improve project success prediction and expected pledged money prediction rates, we collected temporal data of 74,053 projects which were created between March 2013 and August 2014 and were ended by September 2014.
\begin{table}
\tbl{Datasets. \label{table:dataset}}
{
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|ll}
\hline
Kickstarter projects & 151,608 \\ \hline
Kickstarter users & 132,286 \\ \hline
\hline
Kickstarter projects with temporal data & 74,053 \\ \hline
Kickstarter projects with Twitter user profiles & 21,028 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\subsection{Twitter Dataset} What if we add social media information of a project creator to build predictive models? Can a project creator's social media information improve project success and expected pledged money prediction rates? Can we link a project creator's account on Kickstarter to Twitter? To answer these questions, we checked project creators' Kickstarter profiles. Interestingly 19,138 users (13.4\% of all users in our dataset), who created 22,408 projects, linked their Twitter user profile pages (i.e., URLs) to their Kickstarter user profile pages. To use these users' Twitter account information in experiments, we collected their Twitter account information. Specifically, we extracted a Twitter user profile URL from each Kickstarter user profile, and then collected the user's Twitter profile information consisting of the basic profile information (e.g., a number of tweets, a number of following and a number of followers) and tweets posted during a project period. In a step of the Twitter user profile collection, we noticed that some of Twitter accounts had been either suspended or deleted. By filtering these accounts, finally, we collected 17,908 Twitter user profiles and tweets, and then combined these Twitter information with 21,028 Kickstarter project pages created by the 17,908 users.
\section{Analyzing Kickstarter Users and Projects}
In the previous section, we presented our data collection strategy and datasets. Now we turn to analyze Kickstarter users and projects.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\begin{floatrow}
\ffigbox[\FBwidth]
{
\caption{Number of newly joined Kickstarter users in each month.}
\label{fig:change-date}
}
{
\includegraphics[width=0.465\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/userJoined_byMonth_overtime_v2.pdf}
}
\ffigbox[\FBwidth]
{
\caption{CDFs of intervals between user joined date and project creation date (Days).}
\label{fig:interval}
}
{
\includegraphics[width=0.465\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/figure10_INTERVAL.pdf}
}
\end{floatrow}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Analysis of Users}
Given 132,286 user profiles, we are interested in answering following research questions: Has the number of newly joined users increased over time? Are users only interested in creating and launching their own projects? or Do they support other projects? Do experienced users have a higher probability to make a project successful?
First of all, we analyze how many new users joined Kickstarter over time. Figure~\ref{fig:change-date} shows the number of newly joined Kickstarter users per month. Overall, the number of newly joined users per month has linearly increased until May 2012, and then has been decreased until June 2014 with some fluctuation. In July 2014, there was a huge spike. Note that we tried to understand why there was a huge spike in July 2014 by checking news articles, but we were not able to find a concrete reason. Interesting observation is that the number of newly joined users was the lowest during winter season, especially, December in each year. We conjecture that since November and December contains several holidays, people may delay to join Kickstarter.
Next, we present general statistics of users in Table~\ref{fig:gs-creator-page}. The user statistics show that average number of backed projects and created projects are 3.48 and 1.19, respectively. It means that users backed larger number of projects and created less number of their own projects. Each user linked 1.75 websites on average into her profile so that she can get trust from potential investors. Examples of websites are company sites and user profile pages in social networking sites such as Twitter and YouTube. 13.4\% Kickstarter users linked their Twitter pages, and 6.89\% Kickstarter users linked their YouTube pages.
\begin{table}[t
\tbl{Statistics of Kickstarter users. \label{fig:gs-creator-page}}
{
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lc}
& \textbf{Total} \\ \hline
Total number of users & 132,286 \\
Number of backed projects per user & 3.48 \\
Number of created projects per user & 1.19 \\
Number of websites per user & 1.75 \\
Twitter connected & 13.4\% users \\
YouTube connected & 6.89\% users \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t
\tbl{Two groups of users: all-time (AT) creators and active users \label{table:groups}}
{
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{rrrr}
\multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Number}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Avg. backed}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\textbf{Avg. created}} \\ \hline
AT creators & 60,967 & N/A & 1.12 \\
Active users & 71,319 & 6.45 & 1.25 \\
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
Next, we categorized Kickstarter users based on their project backing and creating activities. We found two groups of users: (i) all-time creator (AT creator), who only created projects and did not back other projects; and (ii) active user, who not only created her own projects but also backed other projects. As shown in Table~\ref{table:groups}, there are 60,967 (46.1\%) all-time creators and 71,319 (53.9\%) active users. Each all-time creator created 1.12 projects on average. These creators were only interested in creating their own projects and sought funds. Interestingly, the average number of created projects per all-time creator reveals that these creators created just one or two projects. However, each of 71,319 active users created 1.25 projects and backed 6.45 projects on average. These active users created a little more projects than all-time creators, and backed many other projects.
A follow-up question is ``Do experienced users achieve a higher project success rate?''. We measured experience of a user based on when they create a project after joining Kickstarter. Figure~\ref{fig:interval} shows cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of intervals between user joined date and project creation date in successful projects and failed projects. As we expected, successful projects had longer intervals. We conjecture that since users with longer intervals become more experienced and familiar with Kickstarter platform, their projects have become successful with a higher probability.
\subsection{Analysis of Projects}
\label{sec:analysis}
\begin{table
\tbl{Statistics of Kickstarter projects.\label{table:quick-view-dataset}}
{
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lrrr}
& \textbf{Success} & \textbf{Failure} & \textbf{Total} \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Percentage (\%)\end{tabular} & 46 & 54 & 100 \\
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Classified project count\end{tabular} & 69,448 & 82,160 & 151,608 \\
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Duration (days)\end{tabular} & 33.21 & 36.2 & 34.83 \\
Project Goal (USD) & 8,364.34 & 35,201.89 & 22,891.15 \\
Final money pledged (USD) & 16,027.96 & 1,454.18 & 8,139.37 \\
Number of images & 4.63 & 3.37 & 3.95 \\
Number of videos & 1.18 & 0.93 & 1.04 \\
Number of FAQs & 0.84 & 0.39 & 0.6 \\
Number of rewards & 9.69 & 7.49 & 8.5 \\
Number of updates & 9.59 & 1.59 & 5.26 \\
Number of project comments & 77.52 & 2.45 & 36.89 \\
Facebook connected (\%) & 61.00 & 59.00 & 60.00 \\
Number of FB friends & 583.48 & 395.15 & 481.54 \\
Number of backers & 211.16 & 19.34 & 107.33 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
So far we analyzed collected user profiles. Now we turn to analyze Kickstarter projects. Interesting research questions are: How many projects have been created over time? What percent of projects has been successfully funded? Can we observe clearly different properties between successfully funded projects and failed projects? To answer these questions, we analyzed Kickstarter project dataset presented in Table~\ref{table:dataset}.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Number of projects and project success rate over time.} Figure~\ref{fig:number-projects-over-time} shows how the number of projects has been changed over time. Overall, the number of created projects per month has been increased over time with some fluctuation. Interestingly, lower number of projects in December of each year (e.g., 2011, 2012 and 2013) has been created. Another interesting observation was that the largest number of projects (9,316 projects) were created in July 2014. The phenomena would be related to the number of newly joined users per month shown in Figure~\ref{fig:change-date} in which less number of users joined Kickstarter during Winter season, especially in December in each year, and many users joined in July 2014.
\begin{figure
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/numProjects_byMonth_overtime.pdf}
}
\caption{Number of created projects per month has been increased over time with some fluctuation.}
\label{fig:number-projects-over-time}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\begin{floatrow}
\ffigbox[\FBwidth]
{
\caption{Project success rate in each month.}
\label{fig:change-s-rate}
}
{
\includegraphics[width=0.43\textwidth, height=1.6in]{fig-files-pdf/figure08-monthly-s-rate_v2.pdf}
}
\ffigbox[\FBwidth]
{
\caption{Project success and failure rates according to a duration that more than 1,000 projects has.}
\label{fig:duration-rate}
}
{
\includegraphics[width=0.43\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/figure05_rate_according_to_duration.pdf}
}
\end{floatrow}
\end{figure}
Next, we are interested in analyzing how project success rate has been changed over time. We grouped projects by their launched year and month. Interestingly, the success rate has been fluctuated and overall project success rate in each month has been decreased over time as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:change-s-rate}. In July 2014, the success rate was dramatically decreased. We conjecture that since many users joined Kickstarter in July 2014, these first-time project creators caused the sharp decrease of success rate.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Statistics of successful projects and failed projects.} Next, we analyze statistics of successful projects and failed projects. Table~\ref{table:quick-view-dataset} presents the statistics of Kickstarter projects. Overall, percentage of the successful projects in our dataset is about 46\%. In other words, 54\% of all projects was failed. We can clearly observe that the successful projects had shorter project duration, lower funding goal, more active engagements and larger number of social network friends than failed projects.
Figure~\ref{fig:duration-rate} shows more detailed information about how project success rate was changed when a project duration was increased. This figure clearly shows that project success rate was higher when a projet duration was shorter. Intuitively, people may think that longer project duration would be helpful to get more fund, but this analysis reveals the opposite result. To show how many projects have what duration, we plotted Figure~\ref{fig:duration-num-projects}. 39.7\% (60,191 projects) of all projects had 30 day duration and then 6.5\% (9,784 projects) of all projects had 60 day duration. We conjecture that since 30 day duration is the default duration on Kickstarter, many users just chose 30 day duration for their projects.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{floatrow}
\ffigbox[\FBwidth]
{
\caption{Number of Projects according to a duration that more than 1,000 projects has.}
\label{fig:duration-num-projects}
}
{
\includegraphics[width=0.465\textwidth, height=1.8in]{fig-files-pdf/figure04_num_of_projects_by_duration_more_than_1000.pdf}
}
\ffigbox[\FBwidth]
{
\caption{Project success rate under each of 15 categories.}
\label{fig:category-s-rate}
}
{
\includegraphics[width=0.465\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/figure06_category_success_rate.pdf}
}
\end{floatrow}
\end{figure}
While the average project goal of successful projects was 3 times less than failed projects, the average pledged money of successful projects was 10 times more than failed projects. Project creators of successful projects spent more time to make better project description by adding a larger number of images, videos, FAQ and reward types. The creators also frequently updated their projects. Interestingly, project creators of the successful projects had a larger number of Facebook friends. It means that the creators' Facebook friends might help for their project success by backing the projects or spreading information of the projects to other people \cite{mollick:2014}.
When a user creates a project on Kickstarter, she can choose a category of the project. Does a category of a project affect a project success rate? To answer this question, we analyzed project success rate according to each category. As you can see in Figure~\ref{fig:category-s-rate}, projects in Dance, Music, Theater, Comics and Art categories achieved between 50\% and 72\% success rate which is greater than the average success rate of all projects (again, 46\% success rate).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{floatrow}
\ffigbox[\FBwidth]
{
\caption{Distribution of projects in the world.}
\label{fig:loc-world}
}
{
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/location_country_map.pdf}
}
\ffigbox[\FBwidth]
{
\caption{Distribution of projects in US.}
\label{fig:loc-us-num}
}
{
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/usmap.pdf}
}
\end{floatrow}
\end{figure}
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Location.} A user can add location information when she creates a project. We checked our dataset to see how many projects contain location information. Surprisingly, 99\% project pages contained location information. After extracting the location information from the projects, we plotted distribution of projects on the world map in Figure~\ref{fig:loc-world}. 85.65\% projects were created in US. The next largest number of projects were created in the United Kingdom (6.23\%), Canada (2.20\%), Australia (1\%)and Germany (0.92\%). Overall, the majority of projects were created in the western countries. The project distribution across countries makes sense because initially only US based projects on Kickstarter were created, and then the company allowed users in other countries to launch projects since October 2012. Since over 85\% projects were created in US, we plotted distribution of the projects on US map in Figure~\ref{fig:loc-us-num}. Top 5 states are California (20.23\%), New York (12.93\%), Texas (5.45\%), Florida (4.57\%) and Illinois (4.03\%). This distribution mostly follows population of each state.
A follow-up question is how project distribution across states in US is related to projects success rate. To answer this question, we plotted project success rate of each state in Figure~\ref{fig:loc-us-success}. Top 5 states with the highest success rate are Vermont (63.81\%), Massachusetts (58.49\%), New York (58.46\%), Rhode Island (58.33\%) and Oregon (53.56\%). Except New York state, small number of projects were created in the four states. To make a concrete conclusion, we measured Pearson correlation between distribution of projects and project success rate. The correlation value was 0.25 which indicates that they are not significantly correlated.
\begin{figure
\centerline {
\includegraphics[height=1.5in]{fig-files-pdf/usmap_success.pdf}
}
\caption{Project success rate across states in US.}
\label{fig:loc-us-success}
\end{figure}
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Analysis of Kickstarter Temporal Data.} As we presented in Table~\ref{table:dataset}, we collected temporal data of 74,053 projects (e.g., daily pledged money and daily increased number of backers). Using these temporal data, we analyzed what percent of total pledged money and what percent of backers each project got over time after launching a project. Since each project has different duration (e.g., 30 days or 60 days), first, we converted each project duration to 100 states (time slots). Then, in each state, we measured percent of pledged money and number of backers.
Figure~\ref{fig:avg-pledgedmoney-perState} shows the percentage distribution of pledged money and number of backers per state over time. One of the most interesting observations is that the largest amount of money was pledged in the beginning and end of a project. For example, 14.69\% money was pledged and 15.68\% backers were obtained in the first state. Other researchers also observed the same phenomena in smaller datasets \cite{Kuppuswamy,lu:2014}.
Another interesting observation is that there is another spike after the first spike in the beginning of project durations. We conjecture that the first spike was caused by a project creator's family and friends who backed the project \cite{thundering}, and the second spike was caused by other users who noticed the project and heard of a trend of the project.
The other interesting observation is that after 60th state, the number of backers and the number of pledged money have been exponentially increased. Especially, people rushed investing a project, as a project was heading to the end of the project duration. The phenomenon is called the Deadline effect \cite{roth:1988},\cite{yildiz:2004}. Even amount of invested money has been increased more quickly than the number of backers. This may indicate that people tend to purchase more expensive reward item. They may want to make sure a project become successful, achieving higher amount of pledged money than a project goal\footnote{Kickstarter has an All-or-Nothing policy. If a project reaches at or over its goal, its creator will receive pledged fund. Otherwise, the project creator will receive nothing.}. In another case, they knew that other people already supported the project with a large amount of money which motivated them to back the project with high trust.
\begin{figure}
\centerline {
\includegraphics[height=2in]{fig-files-pdf/average_pledgeMoney_perState.pdf}
}
\caption{Percentage distribution of pledged money and number of backers per state.}
\label{fig:avg-pledgedmoney-perState}
\end{figure}
\section{Features and Experimental Settings}
\label{sec:features}
In the previous section, we analyzed behaviors of Kickstarter users and characteristics of projects. Based on the analysis, in this section we propose features which will be used to develop a project success predictor and an expected funding range predictor. We also describe our experimental settings which are used in Sections~\ref{sec:success} and~\ref{sec:range}.
\subsection{Features}
We extracted 49 features from our collected datasets presented in Table~\ref{table:dataset}. Then, we grouped the features to 4 types: (i) project features; (ii) user features; (iii) temporal features; and (iv) Twitter features.
\subsubsection{Project Features}
From a project page, we generated 11 features as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item Project category, duration, project goal, number of images, number of videos, number of FAQs, and number of rewards.
\item SMOG grade of reward description: To estimate the readability of the all rewards text.
\item SMOG grade of main page description: To estimate the readability of the main page description of a project.
\item Number of sentences in reward description.
\item Number of sentences in the main description of a project.
\end{itemize}
The SMOG grade estimates the years of education needed to understand a piece of writing \cite{McLaughlin1969}. The higher SMOG grade indicates that project and reward descriptions were written well. To measure SMOG grade, we used the following formula:
\[
1.043\sqrt{|polysyllables| \times \frac{30}{|sentences|}} + 3.1291
\]
, where the number of Polysyllables is the count of the words of 3 or more syllables.
\subsubsection{User Features}
From a user profile page and the user's previous experience, we generated 28 features as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item Distribution of the backed projects under the 15 main categories (15 features): what percent of projects belongs to each main category.
\item Number of backed projects, number of created projects in the past, number of comments that a user made in the past, number of websites linked in a user profile, and number of Facebook friends that a user has.
\item Is each of Facebook, YouTube and Twitter user pages connected? (3 features)
\item SMOG grade of bio description, and Number of sentences in a bio description.
\item Interval (days) between a user's Kickstarter joined date and a project's launched date.
\item Success rate of the backed projects by a user.
\item Success rate of the projects created by a user in the past.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Temporal Features}
As we mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:dataset}, we collected 74,053 projects' temporal data consisting of daily pledged money and number of daily increased backers. First, we converted these temporal data points (i.e., daily value) to cumulated data points. For example, if a project's daily pledged money for 5 days project duration are 100, 200, 200, 100 and 200, cumulated data point in each day will be 100, 300, 500, 600 and 800. Since each project has various duration, we converted a duration to 100 states (time slots). Then, we normalized cumulated data points by 100 states. Finally, we generated two time-series features:
\begin{itemize}
\item Cumulated pledged money over time.
\item Cumulated number of backers over time.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Twitter Features}
As we mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:dataset}, 17,908 users linked their Twitter home pages to their Kickstarter user pages. From our collected Twitter dataset, we generated 8 features as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item Number of tweets, Number of followings, Number of followers and Number of favorites.
\item Number of lists that a user has been joined in.
\item Number of tweets posted during active project days (e.g., between Jan 1, 2014 and Jan 30, 2014).
\item Number of tweets containing word ``Kickstarter'' posted during active project days.
\item SMOG grade of aggregated tweets which are posted during active project days.
\end{itemize}
The first five features were used for any project created by a user. The rest three features were generated for each project since each project was active in different time period.
Finally, we generated 49 features from a project and a user who created the project.
\subsection{Experimental Settings}
We describe our experimental settings which are used in the following sections for predicting project success and expected pledged money range.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Datasets.} In the following sections, we used three datasets presented in Table~\ref{table:number-instance}. Each dataset consists of a different number of projects and corresponding user profiles as we described in Section~\ref{sec:dataset}. Two datasets (KS Static + Twitter, and KS Static + Temporal + Twitter) contained Twitter user profiles as well.
We extracted 39 features from KS Static dataset (i.e., project features and user features), 47 features from KS Static + Twitter dataset (i.e., project features, user features and Twitter features), and 49 features from KS Static + Temporal + Twitter (i.e., all four feature groups). Note that in this subsection we presented the total number of our proposed features before applying feature selection.
\begin{table
\tbl{Three datasets which were used in experiments.\label{table:number-instance}}
{
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|}
\hline
\textbf{Datasets} & \textbf{$|$Projects$|$} & \textbf{$|$Features$|$} \\ \hline
KS Static & 151,608 & 39 \\ \hline
KS Static + Twitter & 21,028 & 47 \\ \hline
KS Static + Temporal + Twitter & 11,675 & 49 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Predictive Models.} Since each classification algorithm might perform differently in our dataset, we selected 3 well-known classification algorithms: Naive Bayes, Random Forest, AdaboostM1 (with Random Forest as the base learner). We used Weka implementation of these algorithms \cite{Hall:2009}.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Feature Selection.} To check whether the proposed features were positively contributing to build a good predictor, we measured $\chi^{2}$ value \cite{657137} for each of the features. The larger the $\chi^{2}$ value is, the higher discriminative power the corresponding feature has. The feature selection results are described in following sections.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Evaluation.} We used Accuracy as the primary evaluation metrics and Area under the ROC Curve (AUC) as the secondary metrics, and then built and evaluated each predictive model (classifier) by using 5-fold cross-validation.
\section{Predicting Project Success}
\label{sec:success}
Based on the features and experimental settings, we now develop and evaluate project success predictors.
\subsection{Feature Selection}
First of all, we conducted $\chi^{2}$ feature selection to check whether the proposed features were all significant features. Since we had three datasets, we applied feature selection for each dataset. All features in KS Static dataset had positive distinguishing power to determine whether a project will be successful or not. But, in both of KS Static + Twitter dataset and KS Static + Temporal + Twitter, ``Is each of Facebook, YouTube and Twitter user pages connected'' features were not positively contributing, so we excluded them. Overall, some of project features (e.g., category, goal and number of rewards), some of user features (e.g., number of backed projects, success rate of backed projects, number of comments), some of Twitter features (e.g. number of lists, number of followers and number of favorites), and all temporal features were the most significant features.
\subsection{Experiments}
Our experimental goal is to develop and evaluate project success predictors. We build project success predictors by using each of the three datasets and evaluate performance of the predictors.
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Using KS Static dataset.} The first task was to test whether only using Kickstarter static features (i.e., project and user features) would achieve good prediction results. To conduct this task, we converted Kickstarter static dataset consisting of 151,608 project profiles and user profiles to feature values. Then, We developed project success predictors based on each of 3 classification algorithms -- Naive Bayes, Random Forest and AdaboostM1. Finally, we evaluated each predictor by using 5-fold cross-validation. Table~\ref{table:predict-success} shows experimental results of three project success predictors based on Kickstarter static features. AdaboostM1 outperformed the other predictors, achieving 76.4\% accuracy and 0.838 AUC. This result was better than 54\% accuracy of a baseline which was measured by a percent of the majority class instances in Kickstarter static dataset (54\% projects were unsuccessful). This result was also better than the previous work in which 68\% accuracy was achieved \cite{Greenberg:2013}.
\begin{table
\tbl{Experimental results of three project success predictors based on Kickstarter static features.\label{table:predict-success}}
{
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|cc|}
\hline
Classifier & Accuracy & AUC \\ \hline
Naive Bayes & 67.3\% & 0.750 \\
Random Forest & 75.2\% & 0.827 \\
AdaboostM1 & \textbf{76.4\%} & \textbf{0.838} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\begin{table
\tbl{Project success predictors based on Kickstarter static features vs. based on Kickstarter static features and Twitter features.\label{table:predict-success-twt}}
{
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|cc|}
\hline
Classifier & Accuracy & AUC \\ \hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{\textbf{Kickstarter}} \\ \hline
Naive Bayes & 60.3\% & 0.722 \\
Random Forest & 72.8\% & 0.790 \\
AdaboostM1 & \textbf{73.9\%} & \textbf{0.798} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{\textbf{Kickstarter + Twitter}} \\ \hline
Naive Bayes & 56.5\% & 0.724 \\
Random Forest & 73.4\% & 0.800 \\
AdaboostM1 & \textbf{75.7\%} & \textbf{0.826} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Using KS Static + Twitter dataset.} What if we add Twitter features to Kickstarter static features? Can we even improve performance of project success predictors? To answer these questions, we compared performance of predictors without Twitter features with performance of predictors with Twitter features. In this experiment, we extracted Kickstarter static features from 21,028 projects and corresponding user profiles, and Twitter features from corresponding Twitter user profiles. As you can see in Table~\ref{table:predict-success-twt}, AdaboostM1 classifier with Twitter features achieved 75.7\% accuracy and 0.826 AUC, increasing accuracy and AUC of AdaboostM1 classifier without Twitter features by 2.5\% (= $\frac{75.7}{73.9} - 1$) and 3.5\% (= $\frac{0.826}{0.798} - 1$), respectively.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/temporal-SorF.pdf}
}
\caption{Project success prediction rate of predictors based on Kickstarter static and temporal features with/without Twitter features.}
\label{fig:TEM-TWT-SorF}
\end{figure}
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Using KS Static + Temporal + Twitter dataset.} What if we replace Twitter features with Kickstarter temporal features? Or what if we use all features including Kickstarter static, temporal and Twitter features? Would using all features give us the best result? To answer these questions, we used KS Static + Temporal + Twitter dataset consisting of 11,675 project profiles, corresponding user profiles, Twitter profiles and project temporal data. Since each project has a different project duration, we converted each project duration to 100 states (time slots). Then we calculated temporal feature values in each state. Finally, we developed 100 predictors based on KS Static + Temporal features and 100 predictors based on KS Static + Temporal + Twitter features (each predictor was developed in each state). Note that in the previous experiments AdaboostM1 consistently outperformed the other classification algorithms, so used AdaboostM1 for this experiment. Figure~\ref{fig:TEM-TWT-SorF} shows two project success predictors' accuracy in each state. In the beginning, KS Static + Temporal + Twitter features based predictors were slightly better than KS Static + Temporal features based predictors, but both of approaches performed similarly after 3rd state because temporal features became more significant. Overall, accuracy of predictors has been sharply increased until 11th state and then consistently increased until the end of a project duration. In 10th state (i.e., in the first 10\% duration), the predictors achieved 83.6\% accuracy which was increased by 11\% (= $\frac{83.6}{75.3} - 1$) compared with 75.3\% accuracy when a state was 0 (i.e., without temporal features). The more a state value increased, the higher accuracy a predictor achieved.
In summary, we developed project success predictors with various feature combinations. A project success predictor based on Kickstarter static features achieved 76.4\% accuracy. Adding social media features increased the prediction accuracy by 2.5\%. Adding temporal features consistently increased the accuracy. The experimental results confirmed that it is possible to predict a project's success when a user creates a project, and we can increase a prediction accuracy further with early observation after launching the project.
\section{Predicting an Expected Pledged Money Range of a Project}
\label{sec:range}
So far we have studied predicting whether a project will be successful or not. But a project's success depends on a project goal and pledged money. If pledged money is equal to or greater than a project goal, the project will be successful. On the other hand, even though a project received a lot of pledged money (e.g., \$99,999) , if a project goal (e.g., \$100,000) is slightly larger than the pledged money, the project will be failed. Remember the All-or-Nothing policy. If we predict how much a project will get invested in advance, we can set up a realistic project goal and make the project successful. A fundamental research problem is ''Can we predict expected pledged money? or Can we predict a range of expected pledged money of a project?''. To our knowledge, no one has studied this research problem yet. In this section, we propose an approach to predict a range of expected pledged money of a project.
\subsection{Approach and Feature Selection}
In this section, our research goal is to develop predictive models which can predict a range of pledged money of a project. We defined the number of classes (categories) in two scenarios: (i) 2 classes; and (ii) 3 classes. In a scenario of 2 classes, we used a threshold, \$5,000. The first class is $\leq \$5,000$, and the second class is $> \$5,000$. In other words, if pledged money of a project is less than or equal to \$5,000, the project will belong to the first class. Likewise, in a scenario of 3 classes, we used two thresholds, \$100 and \$10,000. The first class is $\leq \$100$, the second class is $\$100<project\leq\$10,000$ and the third class is $> \$10,000$. Now we have the ground truth in each scenario.
Next, we applied feature selection to our datasets. In 2 classes, ``Is Youtube connected'' feature was not a significant feature in KS Static and KS Static + Temporal + Twitter datasets. ``Is Twitter connected'' feature was not a significant feature in KS Static + Twitter and KS Static + Temporal + Twitter datasets. In 3 classes, ``Is Twitter connected'' feature was not a significant feature in KS Static + Twitter and KS Static + Temporal + Twitter datasets.
\subsection{Experiments}
We conducted experiments in two scenarios -- prediction in (i) 2 classes and (ii) 3 classes.
\begin{table}[h]
\tbl{Experimental results of pledged money range predictors based on Kickstarter static features under 2 classes.\label{table:predict-class2-range}}
{
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|cc|}
\hline
Classifier & Accuracy & AUC \\ \hline
Naive Bayes & 75.9\% & 0.780 \\
Random Forest & 85.6\% & \textbf{0.906} \\
AdaboostM1 & \textbf{86.5\%} & 0.901 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Using KS Static dataset.} The first experiment was to predict a project's pledged money range by using KS Static dataset (i.e., generating the static features -- project features and user features). A use case is that when a user creates a project, this predictor helps the user to set up an appropriate goal. We conducted 5 fold cross-validation in each of the two scenarios. Table~\ref{table:predict-class2-range} shows experimental results in 2 classes. AdaboostM1 outperformed Naive Bayes and Random Forest, achieving 86.5\% accuracy and 0.901 AUC. When we compared our predictor's performance with the baseline -- 74.8\% accuracy (percent of the majority class, assuming selecting the majority class as a prediction result) --, our approach increased 11.5\% (= $\frac{86.5}{74.8} - 1$).
\begin{table}[h]
\tbl{Experimental results of pledged money range predictors based on Kickstarter static features under 3 classes.\label{table:predict-class3-range}}
{
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|cc|}
\hline
Classifier & Accuracy & AUC \\ \hline
Naive Bayes & 49.4\% & 0.713 \\
Random Forest & 73.3\% & \textbf{0.817} \\
AdaboostM1 & \textbf{74.2\%} & 0.811 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
We also ran another experiment in 3 classes. Table~\ref{table:predict-class3-range} shows experimental results. Again, AdaboostM1 outperformed the other classification algorithms, achieving 74.2\% accuracy and 0.811 AUC. When we compared its performance with the baseline -- 63.1\% --, it increased 17.6\% (= $\frac{74.2}{63.1} - 1$). Regardless of the number of classes, our proposed approach consistently outperformed than the baseline. The experimental results showed that it is possible to predict an expected pledged money range in advance.
\begin{table}[h]
\tbl{Experimental results of pledged money range predictors based on Kickstarter static features and Twitter features under 2 classes.\label{table:predict-class2-range-twt}}
{
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|cc|}
\hline
Classifier & Accuracy & AUC \\ \hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{Kickstarter} \\ \hline
Naive Bayes & 70.6\% & 0.759 \\
Random Forest & 81.4\% & 0.889 \\
AdaboostM1 & \textbf{82.5\%} & \textbf{0.896} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{Kickstarter + Twitter} \\ \hline
Naive Bayes & 70.7\% & 0.763 \\
Random Forest & 83.1\% & 0.904 \\
AdaboostM1 & \textbf{84.2\%} & \textbf{0.910} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Using KS Static + Twitter dataset.} What if we add Twitter features? Will these improve a prediction accuracy? To answer this research question, we used KS Static + Twitter dataset in each of 2 classes and 3 classes. Experimental results under 2 classes and 3 classes are shown in Tables~\ref{table:predict-class2-range-twt} and~\ref{table:predict-class3-range-twt}, respectively. In case of 2 classes, AdaboostM1 with Twitter features increased 2.1\% (= $\frac{84.2}{82.5} - 1$) compared with a predictor without Twitter features, achieving 84.2\% accuracy and 0.91 AUC. In case of 3 classes, AdaboostM1 with Twitter features also increased 1.8\% (= $\frac{77.2}{75.8} - 1$) compared with a predictor without Twitter features, achieving 77.2\% accuracy and 0.843 AUC. The experimental results confirmed that adding Twitter features improved prediction performance.
\begin{table
\tbl{Experimental results of pledged money range predictors based on Kickstarter static features and Twitter features under 3 classes.\label{table:predict-class3-range-twt}}
{
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|cc|}
\hline
Classifier & Accuracy & AUC \\ \hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{\textbf{Kickstarter}} \\ \hline
Naive Bayes & 48.6\% & 0.677 \\
Random Forest & 74.2\% & 0.829 \\
AdaboostM1 & \textbf{75.8\%} & \textbf{0.830} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{\textbf{Kickstarter + Twitter}} \\ \hline
Naive Bayes & 48.8\% & 0.668 \\
Random Forest & 75.4\% & 0.841 \\
AdaboostM1 & \textbf{77.2\%} & \textbf{0.843} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[Under 2 classes]
{
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/temporal-range2.pdf}
\label{fig:TEM-range2}
}
\subfigure[Under 3 classes]
{
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/temporal-range3.pdf}
\label{fig:TEM-range3}
}
\caption{Pledged money range prediction rate of predictors based on Kickstarter static and temporal features with/without Twitter features under 2 and 3 classes.}
\label{fig:TEM-Range}
\end{figure*}
\smallskip
\noindent\textbf{Using KS Static + Temporal + Twitter dataset.} What if we add temporal features? Can we find a sweet spot where we can reach to a high accuracy in a short period? To answer these questions, we used KS Static + Temporal + Twitter dataset. Again, each project duration was converted to 100 states (time slots). Figure~\ref{fig:TEM-Range} shows how accuracy of predictors has been changed over time under 2 classes and 3 classes. Prediction accuracy of AdaboostM1 classifiers with all features (project features + user features + temporal features + Twitter features) has been sharply increased until 5th state in 2 classes and 10th state in 3 classes. The classifiers reached to 90\% accuracy in 15th state under 2 classes, and in 31st state under 3 classes.
What if we do not use Twitter features? In both 2 and 3 classes, adding Twitter features slightly increased prediction accuracy until 3rd state in 2 classes, and 9th state in 3 classes compared with predictors without Twitter features.
In summary, our proposed predictive models predicted a project's expected pledged money range with a high accuracy in 2 classes and 3 classes. Adding Twitter and Kickstarter temporal features increased a prediction accuracy even higher than only using Kickstarter static features. Our experimental results confirmed that predicting a project's expected pledged money in advance is possible.
\section{Project Creators' Reactions after Projects Failed}
In the previous sections, we found that predicting whether a project will be successful and how much (what range of) fundraising money a project will get. Next, we analyze how project creators behaved after their projects failed. Did they give up and no longer create projects? Or did they continue to create projects? If they continued creating projects with the same idea of the failed projects, what changes did they make in order to make the projects successful.
First of all, we analyzed how many projects each user created in Kickstarter as shown in Table~\ref{table:ProjectCreatorDistribution}. 89.74\% (118,718) users created only 1 project while 7.97\% users created 2 projects and 2.29\% users created at least 3 projects. Among the 89.74\% creators, who created only 1 project, 44.15\% project creators successfully reached project goals (i.e., fundraising goals) while 55.85\% project creators failed in reaching project goals. It may mean that the 55.85\% (66,304) project creators among the one-time project creators gave up their project idea, and no longer created new projects.
\begin{table}
\tbl{Distribution of projects by creators. \label{table:ProjectCreatorDistribution}}
{
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
\# created project & \# creators & Percentage (\%) \\ \hline
1 & 118,718 & 89.74 \\
2 & 10,546 & 7.97 \\
3 & 1,959 & 1.48 \\
4 & 546 & 0.41 \\
5 & 235 & 0.18 \\
${>}$ 5 & 282 & 0.21 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
A follow-up question is ``when a project failed, what properties of the project did project creators change to make the project successful?'' Did they lower project goal? or Did they add more reward types? or Did they add more detailed information into the project description? Before answering these questions, we assume that once a certain project is successful, the project creator will no longer improve or relaunch it. But if a project failed, the project creator may (i) want to improve and relaunch it, (ii) create a project with a completely new idea, or (iii) no longer create any other project. In this study we focus on the first (i) case because we aim to understand what properties of the previously failed project the project creators changed to make it (of the same idea with the previous project) successful.
A challenge in the study was to extract two consecutive projects based on the \emph{same project idea} in chronological order. We assumed that if two consecutive projects created by the same creator were based on the same idea, their project descriptions should be similar. Based on this assumption, we examined 22,320 projects created by 9,166 distinct creators, each of whom created at least 2 projects and had at least one failed project. Then we built Vector Space Model for 22,320 projects so that each project was represented by a TF-IDF based vector \cite{Manning:2008}. We extracted each pair of two consecutive projects created by the same user from the 22,320 projects and measured the cosine (description) similarity of the pair.
Specifically, given two projects $P_i$ and $P_j$ represented by two vectors $V_i$ and $V_j$ respectively, cosine (description) similarity was calculated as follows:
\[
sim(P_i,P_j) = cos(V_i, V_j) = \frac{\sum_{k=1}^{|D|}v_{ik}v_{jk}}{\sqrt{\sum_{k=1}^{|D|}{v_{ik}^2}}\sqrt{\sum_{k=1}^{|D|}{v_{jk}^2}}}
\]
where, $|D|$ is the total number of unique terms in Vector Space Model, $v_{ik}$ and $v_{jk}$ are TF-IDF values at $k^{th}$ dimension of $V_i$ and $V_j$, respectively.
If a pair's cosine similarity was equal to or greater than a threshold $\lambda$, we would consider the pair as similar projects based on the same project idea.
\begin{figure
\centering
\subfigure[Number of failed-to-successful project pairs.]
{
\label{fig:FailToSuccessPair}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\textwidth]{fig-files-pdf/FailSuccessSimPair.pdf}
}
\subfigure[Number of failed-to-failed project pairs.]
{
\label{fig:FailToFailPair}
\includegraphics[width=0.475\linewidth]{fig-files-pdf/FailFailSimPair.pdf}
}
\caption{Number of similar project pairs in failed-to-successful case and failed-to-failed case.}
\label{fig:pairs}
\end{figure}
An up-coming question is what would be a good $\lambda$? To answer this question, first we plotted Figure~\ref{fig:pairs} which shows how the number of pairs of failed-to-failed projects and the number of pairs of failed-to-successful projects were changed as we changed $\lambda$ from 0 to 1 by increasing 0.1. The number of similar project pairs had decreased as we increased $\lambda$. Interestingly, we observed that there were 131 pairs and 242 pairs of projects without changing any word in their project descriptions (i.e., similar score = 1) in Figure~\ref{fig:FailToSuccessPair} and Figure~\ref{fig:FailToFailPair}, respectively. It means some project creators did not change project description of the latter project compared with the former project, but it was successful in 131 cases.
Then, we manually analyzed sample pairs to see what threshold would be the most appropriate to find similar project pairs. Based on the manual investigation, we decided $\lambda$ as 0.8. With the threshold ($\lambda$=0.8), we found 918 failed-to-successful project pairs called \textit{group I} and 1,127 failed-to-failed project pairs called \textit{group II}. By comparing projects in each pair in the two groups, we noticed that overall project creators changed 13 properties: duration, goal, number of images, number of videos, number of FAQs, number of updates, number of rewards, number of sentences in reward description, smog grade of reward, number of sentences in project description, smog grade of project description, number of sentences in project creator's biography, and smog grade of project creator's biography. We measured how much each property was changed by $\frac{(P_{ik} - P_{jk})*100}{P_{ik}}$ where $P_{ik}$ is the former project's \emph{k}th property value and $P_{jk}$ is the latter property's \emph{k}th property value.
Table~\ref{table:ProjectEnhancement} shows the average change rate of failed-to-successful project pairs and failed-to-failed project pairs. A positive change rate means that project creators increased the property value of the latter project compared with the former project. To measure which property had significant difference, we computed one-tailed p-value of two-sample t-test for difference between the means of the two groups. In particular, the mean of project goal's change rate in \textit{group I} was -59.62\%, which was approximately four times decrement compared to \textit{group II} which had -16.39\% change rate. In other words, project creators in \emph{group I} lowered project goal much more than project creators in \emph{group II}. The mean of change rate of the number of updates in \textit{group I} was +118\% while project creators in \textit{group II} made -38.41\% change. It indicates that project creators in \textit{group I} increased the number of updates significantly, while project creators in \textit{group II} decreased the number of updates. Interestingly, decreasing a project duration was helpful to make projects successful. Overall, reducing the duration and goal as well as posting more images, videos and updates are a smart way to make previously failed projects successful.
Since the number of updates and project goal were the most significant properties, we further analyzed CDFs of change rates of the two properties -- project goal and number of updates -- in the two groups as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ProjectFeaturesChange}. 88\% project creators in \textit{group I} lowered project goal while 63\% project creators in \emph{group II} lowered project goal. About 62\% project creators in \textit{group I} increased posting the number of updates while only 15\% project creators in \textit{group II} increased posting the number of updates.
\begin{table
\centering \tbl{Average change rate of 13 properties in failed-to-successful project pairs and failed-to-failed project pairs. $***$, $**$, $*$ and ns indicate $p < 10^{-13}$, $p < 10^{-4}$, $p < 0.05$ and \emph{not significant}, respectively.}{
\small
\begin{tabular}{|l|>{\centering\arraybackslash}p{3.8cm}|>{\centering\arraybackslash}p{3.8cm}|c|}
\hline
Property & Avg. change rate of failed-to-successful pairs \emph{Group I} & Avg. change rate of failed-to-failed pairs \emph{Group II} & p-value \\ \hline
\textbf{Duration} & -6.15\% & +23.03\% & ** \\
\textbf{Goal} & \textbf{-59.62\%} & \textbf{-16.39\%} & *** \\
\textbf{\#images} & +14.25\% & +1.91\% & * \\
\textbf{\#video} & +6.40\% & -3.22\% & ** \\
\#FAQs & -34.69\% & -47.47\% & ns \\
\#reward & -0.26\% & +2.36\% & ns \\
\textbf{\#updates} & \textbf{+118.00\%} & \textbf{-38.41\%} & *** \\
smog\_reward & +1.70\% & +2.78\% & ns \\
\#reward\_sentence & +22.24\% & +13.73\% & ns \\
\#main\_sentence & -0.40\% & -0.27\% & ns \\
smog\_main & +7.26\% & +5.17\% & ns \\
\#bio\_sentence & 0\% & 0\% & ns \\
smog\_bio & 0\% & 0\% & ns \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\label{table:ProjectEnhancement}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[Goal]
{
\label{fig:GoalChange}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{more-pdf/Goal-change3.png}
}
\subfigure[Number of updates]
{
\label{fig:NumberOfUpdateChange}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{more-pdf/NumberOfUpdate-change3.png}
}
\caption{CDFs of change rates of goal and number of updates in similar project pairs.}
\label{fig:ProjectFeaturesChange}
\end{figure}
\section{Clustering Successful Projects and Analyzing the Clusters}
In this section, we aim to (i) cluster successful projects based on a time series of normalized daily pledged money, (ii) analyze what kind of clusters we find and how the clusters are different from each other, and understand (iii) how external activities affected projects' temporal patterns.
\subsection{Preprocessing Data}
Out of 74,053 projects containing temporal data presented in Table~\ref{table:dataset}, we selected successful projects each of which had a project goal equal to or greater than \$100 since it is less interesting to find patterns from projects whose goal is less than \$100, considering them as noisy data. Finally, the number of the selected projects was 30,333. Since each project has different duration (e.g., 30 days or 60 days), first, we converted each project duration to 20 states (time slots). Then, in each state, we measured obtained pledged money during each state. We created 20 temporal/time buckets and inserted each project's pledged money during each state to each bucket (e.g., the 1st bucket contains each project's pledged money obtained during the first state -- first 5\% duration in this context). To make sure which project got relatively higher or lower pledged money in each bucket, first we measured the mean ($\mu$) and standard deviation ($\sigma$) of pledged money of 30,333 projects in each bucket. Then, we normalized pledged money ($pm_i$) of each project in the \emph{i}th bucket (i.e., pledged money obtained during the \emph{i}th state) as follows:
\[
\bar{pm}_i = \frac{pm_i - \mu_i}{\sigma_i}
\]
where ${\mu_i}$ and ${\sigma_i}$ are the mean and standard deviation of pledged money of the successful projects in \emph{i}th bucket.
After running the normalization in each bucket for the projects, we had a time series of \emph{relative pledged money} for each project, and used these time series in the following subsections.
\subsection{Clustering Approach}
To identify clusters of 30,333 projects, we applied Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) based clustering algorithm. GMM based clustering approach has been widely used by other researchers in other domains such as clustering experts in a question-answering community \cite{pal2012evolution} and image processing \cite{zivkovic2004improved,permuter2006study}.
We formally define our clustering problem as follows: Given vectors $X=\lbrace{x_1}, {x_2}, ..., {x_N}\rbrace$ of \emph{N} independent projects, where ${x_i}$ represents a time series vector of relative pledged money in \emph{i}th project, we applied GMM based clustering algorithm to find \emph{K} clusters amongst observed \emph{N} time series in \emph{X}.
By using GMM, the log likelihood of the observed \emph{N} time series is written as follows:
\[
lnP(X\mid\pi,\mu,\Sigma) = \sum_{i=1}^{N}ln \bigg\{ \sum_{k=1}^{K}\pi_k \mathcal{N}(x_i\mid\mu_k, \Sigma_k) \bigg\}
\]
, where the parameter $\{{\pi_k}\}$ is the mixing coefficients of a cluster \emph{k} and must satisfy two conditions: ${0\leq\pi_k\leq1}$ and ${\sum_{k=1}^{K}\pi_k} = 1$. $\mu_k$ and $\Sigma_k$ are the mean and covariance matrix of the cluster \emph{k}, respectively. ${\mathcal{N}(x_i\mid\mu_k, \Sigma_k) }$ is the multivariate Gaussian distribution of cluster \emph{k}, defined as follows:
\[
\mathcal{N}(x_i\mid\mu_k, \Sigma_k) = \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{D/2}}\frac{1}{\mid\Sigma_k\mid^{1/2}} exp \bigg\{ -\frac{1}{2} (x_i -\mu_k)^T \Sigma_k^{-1} (x_i -\mu_k) \bigg\}
\]
We used EM algorithm to maximize the log likelihood function with regard to parameters including means ${\mu_k}$, covariance ${\Sigma_k}$ and the mixing coefficient ${\pi_k}$. We first initialized the values of these parameters. Then in Expectation step, the responsibilities ${\gamma_k(x_i)}$ of the $k^{th}$ component of observation $x_i$ was calculated by the current parameter values with regard to Bayesian theorem as follows:
\[
\gamma_k(x_i) = p(k|x_i)
= \frac{p(x_i)p(x_i|k)}{\sum_{l=1}^{K}{p(l)p(x_i|l)}}
= \frac{\pi_k \mathcal{N}(x_i\mid\mu_k, \Sigma_k) }{ \sum_{j=1}^{K} \pi_j \mathcal{N}(x_i\mid\mu_j, \Sigma_j)}
\]
In Maximization step, parameters ${\mu_k}$, ${\Sigma_k}$ and ${\pi_k}$ were re-estimated by using the current responsibilities as follows:
\[
\mu_{k}^{new} = \frac{1}{ \sum_{i=1}^{N} \gamma_k(x_i) } \sum_{n=1}^{N}\gamma_k(x_i)x_i
\]
\[
\Sigma_{k}^{new} = \frac{1}{ \sum_{i=1}^{N} \gamma_k(x_i) } \sum_{n=1}^{N}\gamma_k(x_i) (x_i-\mu_k^{new}) (x_i -\mu_k^{new})^T
\]
\[
\pi_k^{new} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{N} \gamma_k(x_i)}{N}
\]
Then, the log likelihood was evaluated. The EM algorithm was stopped when the convergence condition of log likelihood was satisfied or the number of iterations exceeded a pre-defined value.
To estimate the optimal number of clusters inputting in GMM, we used the Bayesian Information Criteria (BIC). In statistics, BIC is a criterion based on the likelihood function for model selection among a finite set of models. The model with the lowest BIC value is the best one among the models. In our study, a model with the lowest BIC value indicates that the number of clusters \emph{K} in the model is the optimal number, returning the most meaningful clusters. Let ${\widehat{L}}$ as the maximum value of the likelihood function of the model, the value of BIC is calculated as following:
\[
BIC(K) = -2ln\widehat{L} + K\ln{N}
\]
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.465\linewidth]{fig-files-pdf/BIC-Successful.pdf}
\caption{A BIC curve of the 30,333 successful projects.}
\label{fig:BIC-values}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Analysis of Clusters}
To find the optimal number of clusters, we ran the GMM based clustering algorithm in a range of $K = {1 \sim 20}$ by increasing 1 in each time, and got a BIC value in each case. Figure~\ref{fig:BIC-values} depicts a BIC curve showing how a BIC value was changed as we increased \emph{K} by 1 in each time. Finally, $K$ = 5 returned the smallest BIC value and returned the optimal 5 clusters.
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.465\linewidth]{fig-files-pdf/avg_successful_bucket_fund6.png}
\caption{Evolutional patterns of five clusters.}
\label{fig:pattern-suc}
\end{figure}
To understand how each cluster had different temporal patterns, we measured the mean of relative pledged money in each bucket of projects in each cluster. Then, we drew a line of the means for each of the five clusters as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:pattern-suc}.
\begin{itemize}
\item Projects in a cluster C2 received almost same amount of relative pledged money over time.
\item Projects in a cluster C3 received the largest amount of pledged money over time compared with projects in the other four clusters. In the beginning, relative pledged money went down until the 3rd time bucket, went up until the 13th time bucket with some fluctuation, and then gradually went down. Why did this evolutional pattern happen? We conjecture that the news of initial popularity was propagated to other users, some of whom eventually backed up the projects, increasing daily/relative pledged money. It is a typical evolutional pattern of the most popular projects like the Coolest Cooler \cite{cooler} and the Pono Music \cite{pono}\footnote{The Coolest Cooler project received \$13,285,226, and the Pono Music project received \$6,225,354.}.
\item A cluster C4 had the most interesting pattern. The initial popularity (pledged money) was low, but the pledged money gradually increased until the 16th time bucket with sharp increments between 12th and 14th time buckets. A cluster C1 (less interesting cluster) had a similar pattern with C4, but overall increments were much lower than C4.
\item A cluster C5 had also an interesting pattern which was gradually going up during the first half duration and going down during the other half duration.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[t]
\tbl{Number of projects, average project goal and average pledged money in each cluster.
\label{table:distribution-success}}
{
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|r|r|r|}
\hline
Cluster & $|$projects$|$ & Avg. goal & Avg. pledged money \\ \hline
C1 & 1,563 & \$41,542 & \$95,429 \\
C2 & 28,209 & \$6,334 & \$9,306 \\
C3 & 97 & \$273,222 & \$1,487,672 \\
C4 & 186 & \$98,253 & \$227,078 \\
C5 & 278 & \$79,354 & \$284,761 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
Next, we analyzed how many projects belonged to each cluster, and estimated average project goal and pledged money of projects in each cluster. Table~\ref{table:distribution-success} shows the number of projects, and corresponding average project goal and average pledged money. Two largest clusters were C2 and C1 consisting of 28,209 (93\%) and 1,563 (5\%) projects, respectively. These clusters had the lowest goal, and achieved the lowest pledged money compared with the other three clusters. C3 had the highest goal and got the highest pledged money. C4 and C5 had next highest goal and got next highest pledged money. Overall, each of the top 2\% successful projects (including C3, C4 and C5) on average received more than 200K pledged money. It means that there were a lot of successful projects with low goal and low pledged money, while there existed a small portion of projects (2\%) with high goal and high pledged money, resulting in unequal distribution of pledged money across successful projects in a crowdfunding platform, Kickstarter.
\begin{table
\tbl{Average percent of duration reaching a goal in each cluster.
\label{table:TimeforGoal}}
{
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|r|c|}
\hline
Cluster & Avg. goal & Avg. percent of duration reaching a goal \\ \hline
C1 & \$41,542 & 55\% \\
C2 & \$6,334 & 66\% \\
C3 & \$273,222 & 17\% \\
C4 & \$98,253 & 58\% \\
C5 & \$79,354 & 26\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
\begin{table
\tbl{Average property values in each cluster.
\label{table:SUC-proj-features}}
{
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|rrrrrr|}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Cluster} & \multicolumn{7}{c}{Average} \\ \cline{2-8}
& Pl. Money & $|$Images$|$ & $|$Videos$|$ & $|$FAQs$|$ & $|$Rewards$|$ & $|$Updates$|$ & $|$Comments$|$ \\ \hline
C1 & 85,429 & 18.36 & 2.03 & 3.38 & 15.51 & 19.94 & 405.70 \\
C2 & 9,306 & 6.59 & 1.28 & 0.72 & 10.07 & 9.14 & 26.89 \\
C3 & 1,487,672 & 34.44 & 2.51 & 12.71 & 18.20 & 41.80 & 16,712.34 \\
C4 & 227,077 & 23.74 & 2.52 & 5.50 & 18.89 & 27.28 & 1509.78 \\
C5 & 284,761 & 22.24 & 2.20 & 7.66 & 14.57 & 23.94 & 1233.47 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{table}
Up-coming questions are ``When did projects in each cluster reach their goal? Did they reach in almost similar time (e.g., the first 30\% duration)?''. To answer these questions, we analyzed accumulated daily pledged money to see when they reached the goal. Table~\ref{table:TimeforGoal} presents the analytical results. All the successful projects reached their goal before 67\% duration. Projects in cluster C3 (with the highest goal and pledged fund) reached their goal very fast, only in 17\% duration. Projects in C5 reached their goal faster than projects in C4, but total pledged money was less than C4 in the end of the fundraising campaigns. Interestingly, projects in C1, which had similar (but less popular) temporal pattern with C4 in Figure~\ref{fig:pattern-suc}, reached their goal in similar time (55\%) even though their goal was lower than C4. C2 with the lowest goal took the longest duration to reach the goal.
Next, we further analyzed the five clusters to understand how other properties were associated with pledged money across the five clusters. In particular, we focused on properties such as number of updates, number of images, number of videos, number of FAQs, number of rewards, number of updates and number of comments. Table~\ref{table:SUC-proj-features} shows the average value of the properties in each cluster. We clearly observed that projects in C3 had the largest values in all the properties except the number of videos (still almost similar with the largest value in C4). Project creators in C3 spent more time to create their project descriptions by adding more images, videos and reward types. During a fundraising period, they actively added more updates, FAQs and received more comments from backers. Mostly, these phenomena applied to the other clusters.
Finally, we focused on C4 and C5 which had interesting evolutional patterns as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:pattern-suc}. Specifically, projects in C4 were initially not popular, but later became popular with a sharp increment in terms of relative pledged money in each time bucket, while projects in C5 were initially popular and then became less popular or relative pledged money in each time bucket decreased. To understand the phenomenon, we investigated how external promotional activities in C4 and C5 were different.
To conduct this study, first we collected promotion-related tweets for each project in C4 and C5 from Twitter by searching each Kickstarter project URL. These tweets were posted by project creators, their friends and backers. Then, we computed the average number of promotion tweets during each time bucket in each cluster. Figure~\ref{fig:PromotionPattern} shows how the number of promotion tweets was changed over time. Interestingly, in the first 8 time buckets, the number of promotion tweets in C5 were higher than the number of promotion tweets in C4. Since then, the situation was reversed -- there were more promotion tweets in C4 than C5. Interestingly, the temporal promotional activities were similar with the evolutional patterns of pledged money in C4 and C5 shown in Figure~\ref{fig:pattern-suc}. Note that it took time for these promotional activities to take effect in terms of relative pledged money in each time bucket. Based on this study, we conclude that promotional activities on social media played an important role for increasing relative pledged money over time.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{more-pdf/PromotionPattern.pdf}
}
\caption{Average number of promotional tweets posted during each time bucket in C4 and C5.}
\label{fig:PromotionPattern}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
In Sections~\ref{sec:features},~\ref{sec:success} and~\ref{sec:range}, we described our proposed approaches with a list of feature, and showed experimental results. In this section, we discuss other features that we tried to use but finally excluded because of degrading performance of our predictive models.
\subsection{N-gram Features}
In the literature, researcher have generated and used n-gram features from texts such as web pages, blogs and short text messages toward building models in various domains like text categorization \cite{text:categorization}, machine translation \cite{Marioo:2006} and social spam detection \cite{Lee:2010}.
We extracted unigram, bigram and trigram features from Kickstarter project descriptions after lowercasing the project descriptions, and removing stop words. Then, we conducted $\chi^{2}$ feature selection so that we could only keep n-gram features which have positive power distinguishing between successful projects and failed projects. Finally, we added 22,422 n-gram features to our original feature set (i.e., project features, user features, temporal features and Twitter features) described in Section~\ref{sec:features}. Then, we built and tested project success predictors. Unfortunately, adding n-gram features deteriorated performance of project success predictors compared with only using the original feature set described in Section~\ref{sec:features}. The experimental results were the opposite of our expectation because other researchers \cite{Mitra:2014} reported that using n-gram features improved their prediction rate in their own Kickstarter dataset. We conjecture that the researchers used smaller dataset which might give them some improvements. But, given the larger dataset containing all Kickstarter projects, using n-gram features decreased a prediction rate.
\subsection{LIWC Features}
We were also interested in using the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) dictionary, which is a standard approach for mapping text to psychologically-meaningful categories \cite{james2001linguistic}, to generate linguistic features from a Kickstarter project main description, reward description and project creator's bio description. LIWC-2001 defines 68 different categories, each of which contains several dozens to hundreds of words. Given a project's descriptions, we measured linguistic characteristics in the 68 categories by computing a score of each category based on LIWC dictionary. First we counted the total number of words in the project description (\emph{N}). Next we counted the number of words in the description overlapped with the words in each category \emph{i} on LIWC dictionary ($C_{i}$). Then, we computed a score of a category \emph{i} as $C_{i}/N$. Finally, we added 68 features to the original features described in Section~\ref{sec:features}. Then we built project success predictors and evaluated their performance. Unfortunately, the predictors based on 68 linguistic features and the original features were worse than predictors based on only the original features.
\section{Conclusion}
In this manuscript we have analyzed users and projects in Kickstarter. We found that 46.1\% users were all-time creators and 53.9\% users were active users who not only created their own projects but also backed other projects. We also found that project success rate in each month has been decreasing as new users joined Kickstarter and launched projects without enough preparation and experience. When we analyzed temporal data of our collected projects, we noticed that there were two peaks in the beginning of a project duration and there was the deadline effect, rushing to invest the project as the project was heading to the end of its duration. Then, we proposed 4 types of features toward building predictive models to predict whether a project will be successful and a range of pledged money. We developed the predictive models based on various feature sets. Our experimental results have showed that project success predictors based on only static features achieved 76.4\% accuracy and 0.838 AUC, by adding Twitter features, increased accuracy and AUC by 2.5\% and 3.5\%, respectively. Adding temporal features consistently increased the accuracy. Our pledged money range predictors based on the static features have achieved up to 86.5\% accuracy and 0.901 AUC. Adding Twitter and temporal features increased performance of the predictors further.
We analyzed what reactions project creators made when their projects failed. By identifying similar project pairs, we compared what properties project creators changed in order to make their failed projects successful in the next try. Our t-test revealed that project creators who lowered their project goal by -59.62\% and increased posting the number of updated by +118\% on average made the projects successful. Then, we clustered successful projects based on a time series of relative pledged money, and found 5 clusters. Out of the 5 clusters, we found three interesting clusters: (i) projects in a cluster were the most popular, receiving the highest relative pledged money over time; (ii) relative pledged money of projects in a cluster went up and went down; and (iii) relative pledged money of projects in a cluster had low relative pledged money initially, but went up with a sharp increment. Overall, our work will help project creators organize their projects intelligently, creating better project description and behaving more actively while running fundraising campaigns, and eventually increasing project success rate.
\bibliographystyle{ACM-Reference-Format-Journals}
|
\section{Introduction}
The concept of quantum walk (QW) is a natural generalization of classical random walks and can be considered a
subarea of quantum computation and quantum information~\cite{Kempe:2003a,Venegas-Andraca:2008,Portugal:Book}.
The possibility of developing fast quantum algorithms based on QWs has attracted the attention of researchers from
different fields and the first successes were provided in Refs.~\cite{Shenvi:2003,Ambainis:2005}.
Experimental implementations of QWs have been proposed using many kind of physical setups~\cite{Manouchehri2014}.
Actual implementations were reported through experiments on
optical~\cite{Schreiber2010} and atomic systems~\cite{Karski2009,Zahringer2010}.
A new proposal of implementation of QWs on cycles using optomechanical systems is described in Ref.~\cite{MPO15}.
One of the most striking properties of QWs on lattices is their ability to spread over the lattice linearly in time,
as characterized by the standard deviation $\sigma (t)\sim t$, while its classical analog spreads out as the square
root of time $\sigma (t)\sim t^{1/2}$~\cite{ABNVW01,MBSS02}.
This characteristic is not preserved in fractal-like structures, as is discussed in
Refs.~\cite{BFP14,BFP15}.
QWs also have different mixing properties compared to classical random walks.
The mixing time measures the time it takes for the average probability distribution to approach the limiting
distribution.
The mixing time on $N$-cycles is $O(N\ln N)$, giving a nearly quadratic speedup over the classical walk,
and it is the best possible, since the diameter of the graph is a lower bound for the mixing time~\cite{Aharonov:2000}.
Similar results were reported for the hypercube in Ref.~\cite{MPAD08}.
The notion of temperature of QWs is discussed in Refs.~\cite{Rom10,Rom12,RDPM14,RS14} by analyzing the entanglement
between the coin and the spatial subspaces of the composite Hilbert space of a coined QW on the line.
Considering the coin as the main system and tracing out the spatial degrees of freedom, the coin reduced density
matrix evolves stochastically and has a limiting configuration as time goes to infinity.
Considering the quantum canonical ensemble, an entanglement temperature and other thermodynamical quantities can
be defined, which help understand the QW dynamics.
In the quantum case, the thermodynamical quantities depend on the initial condition in stark contrast with the
classical Markovian behavior.
In all the previous work on QW's entanglement temperature, the analysis was performed considering the system in
thermodynamical equilibrium, which is reached when time goes to infinity.
In the present paper we analyze the transient behavior of the entanglement temperature on $N$-cycles.
We describe the behavior of the temperature as a function of time and determine how quickly thermal equilibration occurs.
Using a threshold $\varepsilon$ analogous to the one used in the definition of the mixing time, we define the
thermalization time on $N$-cycles and show that this time depends on $\varepsilon$ as $O(\ln {1}/{\varepsilon})$ for a fixed $N$.
On the other hand, for large $N$, the value of the thermalization time is determined only by $\varepsilon$ and does not depend on $N$.
We also calculate the thermalization time in the classical case and obtain that it also is independent of the cycle size $N$.
The mixing time of QWs has been extensively analyzed in the literature with the goal of establishing that QWs mix faster than
the classical random walk, a result which should be useful for quick sampling~\cite{Richter:2007,Ric07}.
In this work we analyze an alternative physical intepretation of the mixing time by establishing a connection between the mixing-
and the thermalization times.
We show analytically that the thermalization time is proportional to the mixing time, which demonstrates that the mixing time is
strongly related with the time that thermodynamic quantities take to reach equilibrium.
The paper is organized as follows.
In Sec.~\ref{secII}, we discuss the dynamics of QWs on cycles.
In Sec.~\ref{secIII}, we obtain the coin reduced density matrix as a function of time.
In Sec.~\ref{secIV}, we analyze the asymptotic entanglement temperature on cycles and compare with the results on the infinite line.
In Sec.~\ref{secV}, we calculate the entanglement temperature as a function of time and connect the mixing time and thermalization time for cycles.
In Sec.~\ref{secVI}, we discuss the Markovian analogue of the classical thermalization time and compared to its quantum version. Finally, in Sec.~\ref{secVII}, we
present the main conclusions.
\section{QW on cycles}\label{secII}
The standard QW on the line corresponds to a one-dimensional evolution of a quantum system (the walker) in a
direction which depends on an additional degree of freedom, the chirality, with two possible states:
\textquotedblleft left\textquotedblright\ $|L\rangle $\ or \textquotedblleft right\textquotedblright\ $|R\rangle $.
The global Hilbert space of the system is the tensor product $H_{s}\otimes H_{c}$ where $H_{s}$ is the Hilbert
space associated to the motion on the line and $H_{c}$ is the chirality Hilbert space.
Let us call $T_{-}$ ($T_{+}$) the operators in $H_{s}$ that move the walker one site to the left (right), and
$|L\rangle \langle L|$ and $|R\rangle \langle R|$ the chirality projector operators in $H_{c}$.
We consider the unitary transformations
\begin{equation}
U(\theta )=\left\{ T_{-}\otimes |L\rangle \langle L|+T_{+}\otimes |R\rangle
\langle R|\right\} \circ \left\{ I\otimes K(\theta )\right\} , \label{Ugen}
\end{equation}%
where $K(\theta )=\sigma _{z}e^{-i\theta \sigma _{y}}$, $I$ is the identity operator in $H_{s}$, and $\sigma _{y}$
and $\sigma _{z}$ are Pauli matrices acting in $H_{c}$.
The unitary operator $U(\theta )$ evolves the state in one time step as
$|\Psi (t+1)\rangle =U(\theta )|\Psi (t)\rangle $.
The wave vector can be expressed as the spinor
\begin{equation}
|\Psi (t)\rangle =\sum\limits_{k=-\infty }^{\infty }\left[
\begin{array}{c}
a_{k}(t) \\
b_{k}(t)%
\end{array}%
\right] |k\rangle , \label{spinor}
\end{equation}%
where the upper (lower) component is associated to the left (right) chirality.
The unitary evolution implied by Eq.~(\ref{Ugen}) can be written as the map
\begin{align}
a_{k}(t+1)& =a_{k+1}(t)\,\cos \theta \,+b_{k+1}(t)\,\sin \theta , \notag \\
b_{k}(t+1)& =a_{k-1}(t)\,\sin \theta \,-b_{k-1}(t)\,\cos \theta , \label{mapab}
\end{align}
where $\theta \in \left[ 0,\pi /2\right] $ is a parameter defining the bias of the coin toss
($\theta =\frac{\pi }{4}$ for an unbiased or Hadamard coin).
Then, the cyclic map is achieved by postulating an appropriate periodicity.
In one-dimension, the lattice is bent into a ring so that its last site is the nearest neighbor to its first site.
If the lattice extends from the site $0$ to the site $N-1$, then we obtain the evolution equations for the cycle
by taking subindices modulo $N$.
The evolution of Hadamard QWs on cycles was analyzed in Ref.~\cite{BGKLW03} with the goal of obtaining explicit
formulas for the limiting probability distribution.
We depart from the approach of this paper because we are interested to analyze the limiting distribution of the
reduced coined space.
We leave for Appendix~\ref{appendixA} the derivation of coefficients $a_k(t)$ and $b_k(t)$, and simply quote
the result,
\begin{align}
a_{k}(t)& =\sum\limits_{l=0}^{N-1}\upsilon _{kl}c_{l}^L(t), \notag \\
b_{k}(t)& =\sum\limits_{l=0}^{N-1}\upsilon _{kl}c_{l}^R(t), \label{abk}
\end{align}
where $\upsilon _{kl}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\exp \left( \frac{ 2\pi ikl }{N}\right)$ and
the $c_{l}^{L,R}(t)$ are determined from the initial conditions for $a_{k}(0)$ and $b_{k}(0)$.
\section{Average reduced density operator as a function of time}\label{secIII}
The unitary evolution of the QW generates entanglement between the coin and position degrees of freedom.
This entanglement can be quantified by the associated von Neumann entropy for the reduced density
operator~\cite{CLXGKK05} that defines the entropy of entanglement
\begin{equation}
S(t)=-\mathrm{tr}(\rho _{c}(t)\ln \rho _{c}(t)), \label{dos1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\rho _{c}(t)=\mathrm{tr}(|\Psi (t)\rangle\langle\Psi (t)|), \label{dos2}
\end{equation}
and the partial trace is taken over the positions.
Using Eq.~(\ref{spinor}) and its normalization properties, we obtain the reduced density
operator
\begin{equation}
\rho_{c}(t) =\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
P_{L}(t) & Q(t) \\
Q(t)^{\ast } & P_{R}(t)%
\end{array}%
\right) , \label{rho}
\end{equation}
where the global left and right chirality probabilities are defined as
\begin{align}
P_{L}(t)&\equiv\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}\left\vert a_{k}(t)\right\vert ^{2},\, \label{chirality0} \\
P_{R}(t)&\equiv\sum_{k=0 }^{N-1}\left\vert b_{k}(t)\right\vert ^{2}, \label{chirality1}
\end{align}
with $P_{R}(t)+P_{L}(t)=1$ and the interference term is defined as
\begin{equation}
Q(t)\equiv \sum_{k=0 }^{N-1}a_{k}(t)b_{k}^{\ast }(t). \label{qdet}
\end{equation}
Due to the unitarity of evolution of closed quantum systems, the probability distributions $P_{L}(t)$ and $P_{R}(t)$
do not converge when time goes to infinity. However, we can use a natural notion of convergence in the
quantum case, if we define the average of the probability distributions over time. As we shall see, with this definition
the results for a large cycle approach those for the quantum walk on the line.
For instance, the average of ${P}_{L}(t)$ is
\begin{equation}
\bar{P}_{L}(t)=\frac{1}{t}\sum_{t'=0}^{t-1}P_{L}(t'). \label{defa}
\end{equation}
$\bar{P}_{R}(t)$ and $\bar{Q}(t)$ are obtained in the same manner.
These definitions correspond to the natural concept of sampling from the system, since if one measures the
system at a random time chosen from the interval $\left[ 0,t\right] $, the resulting distribution is
exactly the average probability distribution.
The average reduced density operator is
\begin{equation}
\bar{\rho}_{c}(t)\equiv\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\bar{P}_{L}(t) & \bar{Q}(t) \\
\bar{Q}^{\ast }(t) & \bar{P}_{R}(t)
\end{array}
\right) \label{rhotilde}
\end{equation}
and its limit when $t\rightarrow \infty$ is
\begin{equation}
\bar{\rho}_{c}(\infty) =\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
{\Pi}_{L} & {Q_0} \\
{Q_0}^{\ast }&{\Pi}_{R}%
\end{array}
\right) , \label{rho2}
\end{equation}
where ${\Pi}_{L}$, ${\Pi}_{R}$, and ${Q}_{0}$ are the limiting probability distribution, which are obtained
from $\bar{P}_{L}(t)$, $\bar{P}_{R}(t)$, and $\bar{Q}(t)$, respectively, after taking the limit
$t\rightarrow \infty$, and are given in Appendix\ref{appendixB}.
Ref.~\cite{Aharonov:2000} addressed a similar calculation by tracing out the coin space.
It is interesting to point out that Eq.~(\ref{rhotilde}) can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\bar{\rho}_{c}(t)=\bar{\rho}_{c}(\infty)+\frac{2}{t}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\xi(t) &\varsigma(t)\\
\varsigma^{\ast}(t)
& -\xi(t)
\end{array}
\right), \label{rhotilde2}
\end{equation}
where $\xi(t)$ and $\varsigma(t)$ are functions of $t$, whose expressions are obtained in Appendix~\ref{appendixB}.
Eq.~(\ref{rhotilde2}) shows that the convergence of $\bar{\rho}_{c}(t)$ to its asymptotic value goes essentially as $1/t$.
\section{Asymptotic entanglement temperature}\label{secIV}
The eigenvalues of $\bar{\rho}_{c}(\infty)$ given by Eq.~(\ref{rho2}) are
\begin{equation}
\bar{\Lambda}^{\pm}=\frac{1}{2}\left[ 1\pm \sqrt{1-4\left(\Pi_L\,\Pi_R-\left\vert Q_0\right\vert ^{2}\right)
}\right], \label{lam0}
\end{equation}
and can be expressed in the following form
\begin{equation}
\bar{\Lambda}^{\pm}=\frac{1}{2}\pm \sqrt{\chi}. \label{lam1}
\end{equation}
Ref.~\cite{Rom12} proposed a correspondence between $\bar{\Lambda}^{\pm}$ and the probabilities of being in the ground
and excited states of a two-state system. Using the canonical ensemble and a two-state Hamiltonian with energy levels
$\pm E_0$, we have\begin{equation}\label{lambda_pm}
\bar{\Lambda}^{\pm}\,=\,\frac{e^{\pm \beta E_0}}{e^{\beta E_0}+e^{-\beta E_0}},
\end{equation}
where $\beta=1/T$. Solving for $T$, we obtain the expression for the asymptotic entanglement temperature:
\begin{equation}
T=2E_0/\ln\left(\frac{1+2\sqrt{\chi}}{1-2\sqrt{\chi}}\right). \label{betae}
\end{equation}
Once the value of $\chi$ is known, the temperature is completely determined.
In order to analyze details about this asymptotic temperature on $N$-cycles and to show the differences with respect
to the entanglement temperature on the infinite line (analyzed in Ref.~\cite{Rom12}),
we consider a QW on $N$-cycles with a localized initial condition, that is,
the initial position of the walker is assumed to be at the origin with arbitrary chirality.
Then
\begin{equation}
\left[
\begin{array}{c}
a_{k}(0) \\
b_{k}(0)%
\end{array}%
\right] =\delta _{k0}\left[
\begin{array}{c}
\cos {\frac{\gamma}{2}} \\
e^{i\varphi }\text{ }\sin {\frac{\gamma}{2}}%
\end{array}%
\right] , \label{psi0}
\end{equation}%
where $\gamma \in \left[ 0,\pi \right] $ and $\varphi \in \left[ 0,2\pi \right] $ define a point on the unit
three-dimensional Bloch sphere (see Eq.~(\ref{spinor})).
Using the results of Appendices~\ref{appendixA} and~\ref{appendixB} and after some algebra, we obtain the
following expressions for the the limiting probability distributions:
\begin{align}
{\Pi}_{L}& =1-{\Pi}_{R} , \label{ty4a} \\
{\Pi}_{R}& =\left( \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\cos ^{2}\theta \cos \gamma
-\frac{1}{4}\sin \gamma \sin {2\theta }\cos \varphi \right) f(N,\theta ) \notag \\
& +\left( \frac{1}{4}\sin \gamma \sin {2\theta }\cos \varphi
-\cos ^{2}\theta \sin ^{2}\frac{\gamma }{2}\right) g(N,\theta ), \label{ty4} \\
{Q_0}& =\frac{1}{4}\left( e^{-i\varphi }\sin \gamma \sin ^{2}\theta
+\frac{1}{2} \cos \gamma \sin 2\theta \right) f(N,\theta ) \notag \\
& +\frac{1}{4}\left( e^{i\varphi }\sin \gamma \sin ^{2}\theta
+\frac{1}{2} \cos \gamma \sin 2\theta \right) h(N,\theta ),\, \label{ty6}
\end{align}%
where
\begin{align}
f(N,\theta )& =\frac{1}{N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}{\frac{1}{1-\cos ^{2}\theta \sin ^{2}{\frac{2\pi k}{N}}}}, \label{fn} \\
g(N,\theta )& =\frac{1}{\cos ^{2}\theta }(f(N,\theta )-1), \label{gn} \\
h(N,\theta )& =\frac{2}{\cos ^{2}\theta }+\left( 1-\frac{2}{\cos ^{2}\theta }\right) f(N,\theta ). \label{hn}
\end{align}%
Fixing the bias of the coin toss $\theta =\pi /4$, it is possible to show that
\begin{equation*}
f(N,\pi /4)=\left\{
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{\left( 1+\sqrt{2}\right) ^{N}+\left( 1-\sqrt{2}\right) ^{N}}{\left( 1+\sqrt{2}\right) ^{N}
-\left( 1-\sqrt{2}\right) ^{N}}\sqrt{2} \\
\frac{\left( 1+\sqrt{2}\right) ^{N/2}+\left( 1-\sqrt{2}\right) ^{N/2}}{\left( 1+\sqrt{2}\right) ^{N/2}
-\left( 1-\sqrt{2}\right) ^{N/2}}\sqrt{2}
\end{array}%
\right.
\begin{array}{c}
\text{for }N\text{ odd}, \\
\text{for }N\text{ even}.%
\end{array}%
\end{equation*}
Additionally, using again Eq.~(\ref{fn}) and taking $N\rightarrow\infty$, it is straightforward to show that
\begin{equation*}
f(N,\theta)\rightarrow \frac{1}{\sin\theta}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=6.cm,width=7.cm]{tem.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Isothermal curves as functions of the
initial position, Eq.~(\ref{psi0}), expressed by the two
dimensionless angles $\protect\gamma$ and $\protect\varphi$. The
left and right side of the figure correspond for two QWs on the
cycle with $N=3$ and $N=100$ respectively. In both sub-figures the
bias of the coin is $\theta=\pi/4$. Due to the rotation symmetry in
the angle $\varphi$ only two zones are distinguished in each figure:
one ``cold'' and one ``hot''. For the ``hot'' zones (the orange
lines on the lower part of the figure) six isotherms are shown, and
their temperatures are, starting for the most inner one,
$T/T_{0}=6.5,~3.2,~2.2,~1.6,~1.3$ and $1.06$. In the case of the
``cold'' zones (blue lines in the upper part of the figure) five
isotherms are shown, and their temperatures are, starting from the
outermost one: $T/T_{0}=0.9,~0.8,~0.7,~0.68$ and $0.66$. The dashed
green lines correspond to $T/T_{0}=1$.} \label{f0a}
\end{figure}
Using Eqs.~(\ref{ty4a}-\ref{ty6}) for a fixed $\theta$, the asymptotic isothermal lines as a function of the
initial conditions are determined by the equation
\begin{align}
\chi=&\left[h(N,\theta )-f(N,\theta )\right]^2\sin^2\varphi\sin^2\gamma\sin^4\theta /16\notag \\
+&\left[h(N,\theta )+f(N,\theta )\right]^2\left(\cos\varphi\sin\gamma\sin\theta\right. \notag \\
+&\left.{\cos\gamma}\cos\theta\right)^2/16. \label{iso}
\end{align}
If we simultaneously make the substitutions $\pi-\gamma\rightarrow\gamma$ and $\varphi+\pi\rightarrow\varphi$,
then Eq.~(\ref{iso}) is invariant.
The angles $\gamma$ and $\varphi$ define the initial chirality on the Bloch sphere, and the mentioned invariance
implies that the asymptotic behavior has a symmetry with respect to the origin.
This means that any point on the Bloch sphere has the following property
\begin{align}
&\left[X(\varphi+\pi,\pi-\gamma),Y(\varphi+\pi,\pi-\gamma),Z(\varphi+\pi,\pi-\gamma)\right]\notag \\
=&-\left[X(\varphi,\gamma),Y(\varphi,\gamma),Z(\varphi,\gamma)\right]. \label{sim}
\end{align}
Therefore, due to this property, it is sufficient to study the asymptotic isothermal lines as a function of the
initial conditions, see Eq.~(\ref{psi0}), for $\varphi\in\left[-\pi/2,\pi/2\right]$ and $\gamma\in\left[0,\pi\right]$.
From Eq.~(\ref{iso}), with $\gamma=\pi$, we define
\begin{equation}
\chi_{0}\equiv\left[h(N,\theta )+f(N,\theta
)\right]^2\frac{\cos^2\theta}{16}. \label{chi0}
\end{equation}
This value $\chi_0$ determines, using Eq.~(\ref{betae}), the
characteristic temperature $T_0$. Then the entanglement temperature
of the system can be expressed in terms of $T_0$.
Fig.~\ref{f0a} shows the level curves (isotherms) for the
entanglement temperature as a function of the QW initial position
for two QWs on the cycle with $N=3$ (left) and $N=100$ (right).
The initial position is defined through the angles $\gamma$ and $\varphi$.
Both sides of the figure show two regions, one
of them corresponding to temperatures $T>T_0$ (the orange lines in
the lower regions) and the other to temperatures $T<T_0$ (the blue
lines in the upper regions). The dashed green straight lines
correspond to the temperature $T=T_{0}$ and their initial conditions
are $\gamma=\pi$. From this figure it is clear that the dependence
of the temperature with the size $N$ of the cycle is very weak.
This arises from the fact that the convergence of
$f(N,\theta)$ and $h(N,\theta)$, Eqs.~(\ref{fn}) and~(\ref{hn}), with $N$
is very fast. Additionally, it is important to point out that taking
$N\rightarrow\infty$ we re-obtain analytically the asymptotic
behavior of the QW on the line reported in Ref.~\cite{Rom12}.
This last result indicates that the extension of the entanglement
temperature to finite graphs, as proposed in this work, is
consistent.
\section{Transient Entanglement Temperature}\label{secV}
In this section we analyze the thermal transient behavior on $N$-cycles.
Using the same correspondence between the eigenvalues of the
reduced density operator and the energy
levels of a two-state Hamiltonian for any time $t$ (given
by Eq.~(\ref{lambda_pm}) in the asymptotic case), we can define a
transient entanglement temperature by using the expression
\begin{equation}\label{T(t)}
T(t)\,=\,\frac{E_0}{\ln {\left(\bar{\Lambda}^{+}(t) / \bar{\Lambda}^{-}(t)\right)}},
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\Lambda}^\pm(t)$ are the eigenvalues of $\bar{\rho}_{c}(t)$
given by Eq.~(\ref{rhotilde}). We assume that $\Lambda^+(t)>\Lambda^-(t)$.
Fig.~\ref{f0} presents three curves for the entanglement temperature as a function of time.
They are calculated using the original map given by Eq.~(\ref{mapab}).
This figure shows that the temperature quickly approaches a limiting value in $t\sim 100$ time steps.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{fig0.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Dimensionless entanglement temperatures as a function of time, in log scale, for
$N=3$ and $\theta =\pi /4$. Starting from the bottom to the top, the asymptotic temperatures are
$T/T_0=0.8,1$ and $1.1$. The initial conditions for these curves can be obtained from Fig.~\ref{f0a}.}
\label{f0}
\end{figure}
Let us now connect this thermalization process with the convergence of the density distribution.
The usual mixing time is defined from the density matrix as
\begin{equation}
\tau_{\varepsilon}(N)\equiv\min\{\widetilde{t}\ | \ \forall t\ge \widetilde{t},
\|\bar{\rho}_{c}(t)-\bar{\rho}_{c}(\infty)\|\le \varepsilon\} \label{mixingtime}
\end{equation}
where $\varepsilon$ is an arbitrarily small positive number.
For the norm in Eq.~(\ref{mixingtime}) we employ the definition
\begin{equation}
\| \bar{\rho}_{c}(t_1)-\bar{\rho}_{c}(t_2)\|\equiv \left|\bar{\Lambda}^+(t_1)- \bar{\Lambda}^+(t_2)\right| . \label{normcont}
\end{equation}
\noindent It is straightforward to show that this definition meets the requirements of a properly defined seminorm,
{it i.e.} absolute homogeneity and subaditivity.
The elements of the density matrix $\bar{\rho}_{c}(t)$ converge to the corresponding ones of $\bar{\rho}_{c}(\infty)$.
Besides, aside from a set of initial conditions of measure zero, $\bar{\Lambda}^+(t_1) = \bar{\Lambda}^+(t_2) \Leftrightarrow t_1=t_2$.
This is a direct consequence of the evolution being over discrete values of the time.
Therefore the definition in Eq.(\ref{normcont}) can be considered as a true norm for the definition of the mixing time in Eq.(\ref{mixingtime}).
Using Eq.~(\ref{rhotilde}) we obtain
\begin{equation}
\bar{\Lambda}^{\pm}(t)=\frac{1}{2}\left[ 1\pm \sqrt{1-4\left( \bar{P}_L(t)\,\bar{P}_R(t)-\left\vert \bar{Q}(t)\right\vert^{2}\right) }\right], \label{lam00}
\end{equation}
and from Eq.~(\ref{T(t)}) it is straightforward to show that
\begin{equation}
\tanh\left(\beta(t)E_0\right)=\sqrt{1-4\left(
\bar{P}_L(t)\,\bar{P}_R(t) -\left\vert \bar{Q}(t)\right\vert
^{2}\right) }, \label{lam2}
\end{equation}
where we have defined $\beta(t)= 1/T(t)$.
\begin{equation}
\bar{\Lambda}^+(t)-\bar{\Lambda}^+(\infty)=\frac{1}{2}\left[\tanh\left(\beta(t) E_0\right)-\tanh\left(\beta(\infty) E_0\right)\right].
\end{equation}
Defining $\Delta\beta=\beta(t)-\beta(\infty)$ and using that $\Delta\beta$ goes to zero when $t$ is large we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{deltabeta}
\bar{\Lambda}^+(t)-\bar{\Lambda}^+(\infty)=\frac{E_0}{c}\,\Delta\beta+O(\Delta\beta^2)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
c=2\cosh^2\left(\beta(\infty) E_0\right). \label{cdef}
\end{equation}
If we now define the thermodynamic thermalization time as
\begin{equation}
\tilde\tau_{\varepsilon}(N)\equiv\min\{\widetilde{t}\ | \ \forall t\ge \widetilde{t},
E_0|\beta(t)-\beta(\infty) |\le \varepsilon\}, \label{thermotime}
\end{equation}
we see that the mixing and thermalization times are related through
\begin{equation}
\tau_{\varepsilon}(N)\simeq \tilde\tau_{c\varepsilon}(N)
\end{equation}
for large $t$, where $\tilde\tau_{c\varepsilon}(N)$ is defined by Eq.~(\ref{thermotime}) after replacing $\varepsilon$ by $c\varepsilon$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{fig1.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{ Mixing time as a function of $N$. In all calculations we took $\theta =\pi /4$, $\gamma =\pi /3$
and $\varphi=\pi /6$. A fit of $\tau$ with the function $N\ln N$ for an initial small range of values of $N$
is shown with dashed lines. } \label{f1}
\end{figure}
The mixing time depends on both $N$ and $\varepsilon$. Fig.~\ref{f1} depicts the mixing time as a function of
$N$ for several values of $\varepsilon$. Notice that $\tau_\varepsilon$ does not depend on $N$ for large $N$.
However, $\tau_\varepsilon$ depends on $N$ for small values of $N$, and when $\varepsilon$ is very small,
$\tau_\varepsilon$ is independent of $N$ only for large $N$. Additionally, Fig.~\ref{f1} shows that
$\tau_\varepsilon=O(1/\varepsilon)$ for $N$ large. This behavior is a direct consequence
of Eq.~(\ref{rhotilde2}), which shows that $\| \bar{\rho}_{c}(t)-\bar{\rho}_{c}(\infty)\| \sim 1/t$.
A similar conclusion can be reached by using the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma~\cite{PBF15}.
Using this result we obtain
\begin{equation}
\tau_{\varepsilon}\simeq \tilde\tau_{\varepsilon}/c.
\end{equation}
Thus, there is a linear connection between the mixing time and the thermalization time, and those quantities do not
depend on the system size when $N$ is large for fixed $\varepsilon$.
From the expression for $c$ given in Eq.(\ref{cdef}), we see that, for small values of the equilibrium entanglement
temperature, the mixing time is a small fraction of the thermalization time.
\section{Markovian version of the Quantum Walk on the cycle}\label{secVI}
It is shown in Refs.~\cite{Rom10,Rom12} that $P_{L}$, $P_{R}$ and $Q$ satisfies the following map
\begin{align}
{\left[
\begin{array}{c}
P_{L}(t+1) \\
P_{R}(t+1)%
\end{array}%
\right] }& ={\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos ^{2}\theta & \sin ^{2}\theta \\
\sin ^{2}\theta & \cos ^{2}\theta
\end{array}%
\right) }\left[
\begin{array}{c}
P_{L}(t) \\
P_{R}(t)%
\end{array}%
\right] \notag \\
& +\mathrm{Re}\left[ Q(t)\right] \sin {2}\theta \left[
\begin{array}{c}
1 \\
-1%
\end{array}%
\right] . \label{master}
\end{align}%
This equation is valid for both the QW on the line as on the cycle and from it is clear that $Q(t)$ accounts for
the interferences.
When $Q(t)$ vanishes the behavior of $[P_{L}(t),P_{R}(t)]$ can be described as a classical Markovian process.
Therefore, the classical analogous map for the quantum walk on the cycle (Eq.~(\ref{master})) is given by the
following equations
\begin{align}
{\left[
\begin{array}{c}
P_{mL}(t+1) \\
P_{mR}(t+1)%
\end{array}%
\right] } & ={\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos ^{2}\theta & \sin ^{2}\theta \\
\sin ^{2}\theta & \cos ^{2}\theta
\end{array}%
\right) }\left[
\begin{array}{c}
P_{mL}(t) \\
P_{mR}(t)%
\end{array}%
\right] , \label{masterMarkov}
\end{align}
where the additional subindex $m$ (in $P_{mL}$ and $P_{mR}$) refers to the Markovian character of this distribution.
The solution of this map is
\begin{align}
&{\left[
\begin{array}{c}
P_{mL}(t) \\
P_{mR}(t)%
\end{array}%
\right] }\notag \\& =\frac{1}{2}{\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1+\cos^t (2\theta) & 1-\cos^t (2\theta) \\
1-\cos^t (2\theta) & 1+\cos^t (2\theta)
\end{array}%
\right) }\left[
\begin{array}{c}
P_{mL}(0) \\
P_{mR}(0)
\end{array}%
\right] , \label{solutionMarkov}
\end{align}
and its asymptotic behavior is independent of the initial condition
\begin{align}
\begin{array}{c}
\lim \text{ }P_{mL}(t) \\
t\rightarrow \infty~~~~
\end{array}&=\frac{1}{2}%
,\, \notag \\
\begin{array}{c}
\lim \text{ }P_{mR}(t) \\
t\rightarrow \infty~~~~
\end{array}&=\frac{1}{2}%
. \label{asym}
\end{align}%
The reduced density matrix in this case is
\begin{equation}
\rho_{mc}(t) =\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
P_{mL}(t) & 0 \\
0 & P_{mR}(t)%
\end{array}
\right) . \label{rho2m}
\end{equation}
If we assume equilibrium between the lattice and the chirality, it is possible to define a time-dependent
transient temperature for the Markovian process in the same way than in the quantum case, that is
\begin{equation}
P_{mL}(t)\equiv\frac{e^{\beta_m E_0}}{e^{\beta_m E_0}+e^{-\beta_m E_0}}, \label{ma1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
P_{mR}(t)\equiv\frac{e^{-\beta_m E_0}}{e^{\beta_m E_0}+e^{-\beta_m E_0}}, \label{ma2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\beta_m(t)=\frac{1}{2 E_0}\ln\left\{\frac{1+\cos^t(2\theta) (P_{mL}(0)-P_{mR}(0))}{1-\cos^t(2\theta)
(P_{mL}(0)-P_{mR}(0))}\right\}. \label{be}
\end{equation}
The above equation shows that in the asymptotic limit of large $t$ the temperature is infinite, independently
of the initial conditions, and the chirality is equally distributed between left and right. Using
Eq.~(\ref{thermotime}) we obtain
\begin{equation}
\tilde\tau_{\varepsilon}(N)\approx\frac{\ln\varepsilon-\ln|P_{mL}(0)-P_{mR}(0)|}{\ln |\cos(2\theta)|},
\end{equation}
for small $\varepsilon$. We note that, differing from the quantum case, $\tilde\tau_{\varepsilon}(N)$ does not depend on $N$ even for
small $N$, and it is valid for both the line and cycle.
Note that, according to Eq.~(\ref{masterMarkov}), for $\theta = 0$ the probabilities $P_{L,R}(t)$ are constant.
Thus, in this case, as well as for $\theta = \frac{\pi}{4}$, which corresponds to the usual Hadamard coin, the thermalization time vanishes.
For $\theta = \frac{\pi}{2}$ the probabilities $P_{L,R}(t)$ flip-flop without converging, so the system does not thermalize.
For other values of $\theta$ the thermalization time scales as $\tilde\tau_{\varepsilon}(N)=O\big(\ln\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\big)$.
\section{Conclusions}\label{secVII}
We have studied the asymptotic regime of QWs on $N$-cycles and we have focused into the asymptotic entanglement
between chirality and position degrees of freedom in order to
define the entanglement temperature on cycles, generalizing the definition
obtained for the line in Ref.~\cite{Rom12}.
A map for the isotherms was analytically built for arbitrary localized initial conditions and found that the
entanglement temperature depends strongly on the initial conditions of the system but weakly with the cycle size $N$.
We have also verified that when $N\rightarrow\infty$ the thermodynamic behavior of the QW on the line is recovered.
Then we have focused on the transient behavior of the QW on $N$-cycles.
We have extended the definition of entanglement temperature for times
where the equilibrium thermodynamic between chirality and position
was still not achieved.
Using this temperature, we have introduced
the concept of thermalization time.
One of the main results of this work was to show
that the thermalization time is proportional to
the mixing time, a result which provides a new interpretation
of the concept of mixing times of QWs in terms of the time that
thermodynamic quantities take to reach the equilibrium.
The mixing time in our case is defined as the time it takes for
the average global chirality be $\varepsilon$-close to its limiting
distribution. We have numerically shown that, fixing $\varepsilon$, the mixing time depends on $N$
only for small values of $N$, and becomes practically independent on the
system's size when $N$ is large.
This last fact shows that the entanglement between the coin and position
degrees of freedom achieves equilibrium in a much faster way than the density distribution associated to
the full wave function.
For a given threshold $\varepsilon$, the mixing time is at
most half of the thermalization time, and their ratio becomes much
smaller for small values of the equilibrium entanglement
temperature.
Finally, we have built and studied the chirality distribution for the classical analogous of QWs on $N$-cycles.
In this case the chirality distribution has a Markovian behavior and the mixing time does not depend of $N$
even for a small $N$.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We acknowledge the support from ANII (grant FCE-2-2011-1-6281) and PEDECIBA (Uruguay).
RP acknowledges financial support from FAPERJ (grant n.~E-26/102.350/2013) and
CNPq (grants n.~304709/2011-5, 4741\-43/2013-9, and 400216/2014-0) (Brazil).
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{SecIntro}
\subsection*{A general question}
When one is given a weighted graph (or an electric network), what are the natural random metrics or pseudo-metrics that one can define on them?
This simple question is of course not new and has given rise to a number of works, and in the continuum, the definition of random metrics is sometimes described in theoretical physics under the name of
quantum gravity (see eg. the references in \cite {DuplantierSheffield}). In the present paper, we will define and describe a simple and fairly natural random pseudo-metric on an electric network, point out some of its nice
features, and briefly discuss some conjectures about scaling limits, in particular in the two-dimensional case.
\subsection*{One-dimensional local time background}
When $(\beta_{t})_{t\geq 0}$ is a standard one-dimensional Brownian motion started from $0$ and
$(L_t)_{t\ge 0}$ denotes its local time at zero,
then it is well-known (it is one of the many results by Paul L\'evy about Brownian motion, see for instance Theorem 2.3, chapter VI, § 2 in \cite{RevuzYor1999BMGrundlehren}),
that the process $(\vert \beta_{t}\vert, L_t)_{t\geq 0}$ is distributed exactly like
$(W_t - I_t, - I_t)_{t \ge 0}$ where $W$ is a standard Brownian motion and $I_t := \min_{s \in [0,t]} W_s$. It can be viewed as a direct consequence of Tanaka's formula
$d \vert \beta_{t}\vert = \hbox {sgn} (\beta_{t}) d \beta_{t} + d L_t$;
Indeed, this shows that $W_t := \vert \beta_{t}\vert - L_t$ is a Brownian motion and it is easy to check that $- L_t = \min_{[0,t]} W$. This is also closely related to the
so-called Skorokhod reflection Lemma (see also \cite{RevuzYor1999BMGrundlehren}).
Before explaining our generalisation of this result to general metric graphs, let us first describe the special case of the segment $[0,T]$ (the previous Brownian case corresponds
in fact to the case where $T$ is infinite), which is due to Bertoin and Pitman \cite {BertoinPitman}. Instead of Brownian motion, we now consider $(W_t)_{t \in [0,T]}$ to be
a Brownian bridge with $W_0 =w_0$ and $W_T = w_T$, where $w_0$ and $w_T$ are fixed and non-negative. For $t \in [0,T]$, we then define $I_t := \max ( \min_{[0,t]} W, \min_{[t,T]} W )$ (see Figure \ref {BBridge}).
We also consider another Brownian bridge $\beta$ on $[0,T]$ from $w_0$ to $w_T$, that we use to define the ``reflected Brownian bridge'' $|\beta|$. We can then define the local time at $0$ process $L$ of this
reflected bridge (or equivalently of $\beta$).
For each $t \in [0,T]$, we define $\delta_t := \min ( L_t, L_T - L_t ) = \min ( L [0,t], L[t,T])$.
Then (see Theorem 4.1 in \cite {BertoinPitman}),
the process $( |\beta_t| - \delta_t )_{ t \in [0,T]}$ is distributed exactly like $W$ and the process $(\min ( I_t, 0))_{t \in [0,T]}$ is distributed like $-\delta$.
Hence, we see that L\'evy's theorem has also a more symmetric version, and does not rely on the orientation of the real line.
In this setting, it is therefore possible to construct a (non-reflected) Brownian bridge $W$
from a reflected Brownian bridge $|\beta|$ by using the latter's local time at $0$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=.8\textwidth]{BBexc}
\vskip 5mm
\caption{Sketch of a Brownian bridge $W$ (in dashed) and of the corresponding process $t \mapsto \min (I_t, 0)$ (in plain -- the two colors correspond to the portions before and after the minimum of the bridge). The generalisation of L\'evy's theorem by Bertoin and Pitman \cite {BertoinPitman} states that the difference between the two is distributed like a reflected Brownian bridge $|\beta|$ from $w_0$ to $w_T$, and that conversely, one can recover $W$ from $|\beta|$.
}
\label{BBridge}
\end{figure}
Note that it is easy\footnote {Since this formula will be used throughout the paper, let us recall briefly a possible direct proof: For a Brownian motion $W$ started from $W_0$, one knows from the reflection principle \cite{RevuzYor1999BMGrundlehren} the joint law of $(W_T, I_T)$, from which one can deduce the law of $(|W_T|, L_T)$ by L\'evy's theorem. We note that by reflection, the laws of $(W_T, L_T) 1_{L_T >0}$ and of $(-W_T, L_T) 1_{L_T >0}$ coincide while $L_T = 0$ implies that $W_T$ has the same sign as $W_0$. From this, one can deduce the joint law of $(W_T, L_T)$, and by conditioning on the value of $W_T$, one gets the law of $L_T$ for the Brownian bridge.} to compute the law of $L_T$,
\begin{equation}
\label{EqLocTimeZeroBridge}
\mathbb{P}(L_T > \ell )=
\exp \left(-\frac{1}{2T}(\vert w_0 \vert+\vert w_T \vert + \ell )^{2}
+\frac{1}{2T}(w_0 -w_T)^{2}\right)
\end{equation}
for all $\ell \ge 0$ (see for instance \cite{BorodinSalminen1996HandbookBM}, page 155, Formula 1.3.8).
Note that this formula holds regardless of the signs of $w_0$ and $w_T$.
In particular, when $w_0$ and $w_T$ have the same sign, then the probability that $L_T$ is positive is
$\exp(-2w_0 w_T /T )$ (which is the probability that the bridge touches $0$), but $L_T$ is almost surely positive when $w_0$ and $w_T$ have opposite signs.
A very special case is when $w_0 = w_T =0$, where $L_T^2 / (2T)$ is distributed like an exponential variable with mean $1$.
\subsection*{GFF on metric graphs background}
When one is given a finite connected undirected graph ${\mathcal G}$ consisting of a set of vertices $V$, a set of edges $E$ where each edge $e$ is also equipped with a positive and finite conductance $C(e)$, one can define
a natural continuous-time Markov chain (that we will refer to as the continuous-time random walk) on the graph, and the related notion of harmonic functions. If one is given a non-empty subset $A$ of $V$, one can view $A$ as a boundary and one can then define the GFF with zero-boundary conditions on $A$ to be the centered Gaussian process on $V$, with covariance given by the Green's function of the random walk killed upon reaching $A$.
More generally, when $h$ is a given function on $A$, one can define the GFF $\phi$ with boundary conditions $h$ on $A$ to be the sum of the aforementioned GFF with zero boundary conditions on $A$, with the deterministic harmonic extension of $h$ to $V$ (i.e., the function that is equal to $h$ on $V$ and is harmonic at all other vertices).
As explained and used in \cite{Lupu2014LoopsGFF,Lupu2015ConvCLE}, it can be very useful to respectively couple random walks and the GFF on such a discrete graph with Brownian motion and the GFF on the metric graph that is naturally associated to it (in particular when relating the GFF to the so-called loop-soups on those graphs).
This metric graph is the structure $\widetilde {\mathcal G}$ that one obtains when one replaces formally each edge $e$ by a one-dimensional segment of length $R(e)=1/C(e)$. A point $x$ in the metric graph is
therefore either a vertex in $V$ or a point on one of these segments. One can then easily define Brownian motion on this metric graph (loosely speaking, it moves
like one-dimensional Brownian motion on the segments, and when at a vertex, it locally chooses to do excursions in each of the incoming segments uniformly). The trace of this Brownian motion on
the sites of the graph (when parametrised by its local time at these sites) is then exactly the continuous-time random walk on the discrete graph, and the Green's functions on the metric graph does coincide with that of this continuous-time random walk, when looked at the vertices in $V$.
In particular, this shows that one can define the GFF $\tilde \phi$ on the metric graph (with boundary $A$) in two equivalent ways: Either directly, as the Gaussian process with covariance function given by the Green's function of the Brownian motion on the metric graph. The field $\tilde \phi$ is then a strong Markov field on $\widetilde {\mathcal G}$ (\cite{Lupu2014LoopsGFF}).
Or alternatively, by first sampling the discrete GFF $\phi$ on the discrete graph $\mathcal G$, which provides the value of $\tilde \phi$ when restricted to the sites of $V$. Then one has, for each edge $e$ to ``fill in'' the values of the GFF, using independent Brownian bridges (the time-length of the bridge is the length of this interval, and the values of the bridges at the end-points are given by the values of the GFF on the vertices).
As pointed out in \cite {Lupu2014LoopsGFF}, considering the metric graph allows to describe the conditional law of the GFF $\tilde \phi$ given its absolute value $|\tilde \phi|$ (or equivalently given its square $\tilde \phi^2$, which is a quantity that is naturally connected to loop-soups, see \cite{LeJan2011Loops}). Indeed, one can easily make sense of the excursions away from $0$ by $|\tilde \phi|$ on the metric graph, and conditionally on $|\tilde \phi|$, the signs of these excursions are just i.i.d. This makes it very natural to study further what one can do using the local time at $0$ of $|\tilde \phi|$, which is of course closely related to these excursions. This is the purpose of the present paper, which will illustrate the fact that on metric graphs, a number of identities
and tricks related to one-dimensional Brownian motions, bridges or excursions (see \cite {BertoinPitman,YorABM}) can be adapted and shed some light on important features of the GFF in higher dimensions.
\subsection*{Some results of the present paper}
Let us consider a real-valued function $h$ on the boundary $A$,
and the GFF $\tilde \phi$ on the metric graph with condition $h$ on $A$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=.68\textwidth]{Graphandboundaryconditions.pdf}
\caption{Sketch of a graph and positive boundary conditions at the four boundary points in $A$. {This is a picture in dimension $2+1$, and dashed lines and squares represent the height of the boundary conditions.}
}
\label{GenLevy0}
\end{figure}
On each edge, conditionally on the value of $\tilde \phi$ on the vertices, this process is a Brownian bridge, and it is therefore almost surely possible to define its local time at the level zero (on each of the edges).
We now use this local time to define the following pseudo-metric. Given $x$ and $y$ two points in the metric graph, the distance $\delta_{x,y}=\delta_{x,y}(\tilde{\phi})$ is the infimum over all continuous paths $\gamma$ joining $x$ to $y$ of the local time at $0$ accumulated along this path. Even though we will use the word ``distance'' throughout the paper, we stress that the mapping $(x,y) \mapsto \delta_{x,y}$ is in fact a pseudo-metric on the metric graph (and therefore also on the original graph): Two points are at distance zero from each other if and only if they
belong to the same connected component of the non-zero set of $\tilde{\phi}$. For each $x$ in the metric graph, we consider the distance
$\delta_{x,A}=\delta_{x,A}(\tilde{\phi})$ to the boundary set $A$ induced by the above pseudo-metric (again, mind that $\delta_{x,A}$ can be zero even if $x \notin A$).
Note that the quantities $\delta_{x,y}$ and $\delta_{x,A}$ can in fact be viewed as functionals of the absolute value of the GFF i.e. of the field $|\tilde \phi|$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=.68\textwidth]{sketchofmetric.pdf} \vskip 5mm
\caption{Sketch of a GFF and of the corresponding local time measure used to define the pseudo-distance $\delta$.}
\label{GenLevy1}
\end{figure}
Similarly, when we are given the field $\tilde \phi$, we can define for each $x$ in the metric graph, the quantity $\tilde I_{x,A}$ to be the supremum over all
continuous paths connecting $x$ to $A$ of the minimum of $\tilde \phi$ along this path, and then finally, $I_{x,A} = I_{x,A} ( \tilde \phi) := \min (0, \tilde I_{x,A})$.
The processes $\delta_{x,A}$ and $I_{x,A}$ can be viewed as the metric graph generalisations of the local time process (of reflected Brownian motion and of the reflected Brownian bridge) and of the infimum process (of Brownian motion and Brownian bridges) that appear in L\'evy's result and its afore-mentioned generalisation to Brownian bridges.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=.68\textwidth]{GeneralizedLevySketch2.pdf} \vskip 5mm
\caption{Sketch of a GFF (in dashed) with the function $x \mapsto I_{x,A}$ (in plain). Proposition \ref {thmGeneralisedLevy} says in particular that the difference between the two is a reflected GFF with the same boundary conditions, and that one can recover this picture from this reflected GFF. The different colors correspond to the ``basins of attraction'' of the four boundary points, and the crosses do separate these four regions.
}
\label{GenLevy}
\end{figure}
The following generalisation of L\'evy's theorem to metric graphs will be the main result of Section \ref {S2} in the present paper:
\begin{proposition}
\label{thmGeneralisedLevy}
Consider a finite graph $\mathcal{G}$, a non-negative function $h$ defined on a non-empty subset $A$ of $V$,
$\tilde \phi$ the metric graph GFF on $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}$ with boundary condition $h$ on $A$, and define the processes $\delta$ and $I$ as before.
Then the two pairs of processes
$(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{x}\vert,\delta_{x,A} )
_{x\in \widetilde{\mathcal{G}}}$ and $
(\tilde{\phi}_{x}-I_{x,A},
-I_{x,A} )_{x\in \widetilde{\mathcal{G}}}$
have the same law.
\end{proposition}
In particular, this shows that the field
$(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{x}\vert-\delta_{x,A} )_{x\in \widetilde{\mathcal{G}}}$
has the same distribution as $\tilde{\phi}$.
\medbreak
In Section \ref {S3}, will then point out features of some functionals of the pseudo-metric
that we now briefly illustrate: Consider a partition of the boundary $A$ into two non-empty sets
$\widehat{A}$ and $\widecheck{A}$, and suppose that the boundary condition $h$ has a constant sign on each of
$\widehat{A}$ and $\widecheck{A}$ (it does not have to be the same sign on both sets).
Then we can define the pseudo-distance between $\widehat A$ and $\widecheck A$
to be the infimum over all paths that join a point of $\widehat A$ to
a point in $\widecheck A$, of the cumulative local time along this path. It turns out that its law
is invariant if we modify the network $\mathcal{G}$ into an electrically equivalent circuit, seen simultaneously from all boundary points in $A$. A subcase of the
general result (Proposition \ref {thmDist2Sets}) that will be given in Section \ref {S3} goes as follows:
\begin {proposition}
\label{PropLaw2Points}
When $A$ contains only two points $\hat{x}$ and $\check{x}$, then the law of the
distance $\delta_{\hat{x},\check{x}}$ depends only on the {\em effective resistance}
$R^{\rm eff}(\hat x,\check x)$
of the electric network between $\hat x$ and $\check x$.
This law is therefore given by Formula \eqref {EqLocTimeZeroBridge}, where $w_0 := h( \hat x)$,
$w_T := h (\check x)$ and $T:= R^{\rm eff}(\hat x,\check x)$.
\end {proposition}
However, as we shall point out, it is easy to see that for the joint law of the distance between more than two boundary points, there is no such simple identity.
Indeed, the laws of joint distances between three points turn out not to be
invariant under local {star-triangle transformations (also known as Y-$\Delta$ transformations)} which do however preserve all resistances between boundary points.
It is also possible to use this pseudo-distance $\delta$ to define and study interesting random sets.
Suppose that $h$, $\widehat A$ and $\widecheck A$ are as before. For each $a<\min_{\widehat{A}} h$, define
$\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ to be the set of points $x$ in the metric graph, for which there exists a continuous path joining $x$ to $\widehat{A}$ such that
$\tilde{\phi}(z)\geq a$ along the path.
Note that $\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ is a random compact connected set containing $\widehat{A}$.
We can call it \textit{the first {passage} set of level} $a$ from $\widehat A$. It is an
\textit{optional set} for the metric graph GFF $\tilde{\phi}$, that is to say that given $K$ a deterministic compact subset of $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}$, the event $\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}\subseteq K$ is measurable with respect the restriction of $\tilde{\phi}$ to $K$ (this is also closely related to the fact that
$\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ is a \textit{local set} for the GFF
$\tilde{\phi}$, see
\cite{SchrammSheffield2013ContourContGFF, AruSepulvedaWerner2016BoundedLocSets,Rozanov1982MarkovRandomFields}).
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.6\textwidth]{MetricTLLocalSet}
\caption{
Representation of $\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$, in thick lines.
Boundary components are surrounded by dashed lines.
}
\label{figLocalSet}
\end{figure}
We will study the distribution of the
effective resistance $R^{\rm eff}(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a},\widecheck{A})$ between the subsets
$\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ and $\widecheck{A}$ in the electrical network $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}$.
Note that this resistance is zero if and only if $\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ intersects
$\widecheck{A}$, and that only the connected components
of $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}\setminus \widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ that intersect $\widecheck{A}$ matter to determine $R^{\rm eff}(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a},\widecheck{A})$.
We will for instance compute the Laplace transform of the effective conductance $1/ R^{\rm eff}(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a},\widecheck{A})$ in the case where $h$ is constant on $\widecheck{A}$.
\subsection*{Further comments on the two-dimensional case}
While all the above considerations are not restricted to any particular dimensions (and in a way, this is one punchline of the present setup), one of the motivations for the present work comes from the very special two-dimensional case and the study of the GFF in
continuous two-dimensional domains. Recall that in two dimensions, conformal invariance is a powerful additional property of the GFF. A lot of geometric properties and features of the
GFF have been recently obtained using SLE, and some of them turn out to be closely related to properties of Brownian loop-soups
(see e.g. \cite {SchrammSheffield2013ContourContGFF,SheffieldWerner2012CLE, MillerSheffieldCLE4GFF,MillerSheffieldIG1,QW} and the references therein).
These results have been essentially obtained
for the GFF in simply connected domains (where SLE tools are more easily applicable), and by local absolute continuity, they also provide some results (existence of level lines etc) on more general surfaces. Explicit formulas (for probabilities of events for instance) have also been produced in simply connected domains, using SLE techniques, but these appear
difficult to extend to more general surfaces.
The GFF on metric graphs approach has recently been shown to provide an alternative and useful approach to level lines of the continuum GFF in two dimensions (see \cite {Lupu2015ConvCLE} and also \cite {QW}).
The results of the present paper do involve quantities (typically the effective resistance) that have nice conformally invariant counterparts in the appropriate scaling limits.
Indeed, taking the formal scaling limit of our computations in the simply connected case leads to known results for the continuous GFF. In Section \ref {S4}, we will:
\begin {itemize}
\item Briefly review the relation between the GFF on metric graphs, loop-soups and the conformal loop ensembles CLE$_4$ and the continuous GFF.
\item Explain why the scaling limit of our pseudo-distance should be the distance between CLE$_4$ loops that has been recently introduced and studied by Sheffield, Watson and Wu \cite {SheffieldWatsonWuMetricCLE4} and by Werner and Wu \cite {WernerWu2013ExplorCLE}, and why this could provide an alternative approach to some of its properties.
\item Give examples of formulae that conjecturally hold for the GFF (and the scaling limit of the pseudo-distance) on bordered Riemann surfaces, that seem out of the scope of SLE techniques. Here, \textit{extremal distance} (see \cite{Ahlfors2010ConfInv}, Section 4, and \cite{Duffin1962ELRes}) is (not surprisingly) the natural conformal invariant that appears in the scaling limit to describe these conjectural laws.
\end {itemize}
\section{Generalisation of Lévy's theorem to metric graph GFF}
\label{SecLevy}
\label{S2}
\subsection {Approach by discretisation}
In this section we will establish Proposition \ref{thmGeneralisedLevy}. We will do this with a stochastic calculus-type proof, as
will also smoothly lead to our further results. However, in the present subsection, we first describe informally another possible proof, based on a discretisations. One goal of this informal
discussion is to explain that the generalisation of L\'evy's theorem should by no means be thought of as surprising (however, as the reader will probably realise, turning this informal description
into a rigorous proof would require some technical work). Another goal is to introduce some of the ideas (such as simultaneous explorations of the values of the field when starting from the boundary) that will be used in the continuous setting.
Let us briefly recall the following approach to L\'evy's theorem via discretisation. When $(S_n, n \ge 0)$ denotes a simple random walk, one can define the hitting times $\tau_{-m}$ of negative integers $-m$.
Then, one can decompose the path of $S$ into i.i.d. pieces $(U^m, m \ge 1)$, where $U^m$ denotes the portion of $S + m$ between $\tau_{1-m}$ and $\tau_{-m}$. They are distributed each like a simple random walk started from $1$ and stopped at their
first hitting of $0$. Hence, if we define $\widetilde U^m$ to be $U^m$ with an additional first upwards step from $0$ to $1$, and then concatenates these $U^m$, one gets exactly a reflected random walk (i.e., distributed like $|S|$). Conversely,
starting from this reflected random walk, one can easily recover $S$ by erasing all its upwards moves from level $0$ to level $1$, and then concatenating the obtained pieces. Hence, in the discrete case, one has in fact a bijective transformation between the
reflected random walk and the random walk. When one lets the number of steps grow to infinity (and renormalises appropriately, so that the random walk approaches a Brownian motion), then it is not difficult to see that this transformation
converges to the identity in L\'evy's theorem (indeed, the appropriately renormalised number of visits to the origin by the reflected random walk will converge to the local time at the origin of the limiting Brownian motion).
If one now wants to use this idea to derive the result for the one-dimensional Brownian bridge on a single segment $[0,T]$ that we described in the introduction, one can use the very same idea, ``discovering'' the random walk bridge from
its two ends simultaneously. This time, the different pieces of the random walk will not be independent anymore, but one still has a one-to-one correspondence between a random walk bridge and a reflected random walk bridge.
A new apparent difficulty arises because the total number of steps of the random walk bridge (say $2N$) is not the same as the total number of steps of the reflected bridge (indeed, one has added a certain number of forward upward
moves from $0$ to $1$, and of the same number of backward upward moves from $0$ to $1$). However, when $N \to \infty$, this number will be of order $N^{1/2}$, and one can therefore resolve this problem by first choosing $N$ uniformly at random in $[n , n + n^{2/3} ]$ and then let $n$ tend to infinity:
In this way, one has, for each $n$, a bijective correspondence between a random walk bridge of length $2N$, and a random path, which (with a total variation probability $1+ o(1)$ as $n \to \infty$) is close
to a reflected random walk bridge of length $2N'$ (where $N'$ is distributed like $N$). Letting then $n$ tend to infinity, and using the invariance principle (and the local central limit theorem, so that the discrete
bridges converge to Brownian bridges), one can fairly easily derive the generalisation of L\'evy's theorem in the case of a single segment.
A generalisation to the case of metric graphs as stated in Proposition \ref {thmGeneralisedLevy} can be obtained along similar lines. One divides for instance each segment $e$ of the metric graph into a large number of
discrete edges chosen uniformly in $[R(e) n, R(e) n + n^{2/3} ]$, with the constraint that every cycle in the graph must have even length. The approximation of the Gaussian field on the metric graph, by the (renormalised) discrete integer-valued field on
this discrete graph is then the uniform measure on all integer-valued functions $f(x)$ on the discretised graph, with the constraint that the values of $f$ at any two neighbouring points always differ exactly by one, and with prescribed even values at the
boundaries. The local central limit theorem also ensures that (when $n$ becomes large), the probabilities of two given possible outcomes does in fact not depend much on the exact outcome of the number of edges.
Then, again, by discovering the values of this discrete field starting from the boundary, one gets for each $n$ a bijection between the pair $($discretisation of the graph, discrete field$)$ and a pair given by
$($discretisation of the graph, reflected discrete field$)$,
where the latter is (in absolute variation) close to the former where one just changes the field into its absolute value.
Letting $n$ tend to infinity, and using the invariance principle, the local central limit theorem as well as the fact, one can obtain Proposition~\ref {thmGeneralisedLevy}.
Of course, we have omitted here quite a number of technical steps in this informal description.
\subsection {Some notations and preliminary remarks}
In the present subsection, we make a few elementary remarks concerning electric networks and their relations to GFF, and we also put down some important notation.
When one considers a finite electric network (i.e. here, only a graph where the edges $e$ have conductances $C(e) = 1 / R(e)$), and one chooses two vertices $x_1$ and $x_2$, then one can define
the equivalent or effective conductance $C^{\rm eff} (x_1, x_2)$ of the network between these two points. This means that for all purposes that do only involve the quantities related to $x_1$ and $x_2$, the network behaves exactly like the network with just one edge with conductance $C^{\rm eff} (x_1, x_2)$ joining $x_1$ to $x_2$ (see eg. \cite {LyonsPeres} for background on electric networks and their relations to random walks).
When we are now given a set $F$ of vertices in the graph that contains more than two elements, it is also easy to see that there exists a unique symmetric matrix $(C(x,y))$ indexed by $(x,y)$ in $F \times F$, such that for all purposes that involve quantities related to the vertices in $F$, the network behaves exactly like the network consisting of the sites $F$ and edges joining
these sites in such a way that the conductance of the edge between $x$ and $y$ is $C(x,y)$ (with the constraint that $C(x,x)$ is always zero). We will refer to this matrix as the effective
conductance matrix of $F$ in this network, and we will denote it by $(C_F^{\rm eff} (x,y))$. It should be stressed that in general, the quantity $C^{\rm eff}_F (x,y)$ is not equal
to the previous ``two-point'' effective conductance $C^{\rm eff} (x,y) = C^{\rm eff}_{\{ x,y\}} (x,y)$.
Some readers may actually probably prefer to think of the matrix $C_F^{\rm eff}$ as a boundary excursion kernel (and this interpretation will indeed be useful later). Indeed, one can define the natural Brownian excursion measure $\mu_F$ away from $F$ in the metric graph as the limit when $\varepsilon \to 0$ of the sum over all points $y$ located exactly at distance $\varepsilon$ of $F$, of $\varepsilon^{-1}$ times the law of Brownian motion on the metric graph, started at $y$ and stopped at its first hitting of $F$. This is then an infinite measure on Brownian paths in the metric graph, that start on $F$ and end on $F$, and stay away from $F$ during the interior of their life-time. The mass of the excursions that start and end at the same point $x \in F$ is infinite, but the mass of the excursions that start at $x$ and end at another point $y \neq x$ in $F$ is finite. It is an easy exercise (one way would be to notice that it is obvious in the case where there are no other vertices than $F$ in the graph, and that this mass does not change under local star to complete graph transformations) to check that this mass is in fact
exactly $C^{\rm eff}_F (x,y)$. Hence, $C^{\rm eff}_F (x,y)$ is in fact really the metric graph version of the boundary Poisson excursion kernel in the metric graph with boundary $F$, and the notation
{$H_F (x,y)$} could be equally appropriate for it.
This effective conductance matrix is very closely related to the GFF. For instance, one can consider the previous electric network with a non-empty boundary $A$, and a
real-valued function $h$ defined on $A$. It is then possible to define the GFF $\tilde \phi$ in the graph, with boundary condition $h$ on $A$.
We then consider another finite set $B = \{ z_1, \ldots, z_n \}$ of other distinct points in the graph, and we would like to describe the joint law of $\tilde \phi$ on $B$. Then, it is easy to see that the Gaussian density of
$(\tilde \phi (z), z \in B)$ will be described via the effective conductance matrix $C_{A \cup B}^{{\rm eff}}$, and more precisely, that it will be proportional to
\begin {equation}
\label {partitionfunction}
\prod_{x \in A, z \in B }\exp \left( {C^{\rm eff}_{A \cup B} ( x,z)} \frac { ( \tilde \phi (z) - h(x))^2} 2 \right) \times \prod_{1 \le i < j \le n }
\exp \left( {C^{\rm eff}_{A \cup B} ( z_i,z_j)} \frac {( \tilde \phi (z_i) - \tilde \phi (z_j) )^2}2 \right).
\end {equation}
We are now going to use natural ways to discover the GFF on the metric graph, by exploring it starting from part of the boundary.
This strategy is again reminiscent of the Schramm-Sheffield theory of local sets as in \cite {SchrammSheffield2013ContourContGFF, MillerSheffieldIG1, MillerSheffieldQLE}. But of course, in the present metric graph setting, one is in the realm of usual stochastic calculus.
The idea will again be to consider multiple particles evolving on the metric graph, all starting from the boundary, in such a way that
at any given time, all particles will be at the same $\delta(\tilde{\phi})$ distance from the boundary.
The particles will progressively discover the GFF. We will write the stochastic differential equation for
$\tilde{\phi}_{\bullet}$ and for
$\vert\tilde{\phi}_{\bullet}\vert-\delta_{\bullet,A}(\tilde{\phi})$,
were $\bullet$ stands for the multiple evolving particles, and check that it is the same in both cases.
Let us briefly recall the setup:
We consider a finite graph $\mathcal{G}=(V,E)$ and $A$ a non-empty subset of $V$. We suppose that $E$ contains no edges that joins a site of $A$ directly to another site of $A$.
Let $e_{1},\dots,e_{n}$ be the edges adjacent to $A$ i.e. that connect a site of $A$ to a site in $V\setminus A$. $x_{i}$ will denote the endpoint of $e_{i}$ in $A$, $y_{i}$ the endpoint in $V\setminus A$.
For $r_{i}\in[0,R(e_{i})]$,
$z_i := z_{i}(r_{i})$ will denote the point in the edge $[x_{i},y_{i}]$ lying at distance $r_{i}$ from $x_{i}$.
For this collection $r_i$, we define the set $B:= \{ z_i, 1 \le i \le n\}$, and we look at the effective conductance matrix of $A \cup B$.
The construction shows immediately, that $C^{{\rm eff}}_{A \cup B} (z_i, z_j)$ for $i < j$ depends only on the new electric network that is obtained by simply erasing all the
portions $[x_i, z_i]$ (and it is then just $C^{\rm eff}_B$ for this network).
When $A$ is considered to be fixed once and for all, we will write
$$ C_{ij}^{\rm eff} ( r_1, \ldots, r_n ) := C^{{\rm eff}}_{A \cup B} (z_i, z_j).$$
This means that one can first discover the electric quantities on the network on the edges $[x_i, z_i]$ and then rewire the not-yet explored part of the network and replace it by a
weighted complete graph joining the $z_i$'s, as illustrated in Figure \ref {MetricTLRewiring}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\textwidth]{MetricTLRewiring}
\caption{
The original network $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}$ on the left and the network after rewiring on the right.
Dashed lines are the edges used for rewiring, with corresponding effective conductances.
}
\label{MetricTLRewiring}
\end{figure}
Let us now explain how to use this procedure also to discover the GFF $\tilde \phi$ first on the edges $[x_i, z_i]$, and also to describe the marginal law of the GFF on these edges.
Given $r_{1},\dots,r_{n}$, such that $r_{i}\in [0,R(e_{i})]$, let us define
$$\tilde \phi (r_1, \ldots, r_n) := ( ( \tilde{\phi}_{z_{1}(r)})_{ r \leq r_{1}}, \ldots, (\tilde{\phi}_{z_{n}(r)})_{ r \leq r_{n}} )$$
and let $\mathcal{F}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})$ be the $\sigma$-algebra that generated by this process.
The following lemma is then an immediate consequence of (\ref{partitionfunction}) and of the spatial Markov property of the GFF:
\begin{lemma}
\label{LemAbsCont}
When $r_{i}\in [0,R(e_{i}))$, the law of $\tilde \phi (r_1, \ldots, r_n)$ is absolutely continuous with respect to
the law of $n$ independent Brownian motions $(W^1, \ldots, W^n)$ respectively started from $(h(x_1), \ldots, h(x_n))$
and defined on the time intervals $[0,r_1], \ldots, [0,r_n]$.
The relative intensity between these two distributions at $w=(w^{1} ( \cdot), \ldots , w^{n} ( \cdot))$ is equal to
\begin{equation}
\label{EqDensityConduc}
D(r_{1},\dots,r_{n}) [w] :=
\dfrac{1}{Z(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})}
\prod_{1\leq i<j\leq n}\exp\left(-C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})
\frac {(w^{(j)}(r_{j})-w^{(i)}(r_{i}))^{2}} 2\right),
\end{equation}
{where $Z(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})$ is the corresponding partition function so that the expected value of $D(r_1, \ldots , r_n)[W]$ when $W=(W^1, \ldots, W^n)$ is equal to $1$.}
\end {lemma}
In the sequel, we will sometimes simply write $D(r_1, \ldots, r_n)$ as a shorthand for the random variable $D(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})[\tilde \phi(r_1, \ldots, r_n)]$.
With this notation, given $r_{1},\dots,r_{n}$ and $r'_{1},\dots,r'_{n}$ such that
$0\leq r_{i}\leq r'_{i}< R(e_{i})$, we can iterate the procedure and see that:
\begin{equation}
\label{EqDensityMultiMart}
\mathbb{E}[1 / D(r'_{1},\dots,r'_{n}) \vert \mathcal{F}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})]=
1/ D(r_{1},\dots,r_{n}).
\end{equation}
Note that when $r_{i}=R(e_{i})$, it may happen that $y_{i}=y_{j}$ for some $i \neq j$. Then
$\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_i)}=\tilde{\phi}_{z_{j}(r_j)}$ and there is no absolute continuity anymore with the law of $n$ independent Brownian motions.
We will consider the class of continuous non-decreasing stochastic
processes $(r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$, coupled with the metric graph GFF $\tilde{\phi}$, such that
$r_{i}(0)=0$, $r_{i}(t)\in [0,R(e_{i})]$, and
for all $(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})\in\prod_{i=1}^{n}[0,R(e_{i})]$ and $t\geq 0$,
$$\lbrace\forall i\in\lbrace 1,\dots,n\rbrace, r_{i}(t)\leq r_{i}\rbrace
\in \mathcal{F}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n}).$$
We will refer to such processes
$(r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ as \textit{explorations} of the metric graph GFF. Mind that we explore here only the edges adjacent to $A$, and that
we also allow the exploration to go all the way to $r_i = R(e_i)$.
The previous lemma allows easily to associate simple martingales to such explorations: Define for each $t \ge 0$,
$$
\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t):=\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t))},
\quad
C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(t):=C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1}(t),\dots,r_{n}(t))
$$
and denote the natural filtration of
$((\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t),r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n})_{t\geq 0}$
by $(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{LemSDE}
The processes
$(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ have the following semi-martingale decomposition:
\begin{equation}
\label{EqSDEExplor}
\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t)=
M_{i}(t)+\sum_{j\neq i}\int_{0}^{t}
C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(s)(\tilde{\phi}_{j}(s)-\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s)) dr_{i}(s),
\end{equation}
where $M_{i}$ is a continuous martingale with respect the filtration of
$(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$. Moreover, the quadratic variations satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{EqVarQuad}
\langle M_{i},M_{i}\rangle_{t}=r_{i}(t),
\qquad \langle M_{i},M_{j}\rangle_{t}=0,~\text{for}~i\neq j.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varepsilon>0$ small.
Let us first assume that for all $i\in \lbrace 1,\dots,n\rbrace$ and $t\geq 0$,
$r_{i}(t)\leq R(e_{i})-\varepsilon$.
Denote, with same the notation as in \eqref{EqDensityMultiMart},
\begin{displaymath}
D_{t}:=D(r_{1}(t),\dots,r_{n}(t)).
\end{displaymath}
Let $(\widetilde{M}_{i}(t),\tilde{r}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ be the process
with the density $D^{-1}(R(e_{1})-\varepsilon,\dots,R(e_{n})-\varepsilon) [\cdot]$ with respect the law of
$(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t),r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$.
Let $(\widetilde{F}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$ be the natural filtration of
$(\widetilde{M}_{i}(t),\tilde{r}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$.
According to Lemma \ref{LemAbsCont}, there are $n$ independent Brownian motions
$(W^{(i)}(r))_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq r\leq R(e_{i})}$,
such that
\begin{displaymath}
\widetilde{M}_{i}(t)=W^{(i)}(\tilde{r}_{i}(t)).
\end{displaymath}
By construction, an event
\begin{displaymath}
\lbrace\forall i\in\lbrace 1,\dots,n\rbrace, \tilde{r}_{i}(t)\leq r_{i}\rbrace
\end{displaymath}
is measurable with respect to
$(W^{(i)}_{r})_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq r\leq r_{i}}$.
Thus, the processes $(\widetilde{M}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ are
$(\widetilde{F}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$-martingales with
\begin{displaymath}
\langle \widetilde{M}_{i},\widetilde{M}_{i}\rangle_{t}=\tilde{r}_{i}(t),
\qquad
\langle \widetilde{M}_{i},\widetilde{M}_{j}\rangle_{t}=0,~\text{for}~i\neq j.
\end{displaymath}
Using Lemma \ref {LemAbsCont}, \eqref{EqDensityMultiMart} and dyadic partitions, one can show that for any positive time $t$, the density of
the process $(\widetilde{M}_{i}(s),\tilde{r}_{i}(s))_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq s\leq t}$ with respect to
$(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s),r_{i}(s))_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq s\leq t}$ is $D^{-1}_{t}$.
According to \eqref{EqDensityConduc}, we can write
\begin{displaymath}
D_{t}=\dfrac{1}{Z(\tilde{r}_{1}(t),\dots,\tilde{r}_{n}(t))}
\prod_{1\leq i<j\leq n}\exp\left(-\dfrac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(\tilde{r}_{1}(t),\dots,\tilde{r}_{n}(t))
(\widetilde{M}_{j}(t)-\widetilde{M}_{i}(t))^{2}\right).
\end{displaymath}
The function $Z(\tilde{r}_{1}(t),\dots,\tilde{r}_{n}(t))$ has bounded variation, so that It\^o's formula implies that
\begin {displaymath}
\left\langle \dfrac{d D_{t}}{D_{t}},d\widetilde{M}_{i}(t)\right\rangle=
\sum_{j\neq i}C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(\tilde{r}_{1}(t),\dots,\tilde{r}_{n}(t))(\widetilde{M}_{j}(t)-\widetilde{M}_{i}(t)) dr_{i}(t).
\end{displaymath}
The lemma in this particular case follows by applying Girsanov's theorem (for the multidimensional version of Girsanov's Theorem,
see for instance \cite{KaratzasShreve2010BMStochCalc}, Section 3.5).
Let us now consider the general case where we do not assume anymore that $r_{i}(t)\leq R(e_{i})-\varepsilon$.
Let $\tau_{1}^{\varepsilon}$ be the first time at which one of the $r_{i}(t)$
hits $ R(e_{i})-\varepsilon$. Then,
$(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{1}^{\varepsilon} ))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ satisfies
\eqref{EqSDEExplor} and \eqref{EqVarQuad}.
As $\varepsilon$ tends to $0$, $(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{1}^{\varepsilon} ))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$
converges to $(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{1}))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$, where
$\tau_{1}$ is the first time one of the $r_{i}(t)$ hits $ R(e_{i})$.
The stopped martingales $(M_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{1}^{\varepsilon}))_{t\geq 0}$ have a bounded quadratic variation uniformly
in $\varepsilon$. Thus the stopped martingales converge as $\varepsilon$ tends to $0$.
Consequently the drift term in \eqref{EqSDEExplor} converges too.
By convergence,
$(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{1}))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ satisfies
\eqref{EqSDEExplor} and \eqref{EqVarQuad}.
After time $\tau_{1}$, the $r_{i}(t)$-s that did already
hit $R(e_{i})$, as well as the corresponding $\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t)$-s, stay constant. The number of evolving processes $\tilde{\phi}_{j}(t)$ decreases but the evolution equation is the same. Indeed, we can apply the argument of absolute continuity with respect a family of time-changed independent Brownian motions to a smaller number of processes. We can decompose the time-line $[0,+\infty)$ using stopping times
$\tau_{0}=0< \tau_{1}<\dots< \tau_{k}< \tau_{k+1}=+\infty$, where $\tau_{1},\dots,\tau_{k}$ correspond to the successive times when
one of the $r_{i}(t)$ hits $R(e_{i})$. On each interval $[\tau_{q},\tau_{q+1})$, the processes
$\tilde{\phi}_{j}(t)$ that are not frozen evolve
according \eqref{EqSDEExplor} and \eqref{EqVarQuad}. Since all the processes $\tilde{\phi}_{j}(t)$ are continuous, \eqref{EqSDEExplor} and \eqref{EqVarQuad} are valid on $[0,+\infty)$.
\end{proof}
The previous lemma allows to obtain the following simple variational property of the partition functions $Z(r_1, \ldots, r_n)$
{and of the effective conductances $C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})$}. Note that other proofs of these deterministic facts
are possible (this is indeed analogous to Hadamard's variational formula
\cite[Chapter 15]{Garaberdian1986PDE} which gives the first order variation of a Green's function under a perturbation of a continuum domain -- the Green's function corresponds to effective resistances).
\begin{lemma}
\label{LemDerivPartFunc}
Let $(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})\in\prod_{i=1}^{n}(0,R(e_{i}))$. Then, with the notation of
\eqref{EqDensityConduc}, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{EqDerLogZ}
\dfrac{\partial_{r_{i}}Z(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})}{Z(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})}
+\dfrac{1}{2}
\sum_{j\neq i}
C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})
=0.
\end{equation}
For $j\neq i$,
\begin{equation}
\label{EqDerCond}
\partial_{r_{i}}C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})=
C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})\sum_{j'\neq i}C^{\rm eff}_{ij'}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n}).
\end{equation}
For $i \notin \{ j, j'\}$, and $j \neq j'$,
\begin{equation}
\label{EqDerCond2}
\partial_{r_{i}}C^{\rm eff}_{jj'}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})=
-C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})C^{\rm eff}_{ij'}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n}).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By symmetry, we can restrict to the case where $i=1$.
With the notation of \eqref{EqDensityMultiMart},
the process $(D(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})^{-1})_{r\in (0,R(e_{1}))}$ is a martingale.
Applying Itô's formula and \eqref{EqSDEExplor} to it, we see that the drift term turns out to be equal to
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&
D(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})^{-1}
\Big(\dfrac{\partial_{r_{1}}Z(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})}{Z(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})}+
\dfrac{1}{2}\sum_{j=2}^{n}C^{\rm eff}_{1j}(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})
\\
&+&
\sum_{j=2}^{n}\Big(\partial_{r_{1}}C^{\rm eff}_{1j}(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})
-C^{\rm eff}_{1j}(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})\sum_{j'=2}^{n}C^{\rm eff}_{1j'}(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})\Big)
(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{j}(r_{j})}-\tilde{\phi}_{z_{1}(r)})^{2}
\\
&+&
\dfrac{1}{2}\sum_{2\leq j<j'\leq n}
\Big(\partial_{r_{1}}C^{\rm eff}_{jj'}(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})
+C^{\rm eff}_{1j}(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})C^{\rm eff}_{1j'}(r,r_{2},\dots,r_{n})\Big)
(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{j'}(r_{j'})}-\tilde{\phi}_{z_{j}(r_{j})})^{2}\Big).
\end{eqnarray*}
Since this drift must be equal to zero, each pre-factor of a term
in $(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{j}(r_{j})}-\tilde{\phi}_{z_{1}(r)})^{2}$ or a
term in $(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{j'}(r_{j'})}-\tilde{\phi}_{z_{j}(r_{j})})^{2}$, as
well as the term not involving $\tilde{\phi}$, must be zero.
By identifying different terms, we get exactly
\eqref{EqDerLogZ}, \eqref{EqDerCond} and \eqref{EqDerCond2}.
\end{proof}
Finally, we note that conversely, the previous descriptions can be used to actually construct a GFF. More specifically,
let us consider a continuous stochastic process $(X_{i}(t),r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq t\leq T}$ and denote
$(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{0\leq t\leq T}$ its natural filtration.
We further assume that:
\begin{itemize}
\item Each $r_{i}(t)$ is a non-decreasing process with values in $[0,R(e_{i})]$ and $r_{i}(0)=0$.
\item For each $i$, $X_{i}(0)=h(x_{i})$, and $X_{i}(t)$ is a semi-martingale with respect the filtration
$(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$, with the semi-martingale decomposition
\begin{equation}
\label{EqSDEX}
X_{i}(t)=
M_{i}(t)+\sum_{j\neq i}\int_{0}^{t}
C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1}(s),\dots,r_{n}(s))(X_{j}(s)-X_{i}(s)) dr_{i}(s),
\end{equation}
where $M_{i}(t)$ is an $(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{0\leq t\leq T}$-martingale.
\item The martingales $M_{i}(t)$ satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{EqSDEXQV}
\langle M_{i},M_{i}\rangle_{t}=r_{i}(t),
\qquad
\langle M_{i},M_{j}\rangle_{t}=0,~\text{for}~i\neq j.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
We can note that $X_{i}(t)$ is then constant on the time intervals where $r_{i}$ remains constant.
We then define $(\hat{\phi}_{z})_{z\in\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}}$
to be the random field on the metric graph
$\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}$ coupled to $(X_{i}(t),r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq t\leq T}$ in the following way:
\begin{itemize}
\item For $t\leq T$, $\hat{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t))}=X_{i}(t)$.
\item Outside the lines $[x_{1},z_{1}(r_{1}(T))],\dots,[x_{n},z_{n}(r_{n}(T))]$, conditionally on the value of
$\hat{\phi}$ on these lines, $\hat{\phi}$ is distributed like a metric graph GFF with boundary conditions
$\hat{\phi}_{x_{1}}, \hat{\phi}_{z_{1}(r_{1}(T))},\dots,$
$\hat{\phi}_{x_{n}}, \hat{\phi}_{z_{n}(r_{n}(T))}$.
\end{itemize}
\begin {lemma}
\label {LemSDE2}
Under all these conditions, the field $\hat{\phi}$ is distributed like the metric graph GFF $\tilde{\phi}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varepsilon>0$ small. Let us first assume that for all $i$, $r_{i}(T)\leq R(e_{i})-\varepsilon$.
We extend the definition of $r_{i}(t)$ and $X_{i}(t)$ for $t>T$,
\begin{displaymath}
r_{i}(t):=
(r_{i}(T)+(t-T))\wedge (R(e_{i})-\varepsilon) ~\text{if}~t>T,
\end{displaymath}
and set $X_{i}(t)=\hat{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t))}$. Let $(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$ be the natural filtration
of $(X_{i}(t),r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$.
From Lemma~\ref{LemSDE} follows that for $t\geq T$, the processes
$(X_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq T}$ satisfy the equations \eqref{EqSDEExplor} and \eqref{EqVarQuad}, because by definition, for $t\geq T$, $z_{i}(r_{i}(t))$ explores a metric graph GFF.
For $t\in[0,T]$, \eqref{EqSDEExplor} and \eqref{EqVarQuad} are satisfied too, because of
\eqref{EqSDEX} and \eqref{EqSDEXQV}. So for all $t\geq 0$, we have
\begin{displaymath}
X_{i}(t)=
M_{i}(t)+\sum_{j\neq i}\int_{0}^{t}
C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1}(s),\dots,r_{n}(s))(X_{j}(s)-X_{i}(s)) dr_{i}(s),
\end{displaymath}
where the quadratic variations and covariations of the $(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$-martingales
$(M_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ are given by \eqref{EqVarQuad}.
Define
\begin{displaymath}
D^{-1}_{t}:=Z(r_{1}(t),\dots,r_{n}(t))
\prod_{1\leq i<j\leq n}
\exp\left(\frac{1}{2}
C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(r_{1}(t),\dots,r_{n}(t))(X_{j}(t)-X_{i}(t))^{2}
\right).
\end{displaymath}
Applying Itô's formula and \eqref{EqDerLogZ}, \eqref{EqDerCond} and \eqref{EqDerCond2},
we get that $(D^{-1}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$ is
an $(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$ local martingale.
Moreover
\begin{displaymath}
D^{-1}_{0}=
Z(0,\dots,0)\prod_{1\leq i<j\leq n}
\exp\left(\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(0,\dots,0)(h(x_{j})-h(x_{i}))^{2}\right).
\end{displaymath}
From Lemma \ref{LemAbsCont}, it follows that $D^{-1}_{0}=1$.
For $K>0$, denote $\theta_{K}$ the stopping time when one of the $X_{i}(t)$ hits $K$ or $-K$.
The stopped local martingale $(D^{-1}_{t\wedge \theta_{K}})_{t\geq 0}$ is bounded, thus it is a true martingale.
With the condition $D^{-1}_{0}=1$, we get that it is a change of measure martingale for the filtration
$(\mathcal{F}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$. We apply the change of measure of density
$(D^{-1}_{t\wedge \theta_{K}})_{t\geq 0}$ to the process
$(X_{i}(t\wedge\theta_{K}), r_{i}(t\wedge\theta_{K}))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$
and obtain a processes denoted
$(\widetilde{M}_{i,K}(t), \tilde{r}_{i,K}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$. By Girsanov's theorem,
$\widetilde{M}_{i,K}$ is a martingale with respect the natural filtration of
$(\widetilde{M}_{i,K}(t), \tilde{r}_{i,K}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ the quadratic variations are
\begin{displaymath}
\langle \widetilde{M}_{i,K},\widetilde{M}_{i,K}\rangle_{t}=\tilde{r}_{i,K}(t),
\qquad
\langle \widetilde{M}_{i,K},\widetilde{M}_{j,K}\rangle_{t}=0,~\text{for}~i\neq j.
\end{displaymath}
Let $\tilde{\theta}_{K,K'}$ be the first time one of the $\widetilde{M}_{i,K}$ hits $K'$ or $-K'$.
The processes do not evolve after time $\tilde{\theta}_{K,K'}$.
Let $K'\in(0,K)$.
Then
$(\widetilde{M}_{i,K}(t), \tilde{r}_{i,K}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$
and
$(\widetilde{M}_{i,K'}(t), \tilde{r}_{i,K'}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$
are naturally coupled on the same probability space such that
\begin{displaymath}
(\widetilde{M}_{i,K'}(t), \tilde{r}_{i,K'}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}=
(\widetilde{M}_{i,K}(t\wedge\tilde{\theta}_{K,K'}),
\tilde{r}_{i,K}(t\wedge\tilde{\theta}_{K,K'}))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}.
\end{displaymath}
By coupling this way the processes for all values of $K$, one gets a process
$(\widetilde{M}_{i}(t), \tilde{r}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ such that
\begin{displaymath}
(\widetilde{M}_{i,K}(t), \tilde{r}_{i,K}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}=
(\widetilde{M}_{i}(t\wedge\tilde{\theta}_{K}),
\tilde{r}_{i}(t\wedge\tilde{\theta}_{K}))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0},
\end{displaymath}
where $\tilde{\theta}_{K}$ is the first hitting time of $K$ or $-K$.
$\widetilde{M}_{i}$ is a martingale with respect to the filtration generated by
$(\widetilde{M}_{i}(t), \tilde{r}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ and
it satisfies
\begin{displaymath}
\langle \widetilde{M}_{i},\widetilde{M}_{i}\rangle_{t}=\tilde{r}_{i}(t),
\qquad
\langle \widetilde{M}_{i},\widetilde{M}_{j}\rangle_{t}=0,~\text{for}~i\neq j.
\end{displaymath}
According to Dubins-Schwarz-Knight's theorem (see Theorem 1.9, chapter V, §1 in \cite{RevuzYor1999BMGrundlehren}), there are
$n$ independent Brownian motions $(W^{(i)})_{1\leq i\leq n}$ and independent from
$(\tilde{r}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$, such that
\begin{displaymath}
\widetilde{M}_{i}(t)=W^{(i)}(\tilde{r}_{i}(t)).
\end{displaymath}
With the notation of \eqref{EqDensityConduc}, the process
$(X_{i}(t\wedge\theta_{K}), r_{i}(t\wedge\theta_{K}))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$
has a density
\begin{displaymath}
D(R(e_{1})-\varepsilon,\dots,R(e_{n})-\varepsilon)
\end{displaymath}
with respect the process
$(\widetilde{M}_{i}(t\wedge\tilde{\theta}_{K}),
\tilde{r}_{i}(t\wedge\tilde{\theta}_{K}))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$.
Thus
$(X_{i}(t), r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ has the same density
$D(R(e_{1})-\varepsilon,\dots,R(e_{n})-\varepsilon)$ with respect
$(\widetilde{M}_{i}(t),\tilde{r}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$.
From Lemma \ref{LemAbsCont} follows that the process
$(\hat{\phi}_{z_{i}(r)})_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq r\leq R(e_{i})-\varepsilon}$
is distributed like the restriction of a metric graph GFF to
\begin{displaymath}
\lbrace z_{i}(r)\vert 1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq r\leq R(e_{i})-\varepsilon\rbrace.
\end{displaymath}
Together with the Markov property follows that $\hat{\phi}$ is distributed like a metric graph GFF.
Finally, let us not assume anymore that $r_{i}(T)\leq R(e_{i})-\varepsilon$ for all $i$. Let $\tau^{\varepsilon}_{1}$
be the first time on $[0,T]$ when one of the $r_{i}(t)$ hits $R(e_{i})-\varepsilon$.
Let $\tau_{1}$ be the first time on $[0,T]$ when one $r_{i}(t)$ hits $R(e_{i})$.
Then the process
$(X_{i}(t\wedge \tau^{\varepsilon}_{1}),r_{i}(t\wedge \tau^{\varepsilon}_{1}))_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq t\leq T}$
satisfies the lemma. By convergence
$(X_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{1}),r_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{1}))_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq t\leq T}$
satisfies the lemma, too.
Then one can consider successive stopping times $\tau_{1},\dots,\tau_{k}$ when one
of the $r_{i}(t)$ hits $R(e_{i})$. After each stopping time $\tau_{q}$, there is at least one process
$(X_{i}(t),r_{i}(t))$ that is frozen, and applying our previous method to a smaller number of evolving processes, one can show that
$(X_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{q}),r_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{q}))_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq t\leq T}$
satisfies the lemma for all $q\in \lbrace 1,\dots,k\rbrace$.
\end{proof}
\subsection {A particular exploration}
We now define a particular exploration of the GFF, keeping the same notation as before. Let us first give the formal definition:
Given $r\in[0,R(e_{i})]$, we will denote by $L_{i}(r)$ the local time at zero accumulated by $\tilde{\phi}$ on the interval
$[x_{i},z_{i}(r)]$. We will construct an exploration $(r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ of $\tilde{\phi}$, such that for all $t\geq 0$,
\begin{equation}
\label{EqSameLT0}
L_{1}(r_{1}(t))=\dots=L_{n}(r_{n}(t)).
\end{equation}
{This is reminiscent of first-passage percolation, where one also looks at the growth of geodesic balls in a random metric. Note however that in the present setting,
the random lengths of edges are neither uniform nor independent, and that some edges have zero length.}
Denote
\begin{displaymath}
\ell_{max}:=\min(L_{1}(R(e_{1})),\dots,L_{n}(R(e_{n}))).
\end{displaymath}
For $\ell\in(0,\ell_{max}]$, define
\begin{displaymath}
R^{-}_{i}(\ell):=\sup\lbrace r\in[0,R(e_{i})]\vert L_{i}(r)<\ell\rbrace.
\end{displaymath}
and
\begin{displaymath}
R^{-}(\ell):=\sum_{i=1}^{n}R^{-}_{i}(\ell).
\end{displaymath}
Denote, if $h(x_{i})\neq 0$,
\begin{displaymath}
\rho^{0}_{i}:=\sup\lbrace r\in[0,R(e_{i})]\vert \tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(\cdot)}
~\text{stays away from}~0~\text{on}~[0,r]\rbrace
.
\end{displaymath}
If $h(x_{i})= 0$, set $\rho^{0}_{i}=0$.
For $r\in (0,R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})]$, define
\begin{displaymath}
T_{i}(r)=
\left\lbrace
\begin{array}{ll}
r+\sum_{j=1}^{i-1}\rho^{0}_{j} & \text{if}~r\leq\rho^{0}_{i}, \\
r-R^{-}_{i}(L_{i}(r)) + R^{-}(L_{i}(r)) & \text{if}~r>\rho^{0}_{i}.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{displaymath}
Define $r_{i}(t)$ as the inverse of $T_{i}$. If $t\in[0,R^{-}(\ell_{max})]$, let
\begin{displaymath}
r_{i}(t)=\inf\lbrace r\in(0,R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})]\vert T_{i}(r)\geq t\rbrace
\end{displaymath}
For $t>R^{-}(\ell_{max})$, we set $r_{i}(t)=R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})$.
Let us now explain in words what this processes $(r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ does. Each $r_{i}(t)$ starts from $0$.
First, $r_{1}(t)$ starts by exploring the interval $[0,\rho^{0}_{1}]$ while
$r_{2}(t),\dots,r_{n}(t)$ stay at $0$. Then $r_{2}(t)$ explores $[0,\rho^{0}_{2}]$, etc.
At time $\sum_{i=1}^{n}\rho^{0}_{i}$, each $r_{i}(t)$ is at $\rho^{0}_{i}$. After that time, each
$r_{i}(t)$ explores the excursions of $\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(\cdot)}$ away from zero. The condition
\eqref{EqSameLT0} actually imposes the order in which the excursions across different values of $i$ are explored. At time $R^{-}(\ell_{max})$, each $r_{i}(t)$ reaches $R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})$ and does not
evolve after that time. For exactly one $i$, $R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})$ equals $R(e_{i})$ and $r_{i}(t)$
reaches the end of the interval corresponding to the edge $e_{i}$. Moreover,
for all $t\in [0,R^{-}(\ell_{max})]$, we have
$\sum_{i=1}^{n}r_{i}(t)=t$.
The folowing lemma sums up some easy properties of this process:
\begin{lemma}
\label{LemExplor}
For $i\in \lbrace 1,\dots,n\rbrace$, the process $r_{i}(t)$ is non-decreasing continuous with values in $[0,R(e_{i})]$.
$r_{i}(0)=0$. For $t$ large enough, $r_{i}(t)=R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})$ and
$\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t))}=\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max}))}=0$.
Almost surely, there exactly one $i\in \lbrace 1,\dots,n\rbrace$, such that $R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})=R(e_{i})$.
The process $(r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ is an exploration of the metric graph GFF $\tilde{\phi}$ such that
for all $t\geq 0$,
\begin{equation}
\label{EqSameLT}
L_{1}(r_{1}(t))=\dots=L_{n}(r_{n}(t)).
\end{equation}
Almost surely, for all $t\geq 0$, there is at most one $i\in \lbrace 1,\dots,n\rbrace$ such that
$r_{i}(t)>0$ and $\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t))}\neq 0$. In particular, if $h$ is non-negative on $A$, then for any
$i,j\in\lbrace 1,\dots,n\rbrace$, $\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t))}\tilde{\phi}_{z_{j}(r_{j}(t))}\geq 0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By definition, $r_{i}(t)\in[0,R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})]\subseteq [0,R(e_{i})]$, and for $t>R^{-}(\ell_{max})$, $r_{i}(t)=R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})$.
Also, by definition, $r_{i}(t)$ is non-decreasing. To show that it is continuous, we need to check that $T_{i}(r)$ is strictly increasing and that
$r_{i}(R^{-}(\ell_{max}))=R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})$. $T_{i}(r)$ is clearly strictly increasing on $(0,\rho_{i}^{0}]$. For $r>\rho_{i}^{0}$,
\begin{displaymath}
T_{i}(r)=r+\sum_{j\neq i}R^{-}_{j}(L_{i}(r)).
\end{displaymath}
The first term $r$ is strictly increasing and the others are non-decreasing. Thus $T_{i}(r)$ is strictly increasing on $(\rho_{i}^{0},R^{-}(\ell_{max})]$.
Moreover, $R^{-}_{j}(L_{j}(r))\geq\rho^{0}_{j}$. Thus, for $r>\rho_{i}^{0}$,
\begin{displaymath}
T_{i}(r)>\sum_{j=1}^{n}\rho^{0}_{j}=T_{i}(\rho_{i}^{0}).
\end{displaymath}
So $T_{i}(r)$ is strictly increasing on $(0,R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})]$ and consequently $r_{i}(t)$ is continuous on $[0,R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})]$ and
$r_{i}(0)=0$. Moreover,
\begin{displaymath}
T_{i}(R_{i}^{-}(\ell_{max}))=R^{-}(L_{i}(R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})))=R^{-}(\ell_{max}).
\end{displaymath}
Thus $r_{i}(R^{-}(\ell_{max}))=R_{i}^{-}(\ell_{max})$ and $r_{i}(t)$ is continuous on $[0,+\infty)$.
Let us check now \eqref{EqSameLT}. If $t\leq \sum_{i=1}^{n}\rho_{i}^{0}$, then $r_{i}(t)\leq \rho_{i}^{0}$ and
\begin{displaymath}
L_{1}(r_{1}(t))=\dots=L_{n}(r_{n}(t))=0.
\end{displaymath}
If $t\geq R^{-}(\ell_{max})$, then $r_{i}(t)=R^{-}_{i}(\ell_{max})$ and
\begin{displaymath}
L_{1}(r_{1}(t))=\dots=L_{n}(r_{n}(t))=\ell_{max}.
\end{displaymath}
Consider now that
\begin{displaymath}
\sum_{i=1}^{n}\rho_{i}^{0}<t<R^{-}(\ell_{max}).
\end{displaymath}
Assume that there is $i\neq j$ such that $L_{i}(r_{i}(t))<L_{j}(r_{j}(t))$.
Let $\ell\in (L_{i}(r_{i}(t)),L_{j}(r_{j}(t)))$. Then $R^{-}_{j}(\ell)<r_{j}(t)$.
Moreover,
\begin{displaymath}
t\leq T_{i}(r_{i}(t)) < R^{-}(\ell)=T_{j}(R^{-}_{j}(\ell)).
\end{displaymath}
By definition of $r_{j}$, this means that $r_{j}(t)\leq R^{-}_{j}(\ell)$, which contradicts $R^{-}_{j}(\ell)<r_{j}(t)$.
This means that we cannot have $L_{i}(r_{i}(t))<L_{j}(r_{j}(t))$.
Let us check now that $(r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ is an exploration of $\tilde{\phi}$.
Let $t>0$. Let $(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})\in\prod_{i=1}^{n}[0,R(e_{i})]$. Define
\begin{displaymath}
\underline{\ell}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n}):=\min(L_{1}(r_{1}),\dots,L_{n}(r_{n})).
\end{displaymath}
Let $\underline{i}$ be the smallest $i$ such that $r_{i}<\rho_{i}^{0}$ if such exists, $n$ otherwise. The random variables
$\underline{\ell}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})$ and $\underline{i}$ are $\mathcal{F}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})$-measurable
If $\underline{\ell}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})=0$, then
\begin{equation}
\label{EqCondExplor}
r_{i}(t)\leq r_{i}~\text{for all}~i\in \lbrace 1,\dots,n\rbrace
\end{equation}
is equivalent to
\begin{displaymath}
t\leq r_{\underline{i}}\wedge \rho_{\underline{i}}^{0}.
\end{displaymath}
If $\underline{\ell}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})>0$, then \eqref{EqCondExplor} is equivalent to
\begin{displaymath}
t\leq R^{-}(\underline{\ell}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n}))+
\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq n\\L_{i}(r_{i})=\underline{\ell}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})}}
(r_{i}-R_{i}^{-}(\underline{\ell}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n}))).
\end{displaymath}
Thus the event \eqref{EqCondExplor} is $\mathcal{F}(r_{1},\dots,r_{n})$-measurable.
If $\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t))}\neq 0$, then either $r_{i}(t)<\rho^{0}_{i}$ or
$r_{i}(t)>\rho^{0}_{i}$ and $R^{-}_{i}(\ell)$ has a discontinuity at $\ell=L_{i}(r_{i}(t))$. If
$r_{i}(t)<\rho^{0}_{i}$, then by definition, for $j\neq i$, either $r_{j}(t)=0$ or
$r_{j}(t)=\rho^{0}_{j}$ and $\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{j}(t))}=\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(\rho^{0}_{j})}=0$.
Consider now the case when $r_{i}(t)>\rho^{0}_{i}$ and $R^{-}_{i}(\ell)$ has a discontinuity at
$\ell=L_{i}(r_{i}(t))$.
To show that for $j\neq i$, $\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{j}(t))}=0$, we need to show that
$R^{-}_{j}(\ell)$ is continuous at $\ell=L_{i}(r_{i}(t))=L_{j}(r_{j}(t))$. So we need to check that
for $i\neq j\in \lbrace 1,\dots,n\rbrace$, almost surely, the discontinuity sets of $R^{-}_{i}(\ell)$ and $R^{-}_{j}(\ell)$ are
disjoint. This comes from the fact that the law of $(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(\cdot)},\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(\cdot)})$
is absolutely continuous with respect the law of two independent Brownian motions and the fact that for two independent Brownian motions the discontinuity
sets of the inverse of the local time at zero (corresponding to the local time levels of Brownian excursions away from zero) are disjoint.
\end{proof}
Next is the key lemma for the proof of Proposition \ref{thmGeneralisedLevy}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{LemGenLevySDE}
Assume that the boundary condition $h$ is non-negative on $A$. Let $I_{max}$ denote the maximum over $1\leq i\leq n$ of the quantities $ I_{y_{i},A}(\tilde{\phi})$
and let $\rho_i$ denote the first $r$ at which $I_{z_{i}(r),A}$ reaches $I_{max}$.
Then, the processes
\begin{displaymath}
(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r)}\vert, \delta_{z_{i}(r),A})
_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq r\leq R_{i}^{-}(\ell_{max})}
\end{displaymath}
and
\begin{displaymath}
(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r)}-I_{z_{i}(r),A}, -I_{z_{i}(r),A})
_{1\leq i\leq n, 0 \le r \le \rho_i}
\end{displaymath}
have the same distribution.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $(r_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$ be the exploration of the metric graph GFF $\tilde{\phi}$
that appears in Lemma \ref{LemExplor}. According to Tanaka's formula
(see Theorem 1.2, chapter VI, §1 in \cite{RevuzYor1999BMGrundlehren}), we have the following semi-martingale decomposition for $\vert\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t))}\vert$:
\begin{displaymath}
\vert\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t))}\vert=
h(x_{i})+\int_{0}^{t}\hbox {sgn}(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(s))})
d\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r_{i}(s))}+L_{i}(r_{i}(t)).
\end{displaymath}
With the notation of Lemma \ref{LemSDE},
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn {
\vert\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t)\vert-L_{i}(r_{i}(t))} \\
&=&
h(x_{i})+\int_{0}^{t}\hbox {sgn}(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s))
d\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s)
\\&=&h(x_{i})+\int_{0}^{t}\hbox {sgn}(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s))dM_{i}(s)
+\sum_{j\neq i}\int_{0}^{t}\hbox {sgn}(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s))
C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(s)(\tilde{\phi}_{j}(s)-\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s)) dr_{i}(s).
\end{eqnarray*}
By construction, $L_{i}(r_{i}(s))=L_{j}(r_{j}(s))$, and according to Lemma \ref{LemExplor},
$\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s)\tilde{\phi}_{j}(s)\geq 0$.
Thus,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn { \vert\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t)\vert-L_{i}(r_{i}(t))}\\
&=& h(x_{i})+\int_{0}^{t}\hbox {sgn}(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s))dM_{i}(s)
+\sum_{j\neq i}\int_{0}^{t}
C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(s)(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{j}(s)\vert-L_{j}(r_{j}(s))
-\vert\tilde{\phi}_{i}(s)\vert+L_{i}(r_{i}(s))) dr_{i}(s).
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, the processes $(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t)\vert-L_{i}(r_{i}(t)))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$
satisfy \eqref{EqSDEX} and \eqref{EqSDEXQV}. Let $T>0$. According to Lemma
\ref{LemSDE2}, $(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t)\vert-L_{i}(r_{i}(t)))_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq t\leq T}$ can be extended to a GFF $\hat{\phi}^{T}$ on the whole metric graph $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}$. By letting $T$ tend to infinity, we get that $(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t)\vert-L_{i}(r_{i}(t)))_{1\leq i\leq n, t\geq 0}$
extends to a GFF $\hat{\phi}$ on whole $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}$.
For that GFF we have
\begin{displaymath}
L_{i}(r_{i}(t))=-I_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t)),A}(\hat{\phi}).
\end{displaymath}
Moreover, $L_{i}(r_{i}(t))=\delta_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t)),A}(\tilde{\phi})$.
This implies our lemma.
\end{proof}
The idea is now to use the previous lemma to prove Proposition \ref {thmGeneralisedLevy} by induction on the number of edges of the graph.
We first need to check that the proposition holds in the case where the graph consists only of one edge, which is the case of the Brownian bridge described at the beginning of the introduction:
\begin{lemma}[Bertoin-Pitman, \cite {BertoinPitman}]
\label{LemLevyBridge}
Proposition \ref {thmGeneralisedLevy} holds when the graph $\mathcal{G}$ is just two vertices $x_{1}$ and $x_{2}$ with only one edge $e$
joining them.
\end{lemma}
As already mentioned in the introduction, this result is due to Bertoin and Pitman (Theorem 4.1 in \cite{BertoinPitman}) and there are several possible ways to derive it.
{In \cite{BertoinPitman}, it was obtained via a combination of several classical transforms (such as the Verwaat transform) between the Brownian bridge, the Brownian excursion and the Brownian meander.}
The following short proof {differs from} that of \cite {BertoinPitman}, and is quite natural from our general metric graph perspective.
\begin{proof}
For $r\in [0,R(e)]$, denote $z_{1}(r)$ the point at distance $r$ from $x_{1}$ and $z_{2}(r)$ the point
at distance $r$ from $x_{2}$. $L_{1}(r)$ respectively $L_{2}(r)$ will denote the local time at zero accumulated by $\tilde{\phi}$ on $[x_{1},z_{1}(r)]$, respectively on $[z_{2}(r),x_{2}]$.
As described previously (see Lemma \ref{LemExplor}), one can construct the pair of continuous non-decreasing processes
$(r_{1}(t),r_{2}(t))_{t\geq 0}$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $r_{1}(0)=r_{2}(0)=0$,
\item $(r_{1}(t),r_{2}(t))_{t\geq 0}$ is an exploration of $\tilde{\phi}$,
that is to say the event $\lbrace r_{1}(t)\leq r_{1}, r_{2}(t)\leq r_{2}\rbrace$ is measurable
with respect the restriction of $\tilde{\phi}$ to
$[x_{1},z_{1}(r)]\cup [z_{2}(r),x_{2}]$,
\item for all $t\geq 0$, $L_{1}(r_{1}(t))=L_{2}(r_{2}(t))$,
\item for all $t\geq 0$, $z_{1}(r_{1}(t))\leq z_{2}(r_{2}(t))$,
that is to say $r_{1}(t)+r_{2}(t)\leq R(e)$,
\item for $t$ large enough $z_{1}(r_{1}(t))=z_{2}(r_{2}(t))$ and
$(r_{1}(t),r_{2}(t))$ does not evolve any more,
\item for all $t\geq 0$,
$\tilde{\phi}_{z_{1}(r_{1}(t))}\tilde{\phi}_{z_{2}(r_{2}(t))}\geq 0$.
\end{itemize}
By construction,
$L_{i}(r_{i}(t))=\delta_{z_{i}(r_{i}(t)),A}$, $i=1,2$.
The process $(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{1}(r_{1}(t))},\tilde{\phi}_{z_{2}(r_{2}(t))})_{t\geq 0}$
satisfies the SDE \eqref{EqSDEExplor},\eqref{EqVarQuad}, where
\begin{displaymath}
C^{\rm eff}_{12}(s)=(R(e)-r_{1}(s)-r_{2}(s))^{-1}.
\end{displaymath}
For $\varepsilon\in (0,R(e))$, $\tau^{\varepsilon}$ will denote the stopping time when
$r_{1}(t)+r_{2}(t)$ hits $R(e)-\varepsilon$. The stopped process
$(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{z_{1}(r_{1}(t\wedge\tau^{\varepsilon}))}\vert
-L_{1}(r_{1}(t\wedge\tau^{\varepsilon})),
\vert\tilde{\phi}_{z_{2}(r_{2}(t\wedge\tau^{\varepsilon}))}\vert
-L_{2}(r_{2}(t\wedge\tau^{\varepsilon})))_{t\geq 0}$ satisfies the SDE
\eqref{EqSDEX},\eqref{EqSDEXQV} and one can apply Lemma
\ref{LemSDE2}, to show that by interpolating the stopped process above
by an independent Brownian bridge of length $\varepsilon$ from
$-L_{1}(r_{1}(\tau^{\varepsilon}))$ to
$-L_{2}(r_{2}(\tau^{\varepsilon}))=-L_{1}(r_{1}(\tau^{\varepsilon}))$, one gets
a Brownian bridge of length $R(e)$ from $h(x_{1})$ to $h(x_{2})$. By letting
$\varepsilon$ tend to zero, we get that
$(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{x}\vert-\delta_{x,A})_{x\in [x_{1},x_{2}]}$
is distributed like $\tilde{\phi}$, which is equivalent to the statement of the lemma.
\end{proof}
We are now finally able to prove Proposition \ref {thmGeneralisedLevy}:
\begin{proof}
We will prove the proposition by induction on the number of edges $\vert E\vert$ in the graph. The case where this number is equal to one is covered by Lemma \ref {LemLevyBridge}.
Suppose now that $|E| \ge 2$, and that Proposition \ref {thmGeneralisedLevy} holds for all graphs with fewer edges.
As explained before, the edges that do join points of $A$ together can be removed (mind that one uses
Lemma \ref {LemLevyBridge} to justify this), so that if there is such an edge in the graph, then the induction hypothesis allows to conclude that the result holds also for the graph $(V,E)$.
We now assume that no edge of $E$ joins two sites of $A$.
Using the notation of the beginning of Section \ref{SecLevy} and Lemma
\ref{LemGenLevySDE}, we get that the processes
\begin{displaymath}
(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r)}\vert - \delta_{z_{i}(r),A})
_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq r\leq R_{i}^{-}(\ell_{max})}
\hbox { and } (\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r)})_{1\leq i\leq n, r \le \rho_i}
\end {displaymath}
where
$I_{max}=\max_{1\leq i\leq n} I_{y_{i},A}$,
have the same distribution. The sets
\begin{equation}
\label{EqExploredSet1}
\left\lbrace z_{i}(r)\Big\vert 1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq r\leq R_{i}^{-}(\ell_{max})\right\rbrace
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{EqExploredSet2}
\left\lbrace z_{i}(r)\Big\vert 1\leq i\leq n, I_{z_{i}(r),A}\geq I_{max}\right\rbrace
\end{equation}
are each made of $n$ lines contained inside $[x_{i},y_{i}]$, $1\leq i\leq n$.
Moreover, in each case, for exactly one $i$, the
interval $[x_{i},y_{i}]$ is entirely contained in the corresponding set.
Conditionally on
$(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r)})_{1\leq i\leq n, 0\leq r\leq R_{i}^{-}(\ell_{max})}$,
outside the set \eqref{EqExploredSet1}, $\tilde{\phi}$ is distributed like a metric graph GFF
with boundary condition 0 at $z_{i}(R_{i}^{-}(\ell_{max}))$, $1\leq i\leq n$.
Conditionally on
$(\tilde{\phi}_{z_{i}(r)})_{1\leq i\leq n, r < \rho_i }$,
outside the set \eqref{EqExploredSet2}, $\tilde{\phi}$ is distributed like a metric graph GFF
with boundary condition $I_{max}$. Since we already have Lemma \ref{LemGenLevySDE}, to show the proposition, we need to check that it is satisfied by a metric graph GFF on $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}$ minus
\eqref{EqExploredSet1} with boundary condition zero. But the metric graph $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}$ minus
\eqref{EqExploredSet1} has one less edge, thus we can use the induction hypothesis. This concludes our proof.
\end{proof}
\section {Invariance under rewiring}
\label{SecExplicit}
\label{S3}
\subsection {Main statement and some comments}
Let us first state the more general version of Proposition~\ref{PropLaw2Points}.
Consider a finite graph $\mathcal{G}=(V,E)$ as before, and assume that the boundary set $A\subseteq V$ contains at least two vertices. We also consider a partition
of $A$ into two non-empty subsets $\widehat{A}$ and $\widecheck{A}$ so that the sign of the boundary condition $h$ on $\widehat A$ is constant, and that its sign on $\widecheck A$ is also constant (the value $0$ is allowed for some boundary points, and the
signs on $\widehat A$ and on $\widecheck A$ do not need to be the same).
As before, we will consider the effective conductance matrix $C^{\rm eff}_A$ of the circuit corresponding to the boundary $A$.
We then consider the metric graph Gaussian free field $\tilde{\phi}$ with boundary condition $h$ on $A$, and we more specifically study the random variable
$$\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}} = \delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}} ( \tilde \phi) := \min_{\hat x \in \widehat A, \check x \in \widecheck A} \delta_{\hat x , \check x } $$
that measures the pseudo-distance between these two parts of the boundary.
\begin{proposition}
\label{thmDist2Sets}
The law of the non-negative random variable
$\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}}$ is described by the fact that for all $\ell > 0$,
\begin{equation}
\label{EqExplDist}
\mathbb{P}(\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}} \geq \ell)=
\prod_{\substack{\hat{x}\in\widehat{A}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\exp\bigg(-\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_A (\hat{x},\check{x})
\big(\vert h(\hat{x})\vert +\vert h(\check{x})\vert+\ell\big)^{2}
+\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_A (\hat{x},\check{x})\big(h(\hat{x})-h(\check{x})\big)^{2}\bigg).
\end{equation}
\end {proposition}
We can also note that if the sign of $h$ is the same on $\widecheck A$ as on $\widehat A$, then this implies that
\begin{equation}
\label{EqProbConnect}
\mathbb{P}(\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}}> 0)=
\prod_{\substack{\hat{x}\in\widehat{A}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\exp\left(-2C^{\rm eff}_A (\hat{x},\check{x}) h(\hat{x})h(\check{x}) \right).
\end{equation}
Note that in the special case where $\widehat A$ and $\widecheck A$ are both singletons (or equivalently, when $h$ is constant on both $\hat A$ and $\check A$), this proposition is exactly Proposition~\ref{PropLaw2Points}. Also, when $h$ is the zero function, then $(\delta_{\widehat A, \widecheck A})^2$ is exponentially distributed.
Note also that Lemma \ref {LemLevyBridge} implies the proposition in the special case where the graph consists only of edges that join directly points from $\widecheck A$ to points from $\widehat A$. Indeed, in this case, $\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}} > \ell$ if and only if the length of each of the edges in greater than $\ell$, and we can note that the events corresponding to these edges are all independent (and their laws are given by Lemma \ref {LemLevyBridge}). Hence, given what we have established so far, proving Proposition \ref {thmDist2Sets} is equivalent to proving that:
\begin {proposition}
\label {reformulation}
Suppose that two finite graphs ${\mathcal G}$ and ${\mathcal G}'$ share the same boundary set $A$, that $A$ is partitioned into two non-empty sets $\widehat A$ and $\widecheck A$.
Suppose further that for each $\hat x \in \widehat A$ and $\check x \in \widecheck A$, the effective resistance $R^{\rm eff}_A (\hat x, \check x)$ is the same for both graphs. Then, for each boundary condition $h$ with constant signs on each of $\widehat A$ and $\widecheck A$, the law of $\delta_{\widehat A, \widecheck A}$ is the same for both graphs.
\end {proposition}
In other words, one can view this as an invariance of the distribution of $\delta_{\widehat A, \widecheck A}$
under rewiring of the electrical network that preserves the effective conductance matrix $C_A^{\rm eff}$.
Let us also note that \eqref{EqProbConnect} can also be reformulated as follows: For general boundary conditions $h$ on $A$, if $a < \min_A h$,
then the event $E_a$ that there exists a continuous path
$\gamma$ connecting $\widehat{A}$ to $\widecheck{A}$ along which $\tilde \phi$ remains greater than $a$,
is exactly the event $\{ \delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi}-a) = 0 \}$, so that
\begin{displaymath}
\mathbb{P}(E_a )=
1- \prod_{\substack{\hat{x}\in\widehat{A}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\exp\left(-2C^{\rm eff}_A (\hat{x},\check{x})(h(\hat{x})-a)(h(\check{x})-a)\right).
\end{displaymath}
This can then be used to establish a lower bound for the probability that
$\widehat{A}$ and $\widecheck{A}$ are connected by a path on which the height of the discrete Gaussian free field is greater than some value.
For similar lower bounds, using different techniques, see \cite{Sznitman2015PercGFF}, Section 3, and \cite{DingLi2016ChimGFF}, Proposition 2.1.
\medbreak
Let us first make a few further comments.
\begin {itemize}
\item
In all these statements, edges of the graph that join two points of $\widehat A$ (or two points of $\widecheck A$) do play no role in the distance $\delta_{\widehat A, \widecheck A}$, and the GFF on those edges is independent from the rest for a given $h$. Hence, we do not need to bother about these edges.
\item
In the special case where the graph is a three-legged ``star-graph'' ${\mathcal G}_3$ with $V= \{ \hat x_1, \hat x_2, y, \check x \}$ and three edges joining respectively $y$ to the three boundary point $\hat x_1$, $\hat x_2$ and $\check x$, then for $\widehat A = \{ \hat x_1, \hat x_2 \}$, it is easy to check directly that Proposition \ref{thmDist2Sets} holds: Indeed,
$$\delta_{\widehat A, \check x} = \min ( \delta_{\hat x_1, y} , \delta_{\hat x_2, y}) + \delta_{y, \check x},$$ and one can first sample $\tilde \phi (y)$ and because these three random edge-lengths
are then conditionally independent, one can conclude.
\item
The previous case of the star-graph ${\mathcal G}_3$ shows that the law of $\delta_{\widehat A, \widecheck A}$ in this case is identical to that when the star-graph is replaced by the electrically equivalent
triangle graph.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{MetricTLStarDelta2}
\caption{
{Star-triangle} transformation.
}
\label{figStarDelta}
\end{figure}
In fact, the previous observation can be immediately generalised to the case of star graphs ${\mathcal G}_N$ with more boundary points (when the graph consists only of edges joining one single central point $y$ to each boundary point in $\widehat A \cup \widecheck A$ but this time, the number $N$ of sites of $A$ can be greater than $3$). In that case, replacing this graph by the complete graph on $A$ with the same effective resistances will also not change the law of $\delta_{\widehat A, \widecheck A}$.
\end {itemize}
Recall that the electrical network defined by ${\mathcal G}$ can always be ``reduced'' to the electrically equivalent network (viewed from $A$) consisting only of edges joining directly the edges of $A$, by a finite iteration of local ``star ${\mathcal G}_N$ to complete graph'' transformations (at each step, one chooses a site that is not in $A$ and removes it using this transformation). Proving Proposition \ref {reformulation} is therefore equivalent to showing that the law of $\delta_{\widehat A, \widecheck A}$ remains
unchanged under each of such local transformation. One may wonder if one simple direct proof of this fact might just be to see that if one conditions
on the values of the GFF outside of the considered star (which is the same before and after the local transformation), then the conditional law of $\delta_{\widehat A, \widecheck A}$ remains unchanged under this local transformation. In the coming few paragraphs, we now explain that this is {\em not} the case -- this will also provide some
justification for the actual strategy of our proof.
Let us first consider the case where the graph ${\mathcal G}$ is just a three-legged star with $A = \{ \hat x_1, \hat x_2, \check x\}$ and the inner point $y$ as before. This
set is electrically equivalent to a triangle graph ${\mathcal G'}$ consisting only of three edges joining the points of $A$. It is easy to see that it is {\em not true} that for any non-negative boundary condition $h$, the joint law of the couple $(\delta_{\hat x_1, \check x}, \delta_{\hat x_2, \check x})$ is the same for both graphs (recall that the proposition only states than the minimum of these two quantities have the same law for both graphs).
Indeed, one can for instance consider the case where $h$ is constant and equal to $a$ on $A$, and look at the asymptotic behaviour when $a \to 0$ of the probability
that $(\delta_{\hat x_1, \check x}, \delta_{\hat x_2, \check x}) = (0, 0 )$ on each of the graphs. One can directly compute and compare these probabilities, but one can also
proceed heuristically as follows:
For $(\delta_{\hat x_1, \check x}, \delta_{\hat x_2, \check x}) = (0, 0 )$ to hold on the triangle graph, we see that the GFF has to be positive on each of the three edges, and
it is easy to check that when $a \to 0$, this occurs with a probability equivalent to a constant times $a^3$ (basically, each of the GFF's is starting from $a$ near the three
boundary points and has to avoid the origin). On the other hand, one the triangle graph, $(\delta_{\hat x_1, \check x}, \delta_{\hat x_2, \check x}) = (0, 0 )$ if and only
the GFF is positive on two of the three edges, which occurs with a probability equivalent to a constant times $a^4$ (this time, for each of these two edges, the GFF has to remain positive near both of the endpoints of the edge).
Hence, we see that Proposition \ref {thmDist2Sets} can not be generalised to statements that involve the joint law of more than
two more than one distance between parts of the boundary.
One could nevertheless wonder (and this would indicate that the proof of Proposition \ref {thmDist2Sets} via conditioning and local rewirings
could work) whether the following more general general result could hold: Suppose that we are now given a non-negative function $u$ on $A$, and we define
$$\delta^u_{\widehat A, \widecheck A} := \min_{\hat x \in \widehat A, \check x \in \widecheck A} ( \delta_{\hat x, \check x} + u(\hat x) + u(\check x)).$$
Then, is it the case that for each given $u$ and $h$, the law of this quantity is invariant under the rewiring procedure described in Proposition \ref{reformulation}?
Again, as we shall now explain, the answer to this question is negative already in the case of the three-legged star graph:
Suppose that for the three-legged graph ${\mathcal G}_{3}$ and its electrical equivalent triangle graph
${\mathcal G}'_{3}$, with $\widehat A = \{\hat x_1, \hat x_2 \}$ and each given $h$ and $u$,
the laws of $\delta^u_{\widehat A, \widecheck A}$ are the same for both graphs. By definition, this would imply that for each given $h$, and each $\ell$, $u_1$ and $u_2$,
the probabilities of the event $\{ \delta_{\hat x_1, \check x} > \ell - u_1, \delta_{\hat x_2, \check x} > \ell - u_2 \}$ are the same for both graphs. This would imply that
the joint law of the couple $(\delta_{\hat x_1, \check x} , \delta_{\hat x_2, \check x} )$ are the same for both graphs, but we have just argued that this is not the case.
Consider now the three-legged graph ${\mathcal G}_3$, and divide each of the two edges $(\hat x_1, y)$ and $(\hat x_2, y)$ into two pieces (by introducing additional vertices $x_1$ and $x_2$).
Then, what we have just explained is that for this new graph (with six vertices), the conditional distribution of $\delta_{ \widehat A, \widecheck A}$ given what happens
on the edges $(\hat x_1, x_1)$ and $(\hat x_2, x_2)$ is {\em not} invariant under the transformation that turns the star $(x_1, x_2, y, \check y)$ into a triangle
(in that setting, the function $u$ can be understood in terms of the distances $\delta_{\hat x_1, x_1}$ and $\delta_{\hat x_2, x_2}$ that have already been discovered).
This does therefore show that the previously mentioned possible proof of Proposition \ref {reformulation} via conditioning and local modifications can not work. It also
suggests that a good exploration procedure to use in order to establish Proposition \ref {thmDist2Sets} is to start from the boundary and to discover simultaneously all
points that are at the same distance from the boundary. Indeed, in the remaining-to-be-discovered domain, no non-constant ``delay-type terms'' like $u$ will appear.
\subsection {Proof of Proposition \ref {thmDist2Sets}}
\label{SubSevIdMetricGraph}
We will use the similar exploration martingale approach as for Proposition \ref {thmGeneralisedLevy}.
As in Section \ref{SecLevy}, we will consider a particular exploration
$\hat{r}_{i}(t)\in [0,R(\hat{e}_{i})]$ of the metric
graph GFF $\tilde{\phi}$, such that for all
$t\geq 0$,
\begin{displaymath}
L_{1}(\hat{r}_{1}(t))=\dots =L_{\hat{n}}(\hat{r}_{\hat{n}}(t)),
\end{displaymath}
where $L_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))$ is the local time at zero accumulated on the line
$[\hat{x}_{i},\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))]$.
We will denote by $L(t)$ the common value of $L_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))$.
As before, the exploration will eventually stop evolving at time
$\widehat{T}$ when one of the $\hat{r}_{i}(t)$ hits
$R(\hat{e}_{i})$ (a.s., the corresponding value of $i$ is unique, see Lemma \ref{LemExplor}). In particular, if for all
$i,j\in \lbrace 1,\dots,\hat{n}\rbrace$, $h(\hat{x}_{i})h(\hat{x}_{j})\geq 0$, then
for all $i,j\in \lbrace 1,\dots,\hat{n}\rbrace$ and all $t\geq 0$,
\begin{displaymath}
\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))}
\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{j}(\hat{r}_{j}(t))}\geq 0.
\end{displaymath}
Consider a time $t\in (0, \widehat{T})$. If we replace the circuit outside edges that join two vertices in $\widehat{A}$ or two vertices in $\widecheck{A}$, and outside the lines
$[\hat{x}_{i},\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))]$, $1\leq i\leq \hat{n}$, by a complete graph
joining $\lbrace \hat{z}_{1}(\hat{r}_{1}(t)), \ldots , \hat{z}_{n}(\hat{r}_{n}(t))\rbrace\cup\widecheck{A}$, and have an electrically equivalent circuit, then we will denote the obtained conductances by
\begin{itemize}
\item $C^{\rm eff}_{i j}(t)$ for the conductance of the edge between $\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))$ and
$\hat{z}_{j}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))$,
\item $C^{\rm eff}_{i\check{x}}(t)$
for the conductance of the edge between $\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))$ and $\check{x}\in \widecheck{A}$,
\item $C^{\rm eff}_{\check{x}\check{x}'}(t)$ for the conductance of the edge between
$\check{x}\neq\check{x}'\in \widecheck{A}$.
\end{itemize}
All these conductances have limits at $t=0$ and
\begin{displaymath}
\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(t)=
C^{\rm eff}(\hat{x}_{i},\hat{x}_{j})~\text{if}~\hat{x}_{i}\neq\hat{x}_{j},
\qquad
\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\hat{x}_{i}=\hat{x}}}
\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}C^{\rm eff}_{i\check{x}}(t)=C^{\rm eff}(\hat{x},\check{x}),
\end{displaymath}
\begin{displaymath}
\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}C^{\rm eff}_{\check{x}\check{x}'}(t)=C^{\rm eff}(\check{x},\check{x}').
\end{displaymath}
If $i_{0}$ is the value such that $\hat{r}_{i_{0}}(\widehat{T})=R(\hat{e}_{i_{0}})$ and if
$\hat{y}_{i_{0}}\in \widecheck{A}$, then
\begin{displaymath}
\lim_{t\rightarrow \widehat{T}} C^{\rm eff}_{i_{0}\hat{y}_{i_{0}}}(t) = +\infty.
\end{displaymath}
In all other cases the limits of effective conductances at $\widehat{T}$ are finite.
Let $\ell > 0$. Let $\tau_{\ell}\in [0,+\infty]$ be the first time
$L(t)$ hits the level $\ell$.
Consider the process $\Psi_{\ell}(t)$, defined for
$t\in [0, \widehat{T})$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{EqDefPsiell}
\Psi_{\ell}(t) &:= &
\prod_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\exp\bigg(
-\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_{i\check{x}}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell})
\big(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell}))}\vert +
\vert h(\check{x})\vert+
\ell-L(t\wedge\tau_{\ell})\big)^{2}
\\
\nonumber
&& \null \quad +\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_{i\check{x}}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell})
\big(\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell}))}-h(\check{x})
\big)^{2}\bigg)
\end{eqnarray}
We know that almost surely, $\tau_{\ell}\neq \widehat{T}$. If $\tau_{\ell}< \widehat{T}$, then for all
$i\in {1,\dots,\hat{n}}$, $\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(\tau_{\ell}))=0$
and $\Psi_{\ell}(\tau_{\ell})=1$. Then we can extend $\Psi_{\ell}(t)$ for $t\geq \tau_{\ell}$, in particular for $t\geq \widehat{T}$, to be equal to $1$.
If $\tau_{\ell} > \widehat{T}$ and none of the $\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T})$
hits $\widecheck{A}$, then $\Psi_{\ell}(t)$ has a finite limit
in $(0,1)$ at $\widehat{T}$, and we extend $\Psi_{\ell}(t)$ for $t\geq \widehat{T}$ to be equal this limit.
If $\tau_{\ell} > \widehat{T}$ and for the value $i_{0}$, such that
$\hat{z}_{i_{0}}(\hat{r}_{i_{0}}(\widehat{T})=\hat{y}_{i_{0}}$, we have
$\hat{y}_{i_{0}}\in \widecheck{A}$, then the factor
\begin{displaymath}
\exp\bigg(
-\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_{i_{0}\hat{y}_{i_{0}}}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell})
\big(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i_{0}}(\hat{r}_{i_{0}}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell}))}\vert +
\vert h(\hat{y}_{i_{0}})\vert+
\ell-L(t\wedge\tau_{\ell})\big)^{2}
+\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_{i_{0}\hat{y}_{i_{0}}}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell})
\big(\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i_{0}}(\hat{r}_{i_{0}}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell}))}-h(\hat{y}_{i_{0}})
\big)^{2}\bigg),
\end{displaymath}
appearing in the product \eqref{EqDefPsiell}, tends to $0$ at
$\widehat{T}$. Indeed, $C^{\rm eff}_{i\hat{y}_{i_{0}}}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell})$ tends to infinity and
\begin{displaymath}
\big(\vert h(\hat{y}_{i_{0}})\vert+\ell-L(\widehat{T})\big)^{2}>
h(\hat{y}_{i_{0}})^{2}.
\end{displaymath}
Thus, $\Psi_{\ell}(t)$ has limit $0$ at $\widehat{T}$. In this case we will extend
$\Psi_{\ell}(t)$ to be equal $0$ for $t\geq \widehat{T}$.
Extended this way, $(\Psi_{\ell}(t))_{t\geq 0}$ is a continuous process on
$[0,+\infty)$, stopped at time $\tau_{\ell}\wedge\widehat{T}$. The initial value of the process is
\begin{displaymath}
\Psi_{\ell}(0)=
\prod_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\exp\bigg(
-\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_A(\hat{x}_{i},\check{x})
\big(\vert h(\hat{x}_{i})\vert +
\vert h(\check{x})\vert+\ell\big)^{2}
+\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_A (\hat{x}_{i},\check{x})
\big(h(\hat{x}_{i})-h(\check{x})\big)^{2}\bigg).
\end{displaymath}
\begin{lemma}
\label{LemMartingale}
Let $(\widehat{\mathcal{F}}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$ be the natural filtration of
$(\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))},\hat{r}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq \hat{n}, t\geq 0}$. Let
$\ell > 0$. Assume that for all
$i,j\in \lbrace 1,\dots,\hat{n}\rbrace$, $h(\hat{x}_{i})h(\hat{x}_{j})\geq 0$,
and that for all $\check{x},\check{x}'\in \widecheck{A}$,
$h(\check{x})h(\check{x}')\geq 0$. Then the process $(\Psi_{\ell}(t))_{t\geq 0}$
defined previously (see \eqref{EqDefPsiell}) is a martingale with respect the filtration
$(\widehat{\mathcal{F}}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$. In particular
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Psi_{\ell}(0)&=&
\prod_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\exp\bigg(
-\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_A (\hat{x}_{i},\check{x})
\big(\vert h(\hat{x}_{i})\vert +
\vert h(\check{x})\vert+\ell\big)^{2}
+\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_A(\hat{x}_{i},\check{x})
\big(h(\hat{x}_{i})-h(\check{x})\big)^{2}\bigg)
\\
&=&\mathbb{P}(\tau_{\ell}< \widehat{T})+
\mathbb{E}[1_{\tau_{\ell}> \widehat{T}}\Psi_{\ell}(\widehat{T})].
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since the process $(\Psi_{\ell}(t))_{t\geq 0}$ is bounded, with values in
$[0,1]$, to show that it is a martingale, we need only to show that it is a local martingale.
Note that the process is stopped at $\tau_{\ell}\wedge\widehat{T}$, which is a stopping time for the filtration $(\widehat{\mathcal{F}}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$. To show the local martingale property, we apply Itô's formula and check that
${d\Psi_{\ell}(t)}$ has no bounded variation term and only a local martingale term. The computations are straightforward but quite long; we reproduce them in the appendix.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to prove Proposition \ref {thmDist2Sets}:
\begin{proof}
We will prove the proposition by induction on the number of edges $\vert E\vert$ in the graph.
As we have already pointed out, the result in the case where $|E|=1$ follows from
Lemma \ref {LemLevyBridge}.
Consider now that $\vert E\vert\geq 2$. As before, we can assume that there is no edge $e$ with
both endpoints in $\widehat{A}$ (as we could have removed it).
We will reuse the notation of the beginning of Section \ref{SecExplicit} and of Lemma
\ref{LemMartingale}. We will use an exploration $(\hat{r}_{i}(t))_{1\leq i\leq \hat{n},t\geq 0}$
of $\tilde{\phi}$ such that
\begin{displaymath}
L_{1}(\hat{r}_{1}(t))=\dots =L_{\hat{n}}(\hat{r}_{\hat{n}}(t)):=L(t).
\end{displaymath}
$\widehat{T}$ is the first time one of the $\hat{r}_{i}(t)$ hits $R(\hat{e}_{i})$.
Denote $\widehat{\mathcal{F}}_{\widehat{T}}$ the sigma-algebra of
\begin{displaymath}
(\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t))},\hat{r}_{i}(t))
_{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}, 0\leq t\leq \widehat{T}}.
\end{displaymath}
Let $\ell>0$, and $\tau_{\ell}$ the first time $L(t)$ hits $\ell$.
We will consider the martingale $(\Psi_{\ell}(t))_{t\geq 0}$ that appears in Lemma
\ref{LemMartingale}, according to which
\begin{equation}
\label{EqPsiST}
\Psi_{\ell}(0)=\mathbb{P}(\tau_{\ell}< \widehat{T})+
\mathbb{E}[1_{\tau_{\ell}> \widehat{T}}\Psi_{\ell}(\widehat{T})].
\end{equation}
Let $i_{0}$ be the a.s. unique value of $i$ such that
$\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T})=R(\hat{e}_{i})$.
Let $\underline{\mathcal{G}}=(\underline{V},\underline{E})$ be the following network:
\begin{itemize}
\item The set of vertices is $\underline{V}= (V\setminus\widehat{A})
\cup\lbrace \hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T}))\vert 1\leq i\leq \hat{n}, i\neq i_{0}\rbrace$.
\item The set of edges $\underline{E}$ is obtained by removing the edges $(\hat{e}_{i})_{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}}$ from $E$ and then adding the
edges $(\lbrace\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T})),\hat{y}_{i}\rbrace)_{i\neq i_{0}}$ joining
$\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T}))$ to $\hat{y}_{i}$.
\item The conductances of edges in $\underline{E}$ that were already present in $E$ are unchanged. The conductance of an edge $\lbrace\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T})),\hat{y}_{i}\rbrace$ is
$(R(\hat{e}_{i})-\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T}))^{-1}$.
\end{itemize}
The network $\underline{\mathcal{G}}$ has one less edge than $\mathcal{G}$. Denote
$\underline{\widehat{A}}$ the set
$\lbrace\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T}))\vert 1\leq i\leq \hat{n}\rbrace$.
$\underline{\tilde{\phi}}$ will denote the process defined on the metric graph
$\underline{\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}}$ associated to $\underline{\mathcal{G}}$ and distributed
like a metric graph GFF with boundary condition $h$ on $\widecheck{A}$ and
condition $\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T}))}$ on
$\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(\widehat{T}))$, $1\leq i\leq\hat{n}$. This boundary condition has constant sign on
$\underline{\widehat{A}}$.
The event $\tau_{\ell}< \widehat{T}$ is contained inside the event
$\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi})\geq \ell$. On the event
$\tau_{\ell}>\widehat{T}, y_{i_{0}}\in\widecheck{A}$, $\Psi_{\ell}(\widehat{T})$ equals $0$ and
$\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi})<\ell$.
On the event $\tau_{\ell}>\widehat{T}, y_{i_{0}}\notin\widecheck{A}$, the value of
$\Psi_{\ell}(\widehat{T})$ is the expression \eqref{EqExplDist} applied to the network
$\underline{\mathcal{G}}$ and the distance $\ell-L(\widehat{T})$. Applying the induction
hypothesis, we get that
\begin{displaymath}
\Psi_{\ell}(\widehat{T})
=\mathbb{P}\Big(\delta_{\underline{\widehat{A}},\widecheck{A}}(\underline{\tilde{\phi}})
\geq \ell-L(\widehat{T})\Big\vert\widehat{\mathcal{F}}_{\widehat{T}}\Big).
\end{displaymath}
Since by construction
$\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi})=
L(\widehat{T})+
\delta_{\underline{\widehat{A}},\widecheck{A}}(\underline{\tilde{\phi}})$,
applying \eqref{EqPsiST} we get that
\begin{displaymath}
\Psi_{\ell}(0)=\mathbb{P}(\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi})\geq \ell),
\end{displaymath}
which concludes the proof of the proposition.
\end{proof}
\subsection {Distributions related to pseudo-metric balls and variants}
Next we consider the first {passage} set
$\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ which is the set of points $x$ in the metric graph, for which there exists a continuous path joining $x$ to $\widehat{A}$ such that
$\tilde{\phi}(z)\geq a$ along the path. In the case where $\widehat A$ is just one point, one can view this set as a pseudo-metric ball.
In the same framework as before, let us first assume that the boundary set $A\subseteq V$ contains at least two vertices and we consider a partition
of $A$ in two non-empty subsets $\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}$.
Let be $a\in\mathbb{R}$, $a<\min_{\widehat{A}} h$. Let $C^{\rm eff}(\Lambda_{a}, \widecheck{A})$ be the effective conductance between $\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ and $\widecheck{A}$
(finite if and only if $\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}\cap \widecheck{A}=\emptyset$)
and let $R^{\rm eff}(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}, \widecheck{A})$ be its inverse, the effective resistance.
We first assume that $h$ is constant on $\widecheck{A}$. Note that this is equivalent to the fact that $\widecheck A$ is a singleton (when one identifies all points of $\widecheck A$). Let
\begin{displaymath}
m:=C^{\rm eff}(\widehat{A},\widecheck{A})^{-1}
\sum_{\substack{\hat{x}\in\widehat{A}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}C^{\rm eff}_A(\hat{x},\check{x})
h(\hat{x}).
\end{displaymath}
\begin{proposition}
\label{ThmReffLocSet}
The Laplace transform of the random variable $C^{\rm eff} (\widetilde \Lambda_a, \widecheck A)$ in $[0,\infty]$ is given by (for $u >0$),
$$\mathbb{E}\left[e^{-u C^{\rm eff}(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}, \widecheck{A})}\right]=
\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}(\widehat{A},\widecheck{A})
\left[ \left(m-a+\sqrt{(h ( \widecheck A)-a)^{2}+2u}\right)^{2}
- (m-h ( \widecheck A))^{2} \right]\right).
$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We consider the pseudo-metric $\delta_{x,y}(\tilde{\phi}-a)$associated to the GFF
$\tilde{\phi}-a$. Then, by construction of
$\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$,
\begin{displaymath}
\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi}-a)=
\delta_{\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi}-a).
\end{displaymath}
Using the fact that $\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ is a local set for $\tilde{\phi}$ and applying Proposition \ref{thmDist2Sets}, we get that for all positive $\ell$,
$$
\mathbb{P}\left(\delta_{\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi}-a)\geq \ell
\Big\vert \widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}, \tilde{\phi}_{\vert \widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}}\right)=
\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}, \widecheck{A})
\left[ (h ( \widecheck A)-a+\ell)^{2}
- (h ( \widecheck A)-a)^{2} \right] \right).
$$
In above identity we have to distinguish two cases.
Either $\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}\cap \widecheck{A}=\emptyset$ and then $\tilde{\phi}$ equals $a$ on
$\partial\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}\setminus\widehat{A}$. Or
$\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}\cap \widecheck{A}\neq\emptyset$ and then
$C^{\rm eff}(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}, \widecheck{A})=+\infty$ and both sides of the equality equal $0$.
Moreover,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn { \mathbb{E}\left[\mathbb{P}\left(\delta_{\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi}-a)\geq \ell
\Big\vert \widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}, \tilde{\phi}_{\vert \widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}}\right)\right]} \\
&=&
\mathbb{P}\left(\delta_{\widehat{A},\widecheck{A}}(\tilde{\phi}-a)\geq \ell\right)
\\&=&
\prod_{\substack{\hat{x}\in\widehat{A}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_A(\hat{x},\check{x})
(h(\hat{x})-a+\vert h ( \widecheck A)-a\vert+\ell)^{2}
+\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}_A(\hat{x},\check{x})(h(\hat{x})-h ( \widecheck A))^{2}\right)
\\&=&
\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}(\widehat{A},\widecheck{A})
(m-a+\vert h ( \widecheck A)-a\vert+\ell)^{2}
+\frac{1}{2}C^{\rm eff}(\widehat{A},\widecheck{A})(m-h ( \widecheck A))^{2}\right)
.
\end{eqnarray*}
By taking
\begin{displaymath}
u=\frac{1}{2}(\vert h ( \widecheck A)-a\vert+\ell)^{2}-
\frac{1}{2}(h ( \widecheck A)-a)^{2},
\end{displaymath}
we get the proposition.
\end {proof}
Note that one can rephrase the proposition by saying that $R^{\rm eff}(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}, \widecheck{A})$ is distributed like the {\em last} visit time of level $a$
by a Brownian bridge of length
$R^{\rm eff}(\widehat{A}, \widecheck{A})$ from
$h ( \widecheck A)$ to $m$ (with the convention that this last time is $0$ when the bridge does not visit $a$, which corresponds to the event that $\widetilde \Lambda_a$ intersects $\widecheck A$).
Indeed, the expression of the Laplace transform shows that the distribution of $C^{\rm eff} (\widetilde \Lambda_a, \widecheck A)$ (and therefore also the distribution of its inverse) depends only on the four parameters
$m$, $h ( \widecheck A)$, $C^{\rm eff}(\widehat{A}, \widecheck{A})$ and $a$. The distribution of $R^{\rm eff} ( \widetilde \Lambda_a, \widecheck A)$ is therefore the same as for the GFF on a graph consisting of just
one edge, i.e. for a Brownian bridge of length $R^{\rm eff}(\widehat{A}, \widecheck{A})$ from
$m$ to $h ( \widecheck A)$.
This can be used to obtain estimates for the discrete GFF on $\mathcal{G}$. One can for instance define
\begin{displaymath}
\Lambda_{a}:=\left\lbrace x\in V\Big\vert
\exists \gamma~\text{discrete nearest neighbour path from}~x~
\text{to}~\widehat{A},~\text{s.t.}~\inf_{\gamma\setminus\lbrace x\rbrace}\phi\geq a\right\rbrace.
\end{displaymath}
$\Lambda_{a}$ is an optional set for the discrete GFF $\phi$. $\phi$ is greater on equal to
$a$ on $\Lambda_{a}$, except on neighbours of $V\setminus\Lambda_{a}$, that is to say on the boundary
of $\Lambda_{a}$. Indeed, one has to discover a vertex $x$ with
$\phi_{x}<a$ to know where to stop. By construction,
$
\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}\subseteq\Lambda_{a}$
and
$
R^{\rm eff}(\Lambda_{a},\widecheck{A})\leq R^{\rm eff}(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a},\widecheck{A})$.
Hence, if $a\leq\min_{\widehat{A}} h$ and $h$ is constant on $\widecheck{A}$, then the distribution of
$R^{\rm eff}(\Lambda_{a},\widecheck{A})$ is stochastically dominated by the law given by Proposition \ref{ThmReffLocSet}.
\medbreak
Let us now consider the following consequence of Proposition \ref {ThmReffLocSet}: This time, we consider $\widecheck A$ to be empty, so that
$(\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a})$ starts from {\em the whole boundary $A$}. We however assume that $A$ and $V \setminus A$ are not empty.
\begin{corollary}
\label{CorDistrib1ptandHitting}
(i)
Let $x_{0}\in V\setminus A$ and $m=\mathbb{E}[\tilde{\phi}_{x_{0}}]$.
Let $(W_{t})_{t\geq 0}$ be a standard Brownian motion starting from $m$.
Define
\begin{displaymath}
I_{t}:=\inf_{[0,t]}W,
\qquad
T_{a}:=\inf\lbrace t\geq 0\vert W_{t}=a\rbrace .
\end{displaymath}
The joint distribution of
\begin{displaymath}
\bigg(\tilde{\phi}_{x_{0}},
(R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)-R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}))_{a\leq \min_{A}h},
\sup_{\substack{\gamma~\text{continuous}\\ \text{path connecting}\\x_{0}~\text{to}~A}}
\min_{\gamma}\tilde{\phi}\wedge \min_{A}h\bigg)
\end{displaymath}
is the same as the joint distribution of
\begin{displaymath}
\left(W_{R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)},
(T_{a}\wedge R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A))_{a\leq \min_{A}h},
I_{R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)}\wedge\min_{A}h\right).
\end{displaymath}
(ii) Consider now that the boundary condition $h$ is non-negative and define the sets
\begin{displaymath}
B(A,\ell):=\left\lbrace z\in\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}\Big\vert
\delta_{z,A}\leq \ell
\right\rbrace,~\ell\geq 0.
\end{displaymath}
The joint distribution of
\begin{displaymath}
\bigg(\vert\tilde{\phi}_{x_{0}}\vert - \delta_{x_{0},A},
(R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)-R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},B(A,\ell)))_{\ell\geq 0},
- \delta_{x_{0},A}\bigg)
\end{displaymath}
is the same as the joint distribution of
\begin{displaymath}
\left(W_{R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)},
(T_{-\ell}\wedge R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A))_{\ell\geq 0},
I_{R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)}\wedge 0\right).
\end{displaymath}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
(i) First of all $\tilde{\phi}_{x_{0}}$ is distributed like $W_{R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)}$.
One needs to check that for any family $a_{k}<\dots<a_{2}<a_{1}\leq h$, the distribution of
\begin{displaymath}
(R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)-R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a_{i}}))_{1\leq i\leq k}
\end{displaymath}
conditionally on $\tilde{\phi}_{x_{0}}$ is the same as the distribution
of $(T_{a_{i}}\wedge R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A))_{1\leq i\leq k}$ conditionally on
$W_{R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)}$. The conditional distribution of
$R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)-R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a_{1}})$ follows from Proposition \ref{ThmReffLocSet}.
Then, for the conditional distribution of
$R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a_{1}})-R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a_{2}})$
given $\tilde{\phi}_{x_{0}}$ and $R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},A)-R^{\rm eff}(x_{0},\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a_{1}})$, one can
iterate, using the fact that $\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a_{2}}\setminus\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a_{1}}$ is the first {passage} set of level
$a_{2}$ on $\widetilde{\mathcal{G}}\setminus\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a_{1}}$, and so on.
(ii) Combine (i) with Proposition \ref{thmGeneralisedLevy}.
\end{proof}
\section{Predictions for the two-dimensional continuum GFF}
\label{SecConj2DGFF}
\label {S4}
\subsection {CLE(4)-distance, and conjectures}
Let us briefly survey some relevant background on the two-dimensional GFF and the conformal loop ensembles CLE$_4$:
When $D$ is an open domain in the plane with non-polar boundary, one can define the continuum GFF $\phi_{D}$ in $D$ with zero boundary conditions, associated to the Dirichlet from $ \int_D | \nabla f|^2$. Mind that, as opposed to the GFF defined on metric graphs, this GFF is not a random function anymore (it is just a random generalised function -- see eg. \cite {SheffieldGFF,Wln} for background).
When $D$ is simply connected, one can define (see \cite{SheffieldWerner2012CLE}) a special random countable collection of Jordan loops in $D$ which do not touch each other and do not surround each other. This collection of loops (whose law is invariant under conformal transformations of the domain) is called CLE$_4$ and can be coupled with the continuous GFF in two natural yet different ways:
\begin {itemize}
\item
One can couple the Gaussian free field $\phi_{D}$ and the $\hbox{CLE}_{4}$ loop ensemble as follows (this coupling was pointed out by Miller and Sheffield \cite{MillerSheffieldCLE4GFF}).
Given the {CLE}$_{4}$, for each loop $\Gamma$ sample in the domain $\hbox {Int} ( \Gamma)$ surrounded by $\Gamma$ an independent Gaussian free field $\phi_{\Gamma}$ with zero boundary condition on $\Gamma$.
Also sample an independent uniformly distributed sign $\sigma_{\Gamma}\in\lbrace -1,1\rbrace$. Then, for a well-chosen constant $\lambda >0$ (equal to $\sqrt{\pi / 8}$ in our normalisation of the GFF), the field
\begin{displaymath}
\sum_{\Gamma\in\hbox{CLE}_{4}} 1_{\hbox{Int}(\Gamma)}(\phi_{\Gamma}+\sigma_{\Gamma} 2 \lambda)
\end{displaymath}
is a Gaussian free field $\phi_{D}$ in $D$ with zero boundary conditions
(see also \cite{WangWu2014GFF1,MillerWatsonWilson2015NestField}). In this coupling the
$\hbox{CLE}_{4}$ loops can be interpreted as level lines of the
continuum Gaussian free field $\phi_{D}$ on $D$ and are in fact deterministic functions of the GFF (\cite{MillerSheffieldCLE4GFF}, see also \cite {AruSepulvedaWerner2016BoundedLocSets}).
The discontinuity $2\lambda$ is often referred to as the
\textit{height gap} (this was introduced by Schramm-Sheffield,
see \cite{SchrammSheffield2013ContourContGFF}, Section 4.4 and
\cite{SchrammSheffield2009ContourDiscrGFF}, Section 1.2).
\item
There is another coupling between {CLE}$_{4}$ and the GFF $\phi_{D}$ pointed out by Sheffield, Watson and Wu (see \cite{WuThesis,SheffieldWatsonWuMetricCLE4}), which is based on the
conformal invariant growing mechanism in {CLE}$_{4}$ constructed in
\cite{WernerWu2013ExplorCLE}, Section 4. This conformal invariant growing mechanism associates to each loop
$\Gamma$ in $\hbox{CLE}_{4}$ a time parameter $t(\Gamma)>0$, where the loops closer to the boundary
$\partial D$ of the domain tend to have smaller time parameters, and the loops farther away tend to have larger time parameters. Then one samples for each loop $\Gamma$ in the interior surrounded by $\Gamma$ an independent GFF $\phi_{\Gamma}$ with zero boundary condition at $\Gamma$, which is also independent from the time parameters. The field
\begin{displaymath}
\sum_{\Gamma\in\hbox{CLE}_{4}} 1_{\hbox{Int}(\Gamma)}(\phi_{\Gamma}+2 \lambda-t(\Gamma))
\end{displaymath}
is distributed as the Gaussian free field in $D$ with $0$ boundary condition (see Theorem 1.2.2 in \cite{WangWu2014GFF1} and the references therein).
\end {itemize}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{MetricTL2Coupl}
\caption{
Two couplings between {CLE}$_{4}$ and the GFF. Only four {CLE}$_{4}$ loops are represented.
}
\label{fig2Coupl}
\end{figure}
These couplings are reminiscent of the two ways to construct a one-dimensional Brownian motion (or rather a one-dimensional Brownian bridge) from a reflected Brownian motion (or a reflected Brownian bridge). The first one corresponds to tossing an independent coin to decide the sign of each excursion away from the origin by a reflected Brownian motion, while the second
is reminiscent of L\'evy's theorem. In both cases, the set of points that are not surrounded by any $\hbox{CLE}_{4}$ loop plays the role of the zero-set of the Brownian motion (or bridge).
While the notion of zero-set of the continuous GFF is tricky (see the previous notion of height-gap), the zero-set of the GFF on a metric graph is easy to define. As explained in
\cite{Lupu2014LoopsGFF,Lupu2015ConvCLE}, when one approximates the continuous domain $D$ and the GFF on it, by a discrete fine-mesh lattice and the GFF on its metric graph, then the outermost boundaries of the excursion-domains away from $0$ in the metric graph do indeed converge to the CLE$_4$ loops associated to the GFF, in the fine-mesh limit. This means that in some sense, the first coupling of CLE$_4$ with the GFF can be viewed as a limit of a similar coupling on the metric graph (see \cite {Lupu2015ConvCLE} for details).
It is therefore very natural to conjecture that the second coupling can be obtained in the same way as the scaling limit of our pseudo-metric:
\begin{conjecture}
Let $D$ be an open bounded simply connected domain of $\mathbb{C}$.
Let $D^\varepsilon$ be a fine-mesh approximation of the domain $D$, $A^{\varepsilon}$ the approximation of the boundary $\partial D$ and $\tilde{\phi}^{\varepsilon}$ the metric graph GFF on $D^\varepsilon$ with zero boundary condition on $A^{\varepsilon}$. When $\varepsilon\to 0$, the local time distance
$\delta_{x,A}(\tilde{\phi}^{\varepsilon})$, jointly with the outermost sign clusters of
$\tilde{\phi}^{\varepsilon}$, converge to the time parameters $t(\Gamma)$ on CLE$_{4}$.
\end{conjecture}
Actually, in the paper in preparation \cite {SheffieldWatsonWuMetricCLE4}, Sheffield, Watson and Wu show that the collection $t(\Gamma)$ can be extended to a conformally invariant metric on the collections of
$\hbox{CLE}_{4}$ loops in $D$ together with $\partial D$, i.e. that one can also define in a similar way the distance between two CLE$_4$ loops ($t(\Gamma)$ is the distance of the loop $\Gamma$ to $\partial D$). This is
related to the inversion property of CLE$_4$ (see e.g. \cite{KempainenWerner2015NestedCLE}), which makes it possible to define for each loop $\Gamma_0$ the time $t_{\Gamma_0} (\Gamma)$. The main point
in \cite {SheffieldWatsonWuMetricCLE4} is then to check that $t_\Gamma (\Gamma_0) = t_{\Gamma_0} ( \Gamma)$, which is not obvious at all from the growing mechanism point of view.
However, this symmetry is obvious for the metric graph analogue (the distance between two excursion of the GFF away from the origin to be the minimal local time at $0$ collected by a continuous path in the metric graph that joins them, which
is clearly symmetric). Hence, establishing the previous conjecture would provide an alternative proof of the existence of this random metric on CLE$_4$ loops.
To further substantiate this conjecture, one can note that in the scaling limit, the behaviour of the first {passage} sets described in Corollary \ref{CorDistrib1ptandHitting}
is known to correspond to the corresponding quantity for the two-dimensional continuum GFF
in a simply connected domain (see for instance \cite{AruSepulvedaWerner2016BoundedLocSets}). Let $D\neq \mathbb{C}$ be such an open simply connected domain, let $\phi_{D}$
be the continuum GFF inside $D$ with zero boundary condition and let $z_{0}\in D$. Denote $2\lambda$ the
height gap. Given $a\in\mathbb{R}$,
one can define a random subset $\Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0})$ of $D$, such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $D\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0})$ is an open simply connected subset of $D$ containing $z_{0}$,
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0})$ is measurable with respect the GFF $\phi_{D}$,
\item conditionally on $\Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0})$ and $\phi_{D}$ on $\Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0})$,
the restriction of $\phi_{D}$ to $D\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0})$ is distributed like a GFF with boundary condition $a$,
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0})$ is minimal for the above properties, that is to say any other random set satisfying the above three properties a.s. contains $\Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0})$.
\end{itemize}
The distribution of $\operatorname{crad}(z_{0},D\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0}))$,
the conformal radius of
$D\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0})$ seen from $z_{0}$ is explicitly known. And it is known that the random variable
\begin{equation}
\label{EqDeltaLogCrad}
\log\left(\dfrac{\operatorname{crad}(z_{0},D)}
{\operatorname{crad}(z_{0},D\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{D}(z_{0}))}\right)
\end{equation}
is distributed like the first hitting time of level ${a \pi}/ ({2\lambda})$ by a standard Brownian motion starting from $0$ (see eg. Proposition 15 in \cite{AruSepulvedaWerner2016BoundedLocSets}).
Moreover, \eqref{EqDeltaLogCrad} is the limit of
\begin{displaymath}
\dfrac{\pi^{2}}{4\lambda^{2}}(R^{\rm eff}(z_{0},\partial D^{\varepsilon})-
R^{\rm eff}(z_{0},\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}^{\varepsilon}))
\end{displaymath}
in an approximation of $D$ by a metric graph.
\subsection {Background on Riemann surfaces and extremal distance}
We will explain why our results should also provide (in the scaling limit) some new formulas related to the GFF, loop-soups and CLE$_4$-type models on Riemann surfaces. Recall that
on such surfaces, the SLE approach is much less obvious (when one cuts a Riemann surface open via a slit, one changes its modulus) and also that the notion of ``outside'' and ``inside'' of a cluster is also problematic. However, the scaling limit of quantities like the effective resistance still make sense, as we now explain.
A first remark is that in two dimensions and in the scaling limit, the invariance under electric rewiring of the boundary excursion kernel is closely related to conformal invariance.
Indeed, if $D$ denotes a (non-necessarily simply connected) open domain in the complex plane (this definition is also immediate in Riemann surfaces), then one can define the excursion measure away from its boundary, and see
that this excursion measure is conformally invariant (see \cite {LawlerWerner2000}, where this fact was probably first used in the context of conformally invariant structures such as percolation). This indicates that the quantities involving the effective conductance matrix (i.e. boundary excursion kernel) have nice natural scaling limits when one lets the mesh of the lattice go to $0$.
Let us first in the present subsection quickly browse through background on Riemann surfaces (we refer to \cite{FarkasKra1992RiemSurf},
\cite{Ahlfors2010ConfInv}, Sections 9 and 10,
\cite{Jurchescu1961BordRiemSurf} and \cite{Dubedat2015Virasoro1}, Sections 2 and 3 for details) and on extremal distance.
Let $\Sigma$ be a compact \textit{bordered Riemann surface} (\cite{Jurchescu1961BordRiemSurf}).
This is a smooth compact connected surface equipped with a complex structure given by a complex analytic atlas. The local charts model $\Sigma$ on the unit disk (for interior points)
or on the semi-disk $\lbrace z\in\mathbb{C}\vert \Im(z)\geq 0,\vert z\vert <1\rbrace$ (for boundary points, and this does in fact characterise the boundary points, the border $B(\Sigma)$ will be the set of boundary points). We assume that $B(\Sigma)$ is non-empty, and $B(\Sigma)$ has then finitely many connected components, each of which is homeomorphic to a circle.
The complex structure of $\Sigma$ induces a section $J$ of the endomorphisms of the tangent bundle of
$\Sigma\setminus B(\Sigma)$ such that $J^{2}=- Id$.
Let $g$ be a smooth metric on $\Sigma$, compatible with its complex structure, that is to say for any tangent
vector $v$, $v$ and $Jv$ are $g$-orthogonal.
$\nabla^{g}$ will denote the gradient associated to $g$,
$\Delta_{g}$ the \textit{Laplace-Beltrami operator}, which in local coordinates is expressed as
\begin{displaymath}
\Delta_{g}=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{\det g}}\sum_{i,j\in\lbrace 1,2\rbrace}
\dfrac{\partial}{\partial x_{i}} g^{ij} \sqrt{\det g} \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x_{j}}.
\end{displaymath}
$d\nu_{g}$ will denote the volume form associated with $g$, which in local coordinates is
\begin{displaymath}
d\nu_{g}=\sqrt{\det g} \ ( dx_{1}\wedge dx_{2}).
\end{displaymath}
Given any other smooth metric $g'$ compatible with $\Sigma$, $g'$ and $g$ are conformally equivalent, that is to say there is a smooth function $\rho$ such that $g'=e^{\rho}g$. Moreover
\begin{displaymath}
\nabla^{g'}=e^{-\rho}\nabla^{g}, \qquad
\Delta_{g'}=e^{-\rho}\Delta_{g}, \qquad
d\nu_{g'}=e^{\rho} d\nu_{g}.
\end{displaymath}
In particular, the set of $\Delta_{g}$-harmonic functions and the Dirichlet form
\begin{equation}
\label{EqDirichletSigma}
\mathcal{E}_{\Sigma}(f,f)=\int_{\Sigma}g(\nabla^{g}f,\nabla^{g}f) d\nu_{g}
\end{equation}
do not depend on the particular choice of a metric compatible with the complex structure of $\Sigma$.
Given $K_{1}$ and $K_{2}$ two compact non-polar subsets of $\Sigma$, the {\em extremal distance}
$\operatorname{ED}(K_{1},K_{2})$ between $K_{1}$ and $K_{2}$ in $\Sigma$ is defined as follows. First, for a given metric $g$ that is
compatible with the complex structure of $\Sigma$, one can define the distance $d_g (K_1, K_2)$ as the infimum over all
continuous smooth paths joining $K_1$ to $K_2$ of the $\rho$-length of this path.
Then, $\operatorname{ED}(K_{1},K_{2})$ is the supremum over all $g$'s that are compatible with the complex structure of $\Sigma$ of
$$
\dfrac{d_g (K_1, K_2))^{2}}{\nu_{g}(\Sigma\setminus (K_{1}\cup K_{2}))}
$$
(this quantity is also known as the extremal length of the set of all paths connecting $K_1$ to $K_2$ in $\Sigma$).
Let us quickly review some of the properties of extremal distance:
\begin {itemize}
\item
By definition, it is invariant under conformal transformations.
\item
It is also the inverse of the Dirichlet energy of the the harmonic function $u$ on
$\Sigma\setminus (K_{1}\cup K_{2})$, with Dirichlet boundary condition $0$ on $K_{1}$, $1$ on
$K_{2}$ and zero Neumann boundary condition on
$B(\Sigma)\setminus (K_{1}\cup K_{2})$ (the normal derivative vanishes),
\begin{equation}
\label{EqELEnergy}
\operatorname{ED}(K_{1},K_{2})=\mathcal{E}_{\Sigma}(u,u)^{-1}
\end{equation}
(see \cite{Ahlfors2010ConfInv}, Section 4.9, for a proof in case $\Sigma$ is a domain of
$\mathbb{C}$).
\item When one approximates $\Sigma$ by electrical networks $\Sigma^{\varepsilon}$ and
$K_{1}$ and $K_{2}$ by subsets of vertices $K_{1}^{\varepsilon}$ and $K_{2}^{\varepsilon}$, then
the extremal distance $\operatorname{ED}(K_{1},K_{2})$ is the limit as $\varepsilon$ tends to $0$
of the effective resistances $ R^{\rm eff}(K_{1}^{\varepsilon},K_{2}^{\varepsilon})$.
Indeed, the effective resistances have a representation similar to \eqref{EqELEnergy}:
\begin{displaymath}
R^{\rm eff}(K_{1}^{\varepsilon},K_{2}^{\varepsilon})^{-1}
=C^{\rm eff}(K_{1}^{\varepsilon},K_{2}^{\varepsilon})
= \sum_{e~\text{edge}} \left( C(e)(u_{\varepsilon}(e^{+})-u_{\varepsilon}(e^{-}))^{2}\right),
\end{displaymath}
where $e^{+}$ and $e^{-}$ denote the end-vertices of an edge $e$ and $u_{\varepsilon}$ is a harmonic function on the vertices of $\Sigma^{\varepsilon}$, with boundary condition $0$ on $K_{1}^{\varepsilon}$ and $1$ on $K_{2}^{\varepsilon}$ (see also \cite{Duffin1962ELRes} for an interpretation of the effective resistance as the extremal
distance of a network with a similar representation).
\item
Related to the previous fact and to the fact that the excursion measures of the Brownian motions on the metric graphs $\Sigma^{\varepsilon}$ converge to the excursion measure of Brownian motion in $\Sigma$ (away from their respective Dirichlet boundaries -- the Brownian motions are reflected on the Neumann boundary), we see that one can express the extremal distance in terms of the inverse of the total mass of the set of Brownian excursions that start on $\Sigma_1$ and end on $\Sigma_2$. This total mass is the scaling limit of the effective conductance while extremal distance is the scaling limit of effective resistance.
\end {itemize}
\subsection {Conjectures for some GFF fuctionals on Riemann surfaces}
Consider now a partition of the border $B(\Sigma)$ of the Riemann surface $\Sigma$ into three parts $B_{1}(\Sigma),B_{2}(\Sigma),B_{3}(\Sigma)$. Here
$B_{3}(\Sigma)$ is allowed to be empty but not $B_{1}(\Sigma)$ and $B_{2}(\Sigma)$. We suppose further that each of the
$B_{i}(\Sigma)$, $i\leq i\leq 3$, contains finitely many connected components and that
$B_{1}(\Sigma)$ and $B_{2}(\Sigma)$ are at positive distance of each other, i.e. their topological closures do not intersect.
To fix ideas, the reader can think of the following two simple examples:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Sigma$ is a rectangle $Q_{R}=[0,1]\times[0,R]$,
$B_{1}(Q_{R})=[0,1]\times \lbrace 0\rbrace$,
$B_{2}(Q_{R})=[0,1]\times \lbrace R\rbrace$ and
$B_{3}(Q_{R})=\lbrace 0,1\rbrace\times (0,R)$.
\item $\Sigma$ is the annulus $
\mathcal{A}_{R}=\lbrace z\in\mathbb{C}\vert 1\leq \vert z\vert\leq R\rbrace$,
$B_{1}(\mathcal{A}_{R})$ is the inner circle, $B_{2}(\mathcal{A}_{R})$ is the outer circle and
$B_{3}(\mathcal{A}_{R})$ is empty.
\end{itemize}
We now consider $\phi_{\Sigma}$ the Gaussian free field on $\Sigma$ associated to the Dirichlet form
\eqref{EqDirichletSigma}, with zero boundary condition on $B_{1}(\Sigma)\cup B_{2}(\Sigma)$ and
free boundary condition on $B_{3}(\Sigma)$ (recall that it is a random generalised function but not a random function).
The Wick square $:\phi_{\Sigma}^{2}:$ of $\phi_{\Sigma}$ is then also a random generalised function that can be defined via the limit of regularisations
$\phi_{\Sigma,\varepsilon}$ of $\phi_{\Sigma}$ as
\begin{displaymath}
:\phi_{\Sigma}^{2}: =
\lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0} \left [ \phi_{\Sigma,\varepsilon}^{2} - \mathbb{E}[\phi_{\Sigma,\varepsilon}^{2}] \right]
\end{displaymath}
(recall that it is also a random generalised function).
The field $\phi_{\Sigma}$ is related to a Brownian loop-soup. Let $g$ be a smooth metric compatible with the complex
structure of $\Sigma$ and consider the Brownian motion on $\Sigma$ with generator $\Delta_{g}$, killed on
the border $B_{1}(\Sigma)\cup B_{2}(\Sigma)$ and instantaneously {normally} reflected on
$B_{3}(\Sigma)$. Let $p^{g}_{t}(z_{1},z_{2})$ be the associated transition densities with respect the measure
$d\nu_{g}(z_{2})$ and $\mathbb{P}^{g}_{t,z_{1},z_{2}}$ the bridge probabilities, with the conditioning
not to hit $B_{1}(\Sigma)\cup B_{2}(\Sigma)$. Then we can define an infinite measure on time-parametrised loops inside $\Sigma$ by
\begin{displaymath}
\mu^{\rm loop}_{g}(\cdot):=
\int_{\Sigma}\int_{0}^{+\infty}
\mathbb{P}^{g}_{t,z,z}(\cdot) p^{g}_{t}(z,z) \dfrac{dt}{t} d\nu_{g}(z).
\end{displaymath}
If $g'$ is another conformally equivalent metric, then $\mu^{\rm loop}_{g'}$ is the image of
$\mu^{\rm loop}_{g}$ under a change of the root (starting and endpoint) and a change of parametrisation of loops, but the measure induced on the set occupied by a loop is the same
(\cite{Dubedat2015Virasoro1}, Section 3).
See \cite{LawlerLimic, LeJan2011Loops, LeJanMarcusRosen2012Loops} for the definition of the loop measure of a Markov process in a wider framework.
Let $\mathcal{L}_{g,1/2}$ be the Poisson point process of intensity $\mu^{\rm loop}_{g } /2$.
We see it as a random infinite countable collection of Brownian loops. It is a \textit{Brownian loop-soup}
after the terminology of \cite{LawlerWerner2004ConformalLoopSoup}. The intensity parameter
${1}/{2}$ corresponds to the central charge $c=1$ (\cite{Lawler2009PartFuncSLELoopMes}).
The law of $\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}$ is invariant, up to rerooting and reparametrisation, under conformal
transformations of $\Sigma$. The centred occupation field of $\mathcal{L}_{g, {1}/{2}}$,
$L^{\rm ctr}(\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}})$, is defined as follows:
\begin{displaymath}
L^{\rm ctr}(\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}})(f):=
\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow 0} \left(
\sum_{\gamma\in\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}, t_{\gamma}>\varepsilon}
\int_{0}^{t_{\gamma}}f(\gamma(s)) ds
-\mathbb{E}\bigg[
\sum_{\gamma\in\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}, t_{\gamma}>\varepsilon}
\int_{0}^{t_{\gamma}}f(\gamma(s)) ds
\bigg] \right),
\end{displaymath}
where $t_{\gamma}$ is the lifetime of the loop $\gamma$.
It turns out that this centered field $L^{\rm ctr}(\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}})$ is distributed exactly as
\begin{displaymath}
\dfrac{1}{2}:\phi_{\Sigma}^{2}: d\nu_{g}.
\end{displaymath}
For the existence of the centered occupation field and the equality in law on an open subset of $\mathbb{C}$,
see \cite{LeJan2011Loops}, chapter 10.
The following informal description could be helpful: The field $\phi_{\Sigma}$ is non-zero and has a constant sign on each loop
of $\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}$. The field $\frac{1}{2}\phi_{\Sigma}^{2} d\nu_{g}$ is the occupation field of the loops. The zero set of $\phi_{\Sigma}$ can be viewed as
the complementary of the set of points visited by the loops of
$\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}$. Since $\phi_{\Sigma}$ is a generalised function, this intuition needs to be made more precise (see also \cite {QW}). However this relation between the loops and the GFF is exact on
a metric graph (\cite{Lupu2014LoopsGFF}).
\medbreak
Let us now list three examples (more general variants are easy to obtain along the same lines) of concrete conjectures in the present setup, that should correspond to the scaling limit of the formulas derived on metric graphs :
\begin {enumerate}
\item
Let us consider the clusters of $\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}$. Two loops belong to the same cluster if they are connected by a finite chain of loops in $\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}$, where any two consecutive loops
intersect each other. If $\Sigma$ is a simply connected domain of $\mathbb{C}$, the outer boundaries of
outermost clusters, i.e. not surrounded by an other cluster, are distributed like the $\hbox{CLE}_{4}$
conformal loop ensemble (\cite{SheffieldWerner2012CLE}).
\begin{conjecture}
\label{ConjMetricRiemSurf}
There is a metric on the clusters of $\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}$ inside $\Sigma$, measurable
with respect to $\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}$, which is obtained as the limit of the pseudo-metric on metric graphs approximating $\Sigma$. The metric does not depend on the time-parametrisation of loops and on the particular choice of $g$ compatible with the complex structure of $\Sigma$ (in the case where $\Sigma$ is a simply connected domain of $\mathbb{C}$, the metric is the one given by the conformal invariant growth mechanism inside $\hbox{CLE}_{4}$). As in Proposition \ref{thmDist2Sets}, the square of the distance between
$B_{1}(\Sigma)$ and $B_{2}(\Sigma)$ induced by the metric on clusters of $\mathcal{L}_{g,{1}/{2}}$
is an exponential random variable, and its mean is $2 \operatorname{ED}(B_{1}(\Sigma),B_{2}(\Sigma))$.
\end{conjecture}
\item
We consider now the case where the field $\phi_{\Sigma}$ has constant boundary condition $h_{2}$ on $B_{2}(\Sigma)$,
where it is not necessarily constant on $B_{1}(\Sigma)$, and has free boundary condition on $B_{3}(\Sigma)$.
Some regularity condition is needed for the boundary condition $h_1$ on $B_{1}(\Sigma)$.
We for instance assume that $h_1$ is continuous and bounded on $B_1 (\Sigma)$
(but more general setups are also possible).
We can consider the excursion measure $\mu$ of Brownian motion in $\Sigma$ (reflected on $B_3$ and killed upon hitting $B_1$ and $B_2$), and restrict it to the set of excursions that start on $B_1$ and end on $B_2$. This set of excursions has finite mass, so that it is possible to renormalise $\mu$ into a probability measure, and to consider the
expected value of $h$ at the starting point of this excursion (according to this probability measure). We call this quantity $m$ (and note that it is
exactly the continuous 2D counterpart of the quantity $m$ defined just before Proposition \ref {ThmReffLocSet}). Note that when $h_1$ is constant, then $m$ is equal to that constant.
We assume that $a < \min_{B_1 (\Sigma)} h_1$.
We consider the local set $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$ for $\phi_{\Sigma}$, with the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$ is compact,
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$ contains $B_{1}(\Sigma)$,
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$ is measurable with respect the GFF $\phi_{\Sigma}$,
\item Conditionally on $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$ and $\phi_{\Sigma}$ on $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$,
the restriction of $\phi_{\Sigma}$ to $\Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$ is distributed like a GFF with boundary condition $a$ on $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$, $h_{2}$ on $B_{2}(\Sigma)\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$
and free on $B_{3}(\Sigma)\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$,
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$ is minimal for the above properties, that is to say any other random set satisfying the above four properties a.s. contains $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$.
\end{itemize}
$\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$ is a first {passage} set, analogous to
$\widetilde{\Lambda}_{a}$ on the metric graph, where $B_{1}(\Sigma)$ plays the role of $\widehat{A}$.
$\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}$ can be for instance constructed out of a metric graph approximation of $\Sigma$.
Proposition~\ref{ThmReffLocSet} (and the comments that follow it) leads to the following:
\begin{conjecture}
\label{ConjEL}
The extremal distance $\operatorname{ED}(\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma},B_{2}(\Sigma))$ is distributed like the {\em last} visit time of the level $a$ by a Brownian bridge of length
$\operatorname{ED}(B_{1}(\Sigma),B_{2}(\Sigma))$ from $h_2$ to $m$ (this last time is defined to be $0$ when the bridge does not hit $a$ at all).
\end{conjecture}
\item
We finally consider the case there $\phi_{\Sigma}$ has some sufficiently regular boundary condition $h$ on $B_{1}(\Sigma)\cup B_{2}(\Sigma)$ and
free boundary condition on $B_{3}(\Sigma)$. Let $z_{0}\in \Sigma\setminus B(\Sigma)$.
We consider the local set $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ for $\phi_{\Sigma}$, with the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ is compact,
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ contains $B_{1}(\Sigma)\cup B_{2}(\Sigma)$,
\item $\Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ is connected and contains $z_{0}$,
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ is measurable with respect the GFF $\phi_{\Sigma}$,
\item conditionally on $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ and $\phi_{\Sigma}$ on $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$,
the restriction of $\phi_{\Sigma}$ to $\Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ is distributed like a GFF with boundary condition $a$ on $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$
and free on $B_{3}(\Sigma)\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$,
\item $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ is minimal for the above properties, that is to say any other random set satisfying the above five properties a.s. contains $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$.
\end{itemize}
Let $G_{\Sigma}(z_{1},z_{2})$ denote the Green function of the Laplacian on $\Sigma$ with zero Dirichlet
boundary condition on $B_{1}(\Sigma)\cup B_{2}(\Sigma)$ and zero Neumann boundary condition on
$B_{3}(\Sigma)$. Let $G_{\Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})}(z_{1},z_{2})$ denote the Green function of the Laplacian on $\Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ with zero Dirichlet
boundary condition on $\Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ and zero Neumann boundary condition on
$B_{3}(\Sigma)\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$. For any
$z_{1}\in \Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$, the function
\begin{displaymath}
z_{2}\mapsto G_{\Sigma}(z_{1},z_{2})-G_{\Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})}(z_{1},z_{2})
\end{displaymath}
is harmonic on $\Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})$ and thus has a continuous extension at
$z_{2}=z_{1}$. Moreover
\begin{displaymath}
G_{\Sigma}(z_{1},z_{1})-G_{\Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})}(z_{1},z_{1})
\end{displaymath}
is the limit of differences of effective resistances in an approximation of $\Sigma$ by metric graphs.
Let $m$ be the value at $z_{0}$ of the harmonic extension of $h$ (with zero Neumann condition on
$B_{3}(\Sigma)$). If $h$ is constant on $B_{1}(\Sigma)\cup B_{2}(\Sigma)$, then $m$ is that constant.
Corollary \ref{CorDistrib1ptandHitting} leads to the following.
\begin{conjecture}
\label{ConjGreenFunc}
The random variable $
G_{\Sigma}(z_{0},z_{0})-G_{\Sigma\setminus \Lambda_{a}^{\Sigma}(z_{0})}(z_{0},z_{0})$
is distributed like the first hitting time of the level $a$ by a standard Brownian motion starting from
$m$.
\end{conjecture}
\end {enumerate}
\section*{Appendix}
Here we provide some details about the rather brute-force It\^o formula computation of
the semi-martingale decomposition of $\Psi_{\ell}(t)$ that proves Lemma \ref{LemMartingale}. We use the notation of the beginning of Section \ref{SecExplicit}.
To simplify the expressions, we will use the following notation:
\begin{displaymath}
r^{\ast}_{i}(t):=\hat{r}_{i}(t\wedge\tau_{\ell}),
\qquad
\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t):=\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell}))},
\qquad
L^{\ast}(t):=L(t\wedge\tau_{\ell}),
\end{displaymath}
$$
C^{\ast}_{ij}(t):=C^{\rm eff}_{ij}(t\wedge\tau_{\ell}),
\qquad
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t):=C^{\rm eff}_{i\check{x}}(t\wedge\tau_{\ell}),
$$
\begin{displaymath}
S_{i\check{x}}(t):=\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell}))}-h(\check{x}),
\qquad S^{+}_{i\check{x}}(t):=\vert\tilde{\phi}_{\hat{z}_{i}(\hat{r}_{i}(t\wedge \tau_{\ell}))}\vert +
\vert h(\check{x})\vert+\ell-L(t\wedge\tau_{\ell}),
\end{displaymath}
\begin{displaymath}
F(t)=\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)(S^{+}_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2}-S_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2}).
\end{displaymath}
At each time $t$, the $\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)$ for different values of $i$ have the same sign.
We will denote this common sign by $\sigma(t)\in \lbrace -1,+1\rbrace$. If all the
$\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)$ are zero, the value of $\sigma(t)$ does not matter.
Similarly, we will denote $\hbox {sgn}(h ( \widecheck A))\in \lbrace -1, +1\rbrace$ the common sign of $h$ on $\widecheck{A}$. If $h$ vanishes on $\widecheck{A}$, the value of the sign does not matter.
According to Lemma \ref{LemSDE}, $\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)$ has the following semi-martingale decomposition:
$$ M^{\ast}_{i}(t)+
\sum_{j\neq i}\int_{0}^{t}
C^{\ast}_{ij}(s)(\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{j}(s)-\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(s)) dr^{\ast}_{i}(s)
+\sum_{\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}\int_{0}^{t}
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(s)(h(\check{x})-\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(s)) dr^{\ast}_{i}(s),
$$
where $M^{\ast}_{i}(t)$ is an $(\widehat{\mathcal{F}}_{t})_{t\geq 0}$-martingale. Moreover,
$\langle M_{i}^{\ast},M_{i}^{\ast}\rangle_{t}=r^{\ast}_{i}(t)$ and $
\langle M_{i}^{\ast},M_{j}^{\ast}\rangle_{t}=0$ for $i\neq j$.
Further, $d S_{i\check{x}}(t)= d \tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)$,
$d S_{i\check{x}}^{+}(t)= \sigma(t) d\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)$,
and
$d\langle S_{i\check{x}},S_{i\check{x}}\rangle_{t}=
d\langle S^{+}_{i\check{x}},S^{+}_{i\check{x}}\rangle_{t}
= d r^{\ast}_{i}(t).$
According to Lemma \ref{LemDerivPartFunc}, Equations \eqref{EqDerCond} and \eqref{EqDerCond2},
\begin{displaymath}
d C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t) = C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)\sum_{j\neq i}C^{\ast}_{ij}(t) d r^{\ast}_{i}(t)
+C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)\sum_{\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t) d r^{\ast}_{i}(t)
-\sum_{j\neq i}C^{\ast}_{ij}(t)C^{\ast}_{j\check{x}}(t) d r^{\ast}_{j}(t).
\end{displaymath}
Using It\^o's formula formula we get that
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&d(S^{+}_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2}-S_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2})=
2S^{+}_{i\check{x}}(t) dS^{+}_{i\check{x}}(t)+ d\langle S^{+}_{i\check{x}},S^{+}_{i\check{x}}\rangle_{t}
-2S_{i\check{x}}(t) dS_{i\check{x}}(t)
- d\langle S_{i\check{x}},S_{i\check{x}}\rangle_{t}
\\
&&=
2(\sigma(t)S^{+}_{i\check{x}}(t)-S_{i\check{x}}(t)) d\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)=
2\theta_{\check{x}}(t)d\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)
\\
&&=
2\theta_{\check{x}}(t)\bigg(
d M^{\ast}_{i}(t)+
\sum_{j\neq i}
C^{\ast}_{ij}(t)(\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{j}(t)-\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)) dr^{\ast}_{i}(t)
+\sum_{\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)(h(\check{x}')-\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)) dr^{\ast}_{i}(t)
\bigg),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\theta_{\check{x}}(t)=(\sigma(t)\vert h(\check{x})\vert + h(\check{x})+\sigma(t)(\ell-L^{\ast}(t)))$.
Further
\begin{eqnarray*}
d F(t)&=&
\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}(
2\theta_{\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)d\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)+
(S^{+}_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2}-S_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2})
dC^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t))
\\&=&
2\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)d\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)
+\sum_{\substack{i\neq j\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{ij}(t)
(S^{+}_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2}-S_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2}-S^{+}_{j\check{x}}(t)^{2}+S_{j\check{x}}(t)^{2})
dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&&+
\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
(S^{+}_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2}-S_{i\check{x}}(t)^{2})
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&=&
2\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)d\tilde{\phi}^{\ast}_{i}(t)
-2\sum_{\substack{i\neq j\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}\theta_{\check{x}}(t)
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{ij}(t)(\tilde{\phi}_{j}(t)-\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t))d r^{\ast}_{i}(t)
\\&&+
\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
(\theta_{\check{x}}(t)^{2}+2\theta_{\check{x}}(t)(\tilde{\phi}_{i}(t)-h(\check{x})))
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&=&
2\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t) dM_{i}^{\ast}(t)
+\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)^{2}C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&&+
2\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)(h(\check{x}')-h(\check{x}))
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&=&
2\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t) dM_{i}^{\ast}(t)
+\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)^{2}C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&&-(1+\sigma(t)\hbox{sgn}(h ( \widecheck A)))
\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
(h(\check{x}')-h(\check{x}))^{2}
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t),
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{eqnarray*}
d \langle F,F\rangle_{t}&=&
4\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)\theta_{\check{x}'}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&=&
4\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)^{2}C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
+
4\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)(\theta_{\check{x}'}(t)-\theta_{\check{x}}(t))
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&=&
4\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)^{2}C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
-
2\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
(\theta_{\check{x}'}(t)-\theta_{\check{x}}(t))^{2}
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&=&
4\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)^{2}C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t)
\\&&-4(1+\sigma(t)\hbox{sgn}(h ( \widecheck A)))
\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x},\check{x}'\in\widecheck{A}}}
(h(\check{x}')-h(\check{x}))^{2}
C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}'}(t)dr_{i}^{\ast}(t).
\end{eqnarray*}
Finally,
\begin{displaymath}
\dfrac{d\Psi_{\ell}(t)}{\Psi_{\ell}(t)} =
-\dfrac{1}{2} dF(t)+\dfrac{1}{8} d \langle F,F\rangle_{t}
= -\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq\hat{n}\\\check{x}\in\widecheck{A}}}
\theta_{\check{x}}(t)C^{\ast}_{i\check{x}}(t) dM_{i}^{\ast}(t).
\end{displaymath}
It follows that $\Psi_{\ell}(t)$ is a local martingale.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
TL acknowledges the support of Dr. Max Rössler, the Walter Haefner
Foundation and the ETH Zurich Foundation. WW acknowledges the support of the SNF grant
SNF-155922. The authors are also part of the NCCR Swissmap of the SNF. They also thank the referees for their comments.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Synchronization effects in ensembles of coupled oscillators are
relevant for various physical systems,
such as coupled lasers, spin-torque oscillators, and Josephson
junctions~\cite{Nixon_etal-13,*Grollier-Cros-Fert-06,*Cawthorne_etal-99}, as well as for diverse
natural phenomena in life
sciences~\cite{Richard-Bakker-Teusink-Van-Dam-Westerhoff-96,*Prindle_etal-12}, and even for many
social systems~\cite{Neda_etal-00,*Eckhardt_et_al-07}. Synchronization
caused by an attractive mean-field coupling, studied in pioneering works by
Winfree and Kuramoto~\cite{Winfree-67,*Kuramoto-75},
allows a two-fold characterization. On one hand, the synchronization transition
can be described via
the appearance of a macroscopic mean field, amplitude of which often serves as the order parameter
of the transition.
On the other hand, synchronization can be characterized via an adjustment of
the frequencies of the
oscillators
in the ensemble (e. g., N. Wiener described synchronization~\cite{Wiener-65} as a ``phenomenon of
the pulling together of frequencies'').
There is also a nontrivial way to synchronize oscillators without coupling by acting
on them with
a common external noise~\cite{Pikovsky-84,*Pikovsky-84a,*Goldobin-Pikovsky-05b}.
Remarkably, common noise synchronizes
oscillators
in the first meaning only.
So, an ensemble of identical uncoupled oscillators under common noise
forms a perfect cluster where all the states
coincide and the value of the order parameter is the maximal possible.
The phases of slightly different oscillators also form a cluster. Their frequencies
are however not adjusted: their difference
is preserved under
common noise.
In this Letter we study properties of synchronization
and of the behavior of the frequencies
if both coupling and common noise are present. Our theory generalizes previous studies of
noise-driven ensembles
without coupling~\cite{Braun-etal-12}. We demonstrate how the Ott-Antonsen ansatz,
valid in the thermodynamic limit
for coupled oscillators with a Lorenzian distribution of
natural frequencies, can be generalized to include a common noisy driving.
After averaging of the resulting
equations over the fast basic frequency of oscillations,
we get a tractable Langevin-type
dynamics of the order parameter. We discuss in detail a nontrivial
competition between the synchronizing action
of noise and the desynchronizing action of the repulsive coupling. For
nonidentical oscillators, where
complete synchrony is impossible, we derive stationary distribution
of the order parameter and describe a rather counter-intuitive dispersion
of the frequencies at synchronization in presence of the repulsive coupling.
We consider an ensemble of phase oscillators subject to a
common Gaussian white noise with intensity $\sigma^2$
and to a Kuramoto-type coupling with strength $\mu$ (the coupling
is attractive for $\mu>0$ and repulsive otherwise). We consider
the ensemble in the thermodynamic limit,
suitable for the application
of the Ott-Antonsen theory~\cite{Ott-Antonsen-08}:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\dot{\varphi}_\Omega=\Omega+\sigma\xi(t)\sin\varphi_\Omega+
\mu R\sin(\Phi-\varphi_\Omega)\;,\\\quad \langle \xi(t)\xi(t')
\rangle=2\delta(t-t')\;.
\end{gathered}
\label{eq:1}
\end{equation}
Here the mean field is defined as
\begin{equation}
Z=Re^{i\Phi}=\langle e^{i\varphi}\rangle=
\int_{-\infty}^\infty d\Omega\, g(\Omega)\int_0^{2\pi}d\varphi_\Omega\, e^{i\varphi_\Omega}
w(\varphi_\Omega,t) \;,
\label{eq:2}
\end{equation}
where $g(\Omega)$ is the distribution of the natural frequencies.
According to the Ott-Antonsen ansatz~\cite{Ott-Antonsen-08},
the distribution function of the phases at given $\Omega$ can be represented
as $w(\varphi_\Omega,t)=(2\pi)^{-1}(1+\sum_{k=1}^\infty
[(z_\Omega(t))^k e^{-ik\varphi_\Omega}+c.c])$
and the mean field $z_\Omega(t)$ of a subpopulation with frequency $\Omega$
obeys the equation
\begin{equation}
\dot z_\Omega=i\Omega z_\Omega+0.5[\mu Z-\sigma\xi(t)-
(\mu Z^*-\sigma \xi(t)) z^2_\Omega]\;.
\label{eq:3}
\end{equation}
For a Lorentzian distribution of frequencies
$g(\Omega)=\gamma[\pi(\gamma^2+(\Omega-\Omega_0)^2)]^{-1}$, the
integral in~\eqref{eq:2} can be calculated by virtue of the
residual theorem, under assumption of analyticity of $z_\Omega$ in the upper half-plane,
$
Z=\int_{-\infty}^\infty d\Omega g(\Omega) z_\Omega=z_{\Omega_0+i\gamma}
$.
As a result one obtains a closed equation for the
mean field $Z$ for coupled
non-identical oscillators under common noise:
\begin{equation}
\dot Z=i\Omega_0 Z-\gamma Z+0.5[\mu Z(1-|Z|^2)-\sigma(1-Z^2)\xi(t)]\;.
\label{eq:5}
\end{equation}
It contains four parameters: the basic frequency $\Omega_0$ (which, in
contradistinction to the usual
Kuramoto model, cannot be simply shifted to zero, because the noise term breaks
the frequency-shift invariance), the
noise intensity $\sigma^2$, the coupling constant $\mu$, and the width of the distribution
of natural frequencies $\gamma$.
For an analytical treatment below, it is convenient to use the real-valued variables
$(J,\Phi)$, where $J=R^2/(1-R^2)$
is the order parameter characterizing the level of synchrony (closeness of the phases of
oscillators in the ensemble):
for $J=0$ the mean field amplitude $R=\sqrt{J/(1+J)}$ vanishes, while the
full synchrony with $J=\infty$ corresponds to $R=1$. Equations for these variables read
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\dot J&=\mu J-2\gamma J(1+J)-\sigma\xi(t)\sqrt{J(1+J)}\cos\Phi\;,\\
\dot \Phi&=\Omega_0+\sigma \xi(t) (J+1/2)[J(1+J)]^{-1/2}\sin\Phi\;,
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:6}
\end{equation}
and are complemented with the
equation for the phase,
relative to that of the mean field, $\theta_\omega=\varphi_\Omega-\Phi$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\dot\theta_\omega=\omega-\mu\sqrt{J/(1+J)}\sin\theta_\omega+\\
\sigma\xi(t)[\sin(\Phi+\theta_\omega)-(J+1/2)[J(1+J)]^{-1/2}\sin\Phi]\;.
\end{gathered}
\label{eq:7}
\end{equation}
Here $\omega=\Omega-\Omega_0$ is the deviation of the natural frequency
from the ensemble mean one. For the sake
of simplicity of notations we omit index $\omega$ below.
As the first step, we employ the natural condition that
the basic frequency of oscillations $\Omega_0$
is much larger than the parameters $\mu,\gamma,\sigma^2$
(which all have dimension of inverse time).
This suggests to average over the fast rotating phase $\Phi$. One
writes the Fokker-Planck equation corresponding to the
Langevin equations~(\ref{eq:6},\ref{eq:7}), and by virtue of the
multiple scales expansion obtains in the leading order in the small
parameters $\mu,\gamma,\sigma^2$ the
following equation for the probability density $w(J,\theta,t)$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial w}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial}{\partial J}
([\mu J-2\gamma J(1+J)+\frac{\sigma^2}{2}(J+1/2)]w)\\
+\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\left(\left[\omega-\mu\sqrt{\frac{J}{1+J}}\sin\theta-
\frac{\sigma^2(J+1/2)}{2\sqrt{J(1+J)}}\right]w\right)\\
-\sigma^2 \hat Q_{J,\theta}^2 w-\sigma^2 \hat Q_\theta^2 w=0\;.
\end{gathered}
\label{eq:8}
\end{equation}
Here we defined the operators
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{Q}_{J,\theta}(\cdot)&\equiv
\frac{\partial}{\partial J}\left(\sqrt{\frac{J(1+J)}{2}}\,(\cdot)\right)
-\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\left(\frac{\sin{\theta}}{\sqrt{2}}\,(\cdot)\right),\\
\hat{Q}_\theta(\cdot)&\equiv
\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\left(\left(\frac{\cos{\theta}}{\sqrt{2}}
-\frac{J+1/2}{\sqrt{2J(1+J)}}\right)
(\cdot)\right).
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:9}
\end{equation}
The Fokker-Planck equation~(\ref{eq:8},\ref{eq:9}) is equivalent to the
following system of stochastic
Langevin equations which can be interpreted as Eqs.~(\ref{eq:6},\ref{eq:7}) averaged over
the fast oscillations with frequency $\Omega_0$:
\begin{align}
\dot J&=\mu J-2\gamma J(1+J)+
\frac{\sigma^2}{2}(J+1/2)-\sigma\sqrt{\frac{(1+J) J}{2}}\zeta_1(t)\;,
\label{eq:10-1}\\
\dot\theta&=\omega-\mu\sqrt{\frac{J}{1+J}}\sin\theta-
\frac{\sigma^2}{4}\frac{(J+1/2)}{\sqrt{J(1+J)}}\sin\theta\nonumber\\&
+
\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{2}}
\sin\theta\zeta_1(t)+\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\cos\theta-\frac{(J+1/2)}{\sqrt{J(1+J)}}\right)\zeta_2(t)\;.
\label{eq:10-2}
\end{align}
The original noise $\xi(t)$ generates two effective independent
noise terms $\zeta_1(t)$ and $\zeta_2(t)$, which are Gaussian and
delta-correlated, $\langle\zeta_n(t)\zeta_l(t+t')\rangle=2\delta_{n,l}\delta(t')$\,,
because the signals $\xi(t)\cos{\varOmega_0t}$ and $\xi(t)\sin{\varOmega_0t}$ are
uncorrelated on time scales that are large compared to $2\pi/\varOmega_0$. The derived equations
contain four parameters $\mu,\gamma,\sigma^2,\omega$, and the properties of the stationary
solutions depend on $\mu/\sigma^2$, $\gamma/\sigma^2$, and $\omega/\sigma^2$ only.
Our first goal is to characterize the statistics of the order parameter $J$.
One can see that, as it should be for any
global coupling setup,
the system~(\ref{eq:10-1},\ref{eq:10-2}) is a skew one, where the dynamics of the
order parameter affects that of the phases,
but not vice versa. Thus one obtains a closed Fokker-Planck equation (the corresponding
Langevin equation is ~\eqref{eq:10-1}) for the
distribution of the order parameter
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial W(J,t)}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial}{\partial J}
([\mu J-2\gamma J(1+J)+\frac{\sigma^2}{2}(J+1/2)]W(J,t))\\=\frac{\sigma^2}{2}
\frac{\partial}{\partial J}\sqrt{J(1+J)}\frac{\partial}{\partial J}\sqrt{J(1+J)} W(J,t)\;.
\end{gathered}
\label{eq:fpJ}
\end{equation}
We start by considering the case of identical oscillators $\gamma=0$. Here,
the analysis of states close to full synchrony
$J\to\infty$ is simple, as $\ln J$ performs a biased random walk:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d}{dt}\ln J=\mu+\frac{\sigma^2}{2}+\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{2}}\eta_1(t)\;.
\label{eq:11}
\end{equation}
The quantity $\lambda=-\mu-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}$ is nothing else as the
Lyapunov exponent determining stability
of the full synchrony, the latter is stable if $\lambda<0$, i.e. if $\mu>-\sigma^2/2$.
Thus, the small enough repulsive coupling between the
oscillators does not break stability of the full synchrony. Another important state
is that of full asynchrony, $J=0$. One can see
however from Eq.~\eqref{eq:10-1} that this state is not invariant in presence of noise.
In fact, here we meet a nontrivial
situation where the states of full asynchrony ($J=0$) and of full synchrony
($J=\infty$) are differently driven by noise.
For the asynchronous state the driving is additive, therefore this state is not
invariant and the order parameter
experience fluctuations close to $J=0$, even if this state is stable (i.e. for repulsive
coupling $\mu<0$). In contradistinction, the noise
is acting on the fully synchronous state in a multiplicative way, so that if this state
is stable, noise does not kick the system out of it.
Thus, the stable ($\lambda<0$) fully synchronous state is an absorbing one.
This means that also for a
slightly repulsive coupling $-\sigma/2<\mu<0$, the asynchronous state $J\approx 0$,
although stable without noise, does
not survive the competition with the fully synchronous state $J=\infty$ which is the
global attractor.
In this ``bistable'' situation the nontrivial statistical characteristics is the
mean first passage time $T(0,\tilde J)$ for the stochastic
process ()\ref{eq:10-1},\ref{eq:fpJ}), from asynchrony
$J(0)=0$ to synchrony $\tilde J\gg 1$ (here
a cutoff is needed, because the
approach to the full synchrony $J=\infty$ is exponential,
formally the time to achieve it
is infinite). The expression for $T$ can be found via the standard
first-passage time theory for one-dimensional stochastic
processes~\cite{Gardiner-96}:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
T=\frac{2}{2\mu+3\sigma^2}\int_0^{\tilde J}
\frac{1-(1+z)^{2\mu\sigma^{-2}+3}}{z}dz\;.
\end{gathered}
\label{eq:12}
\end{equation}
Depending on the value of $\mu/\sigma^2$, this time
changes from a logarithmically large one $\sim\log\tilde J$
for
$2\mu\sigma^{-2}+3>0$, to a time diverging as a power law of $J$ for
$2\mu\sigma^{-2}+3<0$.
For nonidentical oscillators, $\gamma>0$, the fully synchronous state does not exist.
In this situation the order
parameter $J$ fluctuates with the stationary distribution, which can be
straightforwardly found from \eqref{eq:fpJ}:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
W(J;\gamma,\mu,\sigma^2)=\frac{ (1+J)^{2\mu\sigma^{-2}}
\exp[-4\gamma\sigma^{-2}(1+J)]}
{(4\gamma\sigma^{-2})^{1+2\mu\sigma^{-2}}\Gamma(2\mu\sigma^{-2}+1,4\gamma\sigma^{-2})}\;,\end{gathered}
\label{eq:15}
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma(m,x)$ is the upper incomplete Gamma function. The average value of the
order parameter is
\begin{equation}
\langle J\rangle=
\frac{1+2\mu\sigma^{-2}}{4\gamma\sigma^{-2}}-1+
\frac{\exp[-\frac{4\gamma}{\sigma^2}][\frac{4\gamma}{\sigma^2}]^{2\mu\sigma^{-2}}}
{\Gamma(1+2\mu/\sigma^2,4\gamma\sigma^{-2})}
\label{eq:avJ}
\end{equation}
These expressions are valid for any $\gamma>0$, however
the limit $\gamma\to 0$ is singular:
a normalizable distribution for $J$ at $\gamma=0$
\begin{equation}
W(J;0,\mu,\sigma^2)=-(2\mu\sigma^{-2}+1)(1+J)^{2\mu\sigma^{-2}}
\label{eq:13}
\end{equation}
exists only
if the synchronous state is unstable, i.e. $\mu<-\sigma^2/2$,
and the average $\langle J\rangle=-(2\mu\sigma^{-2}+2)^{-1}$ is finite only if
$\mu<-\sigma^{-2}$.
We present the dependencies of $\langle J\rangle$ on the parameters
of the problem
in Fig.~\ref{fig:avJ}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\psfrag{xlab}[cc][cc]{$\mu/\sigma^2$}
\psfrag{ylab}[cc][cc]{$\langle J\rangle$}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig1.eps}
\caption{(color online) Values of $\langle J\rangle$ for different $\gamma/\sigma^2$ as functions
of $\mu/\sigma^2$. From top to bottom: $\gamma/\sigma^2=10^{-4},\;10^{-3},\;10^{-2},\; 10^{-1},\;1$.
Brown dashed line corresponds to the system of identical oscillators $\gamma=0$.
Vertical grey line shows the border
of stability of the fully synchronous state for $\gamma=0$.}
\label{fig:avJ}
\end{figure}
For nonidentical oscillators we face a new problem of the behavior of the frequencies. The skew
Langevin Eqs.~(\ref{eq:10-1},\ref{eq:10-2}) appear to be analytically solvable only if we make another
approximation: We neglect fluctuations of the order parameter
(i.e. we assume $J\approx const$, for large $J$ this agrees with numerics)
in the equations for the phases. In this approximation
we obtain from Eq.~\eqref{eq:10-2} a closed Langevin equation for the phase dynamics:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\dot\theta=\omega-\mu b\sin\theta-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}c\sin\theta\\
-\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{2}}\sin\theta \zeta_1(t)+\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{2}}
(\cos\theta-c)\zeta_2(t)\;,
\end{gathered}
\label{eq:16}
\end{equation}
where we denote
$
b= \sqrt{J/(1+ J )}$, $c=(J+1/2)/
{\sqrt{ J (1+ J )}}
$.
The stationary solution $w(\theta)$ of the corresponding Fokker-Planck equation with
a constant flux $j=(2\pi)^{-1}\langle \dot\theta\rangle$ obeys
\begin{equation}
(\omega-\mu b\sin\theta)w-\frac{\sigma^2}{2}\frac{d}{d\theta}(1-2c\cos\theta+c^2)w =j\;.
\label{eq:17}
\end{equation}
Solution of this equation reads
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
w(x)&=\frac{C}{1-2c\cos\theta+c^2}\int_x^{x+2\pi}\exp[V(y)-V(x)]dy\;,\\
V(x)&=
-\frac{4\omega}{\sigma^2(c^2-1)}
\arctan \left(\frac{1+c}{c-1}\tan\frac{x}{2}\right)\\&+
\frac{\mu b}{c\sigma^2}\ln(1+c^2-2c\cos x)\;,\\
C^{-1}&=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{\int_x^{x+2\pi}\exp[V(y)-V(x)]dy}{1-2c\cos x+c^2}dx\;,\\
\langle\dot\theta\rangle&=\pi C\sigma^2[1-\exp[V(x+2\pi)-V(x)]]\\&=\pi C\sigma^2
\left(1-\exp\left[-\frac{4\pi \omega}{\sigma^2(c^2-1)}\right]\right)\;.
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:18}
\end{equation}
This rather lengthy exact solution can be simplified, for small $\omega$, to include
the first-order terms $\sim \omega$ only.
Here the expression for $j$ reduces to $j\approx C\frac{2\pi\omega}{c^2-1}$, and
in the normalization factor $C$ we can set $\omega=0$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
C^{-1}=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{\int_x^{x+2\pi}
\left(\frac{1+c^2-2c\cos y}{1+c^2-2c\cos x}\right)^{\frac{\mu b}{c\sigma^2}}}
{1+c^2-2c\cos x}dx=\\
=\frac{4\pi^2}{c^2-1}\left(P_{\frac{\mu b}{c\sigma^2}}\left(\frac{c^2+1}{c^2-1}\right)\right)^2\;,
\end{gathered}
\label{eq:19}
\end{equation}
where $P_\lambda(x)$ is the Legendre function. A rather simple expression appears
for small $\mu$, where an expansion of the Legendre function can be used. The final
approximate formula for the observed frequencies of oscillators $\nu=\langle \dot \theta\rangle$
reads
\begin{equation}
\nu(\omega)=\langle\dot\theta\rangle=2\pi j\approx
\omega\left(1- 2\mu \frac{b}{c\sigma^2}\ln\frac{c^2}{c^2-1}\right)\;.
\label{eq:20}
\end{equation}
Noteworthy, for uncoupled oscillators $\mu=0$ one obtains $\nu=\omega$.
This means that common noise
does not influence the average
frequencies. In the presence of coupling, the observed frequencies $\nu$
are pulled together if the coupling is attractive, $\mu>0$, and are pushed apart
if the coupling is repulsive, $\mu<0$. The effect depends on the level of synchrony,
characterized by the value of the order parameter
$J$. In fact, the limit $J\to\infty$ is singular as here $c\to 1$; as we show in Fig.~\ref{fig:avom},
in this limit the dependence $\nu(\omega)$ is not linear, but a power law one.
Formula \eqref{eq:20} describes, in an approximate way, the main nontrivial
effect that appears due to combined action of common noise and mean-field coupling
on the ensemble of nonidentical oscillators. We first remind what happens to the frequencies
in the absence of the common noise, i.e. for the standard Kuramoto model. In this case
there is a critical value of the coupling constant, beyond which the order parameter is non-zero.
In this synchronized state the frequencies are pulled together; moreover there appears
a cluster of oscillators that have equal frequencies, the size of this cluster grows with
the coupling constant. Below the critical coupling strength, the order parameter vanishes, so that there
is no any effect on the frequencies of the oscillators, and they remain the natural ones.
Common noise additionally influences the order parameter,
which is non-vanishing and even large also when the mean-field
coupling is repulsive (cf. Fig.~\ref{fig:avJ}). This leads to a surprising
state of synchronization
with dispersion of the frequencies: synchrony (in the sense of a large value order parameter)
is in this case maintained by the common noise, while the repulsive coupling is responsible
for the scattering of frequencies.
As this effect is notable, we characterize it below numerically on different levels.
First, in Fig.~\ref{fig:avom} we show the solutions~\eqref{eq:18} for $J=\infty$ (perfect
synchronization) and for a finite $J$. One can see that in the fully synchronous case
$J=\infty$ the repulsion of frequencies is not linear as in Eq.~\eqref{eq:20}, but follows
a power law $\nu\sim \omega^\alpha$, with an exponent that with high accuracy can be fitted
as $\alpha= 1+2\mu/\sigma^2$.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\psfrag{xlab}[cc][cc]{$\omega$}
\psfrag{ylab}[cc][cc]{$\nu$}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig2.eps}
\caption{(color online) Observed frequencies $\nu$ vs natural frequencies $\omega$, obtained
from~\eqref{eq:18}. We use here the continuous fraction expansion of the Fourier
representation of $w(\theta)$, following~\cite{Risken-89}. Solid lines: solutions for $J=\infty$,
markers: solutions for $\langle J\rangle=10$. From top to bottom:
$\mu/\sigma^2=-0.4,\;-0.2,\;0,\;0.2,\;0.4$. Dashed lines have slopes $1+2\mu/\sigma^2$.
}
\label{fig:avom}
\end{figure}
Next, we illustrate in Fig.~\ref{fig:oasim} the effect of dispersion of the frequencies with the direct
simulation of
Langevin equations~(\ref{eq:1},\ref{eq:5})
describing the ensemble of coupled oscillators. One clearly sees
dispersion of the frequencies for the repulsive
coupling and their concentration for the attractive coupling, both for the cases
of Ott-Antonsen equations~\eqref{eq:5} valid in the
thermodynamic limit, and for a finite population governed by~\eqref{eq:1}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\psfrag{xlab}[cc][cc]{$\omega/\gamma$}
\psfrag{ylab}[cc][cc]{$(\nu-\omega)/\gamma$}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig3.eps}
\caption{Observed frequencies $\nu$ vs natural frequencies $\omega$, obtained
from~(\ref{eq:1},\ref{eq:5}). Parameters of simulations: $\Omega_0=100,\;\sigma=1$,
$\gamma=0.05$ (a) and $\gamma=0.01$ (b). Values of the coupling constant (from top to
bottom curves at the right side of the panels): $\mu=-0.6,\;-0.4,\;-0.2,\;0,\;0.2$.
Solid lines: simulations of the Ott-Antonsen equations~\eqref{eq:5}
valid in the thermodynamic limit. Markers: direct simulations of the population of
21 phase oscillators~\eqref{eq:1}.
}
\label{fig:oasim}
\end{figure}
In summary, in this Letter we have developed a theory for an ensemble of coupled
oscillators driven by common noise. In the thermodynamic limit, by adopting
the Ott-Antonsen ansatz and by averaging over the high basic frequency, we obtain
analytically tractable equations for the order parameter and find
the distribution of the order parameter in a closed form. As the common
noise always fosters synchrony of oscillators, nontrivial features appear if
the mean-field coupling acts in the opposite direction, i.e. is repulsive.
For identical oscillators this competition results in
the existence of the critical coupling strength $\mu_c=-\sigma^2/2$. For
$\mu>\mu_c$ the fully synchronous state where all the oscillators form a perfect
cluster is stable, while for $\mu<\mu_c$ it is not. Because, for vanishing noise,
the splay state with a uniform distribution of phases is stable for all negative
values of $\mu$, one could expect bistability for $\mu_c<\mu<0$. However,
bistability does not happen, because the noise acts differently at the two states
of interest: it is additive for the splay state with vanishing order parameter,
and is multiplicative for the fully synchronous state. The latter is thus an absorbing
state and the system never leaves it when the full synchrony is achieved.
Therefore for $\mu_c<\mu$ only the synchronous state is eventually observed, and the only
nontrivial question is how fast it is reached - the answer to this question is given by
Eq.~\eqref{eq:12}.
Another quite counter-intuitive effect of the competition between the common noise
and the coupling can be observed for non-identical oscillators. The order
parameter is always non-vanishing in presence of common noise, and this leads
to dispersion of the frequencies - their distribution is wider than in the coupling-free case.
Here one should take into account that the common noise does not
directly adjust the frequencies,
although it pulls the phases together into a stochastic bunch.
In presence of an additional repulsive
coupling, the phases in the bunch repel each other (although synchrony is preserved)
and as the
result their frequencies diverge.
\acknowledgments
We thank P. Collet and M. Matias for useful discussions.
The work was supported by ITN COSMOS (funded by
the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation
programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 642563).
Numerical part of this work was
supported by the Russian Science Foundation
(Project No. 14-12-00811).
The analytical calculations which led to Eqs.~(\ref{eq:6})--(\ref{eq:13}) was
supported by the Russian Science Foundation (Project No.\ 14-12-00090).
\def$'${$'$}
|
\section*{Acknowledgment}
\label{sec:acknowledgement}
This research is supported by the National Research Foundation,
Prime Minister’s Office,
Singapore under its International Research Centre in Singapore Funding Initiative.
\section{Benchmark}
\label{sec:benchmark}
\input{plots/fig_dev_results}
\input{plots/tab_Eval_result_SC}
\subsection{Baseline Algorithms}
\label{sec:benchmark_baseline}
In this work,
we benchmark the Bag-of-Words descriptor based method with four spatial-temporal local features and three encoding methods.
Specifically,
we selected Spatio-Temporal Interest Point (STIP) feature~\cite{Laptev_ICCV_2003},
Cuboid feature~\cite{Dollar_VSPETS_2005},
Covariance matrices (denoted as Cov)~\cite{Faraki_CV_2014},
and Improved Dense Trajectory (IDT)~\cite{Wang_ICCV_2013}.
For Cuboid feature,
we use the parameter {\small $\sigma=2$} and {\small $\tau=1.5$} to extract up to 200 Cuboids from each action video,
followed by Principle Component Analysis (PCA)~\cite{Hastie_springer_2001} to reduce the dimensionality of the extracted feature to 100.
For the covariance matrices,
we first extract the 72-dimension HOF feature from Dense Trajectory (DT) feature to generate {\small $72 \times 72$} dimensional covariance matrices $X$.
Following~\cite{Faraki_CV_2014} we compute the Log-Euclidean vector representation of each $X$ and use this representation as covariance feature.
In our first set of baseline methods,
we adopt two encoding methods for STIP, Cuboid and Cov features.
In the first encoding method,
we utilized Kmeans++~\cite{Arthur_SDG_2007} to learn the codebook and use Vector Quantization to encode each local feature,
followed by mean pooling to generate the descriptor.
We denote this baseline method as {\it Featurename}\_VQ.
For the second encoding method,
we adopt a sparse coding approach,
where the K-SVD algorithm~\cite{Aharon_TSP_2006} is utilized for codebook learning and Orthogonal Matching Pursuit (OMP) algorithm~\cite{Tropp_TIT_2007} is used for encoding.
This baseline is denoted as {\it Featurename}\_OP.
For the IDT feature,
we follow \cite{Wang_ICCV_2013} and use Fisher Vector (FV) encoding to generate the descriptor.
Specifically,
we first use Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) to learn the codebook.
Unlike VQ and OMP encoding method,
FV encodes both the first and second order statistics between the video descriptors and a GMM.
We denote this baseline as IDT\_FV.
Given a descriptor,
we used an SVM with {\small $\chi^{2}$} kernel for classification.
The dimensionality of IDT\_FV descriptor is too high for {\small $\chi^{2}$} kernel SVM.
We select a linear SVM,
which shows good results in classification for descriptor with high dimensionality~\cite{Fan_JMLR_2008,Douglas_springer_2009},
The aforementioned classification is deployed for closed-set classification scenario.
In this benchmark,
we also employ an open-set linear SVM classifier~\cite{Bendale_CVPR_2015} to evaluate the performance under open-set scenario.
Based on the preliminary experiment,
near and far plane pressures is fixed to 0.4 and 1.0,
respectively.
\input{plots/fig_eval_action_result_3P}
\subsection{Evaluation under Closed View Scenario}
\label{sec:benchmark_closed_view}
In this section,
we evaluate the benchmark performance with closed view recognition scenario,
\ie~the camera view of the test data is the same as that for the training data.
Specifically,
we restrict the training and test data from same camera source,
while the subjects can only appear in either the training or test data.
Three types of camera source scenarios are evaluated,
namely Single Camera (SC),
Same camera Type (ST), and
All Cameras (AC).
First,
we use the Development Set to fine-tune the optimal codebook size and parameters of SVM classifier under closed-set classification scenario.
{Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:dev_result} shows the performance on all 5 camera views.
Across all camera views,
the accuracy gradually increases and saturates when the codebook size is set to 1024.
The only exception is for the Cuboids feature based descriptor,
which the performance under codebook size of 512 is the best.
Due to the limits of computational resources,
the codebook size of IDT\_FV is evaluated up to 256.
Based on the optimal performance,
we conducted 10-fold cross validation on the Evaluation Set.
The results are shown in {Table}\@\xspace~\ref{tab:eval_result_SC} and the category wise performance of the best performing descriptor are shown in {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:IDT_SC_3P}.
The key findings are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
IDT\_FV consistently achieved the highest mean accuracy and lowest standard error on all scenarios,
which is consistent with the reported performance on other datasets~\cite{Wang_ICCV_2013}.
For the STIP and Cuboids features,
we notice that the performance with PTZ06 is better than for other camera views.
As shown in {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:action_sample},
the FOV of PTZ06 is narrower and the size of each person is more consistent than in other cameras.
Hence,
the extracted local features is more consistent.
%
\item
We observed that when the available training data increases from single camera view to all cameras,
the performance of Cov\_OP and IDT\_FV increases.
However,
this is not true for the VQ based encoding method,
where some of the single camera view scenarios report the best performance.
This suggests that IDT\_FV not only is more discriminative than other baseline methods,
it also is more robust in handling training data with large environmental variation.
%
\item
From {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:IDT_SC_3P},
we found that the performance of micro actions,
such as {\it Sneeze}, {\it CellToEar}, and {\it TakePicture},
is significant lower than the other class of actions.
One reasons is that the available local features on the micro actions are fewer.
On the other hand,
action with large spatial movement,
such as {\it PersonRun} and {\it Jump},
can be accurately recognized.
In generally,
person-object actions are slightly harder to recognize than single person actions.
\end{enumerate}
\input{plots/tab_Eval_result_SC_CC_baseline2_IDT}
\input{plots/tab_Eval_result_SC_CC_baseline2_IDT_IXMAS}
In this work,
we also evaluate the performance of the baseline methods under open-set scenario.
Specifically,
the classifier is required to identify whether the given sample belongs to one of the known class given in the training set or rejects it as an unknown sample,
which is a realistic scenario in real-world applications.
Based on the findings on the above section,
we only show the performance of IDT\_FV approach.
From {Table}\@\xspace~\ref{tab:eval_result_SC} (in \textcolor{blue!80}{BLUE} background color) and {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:IDT_SC_3P},
the performance of IDT\_FV degraded on all scenarios.
In our preliminary experiment,
we also evaluated the performance of open-set action recognition with KTH~\cite{Schuldt_ICPR_2004},
M$^2$I~\cite{Liu_TC_2016}, and
IXMAS~\cite{Weinland_ICCV_2007},
where similar performance trend are observed.
Under MCAD,
the most significant performance drop is with the {\it UseCellPhone} action,
where the performance under all camera cases dropped from from 86.7\% to 45.1\%.
Surprisingly,
the performance of {\it Point} action increased for SC, ST, and AC scenarios.
To investigate this,
we examine the confusion matrix of both closed-set and open-set scenario under AC scenario.
As shown in {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:SC_eval_confusion},
we find that the {\it Point} action is easier to confuse with other actions in the closed-set classification scenario,
where the probability of {\it Point} action to be misclassified as {\it CellToEar} action and {\it TakePicture} action are 0.07 and 0.04,
respectively.
While in the open-set scenario,
the probability of {\it TakePicture} action reduced to 0.01.
We also observed that the performance of the micro actions with object
(\ie~{\it CellToEar}, {\it UseCellphone}, {\it DrinkingWater}, and {\it TakePicture})
suffers significantly.
If we closely examine the confusion matrix,
most of the test samples under these actions are mostly misclassified as {\it Point} action.
Similar to the {\it Point} action,
these action classes contain the arm motion action,
which might make it harder to distinguish with interest point based descriptor under the open-set scenario.
\input{plots/fig_eval_SC_confusion_matrix}
\subsection{Evaluation with Open View Classification}
\label{sec:benchmark_open_view}
In this section,
we evaluate the benchmark performance for the open view recognition scenario,
\ie~the camera view of the test data has never been seen in the training phase.
We comprehensively evaluate all single camera cross view classification cases,
where data from one camera is selected to initialize the codebook and train the classifier (\ie~source view),
and the evaluation is conducted on the selected camera (\ie~target view).
For all cases,
the subjects in each data split is identical to those in Section~\ref{sec:benchmark_closed_view}.
We applied the optimal codebook size from the previous section and the SVM parameters are fine-tuned on the Development Set.
Both the close-set and open-set classification scenarios are evaluated.
The results with IDT\_FV on MCAD are shown in {Table}\@\xspace~\ref{tab:eval_result_SC_CC_2_IDT}.
Furthermore,
we also conducted the same experiment on the synchronous IXMAS dataset (see {Table}\@\xspace~\ref{tab:eval_result_SC_CC_2_IDT_IXMAS}).
Overall,
the performance of cross view recognition drops significantly when compared to the single camera case.
The results are expected as the training and test data has significant difference in view perspective, FOV, image quality, and pixel resolution.
Consistent with the previous section,
the performance with open-set classification method further reduce the performance.
We also observed that the performance is more stable when the evaluated camera view has similar properties as that of the training data.
For instance,
the Cam04-Cam05 pair report an average of 74.15\% on open-set classification scenario,
where the corresponding performance on Cam04-PTZ04 pair is around 75.4\%.
The view conditions of Cam06 is significantly different from the other cameras,
and registers worst performance on all cross-view evaluation.
In {Table}\@\xspace~\ref{tab:eval_result_SC_CC_2_IDT_IXMAS},
we deliberately do not perform cross view evaluation for Cam4 because Cam4 is a top view camera (see {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:review_constraints}) and does not exhibit visually favorable properties for meaningful action recognition task.
Finally,
we highlight that the open view evaluation is essential to assess the robustness of any proposed algorithm.
Different from action recognition with consumer generated data
(\eg~egocentric video or crowdsourced dataset),
it is impractical to collect surveillance video data from all possible conditions for training purposes.
It is important to point out that for dataset that are synchronously recorded
(\eg~IXMAS dataset),
the evaluation needs to carefully designed such that temporal self-similarity is not utilized to improve the performance.
In our future work,
we plan to evaluate view-invariant action recognition algorithms on the open view scenario.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper,
we presented a new action recognition dataset,
namely Multi-Camera Action Dataset (MCAD),
which is designed to evaluate the open view action classification problem.
Different from existing multi-view datasets,
the samples in MCAD are independently recorded with 5 cameras and 20 subjects,
and contains a total of 14,298 action samples.
Inspired by the LFW dataset,
we designed a standard evaluation protocol and benchmarked MCAD under several scenarios.
\section{Dataset Review}
\label{sec:db_review}
\subsection{Constrained Datasets}
The constrained datasets are captured under controlled environments with constant background.
Most of them were recorded under the indoor environment,
which exhibited stable illumination conditions,
fixed distance between person and cameras,
and fixed direction of the actions.
The Weizmann dataset~\cite{Gorelick_PAMI_2007} contains clean and static background,
and the participants perform actions around a small area.
The KTH dataset~\cite{Schuldt_ICPR_2004} (see {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:review_constraints}) is considered more challenging than the Weizmann dataset.
It contains image sequences of human actions taken over from four scenarios and dynamic zoom variations.
The dataset consists of relatively simple actions,
such as ``walking'' and ``jump'',
with limited action variations.
Literature has reported close to perfect performance on these datasets.
Specifically,
100\% classification accuracy on several action classes are reported in Weizmann dataset~\cite{Gorelick_PAMI_2007}.
Different from these actions,
there exist some datasets that recorded more complex actions.
In the Activity of Daily Living (ADL) dataset~\cite{Messing_ICCV_2009},
each activity is performed three times by five individuals of different shapes, size, gender, and ethnicity.
Similarly,
the TUM Breakfast dataset~\cite{Kuehne_CVPR_2014} comprises of actions related to breakfast preparation in various kitchens.
\input{plots/fig_review_constrained}
As the performance on these databases is saturating,
several cross-view action recognition datasets were proposed.
The first multi-view human action dataset is the INRIA Xmas Motion Acquisition Sequences (IXMAS) dataset~\cite{Weinland_ICCV_2007} (see {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:review_constraints}),
which contains actions taken from 5 calibrated and synchronized cameras (4 side views and 1 top view).
Subsequently,
the Multicamera Human Action Video (MuHAVi) dataset~\cite{Singh_AVSS_2010} collected multiple primitive actions video data using 8 CCTV cameras located at 4 sides and 4 corners of a rectangular platform.
Benefiting from the advances in depth sensing,
the MV-TJU dataset~\cite{Liu_TC_2015} contains actions performed in both light and dark environment from two different cameras.
Similarly,
the Multi-modal \& Multi-view \& Interactive (M$^2$I) dataset~\cite{Liu_TC_2016} extends the MV-TJU dataset by including person-person and person-object interactive action.
Both the MV-TJU and M$^2$I dataset consist of RGB image sequence, depth data and 3D skeleton data.
As many reported results on the constrained datasets are very good,
these datasets are no longer regarded as challenging datasets for the action recognition problem.
Furthermore,
we argue that the actions are too simple when compared to the real world scenario.
The action samples in these datasets are synchronized in all cameras,
where the corresponding pairs have the same periodic properties.
Several works are using this information to study the cross-view learning problem~\cite{Zheng_BMVC_2012} and cross-domain learning problem~\cite{Duan_PAMI_2012a,Hal_ACL_2007,Duan_PAMI_2012,Bach_ICML_2004}.
In addition,
we note that the camera views employed in the training stage are unlikely to have direct relationship
(\ie~same view or overlapped region)
with the test camera,
especially for the surveillance application.
\subsection{Consumer generated Datasets}
The datasets of this category are generated by consumers and collected from the Internet, movies or personal video collections.
These datasets are very challenging when compared with constrained datasets,
due to its diversity in visual content, background complexity, and dynamic camera motion
Example of these datasets are shown in {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:review_consumer}.
University of Central Florida (UCF) has collected several challenging human action datasets.
UCF11~\cite{Liu_CVPR_2009},
UCF50~\cite{Rodriguez_CVPR_2008}, and
UCF101~\cite{Soomro_TR_2012} contain realistic videos and personal video collections collected from YouTube with different numbers of action classes.
UCF Sports Action~\cite{Rodriguez_CVPR_2008} consists of a set of actions in sports collected from a wide range of stock footage websites,
including BBC Motion gallery and GettyImages.
Other similar datasets include the Olympic sports dataset~\cite{Niebles_LNCS_2010}.
Moreover,
the Human Motion Database (HMDB)~\cite{Kuehne_ICCV_2014} includes distinct action categories extracted from a wide range of sources.
The Hollywood dataset~\cite{Laptev_CVPR_2008} and the Hollywood2 dataset~\cite{Marszalek_CVPR_2009} contain human actions distributed in the movies,
which enable the comprehensive benchmark for human action recognition in the realistic and challenging settings.
The Stanford 40 Action Dataset~\cite{Yao_ICCV_2011} contains images of humans performing 40 actions.
Different from these datasets which are designed for action classification problem,
Kliper-Gross~\etal~\cite{Kliper_PAMI_2012} proposed the Action Similarity Labeling (ASLAN) Challenge which contains 3697 action samples from 1571 unique YouTube videos divided into 432 non-trivial action categories.
This benchmark focuses on the action verification problem.
\input{plots/fig_review_consumer}
\subsection{Surveillance Datasets}
\input{plots/fig_review_surveillance}
The dataset of this category is captured with fixed view cameras under the real-world surveillance environments,
which contains image sequences with complex background~\cite{Over_TRECVID_2014}, aerial view~\cite{ucf_aerial_2011}, and crowded unconstrained environment~\cite{Over_TRECVID_2014}.
The UCF Aerial Action dataset~\cite{ucf_aerial_2011} was obtained using a R/C-controlled blimp equipped with an HD camera mounted on a gimbal.
The collection represents a diverse pool of actions featured at different heights and various viewpoints.
The UT-Interaction dataset~\cite{ryoo_iccv_2009} focuses on human-human interactions in realistic environments in which each video contains at least one execution per interaction.
The MSR dataset~\cite{yan_iccv_2007} was created in 2009 to study the behavior recognition algorithms in presence of clutter and dynamic backgrounds and other types of action variations.
All the video sequences in this dataset are captured with clutter and moving backgrounds.
The UCF-ARG dataset~\cite{ucf_arg_2011} is a multi-view real-world dataset which consists of a ground camera, a rooftop camera, and an aerial camera mounted onto the payload platform of a helium balloon.
The iLIDS dataset~\cite{Over_TRECVID_2014} is another multi-view real-world dataset which collected action samples from indoor airport surveillance video in a busy airport.
This dataset is also used in the TRECVID Surveillance Event Detection (SED) evaluation since 2008,
where the presented action class remain challenging for the state-of-the-art approaches~\cite{Over_TRECVID_2014}.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Human action recognition has received increasing attention from the computer vision and machine learning community in the past few decades~\cite{Chris_AVC_1998,Laptev_ICCV_2003,Dollar_VSPETS_2005,Wang_IJCV_2013,Schuldt_ICPR_2004,Liu_CVPR_2011,Jain_CVPR_2013,Zhang_JEET_2015,Xu_CVPR_2015,Sapienza_IJCV_2014,Zha_BMVC_2015}.
Its importance is greatly driven by applications,
such as human-computer interaction, action video indexing and retrieval, advanced video surveillance and so on.
In the early action recognition research,
most of the research works were focused on the single-view learning problem.
These works mainly focused on the extraction of robust feature representation
(\eg~spatial features~\cite{Chris_AVC_1998},
spatio-temporal features~\cite{Laptev_ICCV_2003,Dollar_VSPETS_2005},
covariance descriptors~\cite{Wang_TIP_2007,Han_AFGR_2008},
trajectories-based descriptor~\cite{Wang_IJCV_2013}, \etc)
and classification methodology~\cite{Schuldt_ICPR_2004}.
More recently,
semantic feature representations
(\ie~local action attributes)
were explored for improved action classification performance~\cite{Liu_CVPR_2011,Jain_CVPR_2013,Wang_ICCV_2013a,Zhang_JEET_2015}.
As the performance are saturating on the constrained datasets,
several works have focused on cross-view learning problem~\cite{Jiang_TC_2015,Gao_NC_2016,Farhadi_LNCS_2008} and cross-domain learning problem~\cite{Cui_TC_2014,Bach_ICML_2004,Duan_PAMI_2012}.
Cross-view learning aims to map features obtained from multiple views into a common feature space to handle the variations in visual appearance.
In the case where a new action category is given,
it can utilize the feature mapping model to perform action recognition between two different camera views.
On the other hand,
existing datasets often contain limited samples for each action category
(see {Table}\@\xspace~\ref{tab:db_review}).
To address this issue,
cross-domain learning aims to leverage the small-scale data from target domain together with a large-scale data from an auxiliary domain to augment the generalization ability for model learning~\cite{Wang_TSMCB_2012}.
In the existing literature,
many datasets are often collected under single camera view~\cite{Messing_ICCV_2009,Gorelick_PAMI_2007} or multiple views with overlapped observation~\cite{Weinland_ICCV_2007,Liu_TC_2016,Liu_TC_2015}.
Hence,
it is hard to systematically evaluate the robustness of action recognition algorithms on similar yet different backgrounds and captured environments.
On the other hand,
the samples from large scale action recognition dataset collected from the Internet,
such as UCF101~\cite{Soomro_TR_2012},
consists of complex action captured from dynamic background environments.
This type of datasets is ideal for deep learning based approaches~\cite{Xu_CVPR_2015,Zha_BMVC_2015}.
\input{plots/tab_db_review}
Based on the above discussions,
it is timely to have independently recorded multi-view constrained datasets,
which provide standardized evaluation configuration to analyze the robustness of an action recognition system under unseen views.
In this paper,
we present a new Multi-Camera Action Dataset (MCAD),
which consists of actions recorded with two types of CCTV cameras.
Each camera has similar but slightly different FOVs, view perspective, image resolution, and background.
The actions were independently performed on each camera view.
Benchmark performance with single-view state-of-the-art algorithms indicate that this dataset is very challenging,
especially for micro actions (\ie~action with small amount of motion area) and the cross-view action recognition scenario.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
Section~\ref{sec:db_review} reviews the existing datasets.
Section~\ref{sec:proposed_db} delineates the details of the proposed MCAD,
where the benchmark is discussed in Section~\ref{sec:benchmark}.
Section~\ref{sec:conclusion} concludes the paper.
\section{Multi-Camera Action Dataset}
\label{sec:proposed_db}
In this section,
we delineate the details of the proposed dataset,
namely Multi-Camera Action Dataset (MCAD)\footnote{
available via http://mmas.comp.nus.edu.sg/MCAD/MCAD.html}.
\subsection{List of Recorded Actions}
The MCAD consists of 9 single person daily actions and 9 person-object actions.
These action categories are inherited from the KTH~\cite{Schuldt_ICPR_2004},
IXMAS~\cite{Weinland_ICCV_2007},
and iLIDS~\cite{Over_TRECVID_2014} datasets.
The action list and respective definition of each action are shown in {Table}\@\xspace~\ref{tab:action_list}.
Among these actions,
there are 7 actions that contains action with small amount of motion area\footnote{
action ID: \{01, 02, 05, 10, 11, 12, \& 13\}},
we denoted these actions as micro action.
As demonstrated in Section~\ref{sec:benchmark},
these micro actions are more challenging,
especially the person-object actions.
In this dataset,
we recruited a total of 20 human subjects.
Each candidate repeats each action for 8 times
(4 times during the day and 4 times in the evening)
under one camera view.
Different from multi-view datasets such as IXMAS~\cite{Weinland_ICCV_2007} and MuHAVI~\cite{Singh_AVSS_2010}
where several cameras are deployed to record an action sample synchronously,
we use five cameras to record each action sample separately.
Therefore,
an algorithm designed for cross-view learning problem that deliberately explores the properties across two simultaneously recorded action is not applicable.
During the recording stage,
we showed the subjects the list of actions and invited them to act freely with their personal preference.
As a result,
not only we observed high intra action class variation among different action samples,
we also noticed some individuals acted differently across different camera view or section (\ie~daytime or nighttime).
For example,
the {\it Jump} action in {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:action_sample} demonstrates different posture on 5 randomly selected individuals.
Under all recordings,
the individuals were allowed to face any direction within cameras' FOV.
This results in observable scale difference within the same camera view.
The only exception is PTZ06 where the corresponding FOV is narrower than other camera views.
\input{plots/tab_action_list}
\input{plots/fig_MCAD_sample}
\subsection{Environment Configuration}
The MCAD is recorded with five unique cameras,
including three static cameras (\ie~Cam04, Cam05 \& Cam06) with fish eye
effect and two Pan-Tilt-Zoom~(PTZ) cameras (\ie~PTZ04 \& PTZ06).
These camera are mounted in a real-world surveillance environment.
Among these cameras,
the Cam04-PTZ04 and Cam06-PTZ06 pairs covered the same region with different FOV.
The static camera has a resolution of {\small $1280 \times 960$} pixels.
The PTZ camera has a smaller FOV compared to the static camera,
where the image resolution is {\small $704 \times 576$} pixels.
The recording is carried out during both daytime and nighttime.
In all cases,
though the actions are independently recorded for each camera,
the illumination condition is constant for each individual.
However,
due to the difference in the visual sensor and lens,
we noticed observable difference in each camera view.
For example,
the {\it ObjectThrow} samples showed in {Fig.}\@\xspace~\ref{fig:action_sample} are all recorded during nighttime.
Although the lighting conditions are the same for all cameras,
the recorded footage on PTZ06 appears to be darker than Cam06,
where both cameras observed the same region.
\subsection{Evaluation Metric}
In order to enable streamlined comparisons for future studies,
we adopt the evaluation protocol from the Labeled Faces in the Wild (LFW) dataset~\cite{LFW_Tech_2007}.
The MCAD is divided into two sets,
\ie~the Development Set and the Evaluation Set,
The Development Set is recommended for parameters tuning.
It consists of 10 randomly selected subjects from MCAD.
In this work,
we use the Leave-One-Subject-Out Cross Validation (LOSOCV) strategy to evaluate the performance of an algorithm with various parameters.
The optimal parameters are then applied to the evaluation set for reporting results.
This protocol saves time during the comprehensive parameter search stage and creates an impartial condition for algorithm evaluation.
The Evaluation Set randomly divides all the subjects in MCAD into 10 training-test split\footnote{
NOTE: The data split is available from the MCAD website}.
For each training-test split,
12 subjects are selected as training data and the remaining 8 subjects as test set.
We report the final 10-fold cross validation result with estimated mean accuracy and the standard error of the mean as in~\cite{LFW_Tech_2007}.
Specifically,
the estimated mean accuracy {\small $\hat{\mu}$} is given by
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mu} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{10} p_i}{10}
\label{eqn:result_mean}
\end{equation}
\noindent
where {\small $p_i$} is the accuracy from {\small $i$}-th fold.
The standard error of the mean is given as
\begin{equation}
S_{E} = \frac{\hat{\sigma}}{\sqrt{10}}
\label{eqn:result_std_err}
\end{equation}
\noindent
where {\small $\hat{\sigma}$} is the estimate of the standard deviation,
given by
\begin{equation}
\hat{\sigma} = \sqrt{ \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{10} \left( p_i - \hat{\mu} \right)^{2} }{9} }
\label{eqn:result_std_deb}
\end{equation}
|
\section*{Results}
Figures~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(a)-\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(c) show the band structure of 1 and 5 SLs and the bulk crystal of \bti\, obtained with the extended linearized augmented plane wave (ELAPW) method \cite{Krasovskii_PRB_1997} within the local density approximation (LDA) for the exchange-correlation functional and with the use of the full potential scheme of Ref.~\cite{Krasovskii_PRB_1999}. (Details on the equilibrium bulk atomic structure, the bulk-truncated slab geometry of the related thin films, and the calculations performed can be found in Supplementary Note 1.)
The 1SL film is constructed from two BiTeI trilayers with facing Te-layer sides, Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(d). It is noteworthy that the band structure of this film with the gap of 56 meV (70 meV in the relaxed geometry, see Supplementary Fig.~1) differs substantially from that of its constituents (cf. Supplementary Fig.~2): there is no trace of Rashba-type split bands. The band structure of the 5SL film exhibits a gapless Dirac state residing in the band gap of 151~meV, see Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(b) and Supplementary Fig.~3. This is a signature of the topological character of the respective bulk band structure (Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(c)), which has an inverted gap of 234~meV at $\Gamma$ and the fundamental gap of 169~meV in the $\Gamma-$A line close to the A point. As seen in Fig.~\ref{5SL_spin}(a), the Dirac surface state almost completely resides within the outer SL. Moreover, this state is localized stronger than the Dirac state of TIs like \bite, since 70\% of its weight falls in the outermost half of the SL, i.e., in the surface BiTeI TL (see also Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(e)).
The spin texture of the Dirac state is illustrated in Figures~\ref{5SL_spin}(b) and \ref{5SL_spin}(c), which show spin-resolved constant energy contours for the lower and upper cones of the Dirac surface state. Apart from the in-plane polarization -- clockwise above the DP and counterclockwise below it,
both contours also have an out-of-plane spin component, which is an intrinsic feature of the hexagonal surface. However, in this case $S_z$ is extremely small and varies in the range of $\approx \pm 0.01$.
As has been shown for the Dirac state in \bise\ both experimentally and theoretically \cite{Zhang_PRL_2013,Jozwiak_NatPhys_2013,Cao_NatPhys_2013,Zhu_PRL_2014,Xie_NatComm_2014}, the spin textures of $p_x$, $p_y$, and $p_z$ orbitals are remarkably different, which leads to the dependence of the spin polarization of photoelectrons on the polarization of light. The spin texture provided by $p_z$ orbitals has clockwise (counterclockwise) chirality for the upper (lower) cone, while the projections of the total spin on $p_x$ and $p_y$ orbitals are not chiral, and their spins are opposite to each other. Similar spin-orbital texture we find in the \bti, see Figures~\ref{5SL_spin}(d)--\ref{5SL_spin}(f) for the upper Dirac cone (for the lower Dirac cone, the coupling of spin and orbital textures is opposite, not shown). As can be seen, the spin orientations for $p_x$ and $p_y$ projections are antiparallel at each $k_\|$ point, whereas the spin orientation of $p_z$ projection coincides with the total spin.
It is noteworthy that similar spin-orbital texture has been observed for the spin-polarized Rashba state in BiTeI \cite{Maass_NatComm_2016}. For the Te-terminated surface, it was found that the outer Rashba branch demonstrates the same spin orientations for $p_x$, $p_y$, and $p_z$ projections as those for the upper Dirac cone in \bti, and the inner Rashba branch has opposite texture, i.e., the same as in the lower cone. Because the surface of the \bti\ slab has iodine termination and its spin-texture is reversed due to the opposite orientation of the \textbf{z} axis, the spin-orbit texture of the upper
(lower) Dirac cone in \bti\ is the same as the texture of the inner (outer) Rashba branch in BiTeI.
To construct a simple effective \textbf{k$\cdot$p} model for the centrosymmetric \bti\, we derive a model Hamiltonian of a desired dimension and accurate up to the second order in \textbf{k} from the LDA spinor wave functions $\Psi_{n\uparrow(\downarrow)}$ of the doubly degenerate bands $E_n$ found at \textbf{k}=0 (see Supplementary Note 2 and Ref.~\cite{NeKras_PRBR_2016} for details. The subscripts $\uparrow$ or $\downarrow$ in $\Psi_{n\uparrow(\downarrow)}$ refer to the $z$-component of the total angular momentum $\mathrm{\mathbf{J}}=\mathrm{\mathbf{L}}+\mathrm{\mathbf{S}}$ in the atomic sphere that has the largest weight in the $n$-th band, see Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(e). The Hamiltonian is constructed in terms of the matrix elements \cite{Krasovskii_PRB_2014} $\bm{\pi}_{n\uparrow(\downarrow) m\uparrow(\downarrow)}=\langle\Psi_{n\uparrow(\downarrow)}| \bm{\pi}|\Psi_{m\uparrow(\downarrow)}\rangle$ of the velocity operator
$\bm{\pi}=-i\hbar\mathrm{\bm{\nabla}}+\hbar\left[\bm{\sigma} \times \mathrm{\bm{\nabla}} V\right]/4m_0c^2$, where $n$ and $m$ run over the relativistic bands (from semi-core levels up to high-lying unoccupied bands). Here, $\bm{\sigma}$ is the vector of the Pauli matrices, and $V(\mathrm{\mathbf{r}})$ is the crystal potential.
For the bulk \bti, in the basis of the two valence bands $\Psi^{\mathrm{bulk}}_{v\uparrow (\downarrow)}$ and two conduction bands $\Psi^{\mathrm{bulk}}_{c\uparrow (\downarrow)}$, our \textit{ab initio} four-band Hamiltonian reads:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Hkp_bulk}
H^{\mathrm{bulk}}_{\mathrm{\mathbf{kp}}}&=&C\tau_0\sigma_0+M\tau_z\sigma_0 \\
&-&V_{\|}\tau_x(\sigma_xk_y-\sigma_yk_x)-V_z\tau_y\sigma_0k_z, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $C=C_0+C_zk_z^2+C_{\|}k_{\|}^2$, $M=M_0+M_zk_z^2+M_{\|}k_{\|}^2$, $k_{\|}^2=k_{x}^2+k_{y}^2$, and the direct matrix product of the Pauli matrices $\bm{\tau}$ and $\bm{\sigma}$ is implied (the explicit matrix form of $H^{\mathrm{bulk}}_{\mathrm{\mathbf{kp}}}$ is presented in Supplementary Note 3). Note that this Hamiltonian is the same (to within a unitary transformation) as that constructed for \bise\, in Ref.~\cite{Zhang_Nat_Phys_2009} within the theory of invariants. The matrices $\bm{\tau}$ and $\bm{\sigma}$ in Eq.~(\ref{Hkp_bulk}) have different meaning: $\bm{\tau}$ operates in the valence-conduction band space, while $\bm{\sigma}$ refers to the total angular momentum $\mathrm{\mathbf{J}}$.
The parameters in Eq.~(\ref{Hkp_bulk}) obtained within the LDA are: $C_0=0.03$~eV, $C_z=0.13$~a.u., $C_{\|}=4.19$~a.u., $M_0=-0.12$~eV, $M_z=1.35$~a.u., $M_{\|}=5.88$~a.u., $V_{\|}=0.52$~a.u., and $V_z=0.13$~a.u. (we use Rydberg atomic units: $\hbar=2m_0=e^2/2=1$). Since the basis functions explicitly refer to the valence and conduction bands rather than to atomic orbitals, the parameter $M_0$ that defines the band gap at \textbf{k}=0 is negative and does not change sign upon moving from the topologically non-trivial insulator to the trivial one. The eigenvalues $E(\mathrm{\mathbf{k}})$ of the Hamiltonian (\ref{Hkp_bulk}) with the above parameters are shown in Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(c) by red lines, nicely reproducing the LDA curves over a quite large $\mathrm{\mathbf{k}}$-region and providing an absolute gap in the \textbf{k$\cdot$p} spectrum.
Moreover, these parameters reflect the band inversion and meet the condition of the existence of topological surface states (see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{Shan_NJP_2010}) in accord with the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ topological invariant $\nu_{\rm 3D}=1$ obtained from the parities of the bulk LDA wave functions at the TRIM points \cite{Fu_PRB_2007}. Actually, the diagonal dispersion term $M_{z(\|)}$ is positive, and it is larger than the electron-hole asymmetry: $|C_{z(\|)}|<M_{z(\|)}$.
For the \bti\, thin films, we derive the Hamiltonian in the basis $\Psi^{\mathrm{slab}}_{v\uparrow}, \Psi^{\mathrm{slab}}_{c\downarrow}, \Psi^{\mathrm{slab}}_{c\uparrow},\Psi^{\mathrm{slab}}_{v\downarrow}$ as
\begin{equation}\label{Hkp_slab}
H^{\mathrm{slab}}_{\mathrm{\mathbf{kp}}}=C\tau_0\sigma_0+M\tau_z\sigma_z-V_{\|}\tau_0(\sigma_xk_y-\sigma_yk_x),
\end{equation}
where $C=C_0+C_{\|}k_{\|}^2$, $M=M_0+M_{\|}k_{\|}^2$, and $\bm{\tau}$ refers now to the two decoupled sets of massive Dirac fermions. The Hamiltonian (\ref{Hkp_slab}) is similar to the one obtained for 3D TI thin films within the effective continuous model based on the substitution
$k_z \to -i{\partial }_z$ in the Hamiltonian of Ref.~\cite{Zhang_Nat_Phys_2009} and on the imposition of the open boundary conditions (see, e.g., Refs.~\cite{Lu_PRB_2010} and \cite{Shan_NJP_2010}). The crucial difference is that in our \textit{ab initio} approach within the same formalism for 3D and 2D systems we obtain the Hamiltonian and its parameters from the original spinor wave functions. We do not \textit{a priori} impose the form of the Hamiltonian based on symmetry arguments and do not resort to the fitting of \textit{ab initio} band dispersion curves or to a solution of 1D Schr\"{o}dinger equations derived by using the above substitution with special boundary conditions.
All the considered \bti\, films are characterized by the velocity $V_{\|}=0.45\pm0.01$ a.u. and the electron-hole asymmetry $C_{\|}=4.15\pm0.10$ a.u., which are weakly sensitive to the number of SLs, where the $\pm$ ranges indicate the variations of $V_{\|}$ and $C_{\|}$ in moving from 1 to 5 SLs. On the contrary, as seen in Figures~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(g) and \ref{bulk_5SL_params}(h) the parameters $M_0$ and $M_{\|}$ depend strongly on the film thickness, approaching monotonically zero.
In order to explicitly indicate whether a given film is a QSH insulator, in Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(g) we also plot the gap parameter $\Delta=2M_0(-1)^{1+\nu_{2D}}$ with $\nu_{2D}$ being the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ invariant obtained from the parities of the wave functions at the TRIM points of the 2D Brillouin zone. This parameter is negative for a topologically non-trivial film and positive for a trivial one. As follows from the figure,
$\Delta$ ``oscillates'' with the period of 2 SLs within the examined thickness interval. (The parity of $\Psi^{\mathrm{slab}}_{v\uparrow(\downarrow)}$ and $\Psi^{\mathrm{slab}}_{c\uparrow(\downarrow)}$ is $(+)$ and $(-)$, respectively, for $\Delta<0$, and it is $(-)$ and $(+)$ for $\Delta>0$.) As in 3D TI films \cite{Foerster_PRB_2016}, the thickness dependence of $\Delta$ may be sensitive to the quasi-particle approximation employed, and it may change if many-body corrections beyond DFT are introduced. However, even the simplest quasi-particle method, the $GW$ approximation for the self-energy, is methodologically challenging and computationally too demanding to study a large series of complex systems. Thus, DFT remains the method of choice, and its good performance for a wide range of TIs justifies the use of the Kohn-Sham band structure as a reasonable starting point.
The diagonalization of the Hamiltonian (\ref{Hkp_slab}) then leads to $E(\mathrm{\mathbf{k}})$ shown by red lines in Figures~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(a) and \ref{bulk_5SL_params}(b). The absence of the absolute gap in the resulting \textbf{k$\cdot$p} spectrum is the general feature of all the films studied. It is caused by the rather big electron-hole asymmetry $C_{\|}$ compared with the diagonal dispersion parameter $M_{\|}$, Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(h). It should be noted that the conclusion on whether the edge states exist in a TI film is often made based on the signs and relative values of the parameters $M_0$, $M_{\|}$, and $C_{\|}$. On the contrary, we find that the asymmetry $|C_{\|}|$ is larger than $|M_{\|}|$ everywhere, breaking one of the conditions for the film to be a QSH insulator, see, e.g., Refs.~\cite{Zhou_PRL_2008} and \cite{Lu_PRB_2010}.
Focusing on the behaviour of the diagonal dispersion $M_{\|}$ (as, e.g., in the topology analysis of Ref.~\cite{Koenig_JPSJ_2008}), we note
that it is positive for all the thicknesses, Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(h). Along with the negative $M_0$, this should signify an inverted band gap for the respective films. However, it does not correlate with the oscillating $\Delta$, Fig.~\ref{bulk_5SL_params}(g).
Let us now analyze the behaviour of the diagonal dispersion parameter $M_{\|}$ together with the topological invariant under a continuously varying geometry. We choose the 1SL film--the thinnest film, for which the \textbf{k$\cdot$p} prediction of the band inversion does not contradict the actual topological property--and gradually expand the van-der-Waals spacing $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$. The evolution of the band structure with increasing
$d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_bands}. According to the gap parameter $\Delta$, see Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_params}(a), a topological phase transition occurs at $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ that is just around the mentioned 5\% larger than its bulk value, and the 1SL film becomes topologically trivial. Further expansion leads to a larger band gap at $\bar{\Gamma}$, which is not inverted anymore. It is noteworthy that such a behaviour of $\Delta$ as a function of $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ with the topological phase transition around 5\% is stable with respect both to the choice of the approximation to the DFT exchange-correlation functional (LDA, GGA, dispersion corrected GGA) and to the SL geometry (bulk truncated or relaxed). In the limit of very large $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$, when the BiTeI trilayers composing the 1SL film are too far from each other, the band structure is identical to that of a free-standing BiTeI trilayer (see Supplementary Fig. 2). Similarly, artificial reduction of the spin-orbit interaction strength $\lambda$ relative to its actual value $\lambda_0$ in the equilibrium SL leads to a decrease in the gap, which closes at $\lambda/\lambda_0=0.95$. A further decrease in $\lambda$ causes a widening of the already uninverted gap of the trivial phase. In general, the dependence of the relative gap-width on the spin-orbit interaction strength is almost linear and can be approximated as $\Delta(\lambda)/|\Delta(\lambda_0)|=-20.9(\lambda/\lambda_0)+19.9$.
The 1SL parameters of the 4-band \textbf{k$\cdot$p} Hamiltonian (\ref{Hkp_slab}) strongly depend on $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ (the respective eigenvalues $E(\mathrm{\mathbf{k}})$ of this Hamiltonian are shown by red lines in Figures~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_bands}(a)-\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_bands}(c)). With the $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ expansion $\xi$ (given in percents of the bulk value $d^{(0)}_{\mathrm{vdW}}$) up to 50\%, the velocity $V_{\|}$ decreases monotonically from 0.470 a.u. to 0.342~a.u., and the electron-hole asymmetry $C_{\|}$ becomes smaller as well, Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_params}(c). At $\xi=33\%$, $C_{\|}$ is already smaller than $M_{\|}$, ensuring an absolute gap in the 4-band \textbf{k$\cdot$p} spectrum, see Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_bands}(c). With further increasing $\xi$ it even becomes negative, but it remains $|C_{\|}|<M_{\|}$. A stepwise behaviour of the parameter $M_{\|}$ that changes sign at the small $\xi$ indicates that $M_{\|}$ keeps following the actual $\nu_{\rm 2D}$ and, thus, predicts a gap without inversion. With increasing $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ this parameter again goes through zero around $\xi=30\%$, telling us that the band gap becomes inverted again, and at $\sim35\%$ with the given $C_{\|}$ and $M_0$ meets the conditions of the existence of the edge states \cite{Zhou_PRL_2008, Lu_PRB_2010}. However, as seen in Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_params}(a), the 1SL film is too far from a
topological phase transition at such $\xi$. With this example we illustrate the strong limitations of the predictive capabilities of the effective continuous model.
Let us now analyze the formation of the SL band structure with the inverted band gap. Starting from well-separated layers, Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_bands}(f), and going back to the bulk value $d^{(0)}_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ of the van-der-Waals spacing, Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_bands}(a), we retrace the valence bands ($v_1$ with the energy $E_1^v$ and $v_2$ with $E_2^v$) with the predominant contribution coming from the $p_z$ orbitals of Te and the conduction bands ($c_1$ with $E_1^c$ and $c_2$ with $E_2^c$) mainly formed by Bi $p_z$ orbitals, see Supplementary Fig. 2. We derive an 8-band Hamiltonian $H^{\mathrm{1SL}}_{\mathrm{\mathbf{kp}}}$ which is presented in Supplementary Note 3. Its eigenvalues are shown in Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_bands} by blue lines, and the corresponding parameters as a function of the $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ expansion are depicted in Figures~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_params}(b) and \ref{1SL_vs_vdW_params}(d), see also Supplementary Fig.~4.
As seen in Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_params}(b), at $\bar{\Gamma}$ in the large-$d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ limitthere are two doubly degenerate energy levels, $E_1^v=E_2^v$ and $E_1^c=E_2^c$. Upon decreasing $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$, the TLs start to interact primarily by their Te-layer sides to cause the bonding-antibonding splitting of the two degenerate levels: The Te-related energies as a function of $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ disperse stronger than those of Bi. Near the bulk value $d^{(0)}_{\mathrm{vdW}}$, the splitting is large enough to invert the order of the $E_2^v$ and $E_1^c$ levels, ensuring the topological phase transition. Thus, the stacking procedure that leads to the 3D TI is based on SL building blocks principally different from the Rashba bilayers used in Ref.~\cite{DasBalatsky}. It is essential that in our case the two Rashba constituents of the block (the stand-alone TLs) bring not only the Rashba-split conduction band but also the valence band, see Supplementary Note~3. Then the gap in the SL (which may be inverted or not) is quite naturally the gap between the valence and conduction bands, in contrast to the scenario of Ref.~\cite{DasBalatsky}, where the band gap in the bilayer block is achieved by a dispersive ``finite quantum tunneling'' between the two Rashba constituents -- the 2D electron gases of the adjacent layers.
Figure~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_params}(d) shows the behaviour of the inverse effective masses of the chosen bands over the $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ interval considered. We find that the conduction-band inverse masses, which are equal in the large-$d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ limit, $M_1^c=M_2^c$, change smoothly with decreasing $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$: At $d^{(0)}_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ the parameter $M_2^c$ becomes twice as large, while $M_1^c$ falls below zero. On the contrary, the valence-band inverse masses ($M_1^v=M_2^v$ in the large-$d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ limit) ``diverge'' because the band $v_1$ moves down and ``goes through'' the I-orbital dominated bands, and $v_2$ moves up and hybridizes with Te $p_{x,y}$ bands, see Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_bands} and Supplementary Fig. 2. Finally, at $d^{(0)}_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ the parameter $M_2^v$ reaches its large $d_{\mathrm{vdW}}$ limit, while $M_1^v$ becomes negative. Thus, in the topologically non-trivial 1~SL we have $M_2^v\approx C_{\|}-M_{\|}$ and $M_1^c\approx C_{\|}+M_{\|}$, where $C_{\|}$ and $M_{\|}$ are the 1SL parameters of the Hamiltonian~(\ref{Hkp_slab}). At that, the interband coupling of the bands $v_2$ and $c_1$ is equal to $V_{\|}$ of the 4-band \textbf{k$\cdot$p} description. This reveals a close relation between the 4-band and 8-band Hamiltonians. However, already with 8 bands there is an absolute gap (see Fig.~\ref{1SL_vs_vdW_bands}(a)), which is reasonably accurate and quite suitable for the theoretical research on linear response, Hall conductance, and motion of Dirac fermions in external fields.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec.intro}
One challenging mathematical problem from fluid mechanics is to understand the limit of solutions
$u^\nu$ of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations:
\begin{equation} \label{NS}
\partial_t u^\nu + u^\nu \cdot \nabla u^\nu + \nabla p^\nu - \nu \Delta u^\nu \, = \, f\,, \quad {\rm div} \, u^\nu \, = \, 0 \, \quad \text{ in } \Omega\,, \quad u^\nu\vert_{\partial \Omega} \, = \, 0\, ,
\end{equation}
when the parameter $\nu$ goes to zero, for domains $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^d$
with boundaries. Indeed, as the Euler solution $u^0$ does not satisfy the Dirichlet condition, convergence of $u^\nu$ to $u^0$ can not hold in strong topology (say $H^1(\Omega)$). The obstacle to convergence is a concentration phenomenon near the boundary, in the so-called {\em boundary layer}. The mathematical understanding of this boundary layer is a difficult problem. The difficulty is emphasized by Kato's criterion \cite{Kat}: roughly, it says that for smooth bounded domains $\Omega$, the Leray solutions $u^\nu$ of Navier-Stokes converge to a smooth solution $u^0$ of Euler in $L^\infty(0,T; L^2(\Omega))$ if and only if convergence holds in $L^2(\Omega)$ at time $0$ and
$$ \nu \int_0^T \int_{d(x, \partial \Omega) \le \nu} | \nabla u^\nu |^2 \, \rightarrow 0, \quad \nu \rightarrow 0$$
that is the production of enstrophy in a layer of size $\nu$ near the boundary goes to zero with $\nu$. See \cite{Kel} for refinements.
\medskip
\noindent
The most popular model for the boundary layer was introduced by Ludwig Prandtl in 1904, and is inspired by the heat part of the Navier-Stokes equation. In the simple half-plane case $\Omega = \mathbb{R} \times \mathbb{R}_+$ or $\Omega = \mathbb{T} \times \mathbb{R}_+$, the Prandtl model corresponds to the following asymptotics for $u^\nu$:
\begin{equation} \label{prandtl_exp}
u^\nu(t,x,y) \approx (U^E, V^E)(t,x,y) + (U^{BL}, \sqrt{\nu} V^{BL})(t,x,\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}})) \,,
\end{equation}
where $u^0 = (U^E, V^E)$ is the Euler solution, and $(U^{BL}, V^{BL})$ is a corrector localized near the boundary, at typical scale $\sqrt{\nu}$, allowing $u^\nu$ to satisfy the Dirichlet condition. After a few manipulations, one obtains the so-called Prandtl equation on
$$U^{P}(t,x,Y) \, = \, U^E(t,x,0) + U^{BL}(t,x,Y)\,, \quad V^{P}(t,x,Y) \, = \, \partial_Y V^E(t,x,0) Y + V^{BL}(t,x,Y)$$
that is
\begin{equation} \label{P}
\begin{aligned}
&\partial_t U^P + U^P \partial_x U^P + V^P \partial_Y U^P - \partial_Y^2 U^P \, = \, - \partial_x P^E|_{y=0}\,, \\
& \partial_x U^P + \partial_Y V^P \, = \, 0\, , \\
& U^P\vert_{Y = 0} \, = \, V^P\vert_{Y=0} \, = \, 0\, , \quad \lim_{Y \rightarrow +\infty} U^P \, = \, U^E|_{y=0}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Notation $P^E$ refers to the Euler pressure field.
\medskip
\noindent
When trying to justify the Prandtl expansion \eqref{prandtl_exp}, two difficulties are in order:
\begin{itemize}
\item Justifying the well-posedness of the reduced model \eqref{P}, so as to construct the expansion.
\item Justifying that it approximates well the Navier-Stokes solution over some reasonable time scale, starting from close initial data. Note that the Prandtl expansion can almost be seen as a solution of Navier-Stokes: up to the addition of lower amplitude corrections in the expansion, the error source term can be made arbitrarily small. In that sense, the validation of the boundary layer asymptotics can be seen as a stability problem for a special class of solutions of Navier-Stokes.
\end{itemize}
As regards the local in time well-posedness theory for \eqref{P}, the situation is by now rather well-understood. Two important factors are the monotonicity of the initial data $U^P(0,x,Y)$ with respect to $Y$, and its regularity with respect to $x$. In physical terms, the monotonicity assumption prevents (at least for small time) the separation of the boundary layer. Hence:
\begin{itemize}
\item Under a monotonicity assumption in $Y$ (plus other regularity requirements), local in time existence of smooth ($C^k$) solutions was proved by Oleinik \cite{Ole}. The proof is based on a change of variables and unknowns called Crocco transform. Recently, the well-posedness theory for $Y$-increasing data was revisited in the Eulerian form \eqref{P} and Sobolev setting \cite{AlWaXuTa,MaWo}.
\item Without the monotonicity assumption, the situation is much less favorable. Existence of local in time analytic solutions, for analytic initial data, was shown by Sammartino and Caflisch in \cite{SaCa1}, see also \cite{LoCaSa,KuVi}. Article \cite{GeDo} by the first author and Dormy established the ill-posedness of \eqref{P} in the Sobolev setting. More recently, local Gevrey well-posedness for data with non-degenerate critical points was shown in \cite{GeMa}. We refer to \cite{GeDo2,GeNg,KuMaViWo,LiWaYa} for more on the study of the Prandtl equation itself.
\end{itemize}
The present paper is devoted to the second issue, namely the stability of the Prandtl expansion within the Navier-Stokes evolution. Again, one may expect the stability/instability to depend on the monotonicity properties of the boundary layer flow $U^P$, and on the regularity of the perturbations under consideration.
\medskip
On the positive side, local in time convergence of the Prandtl asymptotics was achieved in \cite{SaCa2} in the analytic setting. Recently, the second author relaxed that result, treating the case of Sobolev data with vorticity away from the boundary \cite{Mae}. One can also mention the works \cite{LoMaNuTa,MaTa}, where convergence is shown to hold under low regularity, but under stringent structural conditions on both the boundary layer solution and the perturbations.
\medskip
The main point with analyticity is that perturbations with frequencies $n$ in $x$, $n \gg 1,$ decay like $\exp(-\delta n)$ for some $\delta > 0$. This somehow eliminates any exponential instability of high frequencies. As soon as Sobolev perturbations are allowed, highly oscillatory perturbations can destabilize the Prandtl expansion, and make the exact Navier-Stokes and the boundary layer approximation diverge in very short time (typically a time $t_\nu$ going to zero with $\nu$). This kind of argument was first used by Grenier in article \cite{Gre}. The focus of \cite{Gre} is put on Prandtl expansions of shear flow type, that read
$$ u^\nu(t,x,y) \, =\, (U^E(t,y), 0) + (U^{BL}(t,\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}}), 0)\,, \quad 0<\nu \ll 1\,. $$
More precisely, Grenier considers the special case where $U^E = 0$ and $U^{BL} = U^{BL}(t,Y)$ solves the one-dimensional heat equation with Dirichlet condition. Through the change of variable $(\tau,X,Y) = (t,x,y)/\sqrt{\nu}$, the stability of the boundary layer expansion amounts to the stability of $(U^{BL}(\sqrt{\nu} \tau, Y),0)$ as a solution of the rescaled Navier-Stokes equation
\begin{equation} \label{rescaled_NS}
\partial_\tau u + u \cdot \nabla_{X,Y} u + \nabla_{X,Y} p - \sqrt{\nu} \Delta_{X,Y} u \, = \, 0\, .
\end{equation}
In particular, if the initial shear flow $(U^{BL}(0, Y),0)$ is linearly unstable for the Euler equation, it is likely that this instability persists for $\nu \ll 1$. Indeed, starting from such unstable shear flows, it is shown in \cite{Gre} that equation \eqref{rescaled_NS} admits solutions of the type
$$ u(t,x,Y) \approx (U^{BL}(\sqrt{\nu} \tau, Y),0) + \nu^N e^{i \alpha (X - c\tau)} v^\nu(Y) $$
where $\alpha \in \mathbb{R}^*$, $\alpha \Im c > 0$, , and $N$ large enough. Back to the original variables, it yields a solution that oscillates like $\exp(i \alpha x/\sqrt{\nu})$ and separates from the Prandtl solution as $\exp(\delta t /\sqrt{\nu})$ (over times of order $t = O(\sqrt{\nu} |\ln \nu|$).
This causes instability of these Prandtl expansions in any Sobolev space.
More precisely, the analysis of \cite{Gre} exhibits perturbations with high frequencies $n = 1/\sqrt{\nu} \gg 1$ that grow like $e^{(\Im c) n t}$. Thus, it tends to indicates that stability over times of order $1$ is only possible in the analytic setting: hence, the general convergence result of Sammartino and Caflisch in analytic regularity is likely to be optimal.
\medskip
Let us stress that, for the shear flow to be linearly unstable in the Euler equation, the profile $Y \rightarrow U^{BL}(0,Y)$ must have an inflexion point: this is the famous Rayleigh criterion, {\it cf} the discussion in \cite{DrRe}. In experiments or numerics, the appearance of an inflexion point often goes along with a loss of monotonicity in $Y$, for which we have seen that strong instabilities develop in the reduced Prandtl model itself, in link with boundary layer separation. From this point of view, the instability result in \cite{Gre} may appear less surprising.
\medskip
Hence, a natural problem is the consideration of Prandtl approximations of shear flow type, when $U^{BL}(0,Y)$ is increasing and concave in $Y$. It corresponds to a type of data for which the Prandtl system is well-posed, so that only the justification of the expansion has to be investigated. Following the approach above, a key step is the linear stability analysis of monotonic and concave shear flows for the rescaled Navier-Stokes equation \eqref{rescaled_NS}. This problem has of course a long history : we refer to \cite{DrRe} for an overview and a list of references. It has been revisited in an accurate and rigorous way recently, in remarkable works by Grenier, Guo and Nguyen \cite{GrGuNg,GGN2014}. A main conclusion is that a shear flow which is linearly stable for Euler may be linearly unstable for Navier-Stokes: viscosity has a destabilizing effect. In particular, paper \cite{GGN2014} studies the linearized Navier-Stokes equations around shear flows that are steady, strictly concave, monotonic, analytic near $Y = 0$. They construct explicit growing solutions in the form $e^{i \alpha (X - c \tau)} v_\nu(Y)$, where
$$ \alpha\sim \mathcal{O}(\nu^\frac18)\,, \quad \Im c \sim \mathcal{O}(\nu^\frac18). $$
More details will be given later on. Back to the original scales, we find that some perturbations with frequency $n \sim \mathcal{O}(\nu^{-\frac38})$ in $x$ are amplified by an exponential factor $\exp(\delta n^{2/3} t) \sim \mathcal{O}( \exp(\delta \nu^{-\frac14}) )$. Hence, contrary to the previous non-monotonic setting, stability of the boundary layer over times $t \sim \mathcal{O}(1)$ does not seem to require analyticity, but rather Gevrey regularity (with exponent at most $3/2$ for the case considered in \cite{GGN2014}).
The goal of the present paper is to prove such Gevrey stability, in the nonlinear framework. Precise statements will be given in the next section.
\section{Statement of the main result} \label{sec.result}
Let $U^E = U^E(t,y)$ and $U^P=U^P(t,Y)$ two scalar functions on $\mathbb{R}_+\times \mathbb{R}_+$, satisfying the conditions
\begin{align}\label{sec2.condition}
U^E (t,0)> 0, \qquad U^{P}(t,0) = 0\,, ~ \lim_{Y \rightarrow +\infty} U^{P}(t,Y) = U^E(t,0)~~{\rm for}~t\geq 0 \,.
\end{align}
Let
\begin{align}
U^{BL}(t,Y) \, = \, U^P(t,Y) - U^E(t,0)\,.\label{sec2.U^{BL}}
\end{align}
Then, the shear flow $\big( U^E(t,y) + U^{BL}(t,y/\sqrt{\nu})\big) {\bf e}_1 $ is of boundary layer type, and the goal is to investigate its stability. Therefore, we write the Navier-Stokes equation \eqref{NS} in perturbative form:
$$u^\nu(t,x,y) \, = \, \big(U^E(t,y) + U^{BL}(t,\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}})\big) {\bf e}_1 + u(t,x,y)$$
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq.perturb.intro}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\partial_t u + \mathbb{A}_{\nu} (t) u & \, = \, - \mathbb{P} \big ( u \cdot \nabla u \big ) \,, \qquad t>0\,,\\
u|_{t=0} & \, = \, a\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
\noindent
Here $u=(u_1(t,x,y),u_2(t,x,y))$, $(x,y)\in \Omega = \mathbb{T} \times \mathbb{R}_+$ ($2\pi$-periodic in $x$), and $\mathbb{P}: L^2 (\Omega)^2 \rightarrow L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$ is the Helmholtz-Leray projection, where
$$L^2_\sigma (\Omega) = \{ f\in L^2(\Omega)^2 \ | \ {\rm div}\, f = 0 \ {\rm in } \ \Omega \,, f_2=0 \ {\rm on} \ y=0 \}.$$
The linear operator $\mathbb{A}_\nu (t)$ is defined as
\begin{align}\label{def.A_t}
\mathbb{A}_\nu (t) u \, = \, -\nu \mathbb{P} \Delta u + \mathbb{P} \bigg ( \big (U^E (t) + U^{BL} (t) \big ) \partial_x u + u_2 \partial_y \big (U^E (t) + U^{BL} (t) \big ) {\bf e}_1 \bigg )\,,
\end{align}
with the domain
$$D (\mathbb{A}_\nu (t) ) = W^{2,2}(\Omega)^2 \cap W^{1,2}_{0} (\Omega)^2\cap L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$$
and $W^{1,2}_0 (\Omega)=\{ f\in W^{1,2} (\Omega) \ | \ f=0 \ {\rm on} \ y=0 \}$.
Let us quote that to go from \eqref{NS} to \eqref{eq.perturb.intro}, we implicitly assumed that
\begin{align*}
f(t,x,y) & \, = \, \big(\partial_t U^{BL}(t,\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}}) - \partial^2_Y U^{BL}(t,\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}}) + \partial_t U^E (t,y) - \nu \partial_y^2 U^E (t,y) \big) {\bf e}_1 \\
& \, = \, \big(\partial_t U^{P}(t,\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}}) - \partial^2_Y U^{P}(t,\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}}) +\partial_t U^E (t,y)- \partial_t U^E (t,0)- \nu \partial_y^2 U^E (t,y) \big) {\bf e}_1\\
\end{align*}
Two cases deserve special attention. On one hand, if $U^E (t,y ) \, = \, \mathcal{U}^E (y) + \mathcal{R}^E (t,y)$, where $\mathcal{U}^E$ is given and $\mathcal{R}^E$ solves the heat equation
\begin{align}\label{eq.R^E}
\partial_t \mathcal{R}^E - \nu \partial_y^2 \mathcal{R}^E \, = \, \nu \partial_y^2 \mathcal{U}^E \,, \quad t>0\,, ~ y>0\,, \qquad \mathcal{R}^E |_{y=0} \, =\, 0\,, \quad \mathcal{R}^E |_{t=0} \, =\, 0,
\end{align}
and if moreover $U^P$ solves the heat equation
\begin{equation} \label{heat_Up}
\partial_t U^P - \partial^2_Y U^P \, = \, 0, \quad t>0\,, ~Y>0\,, \qquad U^P\vert_{Y = 0} \, = \, 0\,, \lim_{Y \rightarrow +\infty} U^P \, = \, U^E|_{y=0}\,,
\end{equation}
then the boundary layer expansion can be seen as an exact solution of the homogeneous Navier-Stokes equation. On the other hand, when $U^P(T,Y) = U(Y)$ and $U^E(t,y) = U^E(y)$ are time independent, our stability issue connects to the long history of the stability of steady shear flows \cite{DrRe}.
\medskip
\noindent
As discussed in the introduction, the goal is to prove the stability of such Prandtl boundary layer expansions within the Navier-Stokes evolution, under appropriate monotonicity and concavity conditions on $U^P$. Such stability result will be achieved in a Gevrey framework. Roughly, we will show that if a solution $u$ of \eqref{eq.perturb.intro} is initially $O(\nu^{\frac32})$ in some space of Gevrey regularity in $x$, $L^2$ in $y$, it will remain so over a time interval $(0,T)$ independent of $\nu$. The Gevrey exponent that we obtain is better when we consider steady $U^P$ rather than time dependent. In the case where $U^P$ is steady and strictly concave, our Gevrey exponent is optimal, taking into account recent results of Grenier, Guo and Nguyen \cite{GGN2014}. This will be explained in Remark \ref{rem.parameter}.
\medskip
\noindent
To state our main theorem, we need to introduce a few notations. Let
\begin{align}\label{def.projection.P}
\begin{split}
\big ( \mathcal{P}_n f \big ) (y) & \, = \, f_n (y) e^{i n x} \,, \qquad f_n (y) \, = \, \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_0^{2\pi} f (x, y) e^{-i n x} \,{\rm d} x \,, \qquad n \in \mathbb{Z}\,,
\end{split}
\end{align}
the projection on the Fourier mode $n$ in $x$, $n \in \mathbb{Z}$. We then introduce, for $\gamma\in (0,1]$, $d\geq 0$, and $K>0$ the Banach space $X_{d,\gamma,K}$ as
\begin{align}
X_{d,\gamma, K} \, = \, &\{ f\in L^2_\sigma (\Omega) ~|~ \| f \|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} = \sup_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} \, (1+|n|^d) e^{K \theta_{\gamma,n}} \| \mathcal{P}_n f \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} <\infty \}\,,\\
\mbox{} ~~~~~\qquad \theta_{\gamma,n} & \, = \, |n|^\gamma \big ( 1+ (1-\gamma)\log (1+|n|) \big ) \,.\label{sec2.def.theta}
\end{align}
Fields in this space have $L^2$ regularity in $y$, and Gevrey regularity in $x$, of class $s$ for any $s\geq \frac{1}{\gamma}$. When the boundary layer profile is monotonic and concave in $Y$, we will prove stability on times of order $1$ for initial perturbations that are $O(\nu^{l})$ in $X_{d,\gamma, K}$ for suitable $l\in (\frac12,\frac32)$ and $\gamma \in (0,1)$ (hence, below analytic regularity). The value of the exponent $\gamma$ will depend on the type of concavity that we impose. We distinguish between three settings.
\medskip
\noindent
{\bf Steady flow, weakly concave case}. We consider here $U^E(t,y)=U^E(y)$ and $U^P(t,Y) = U(Y)$, with
\begin{align}\label{sec2.bound.U}
\begin{split}
& \|U\|\, := \, \sum_{k=0,1,2} \sup_{Y \geq 0} \, (1+Y)^k |\partial_Y^k U(Y) | \, <\, \infty\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Our assumptions are:
\begin{align}\tag{WC}\label{concave.weak}
\begin{split}
& {\rm (i)} ~U|_{Y=0} \, =\, 0\,, \, \, \lim_{Y\rightarrow \infty} U \, =\, U^E|_{y=0}\,, \quad U^E, U\in BC^2(\mathbb{R}_+) ~{\rm and }~ U {\rm ~satisfies ~\eqref{sec2.bound.U}},\\
& {\rm (ii)} ~{\rm For ~each ~}\sigma \in (0,1] {\rm ~there ~exists ~} M_\sigma >0 {\rm ~ such ~that}~\, -M_\sigma \partial_Y^2U \geq (\partial_Y U)^2 \, ~ {\rm for} ~Y\geq \sigma\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
The item {\rm (ii)} in \eqref{concave.weak} implies $-\partial_Y^2 U (Y)\geq 0$ for all $Y\geq 0$, and thus,
it ensures the concave shape of $U$. Moreover, it is necessary for \eqref{concave.weak} that $\partial_Y U$ is nonnegative, and then, the boundary condition $U(0)=0$, $U(\infty)=U^E(0)$ implies that $U^E(0)$ must be nonnegative. That is, the condition \eqref{concave.weak} automatically leads to
\begin{align*}
\inf_{Y\geq 0} \partial_Y U(Y)\geq 0\,, \qquad U^E(0)\geq 0\,.
\end{align*}
Moreover, the following statements hold:
\begin{align}\label{sec2.nontrivial.1}
\begin{split}
&\cdot ~{\rm if}~~\partial_Y U(Y_0)=0~~{\rm for~some}~~Y_0\geq 0\,,~{\rm then}~~\partial_Y U(Y)=0~~{\rm for~all}~~Y\geq Y_0\,,\\
&\cdot ~U^E(0)=0~~{\rm if~and~only~if}~~U(Y)=0~~{\rm for~all}~~Y\geq 0\,.\end{split}
\end{align}
Since we are interested in the stability of the boundary layer, the case $U^E(0)=0$ is excluded in this paper
in order to have the nontrivial boundary layer profile $U$. Therefore, as stated in \eqref{sec2.condition}, we always assume the positivity of $U^E(0)$, that is,
\begin{align}\label{sec2.nontrivial.2}
U^E(0)>0\,.
\end{align}
Then, from the statements \eqref{sec2.nontrivial.1} and the boundary condition on $U$, the condition $U'(0)>0$ is always satisfied.
\medskip
\noindent
\begin{rem}\label{sec2.rem.nontrivial}{\rm Let
\begin{align*}
V (Y) \, = \, U^E (\sqrt{\nu} Y) - U^E (0) + U (Y) \,,
\end{align*}
which is the full boundary layer expansion expressed in variable $Y$.
By \eqref{sec2.nontrivial.1} the derivative of the boundary layer, $\partial_Y U$, must be strictly positive in the compact set $D=\{Y\geq 0~|~ U(Y) \leq \frac34 U^E(0)\}$. Thus we have
\begin{align*}
\partial_Y V(Y)\geq \frac{1}{2} \min_{Y\in D} \partial_Y U(Y) >0 \quad {\rm for}~Y\in D \qquad {\rm if} ~\nu~ {\rm is~ sufficiently~ small}\,.
\end{align*}
Then it is not difficult to see that \eqref{concave.weak} implies the following integral condition:
\begin{align}\tag{${\rm IC}$}\label{integral.condition}
\begin{split}
& {\rm There ~exists ~} M'>0~{\rm such~that}~\, \|\frac{Y^\frac12 (\partial_Y U)^2}{(V-\lambda)^2}\|_{L^2}\leq M' (\Im \lambda)^{-\frac32}\, ~{\rm holds}\\
&{\rm for ~all}~\, \lambda\in \{ \mu\in \mathbb{C}~|~ \Re \mu \leq \frac{U^E(0)}{2}, \, \Im \mu>0\} ~{\rm and~for~all~}\nu\in (0,\nu_0]~{\rm with}~0<\nu_0\ll 1\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
The proof of \eqref{integral.condition} is straightforward and omitted here.
}
\end{rem}
\bigskip
\noindent
{\bf Steady flow, strongly concave case}.
Here, we consider again the steady case, but assume
\begin{align}\tag{SC}\label{concave.strong}
\begin{split}
& {\rm (i)} ~U|_{Y=0} \, =\, 0\,, \, \, \lim_{Y\rightarrow \infty} U\, =\, U^E|_{y=0}\,, \quad U^E, U\in BC^2(\mathbb{R}_+) ~{\rm and }~ U {\rm ~satisfies ~\eqref{sec2.bound.U}},\\
& {\rm (ii)} ~{\rm There ~exists ~} M>0 {\rm ~ such ~that}~ \, -M \partial_Y^2 U \geq (\partial_Y U) ^2 ~\, {\rm ~for} ~Y\geq 0\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
The condition (ii) in \eqref{concave.strong} implies strict concavity of the profile $U$ up to the boundary $Y = 0$: $\partial_Y^2 U$ can not vanish even at $Y=0$. This is the main difference with assumptions \eqref{concave.weak}, which will allow us to push the analysis further.
\bigskip
\noindent
{\bf Time dependent flow, weakly concave case}. In this last setting, we fix $T > 0$ and consider $U^E=U^E(t,y)$ and $U^P = U^P(t,Y)$, $t \in [0,T]$. Our assumptions are
\begin{align}\tag{WC-t}\label{concave.weak.t}
\begin{split}
& {\rm (0)}~U^P|_{Y=0} =0\,, \quad \lim_{Y\rightarrow \infty} U^P =U^E|_{y=0}>0 \qquad {\rm for} ~t\in [0,T]\,,\\
& {\rm (i)} ~U^E, ~U^P\in BC([0,T]\times \overline{\mathbb{R}_+})\cap L^\infty (0,T; BC^2 (\mathbb{R}_+))\,, {\rm ~and}\\
& \quad \sup_{0<t<T} \bigg ( \| \partial_t U^E (t) \|_{L^\infty (\mathbb{R}_+)} + \| \partial_t U^P (t) \|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{R}_+)} \\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad + \| Y \partial_t \partial_Y U^P (t) \|_{L^\infty (\mathbb{R}_+)} + \| U^P (t) \| \bigg ) <\infty \,, \\
& \quad {\rm Here }~\| U^P (t) \|~ {\rm is ~ defined ~as ~in ~\eqref{sec2.bound.U}.} \\
& {\rm (ii)} ~{\rm For ~each ~}\sigma \in (0,1] {\rm ~there ~exists ~} M_\sigma >0 {\rm ~independent ~of~}t \in [0,T] {\rm ~ such ~that}~ \\
& \quad - M_\sigma \partial_Y^2U^P \geq (\partial_Y U^P)^2\, {\rm ~for} ~Y\geq \sigma ~{\rm and }~t\in [0,T]\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
We emphasize that the condition \eqref{concave.weak.t} is always satisfied when $U^P$ is the solution to
\begin{equation}\label{eq.heat}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\partial_t U^P - \partial_Y^2 U^P & \, = \, 0\,, & t>0\,, ~ Y>0\,,\\
U^P|_{Y=0} & \, = \, 0 \,, \quad \lim_{Y\rightarrow \infty} U^P \, = \, U^E|_{y=0} \,, & t\geq 0\,,\\
U^P |_{t=0} & \, = \, U\,. &
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
with $\displaystyle \inf_{0\leq t\leq T} U^E|_{y=0}>0$, if the initial data $U \in BC^3 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ satisfies \eqref{sec2.bound.U} and $Y\partial_Y^3U\in L^\infty (\mathbb{R}_+)$, compatibility conditions on $Y=0,\infty$, and (ii) of \eqref{concave.strong}. See the appendix for details.
\bigskip
\noindent
We are now ready to state our main result:
\begin{thm}\label{sec2.thm.nonlinear} Assume that \eqref{concave.weak.t} holds for some $T>0$. For any $\gamma \in [\frac79,1)$, $d>\frac92-\frac72\gamma$, and $K>0$, there exist $C, T,' K'>0$ such that the following statement holds for any sufficiently small $\nu>0$.
If $\| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} \leq \nu^{\frac12+\beta}$ with $\beta = \frac{2(1-\gamma)}{\gamma}$ then the system \eqref{eq.perturb.intro} admits a unique solution $u\in C([0,T']; L^2_\sigma (\Omega))\cap L^2 (0,T'; W^{1,2}_0 (\Omega)^2)$ satisfying the estimate
\begin{align}\label{sec2.est.thm.nonlinear.1}
\sup_{0<t\leq T'} \big ( \| u (t) \|_{X_{d,\gamma,K'}} + (\nu t)^\frac14 \| u (t) \|_{L^\infty (\Omega)} + (\nu t)^\frac12 \| \nabla u (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \big ) \leq C \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}}\,.
\end{align}
\medskip
\noindent
If $U^E(t,y)=U^E(y)$ and $U^P(t,Y) = U(Y)$ are steady and satisfy \eqref{concave.weak} instead of \eqref{concave.weak.t}, the result holds for any $\gamma \in [\frac57,1]$.
\medskip
\noindent
If $U^E(t,y)=U^E(y)$ and $U^P(t,Y) = U(Y)$ are steady and satisfy \eqref{concave.strong} instead of \eqref{concave.weak.t}, the result holds for any $\gamma \in [\frac23,1]$.
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}{\rm (i) Since $a\in L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$ and the problem is a two-dimensional one, the unique existence of global solutions to \eqref{eq.perturb.intro} in $C([0,\infty); L^2_\sigma (\Omega))\cap L^2_{loc} (0,\infty; W^{1,2}_0 (\Omega)^2)$ is classical for any $\nu>0$. The nontrivial part of Theorem \ref{sec2.thm.nonlinear} is the estimate \eqref{sec2.est.thm.nonlinear.1}, which is uniform with respect to sufficiently small $\nu>0$.
\noindent
(ii) Gevrey stability as in Theorem \ref{sec2.thm.nonlinear} can be obtained under the slightly weaker condition $-M_\sigma \partial_Y^2 U\geq (\partial_Y U)^4$, rather than $-M_\sigma \partial_Y^2 U \geq (\partial_Y U)^2$ in \eqref{concave.weak}. However, under this weaker condition the range of the exponent $\gamma$ is confined to $[\frac45,1]$ in the case of time-dependent shear flows, which is narrower than $[\frac79,1]$, and one also needs to take larger $\beta$ for the size of initial perturbations. Hence, in this paper we restrict ourselves to the case $-M_\sigma \partial_Y^2 U \geq (\partial_Y U)^2$, which is still admissible in applications.
\noindent
(iii) When the shear flow is steady as mentioned in the latter part of Theorem \ref{sec2.thm.nonlinear}, one can in fact obtain slightly stronger result than stated in Theorem \ref{sec2.thm.nonlinear}. In particular, when the shear flow is steady and \eqref{concave.strong} holds, the exponent $\theta_{\gamma,n}$ in the definition of $X_{d,\gamma,K}$ (see \eqref{sec2.def.theta}) is simply taken as $|n|^\gamma$. Thus, in this case, by arguing as in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm.nonlinear}, we have the stability estimate like \eqref{sec2.est.thm.nonlinear.1} for the initial data $a$ satisfying
$$\sup_{n\in \mathbb{Z}}\, (1+|n|^d) e^{K|n|^\frac23} \| \mathcal{P}_n a\|_{L^2}\leq \nu^{\frac12 + \beta}$$
for large enough $d,\beta>0$. Indeed, the logarithmic correction of $\theta_{\gamma,n}$ in \eqref{sec2.def.theta} is needed for the estimates of the evolution operator, stated in Theorem \ref{thm.evolution.middle}, rather than the estimates of the semigroup; see Theorem \ref{thm.semigroup}.
}
\end{rem}
Our result can be seen as improving the celebrated result of Sammartino and Caflisch, dedicated to the stability of Prandtl expansions in analytic regularity, see \cite{SaCa1,SaCa2}. Note nevertheless that article \cite{SaCa1} treats general $x$-dependent boundary layer expansions, while ours restricts to the case of shear flows. Extension of our result to arbitrary (meaning $x$-dependent) expansions is a very interesting open problem.
\medskip
\noindent
To go from an analytic setting to a Gevrey setting requires new ideas, and of course the use of the concavity of the boundary layer profile in $Y$. The heart of the proof is the resolvent analysis in Section \ref{sec.middle.notime} for the linearized Navier-Stokes operator at a steady shear flow. This analysis leads to a temporal growth estimate of the associated semigroup, that is compatible with the stability in the Gevrey class. Concretely, for each Fourier mode in the $x$ variable, the resolvent problem is reduced to the analysis of the classical Orr-Sommerfeld equation. This equations is solved and estimated through an iterative process, based on the alternate resolution of the so-called Rayleigh and Airy equations. This Rayleigh-Airy iteration finds its origin in the work of \cite{GGN2014}, about the linear instability of monotonic shear flows in the Navier-Stokes equation. However, we stress that the approach in \cite{GGN2014} is dedicated to a specific regime of spectral parameter and Fourier frequency, for which the fundamental solutions of the Rayleigh and Airy equations have quite explicit expressions. The specific regime of \cite{GGN2014} is enough to construct an unstable eigenfunction, but is far from sufficient here. In order to estimate the evolution of the semigroup, we need to estimate the resolvent when the spectral parameter is in a whole sector of the complex plane, and for arbitrary frequencies. This yields a much wider regime than the one where the approach of \cite{GGN2014} can be applied. Hence, our strategy to handle the Orr-Sommerfeld equation is very different, and based on energy methods. It notably relies on the famous Rayleigh's trick \cite[page 131]{DrRe}. Remarkably enough, at least for the class of shear flows satisfying \eqref{concave.strong}, our approach provides a fairly optimal result on the spectral bound of the generator as well as the growth bound of the associated semigroup.
\medskip
\noindent
Once the estimate for the semigroup is obtained, the proof of Theorem \ref{thm.nonlinear} in the case of steady shear flows follows from Duhamel's formula. In the time dependent case, one must substitute to the growth bound on the semigroup a growth bound on the operator solution, over some fixed time interval $[0,T]$. Roughly, such estimate is derived by partitioning $[0,T] $ into small subintervals $[t_l, t_{l+1}]$, and freezing the time in the linearized operator over these subintervals, that is replacing $\mathbb{A}_\nu (t)$ by $\mathbb{A}_\nu (t_l)$. This allows to connect to the analysis of the steady case. We do not manage to maintain the same Gevrey exponent in this process, which explains the higher value of $\gamma$ in the theorem in the time dependent case.
\medskip
\noindent
The outline of the paper is as follows. Next section presents the mode-by-mode (in Fourier in $x$) reformulation of the problem. Section \ref{sec.low.high} collects standard estimates on the operator solutions, at very low and very high frequencies. The main part of the paper is in Section \ref{sec.middle.notime}: it is devoted to analysis of the linearized operator at steady shear flow and intermediate frequencies. It contains an analysis of the resolvent operator through the Orr-Sommerfeld formulation, and provides a growth bound on the associated semigroup. Section \ref{sec.middle.time} is devoted to the growth bound in the time dependent case, through the time stepping alluded to above. Finally, the proof of Theorem \ref{thm.nonlinear} is achieved in \ref{sec.nonlinear}.
\section{Formulation of linearized problem in Fourier series}\label{sec.formulation.rescale}
Since the shear flow in \eqref{def.A_t} is assumed to be $x$-independent, it is natural to study $\mathbb{A}_\nu (t)$ on each Fourier mode with respect to the $x$ variable. To this end, we use the projections $\mathcal{P}_n$, $n \in \mathbb{Z}$ given in \eqref{def.projection.P}. We define
\begin{align}
\mathcal{Q}_{m, {\rm low}} f \, = \, \sum_{|n|\leq m-1} \mathcal{P}_n f \,, \qquad \qquad
\mathcal{Q}_{m, {\rm high}} f \, = \, \sum_{|n|\geq m+1} \mathcal{P}_n f\,.
\end{align}
These are projections from $L^2(\Omega)^2$ to $L^2(\Omega)^2$,
and the divergence free condition is preserved under their actions.
More precisely, we have
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{P}_n \mathbb{P} \, = \, \mathbb{P} \mathcal{P}_n \,, \qquad
\mathcal{Q}_{m, {\rm low}} \mathbb{P} \, = \, \mathbb{P} \mathcal{Q}_{m, {\rm low}}\,, \qquad
\mathcal{Q}_{m, {\rm high}} \mathbb{P} \, = \, \mathbb{P} \mathcal{Q}_{m, {\rm high}} \,.
\end{align*}
Hence, for each $m_1,m_2\in \mathbb{N}$ with $m_1\leq m_2$ the space $L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$ is decomposed as
\begin{align}\label{decompose.L^2}
L^2_\sigma (\Omega) \, = \, \mathcal{Q}_{m_1, {\rm low}} L^2_{\sigma} (\Omega)
\, \oplus \, \mathcal{Q}_{m_2, {\rm high}} L^2_{\sigma} (\Omega)
\, \oplus \, \big ( \oplus_{m_1\leq |n|\leq m_2} \mathcal{P}_n L^2_\sigma (\Omega) \big )\,.
\end{align}
Moreover, since the shear flow is independent of $x$ it is straightforward to see that for each $t\geq 0$,
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{P}_n \mathbb{A}_\nu (t) \subset \mathbb{A}_\nu (t) \mathcal{P}_n \,, \qquad
\mathcal{Q}_{m,{\rm low}} \mathbb{A}_\nu (t) \subset \mathbb{A}_\nu (t) \mathcal{Q}_{m,{\rm low}} \,, \qquad
\mathcal{Q}_{m,{\rm high}} \mathbb{A}_\nu (t) \subset \mathbb{A}_\nu (t) \mathcal{Q}_{m,{\rm high}}\,,
\end{align*}
which leads to the diagonalization of $\mathbb{A}_\nu (t)$ such as
\begin{align}\label{decompose.A}
\mathbb{A}_\nu (t) \, = \, \mathbb{A}_{\nu, m_1,{\rm low}} (t) \, \oplus \, \mathbb{A}_{\nu, m_2,{\rm high}} (t) \, \oplus \, \big ( \oplus_{m_1\leq |n|\leq m_2} \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n} (t) \big ) \,,
\end{align}
where each operator in the right-hand side of \eqref{decompose.A} is naturally defined as the restriction of $\mathbb{A}_\nu (t)$ on the invariant subspace described in the right-hand side of \eqref{decompose.L^2}.
Then, the evolution operator $\{\mathbb{T}_\nu (t,s)\}_{t\ge s\geq 0}$ generated by $-\mathbb{A}_\nu (t)$ is also diagonalized as
\begin{align}\label{decompose.evolution}
\mathbb{T}_\nu (t,s) \, = \, \mathbb{T}_{\nu, m_1,{\rm low}} (t,s)
\, \oplus \, \mathbb{T}_{\nu, m_2,{\rm high}} (t,s)
\, \oplus \big ( \oplus_{m_1\leq |n|\leq m_2} \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s) \big )\,.
\end{align}
In Section \ref{sec.low.high} we first study the evolution operators
$\mathbb{T}_{\nu, m_1,{\rm low}}$ and $\mathbb{T}_{\nu, m_2,{\rm high}}$
in the case $m_1=\mathcal{O}(1)$ and $m_2=\mathcal{O} (\nu^{-\frac34})$,
where their temporal growth are well controlled by a simple energy method
for general shear flows.
On the contrary, in the middle range of frequencies $m_1 \le |n| \le m_2$, the problem becomes more complicated due to the underlying derivative loss property of the equations, and the behavior of the evolution operator $\mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s)$ highly depends on the structure of the shear flows.
In Section \ref{sec.middle.notime} we discuss this problem under suitable monotonicity conditions and the assumption that the shear flows are time-independent. The case of the time-dependent shear flows are studied in Section \ref{sec.middle.time}.
\section{Linear evolution operator in low and high frequency}\label{sec.low.high}
In this section we study the evolution operators defined in the previous section for the low frequency part and the high frequency part.
The low frequency part is $\mathbb{T}_{\nu,m_1,{\rm low}}$ with $m_1=\mathcal{O}(1)$.
In this case the derivative loss is negligible and the evolution of $\mathbb{T}_{\nu,m_1,{\rm low}}$
can be estimated without difficulty for general time-dependent shear flows.
For convenience we introduce the rescaled variable $Y=\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}}$, which will be used for the boundary layer $U^P$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop.general.low}
If $U^E, U^P\in L^\infty (0,t; BC^1 (\mathbb{R}_+))$ and $\| Y \partial_Y U^P \|_{L^\infty (0,t; L_Y^\infty)} <\infty$, then
\begin{align}
& \| \mathbb{T}_{\nu,m_1,{\rm low}} (t,s) f\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq e^{(t-s) C_1 (m_1,t)} \| f \|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,,\label{est.prop.general.low.1}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\| \nabla \mathbb{T}_{\nu,m_1,{\rm low}}(t,s) f\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 (t-s)^\frac12} \, \big ( 1 + (t-s) C_2 (m_1,t) e^{(t-s) C_1 (m_1, t)} \big ) \| f \|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,.\label{est.prop.general.low.2}
\end{split}
\end{align}
for all $f\in \mathcal{Q}_{m_1, {\rm low}} L^2_{\sigma} (\Omega)$. Here $C$ is a universal constant and
\begin{align*}
C_1 (m_1,t) & \, = \, \| \partial_y U^E\|_{L^\infty(0,t; L^\infty_y)} + 2 (m_1-1) \| Y \partial_Y U^P \|_{L^\infty (0,t; L_Y^\infty)}\,,\\
C_2 (m_1,t) & \, = \, C_1 (m_1,t) + \big ( \| U^E \|_{L^\infty(0,t; L^\infty_y)} + \| U^P\|_{L^\infty (0,t; L^\infty_{Y})} \big ) (m_1-1) \,.
\end{align*}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} It suffices to consider the case $s=0$.
Set $v_{{\rm low}} (t) = \mathbb{T}_{\nu,m_1,{\rm low}} (t,0) f$ for $f \in \mathcal{Q}_{m_1, {\rm low}} L^2_{\sigma} (\Omega)$. Then, by the boundary condition and the divergence free condition,
the vertical component of $v_{{\rm low}}$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\| y^{-1}v_{{\rm low},2} (t,x) \|_{L^2_y} \leq 2 \| \partial_y v_{{\rm low,2}} (t,x) \|_{L^2_y} = 2 \| \partial_x v_{{\rm low},1} (t,x) \|_{L^2_y}\,.\label{proof.prop.general.low.1}
\end{align}
Here we have used the Hardy inequality in the first inequality. Thus we have
\begin{align*}
|\langle v_{{\rm low},2} \partial_y \big ( U^E - U^E(0) + U^P \big ) , \, v_{{\rm low},1} \rangle_{L^2}|
& \leq \big ( \| \partial_y U^E\|_{L^\infty} + 2 (m_1-1) \| Y \partial_Y U^P \|_{L_Y^\infty} \big ) \| v_{\rm low} \|_{L^2}^2 \,.
\end{align*}
Here $\langle , \rangle_{L^2}$ denotes the inner product of $L^2 (\Omega)$ or $L^2(\Omega)^2$.
Hence we have
\begin{align}
\frac{\,{\rm d} }{\,{\rm d} t} \| v_{{\rm low}} \|_{L^2}^2 & \, = \, - 2 \nu \| \nabla v_{{\rm low}} \|_{L^2}^2 - 2 \Re \langle v_{{\rm low},2} \partial_y \big ( U^E - U^E(0) + U^P \big ) , \, v_{{\rm low},1} \rangle_{L^2} \nonumber \\
& \, \leq \, - 2 \nu \| \nabla v_{{\rm low}} \|_{L^2}^2 + 2 \big ( \| \partial_y U^E\|_{L^\infty} + 2 (m_1-1) \| Y \partial_Y U^P \|_{L_Y^\infty} \big ) \| v_{{\rm low}}\|_{L^2}^2\,,\label{proof.prop.general.low.2}
\end{align}
which gives \eqref{est.prop.general.low.1} by the Gronwall inequality.
To show the derivative estimate let us denote by $\mathbb{A}$ the Stokes operator with the viscosity coefficient $1$, i.e., $\mathbb{A}=-\mathbb{P}\Delta$, in $L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$.
Then by the Duhamel formula we have
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general.low.3}
\begin{split}
v_{{\rm low}} (t) & = e^{-\nu t \mathbb{A}} f \\
&- \int_0^t e^{-\nu (t-s) \mathbb{A}} \mathbb{P} \bigg ( \big ( U^E + U^{BL} (s,\frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) \partial_x v_{\rm low} (s) + v_{{\rm low},2} \partial_y \big ( U^E + U^{BL} (s, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) {\bf e}_1 \bigg ) \,{\rm d} s
\end{split}
\end{align}
It is well known that
\begin{align*}
\| \nabla e^{-\nu t\mathbb{A}} f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 t^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,, \qquad t>0\,.
\end{align*}
Then we have from \eqref{proof.prop.general.low.1},
\begin{align*}
\| \nabla v_{{\rm low}} (t) \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 t^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
& + C \int_0^t \frac{(\|U^E(s)\|_{L^\infty} + \| U^{BL} (s) \|_{L^\infty}) (m_1-1) + C_1 (m_1,s)}{\nu^\frac12 (t-s)^\frac12} \| v_{{\rm low}} (s)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,{\rm d} s\,.
\end{align*}
Then \eqref{est.prop.general.low.2} follows from \eqref{est.prop.general.low.1}.
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
Next we consider the high frequency part $\mathbb{T}_{\nu, m_2, {\rm high}} = \oplus_{|n|\geq m_2+1} \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n}$, with $m_2 = \mathcal{O}(\nu^{-\frac34})$. In this case the dissipation due to the viscosity works enough and the derivative loss does not appear.
\begin{prop}\label{prop.general.high} Let $U^E, U^P\in L^\infty (0,t; BC^1 (\mathbb{R}_+))$ and $\| Y \partial_Y U^P \|_{L^\infty (0,t; L_Y^\infty)} <\infty$. Then there exists $\delta_0 \in (0,1)$ such that if $|n|\geq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$ then
\begin{align}
\| \mathbb{T}_{\nu, n} (t,s) f\|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq e^{-\frac14 \nu n^2 (t-s)} \| f \|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,,\label{est.prop.general.high.1}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\| \nabla \mathbb{T}_{\nu, n} (t,s) f\|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C e^{-\frac14 \nu n^2 (t-s)}}{\nu^\frac12(t-s)^\frac12} \big ( 1 + |n| (t-s) C_2 (t) \big ) \| f\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,,\label{est.prop.general.high.2}
\end{align}
for all $f\in \mathcal{P}_{n} L^2_{\sigma} (\Omega)$ and $t>s\geq 0$.
Here $C$ is a universal constant and $C_2(t)$ is given by
\begin{align*}
C_2 (t) \, = \, \| U^E \|_{L^\infty(0,t; BC^1_y)} + \| U^P \|_{L^\infty (0,t; L^\infty_Y)} + \| Y \partial_Y U^P \|_{L^\infty (0,t; L^\infty_Y)}\,.
\end{align*}
\end{prop}
\noindent
\begin{proof} Again it suffices to consider the case $s=0$, and set $v_{{\rm high}} (t) =\mathbb{T}_{\nu, n} (t,0) f$ for $f \in \mathcal{P}_{n} L^2_{\sigma} (\Omega)$,
where $|n|\geq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$ and $\delta_0$ will be determined later.
The standard energy method yields
\begin{align}
\frac{\,{\rm d} }{\,{\rm d} \tau} \| v_{{\rm high}} \|_{L^2}^2 & \, = \, - 2 \nu \| \nabla v_{{\rm high}} \|_{L^2}^2 - 2 \Re \langle v_{{\rm high},2} \partial_y\big ( U^E-U^E (0) + U^P\big ), \, v_{{\rm high},1} \rangle_{L^2} \nonumber \\
& \, \leq \, - \nu \| \nabla v_{{\rm high}} \|_{L^2}^2 - \nu n^2 \| v_{{\rm high}} \|_{L^2}^2 \nonumber \\
& \quad + 2 \big ( \| \partial_y U^E \|_{L^\infty} + \nu^{-\frac12} \| \partial_Y U^P \|_{L^\infty_{t,Y}} \big ) \| v_{{\rm high}}\|_{L^2}^2\,.\label{proof.prop.general.high.1}
\end{align}
Thus, if we set
\begin{align}
\delta_0 \, = \, \frac{1}{2 (1+\| \partial_y U^E \|_{L^\infty} + \| \partial_Y U^P \|_{L^\infty_{t,Y}})^\frac12}\,, \label{proof.prop.general.high.2}
\end{align}
then \eqref{proof.prop.general.high.1} and the condition $|n|\geq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}$ lead to
\begin{align}
\frac{\,{\rm d} }{\,{\rm d} \tau} \| v_{{\rm high}} \|_{L^2}^2
& \, \leq \, - \nu \| \nabla v_{{\rm high}} \|_{L^2}^2 - \frac{\nu n^2}{2} \| v_{{\rm high}} \|_{L^2}^2\,.\label{proof.prop.general.high.3}
\end{align}
By the Gronwall inequality Est.\eqref{est.prop.general.high.1} follows.
The derivative estimate is proved as in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop.general.low}.
Indeed, as in \eqref{proof.prop.general.low.3}, we use the formula for $f\in \mathcal{P}_n L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$,
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general.high.4}
\begin{split}
& v_{{\rm high}} (t) = e^{-\nu t \mathbb{A}} \mathcal{P}_n f \\
&- \int_0^t e^{-\nu (t-s) \mathbb{A}} \mathcal{P}_n \mathbb{P} \bigg ( i n \big ( U^E + U^{BL} (s,\frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) v_{\rm high} (s) + v_{{\rm high},2} \partial_y \big ( U^E + U^{BL} (s, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) {\bf e}_1 \bigg ) \,{\rm d} s
\end{split}
\end{align}
It is not difficult to show
\begin{align*}
\| \nabla e^{-\nu t \mathbb{A}} \mathcal{P}_n f\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 t^\frac12} e^{-\frac12 \nu n^2 t} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,,
\end{align*}
which implies, in virtue of the computation as in \eqref{proof.prop.general.low.1},
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general.high.5}
\begin{split}
\| \nabla v_{{\rm high}} (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 t^\frac12} e^{-\frac12 \nu n^2 t} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
& \quad + CC_2 (t) |n| \int_0^t \frac{1}{\nu^\frac12 (t-s)^\frac12} e^{-\frac12 \nu n^2 (t-s)} \| v_{{\rm high}} (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,{\rm d} s\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Since $\| v_{{\rm high}} (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \leq e^{-\frac14 \nu n^2 s}\| f \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}$ holds, we have from \eqref{proof.prop.general.high.5},
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general.high.6}
\| \nabla v_{{\rm high}} (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 t^\frac12} e^{-\frac12 \nu n^2 t} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} + \frac{CC_2 (t) |n|}{\nu^\frac12} e^{-\frac12 \nu n^2 t} \int_0^t \frac{e^{\frac14 \nu n^2 s}}{(t-s)^\frac12} \,{\rm d} s \| f \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 t^\frac12} e^{-\frac12 \nu n^2 t} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} + \frac{C|n|t^\frac12 C_2 (t)}{\nu^\frac12} e^{-\frac14 \nu n^2 t} \| f \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,,
\end{align}
which gives \eqref{est.prop.general.high.2}. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\section{Linear evolution operator in middle frequency: the case of time-independent shear flow}\label{sec.middle.notime}
In the middle range of frequency $\mathcal{O}(1) \leq |n| \leq \mathcal{O} (\nu^{-\frac34})$
the simple energy method as in the previous section does not provide useful estimates anymore,
and we need more sophisticated analysis by taking into account the structure of the shear flow.
Since the time-dependence of the shear flow could make the problem complicated,
we first focus on the case when the shear flow is independent of the time variable.
That is, instead of $\mathbb{A}_\nu (t)$ in \eqref{def.A_t}, we consider the simplified operator
\begin{align}\label{def.A}
\mathbb{A}_\nu u \, = \, -\nu \mathbb{P} \Delta u + \mathbb{P} \bigg ( V (\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \partial_x u + u_2 \partial_y (V (\frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}}) ) {\bf e}_1 \bigg )\,,
\end{align}
with a given shear flow profile $V=V(Y)$, which is assumed to have the following form by taking into account \eqref{sec2.condition}, \eqref{sec2.U^{BL}}, and \eqref{def.A_t}:
\begin{align}
V (Y) \, = \, U^E (\sqrt{\nu} Y) - U^E (0) + U (Y)\,, \qquad U(0) \, =\, 0\,, \quad \lim_{Y\rightarrow \infty} U(Y) \, =\, U^E(0)\,. \label{shear.appl}
\end{align}
Here $U$ is a given function satisfying the boundary condition as in \eqref{shear.appl},
and further conditions will be mentioned later.
As in \eqref{decompose.A}, the operator $\mathbb{A}_\nu$ is diagonalized as the sum of the restrictions on each Fourier mode $n$ with respect to the $x$ variable, denoted by $\mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}$.
Our aim is to estimate the associated semigroup $e^{-t \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}}$ with $\delta_0^{-1}\leq |n|\leq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}$, since the cases $|n|\leq \delta_0^{-1}$ and $|n|\geq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}$ are already analyzed in Propositions \ref{prop.general.low} and \ref{prop.general.high}.
For this purpose it is convenient to introduce the rescaled velocity
\begin{align}\label{def.scaling}
u(t,x,y) \, = \, v (\tau, X, Y) \,, \qquad (\tau,X,Y) \, =\, (\frac{t}{\sqrt{\nu}}, \frac{x}{\sqrt{\nu}}, \frac{y}{\sqrt{\nu}})\,.
\end{align}
If $u(t) = e^{-t\mathbb{A}_\nu} a$ then $v$ is the solution to
\begin{equation}\label{eq.linear.scale}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\partial_\tau v + V \partial_X v + v_2 \partial_Y V {\bf e}_1- \sqrt{\nu} \Delta_{X,Y} v + \nabla_{X,Y} q & \, = \, 0\,, \qquad \tau>0\,, X\in \mathbb{R}\,, Y>0\,,\\
{\rm div}_{X,Y}\, v & \, = \, 0\,, \qquad \tau\geq 0\,, X\in \mathbb{R}\,, Y>0\,,\\
v|_{Y=0} \, = \, 0 \,, \quad v|_{\tau=0} & \, = \, a^{(\nu)} \,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
Note that the function $v$ is $\frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{\nu}}$-periodic in $X$, and $a^{(\nu)}(X,Y) = a (\nu^\frac12 X, \nu^\frac12 Y)$.
For simplicity of notations we will often omit the symbols $X,Y$ in the differential operators
and write, for example, $\Delta$ instead of $\Delta_{X,Y}$.
To obtain the estimate of solutions to \eqref{eq.linear.scale} in large time
we study the associated resolvent problem for the operator
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{L}_\nu v & \, = \, - \sqrt{\nu} \mathbb{P}_\nu \Delta v + \mathbb{P}_\nu \big ( V \partial_X v + v_2 \partial_Y V {\bf e}_1 \big )\,, \qquad v\in D(\mathbb{L}_\nu)\,,\\
D(\mathbb{L}_\nu) & \, = \, W^{2,2} (\Omega_\nu)^2 \cap W^{1,2}_0 (\Omega_\nu)^2 \cap L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Here $\Omega_\nu =(\nu^{-\frac12}\mathbb{T} ) \times \mathbb{R}_+$, $\Delta=\partial_X^2+\partial_Y^2$,
and $\mathbb{P}_\nu: L^2 (\Omega_\nu)^2 \rightarrow L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$ is the Helmholtz-Leray projection (we will write in the abbreviated style $\mathbb{P}$ if there is no risk of confusion).
For each fixed $\nu>0$ the Stokes operator $-\sqrt{\nu}\mathbb{P}\Delta$ defines a nonnegative self-adjoint operator in $L^2_\sigma(\Omega_\nu)$ and generates a bounded $C_0$-analytic semigroup acting on $L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$. Since the function space considered here is periodic in $X$ and $V$ is assumed to be bounded, the general perturbation theory of sectorial operators implies that $-\mathbb{L}_\nu$ also generates
a $C_0$-analytic semigroup acting on $L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$.
When $\displaystyle \lim_{Y\rightarrow \infty} V =0$ the perturbation term $\mathbb{P} \big ( V \partial_X v + v_2 \partial_Y V {\bf e}_1 \big )$ of $\mathbb{L}_\nu$ becomes a relatively compact perturbation of the Stokes operator $-\sqrt{\nu} \mathbb{P}\Delta$, and
then it is not difficult to show that the difference between the spectrum of $\mathbb{L}_\nu$ and $-\sqrt{\nu}\mathbb{P}\Delta$ consists only of discrete eigenvalues of $\mathbb{L}_\nu$ with finite algebraic multiplicities.
In particular, since the spectrum of $\sqrt{\nu} \mathbb{P}\Delta$ is always included in the nonpositive real axis, we have
\begin{align*}
\sigma (-\mathbb{L}_\nu) \subset \overline{\mathbb{R}_-} \cup \sigma_{disc} (-\mathbb{L}_\nu)\,,
\end{align*}
where $\sigma (-\mathbb{L}_\nu)$ denotes the spectrum of $-\mathbb{L}_\nu$, $\overline{\mathbb{R}_-} =\{\mu \leq 0\}$, and $\sigma_{disc}(-\mathbb{L}_\nu)$ denotes the set of discrete eigenvlaues of $-\mathbb{L}_\nu$ with finite algebraic multiplicities.
As an important consequence, the study of the nontrivial spectrum of $-\mathbb{L}_\nu$ is reduced to the search of the eigenvalues in this case.
Our argument in this paper, however, works without any spatial decay of $V$ itself.
Indeed, the a priori estimates of solutions to the resolvent problem in this section do not depend on the spatial decay of $V$.
By the spectral mapping theorem for sectorial operators, the growth bound for the semigroup $e^{-\tau \mathbb{L}_\nu}$ coincides with the spectral bound of $-\mathbb{L}_\nu$, however, the information on the distribution of the spectrum is not enough for our purpose: in order to solve the nonlinear problem we need to establish the estimates of the operator norm of $e^{-\tau \mathbb{L}_\nu}$ in such a way as the dependence on $\nu$ is explicit.
To fix the idea, as a natural counter part of \eqref{def.projection.P}, we introduce the projections
\begin{align}\label{def.projection.P.nu}
\begin{split}
\big ( \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)}f \big ) (Y) & \, = \, f_n (Y) e^{in \sqrt{\nu} X} \,, \qquad f_n (Y) \, = \, \frac{\sqrt{\nu}}{2\pi} \int_0^{\frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{\nu}}} f (X, Y) e^{-i n \sqrt{\nu} X} \,{\rm d} X \,, \qquad n \in \mathbb{Z}\,,
\end{split}
\end{align}
and for $m\in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{Q}_{m, {\rm low}}^{(\nu)} f \, = \, \sum_{|n|\leq m-1} \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} f \,, \qquad \qquad
\mathcal{Q}_{m, {\rm high}}^{(\nu)} f \, = \, \sum_{|n|\geq m+1} \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} f\,.
\end{align*}
By the same observation as in the previous section the operator $\mathbb{L}_\nu$ is diagonalized as follows.
For each $m_1,m_2\in \mathbb{N}$ with $m_1\leq m_2$, we have
\begin{align}\label{decompose.L^2.nu}
L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu) \, = \, \mathcal{Q}_{m_1, {\rm low}} L^2_{\sigma} (\Omega_\nu)
\, \oplus \, \mathcal{Q}_{m_2, {\rm high}} L^2_{\sigma} (\Omega_\nu)
\, \oplus \, \big ( \oplus_{m_1\leq |n|\leq m_2} \mathcal{P}_n L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu) \big )\,.
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}\label{decompose.L}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{L}_\nu & \, = \, \mathbb{L}_{\nu, m_1,{\rm low}} \, \oplus \, \mathbb{L}_{\nu, m_2,{\rm high}} \, \oplus \, \big ( \oplus_{m_1\leq |n|\leq m_2} \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} \big ) \,,\\
e^{- \tau \mathbb{L}_\nu} & \, = \, e^{- \tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu, m_1,{\rm low}} }
\, \oplus \, e^{- \tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu, m_2,{\rm high}}}
\, \oplus \big ( \oplus_{m_1\leq |n|\leq m_2} e^{- \tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} } \big )\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
To obtain the estimate of the original semigroup $e^{-t\mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}}$ for $\delta^{-1}\leq |n|\leq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}$ it suffices to study the semigroup $e^{-t \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}}$ for the same regime of $n$. Since the semigroup generated by a sectorial operator can be expressed in terms of the resolvent using the Dunford integral we study the resolvent problem for the operator $\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$ in the next section.
Due to the rescaling \eqref{def.scaling} the difficulty appears in the analysis in large time, or equivalently, the analysis for the resolvent parameter near the imaginary axis. On the other hand, there is no difficulty in obtaining short-time estimates of $e^{-\tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}}$. Indeed, by taking into account the rescaling, Proposition \ref{prop.general.low} implies the following estimate.
\begin{prop}\label{prop.general.sg.short} It follows that
\begin{align}
\| e^{-\tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}} f \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} & \leq e^{C_1 (n)\nu^\frac12 \tau } \| f\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)}\,, \qquad \tau>0\,, \qquad f\in \mathcal{P}_n L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)\,,
\end{align}
where $C_1 (n) = \| \partial_y U^E \|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{R}_+)} + 2 |n| \| Y \partial_Y U \|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{R}_+)}$.
\end{prop}
The proof of Proposition \ref{prop.general.sg.short} is straightforward from Proposition \ref{prop.general.low}, so we omit the details.
\begin{rem}{\rm The estimate in Proposition \ref{prop.general.sg.short} is not useful in large time, and one needs to obtain a better growth exponent than $C|n| \nu^\frac12 \tau$ in order to achieve the inviscid limit in a Gevrey class $s$ with $s>1$. The estimate in Proposition \ref{prop.general.sg.short} will be used only in a short time period, e.g., $0<\tau\leq \nu^{-\frac12} |n|^{-1}$.
}
\end{rem}
\subsection{Resolvent problem and Orr-Sommerfeld equations}\label{subsec.os}
In this subsection we consider the resolvent problem associated to the rescaled equations \eqref{eq.linear.scale}, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq.resolvent}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\mu v + V \partial_X v + v_2 \partial_Y V {\bf e}_1 - \sqrt{\nu} \Delta v + \nabla q & \, = \, f\,, \quad {\rm div}\, v \, = \, 0\,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
v & \, = \, 0\,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
Here $\mu\in \mathbb{C}$ is a resolvent parameter, and $v$, $\nabla q$, and $f$ are assumed to be $\frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{\nu}}$-periodic in $X$. Note that $V$ is independent of $X$.
The vorticity field of $v$ is defined as $\omega=\partial_X v_2-\partial_Y v_1$, and we consider the stream function $\psi$, which is the solution to the Poisson equations $-\Delta\psi =\omega$. The direct computation leads to the equations for $\psi$ as follows.
\begin{align*}
\mu \Delta \psi + V \partial_X \Delta \psi - \partial_X \psi \partial_Y^2 V - \sqrt{\nu} \Delta^2 \psi \, = \, - \partial_X f_2 + \partial_Y f_1\,.
\end{align*}
Let $\phi=\phi_n$, $n\in \mathbb{Z}\setminus\{0\}$, be the $n\sqrt{\nu}$ Fourier mode of $\psi$, i.e.,
$\phi = e^{-in\sqrt{\nu} X} \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} \psi$.
The equation for $\phi$ is then written as
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
\frac{i}{n} (\partial_Y^2 - n^2 \nu )^2 \phi + (V + \frac{\mu}{i n \sqrt{\nu}}) (\partial_Y^2- n^2 \nu ) \phi - (\partial_Y^2 V ) \phi & \, = \, - f_{2,n} + \frac{1}{i n \sqrt{\nu}} \partial_Y f_{1,n}\,, \quad Y>0\,,\\
\phi \, = \, \partial_Y \phi & \, = \, 0\,, \quad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation*}
Note that the $n\sqrt{\nu}$ Fourier modes of $v$ and $\omega$, $\mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} v$ and $\mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)}\omega$, are recovered from $\phi$ through the formula
\begin{align}\label{formula.stream}
\mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} v \, = \, (\partial_Y \phi \, e^{in\sqrt{\nu} X} , \, -in\sqrt{\nu} \phi \, e^{in\sqrt{\nu} X} )\,, \qquad \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} \omega \, = \, (n^2\nu-\partial_Y^2) \phi \, e^{in\sqrt{\nu} X} \,.
\end{align}
Thus, the estimates for $\mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} v$ and $\mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)}\omega$ are obtained from the analysis of the ordinary differential equations for $\phi$ as above.
In virtue of Propositions \ref{prop.general.low} and \ref{prop.general.high}
it suffices to consider the case
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{\delta_0} \leq |n|\leq \frac{1}{\delta_0 \nu^{\frac34}}\,,
\end{align*}
where $\delta_0\in (0,1)$ is the number in Proposition \ref{prop.general.high}.
More precisely, since $V$ is now time-independent it is taken as
\begin{align}
\delta_0 = \frac{1}{2 \big (1+\| \partial_y U^E\|_{L^\infty} + \| \partial_Y U\|_{L^\infty} \big )^{\frac12}}\,.\label{def.delta_0}
\end{align}
Note that we may assume without loss of generality that $n$ is positive
(when $n$ is negative it suffices to consider the complex conjugate of the first equation).
Then we set for $n\in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{align}\label{def.coefficient}
\alpha \, = \, n \sqrt{\nu}\,, \qquad \epsilon \, = \, - \frac{i}{n}\,, \qquad c = \frac{i \mu}{\alpha}\,, \qquad h \, = \, - f_{2,n} + \frac{1}{i\alpha} \partial_Y f_{1,n}\,.
\end{align}
With these notation we obtain the Orr-Sommerfeld equations
\begin{equation}\label{eq.os}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
-\epsilon (\partial_Y^2 - \alpha^2 )^2 \phi + (V -c) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi - (\partial_Y^2 V ) \phi & \, = \, h \,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\phi \, = \, \partial_Y \phi & \, = \, 0 \,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
Since $\delta_0^{-1}\leq n\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$, the regime of parameters we need to study is
\begin{align*
\frac{\nu^\frac12}{\delta_0} \leq \alpha\leq \frac{1}{\delta_0 \nu^\frac14} \,, \qquad \qquad \delta_0\nu^\frac34 \leq |\epsilon| = \frac{1}{n} \leq \delta_0 \,.
\end{align*}
Moreover, we consider the case
\begin{align}\label{parameter.stability}
\Re \mu = \alpha \Im c \geq \frac{\nu^\frac12n^\gamma}{\delta}
\end{align}
for some $\gamma \in [0,1]$ and for sufficiently small but fixed $\delta \in (0,\delta_1]$,
where the number $\delta_1\in (0,\delta_0]$ will be determined later in Proposition \ref{prop.general'}.
\begin{rem}\label{rem.parameter} {\rm (i) The value $\gamma\in [0,1]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability} has a special importance in our analysis. Indeed, it represents the order of derivative loss through the action of the semigroup $e^{-t\mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}}$. In order to achieve the nonlinear stability in the Gevrey class $s$ with $s>1$ we need to show the resolvent estimate for the value $\gamma$ strictly less than $1$.
In \cite{GGN2014} the unstable eigenvalue is found in the parameter regime
\begin{align}
\alpha\sim \mathcal{O}(\nu^\frac18)\,, \quad \Im c \sim \mathcal{O}(\nu^\frac18)\,, \quad n=|\epsilon|^{-1} \sim \mathcal{O} (\nu^{-\frac38})\,.
\end{align}
This implies that we can actually expect at most $\gamma=\frac23$ for the spatial frequency $n\sim \mathcal{O}(\nu^{-\frac38})$.
\noindent (ii) Since $\alpha = n \sqrt{\nu}$ the condition \eqref{parameter.stability} gives the lower bound
\begin{align}
\Im c \geq \frac{n^{\gamma-1}}{\delta}\,.\label{bound.nc}
\end{align}
In particular, we have
\begin{align}
\Im c \geq \frac{1}{\delta}\gg 1\,, \qquad ~~ {\rm if} ~~ \gamma=1~{\rm in}~\eqref{parameter.stability}\,.
\end{align}
}
\end{rem}
The Orr-Sommerfeld equations \eqref{eq.os} have to be analyzed in a wide regime of parameters as mentioned above. In particular, the value $\alpha$ can be both small and large depending on the location of the frequency $n$. To reduce the possible dependence on $\alpha$ of the equations it is convenient to introduce the number
\begin{align}\label{def.c.ep}
c_\epsilon = c - \epsilon \alpha^2\,.
\end{align}
Note that
\begin{align}
\Im c_\epsilon \, = \, \Im c + \frac{\alpha^2}{n}\,,\label{Im.c_ep}
\end{align}
which is positive if $\Im c$ is positive. One can easily check that \eqref{eq.os} is equivalent with the modified form of the Orr-Sommerfeld equations as follows.
\begin{equation}\label{eq.os'}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
-\epsilon (\partial_Y^2 - \alpha^2 ) \partial_Y^2 \phi + (V - c_\epsilon ) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi - (\partial_Y^2 V ) \phi & \, = \, h \,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\phi \, = \, \partial_Y \phi & \, = \, 0 \,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.c_epsilon}{\rm Since $\Im c\geq \frac{n^{\gamma-1}}{\delta}$ by \eqref{bound.nc} and $\frac{\alpha^2}{n} = n \nu$ by the definition of $\alpha$, we have
\begin{align}
\frac{\alpha^2}{n}\leq \Im c \qquad {\rm if} \quad n^{2-\gamma}\leq \frac{1}{\delta\nu}\,.
\end{align}
When $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ this condition is satisfied if $n\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$.
}
\end{rem}
\subsection{Resolvent estimate for general shear profile}\label{subsec.general}
We first consider the case of general shear profiles for some regime of parameters.
In this subsection the shear profile $V$ is always assumed to take the form \eqref{shear.appl} with $U^E\in BC^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$, and we also assume that
\begin{align}\label{bound.U}
\begin{split}
& \|U\|\, := \, \sum_{k=0,1,2} \sup_{Y \geq 0} \, (1+Y)^k |\partial_Y^k U (Y) | \, <\, \infty\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\vspace{0.3cm}
Let $\Im c>0$, which ensure $\Im c_\epsilon>0$ due to \eqref{Im.c_ep}.
We consider the modified form \eqref{eq.os'} of the Orr-Sommerfeld equations rather than \eqref{eq.os}.
The argument below is based on Rayleigh's trick.
Multiplying both sides of the first equation of \eqref{eq.os'} by $(V- c_\epsilon)^{-1} \bar{\phi}$
and integrating over $(0,\infty)$, we have
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general.1}
\begin{split}
& -\epsilon \int_0^\infty \partial_Y^2\phi \, \partial_Y^2 \big ( \frac{\bar{\phi}}{V- c_\epsilon} \big ) + \alpha^2 \partial_Y \phi \, \partial_Y \big (\frac{\bar{\phi}}{V- c_\epsilon} \big ) \,{\rm d} Y \\
& \qquad - \int_0^\infty |\partial_Y \phi|^2 +\alpha^2 |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y -\int_0^\infty \frac{\partial_Y^2 V}{V-c_\epsilon} |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \, = \, \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\phi} \,{\rm d} Y\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
The first integration in the right-hand side of \eqref{proof.prop.general.1} is computed as
\begin{align*}
-\epsilon \int_0^\infty \frac{1}{V- c_\epsilon} \big ( |\partial_Y^2 \phi|^2 + \alpha^2 |\partial_Y \phi |^2 \big ) \,{\rm d} Y \, - \,\epsilon R\,,
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
R = \int_0^\infty \partial_Y^2 \phi \bigg ( 2 \partial_Y \big (\frac{1}{V-c_\epsilon} \big ) \partial_Y \bar{\phi} + \bar{\phi} \partial_Y^2 \big ( \frac{1}{V-c_\epsilon}) \bigg ) + \alpha^2 (\partial_Y \phi ) \, \bar{\phi} \partial_Y\big ( \frac{1}{V-c_\epsilon}\big ) \,{\rm d} Y \,.
\end{align*}
Recalling $\epsilon = - \frac{i}{n}$ and taking the real part of both sides of \eqref{proof.prop.general.1},
we obtain
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general.2}
\begin{split}
& -\frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{n} \int_0^\infty \frac{1}{|V- c_\epsilon|^2} \big ( |\partial_Y^2 \phi|^2 + \alpha^2 |\partial_Y \phi |^2 \big ) \,{\rm d} Y - \int_0^\infty |\partial_Y \phi|^2 +\alpha^2 |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \\
& \qquad \qquad - \frac{\Im R}{n} - \int_0^\infty \frac{\partial_Y^2 V}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} (V-\Re c_\epsilon) |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \, = \, \Re \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\phi} \,{\rm d} Y\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
It is straightforward to see
\begin{align*}
|\Im R| & \leq \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{2} \int_0^\infty \frac{1}{|V- c_\epsilon|^2} \big ( |\partial_Y^2 \phi|^2 + \alpha^2 |\partial_Y \phi |^2 \big ) \,{\rm d} Y\\
& \quad + \frac{1}{2 \Im c_\epsilon} \int_0^\infty |V-c_\epsilon|^2 \bigg ( \big | 2 \partial_Y \big (\frac{1}{V-c_\epsilon} \big ) \partial_Y \bar{\phi} + \bar{\phi} \partial_Y^2 \big ( \frac{1}{V-c_\epsilon}) \big | ^2 + \alpha^2 \big | \partial_Y \frac{1}{V-c_\epsilon}\big |^2 |\phi|^2 \bigg ) \,{\rm d} Y\\
& \leq \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{2} \int_0^\infty \frac{1}{|V- c_\epsilon|^2} \big ( |\partial_Y^2 \phi|^2 + \alpha^2 |\partial_Y \phi |^2 \big ) \,{\rm d} Y\\
& \quad + \frac{1}{2 \Im c_\epsilon} \int_0^\infty \frac{12 |\partial_Y V|^2}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\partial_Y \phi|^2 + \big ( \frac{3|\partial_Y^2 V|^2}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} + \frac{12 |\partial_Y V|^4}{|V-c_\epsilon|^4} + \alpha^2 \frac{|\partial_Y V|^2}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} \big ) |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y\,.
\end{align*}
Here $C$ is a universal constant. Hence we have from \eqref{proof.prop.general.2},
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general.3}
\begin{split}
& \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{2 n} \int_0^\infty \frac{1}{|V- c_\epsilon|^2} \big ( |\partial_Y^2 \phi|^2 + \alpha^2 |\partial_Y \phi |^2 \big ) \,{\rm d} Y + \int_0^\infty |\partial_Y \phi|^2 +\alpha^2 |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \\
& \leq \frac{6}{n \Im c_\epsilon} \int_0^\infty \frac{|\partial_Y V|^2}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\partial_Y \phi|^2 + \big ( \frac{|\partial_Y^2 V|^2}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} + \frac{|\partial_Y V|^4}{|V-c_\epsilon|^4} + \alpha^2 \frac{|\partial_Y V|^2}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} \big ) |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y\\
& \qquad \quad + \int_0^\infty \frac{|\partial_Y^2 V|}{|V-c_\epsilon|} |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y - \Re \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\phi} \,{\rm d} Y\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
We note that the inequality \eqref{proof.prop.general.3} is valid for any weak solution $\phi\in H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.os'} (defined in a natural manner) since $\Im c_\epsilon>0$.
For some regime of parameters the inequality \eqref{proof.prop.general.3} provides enough informations on the estimates of solutions. Indeed, the next proposition shows that the resolvent estimate is always available if $|c|$ is large enough depending on $V$. Let us recall that the inhomogeneous term $h$ is related with $f$ as in \eqref{def.coefficient}, and $\delta_0\in (0,1)$ is chosen as in \eqref{def.delta_0}. The weighted norm $\|U\|$ is defined in \eqref{bound.U}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop.general'} There exists $\delta_1\in (0,\delta_0]$ such that the following statement holds.
Let $|c|\geq \delta_1^{-1}$ and $n\in \mathbb{N}$. Assume that \eqref{parameter.stability} holds for some $\gamma\in [0,1]$ and $\delta\in (0,\delta_1]$.
Then for any $f=(f_{1,n},f_{2,n})\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)^2$ there exists a unique weak solution $\phi\in H_0^2(\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.os'}, and $\phi$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C (1+\|U\|)}{|\mu|} \|f \|_{L^2}\,,\label{est.prop.general'.1} \\
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2 ) \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C (1+\|U\|) }{|\mu|^\frac12 \nu^\frac14} \| f\|_{L^2}\,.\label{est.prop.general'.2}
\end{align}
Here $\delta_1$ depends only on $\|U^E \|_{C^2}$ and $\|U\|$, while $C\geq 1$ is a universal constant.
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.prop.general'}{\rm (i) By the standard elliptic regularity the solution $\phi$ also belongs to $H^3(\mathbb{R}_+)$.
\noindent
(ii) Proposition \ref{prop.general'} is valid also for the regime $n\geq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$.
\noindent (iii) Proposition \ref{prop.general'} shows that the case $\gamma=1$ in \eqref{parameter.stability} can be handled by the simple energy method, and there are no unstable eigenvalues of $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$ such that $\Re \mu \geq \mathcal{O}(n \nu^\frac12)$ in general.
On the other hand, when there is an unstable eigenvalue for the Rayleigh equations with some $\alpha>0$
it is likely that the Orr-Sommerfeld equations also possess an unstable eigenvalue
in the parameter regime $\alpha = \mathcal{O}(1)$, $\Im c =\mathcal{O}(1)$, and $|\epsilon| \ll 1$.
From this point of view, by considering the case $n=\mathcal{O}(\nu^{-\frac12})$,
the above elementary energy method actually provides a fairly optimal result
for unstable shear flows satisfying \eqref{bound.U}.
}
\end{rem}
\begin{proofx}{Proposition \ref{prop.general'}} (A priori estimates) Assume that $|c|\geq \delta_1^{-1}$,
where $\delta_1\in (0,\delta_0]$ is determined below.
Since $|\mu| = \alpha |c|$ and $\Im c_\epsilon = \Im c + \frac{\alpha^2}{n} \geq \Im c > 0$,
we have
\begin{align*}
|c_\epsilon|\geq |c|\geq \delta_1^{-1}\,.
\end{align*}
If $\delta_1$ is taken as
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general'.-1}
\delta_1 \, = \, \frac{1}{32 ( 1 + \| U^E \|_{C^2} + \|U\| )}\,,
\end{align}
where $\|U\|$ is defined in \eqref{bound.U},
then $\delta_1\in (0,\delta_0]$ and $\frac{|c|}{2} \leq |V-c_\epsilon|\leq 2 |c|$ holds.
Since the lower bound $n\Im c_\epsilon \gg 1$ is valid as stated in Remark \ref{rem.parameter},
it is not difficult to see that the right-hand side of \eqref{proof.prop.general.3} is bounded from above by
\begin{align*}
\frac12 \int_0^\infty |\partial_Y \phi|^2 +\alpha^2 |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y - \Re \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\phi} \,{\rm d} Y\,.
\end{align*}
For example, the term $\frac{1}{n\Im c_\epsilon} \int_0^\infty \frac{|\partial_Y V|^4}{|V-c_\epsilon|^4} |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y$ is estimated as
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{n\Im c_\epsilon} \int_0^\infty \frac{|\partial_Y V|^4}{|V-c_\epsilon|^4} |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y
& \leq \frac{2^5 \delta_1^4 \|\partial_Y V\|_{L^\infty}^2}{n\Im c_\epsilon}\int_0^\infty \big (\nu \| U^E\|_{C^1}^2 + \| U\|^2 (1+Y)^{-2} \big) |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y\\
& \ll \alpha^2\|\phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \| \partial_Y\phi\|_{L^2}^2\,.
\end{align*}
Here we have used $\alpha=n\nu^\frac12$ and also used the Hardy inequality
\begin{align*}
\| \frac{\phi}{Y} \|_{L^2} \leq 2 \| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
The other terms are estimated in the similar manner, and the details are omitted here.
By the definition of $h$ in \eqref{def.coefficient} and \eqref{bound.U}
the last term is estimated as
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general'.0}
\begin{split}
& - \Re \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\phi} \,{\rm d} Y \leq \frac14 \int_0^\infty |\partial_Y \phi|^2 +\alpha^2 |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \\
& \qquad + C \bigg ( \| \frac{f}{\alpha (V-c_\epsilon)}\|_{L^2}^2 + \|U\|^2 \| \frac{f}{\alpha (V-c_\epsilon)^2}\|_{L^2}^2 +\nu \| U^E \|_{C^1} ^2 \| \frac{f_{1,n}}{\alpha^2 (V-c_\epsilon)^2}\|_{L^2}^2 \bigg )\,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $C$ is a numerical constant.
Note that the Hardy inequality is used again in the derivation of \eqref{proof.prop.general'.0}.
From $\frac{|c|}{2} \leq |V-c_\epsilon|\leq 2 |c|$ and the identity $|\mu|=\alpha |c|$ we have arrived at
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general'.1}
\begin{split}
& \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{2 n} \int_0^\infty \frac{1}{|V- c_\epsilon|^2} \big ( |\partial_Y^2 \phi|^2 + \alpha^2 |\partial_Y \phi |^2 \big ) \,{\rm d} Y + \frac14 \int_0^\infty |\partial_Y \phi|^2 +\alpha^2 |\phi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \\
& \leq C \big ( \frac{1+ \|U\|^2}{|\mu|^2} + \frac{\nu \| U^E \|_{C^1}^2}{|\mu|^4} \big ) \| f \|_{L^2}^2
= \frac{C}{|\mu|^2} \big ( 1+ \|U\|^2 + \frac{\| U^E \|_{C^1}^2}{n^2|c|^2} \big ) \| f\|_{L^2}^2
\end{split}
\end{align}
with a numerical constant $C$.
By the assumption $|c|\geq \delta_1^{-1}$ and the choice of $\delta_1$ in \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}
we have $\frac{\|U^E\|_{C^1}}{n |c|}\leq 1$, which yields \eqref{est.prop.general'.1}.
Next we multiply both sides of \eqref{eq.os} by $\bar{\phi}$ and integrate over $(0,\infty)$, which leads to
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general'.3}
-\epsilon \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \langle (V-c) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi, \phi\rangle _{L^2} - \langle (\partial_Y^2 V) \phi, \phi \rangle _{L^2} \, = \, \langle h, \phi \rangle _{L^2}\,.
\end{align}
Taking the imaginary part of \eqref{proof.prop.general'.3}, we have
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.general'.4}
\begin{split}
& \frac1n \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + (\Im c ) \big ( \|\partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \phi \|_{L^2}^2 \big ) \\
& \quad \, = \, - \Im \langle (V-\Re c) ( \partial_Y^2-\alpha^2 )\phi, \phi\rangle _{L^2} + \Im \langle h, \phi \rangle _{L^2}\\
& \quad \, = \, - \Im \langle V \partial_Y^2 \phi, \phi \rangle _{L^2} + \Im \langle h, \phi \rangle _{L^2}\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
It is straightforward to see from \eqref{est.prop.general'.1} and \eqref{bound.U},
\begin{align}
|\Im \langle V \partial_Y^2 \phi, \phi \rangle _{L^2} |
& \leq \| \partial_Y\phi \|_{L^2}\| (\partial_Y V) \phi \|_{L^2} \nonumber \\
& \leq C \| \partial_Y\phi \|_{L^2} \big ( \nu^\frac12 \| U^E \|_{C^1} \|\phi\|_{L^2} + \|U\| \| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} \big ) \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{|\mu|} \big ( \frac{\nu^\frac12 \| U^E \|_{C^1} }{\alpha |\mu|} + \frac{\|U\|}{|\mu|} \big ) (1+\|U\|)^2 \| f\|_{L^2}^2\,.\label{proof.prop.general'.5}
\end{align}
Here we have also used the Hardy inequality and \eqref{est.prop.general'.1}.
By the definition of $h$ and \eqref{est.prop.general'.1} we also have
\begin{align}
|\langle h,\phi \rangle_{L^2}|\leq \frac{C}{\alpha} \| f\|_{L^2} \big ( \| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi \|_{L^2}\big ) \leq \frac{C}{\alpha |\mu|} (1+\|U\|) \|f\|_{L^2}^2\,.\label{proof.prop.general'.6}
\end{align}
From \eqref{proof.prop.general'.4}, \eqref{proof.prop.general'.5}, and \eqref{proof.prop.general'.6}
we obtain by using the relation $\mu = - i \alpha c = -i n \nu^\frac12 c$,
\begin{align*}
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \phi \|_{L^2}^2 & \leq \frac{C n}{|\mu|} \big ( \frac{\nu^\frac12\| U^E \|_{C^1}}{\alpha |\mu|} + \frac{\|U\|}{|\mu|} + \frac{1}{\alpha} \big ) \| f\|_{L^2}^2 \\
& \leq \frac{C}{|\mu|} \big ( \frac{\| U^E \|_{C^1}}{|\mu|} + \frac{\|U\|}{\nu^\frac12 |c|} + \frac{1}{\nu^\frac12} \big ) (1+\|U\|)^2 \| f\|_{L^2}^2\\
& \leq \frac{C}{|\mu|\nu^\frac12} \big ( \frac{\| U^E \|_{C^1}+\|U\|}{|c|} + 1\big ) (1+\|U\|)^2 \| f \|_{L^2}^2\,.
\end{align*}
By the assumption $|c|\geq \delta_1^{-1}$ and the choice of $\delta_1$ in \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}, we obtain \eqref{est.prop.general'.2}.
\noindent (Uniqueness) The uniqueness of weak solutions in $H^2_0(\mathbb{R}_+)$ is immediate from the a priori estimates.
\noindent (Existence) We first observe that the operator $T=-\epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2)^2 - i \Im c (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2)$ with the domain $H^4 (\mathbb{R}_+) \cap H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ is always invertible in $L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ for $\Im c, \alpha>0$. If $\Im c \gg 1$ the operator $mOS=T + (V-\Re c) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) - (\partial_Y^2 V)$ with the domain $H^4(\mathbb{R}_+) \cap H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ is a small perturbation of $T$ and is invertible by considering Neumann series; indeed, we can write $mOS = \big (I + (V-\Re c) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) T^{-1} \big ) T$ and $W=I + (V-\Re c) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2)T^{-1}$ is bounded in $L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ and invertible if $\Im c$ is large enough, for we can show the bound
$$\| (V-\Re c) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2)T^{-1} h \|_{L^2}\leq \frac{C(\|V\|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c| )}{\alpha (|\epsilon| \Im c)^{\frac12}} \| h \|_{L^2}$$
with a universal constant $C>0$, by a simple energy estimate.
Hence the inverse of $mOS$ is given by $T^{-1} W^{-1}$ for sufficiently large $\Im c$.
We may assume that $\Im c\gg \delta_1^{-1}$.
Then, for such $\Im c$, approximating $f\in L^2(\mathbb{R}_+)^2$ by a sequence in $W^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}_+)^2$,
we obtain the unique weak solution $\phi\in H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.os'} for any $f\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)^2$.
In particular, the solution $\phi$ satisfies the a priori estimates \eqref{est.prop.general'.1} and \eqref{est.prop.general'.2}. Then, in virtue of the method of continuity using the a priori estimates \eqref{est.prop.general'.1} and \eqref{est.prop.general'.2}, we obtain the weak solution $\phi$ to \eqref{eq.os'} for any value of $c$ satisfying $|c|\geq \delta_1^{-1}$. The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
Proposition \ref{prop.general'} enables us to obtain the resolvent in the high temporal frequency,
which will be used in the latter section to obtain the estimate for the analytic semigroup generated by $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$.
\begin{cor}\label{cor.prop.general'} Let $\delta_1\in (0,1)$ be the number in Proposition \ref{prop.general'}.
Then there exist $\theta\in (\frac{\pi}{2},\pi)$ such that the set
\begin{align}\label{est.cor.prop.general'.1}
S_{\nu,n} (\theta) \, = \, \big \{ \mu \in \mathbb{C} ~\big |~ |\Im \mu |\geq (\tan \theta ) \Re \mu + \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan \theta| n^\gamma \nu^\frac12 )\,, \quad |\mu |\geq \delta_1^{-1} \alpha \big \}
\end{align}
is included in the resolvent set of $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$, and
\begin{align}
\| (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} )^{-1} f \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} & \leq \frac{C'}{|\mu|} \| f \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,,\label{est.cor.prop.general'.2}\\
\| \nabla (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} )^{-1} f \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} & \leq \frac{C'}{\nu^\frac14 |\mu|^\frac12} \| f \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,,\label{est.cor.prop.general'.3}
\end{align}
for all $\mu \in S_{\nu,n}(\theta)$ and $f\in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$.
The numbers $\theta$ and $C'$ depend only on $\|U^E\|_{C^1}$ and $\|U\|$ in \eqref{bound.U}.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} Let $n\in \mathbb{N}$. We observe that, since $\mu = -i \alpha c$, the condition of Proposition \ref{prop.general'} is satisfied if $|\mu|\geq \delta_1^{-1} \alpha$ and $\Re \mu=\alpha \Im c\geq \delta_1^{-1} n^\gamma \nu^\frac12$. We first show that such $\mu$ belongs to the resolvent set of $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$ in $\mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$.
To this end take any $f=e^{i n \sqrt{\nu}X} (f_{1,n},f_{2,n}) \in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)}L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$ (that is, $(f_{1,n},f_{2,n}) \in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)^2$ satisfies $in \sqrt{\nu} f_{1,n} + \partial_Y f_{2,n}=0$ in $Y>0$ and $f_{2,n}=0$ on $Y=0$). By applying Proposition \ref{prop.general'}, let $\phi\in H^2_0(\mathbb{R}_+)$ be the unique weak solution to \eqref{eq.os'}, and thus, to \eqref{eq.os}, with $h=-f_{2,n} +\frac{1}{i\alpha} \partial_Y f_{1,n}$.
Note that the solution $\phi$ obtained in Proposition \ref{prop.general'} belongs to $H^3(\mathbb{R}_+)$ by the elliptic regularity. Then the velocity $v=(\partial_Y \phi e^{in\sqrt{\nu}X}, -in \sqrt{\nu} \phi e^{in \sqrt{\nu}X} )$ belongs to $D(\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})=H^2 (\Omega_\nu)^2 \cap H^1_0(\Omega_\nu)^2 \cap \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$ and satisfies \eqref{eq.resolvent} for a suitable pressure $q$.
In particular, $\mu+\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$ is surjective in $\mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$.
Moreover, in virtue of \eqref{est.prop.general'.1} and \eqref{est.prop.general'.2}, the norms $\|v\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)}$ and $\|\nabla v\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)}$ are estimated as in \eqref{est.cor.prop.general'.2} and \eqref{est.cor.prop.general'.3} by recalling the relations $|\epsilon|=n^{-1}$, $\alpha = n\nu^\frac12$, and $\mu = -i \alpha c$, and $\Im c_\epsilon=\Im c + n\nu$.
Next we suppose that $v\in D(\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})$ satisfies $(\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}) v=0$ then for its stream function $\phi (Y) e^{in\sqrt{\nu}X}$, we see that $\phi$ solves the Orr-Sommerfeld equations \eqref{eq.os} with the source term $h=0$. By the uniqueness proved in Proposition \ref{prop.general'}, we have $\phi=0$, and thus, $\omega=\partial_X v_2-\partial_Y v_1=0$. Then $v$ is harmonic in $\Omega_\nu$ and vanishes on the boundary, which implies $v=0$ in $\Omega_\nu$. Therefore, $\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$ is also injective, and thus, we conclude that $\mu\in \rho (-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})$ in $\mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)}L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$
if $|\mu|\geq \delta_1^{-1}\alpha$ and $\Re (\mu) \geq \delta_1^{-1} n^\gamma \nu^\frac12$.
Recall again that, for such $\mu$, \eqref{est.prop.general'.1} implies
\begin{align*}
\| (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} )^{-1} f \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} \leq \frac{C(1+\|U\|)}{|\mu|} \| f \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,,
\qquad f\in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)\,,
\end{align*}
with the same $C\geq 1$ as in \eqref{est.prop.general'.1}.
By considering the Neumann series the ball $B_{r_\mu}(\mu)=\{ \lambda\in \mathbb{C}~|~ |\lambda-\mu|\leq r_\mu\}$ with $r_{\mu}=\frac{|\mu|}{2C(1+\|U\|)}$ belongs to the resolvent set of $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$, and we have
\begin{align*}
\| (\lambda + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} f \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} \leq \frac{4C(1+\|U\|)}{|\mu|} \| f\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)}
\leq \frac{8C(1+\|U\|)}{|\lambda|} \| f\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)}\,, \qquad \lambda \in B_{r_\mu} (\mu)\,.
\end{align*}
This estimate corresponds to \eqref{est.cor.prop.general'.2}, and we will prove \eqref{est.cor.prop.general'.3} later.
So far, we have shown that
\begin{align}\label{proof.cor.prop.general'.0}
\cup_{\mu\in E_{\nu,n}} B_{r_\mu} (\mu) \subset \rho (-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})\,, \qquad E_{\nu,n} \, = \, \big \{ \mu\in \mathbb{C}~|~ \Re \mu \geq \delta_1^{-1} n^\gamma \nu^{\frac12}\,, ~ |\mu | \geq \delta_1^{-1} \alpha \big \}
\end{align}
Then it suffices to show that there exist $\theta\in (\frac{\pi}{2},\pi)$ and $\nu_0\in (0,1)$ satisfying
\begin{align}\label{proof.cor.prop.general'.1}
S_{\nu,n} (\theta) \subset \cup_{\mu\in E_{\nu,n}} B_{r_\mu} (\mu)\,.
\end{align}
But it is not difficult to see that $\theta = \frac{\pi}{2} + \theta_0$ with $\theta_0\in (0,\frac{\pi}{2})$ satisfying
$\tan \theta_0 = \frac{1}{2 C(1+\|U\|)}$ meets our purpose.
Finally let us prove \eqref{est.cor.prop.general'.3}. It suffices to estimate the norm of $(\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi$. To this end we go back to the identity \eqref{proof.prop.general'.4} and also recall the estimates \eqref{proof.prop.general'.5} and \eqref{proof.prop.general'.6}.
Then we have from $\| \partial_Y\phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi \|_{L^2}\leq C|\mu|^{-1} \| f\|_{L^2}$,
\begin{align}
\| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi \|_{L^2}^2 & \leq C n \bigg ( |\Im c| \big (\| \partial_Y\phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \phi \|_{L^2}^2 \big ) + \frac{1}{|\mu|^2} \| f\|_{L^2}^2 + \frac{1}{\alpha |\mu|} \| f\|_{L^2}^2 \bigg ) \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{|\mu|} \big ( \frac{n |\Im c|}{|\mu|} + \frac{n}{|\mu|} + \frac{1}{\nu^\frac12} \big ) \| f\|_{L^2}^2\,.\label{proof.cor.prop.general'.2}
\end{align}
Here $C$ depends only on $\| U^E\|_{C^1}$ and $\|U\|$.
Since $|\mu| = \alpha |c|=n\nu^\frac12 |c|$ and $|c|\geq \delta_1^{-1}$ by the assumption,
the inequality \eqref{proof.cor.prop.general'.2} implies that
\begin{align*}
\| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi \|_{L^2}^2 \leq \frac{C}{|\mu| \nu^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2}^2\,,
\end{align*}
as desired. Thus \eqref{est.cor.prop.general'.3} holds. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\vspace{0.3cm}
The next proposition shows that the solvability of \eqref{eq.os'} in the regime $\alpha\Im c_\epsilon\gg 1$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop.large.alpha}
There exists $\delta_2\in (0,1)$ such that if
\begin{align}\label{est.prop.large.alpha.1}
\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \geq \frac{1}{\delta_2}\,,
\end{align}
then for any $f=(f_{1,n}, f_{2,n})\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)^2$ there exists a unique weak solution $\phi \in H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.os'}, and $\phi$ satisfies the estimates
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha \Im c_\epsilon} \|f \|_{L^2}\,,\label{est.prop.large.alpha.2} \\
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2 ) \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (|\epsilon| \Im c_\epsilon)^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2}\,.\label{est.prop.large.alpha.3}
\end{align}
Here $\delta_2$ depends only on $\|U^E \|_{C^1}$ and $\|U\|$ in \eqref{bound.U}, while $C$ is a universal constant.
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.prop.large.alpha} {\rm (i) By the standard elliptic regularity the solution $\phi$ also belongs to $H^3(\mathbb{R}_+)$.
\noindent (ii) Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha} is valid also for $n\geq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$.
Note that, from $\Re \mu = \alpha \Im c$ and $\alpha = n \nu^\frac12$, the condition \eqref{est.prop.large.alpha.1} is satisfied if
\begin{align*}
\Re \mu \geq \frac{1}{\delta_2}\,.
\end{align*}
Hence, under the assumption of $\Re \mu \geq \delta^{-1}\nu^\frac12 n^\gamma$ in \eqref{parameter.stability} the condition \eqref{est.prop.large.alpha.1} is always satisfied if
\begin{align}
n^{\gamma}\geq \frac{\delta}{\delta_2} \nu^{-\frac12}\,.
\end{align}
}
\end{rem}
\begin{proofx}{Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha}} We first establish the a priori estimates.
Multiplying both sides of \eqref{eq.os'} by $\bar{\phi}$ and integrating over $(0,\infty)$, we obtain
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.large.alpha.1}
\begin{split}
& -\epsilon \big ( \| \partial_Y^2\phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \|\partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2}^2 \big ) + \langle (V-c_\epsilon) (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2 ) \phi, \phi\rangle_{L^2} - \langle (\partial_Y^2 V)\phi, \phi \rangle _{L^2} \\
& \quad \, = \, -\langle f_{2,n}, \phi \rangle _{L^2} +\frac{i}{\alpha} \langle f_{1,n}, \partial_Y \phi\rangle _{L^2} \,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Note that \eqref{proof.prop.large.alpha.1} can be derived from the standard definition of weak solutions to \eqref{eq.os'}.
Then the imaginary part of \eqref{proof.prop.large.alpha.1} gives
\begin{align}
& \frac1n \big ( \| \partial_Y^2 \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \|\partial_Y \phi\|_{L^2}^2 \big ) + \Im c_\epsilon \big ( \|\partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \phi \|_{L^2}^2 \big ) \nonumber \\
& \quad \, = \, - \Im \langle (V-\Re c) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi, \phi \rangle _{L^2} + \Im \langle h, \phi \rangle _{L^2} \nonumber \\
& \quad \, = \, -\Im \langle V\partial_Y^2 \phi, \phi \rangle_{L^2} + \Im \langle h, \phi \rangle _{L^2}\,. \label{proof.prop.large.alpha.2}
\end{align}
For the first term of the right hand side of \eqref{proof.prop.large.alpha.2} we see
\begin{align}
|\Im \langle V \partial_Y^2\phi,\phi \rangle _{L^2}| & \leq \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty} \| \partial_Y\phi \|_{L^2} \|\phi \|_{L^2}\nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{2} \| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \frac{\| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty}^2}{2 \Im c_\epsilon} \| \phi \|_{L^2}^2\,. \label{proof.prop.large.alpha.3}
\end{align}
Hence, if $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon\geq \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty}$ then
\begin{align*}
\frac1n \big ( \| \partial_Y^2 \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \|\partial_Y \phi\|_{L^2}^2 \big ) + \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{2} \big ( \|\partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \phi \|_{L^2}^2 \big ) \leq \Im \langle h, \phi \rangle _{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
Since the term $\Im \langle h, \phi \rangle _{L^2}$ is estimated from above by $C\alpha^{-1} \| f \|_{L^2} \big ( \| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \|\phi \|_{L^2}\big )$ we finally obtain
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.large.alpha.4}
\frac1n \big ( \| \partial_Y^2 \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \|\partial_Y \phi\|_{L^2}^2 \big ) + (\Im c_\epsilon) \big ( \|\partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \phi \|_{L^2}^2 \big ) \leq \frac{C}{\alpha^2 \Im c_\epsilon} \| f\|_{L^2}^2\,.
\end{align}
Here $C$ is a universal constant.
Recalling $\Im c_\epsilon=\Im c+ \frac{\alpha^2}{n}$, we thus obtain \eqref{est.prop.large.alpha.2} and \eqref{est.prop.large.alpha.3} for any weak solution $\phi\in H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.os'} with $h=-f_{2,n}+\frac{1}{i\alpha} \partial_Y f_{1,n}$. The uniqueness directly follows from this a priori estimates.
As for the existence, we can use the method of continuity based on the a priori estimates \eqref{est.prop.large.alpha.2} and \eqref{est.prop.large.alpha.3}.
Since the argument is parallel to the existence part of the proof of Proposition \ref{prop.general'}, we omit the details here.
The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
By arguing as in Corollary \ref{cor.prop.general'}, Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha} yields the following result for the resolvent problem. Recall that $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon = \Re \mu + n^2\nu^\frac32$.
\begin{cor}\label{cor.prop.large.alpha} Let $\delta_2\in (0,1)$ be the number in Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha}.
If $\Re \mu + n^2\nu^\frac32 \geq \delta_2^{-1}$ then $\mu \in \rho (-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})$, and
\begin{align}
\| (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} f \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}
& \leq \frac{C}{\Re \mu + n^2\nu^\frac32} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,,\\
\| \nabla (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} f\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac14 (\Re \mu + n^2\nu^\frac32)^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,,
\end{align}
for any $f\in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)}L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$. Here $C$ is a universal constant.
\end{cor}
Corollary \ref{cor.prop.large.alpha} follows from Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha}
and the proof is just parallel to that of Corollary \ref{cor.prop.general'}, so we omit the details here.
\subsection{Resolvent estimate for special shear profiles}\label{subsec.special}
We study \eqref{eq.os} for a special class of shear profiles such that
the Rayleigh equations does not admit unstable eigenvalues.
Indeed, when there is an unstable eigenvalue for the Rayleigh equations with some $\alpha>0$
it is likely that the unstable eigenvalue for \eqref{eq.resolvent} also exists in the regime $\Re \mu = \mathcal{O}(1)>0$. In other words, for the Fourier modes $n$ located in the middle range
\begin{align}\label{middle.n}
\frac{1}{\delta_0} \leq n \leq \frac{1}{\delta_0 \nu^\frac34}
\end{align}
the structure of the shear profile $V$ should play a crucial role.
The basic condition on $V$ in this subsection is either \eqref{concave.weak} or \eqref{concave.strong} introduced in Section \ref{sec.result}, and the positivity of $U^E(0)$ is also assumed as stated in \eqref{sec2.nontrivial.2}.
We also recall the integral condition \eqref{integral.condition} in Section \ref{sec.result}, which is confirmed under the condition \eqref{concave.weak}.
In virtue of Proposition \ref{prop.general'} we may focus only on the case $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$ in this subsection.
Before going into the details, it is worthwhile noting that, as a resolvent problem,
the Orr-Sommerfeld equations potentially possess three kinds of singularities:
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent (I) boundary layer singularity due to the condition $|\epsilon|\ll 1$,
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent (II) critical layer singularity due to the possible presence of the critical point for $V$ (roughly speaking, the point $Y_{c}$ such that $V(Y_{c})=\Re c$ holds),
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent (III) global singularity originated from the possible presence of the spectrum for the Rayleigh operator.
\vspace{0.3cm}
The appearance of the singularity (I) is directly seen from the equations, and it is responsible for the presence of the fast mode of the Orr-Sommerfeld equations in Section \ref{subsubsec.fast}.
The singularity (II) appears both in the Rayleigh equations and in the Airy equations and it can cause a difficulty for the local regularity of solutions near the critical point.
The singularity (III) has a different nature from (I) and (II), and we are forced to deal with this singularity because of our purpose: in order to show the stability in a wider class of functions in Gevrey spaces it is crucial to establish the resolvent estimate for the resolvent parameter $\mu$ as close as the imaginary axis.
In terms of the parameter $c_\epsilon$ this corresponds to the case $0<\Im c_\epsilon \ll 1$.
However, even if the shear profile is stable for the Euler (Rayleigh) equations the imaginary axis involves the spectrum of the Rayleigh operator. Hence, in general, the inverse of the Rayleigh operator naturally possesses a singularity of the form $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-k}$ for some $k>0$ near $\Im c_\epsilon =0$, reflecting the above fact. This singularity is nothing but (III), which is somewhat independent of the local singularity as in (II), and it is more related to a global character of the Rayleigh operator.
Finding the optimal power $k$ is an important but highly nontrivial task.
The best possible value is considered to be $k=1$, and the analysis of the Rayleigh equations by \cite{GGN2014} indicates that this is indeed the case at least for some specific regime of parameters. However, there seems to be no reasons why the singularity is controlled by the order $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-1}$ also in a wider regime of parameters, since the Rayleigh operator is not a normal operator. Our analysis below provides at least the bound $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-2}$ for the inverse of the Rayleigh operator, but it is not clear whether this value is optimal or not in general.
\subsubsection{Analysis of Rayleigh equations}\label{subsubsec.Ray}
In this subsection we consider the Rayleigh equations
\begin{equation}\label{eq.ray.half}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
(V -c_\epsilon) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \varphi - (\partial_Y^2 V ) \varphi & \, = \, h \,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\varphi & \, = \, 0 \,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
Here $h$ is assumed to be a given smooth function.
Note that we drop the term $-\epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2)\partial_Y^2 \varphi$ in \eqref{eq.os'},
but keep the $\epsilon$-dependence of the number $c_\epsilon$
in order to make the estimate as sharp as possible.
The goal of this subsection is to prove the following proposition about the solvability of \eqref{eq.ray.half}
with the source term $h$ of the form $h=\partial_Y \big (\psi \partial_Y V \big )$ for some $\psi\in H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$. Let us recall that $\delta_0\in (0,1)$ and $\delta_1\in (0,\delta_0]$ are the numbers in \eqref{def.delta_0}
and \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}, respectively, which depend only on $\|U^E\|_{C^2}$ and $\|U\|$ in \eqref{bound.U}. Note that we always assume \eqref{middle.n} in Section \ref{subsec.special}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop.Ray.WC} Let $0<\nu\leq \nu_0$, where $\nu_0\in (0,1]$ is the number in \eqref{integral.condition}, and let $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$. Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds. Then there exists $\delta_1'\in (0,\delta_1]$ such that the following statement holds for all $\delta\in (0,\delta_1']$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}:
there exists a unique solution $\varphi\in H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)\cap H^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.ray.half} with $h=\partial_Y \big (\psi \partial_Y V \big )$ satisfying the estimates
\begin{align}
\| \partial _Y \varphi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \|\varphi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C_{\rm wc}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \| \psi \|_{L^2}\,, \label{est.prop.Ray.WC.1}\\
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2)\varphi \|_{L^2} & \leq C_{\rm wc} \big ( \frac{1}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \| \psi \|_{L^2} + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2}\big )\,. \label{est.prop.Ray.WC.2}
\end{align}
If \eqref{concave.strong} holds then the above estimates can be replaced by
\begin{align}
\| \partial _Y \varphi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \|\varphi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C_{\rm sc}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \psi \|_{L^2}\,,\label{est.prop.Ray.WC.3}\\
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2)\varphi \|_{L^2} & \leq C_{\rm sc} \big ( \frac{1}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \psi \|_{L^2} + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2}\big )\,.\label{est.prop.Ray.WC.4}
\end{align}
Here $\delta_1'$ depends only on $\|U^E\|_{C^2}$ and $\|U\|$, $C_{\rm wc}$ depends only on $\|U^E\|_{C^2}$, $\|U\|$, $\frac{1}{U^E(0)}$, $M'$ in \eqref{integral.condition}, and $M_\sigma$ in \eqref{concave.weak} with $\sigma=\min \{1,\frac{U^E(0)}{4\|U\|}, \frac{U^E(0)}{8\|U^E\|_{C^1}}\}$, while $C_{\rm sc}$ depend only on $\|U^E\|_{C^2}$, $\|U\|$, and $M$ in \eqref{concave.strong}.
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.prop.Ray.WC}{\rm In fact, Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.WC} holds under the weaker condition $-M_\sigma \partial_Y^2 U\geq (\partial_Y U)^4$ for $Y\geq \sigma$, $\sigma\in (0,1]$, rather than $-M_\sigma \partial_Y^2 U\geq (\partial_Y U)^2$ in \eqref{concave.weak}.
}
\end{rem}
In order to prove Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.WC} we start from the following lemma which is obtained from Rayleigh's trick. For the moment we take the general source term $h\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem.Ray.identity}
Let $\Im c_\epsilon >0$ and $V\in BC^2(\mathbb{R}_+)$.
Then any solution $\varphi\in H^1_0(\mathbb{R}_+) \cap H^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.ray.half} satisfies
\begin{align}\label{lem.Ray.identity.1}
\int_0^\infty |\partial_Y \varphi|^2 +\alpha^2 |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y + \int_0^\infty \frac{(V-\Re c)\partial_Y^2 V }{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \, = \, - \Re \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\varphi} \,{\rm d} Y\,,
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}\label{lem.Ray.identity.2}
(\Im c_\epsilon ) \int_0^\infty \frac{\partial_Y^2 V}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y
\, = \, - \Im \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\varphi} \,{\rm d} Y\,.
\end{align}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Multiplying both sides of \eqref{eq.ray.half} by $(V-c_\epsilon)^{-1}\bar{\varphi}$,
we obtain from the integration by parts,
\begin{align}\label{proof.lem.Ray.identity.1}
\int_0^\infty |\partial_Y \varphi|^2 +\alpha^2 |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y + \int_0^\infty \frac{\partial_Y^2 V}{V-c_\epsilon} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \, = \, - \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\varphi} \,{\rm d} Y\,.
\end{align}
Then \eqref{lem.Ray.identity.1} and \eqref{lem.Ray.identity.2} follow from the real part and the imaginary part of \eqref{proof.lem.Ray.identity.1}, respectively.
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\vspace{0.3cm}
Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.identity} is the key to obtain the global estimate for the Rayleigh solutions when $U$ is concave. The next lemma gives a fundamental existence result and a priori estimates of solutions to \eqref{eq.ray.half} under the condition \eqref{concave.weak}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem.Ray.0} Let $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$, where $\delta_1\in (0,1)$ is the number in
Proposition \ref{prop.general'}. Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds.
Then for any $h\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ there exists a unique solution $\varphi\in H^2(\mathbb{R}_+) \cap H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.ray.half}, and $\varphi$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \|\varphi\|_{L^2}^2 \leq C \frac{ \| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |c_\epsilon| }{\Im c_\epsilon} \, \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | \,,\label{est.lem.Ray.0.2}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \varphi \|_{L^2}^2 \leq C \bigg ( \frac{\| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} }{\Im c_\epsilon} \, \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | + \| \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2}^2 \bigg )\,.\label{est.lem.Ray.0.3}
\end{align}
Here $C$ is a universal constant.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} (A priori estimates) Let $\varphi\in H^2(\mathbb{R}_+) \cap H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ be any solution to \eqref{eq.ray.half}. Recalling \eqref{lem.Ray.identity.1}, we first observe from \eqref{parameter.stability} that
\begin{align}
-\int_0^\infty \frac{\nu (V-\Re c)(\partial_y^2 U^E) (\nu^\frac12 Y)}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi |^2 \,{\rm d} Y
\leq \frac{\nu \| U^E\|_{C^2}}{\alpha^2\Im c_\epsilon} \alpha^2 \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2
& \leq \frac{\delta_1 \| U^E \|_{C^2}}{n^{1+\gamma}} \alpha^2 \| \varphi\|_{L^2}^2 \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{1}{32} \alpha^2 \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2\,.\label{proof.lem.Ray.0.0}
\end{align}
Here we have used the choice of $\delta_1$ in \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}.
Thus our aim is now to obtain the upper bound of $-\int_0^\infty \frac{\partial_Y^2 U_s (V-\Re c)}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y$, which is written as
\begin{align}
- \int_0^\infty \frac{(V-\Re c)\partial_Y^2 U}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y & \, = \, -\int_0^\infty \frac{\big (U^E (\nu^\frac12 Y ) - \Re c \big )\partial_Y^2 U}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \nonumber \\
& \qquad -\int_0^\infty \frac{\big (U (Y) - U^E(0) \big )\partial_Y^2 U}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \nonumber \\
& \, \leq \, -\int_0^\infty \frac{\big (U^E (\nu^\frac12 Y ) - \Re c\big )\partial_Y^2 U}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \,.\label{proof.lem.Ray.0.1}
\end{align}
Here we have used the monotonicity of $U$ and $-\partial_Y^2 U\geq 0$.
The last term of \eqref{proof.lem.Ray.0.1} is estimated as, again from $-\partial_Y^2 U\geq 0$,
\begin{align}
& -\int_0^\infty \frac{\big (U ^E (\nu^\frac12 Y) - \Re c \big ) \partial_Y^2 U}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y
\leq
(\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c|) \int_0^\infty \frac{- \partial_Y^2 U}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \nonumber \\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad =
(\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c|) \int_0^\infty \frac{-\partial_Y^2 V + \nu (\partial_Y^2 U^E) (\nu^\frac12 Y)}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \nonumber \\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad = \frac{(\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c|)}{\Im c_\epsilon} \Im \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\varphi} \,{\rm d} Y\nonumber \\
& \quad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad + \nu (\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c|) \int_0^\infty \frac{(\partial_Y^2 U^E) (\nu^\frac12 Y)}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \nonumber \\
\begin{split}\label{proof.lem.Ray.0.2}
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \leq \frac{(\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c|)}{\Im c_\epsilon} \Im \int_0^\infty \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\varphi} \,{\rm d} Y \\
& \qquad \qquad \quad \qquad \qquad + \frac{\nu (\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c|) \, \| U^E\|_{C^2}}{(\alpha \Im c_\epsilon)^2} \alpha^2 \|\varphi \|_{L^2}^2\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
From the condition on the parameters we have
\begin{align}
\frac{\nu (\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c|) \, \| U^E\|_{C^2}}{(\alpha \Im c_\epsilon)^2}
&\leq \nu (\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c|) \, \| U^E\|_{C^2} (\frac{\delta_1}{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12})^2 \nonumber \\
& = \frac{\delta_1^2 (\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c|) \, \| U^E\|_{C^2}}{ n^{2\gamma}} \leq \frac{1}{32}\,.\label{proof.lem.large.Re.3}
\end{align}
Here we have used $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$ and the choice of $\delta_1$ in \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}.
Hence \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.2} follows.
To show \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.3} we observe
\begin{align*}
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2 ) \varphi\|_{L^2}^2 & = \| \frac{\partial_Y^2 V}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi + \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2}^2 \leq 2 \big ( \| \frac{\partial_Y^2 V}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi \|_{L^2}^2 + \| \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2}^2\big )\,,
\end{align*}
and then, by using $|\partial_Y^2 V|\leq -\partial_Y^2 U + \nu \| U^E \|_{C^2}\leq -\partial_Y^2 V + 2\nu \| U^E \|_{C^2}$ and \eqref{lem.Ray.identity.2},
\begin{align}
\| \frac{\partial_Y^2 V}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi \|_{L^2}^2 & \leq \| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} \int_0^\infty \frac{|\partial_Y^2 V|}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \nonumber \\
& \leq \| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} \bigg ( \int_0^\infty \frac{-\partial_Y^2 V}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y + \frac{2 \nu \| U^E \|_{C^2}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2\bigg ) \nonumber \\
& = \| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} \bigg ( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \Im \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2}
+ \frac{2\nu \| U^E \|_{C^2}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2\bigg ) \,.
\end{align}
Thus we arrive at, from \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.2},
\begin{align*}
& \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \varphi \|_{L^2}^2 \\
& \leq
2 \bigg ( \frac{\| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} }{\Im c_\epsilon} \Im \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2}
+ \frac{2\nu \| U^E \|_{C^2} \| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} }{(\alpha \Im c_\epsilon)^2} \alpha^2 \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2
+ \| \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2}^2\bigg ) \\
& \leq C \bigg ( \frac{\| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} }{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big |
\\
& \quad + \frac{\delta_1^2\| U^E \|_{C^2} \| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} }{n^{2\gamma}}
\big ( \frac{ \| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |\Re c| }{\Im c_\epsilon} + 1 \big )
\big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big |
+ \| \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2}^2\bigg )\\
& \leq C \bigg ( \frac{\| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} }{\Im c_\epsilon} \, \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big |
+ \| \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2}^2\bigg )\,.
\end{align*}
Here we have used $|c_\epsilon|\leq |c| + n\nu\leq \delta_1^{-1} + \delta_0^{-1} \nu^\frac14$ and the choice of $\delta_0$ and $\delta_1$ in \eqref{def.delta_0}, \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}.
\noindent (Uniqueness) The uniqueness of solutions in $H^2(\mathbb{R}_+)\cap H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ is immediate from the a priori estimates.
\noindent (Existence) As in Proposition \ref{prop.general'}, the proof is based on the method of continuity using the a priori estimates. Thanks to the choice of $\delta_1$ in \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}, exactly by the same argument as in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop.general'}, we can show the unique existence of solutions to \eqref{eq.ray.half} in $H^2(\mathbb{R}_+)\cap H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ at least when $|c|\geq (2\delta_1)^{-1}$.
In particular, when $(2\delta_1)^{-1} \leq |c| \leq \delta_1^{-1}$ and $\Im c>0$ the solution satisfies the estimates \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.2} and \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.3}, which provides the a priori estimates of $\|\partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2}+\alpha \|\varphi \|_{L^2}$ and $\|(\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2)\varphi\|_{L^2}$.
Then, one can construct the solution $\varphi\in H^2(\mathbb{R}_+)\cap H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.ray.half} for all $c$ satisfying $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$ and $\Im c>0$ by the method of continuity using the a priori estimates obtained from \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.2} and \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.3}. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{prop}\label{prop.Ray.1} Under the assumptions of Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0}
if $h=\partial_Y g$ then
\begin{align}\label{est.prop.Ray.1.1}
\| \partial_Y \varphi\|_{L^2} + \alpha \|\varphi \|_{L^2}
& \leq C \frac{ \| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |c_\epsilon|}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} + \| \frac{Y^\frac12 \partial_Y U\, g}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} \|_{L^1} \big )\,,
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\| (\partial_Y^2 - \alpha^2) \varphi \|_{L^2} &\leq C \bigg ( \frac{ \| U^E \|_{C^2} + \|U\| + |c_\epsilon|}{\Im c_\epsilon} \, \big ( \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} + \| \frac{Y^\frac12 \partial_Y U\, g}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} \|_{L^1} \big ) + \| \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} \bigg )\,.\label{est.prop.Ray.1.2}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Here $C$ is a universal constant.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} From the integration by parts we have
\begin{align}
\big | \langle \frac{\partial_Y g}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | & = \big | -\langle \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}, \partial_Y \varphi \rangle _{L^2} + \langle \frac{\partial_Y V\, g}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} , \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | \nonumber \\
\begin{split}
& \leq \big ( \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} + \| \frac{Y^\frac12 \partial_Y U\, g}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} \|_{L^1} \big ) \| \partial_Y \varphi\|_{L^2}\\
& \quad + \frac{\nu^\frac12 \| U^E \|_{C^1}}{\alpha \Im c_\epsilon} \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2} \, \alpha \| \varphi \|_{L^2} \,. \label{proof.prop.Ray.1.1}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Note that
\begin{align*}
\frac{\nu^\frac12 \| U^E \|_{C^1}}{\alpha \Im c_\epsilon}\leq \frac{\delta_1}{n^\gamma} \| U^E \|_{C^1}\leq 1
\end{align*}
by the condition \eqref{parameter.stability} and the choice of $\delta_1$ in \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}.
Then \eqref{est.prop.Ray.1.1} follows from \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.2} and \eqref{proof.prop.Ray.1.1}.
Next, \eqref{est.prop.Ray.1.1} and \eqref{proof.prop.Ray.1.1} yield
\begin{align*}
\big | \langle \frac{\partial_Y g}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big |
& \leq C \frac{ \| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |c_\epsilon| }{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} + \| \frac{Y^\frac12 \partial_Y U\, g}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} \|_{L^1} \big )^2\,.
\end{align*}
Thus \eqref{est.prop.Ray.1.2} holds by applying \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.3}.
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.prop.Ray.1.1}{\rm Instead of \eqref{proof.prop.Ray.1.1}, we can also compute as, from the Hardy inequality and $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \geq \delta^{-1} n^\gamma$ by \eqref{parameter.stability},
\begin{align*}
\big | \langle \frac{\partial_Y g}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | & \leq
\| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \varphi\|_{L^2} + | \langle \frac{\partial_Y V\, g}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} , \varphi \rangle _{L^2} | \\
& \leq \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \varphi\|_{L^2} + \nu^\frac12 \alpha^{-1} \| U^E \|_{C^1} \| \frac{g}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2}\|_{L^2} \, \alpha \| \varphi \|_{L^2} \\
& \quad + 2 \| \frac{Y \partial_Y U}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} g \|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2}\\
& \leq \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \varphi\|_{L^2} + \delta n^{-\gamma} \| U^E \|_{C^1} \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} \, \alpha \| \varphi \|_{L^2} \\
& \quad + 2 \| \frac{Y \partial_Y U}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} g \|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
Since $\delta\leq \delta_1$ and $\delta_1$ is taken as in \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\big | \langle \frac{\partial_Y g}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | & \leq C \big ( \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} + \| \frac{Y \partial_Y U}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} g \|_{L^2} \big ) \big ( \| \partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi \|_{L^2} \big )\,,
\end{align*}
where $C$ is a universal constant. This implies from Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0},
\begin{align}\label{est.rem.prop.Ray.1.1}
\| \partial_Y \varphi\|_{L^2} + \alpha \|\varphi \|_{L^2}
& \leq C \frac{ \| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |c_\epsilon|}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} + \| \frac{Y \partial_Y U}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} g \|_{L^2} \big ) \,,
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \varphi \|_{L^2} &\leq C \bigg ( \frac{ \| U^E \|_{C^2} + \|U\| + |c_\epsilon|}{\Im c_\epsilon} \, \big ( \| \frac{g}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} + \| \frac{Y \partial_Y U}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} g \|_{L^2} \big ) + \| \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} \bigg )\,.\label{est.rem.prop.Ray.1.2}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Here $C$ is a universal constant.
}
\end{rem}
\vspace{0.3cm}
The next lemma is useful to obtain a sharp estimate when the critical point $Y_c$ for $U$, i.e., $U(Y_c)=\Re c$, is away from the origin $Y=0$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem.nodeg} Let $0<\nu\leq 1$ and $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$. Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds. Suppose in addition that $\Re c >\frac{U^E(0)}{2}$. Then there exist $\sigma\in (0,1]$ and $\delta_1'\in (0,\delta_1]$ such that if $\delta\in (0,\delta_1']$ in \eqref{parameter.stability} then any solution $\varphi\in H^2 (\mathbb{R}_+) \cap H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.ray.half} satisfies
\begin{align}\label{est.lem.nodeg.1}
\begin{split}
& \| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi \|_{L^2}^2 + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | \\
& \leq \frac{C}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \bigg ( \big (\frac{\| Y h \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\})}}{\delta_1 U^E(0)} \big )^2 \, + \|\frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}\|_{L^2 (\{Y\geq \sigma \})}^2 \bigg )\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Moreover, it follows that
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\delta_1 \Im c_\epsilon} \bigg ( \frac{\| Y h \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma \})}}{U^E(0)} + \|\frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}\|_{L^2 (\{Y\geq \sigma\})} \bigg )\,,\label{est.lem.nodeg.2}\\
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2 ) \varphi\|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\delta_1^\frac12 \Im c_\epsilon} \bigg ( \frac{\| Y h \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma \})}}{\delta_1 U^E(0)} + \|\frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}\|_{L^2 (\{Y\geq \sigma\})} \bigg ) + C \| \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} \,.\label{est.lem.nodeg.3}
\end{align}
Here $C$ is a universal constant, $\delta_1'$ depends only on $\|U^E\|_{C^2}$ and $\|U\|$, while $\sigma$ is chosen as in \eqref{def.sigma} which depends only on $\|U^E\|_{C^1}$, $U^E(0)$, and $\|U\|$.
\end{lem}
\begin{rem}{\rm (i) We will use Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg} with $h=\frac{(U')^2}{V-c_\epsilon} \psi$ in the Rayleigh-Airy iteration.
\noindent
(ii) Even in the case the critical point is close to the origin we can show an estimate as in Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg}: see Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg'} below.
}
\end{rem}
\begin{proofx}{Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg}} Recall that
\begin{align}
|-\partial_Y^2 U| = -\partial_Y^2 U\leq - \partial_Y^2 V + \nu \| U^E\|_{C^2}\,.\label{proof.lem.nodeg.1}
\end{align}
Combining \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.1} with \eqref{lem.Ray.identity.2}, we have
\begin{align}
\| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi\|_{L^2}^2 & = \int_0^\infty \frac{|\partial_Y^2 U|}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi |^2 \,{\rm d} Y\nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} (\Im c_\epsilon) \int_0^\infty \frac{-\partial_Y^2 V + \nu \| U^E \|_{C^2}}{|V-c_\epsilon|^2} |\varphi |^2 \,{\rm d} Y\nonumber \\
& = \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \Im \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi\rangle _{L^2} + \nu \| U^E\|_{C^2} \| \frac{\varphi}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2}^2\nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \Im \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi\rangle _{L^2} + \frac{\nu \| U^E\|_{C^2}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2\,.\label{proof.lem.nodeg.2}
\end{align}
Let us estimate the first term in the right-hand side of \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.2}.
The condition \eqref{bound.U} and $U(0)=0$ give the bound $|U(Y)|\leq \|U\|\log (1+Y)$ for $Y\geq 0$,
and then, the condition $\Re c > \frac{U^E(0)}{2}>0$ implies that
\begin{align}
|V (Y) -c_\epsilon|\geq |U^E(\nu^\frac12 Y) - U^E(0) + U(Y) - \Re c| & \geq \Re c- \|U\| \log (1+Y) - \nu^\frac12 Y \| U^E \|_{C^1} \nonumber \\
& \geq \frac{U^E(0)}{2} - \|U\| \log (1+Y) - Y \| U^E \|_{C^1}\,.\nonumber
\end{align}
Set
\begin{align}
\sigma \, = \, \min \{ 1, \, \frac{U^E(0)}{4 \|U\|}, \, \frac{U^E(0)}{8 \| U^E \|_{C^1}} \}\,. \label{def.sigma}
\end{align}
Then we have
\begin{align*}
|V (Y) -c_\epsilon| \geq \frac{U^E(0)}{8}\,, \qquad 0\leq Y \leq \sigma\,,
\end{align*}
which gives from the Hardy inequality
\begin{align}
\big |\int_{0\leq Y\leq \sigma} \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\varphi} \,{\rm d} Y \big |\leq \frac{16}{U^E(0)} \| Y h \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\})} \|\partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2}\,.\label{proof.lem.nodeg.3}
\end{align}
On the other hand, for the integral in the range $Y\geq \sigma$ we have
\begin{align}
\big |\int_{Y\geq \sigma} \frac{h }{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\varphi} \,{\rm d} Y \big |
& =\big | \int_{Y\geq \sigma} \frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}} \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \bar{\varphi} \,{\rm d} Y \big | \nonumber \\
& \leq \| \frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}\|_{L^2(\{Y\geq \sigma\})} \| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi \|_{L^2}\,.\label{proof.lem.nodeg.4}
\end{align}
Collecting \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.2}, \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.3}, and \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.4}, we arrive at
\begin{align*}
\| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi\|_{L^2}^2 \leq I + II\,,
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align}\label{proof.lem.nodeg.5}
\begin{split}
I & = \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}\|_{L^2(\{Y\geq \sigma\})} \| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi \|_{L^2}\,,\\
II & = \frac{16}{U^E(0) \Im c_\epsilon} \| Y h \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\})} \|\partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2} + \frac{\nu \| U^E\|_{C^2}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
First we consider the case $I\leq II$. In this case we have
\begin{align}
\| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi\|_{L^2}^2 \leq 2 II\,,\label{proof.lem.nodeg.6}
\end{align}
and we also have from \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.4} and \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.5},
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | \leq 2 II\,.\label{proof.lem.nodeg.6'}
\end{align}
Then \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.2} and \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.6'} imply
\begin{align*}
& \| \partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \phi \|_{L^2}^2 \\
&\leq C \frac{\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |c_\epsilon| }{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \frac{ \| Y h \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\})}}{U^E(0)} \|\partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2} + \frac{\nu \| U^E\|_{C^2}}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2 \big )\\
& \leq C \frac{\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |c_\epsilon| }{U^E(0)\Im c_\epsilon} \| Y h \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\})} \|\partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2} + C (\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |c_\epsilon| ) \| U^E \|_{C^2} \, \delta^2 \alpha^2 \| \phi \|_{L^2}^2
\end{align*}
Here $C$ is a universal constant. Note that in the last line we have used the inequality
$\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \geq \delta^{-1}\nu^\frac12 n^{\gamma}$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}.
Since $|c_\epsilon|\leq |c| + n\nu \leq \delta_1^{-1} + \delta_0^{-1}\nu^\frac14$, if we take $\delta\in (0,\delta_1]$ small enough so that
\begin{align}\label{condition.delta}
C (\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + \delta_1^{-1} + \delta_0^{-1} ) \| U^E \|_{C^2} \, \delta^2\leq \frac12\,,
\end{align}
we have
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi \|_{L^2} \leq C\frac{\| U^E \|_{L^\infty} + |c_\epsilon|}{U^E(0)\Im c_\epsilon} \, \| Y h \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\})} \label{proof.lem.nodeg.7}
\end{align}
in the case $I\leq II$, where $C$ is a universal constant.
Then \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.6}, \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.6'}, and \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.7} lead to
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi\|_{L^2}^2 +
\frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | & \leq \big ( \frac{C}{\delta_1 U^E(0) \Im c_\epsilon} \big )^2 \| Y h \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\})}^2\,.\label{proof.lem.nodeg.8}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Here we have used $\| U^E\|_{L^\infty} + |c_\epsilon| +1 \leq \delta_1^{-1}$ by the choice of $\delta_1$ in \eqref{proof.prop.general'.-1}. Next we consider the case $II\leq I$. In this case we have
\begin{align*}
\| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi\|_{L^2}^2 \leq 2 I\,, \qquad \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | \leq 2 I\,,
\end{align*}
which gives
\begin{align}
\| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi\|_{L^2}^2 + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | \leq \frac{C}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}} \|_{L^2 (\{Y\geq \sigma\})}^2\,.\label{proof.lem.nodeg.9}
\end{align}
Here $C$ is a universal constant.
In particular, combining \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.9} with \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.8}, we obtain \eqref{est.lem.nodeg.1}.
The estimate \eqref{est.lem.nodeg.2} follows from \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.7} and \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.9} combined with \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.2}. The estimate \eqref{est.lem.nodeg.3} follows from \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.3} and \eqref{est.lem.nodeg.1}. The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
\vspace{0.3cm}
Exactly in the same way as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg} we have the following estimate in the case the critical point $Y_c$ is close to the origin $Y=0$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem.nodeg'} Let $0<\nu\leq 1$ and $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$. Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds. Then there exists $\delta_1'\in (0,\delta_1]$ such that if $\delta\in (0,\delta_1']$ in \eqref{parameter.stability} then any solution $\varphi\in H^2(\mathbb{R}_+) \cap H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.ray.half} satisfies
\begin{align}
\| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi \|_{L^2}^2 + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | \leq \frac{C}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \|\frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}\|_{L^2}^2\,,\label{est.lem.nodeg'.1}
\end{align}
as long as $\|\frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}\|_{L^2}$ is bounded. Moreover, it follows that
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\delta_1^\frac12\Im c_\epsilon} \|\frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}\|_{L^2}\,,\label{est.lem.nodeg'.2}\\
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2 ) \varphi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\delta_1^\frac12\Im c_\epsilon} \|\frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}\|_{L^2} + C \| \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2} \,.\label{est.lem.nodeg'.3}
\end{align}
Here $\delta_1'$ depends only on $\|U^E\|_{C^2}$ and $\|U\|$, while $C$ is a universal constant.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} The proof is similar to the one for Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg}. The only difference is that, for the first term in \eqref{proof.lem.nodeg.2}, we simply compute as
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi \rangle _{L^2} \big | \leq \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \frac{h}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U} }\|_{L^2} \| \frac{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}}{V-c_\epsilon} \varphi \|_{L^2} =: I'\,.
\end{align}
Then it suffices to consider two cases as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg}: (i) $I'\leq \frac{\nu \| U^E\|_{C^2}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2$, (ii) $\frac{\nu \| U^E\|_{C^2}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \varphi \|_{L^2}^2\leq I'$. In fact, the case (i) leads to $\varphi=0$ under the smallness condition on $\delta$ as in \eqref{condition.delta}, and thus, it can not happen unless $h=0$.
The case (ii) gives the estimates \eqref{est.lem.nodeg'.1} - \eqref{est.lem.nodeg'.3} by the same argument as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg}. The details are omitted here. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent
\begin{proofx}{Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.WC}} We decompose $h$ as $h= \partial_Y ( \psi \partial_Y V) = \partial_Y (\psi \partial_Y U^E (\nu^\frac12 \cdot)) + \partial_Y (\psi \partial_Y U)=:h_1 + h_2$.
Let $\varphi_j$, $j=1,2$, be the solution to \eqref{eq.ray.half} with $h=h_j$, respectively.
For $\varphi_1$ we have from \eqref{est.rem.prop.Ray.1.1},
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y \varphi _1 \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi_1 \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C\nu^\frac12}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} ( 1+\frac{1}{\alpha \Im c_\epsilon} ) \| \psi \|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align*}
where $C$ depends only on $\| U^E\|_{C^1}$ and $\|U\|_{C^1}$. Then, from \eqref{parameter.stability} for the lower bound of $\alpha \Im c$, we have
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y \varphi _1 \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi_1 \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \psi \|_{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
Similarly, we see from \eqref{est.rem.prop.Ray.1.2},
\begin{align*}
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2 ) \varphi _1 \|_{L^2} \leq C\big ( \frac{1}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \psi \|_{L^2} + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2}\big )\,,
\end{align*}
with $C$ depends only on $\| U^E \|_{C^2}$ and $\|U\|_{C^1}$. The details are omitted here.
Next we estimate $\varphi_2$. First we consider the case $\Re c\leq U^E(0)/2$.
In this case we apply Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.1} and obtain
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y \varphi _2 \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi _2 \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \| \frac{\partial_Y U\, \psi}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2} + \| \frac{Y^\frac12 (\partial_Y U)^2 \psi}{(V-c_\epsilon)^2} \|_{L^1} \big )\,.
\end{align*}
Then, using the condition \eqref{integral.condition}, we arrive at
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y \varphi _2 \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi_2 \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \psi \|_{L^2} + \frac{1}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \| \psi \|_{L^2} \big ) \leq \frac{C}{ (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \| \psi \|_{L^2} \,.
\end{align*}
The estimate of $\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2 ) \varphi_2\|_{L^2}$ for the case $\Re c \leq U^E(0)/2$ is proved in the similar manner by using \eqref{est.prop.Ray.1.2}. The details are omitted here.
In the case $\Re c\geq U^E(0)/2>0$ we can apply Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg} with $\sigma=\sigma_0>0$,
where $\sigma_0$ depends only on $U^E$ and $U$ for any sufficiently small $\nu$.
To this end we write the term $h_2=\partial_Y (\psi \partial_Y U)$ as
\begin{align*}
h_2 & \, = \, (V-c_\epsilon) \partial_Y \big ( \frac{\psi \partial_Y U}{V-c_\epsilon}\big ) + \frac{\psi (\partial_Y U)^2}{V-c_\epsilon} + \nu^\frac12 (\partial_y U^E )(\nu^\frac12 Y)\frac{\psi \partial_Y U}{V-c_\epsilon}\\
& \, =: \, h_{2,1} + h_{2,2} + h_{2,3}\,.
\end{align*}
The corresponding solutions to \eqref{eq.ray.half} are respectively denoted by $\phi_{2,j}$, $j=1,2,3$, and thus, $\varphi_2 = \sum_{j=1}^3\varphi_{2,j}$.
By applying Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0} the solution $\varphi_{2,1}$ is estimated as
\begin{align*}
& \| \partial_Y \varphi _{2,1} \|_{L^2} + \alpha \|\varphi _{2,1} \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2 - \alpha^2 )\varphi_{2,1} \|_{L^2} \leq C\big ( \frac{1}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2}\| \psi\|_{L^2} + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2} \big )\,.
\end{align*}
On the other hand, Est. \eqref{est.lem.nodeg.2} together with the condition \eqref{concave.weak} implies
\begin{align*}
& \| \partial_Y \varphi _{2,2} \|_{L^2} + \alpha \|\varphi _{2,2} \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2 - \alpha^2 )\varphi_{2,2} \|_{L^2} \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \| \frac{Y \psi (\partial_Y U )^2}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2(\{0\leq Y\leq \frac{\sigma_0}{2}\})} + \| \frac{ \psi (\partial_Y U )^2}{(V-c_\epsilon)\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}} \|_{L^2(\{Y\geq \frac{\sigma_0}{2}\})}\big ) \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \psi \|_{L^2} \,.
\end{align*}
Here the lower bound $-M_{\sigma_0/2} \partial_Y^2 U\geq (\partial_Y U)^2$ in \eqref{concave.weak} is essentially used
(in fact, the argument works under the weaker condition $-M_{\sigma_0/2} \partial_Y^2 U\geq (\partial_Y U)^4$).
The solution $\varphi_{2,3}$ is estimated by using Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0}, in virtue of the factor $\nu^\frac12$.
The details are omitted here, since the similar calculation has been already done.
Collecting the estimates of $\varphi_1$ and $\varphi_2$ above, we obtain \eqref{est.prop.Ray.WC.1} and \eqref{est.prop.Ray.WC.2}.
The estimates \eqref{est.prop.Ray.WC.3} and \eqref{est.prop.Ray.WC.4} under the condition \eqref{concave.strong} is proved in the similar manner.
In this case we can simply use Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg'} for the estimate of $\varphi_2$, instead of Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg}, which especially improves the estimate in the case $\Re c\leq U^E(0)/2$.
The details are omitted here. The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
\subsubsection{Analysis of Airy equations}\label{subsubsec.Airy}
In this subsection we consider the Airy equations
\begin{equation}\label{eq.airy}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
-\epsilon \partial_Y^2 \psi + (V- c_\epsilon) \psi & \, = \, h\,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\psi & \, = \, 0 \,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{prop}\label{prop.airy.1} For any $h\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ there is a unique solution $\psi\in H^2(\mathbb{R}_+) \cap H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.airy}, and $\psi$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\| \psi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| h \|_{L^2}\,,\label{est.prop.airy.1.1} \\
\| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2} & \leq \big (\frac{1}{4 |\epsilon| \Im c_\epsilon}\big )^\frac12 \| h \|_{L^2}\,,\label{est.prop.airy.1.2} \\
\| \partial_Y^2 \psi \|_{L^2} & \leq 2 \big ( \frac{1}{|\epsilon|} + \frac{\| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty} }{|\epsilon|^\frac12 (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \big ) \| h \|_{L^2}\,.\label{est.prop.airy.1.3}
\end{align}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} It suffices to prove the a priori estimates. By taking the inner product for the first equation of \eqref{eq.airy} with $\psi$ we have
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.airy.1}
\epsilon \int_0^\infty |\partial_Y \psi |^2 \,{\rm d} Y + \int_0^\infty (V-c_\epsilon) |\psi|^2 \,{\rm d} Y \, = \, \int_0^\infty h \bar{\psi} \,{\rm d} Y\,.
\end{align}
Recalling that $\epsilon=-\frac{i}{n}$, we take the imaginary part of \eqref{proof.prop.airy.1}, which yields
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{n} \| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2}^2 + (\Im c_\epsilon ) \|\psi\|_{L^2}^2 \, = \, - \Im \, \langle h, \psi \rangle_{L^2}\,.\label{proof.prop.airy.2}
\end{align}
Thus \eqref{est.prop.airy.1.1} holds by the H${\rm \ddot{o}}$lder inequality and the Young inequality
\begin{align*}
|\langle h, \psi\rangle_{L^2} |\leq \frac{1}{4\Im c_\epsilon} \| h \|_{L^2}^2 + (\Im c_\epsilon ) \|\psi \|_{L^2}^2
\end{align*}
for the estimate of $\| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2}$ and $|\langle h, \psi\rangle_{L^2} |\leq \frac{1}{2 \Im c_\epsilon} \| h \|_{L^2}^2 + \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{2} \|\psi \|_{L^2}^2$ for the estimate of $\|\psi\|_{L^2}$.
To show the estimate of $\partial_Y^2 \psi$ we multiply both sides of the first equation of \eqref{eq.airy} by $\partial_Y^2\bar{\psi}$ and then integrate over $(0,\infty)$, which gives
\begin{align*}
-\epsilon \|\partial_Y^2 \psi \|_{L^2}^2 + \langle V \psi , \partial_Y^2\psi \rangle _{L^2} + c_\epsilon \| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2}^2 \, = \, \langle h, \partial_Y^2 \psi \rangle _{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
Taking the imaginary part of both sides of the above equation, we obtain from the integration by parts,
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{n} \| \partial_Y^2 \psi \|_{L^2}^2 + \Im c_\epsilon \, \| \partial _Y \psi \|_{L^2}^2 & \, = \, \Im \langle (\partial_Y V) \psi, \partial_Y \psi \rangle _{L^2} + \Im \langle h, \partial_Y^2 \psi \rangle _{L^2} \nonumber \\
& \, \leq \, \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty} \| \psi \|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2} + \Im \langle h, \partial_Y^2 \psi \rangle _{L^2} \nonumber \\
& \, =: \, I + II \,.\label{proof.prop.airy.3}
\end{align}
If $I\leq II$ then \eqref{proof.prop.airy.3} implies
\begin{align*}
\frac1n \| \partial_Y^2\psi \|_{L^2}^2 \leq 2 II \leq 2 \| h \|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y^2 \psi \|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align*}
which yields $\| \partial_Y^2 \psi \|_{L^2} \leq 2|\epsilon|^{-1} \| h \|_{L^2}$.
On the other hand, if $II\leq I$ then \eqref{proof.prop.airy.3} gives
\begin{align*}
\Im c_\epsilon \, \| \partial_Y\psi \|_{L^2}^2 \leq 2 I = 2 \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty} \| \psi \|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align*}
and therefore, $\|\partial_Y \psi \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{2 \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty}}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \psi \|_{L^2}$.
Then, again from \eqref{proof.prop.airy.3}, we have
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{n} \| \partial_Y^2 \psi \|_{L^2}^2 \leq 2 I \leq \frac{4 \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty}^2}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \psi \|_{L^2} ^2 \leq \frac{4 \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty}^2}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^3} \| h\|_{L^2}^2 \,.
\end{align*}
Collecting these, we obtain the estimate of $\| \partial_Y^2 \psi \|_{L^2}$. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Solutions to modified Orr-Sommerfeld equations with Dirichlet boundary condition}\label{subsubsec.iterate}
The modified Orr-Sommerfeld operator is defined as
\begin{align}\label{def.mos.op}
mOS (\phi) = -\epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \partial_Y^2 \phi + (V - c_\epsilon) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi - (\partial_Y^2 V ) \phi \,.
\end{align}
Then we consider the modified Orr-Sommerfeld equations in $\mathbb{R}_+$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq.os.R}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
mOS (\phi) & \, = \, h \,, \qquad Y >0\,,\\
\phi & \, = \, 0\,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
Here $h$ is a given smooth function.
Note that the boundary condition on $\partial_Y \phi$ is not imposed for the moment.
Our aim is to construct a function $\Phi_{mOS}[h]$ solving \eqref{eq.os.R},
around the Rayleigh mode $\varphi^{(0)}=\Phi_{Ray}[h]$ constructed in Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0}.
To this end set $\phi^{(1)}=\phi - \varphi^{(0)}$, which should solve
\begin{equation}\label{eq.os.R'}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
mOS ( \phi ^{(1)}) & \, = \, \epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)} \,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\phi^{(1)} & \, = \, 0\,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
Since the first equation of \eqref{eq.os.R'} is regarded as
\begin{align*
\begin{split}
& (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \big ( -\epsilon \partial_Y^2 + (V -c_\epsilon) \big ) \phi^{(1)} -2 (\partial_Y V) \partial_Y \phi^{(1)} - 2(\partial_Y^2 V ) \phi ^{(1)}\, = \epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)} \,,
\end{split}
\end{align*}
we set $\psi^{(1)}$ as the solution to
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
-\epsilon \partial_Y^2 \psi^{(1)} + (V -c_\epsilon) \psi^{(1)} & \, = \, \epsilon \partial_Y^2\varphi^{(0)}\,, \qquad Y > 0 \,,\\
\psi^{(1)} & \, = \, 0 \,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation*}
Then $\phi^{(1,1)}=\phi^{(1)}-\psi^{(1)}$ solves
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
mOS (\phi ^{(1,1)}) & \, = \, h^{(1)} \,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\phi^{(1,1)} & \, = \, 0 \,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{align*}
h^{(1)} \, = \, 2 (\partial_Y V) \partial_Y \psi^{(1)} + 2(\partial_Y^2 V ) \psi ^{(1)} \, = \, 2 \partial_Y \big ( (\partial_Y V) \psi^{(1)} \big )\,.
\end{align*}
Next we set
\begin{align*
\phi^{(2)} \, = \, \phi^{(1,1)} - \varphi^{(1)}\,, \qquad \quad \varphi^{(1)}\, = \, \Phi_{Ray} [h^{(1)}]\,.
\end{align*}
and therefore $\phi^{(2)}$ should solve
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
mOS (\phi^{(2)} ) & \, = \, \epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(1)} \,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\phi^{(2)} & \, = \, 0 \,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation*}
In analogy of the above argument the functions $\psi^{(k)}$, $h^{(k)}$, and $\varphi^{(k)}$ are inductively defined as follows: $\psi^{(k)}$ is the solution to
\begin{equation}\label{def.psi.k}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
-\epsilon \partial_Y^2 \psi^{(k)} + (V -c_\epsilon) \psi^{(k)} & \, = \, \epsilon \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(k-1)}\,, \qquad Y > 0\,,\\
\psi^{(k)} & \, = \, 0\,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
while $h^{(k)}$ and $\varphi^{(k)}$ are defined as
\begin{align}\label{def.h.varphi.k}
h^{(k)} \, = \, 2 \partial_Y \big ( (\partial_Y V) \psi^{(k)} \big ) \,, \qquad \varphi^{(k)} \, = \, \Phi_{Ray} [h^{(k)}]\,.
\end{align}
Our goal is to show the convergence of the sums
\begin{align}\label{def.series}
\sum_{k=1}^\infty \psi^{(k)}\,, \qquad \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)}\,.
\end{align}
Indeed, if they converge then the function
\begin{align}\label{def.phi.1}
\phi^{(1)} \, = \, \sum_{k=1}^\infty \psi^{(k)} + \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)}
\end{align}
solves \eqref{eq.os.R'}, as desired. To ensure the convergence of the above series the lower bound of $\gamma$ in \eqref{parameter.stability} is required. As will be seen in the next proposition, under the condition \eqref{concave.weak} we need $\gamma\geq \frac57$, while under the condition \eqref{concave.strong} it can be replaced by $\gamma\geq \frac23$. Our argument is built upon Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.WC} for the Rayleigh equations and Proposition \ref{prop.airy.1} for the Airy equations.
In the next proposition the number $\nu_0$ is as in \eqref{integral.condition}, while the number $\delta_1'\in (0,\delta_1]$ and the constants $C_{{\rm wc}}$, $C_{{\rm sc}}$ are given in Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.WC}.
\begin{prop}[Solvability of \eqref{eq.os.R'}]\label{prop.mos}
Let $0<\nu \leq \nu_0$ and $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$. Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds.
Then there exists $\delta_* \in (0,\delta_1']$ such that the following statement holds.
If $\gamma \in [\frac57,1]$ and $\delta\in (0,\delta_*]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability},
then the series in \eqref{def.series} converges in $H^2(\mathbb{R}_+)$, and it follows that
\begin{align}
\frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{|\epsilon|} \| \sum_{k=1}^\infty \psi^{(k)} \|_{L^2} + \big (\frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{|\epsilon|}\big )^\frac12 \| \partial_Y \sum_{k=1}^\infty \psi^{(k)}\|_{L^2} + \| \partial_Y^2 \sum_{k=1}^\infty \psi^{(k)}\|_{L^2} & \leq C \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)}\|_{L^2} \,, \label{est.prop.mos.1}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}\label{est.prop.mos.2}
\begin{split}
\| \partial_Y \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)} \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)}\|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{2C_{{\rm wc}} |\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac72} \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)}\|_{L^2} \,,\\
\| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)} \|_{L^2}& \leq 2C_{{\rm wc}} \bigg ( \frac{|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac72} + \frac{|\epsilon|^\frac12}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \bigg ) \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)}\|_{L^2} \,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\noindent
If \eqref{concave.strong} holds in addition, then the condition $\gamma\in [\frac57, 1]$ is relaxed to $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$, and the estimates for $\sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)}$ stated above are replaced by
\begin{align}\label{est.prop.mos.3}
\begin{split}
\| \partial_Y \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)} \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)}\|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{2C_{{\rm sc}} |\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^3} \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)}\|_{L^2} \,,\\
\| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)}\|_{L^2}& \leq 2C_{{\rm sc}} \frac{|\epsilon|^\frac12}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)}\|_{L^2} \,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Here $C$ is a universal constant, and $\delta_*$ depends only on $C_{{\rm wc}}$ under the assumption \eqref{concave.weak}, while on $C_{{\rm sc}}$ under the assumption \eqref{concave.strong}.
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.prop.mos}{\rm (i) As is seen in the proof below, the constant $\frac{|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac72}$ is small when $\gamma \in [\frac57,1]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}, while $\frac{|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^3}$ is small when $\gamma \in [\frac23,1]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}.
\noindent (ii) Proposition \ref{prop.mos} gives the estimates for $\phi^{(1)} = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \psi^{(k)} + \sum_{k=1}^\infty \varphi^{(k)}$ which solves \eqref{eq.os.R'}. If $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon\leq \delta_2^{-1}$ in addition, where $\delta_2$ is the number in Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha},
then \eqref{est.prop.mos.1} implies $\alpha^2 \| \sum_{k=1}^\infty \psi^{(k)} \|_{L^2}\leq \frac{C|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^3}\| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)}\|_{L^2}$. Thus we have
\begin{align}\label{est.prop.mos.4}
\| \partial_Y \phi^{(1)} \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi^{(1)} \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi^{(1)} \|_{L^2} \leq C \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)} \|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align}
when $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon\leq \delta_2^{-1}$ under the assumptions of Proposition \ref{prop.mos}.
}
\end{rem}
\begin{proofx}{Proposition \ref{prop.mos}}
We will show that
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.2}
\begin{split}
\| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(k)} \|_{L^2} \leq \| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \varphi^{(k)} \|_{L^2} \leq B_1^k \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(0)}\|_{L^2}\,, \qquad k\in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}\,,
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $B_1$ is given as
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.3}
B_1 & \, = \, C_{{\rm wc}} \bigg ( \frac{|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac72} + \frac{|\epsilon|^\frac12}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \bigg ) \,,
\end{align}
where $C_{{\rm wc}}$ is the constant in Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.WC}.
Note that the first inequality of \eqref{proof.prop.mos.2} is always valid.
The estimate \eqref{proof.prop.mos.2} clearly holds for $k=0$.
Next suppose that \eqref{proof.prop.mos.2} holds for $k$. Then Proposition \ref{prop.airy.1} for the Airy equations gives
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.4}
\begin{split}
\| \psi^{(k+1)} \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{|\epsilon|}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(k)} \|_{L^2}\,,\\
\| \partial_Y \psi^{(k+1)} \|_{L^2} & \leq \big (\frac{|\epsilon|}{4\Im c_\epsilon} \big)^\frac12 \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(k)} \|_{L^2}\,,\\
\| \partial_Y^2 \psi^{(k+1)} \|_{L^2} & \leq 2 \big ( 1 + \frac{\| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty} |\epsilon|^\frac12}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \big ) \| \partial_Y^2\varphi^{(k)} \|_{L^2}\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
On the other hand, Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.WC} yields
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.6}
\| \partial_Y \varphi^{(k+1)} \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi ^{(k+1)} \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C_{{\rm wc}}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \|\psi^{(k+1)}\|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.7}
\| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \varphi^{(k+1)}\|_{L^2} \leq C_{{\rm wc}} \bigg ( \frac{1}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52}\|\psi^{(k+1)}\|_{L^2} + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon}\| \partial_Y \psi^{(k+1)}\|_{L^2} \bigg )\,.
\end{align}
Hence \eqref{proof.prop.mos.4}, \eqref{proof.prop.mos.6}, and \eqref{proof.prop.mos.7} imply
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.8}
\| \partial_Y \varphi^{(k+1)} \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi ^{(k+1)} \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C_{{\rm wc}} |\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac72} \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(k)} \|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.9}
\| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \varphi^{(k+1)}\|_{L^2} \leq C_{{\rm wc}} \bigg ( \frac{|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac72} + \frac{|\epsilon|^\frac12}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \bigg ) \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(k)}\|_{L^2} = B_1 \| \partial_Y^2 \varphi^{(k)}\|_{L^2}
\end{align}
by the definition of $B_1$.
Thus \eqref{proof.prop.mos.2} holds for all $k$.
To achieve the convergence we need the smallness of $B_1$, and in view of \eqref{proof.prop.mos.3}
this requires the smallness of
\begin{align*}
\frac{|\epsilon|^\frac12}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \qquad {\rm and} \qquad \frac{|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac72}\,.
\end{align*}
Recall that $|\epsilon|=n^{-1}$ and $\Im c_\epsilon \geq \Im c \geq \delta^{-1}n^{\gamma-1}$ by the condition \eqref{parameter.stability}. Therefore, we need the smallness of
\begin{align*}
& \frac{|\epsilon|^\frac12}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \, \leq \, \big ( n^{-1} (\delta n^{1-\gamma})^3 \big )^\frac12 \, = \, \big ( \delta^3 n^{2-3\gamma} \big )^\frac12\,, \\
& \frac{|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac72} \, \leq \, n^{-1} (\delta n^{1-\gamma})^\frac72 \, =\, \delta^\frac72 n^{\frac52-\frac72\gamma}\,,
\end{align*}
from which we need the condition $\gamma \geq \frac57$ and the smallness of $\delta$.
Finally the estimates of $\psi^{(k+1)}$ are obtained from \eqref{proof.prop.mos.4} and \eqref{proof.prop.mos.2}
when $B_1\leq \frac12$, while the $H^1$ norm of $\varphi^{(k+1)}$, $k\in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}$, is estimated from \eqref{proof.prop.mos.8} and \eqref{proof.prop.mos.2}. Note that the smallness of $\delta_*$ leads to the bound $\frac{\| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty} |\epsilon|^\frac12}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \leq 1$ in \eqref{proof.prop.mos.4}.
When \eqref{concave.strong} holds then the above argument works for $\gamma\geq \frac23$ with the factor $\frac{|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac72}$ replaced by $\frac{|\epsilon|}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^3}$, in virtue of Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.WC}. The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
A direct consequence of Proposition \ref{prop.mos} and Remark \ref{rem.prop.mos}, we have the following result on the solvability of the Orr-Sommerfeld equations \eqref{eq.os.R}.
\begin{cor}\label{cor.prop.mos} Let $h\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$. Under the assumption of Proposition \ref{prop.mos} there exists a weak solution $\phi=\Phi_{mOS} [h] \in H^2(\mathbb{R}_+) \cap H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.os.R} satisfying the estimate
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y (\phi - \Phi_{Ray}[h] ) \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi - \Phi_{Ray}[h] \|_{L^2} + \| \partial_Y^2 (\phi - \Phi_{Ray}[h] ) \|_{L^2} & \leq C \| \partial_Y^2 \Phi_{Ray}[h] \|_{L^2} \,, \label{est.cor.prop.mos.1}
\end{align}
where $C$ is a universal constant, while the leading term $\Phi_{Ray}[h]$ satisfies the estimates in Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0}. Moreover, if $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon\leq \delta_2^{-1}$ in addition, where $\delta_2$ is the number in Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha}, then we also have
\begin{align}
\| (\partial_Y^2 - \alpha^2 ) ( \phi - \Phi_{Ray}[h] ) \|_{L^2} \leq C \| \partial_Y^2 \Phi_{Ray}[h] \|_{L^2}\,.\label{est.cor.prop.mos.2}
\end{align}
\end{cor}
Proposition \ref{prop.mos} leads to the solvability of \eqref{eq.os.R} also for the case $h=- f_{2,n} + \frac{1}{i\alpha} \partial_Y f_{1,n}$ as follows.
\begin{prop}\label{prop.mos.h}
Let $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon\leq \delta_2^{-1}$. When $h=- f_{2,n} + \frac{1}{i\alpha} \partial_Y f_{1,n}$ for $f=(f_{1,n},f_{2,n})\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)^2$ the solution $\phi$ in Corollary \ref{cor.prop.mos} satisfies the estimates
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \| f\|_{L^2}\,,\label{est.prop.mos.h.1}\\
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha} \big ( \frac{1}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} + \frac{1}{(|\epsilon| \Im c_\epsilon)^\frac12} \big ) \| f\|_{L^2}\,.\label{est.prop.mos.h.2}
\end{align}
Here $C$ depends only on $U^E$ and $U$. When \eqref{concave.strong} holds the factor $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-\frac52}$ in \eqref{est.prop.mos.h.1} and \eqref{est.prop.mos.h.2} is replaced by $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-2}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.prop.mos.h}{\rm By allowing a larger negative power on $\Im c_\epsilon$ in \eqref{est.prop.mos.h.1} and \eqref{est.prop.mos.h.2}, Proposition \ref{prop.mos.h} is valid under the slightly weaker condition than \eqref{concave.weak}: $-M_\sigma \partial_Y^2 U\geq (\partial_Y U)^4$, rather than $-M_\sigma \partial_Y^2 U\geq (\partial_Y U)^2$ in \eqref{concave.weak}. Under this condition the factor $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-\frac52}$ in \eqref{est.prop.mos.h.1} and \eqref{est.prop.mos.h.2} is replaced by $(-\Im c_\epsilon)^{-3}$.
}
\end{rem}
\begin{proofx}{Proposition \ref{prop.mos.h}} The Rayleigh-Airy iteration in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop.mos} requires the bound of the second derivative for the solution to the Rayleigh equations. Thus, we need to be careful about the choice of the ``first approximation'', for the solution $\Phi_{mOS}[h]$ has to be estimated in terms of $\| f\|_{L^2}$, rather than $\|h\|_{L^2}$. Let $\Phi_0 = \Phi_0[f]$ be the solution to
\begin{equation}\label{eq.os.R.0}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
& -\epsilon (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \partial_Y^2 \Phi_0 + \partial_Y \big ( (V-c_\epsilon) \partial_Y\Phi_0 \big ) - \nu^\frac12 (\partial_y U^E )(\nu^\frac12 \cdot) \partial_Y \Phi_0 \\
& \qquad \qquad - (V-c_\epsilon) \alpha^2 \Phi_0 - (\partial_Y^2 V) \Phi_0 \, = \, h \,, \qquad Y >0\,,\\
& \Phi_0 (0) \, = \, \partial_Y \Phi_0 (0) \, = \, 0\,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
This elliptic problem is uniquely solvable. Indeed, it suffices to show the a priori estimate.
By taking the inner product with $\Phi_0$ in the first equation of \eqref{eq.os.R.0}, we have
\begin{align*}
& -\epsilon \big ( \| \partial_Y^2 \Phi_0 \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2}^2 \big )
- \langle (V-c_\epsilon) \partial_Y \Phi_0, \partial_Y \Phi_0\rangle _{L^2} - \alpha^2 \langle (V-c_\epsilon)\Phi_0, \Phi_0\rangle_{L^2} \\
& \qquad -\nu^\frac12 \langle (\partial_y U^E )(\nu^\frac12 \cdot) \partial_Y \Phi_0 , \Phi_0\rangle _{L^2} - \langle (\partial_Y^2 V) \Phi_0, \Phi_0 \rangle_{L^2} \, = \, \langle h, \Phi_0 \rangle _{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
Then the imaginary part of the above identity gives
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.h.1}
\begin{split}
& \frac1n \big ( \| \partial_Y^2 \Phi_0 \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} ^2 \big ) + \Im c_\epsilon \big ( \| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} ^2 \big ) \\
& \qquad \, = \, \nu^\frac12 \Im \langle (\partial_y U^E )(\nu^\frac12 \cdot) \partial_Y \Phi_0 , \Phi_0\rangle _{L^2} + \Im \langle h, \Phi_0 \rangle _{L^2}\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
We see
\begin{align*}
\nu^\frac12 \Im \langle (\partial_y U^E )(\nu^\frac12 \cdot) \partial_Y \Phi_0 , \Phi_0\rangle _{L^2}
& \leq \frac{\nu^\frac12 \| U^E\|_{C^1}}{\alpha} \|\partial_Y \Phi_0\|_{L^2} \, \alpha \|\Phi_0\|_{L^2}\\
& \leq \frac{\nu^\frac12 \| U^E \|_{C^1}}{2\alpha \Im c_\epsilon} \, \Im c_\epsilon \big ( \|\partial_Y \Phi_0\|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \|\Phi_0\|_{L^2}^2\big )\\
& \leq \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{2}\big ( \|\partial_Y \Phi_0\|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \|\Phi_0\|_{L^2}^2\big )
\end{align*}
in virtue of \eqref{parameter.stability} and the smallness of $\delta$.
which implies the unique solvability of \eqref{eq.os.R.0}. Note that
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.h.2}
\big | \langle h, \Phi_0\rangle _{L^2}\big | \leq \frac{1}{\alpha} \| f \|_{L^2} \big ( \| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} + \alpha \|\Phi_0 \|_{L^2} \big )\,.
\end{align}
Hence, \eqref{proof.prop.mos.h.1} and \eqref{proof.prop.mos.h.2} yield
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.h.3}
\| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\alpha \Im c_\epsilon} \| f \|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align}
where $C$ is a universal constant.
Then \eqref{proof.prop.mos.h.2} and \eqref{proof.prop.mos.h.3} imply
$\big | \langle h, \Phi_0\rangle _{L^2}\big | \leq \frac{C}{\alpha^2 \Im c_\epsilon} \| f \|_{L^2}^2$,
which leads to, from \eqref{proof.prop.mos.h.1},
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.h.4}
\| \partial_Y^2 \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} \leq C \big ( \frac{n}{\alpha^2 \Im c_\epsilon} \big ) ^\frac12 \| f \|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align}
and therefore,
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.h.5}
\|( \partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \Phi_0 \|_{L^2}\leq C \bigg ( \big ( \frac{n}{\alpha^2 \Im c_\epsilon} \big ) ^\frac12 + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \bigg ) \| f \|_{L^2} \leq C \big ( \frac{n}{\alpha^2 \Im c_\epsilon} \big ) ^\frac12 \| f\|_{L^2}
\end{align}
when $\gamma \geq \frac23$ in \eqref{parameter.stability} and $n \leq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}$, in virtue of $\alpha = n \nu^\frac12$.
We will now construct the solution $\Phi_{mOS}[h]$ to \eqref{eq.os} of the form $\Phi_{mOS}[h] = \Phi_0[f] + \Phi_1[f]$, where $\Phi_1[f]$ should solve \eqref{eq.os} with $h$ replaced by $h_1 = (\partial_Y U) \partial_Y \Phi_0$. By Corollary \ref{cor.prop.mos} the function $\Phi_1[f]$ is of the form $\Phi_1[f] = \Phi_{Ray} [h_1] + \tilde \Phi_1[f]$ with the estimate
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.h.6}
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \tilde \Phi_1 [f] \|_{L^2} + \| \partial_Y \tilde \Phi_1 [f] \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \tilde \Phi_1 [f] \|_{L^2} \leq C \| \partial_Y^2 \Phi_{Ray}[h_1] \|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align}
where $C$ is a universal constant. Thus it suffices to estimate $\varphi = \Phi_{Ray}[h_1]$.
To this end we decompose $\varphi=\varphi_1+\varphi_2$, where $\varphi_1$ is the solution to \eqref{eq.os} with $h$ replaced by $\chi_{\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\}} h_1=\chi_{\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\}} \partial_Y U\, \partial_Y \Phi_0$ with sufficiently small $\sigma \in (0,1]$, while $\varphi_2$ is the solution to \eqref{eq.os} with $h$ replaced by $\chi_{\{Y\geq \sigma\}}h_1$. The number $\sigma\in (0,1]$ is chosen so that $U(Y)$ is well approximated by the linear function $\partial_Y U|_{Y=0} Y$ for $Y\in [0,\sigma]$. Note that $\partial_Y U|_{Y=0} >0$.
Then $\varphi_1$ satisfies the estimates in Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0}, and we have
\begin{align*}
|\langle \frac{\chi_{\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\}} \partial_Y U\, \partial_Y\Phi_0}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi_1 \rangle _{L^2}|
& \leq \|\frac{Y^\frac12 \chi_{\{ 0 \leq Y\leq \sigma\}} \partial_Y U\, \partial_Y \Phi_0}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^1} \| \partial_Y \varphi_1\|_{L^2} \\
& \leq C \| \frac{\chi_{\{0\leq Y\leq \sigma\}}}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \varphi_1 \|_{L^2}\\
& \leq \frac{C}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac12} \| \partial _Y \Phi_0\|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \varphi_1 \|_{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
Here we have used the fact that $V$ is well approximated by the linear function $\partial_Y V|_{Y=0} Y\approx \partial_Y U|_{Y=0} Y$ for $Y\in [0,\sigma]$ and for sufficiently small $\nu$.
Then we have from \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.2},
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.h.7}
\| \partial_Y\varphi_1 \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi_1 \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2}\leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \| f\|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align}
where $C$ depends only on $U^E$ and $U$, while \eqref{est.lem.Ray.0.3} implies
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.mos.h.8}
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2)\varphi_1\|_{L^2}\leq C\big ( \frac{1}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac32} \| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} \big ) \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \| f\|_{L^2}\,.
\end{align}
The estimate of $\varphi_2$ follows from Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg'}, and we have
\begin{align}
& \| (\partial_Y^2 - \alpha^2)\varphi_2 \|_{L^2} + \|\partial_Y \varphi_2 \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \varphi_2\|_{L^2} \nonumber \\
& \qquad \leq C \big ( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \|\frac{\chi_{\{Y\geq \sigma\}} \partial_Y U\, \partial_Y \Phi_0}{\sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U}} \|_{L^2} + \| \frac{\chi_{\{Y\geq \sigma\}} \partial_Y U\, \partial_Y \Phi_0}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2}\big ) \nonumber \\
& \qquad \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \partial_Y \Phi_0 \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| f\|_{L^2}\,.\label{proof.prop.mos.h.9}
\end{align}
Here we have used the concave condition in \eqref{concave.weak}.
Collecting \eqref{proof.prop.mos.h.3} - \eqref{proof.prop.mos.h.9}, we obtain \eqref{est.prop.mos.h.1} and \eqref{est.prop.mos.h.2}. The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
\subsubsection{Construction of slow mode for modified Orr-Sommerfeld equations}\label{subsubsec.slow}
The goal of this subsection is to construct a slow mode for the modified Orr-Sommerfeld equations,
which is a solution to the boundary value problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq.slow}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
mOS (\phi) \, & = \, 0 \,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\phi \, & = \, 1\,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
The slow mode is constructed around the solution to the Rayleigh equations.
To this end we first consider the boundary value problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq.ray.b}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
(V -c_\epsilon) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \varphi - (\partial_Y^2 V ) \varphi \, & = \, 0 \,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\varphi \, & = \, 1\,, \qquad Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{prop}\label{prop.Ray.b} Let $0<\nu\leq 1$ and $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$. Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds. Let $\delta\in (0,\delta_*]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}.
Then there exists a unique solution $\varphi_{Ray}\in H^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.ray.b} of the form $\varphi_{Ray} = e^{-\alpha Y} + \tilde \varphi_{Ray}$ satisfying
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \tilde \varphi_{Ray} \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \tilde \varphi_{Ray} \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2)\tilde \varphi_{Ray}\|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon}\,.\label{est.prop.Ray.b.1}
\end{align}
Here $C$ depends only on $\|U^E\|_{C^2}$ and $\|U\|$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} The function $\tilde \varphi_{Ray}$ has the form $\tilde \varphi_{Ray} =\tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}+\tilde \varphi_{Ray,2}$, where $\tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}$ is the solution to \eqref{eq.ray.half} with $h (Y)=h_1 (Y) = \nu (\partial_y^2 U^E) (\nu^\frac12 Y) e^{-\alpha Y}$ and $\tilde \varphi_{Ray,2}$ is the solution to \eqref{eq.ray.half} with $h (Y)=h_2 (Y) = e^{-\alpha Y} \partial_Y^2 U (Y)$. Then, in virtue of Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0} we have
\begin{align*}
& \| \partial_Y \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2}^2 + \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2}^2 \\
& \leq C\big ( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h_1}{V-c_\epsilon}, \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1} \rangle _{L^2} \big | + \| \frac{h_1}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2}^2\big )\,.
\end{align*}
Here $C$ depends only on $\|U^E\|_{C^2}$ and $\|U\|$. We observe that
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h_1}{V-c_\epsilon}, \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1} \rangle _{L^2} \big | \leq \frac{\nu\| U^E\|_{C^2}}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| e^{-\alpha Y} \|_{L^2} \| \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C \nu\| U^E\|_{C^2}}{\alpha^\frac12 (\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2} \,,
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\| \frac{h_1}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2}^2 \leq \frac{\nu^2 \|U^E\|_{C^2}^2}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| e^{-\alpha Y}\|_{L^2}^2 \leq \frac{C\nu^2 \|U^E\|_{C^2}^2}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^2}\,,
\end{align*}
which imply
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2}^2 + \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2}^2 \leq C\big ( \frac{\nu^2 \| U^E \|_{C^2}^2}{\alpha^3 (\Im c_\epsilon)^4} +\frac{\nu^2 \|U^E\|_{C^2}^2}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \big )\,.
\end{align*}
Recalling the lower bound $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \geq \delta_1^{-1} n^{\gamma}\nu^\frac12$ assumed in \eqref{parameter.stability}, we thus obtain
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2}^2 + \alpha^2 \| \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2}^2 + \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \tilde \varphi_{Ray,1}\|_{L^2}^2 \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon}\,.
\end{align*}
Next we see from Lemma \ref{lem.nodeg'},
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y \tilde \varphi_{Ray,2}\|_{L^2} +\alpha \| \tilde \varphi_{Ray,2} \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2)\tilde \varphi_{Ray,2}\|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U} e^{-\alpha Y} \|_{L^2} \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| \sqrt{-\partial_Y^2 U} \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon}\,,
\end{align*}
where $C$ depends only on $U^E$ and $U$. Note that we have used the spatial decay such as $|\partial_Y^2 U(Y)|\leq \|U\| (1+ Y)^{-2}$. Collecting these estimates, we obtain \eqref{est.prop.Ray.b.1}, since $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$.
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\vspace{0.3cm}
The existence and the estimates for the slow mode $\phi_s$ are stated as follows.
Recall that $\delta_2>0$ is the number in Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha},
while $\delta_*>0$ is the number in Proposition \ref{prop.mos}.
\begin{prop}[Slow mode for modified Orr-Sommerfeld equations]\label{prop.slow}
Let $0<\nu \leq \nu_0$, $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$, and $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \leq \delta_2^{-1}$.
Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds.
Let $\gamma\in [\frac57,1]$ and $\delta\in (0,\delta_*]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}.
Then there exists a solution $\phi_s\in H^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.slow} of the form
$\phi_s = \varphi_{Ray} + \tilde \phi_s$
satisfying the estimate
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \tilde \phi_s \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \tilde \phi_s \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi_s \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \,.
\end{align}
Here $C$ depends only on $U^E$ and $U$. Moreover, if \eqref{concave.strong} holds in addition then the above statement is valid for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} Since the function $\tilde \phi_s$ satisfies the equations \eqref{eq.os.R'} with the source term
\begin{align*}
\epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \partial_Y^2 \varphi_{Ray} \, = \,
\epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \partial_Y^2 (e^{-\alpha Y} + \tilde \varphi_{Ray} ) \, = \, \epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2 ) \partial_Y^2 \tilde \varphi_{Ray}\,,
\end{align*}
the estimates of $\tilde \phi_s$ follows from Proposition \ref{prop.mos} and Remark \ref{rem.prop.mos} by combining the estimate
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y^2 \tilde \varphi_{Ray} \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \,,
\end{align*}
which is proved in Proposition \ref{prop.Ray.b}. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.prop.slow}{\rm In virtue of Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha} and Corollary \ref{cor.prop.large.alpha}, the construction of the slow/fast modes is needed only in the case $0<\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \leq \delta_2^{-1}$. In this regime of $\alpha$, Propositions \ref{prop.Ray.b} and \ref{prop.slow} lead to the estimate for the slow mode $\phi_s$ such as
\begin{align}
\|\partial_Y ( \phi_s - e^{-\alpha Y} )\|_{L^2} +\alpha \| \phi_s - e^{-\alpha Y} \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) ( \phi_s - e^{-\alpha Y} )\|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon}\,,\label{est.rem.prop.slow}
\end{align}
by recalling the form $\phi_s = \varphi_{Ray} + \tilde \phi_s=e^{-\alpha Y} + \tilde \varphi_{Ray} + \tilde \phi_s$. Note that the constant $C$ in \eqref{est.rem.prop.slow} depends only on $U^E$ and $U$.
In particular, we have
\begin{align}
|\partial_Y \phi _s (0)|\leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \qquad {\rm if}~~\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \leq \delta_2^{-1}\,.
\end{align}}
\end{rem}
\subsubsection{Construction of fast mode for modified Orr-Sommerfeld equations}\label{subsubsec.fast}
In this subsection we construct another solution to \eqref{eq.slow} possessing a boundary layer structure,
called the fast mode due to the rapid dependence on the parameter $\epsilon$.
The result is stated as follows.
\begin{prop}[Fast mode for modified Orr-Sommerfeld equations]\label{prop.fast}
Let $0<\nu \leq \nu_0$, $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$, and $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon\leq \delta_2^{-1}$.
Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds. Let $\delta\in (0,\delta_*]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}.
If $\gamma\in [\frac57,1]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}
then there exists a solution $\phi_f\in H^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.slow} satisfying the estimates
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y^k \phi_f\|_{L^2} \leq C |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^{\frac{k}{2}-\frac14}\,, \qquad k=0,1,2\,,\label{est.prop.fast.1}
\end{align}
for all sufficiently small $\nu>0$. Moreover,
\begin{align}
|\partial_Y \phi_f (0)|\geq \frac{1}{C} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac12\,.\label{est.prop.fast.2}
\end{align}
\noindent
Here $C$ depends only on $U^E$ and $U$.
Moreover, if \eqref{concave.strong} holds in addition then the above statement is valid for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$.
\end{prop}
The construction of the fast mode becomes a delicate issue when the critical point $Y_c$ is close to the boundary $Y=0$. By taking into account the monotonicity of $U$ such a situation corresponds to the case $|\Re c| \ll 1$. For convenience we shall treat separately the following cases.
Fix small $\theta \in (0,\frac{1}{10})$.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent
(1) Case $|c|\leq |\epsilon|^{\frac{1-\theta}{3}}\ll 1$: in this case the critical layer has to be taken into account in the analysis,
\noindent
(2) Case $|c| \geq |\epsilon|^{\frac{1-\theta}{3}}$: in this case the effect of the critical layer is negligible.
\begin{proofx}{Proposition \ref{prop.fast} for case (1) $|c|\leq |\epsilon|^{\frac{1-\theta}{3}}\ll 1$}
We recall that $V(Y)=U^E(\sqrt{\nu} Y)-U^E(0) + U(Y)$ and $\partial_Y U>0$ near $Y = 0$.
Let us introduce the odd extension of $V$ to $\mathbb{R}$: $V(Y)=-V(-Y)$ for $Y<0$.
Then $V$ belongs to $W^{2,\infty}(\mathbb{R})$ and, for sufficiently small $\nu$,
we have $\partial_Y V\geq \kappa$ for $Y\in (-1,1)$.
Here the number $\kappa$ is positive and can be taken uniformly in small $\nu$.
We may assume that there exists a unique $Y_c \in (-1, 1)$ such that $V(Y_c) = \Re c$ holds.
Moreover, $Y_c$ satisfies $Y_c \simeq \Re c$ and $Y_c=0$ if and only if $\Re c=0$.
In particular, we can take a constant $C^*\geq 1$ such that
\begin{align}
| Y_c| \leq C^* |\Re c| \leq C^* |\epsilon|^{\frac{1-\theta}{3}}\,.\label{bound.Y_c}
\end{align}
Then we rewrite the term $V- c_\epsilon$ as
\begin{align*}
V (Y) - c_\epsilon & \, = \, \partial_Y V|_{Y=Y_c} ( Y-Y_c ) + R (Y) - i \Im c_\epsilon \nonumber \\
& \, =: \, \partial_Y V|_{Y=Y_c} \big ( Y - Z_c \big ) + R (Y) \,.
\end{align*}
Here we have set
\begin{align} \label{def_Zc}
Z_c \, = \, Y_c + i \frac{ \Im c_\epsilon}{\partial_Y V|_{Y=Y_c}} \,,
\end{align}
and the remainder term $R$ satisfies the estimate
\begin{align}
|R(Y)|\leq C \| V\|_{C^2(\mathbb{R}_+)} |Y-Y_c|^2\,, \qquad Y\geq 0\,.\label{bound.R}
\end{align}
The key idea is then to build the fast mode $\phi_f$ around a solution $\psi_{Ai}$ to
\begin{equation} \label{eq_psiAi}
-\epsilon \partial^2_Y (\partial^2_Y - \alpha^2) \psi_{Ai} + \partial_Y V|_{Y=Y_c} (Y - Z_c) (\partial^2_Y - \alpha^2) \psi_{Ai} \, = \, 0\,,
\end{equation}
satisfying $\psi_{Ai}(0) =1$, $\psi_{Ai}(Y) \rightarrow 0, \, Y \rightarrow +\infty$. Therefore, we introduce the classical Airy function $Ai = Ai(z)$ defined by the contour integral
$$Ai(z) \, = \, \int_L \exp\big(zt - \frac{t^3}{3}\big) \,{\rm d} t $$
where $\arg(z) \in (-\pi,\pi)$, and $L : \{r(s) e^{i \varphi(s)}, s \in \mathbb{R}\}$ is any contour satisfying
\begin{itemize}
\item $\lim_{s \rightarrow +\infty} r(s) = +\infty$, and in the neigborhood of $s=+\infty$, $\frac{2\pi}{3} \le \varphi(s) \le \frac{2\pi}{3} + \frac{\pi}{6}$.
\item $\lim_{s \rightarrow - \infty} r(s) = +\infty$, and in the neigborhood of $s=-\infty$, $-\frac{2\pi}{3}-\frac{\pi}{6} \le \varphi(s) \le -\frac{2\pi}{3}$.
\end{itemize}
It is well-known that $Ai$ satisfies
$$ \partial^2_z Ai - z Ai \, = \, 0\,, $$
and decays to zero when $|z| \rightarrow +\infty$ with $|\arg(z)| < \frac{\pi}{3}$. See \cite{Die} for details.
To fix the idea, we take the contour
$L$ defined by $L = L_{-} \cup L_{0} \cup L_{+}$
with
$$L_{-} \, = \, \{ r e^{-2i\pi/3}, r \in (1,+\infty) \}, \quad L_{0} \, = \, \{ e^{i \theta}, \theta \in [-\frac{4\pi}{3},-\frac{2\pi}{3}] \}, \quad L_{+} \, = \, \{e^{2i\pi/3} r, r \in (1,+\infty) \}$$
(oriented from bottom to top). We then set
\begin{equation} \label{defAialpha}
Ai_\alpha(z) \, = \, \int_{L} \frac{\exp(zt - \frac{t^3}{3})}{t^2 - (\tilde \epsilon^{\frac13} \alpha)^2} \,{\rm d} t\,, \quad \tilde \epsilon \, = \, \frac{\epsilon}{\partial_Y V|_{Y=Y_c}}\,.
\end{equation}
Note that, since $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \leq \delta_2^{-1}$, we see
\begin{align*}
\tilde \epsilon^{\frac13} \alpha \, = \, e^{-\frac{\pi}{6}i} n^\frac23 \nu^{\frac12} (\partial_Y V|_{Y=Y_c})^{-\frac13} \quad {\rm and } \quad |\tilde \epsilon^\frac13 \alpha |\leq \frac{|\epsilon|^\frac13}{\delta_2 (\partial_Y V|_{Y=Y_c})^\frac13 \Im c_\epsilon} \ll 1
\end{align*}
under the condition $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ with sufficiently small $\delta>0$ in \eqref{parameter.stability},
and thus, the poles $\pm \tilde \epsilon^{1/3} \alpha$ are at the right of $L$.
By simple differentiation, one has
$$ (\partial^2_z - (\tilde \epsilon^{\frac13} \alpha)^2) Ai_\alpha \, = \, Ai \,. $$
Then we set
\begin{align}\label{def.psi_Ai}
\psi_{Ai} (Y) \, = \, \frac{1}{Ai_\alpha (-Z_c/\tilde \epsilon^\frac13)} Ai_\alpha (\frac{Y-Z_c}{\tilde \epsilon^\frac13} )\,,
\end{align}
which clearly solves the equation \eqref{eq_psiAi}.
We collect in the following lemma a few estimates on $\psi_{Ai}$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem.psi_Ai} Let $\gamma \in [\frac{2}{3}, 1]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}.
Then the function $\psi_{Ai}$ given in \eqref{def.psi_Ai} is well-defined and satisfies the estimates
\begin{align}\label{est.lem.psi_Ai.1}
|\partial_Y^k \psi_{Ai} (Y)| \leq C |\tilde \epsilon|^{-\frac{k}{3}} \, | \frac{Z_c}{\tilde \epsilon^\frac13} |^\frac54 \, |\frac{Y-Z_c}{\tilde \epsilon^\frac13}|^{-\frac{5-2k}{4}}\, | \exp \bigg (-\frac23 \big ( \frac{Y-Z_c}{\tilde \epsilon^\frac13} \big )^\frac32 + \frac23 \big (-\frac{Z_c}{\tilde \epsilon^\frac13}\big )^\frac32 \bigg ) |\,,
\end{align}
for all $Y\geq 0$ and $k=0,1,2$, and
\begin{align}
|\partial_Y \psi_{Ai} (0)|\geq \frac{1}{C} \, |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac12\,.\label{est.lem.psi_Ai.2}
\end{align}
In particular, we have
\begin{align}\label{est.lem.psi_Ai.3}
\| \partial_Y^k \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2}\leq C \, |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon} |^{\frac{k}{2}-\frac14}\,, \qquad k=0,1,2 \,.
\end{align}
\end{lem}
The proof of Lemma \ref{lem.psi_Ai} is postponed to the appendix.
To achieve the construction of the fast mode, we consider the remainder $\tilde \phi_f =\phi_f-\psi_{Ai}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq.fast'}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
mOS (\tilde \phi_f) \, & = \, h_f, \quad h_f(Y) = - R(Y) \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} + \partial_Y^2 V \psi_{Ai} \,, \qquad Y>0\,,\\
\phi \, & = \, 0\,, \qquad Y=0\,,
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
In view of Corollary \ref{cor.prop.mos} and Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0}, we have
\begin{equation}
\| \partial_Y \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} \leq C \bigg( \, \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big | \langle \frac{h_f}{V-c_\epsilon}, \tilde \phi_f \rangle _{L^2} \big | + \| \frac{h_f}{V-c_\epsilon}\|_{L^2}^2 \bigg )^{1/2}\,.
\end{equation}
By the Hardy inequality,
\begin{align*}
\big | \langle \frac{R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai}}{V-c_\epsilon}, \tilde \phi_f \rangle _{L^2} \big |
& \le \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| Y R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2}\,, \\
\big | \langle \frac{\partial_Y^2 V \, \psi_{Ai} }{V-c_\epsilon}, \tilde \phi_f \rangle _{L^2} \big |
& \le \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \| Y \partial_Y^2 U\, \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} \| \partial_Y \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} + \frac{\nu \| U^E \|_{C^2} \|\psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2}}{\alpha} \alpha \| \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2}\big )\,,
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\| \frac{h_f}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \| R\partial_Y \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} + \| \partial_Y^2 V\|_{L^\infty} \| \psi_{Ai}\|_{L^2}\big )\,.
\end{align*}
Thus we end up with
\begin{align}\label{estim_tildephif}
\begin{split}
& \| \partial_Y \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} \\
&\quad \leq
\frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \bigg( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| Y R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| Y \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} + \| R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} + \| \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} \bigg)
\end{split}
\end{align}
We focus on the control of the terms $\| Y R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2}$ and $\| R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2}$ at the right-hand side, the other two being similar. We see
\begin{align*}
\| R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} & \leq C \big ( \int_0^\infty \big (Y-Y_c)^4 |\partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} (Y) |^2 \,{\rm d} Y \big )^\frac12 \nonumber \\
& \leq C \big ( \int_0^{2C^* |\epsilon|^\frac{1-\theta}{3}} \big (Y-Y_c)^4 |\partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} (Y) |^2 \,{\rm d} Y \big )^\frac12 \nonumber \\
& \quad + C \big ( \int_{2C^*|\epsilon|^\frac{1-\theta}{3}}^\infty \big (Y-Y_c)^4 |\partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} (Y) |^2 \,{\rm d} Y \big )^\frac12 \nonumber \\
& =: I + II.
\end{align*}
Since $|Y_c|\leq C |\epsilon|^{\frac{1-\theta}{3}}$ as stated in \eqref{bound.Y_c}, the term $I$ is estimated as
\begin{align*}
I & \leq C |\epsilon|^{\frac23 (1-\theta)} \| \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2}\leq C |\epsilon|^{\frac23 (1-\theta)} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac34\,,
\end{align*}
where \eqref{est.lem.psi_Ai.3} is used.
As for $II$, we use the pointwise estimates
\begin{align}
|\partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} (Y) |\leq C |\tilde \epsilon|^{-\frac23} |\frac{Z_c}{\tilde \epsilon^\frac13}|^\frac54 |\frac{Y-Z_c}{\tilde \epsilon^\frac13}|^{-\frac14} e^{-\frac{1}{C} |\frac{Z_c}{\tilde \epsilon}|^\frac12 Y}\,,\label{proof.prop.fast.1}
\end{align}
see \eqref{proof.est.lem.psi.Ai.3.3} in the appendix for the proof.
Then, since $|\epsilon|\leq C (\Im c_\epsilon)^3$ holds and $|Z_c| \simeq |c_\epsilon|$, $|\tilde \epsilon| \simeq |\epsilon|$, the term $II$ is small exponentially in $|\epsilon|^{-\frac{\theta}{3}}$. In particular, we have
\begin{align*}
II\leq C_{\theta,N} |\epsilon|^N\,,
\end{align*}
for large $N\geq 1$. Hence, it follows that
\begin{equation}
\|R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} \le C |\epsilon|^{\frac23 (1-\theta)} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac34\,.\label{proof.prop.fast.2}
\end{equation}
To estimate $\| Y R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2}$, we write
$$ \| Y R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} \, \le \, \| (Y - Y_c) R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} + |Y_c| \| R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2}, $$
and obtain, by the similar computation as above,
\begin{align*}
\|Y R \partial_Y^2 \psi_{Ai} \|_{L^2} & \le C |\epsilon|^{1-\theta} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac34\,.
\end{align*}
Note that $|c_\epsilon|\leq |c| + |\epsilon| \alpha^2 = |c|+n\nu \leq C |c|$ since $n\nu\leq C \Im c$ for $n\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$ and $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}.
Then, back to \eqref{estim_tildephif}, still for small enough $\theta$, we end up with
\begin{align}
& \| \partial_Y \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \tilde \phi_f \|_{L^2} \nonumber \\
& \quad \le \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} |\epsilon|^{1-\theta} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac34 + \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} |\epsilon|^{\frac13(1-\theta)} |\frac{\epsilon}{c_\epsilon}|^\frac14 + |\epsilon|^{\frac23(1-\theta)} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac34 + |\frac{\epsilon}{c_\epsilon}|^\frac14 \big ) \nonumber \\
& \quad \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \bigg ( \frac{|\epsilon|^{\frac12-\frac54 \theta}}{\Im c_\epsilon} + (\frac{|\epsilon|^\frac13}{\Im c_\epsilon})^\frac54 |\epsilon|^{\frac16-\frac{1}{3}\theta}+ |\epsilon|^{\frac16-\frac{11}{12}\theta} + |\epsilon|^{\frac16}\bigg ) \nonumber \\
& \quad \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} |\epsilon|^{\frac16-\frac54\theta} \,,\label{proof.prop.fast.3}
\end{align}
which by the Sobolev embedding implies
\begin{align}
|\partial_Y \tilde \phi_f(0)| \le \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} |\epsilon|^{\frac16-\frac54\theta}\,.\label{proof.prop.fast.4}
\end{align}
On the other hand, by \eqref{est.lem.psi_Ai.2} the function $\partial_Y \psi_{Ai}$ has the lower bound at $Y=0$ as follows:
\begin{align}
|\partial_Y \psi_{Ai} (0)| &\geq \frac{1}{C} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac12\,.\label{proof.prop.fast.5}
\end{align}
We recall again the condition $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}, which ensures $|\epsilon|\ll (\Im c_\epsilon)^3$. Then, combining \eqref{proof.prop.fast.4} and \eqref{proof.prop.fast.5}, for small enough $\epsilon$ (that is large enough $n$), we end up with
\begin{equation} \label{lowerbound_fastmode}
|\partial_Y \phi_f(0)| \ge \frac{1}{C} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac12\,.
\end{equation}
This lower bound on the derivative of the fast mode at the boundary $Y=0$ will be important when solving the Orr-Sommerfeld equation. From \eqref{est.lem.psi_Ai.3} and \eqref{proof.prop.fast.3} we obtain \eqref{est.prop.fast.1} for $\phi_f = \psi_{Ai} + \tilde \phi_f$. The estimate \eqref{est.prop.fast.2} is just obtained by \eqref{lowerbound_fastmode}.
The proof of Proposition \ref{prop.fast} for the case (1) is complete.
\end{proofx}
\begin{proofx}{Proposition \ref{prop.fast} for case (2) $|c|\geq |\epsilon|^{\frac{1-\theta}{3}}$}
In this case the construction of the fast mode is more straightforward than the case (1).
Set
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.6}
\tau_\epsilon \, = \, \big (\frac{-c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}\big )^\frac12 \, = \, \big ( \frac{\Im c_\epsilon - i \Re c_\epsilon}{|\epsilon|} \big )^\frac12\,, \qquad \omega_\epsilon \, = \, \frac{\tau_\epsilon}{|\tau_\epsilon|}\,.
\end{align}
The root is taken so that $\Re \tau_\epsilon>0$, and since $\Im c_\epsilon>0$ we see
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.7}
\Re \tau_\epsilon\geq \frac{1}{C} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac12 = \frac{|\tau_\epsilon|}{C}
\end{align}
for some universal constant $C>0$.
Then we look for a solution $\phi_f$ to \eqref{eq.slow} of the form
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.8}
\phi_f (Y) \, = \, \sum_{k=0}^N \phi_k (|\tau_\epsilon|Y) + R (Y)\,,
\end{align}
where the leading profile $\phi_0$ is given by
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.9}
\phi_0 (z) \, = \, e^{-\omega_\epsilon z}\,,
\end{align}
and $\phi_k$, $k=1,\cdots,N$, are profiles of boundary layer type, and $R$ is a small remainder.
The number $N$ will be taken large enough.
The profile $\phi_k$ is built inductively as the solution to
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.10}
\begin{split}
& -\partial_z^4 \phi_k +\omega_\epsilon^2\partial_z^2 \phi_k \\
& \quad \, = \, - (\frac{\alpha}{|\tau_\epsilon|})^2 \partial_z^2\phi_{k-1} - \frac{1}{\epsilon |\tau_\epsilon|^2} V^{(\epsilon)} \partial_z^2 \phi_{k-1} +\frac{\alpha^2}{\epsilon |\tau_\epsilon|^4} (V^{(\epsilon)} -c_\epsilon ) \phi_{k-1} + \frac{1}{\epsilon |\tau_\epsilon|^4} (\partial_Y^2 V)^{(\epsilon)} \phi_{k-1}
\end{split}
\end{align}
satisfying $\phi_k=0$ on $z=0$, where $f^{(\epsilon)} (z) = f(\frac{z}{|\tau_\epsilon|})$ for any $f=f(Y)$.
Set
$$\partial_z^{-1} f \, = \, -\int_z^\infty f(z') \,{\rm d} z'\,,\qquad \partial_z^{-2} f \, = \, \int_z^\infty \int_{z'}^\infty f(z'') \,{\rm d} z'' \,{\rm d} z'\,.$$
Then the right-hand side of \eqref{proof.prop.fast.10} is written as
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.11}
\begin{split}
& \partial_z^{2} \bigg ( - (\frac{\alpha}{|\tau_\epsilon|})^2 \phi_{k-1} - \frac{1}{\epsilon |\tau_\epsilon|^2} V^{(\epsilon)} \phi_{k-1}
+ \partial_z^{-1} \big ( \frac{2}{\epsilon |\tau_\epsilon|^3} ({\partial_Y V})^{(\epsilon)} \phi_{k-1} \big )
\\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad + \partial_z^{-2} \big ( \frac{\alpha^2}{\epsilon |\tau_\epsilon|^4} (V^{(\epsilon)} -c_\epsilon) \phi_{k-1} \big ) \bigg ) \, =: \, \partial_z^2 g_k\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
As a result, it suffices to solve
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.12}
-\partial_z^2 \phi_k + \omega_\epsilon^2 \phi_k \, = \, g_k \,, \quad z>0\,, \qquad \phi_k|_{z=0} =0\,.
\end{align}
Thus, $\phi_k$ is expressed as
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.13}
\phi_k (z) \, = \, \int_0^z e^{-\omega_\epsilon (z-\xi')} \int_{\xi'}^\infty e^{-\omega_\epsilon (\xi''-\xi')} g_k (\xi'')\,{\rm d} \xi'' \,{\rm d} \xi'\,.
\end{align}
By using the estimate
\begin{align*}
|V^{(\epsilon)}(z)|\leq \frac{z}{|\tau_\epsilon|}\|\partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty_Y}
\end{align*}
each $g_k$ is estimated as, for any $0<\delta<\Re \omega_\epsilon$,
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.14}
\sup_{z>0} \, e^{\delta z} |g_k (z) |\leq C D_\epsilon \sup_{z>0} \, (1+z) e^{\delta z} |\phi_{k-1} (z)|\,,
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.15}
D_\epsilon & \, = \, \frac{\alpha^2}{|\tau_\epsilon|^2} + \frac{1}{|\epsilon| |\tau_\epsilon|^3} \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty_Y} + \frac{\alpha^2}{|\epsilon| |\tau_\epsilon|^5} \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty_Y} + \frac{\alpha^2}{|\tau_\epsilon|^4} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}| \nonumber \\
& \, = \, 2 \frac{\alpha^2}{|\tau_\epsilon|^2} + \frac{1}{|\epsilon| |\tau_\epsilon|^3} \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty_Y} + \frac{\alpha^2}{|\epsilon| |\tau_\epsilon|^5} \| \partial_Y V \|_{L^\infty_Y}\,.
\end{align}
Let us recall the conditions $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon\leq \delta_2^{-1}$ and $|c|\geq |\epsilon|^{\frac{1-\theta}{3}}$. In particular, $|\tau_\epsilon|^{-1} =|\frac{\epsilon}{c_\epsilon}|^\frac12 \leq |\epsilon|^{\frac13+\frac{\theta}{6}}$ holds.
Then $D_\epsilon$ is estimated as
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.16}
D_\epsilon\leq C\big ( \frac{|\epsilon|^{\frac23+\frac{\theta}{3}}}{\Im c_\epsilon^2} + |\epsilon|^{\frac{\theta}{2}} \big ) \leq C |\epsilon|^\frac{\theta}{3}\,,
\end{align}
under the condition $|\epsilon|\leq (\Im c_\epsilon)^3$, which is valid for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}. From \eqref{proof.prop.fast.13} and \eqref{proof.prop.fast.14} it is straightforward to see
\begin{align*}
|\phi_k (z)| & \leq \int_0^z e^{-\Re (\omega_\epsilon) (z-\xi')}\int_{\xi'}^\infty e^{-\Re (\omega_\epsilon) (\xi''-\xi')} |g_k (\xi'')| \,{\rm d} \xi'' \,{\rm d} \xi'\\
& \leq \int_0^z e^{-\Re (\omega_\epsilon) (z-\xi')}\int_{\xi'}^\infty e^{-\Re (\omega_\epsilon) (\xi'' -\xi')-\delta \xi''} \,{\rm d} \xi'' \,{\rm d} \xi' \sup_{\xi''>0} |e^{\delta \xi''} g_k (\xi'')|\\
& \leq \frac{1}{\Re \omega_\epsilon + \delta} \int_0^z e^{-\Re (\omega_\epsilon) (z-\xi') -\delta \xi'} \,{\rm d} \xi'\sup_{\xi''>0} |e^{\delta \xi''} g_k (\xi'')|\\
& \leq \frac{C D_\epsilon e^{-\delta z}}{(\Re \omega_\epsilon+\delta)(\Re \omega_\epsilon - \delta)} \sup_{z>0} | (1+z) |e^{\delta z} \phi_{k-1} (z)|\,.
\end{align*}
Here we have used the condition $0<\delta<\Re \omega_\epsilon$.
Similarly, we obtain
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.17}
\sup_{z>0} \, e^{\delta z} \sum_{j=0}^2 |\partial_z^j \phi_k (z) | & \leq C D_\epsilon \sup_{z>0} \, (1+z) e^{\delta z} |\phi_{k-1} (z)| \nonumber \\
& \leq C_{\delta,k} D_\epsilon^k \,,
\end{align}
for any $0<\delta<\Re \omega_\epsilon$ and $k=1,2,\cdots,N$, where $C_{\delta,k}$ depends only on $\delta$ and $k$.
The remainder $R$ in \eqref{proof.prop.fast.8} is then defined as a solution to
\begin{align*}
mOS (R) \, = \, h \,, \quad Y>0\,, \qquad R|_{Y=0} \, = \, 0
\end{align*}
with
\begin{align*}
h \, = \, \big ( -\epsilon \alpha^2 |\tau_\epsilon|^2 \partial_z^2 \phi_N - |\tau_\epsilon|^2 V^{(\epsilon)} \partial_z^2\phi_N + (V^{(\epsilon)} -c_\epsilon)\alpha^2 \phi_N +(\partial_Y^2 V)^{(\epsilon)} \phi_N \big ) (|\tau_\epsilon| Y)\,.
\end{align*}
In virtue of Corollary \ref{cor.prop.mos} we can take $R$ such that
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.18}
\begin{split}
& \| \partial_Y R \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| R \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) R \|_{L^2} \\
& \qquad \qquad \leq C \big ( \| \partial_Y \Phi_{Ray} [h] \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \Phi_{Ray}[h]\|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2 )\Phi_{Ray}[h] \|_{L^2} \big )
\end{split}
\end{align}
if $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \leq \delta_2^{-1}$. Thus it suffices to consider the estimates of $\Phi_{Ray}[h]$.
By using
$$|\langle \frac{h}{V-c_\epsilon}, \varphi\rangle _{L^2} |\leq C \| \frac{Y h}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2}\| \partial_Y \varphi \|_{L^2}\,, \qquad \varphi \in H^1_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)\,,$$
Lemma \ref{lem.Ray.0} implies that the right-hand side of \eqref{proof.prop.fast.18} is bounded from above by
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.19}
\frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( \| \frac{Y h}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2} + \| h\|_{L^2} \big )\,.
\end{align}
Recalling the definition of $h$, we first observe that
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.20}
\|\frac{Y h}{V-c_\epsilon} \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \| Y h \|_{L^2} \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\Im c_\epsilon} \bigg ( |\epsilon| \alpha^2 |\tau_\epsilon|^\frac12 \| z\partial_z^2 \phi_N \|_{L^2_z} + \|V\|_{L^\infty} |\tau_\epsilon|^\frac12 \| z \partial_z^2 \phi_N \|_{L^2_z} \nonumber \\
& \quad + \alpha^2 \| \partial_Y V\|_{L^\infty} |\tau_\epsilon|^{-\frac52} \| z^2\phi_N \|_{L^2_z} + \alpha^2 |c_\epsilon| |\tau_\epsilon|^{-\frac32} \| z\phi_N \|_{L^2} + \|\partial_Y^2 V \|_{L^\infty} |\tau_\epsilon|^{-\frac32} \| z\phi_N \|_{L^2_z} \bigg )\nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C_N}{\Im c_\epsilon} \big ( |\tau_\epsilon|^\frac12 + \alpha^2 |\tau_\epsilon|^{-\frac52} + (\alpha^2 |c_\epsilon| + 1) |\tau_\epsilon|^{-\frac32} \big ) D_\epsilon^N\,,
\end{align}
since $|\epsilon| \alpha^2=n\nu\leq 1$ by our assumption and \eqref{proof.prop.fast.17}. Similarly, we have
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.21}
\| h \|_{L^2} & \leq C_N \big ( |\tau_\epsilon|^{\frac32} + \alpha^2 |\tau_\epsilon|^{-\frac32} + (\alpha^2 |c_\epsilon| + 1) |\tau_\epsilon|^{-\frac12} \big ) D_\epsilon^N\,.
\end{align}
Since $\Im c_\epsilon\geq |\tau_\epsilon|^{-1}$ and $\alpha^2 \leq |\frac{c}{\epsilon}|=|\tau_\epsilon|^2$ under the conditions $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \leq \delta_2^{-1}$ and $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability} we
have from \eqref{proof.prop.fast.20} and \eqref{proof.prop.fast.21} applied for \eqref{proof.prop.fast.19},
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.22}
\| \partial_Y R \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| R \|_{L^2} + \| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) R \|_{L^2} \leq C |\tau_\epsilon|^\frac52 D_\epsilon^N \leq C |\epsilon|^{\frac{N\theta}{3}-\frac54}\ll 1\,,
\end{align}
if $N$ is taken so that $N>\frac{15}{4\theta}$.
Collecting \eqref{proof.prop.fast.16}, \eqref{proof.prop.fast.17}, and \eqref{proof.prop.fast.22}, we have constructed the fast mode $\phi_f (Y)$ of the form \eqref{proof.prop.fast.8} and $\phi_f$ satisfies
\begin{align}\label{proof.prop.fast.23}
\|\partial_Y^k \big (\phi_f - \phi_0 (|\tau_\epsilon| \cdot ) \big ) \|_{L^2} & \leq C |\epsilon|^{\frac{\theta}{3}} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^{\frac{k}{2}-\frac14}\,,
\end{align}
if $N$ is taken large enough. Comparing the estimate of $\phi_0 (|\tau_\epsilon|Y)$, we obtain \eqref{est.prop.fast.1} and \eqref{est.prop.fast.2}. The proof for the case (2) is complete.
\end{proofx}
\subsubsection{Construction of resolvent}\label{subsubsec.resolvent}
Let us go back to the analysis of the boundary value problem for the modified Orr-Sommerfeld equations \eqref{eq.os'} with the inhomogeneous term $h=- f_{2,n} + \frac{1}{i\alpha} \partial_Y f_{1,n}$.
We look for the solution $\phi$ to \eqref{eq.os'} of the form
\begin{align}
\phi \, = \, \Phi_{mOS} [h] \, + \, \tilde \phi\,,\label{def.phi.re}
\end{align}
where $\Phi_{mOS}[h]$ is the solution to \eqref{eq.os.R} constructed in Proposition \ref{prop.mos.h}.
Then $\tilde \phi$ should satisfy the homogeneous problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq.os'.h}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
-\epsilon (\partial_Y^2 - \alpha^2 ) \partial_Y^2 \tilde \phi + (V - c_\epsilon ) (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \tilde \phi - (\partial_Y^2 V ) \tilde \phi \, = \, 0 \,, \qquad & Y>0\,,\\
\tilde \phi \, = \, 0 \,, \qquad \partial_Y \tilde \phi \, = \, -\partial_Y \Phi_{mOS} [h] \,, \qquad & Y=0\,.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
In virtue of Propositions \ref{prop.slow} and \ref{prop.fast},
the solution $\tilde \phi$ to \eqref{eq.os'.h} is written as
\begin{align}
\tilde \phi \, = \, A \phi_s + B \phi_f\,,
\end{align}
and the coefficients $A$ and $B$ are determined by the equation
\begin{equation}
\begin{pmatrix}
\phi_s (0) & \phi_f(0)\\
\partial_Y \phi_s (0) & \partial_Y \phi_f (0)
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
A\\
B
\end{pmatrix}
\, = \,
\begin{pmatrix}
0 \\
-\partial_Y \Phi_{mOS} [h] (0)
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\end{equation}
Recall that $\phi_s (0) = \phi_f (0)=1$. Then, $A$ and $B$ are determined under the condition $\partial_Y \phi_f (0)-\partial_Y \phi_s (0) \ne 0$, and we have the formula
\begin{align*}
\begin{pmatrix}
A\\
B
\end{pmatrix}
& \, = \, \frac{1}{\partial_Y \phi_f (0)-\partial_Y \phi_s (0) }
\begin{pmatrix}
\partial_Y \phi_f (0) & -1\\
-\partial_Y \phi_s (0) & 1
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 \\
-\partial_Y \Phi_{mOS} [h] (0)
\end{pmatrix}\nonumber \\
& \, = \, \frac{\partial_Y \Phi_{mOS} [h] (0)}{\partial_Y \phi_f (0)-\partial_Y \phi_s (0) }
\begin{pmatrix}
1 \\
-1
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\end{align*}
Hence, $\tilde \phi$ is given by
\begin{align}\label{def.tilde.phi.re}
\tilde \phi \, = \, \frac{\partial_Y \Phi_{mOS} [h] (0)}{\partial_Y \phi_f (0)-\partial_Y \phi_s (0) } \, \big ( \phi_s - \phi_f \big )\,.
\end{align}
The solvability condition $\partial_Y \phi_f (0)-\partial_Y \phi_s (0) \ne 0$ is ensured by Propositions \ref{prop.slow} and \ref{prop.fast} for $\gamma\geq \frac57$ under \eqref{concave.weak}, while for $\gamma\geq \frac23$ under \eqref{concave.strong}.
Collecting \eqref{def.phi.re} and \eqref{def.tilde.phi.re}, we have the following proposition.
Let us recall that we are interested in the case when $h$ in \eqref{eq.os'} is of the form $h=-f_{2,n} + \frac{1}{i\alpha} \partial_Y f_{1,n}$ for $f=(f_{1,n},f_{2,n})\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)^2$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop.resolvent} Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent {\rm (i)} Let $0<\nu\leq \nu_0$, $|c|\leq \delta_1^{-1}$, and $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \leq \delta_2^{-1}$, where $\delta_2$ is the number in Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha}.
Then there exists $\delta_{**} \in (0,\delta_*]$ such that the following statement holds.
If $\gamma \in [\frac57,1]$ and $\delta\in (0,\delta_{**}]$ in \eqref{parameter.stability}, then for any $f=(f_{1,n},f_{2,n})\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)^2$ there exists a weak solution $\phi\in H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to the Orr-Sommerfeld equations \eqref{eq.os'}, and $\phi$ satisfies the estimates
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \| f \|_{L^2} \,, \label{est.prop.resolvent.1}\\
\| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \bigg ( \frac{1}{|\epsilon|^\frac14} + \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{|\epsilon|^\frac12} \bigg ) \| f\|_{L^2}\,.\label{est.prop.resolvent.2}
\end{align}
Here $C$ depends only on $U^E$ and $U$.
If \eqref{concave.strong} holds in addition, then the above statement is valid for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ with the factors $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-\frac52}$ and $\frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{|\epsilon|^\frac12}$ replaced by $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-2}$ and $\frac{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac34}{|\epsilon|^\frac12}$, respectively.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent {\rm (ii)} Let $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \geq \delta_2^{-1}$. Then for any $f=(f_{1,n},f_{2,n})\in L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)^2$ there exists a unique weak solution $\phi\in H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to the Orr-Sommerfeld equations \eqref{eq.os'}, and $\phi$ satisfies the estimates
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha \Im c_\epsilon} \| f \|_{L^2} \,, \label{est.prop.resolvent.3}\\
\| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (|\epsilon| \Im c_\epsilon)^\frac12} \| f \|_{L^2}\,.\label{est.prop.resolvent.4}
\end{align}
Here $C$ is a universal constant.
\end{prop}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.prop.resolvent}{\rm (i) By the standard elliptic regularity the solution $\phi$ in Proposition \ref{prop.resolvent} belongs to $H^3(\mathbb{R}_+)$. In fact, the uniqueness of weak solutions is available also for the case (i) of Proposition \ref{prop.resolvent} by applying the method of continuity. Indeed, following the proof of Proposition \ref{prop.resolvent} below, we can also show the existence of the weak solution $\phi\in H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.os'} for arbitrary $h\in L^2(\mathbb{R}_+)$, which satisfies the similar $H^2$ estimate as in \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.1} and \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.2}: in fact, under the conditions on the parameters of Proposition \ref{prop.resolvent} (i), one can show
\begin{align}
\| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \|\phi\|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \| h\|_{L^2}\,, \qquad \| (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) \phi \|_{L^2} \leq \frac{C}{\alpha(\Im c_\epsilon)^2} \big ( \frac{1}{|\epsilon|^\frac14} + \frac{1}{|c_\epsilon|^\frac12} \big ) \| h\|_{L^2} \,.
\end{align}
Moreover, $\phi$ belongs to $H^4(\mathbb{R}_+)$ by the elliptic regularity.
Since the uniqueness is available at least for the case $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon = \delta_2^{-1}$ in virtue of (ii) of Proposition \ref{prop.resolvent}, one can apply the method of continuity stated in Proposition \ref{prop.continuity} in the appendix for the operator $mOS=-\epsilon (\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2)\partial_Y^2 + (V-c_\epsilon)(\partial_Y^2-\alpha^2) - (\partial_Y^2V)$ with the domain $H^4(\mathbb{R}_+)\cap H^2_0 (\mathbb{R}_+)$, which shows the uniqueness of weak solutions in the case (i). Although we do not give the details here, we use this argument for the operator $\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$, rather than $mOS$, in the next subsection, since it is sufficient for our purpose.
\noindent
(ii) Recalling Remark \ref{rem.prop.mos.h}, we can show Proposition \ref{prop.resolvent} under the condition $-M_\sigma \partial_Y^2U\geq (\partial_Y U)^4$, rather than $-M_\sigma \partial_Y^2 U\geq (\partial_Y U)^2$ in \eqref{concave.weak}, however, the factor $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-\frac52}$ in \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.1} and \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.2} is replaced by $(\Im c_\epsilon)^{-3}$ under this weaker condition.
The similar remark is applied for Corollary \ref{cor.prop.resolvent} below.
}
\end{rem}
\begin{proofx}{Proposition \ref{prop.resolvent}} (i) We may assume that $\delta \in (0,\delta_2]$.
As we have seen in the beginning of this subsection, if $\partial_Y \phi_f (0)-\partial_Y \phi_s (0) \ne 0$ then the weak solution $\phi$ to \eqref{eq.os'} exists, which is written as \eqref{def.phi.re} with $\tilde \phi$ as in \eqref{def.tilde.phi.re}. Proposition \ref{prop.mos.h} implies that
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y \Phi_{mOS} [h] \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \Phi_{mOS} [h] \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \| f\|_{L^2}\,,\\
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \Phi_{mOS}[h] \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha} \big ( \frac{1}{(\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} + \frac{1}{(|\epsilon| \Im c_\epsilon)^\frac12} \big ) \| f\|_{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
The condition $\partial_Y \phi_f (0)-\partial_Y \phi_s (0) \ne 0$ is satisfied if $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ and $\delta$ in \eqref{parameter.stability} is sufficiently small, since Proposition \ref{prop.fast} implies $|\partial_Y \phi_f (0)|\geq \frac{1}{C} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac12 \geq \frac{1}{C} |\epsilon|^{-\frac13}$, while Proposition \ref{prop.slow} and Remark \ref{rem.prop.slow} show $|\partial_Y \phi_s (0)|\leq \frac{1}{C} (\Im c_\epsilon)^{-1}$. In particular, we have $|\partial_Y \phi_f (0)-\partial_Y \phi_s (0)|\geq \frac{1}{C} |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac12$
if $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ and $\delta$ is sufficiently small. Hence, Propositions \ref{prop.slow}, \ref{prop.fast}, and Remark \ref{rem.prop.slow} yield
\begin{align*}
\|\partial_Y \tilde \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \tilde \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq C |\frac{\epsilon}{c_\epsilon}|^\frac12 \big ( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} + |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac14 + \alpha |\frac{\epsilon}{c_\epsilon}|^{\frac14} \big ) | \partial_Y \Phi_{mOS}[h](0)|\\
& \leq C |\frac{\epsilon}{c_\epsilon}|^\frac12 \big ( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} + |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac14 \big ) | \partial_Y \Phi_{mOS}[h](0)|\,,
\end{align*}
by the assumption $\alpha\leq C (\Im c_\epsilon)^{-1}$ and $|\frac{\epsilon}{c}|\leq C$.
Similarly, we have
\begin{align*}
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \tilde \phi\|_{L^2} & \leq C |\frac{\epsilon}{c_\epsilon}|^\frac12 \big ( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} + |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^{\frac34} + \alpha^2 |\frac{\epsilon}{c_\epsilon}|^{\frac14} \big ) | \partial_Y \Phi_{mOS}[h](0)| \\
& \leq C \big ( |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac14 + \frac{1}{|c_\epsilon|^\frac12} \big ) | \partial_Y \Phi_{mOS}[h](0)|\,,
\end{align*}
where we have again used $\alpha\leq C (\Im c_\epsilon)^{-1}$ and $|\epsilon|\leq C (\Im c_\epsilon)^3$.
The value $| \partial_Y \Phi_{mOS}[h](0)|$ is estimated by the interpolation as
\begin{align*}
| \partial_Y \Phi_{mOS}[h](0)| \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \big ( 1+ |\epsilon|^{-\frac12} (\Im c_\epsilon)^2 \big )^\frac12 \| f\|_{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
Collecting these above, since $\phi = \Phi_{mOS}[h]+\tilde \phi_f$, we have arrived at
\begin{align*}
\| \partial_Y \phi \|_{L^2} + \alpha \| \phi \|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \bigg ( 1 +|\frac{\epsilon}{c_\epsilon}|^\frac12 \big ( \frac{1}{\Im c_\epsilon} + |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^{\frac14} \big) \big ( 1+ |\epsilon|^{-\frac14} \Im c_\epsilon \big ) \bigg ) \| f \|_{L^2} \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \| f\|_{L^2}\,,
\end{align*}
since $|\epsilon|\leq C (\Im c_\epsilon)^3$. Similarly,
\begin{align*}
\| (\partial_Y^2 -\alpha^2) \phi\|_{L^2} & \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \bigg ( 1 + \frac{(\Im c_\epsilon)^2}{|\epsilon|^\frac12} + (1+\frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{|\epsilon|^{\frac14}}) \big ( |\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|^\frac14 + \frac{1}{|c_\epsilon|^\frac12}\big ) \bigg ) \| f\|_{L^2}\\
& \leq \frac{C}{\alpha (\Im c_\epsilon)^\frac52} \bigg ( \frac{1}{|\epsilon|^\frac14} + \frac{\Im c_\epsilon}{|\epsilon|^{\frac12}} \bigg ) \| f\|_{L^2}\,.
\end{align*}
Here we have used $|\frac{c_\epsilon}{\epsilon}|\leq C |\epsilon|^{-1}$ and $|c_\epsilon|^{-\frac12}\leq |\epsilon|^{-\frac14}$. Thus, \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.1} and \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.2} follow.
\noindent
(ii) In the case $\alpha \Im c_\epsilon \geq \delta_2^{-1}$ we can apply Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha} and obtain \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.3} and \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.4}. The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
\begin{cor}\label{cor.prop.resolvent} Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent {\rm (i)} Let $\delta_0^{-1}\leq |n|\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$, $0<\nu\leq \nu_0$, $\gamma\in [\frac57,1]$, and $\delta\in (0,\delta_{**}]$.
Then the set
\begin{align}
O_{\nu,n} \, = \, \big \{ \mu \in \mathbb{C}~ \big |~|\mu|\leq \frac{n\nu^\frac12}{\delta_1} \,, \quad \Re \mu \geq \frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta} \big \}\label{est.cor.prop.resolvent.1}
\end{align}
is included in the resolvent set of $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$.
Moreover, if $\mu \in O_{\nu,n}$ satisfies $\Re \mu = \frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}$ and $\Re \mu +n^2\nu^\frac32 \leq \delta_2^{-1}$, then
\begin{align}
\| (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} )^{-1} f \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} & \leq \frac{C n^{\frac32 (1-\gamma)}}{\Re \mu} \| f\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} \,, \quad f\in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)\,, \label{est.cor.prop.resolvent.2}\\
\| \nabla (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} )^{-1} f \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} & \leq \frac{C n^{\frac32(1-\gamma)}}{\Re \mu} \big (n^\frac14 + n^{\frac12-(1-\gamma)} \big ) \| f\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} \,, \quad f\in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu) \,.\label{est.cor.prop.resolvent.3}
\end{align}
If \eqref{concave.strong} holds in addition, then the above statement is valid for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ with the factors $n^{\frac32(1-\gamma)}$ and $n^{\frac12 - (1-\gamma)}$ replaced by $n^{1-\gamma}$ and $n^{\frac12-\frac34(1-\gamma)}$, respectively.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent {\rm (ii)} If $\Re \mu +n^2\nu^\frac32 \geq \delta_2^{-1}$ and $\Re \mu >0$ then $\mu$ belongs to the resolvent set of $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$, and the following estimates hold.
\begin{align}
\| (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} )^{-1} f \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} & \leq \frac{C}{\Re \mu} \| f\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} \,, \quad f\in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)\,, \label{est.cor.prop.resolvent.4}\\
\| \nabla (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} )^{-1} f \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac14 (\Re \mu)^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} \,, \quad f\in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu) \,.\label{est.cor.prop.resolvent.5}
\end{align}
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} The case (ii) is already proved in Corollary \ref{cor.prop.large.alpha}, so we focus on the case (i):
We may assume that $\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\leq \frac{n\nu^\frac12}{\delta_1}$, otherwise the set $O_{\nu,n}$ is empty and there is nothing to be proved.
It is clear that the set $O_{\nu,n}$ is arcwise connected in $\mathbb{C}$. By Proposition \ref{prop.resolvent} (i), for any $\mu\in O_{\nu,n}$ and any $f\in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)}L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$ there exists a weak solution $\phi\in H_0^2(\mathbb{R}_+)$ to \eqref{eq.os'} (and thus, to \eqref{eq.os}), which is $H^3(\mathbb{R}_+)$ by the elliptic regularity and gives the solution $v$ (as in the proof of Corollary \ref{cor.prop.general'}) to \eqref{eq.resolvent} with a suitable pressure $q$.
From \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.1} and \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.2} the norms $\| v\|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)}$ and $\|\nabla v \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)}$ are estimated so that the constants in the estimates are uniform in $O_{\nu,n}$. Moreover, if $|\mu_0|=\delta_1^{-1} n\nu^\frac12$ and $\Re \mu_0 = \delta^{-1} n^\gamma\nu^\frac12$ then $\mu_0\in O_{\nu,n}$ but also $\mu_0 \in \rho (-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})$ from \eqref{proof.cor.prop.general'.0} in the proof of Corollary \ref{cor.prop.general'}.
Then we can apply the method of continuity in Proposition \ref{prop.continuity}, which shows $O_{\nu,n}\subset \rho (-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})$.
The estimates \eqref{est.cor.prop.resolvent.1} and \eqref{est.cor.prop.resolvent.2} follow from \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.1} and \eqref{est.prop.resolvent.2}; indeed, the equality $\Re \mu = \delta^{-1}n^\gamma \nu^\frac12$ implies that $\Im c = \delta^{-1} n^{\gamma-1}$, and thus,
$$\frac{n^{\gamma-1}}{\delta}\leq \Im c_\epsilon \, = \, \frac{n^{\gamma-1}}{\delta} + n\nu \leq C n^{\gamma-1}$$
if $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ and $n\leq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}$.
The proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}{\rm The resolvent estimate is available for all $\mu\in O_{\nu,n}$ also in (i),
but for later use we need the estimate only on the borderline $\Re \mu =\delta^{-1} n^\gamma \nu^\frac12$.
On the borderline $\Re \mu=\delta^{-1} n^\gamma \nu^\frac12$ the conditions (i) and (ii) in Corollary \ref{cor.prop.resolvent} are respectively written as
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent
(i) $n^{\gamma} \nu^\frac12 + \delta n^2\nu^\frac32\leq \delta \delta_2^{-1}$~~~~~~~ (ii) $n^{\gamma} \nu^\frac12 + \delta n^2\nu^\frac32 \geq \delta \delta_2^{-1}$\,.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent
When $n\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$ and $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ the condition $n^{\gamma}\nu^\frac12 \gg \delta n^2\nu^\frac32$ is satisfied. Therefore, the case (i) essentially correspond to the regime $n^{\gamma}\nu^\frac12 \leq \mathcal{O} (1)$ when $n\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$ and $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$. On the other hand, the case (ii) is always satisfied in the regime $n^{\gamma}\nu^\frac12 \geq \mathcal{O}(1)$.
}
\end{rem}
\subsection{Estimate for semigroup}\label{subsec.semigroup}
The resolvent estimates established in Corollaries \ref{cor.prop.general'} and \ref{cor.prop.resolvent} lead to the estimates for the semigroup $e^{-\tau\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}}$, and hence, by going back to the original variables, we obtain the estimates for the semigroup $e^{-t \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}}$ as follows.
\begin{thm}\label{thm.semigroup} Assume that \eqref{concave.weak} holds. Then the following estimates hold for all $f\in \mathcal{P}_n L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$ and $t>0$.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent {\rm (i)} Let $\delta_0^{-1}\leq |n|\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$, $\gamma \in [\frac57,1]$, and $\delta\in (0,\delta_{**}]$. If in addition $|n|^{\gamma} \nu^\frac12 < 1$, then
\begin{align}
\| e^{- t \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}} f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq C |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}t} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,, \label{est.thm.semigroup.1}\\
\| \nabla e^{- t \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}} f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12} \bigg ( \frac{1}{t^\frac12} + |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} \big ( |n|^\frac14 + |n|^{\frac12 - (1-\gamma)} \big ) e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}t} \bigg ) \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,.\label{est.thm.semigroup.2}
\end{align}
Here $C$ depends only on $U^E$ and $U$. If \eqref{concave.strong} holds in addition, then \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.1} and \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.2} are valid for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ with the factors $|n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)}$ and $|n|^{\frac12-(1-\gamma)}$ replaced by $|n|^{2(1-\gamma)}$ and $|n|^{\frac12-\frac34(1-\gamma)}$, respectively.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\noindent {\rm (ii)} Let $|n|^{\gamma} \nu^\frac12 \geq 1$. Then
\begin{align}
\| e^{- t \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}} f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq C |n|^{1-\gamma} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}t}\| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,,\label{est.thm.semigroup.3}\\
\| \nabla e^{- t \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}} f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12} \big ( \frac{1}{t^\frac12} + |n|^{1 -\frac{\gamma}{2}} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}t} \big ) \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,.\label{est.thm.semigroup.4}
\end{align}
Here $C$ depends only on $\|U^E\|_{C^2}$ and $\|U\|$.
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}\label{rem.thm.semigroup}{\rm (i) As is mentioned in Remark \ref{rem.parameter}, the best possible value of $\gamma$ in the temporal growth estimates in (i) of Theorem \ref{thm.semigroup} is $\gamma=\frac23$. Our result achieves this optimal value at least under the strong concave condition \eqref{concave.strong} for the boundary layer profile $U$. In fact, \eqref{concave.strong} can be slightly relaxed as $-M \partial_Y^2 U\geq (\partial_Y U)^4$, but instead, the factor $|n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)}$ of the derivative loss is replaced by $|n|^{3(1-\gamma)}$ under this condition; see Remark \ref{rem.prop.resolvent} (ii).
\noindent (ii) The result for the case (ii) of Theorem \ref{thm.semigroup} is based only on Corollary \ref{cor.prop.general'} and Proposition \ref{prop.large.alpha}. Hence, it holds for $\gamma \in (0,1]$ and for any profile $U$ satisfying \eqref{bound.U} without concave conditions.
}
\end{rem}
\begin{proofx}{Theorem \ref{thm.semigroup}} By the rescaling \eqref{def.scaling} we have
$$(e^{-t\mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}} f )(x,y) \, = \, (e^{-\tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}} f^{(\nu)} ) (X,Y)$$
with $\tau=t\nu^{-\frac12}$ and $f^{(\nu)} (X,Y) = f (\nu^\frac12 X, \nu^\frac12 Y)$. Note that we may assume that $n$ is positive without loss of generality.
By the general perturbation theory we have already known that $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$ generates a $C_0$-analytic semigroup acting on $\mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)$,
and in particular, from Proposition \ref{prop.general.sg.short} we already have the following estimate
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.1}
\| e^{-\tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}} g \|_{L^2(\Omega_\nu)} \leq e^{(\| \partial_y U^E \|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{R}_+)} + 2 n \| Y \partial_Y U \|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{R}_+)} )\nu^\frac12 \tau} \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \,, \qquad g \in \mathcal{P}_n^{(\nu)} L^2_\sigma (\Omega_\nu)\,,
\end{align}
which is useful in the short time interval $0< \tau \leq \nu^{-\frac12} n^{-1}=\alpha^{-1}$.
Hence it suffices to consider the case $\tau \geq \nu^{-\frac12} n^{-1}=\alpha^{-1}$.
Let $S_{\nu,n} (\theta)$ be the set defined in Corollary \ref{cor.prop.general'}.
From the proof of Corollary \ref{cor.prop.general'} we have already known that the set
$\cup_{\mu\in E_{\nu,n}} B_{r_\mu} (\mu)$ with $E_{\nu,n} = \big \{ \mu\in \mathbb{C}~|~ \Re \mu \geq \delta_1^{-1} n^\gamma \nu^{\frac12}\,, ~ |\mu | \geq \delta_1^{-1} n \nu^\frac12 \big \}$ is included in the resolvent set of $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$, and $S_{\nu,n} (\theta)\subset \cup_{\mu\in E_{\nu,n}} B_{r_\mu} (\mu)$ holds.
On the other hand, in virtue of Corollary \ref{cor.prop.resolvent} the set $O_{\nu,n} = \big \{ \mu \in \mathbb{C}~ \big | ~ \Re \mu \geq \delta^{-1} n^\gamma \nu^\frac12\,, ~|\mu|\leq \delta_1^{-1} n\nu^\frac12 \big \}$ is also included in the resolvent set of $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$.
Hence we conclude that the set
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.2}
\Sigma_{\nu,\gamma}(\theta) \, = \, S_{\nu,n} (\theta) \, \cup \, \big \{ \mu \in \mathbb{C}~|~\Re \mu \geq \frac{n^\gamma\nu^\frac12}{\delta} \big \}
\end{align}
is included in the resolvent set of $-\mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}$.
The estimates in Corollary \ref{cor.prop.general'} for $|\Im \mu|\gg 1$ ensures the representation of the semigroup such as
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.3}
e^{-\tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}} \, = \, \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_\Gamma e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n} )^{-1} \,{\rm d} \mu\,,
\end{align}
where the curve $\Gamma$ is oriented counterclockwise and is taken as
\begin{align*}
\Gamma & \, = \, \Gamma_+ \, + \, \Gamma_- \, + \, l_+ \, + \, l_- \, + \, l_0
\end{align*}
with
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.4}
\begin{split}
\Gamma_{\pm} & \, = \, \big \{ \mu\in \mathbb{C} ~|~ \pm \Im \mu = (\tan \theta )\Re \mu + \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan\theta| n^\gamma\nu^\frac12 )\,, ~\Re \mu \leq 0 \big \}\,,\\
l_{\pm} & \, = \, \big \{ \mu \in \mathbb{C} ~|~ \pm \Im \mu = \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan\theta| n^\gamma\nu^\frac12 ) \,, ~ 0\leq \Re \mu \leq \frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta} \big \}\,,\\
l_0 & \, = \, \big \{ \mu \in \mathbb{C} ~|~ 0 \leq |\Im \mu | \leq \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan\theta| n^\gamma\nu^\frac12 )\,, ~ \Re \mu = \frac{n^\gamma\nu^\frac12}{\delta} \big \}\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
The estimate of the resolvent on $\Gamma_\pm \cup l_\pm$ follows from Corollary \ref{cor.prop.general'}.
Let $g \in \mathcal{P}_n L^2 (\Omega_\nu)$. Then we have from \eqref{est.cor.prop.general'.2} and $|\Im \mu | = |\Re (\mu) | \, | \tan\theta| + \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan\theta| n^\gamma\nu^\frac12 )$ on $\Gamma_\pm$,
\begin{align*}
& \| \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\Gamma_\pm} e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} g \,{\rm d} \mu \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \\
& \leq C\int_{\Gamma_\pm} e^{\tau \Re (\mu)} |\mu|^{-1} |\,{\rm d} \mu | \, \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\\
& \leq C \int_0^\infty \frac{e^{-\tau s}}{s + |\tan\theta| s + \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan\theta| n^\gamma\nu^\frac12 )}\,{\rm d} s \, \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,.
\end{align*}
Recall that $\alpha=n \nu^\frac12$ and $0<\gamma\leq 1$.
Then, for any $\kappa\in (0,1]$ there is $C_\kappa>0$ such that
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.5}
\int_0^\infty \frac{e^{-\tau s}}{s + |\tan\theta| s + \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan\theta| n^\gamma\nu^\frac12 )}\,{\rm d} s \leq \frac{C_\kappa}{(\alpha \tau)^\kappa} \leq C_\kappa \qquad {\rm for}~~\alpha \tau\geq 1\,.
\end{align}
Hence we have, by taking $\kappa=\frac12$ for example,
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.6}
\| \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\Gamma_\pm} e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} g \,{\rm d} \mu \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \leq C \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,, \qquad \tau\geq \alpha^{-1}\,.
\end{align}
Next we see
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.7}
& \| \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{l_\pm} e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} g \,{\rm d} \mu \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\nonumber \\
& \leq C \int_0^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}} \frac{e^{\tau s}}{s + \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan\theta| n^\gamma\nu^\frac12 )} \,{\rm d} s \, \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\nonumber \\
& \leq C n^{\gamma-1} e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta} \tau} \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \,.
\end{align}
Finally, on $l_0$ we apply the result of Corollary \ref{cor.prop.resolvent}.
To this end we consider the following two cases by taking Corollary \ref{cor.prop.resolvent} into account:
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent
{\rm (i')} $n^{\gamma} \nu^\frac12 +\delta n^2 \nu^\frac32\leq \delta \delta_2^{-1}$ ~~~ ~~~~~ {\rm (ii')} $n^{\gamma} \nu^\frac12 +\delta n^2 \nu^\frac32\geq \delta \delta_2^{-1}$
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent
In the case (i)' we have from \eqref{est.cor.prop.resolvent.2},
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.8}
\| \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{l_0} e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} g \,{\rm d} \mu \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} & \leq C \frac{\delta}{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12} n^{\frac32(1-\gamma)} e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\tau} \int_0^{\frac{C\alpha}{\delta_1}} \,{\rm d} s \, \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \nonumber \\
& \leq C\delta \delta_1^{-1} n^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\tau} \| g\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,.
\end{align}
Collecting \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.1}, \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.6}, \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.7}, and \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.8}, we have arrived at the estimate
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.9}
\| e^{-\tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}} g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \leq C n^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\tau} \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,,\qquad \tau >0 \,,
\end{align}
where $C$ depends only on $U^E$ and $U$. In virtue of (i) in Corollary \ref{cor.prop.resolvent}, if \eqref{concave.strong} holds then the above estimate holds for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ with the factor $n^{\frac52(1-\gamma)}$ replaced by $n^{2(1-\gamma)}$.
The estimate \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.9} implies \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.1} in the case (i') by returning to the original variables. The estimate \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.3} for the case (ii') is obtained in the same manner by using \eqref{est.cor.prop.resolvent.4} instead of \eqref{est.cor.prop.resolvent.2}. Indeed, in this case \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.8} is replaced by
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.10}
\| \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{l_0} e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} g \,{\rm d} \mu \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} & \leq C \frac{\delta}{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12} \big ( 1+ \frac{\delta}{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12} \big ) e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\tau} \int_0^{\frac{C\alpha}{\delta_1}} \,{\rm d} s \, \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \nonumber \\
& \leq C\delta \delta_1^{-1} n^{1-\gamma} e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\tau} \| g\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,.
\end{align}
Thus we obtain \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.3}.
Note that the dependence on $n$ in the case (ii') is milder than in the case (i').
Hence, we conclude that \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.1} holds for $n^{\gamma}\nu^\frac12 \leq 1$,
while \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.3} follows in the case $n^{\gamma}\nu^\frac12 \geq 1$, as desired.
Next we consider the derivative estimate.
Let us go back to the representation \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.3} with the curve $\Gamma$ as mentioned in \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.4}.
For the integral on $\Gamma_\pm$ we have from \eqref{est.cor.prop.general'.3},
\begin{align}
& \| \nabla_{X,Y} \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{\Gamma_\pm} e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} g \,{\rm d} \mu \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac14} \int_{\Gamma_\pm} e^{\tau \Re (\mu)} |\mu|^{-\frac12} |\,{\rm d} \mu | \, \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac14} \int_0^\infty \frac{e^{-\tau s}}{\big (s + |\tan\theta| s + \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan\theta| n^\gamma\nu^\frac12 ) \big )^\frac12}\,{\rm d} s \, \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac14 \tau^\frac12} \| g\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,.\label{proof.thm.semigroup.11}
\end{align}
Similarly, on $l_\pm$ we have
\begin{align}
& \| \nabla_{X,Y} \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{l_\pm} e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} g \,{\rm d} \mu \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac14} \int_0^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}} \frac{e^{\tau s}}{\big (s + \delta_1^{-1} (\alpha + |\tan\theta| n^\gamma\nu^\frac12 ) \big )^\frac12}\,{\rm d} s \, \| g \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac14 \alpha^\frac12} \int_0^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}} \,{\rm d} s \, e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\tau} \| g\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \leq C n^{\gamma-\frac12} e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\tau} \| g\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,.\label{proof.thm.semigroup.12}
\end{align}
The estimate on $l_0$ is obtained in the same manner as in \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.8} and \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.10}.
Indeed, in the case (i') the estimate \eqref{est.cor.prop.resolvent.3} yields
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.13}
\begin{split}
& \| \nabla_{X,Y} \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{l_0} e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} g \,{\rm d} \mu \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} \\
& \qquad \leq C n^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} \big (n^\frac14 + n^{\frac12 - (1-\gamma)} \big ) e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\tau} \| g\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,,
\end{split}
\end{align}
while in the case (ii') the estimate \eqref{est.cor.prop.resolvent.5} implies
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.semigroup.14}
\| \nabla_{X,Y} \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_{l_0} e^{\tau \mu} (\mu + \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n})^{-1} g \,{\rm d} \mu \|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)} & \leq C n^{1-\frac{\gamma}{2}} e^{\frac{n^\gamma \nu^\frac12}{\delta}\tau} \| g\|_{L^2 (\Omega_\nu)}\,.
\end{align}
Collecting \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.11} - \eqref{proof.thm.semigroup.14}, we obtain the estimates for the spatial derivative of $e^{-\tau \mathbb{L}_{\nu,n}} g$, which lead to \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.2} and \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.4} by returning to the original variables.
The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
\section{Linear evolution operator in middle frequency: the case of time-dependent shear flow}\label{sec.middle.time}
In this section we consider the case when $U^E$ and $U^P$ depend on the time variable.
Our strategy in achieving the estimate of the evolution operator $\mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s)$ with $\delta_0^{-1}\leq |n| \leq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}$, is to split the time interval depending on $n$ and to expand the profile $U^P$ around a fixed time in each short time interval, in which we can apply the perturbation argument based on the result of Theorem \ref{thm.semigroup} in the previous section.
To verify this idea we need enough regularity of $U^E$ and $U^P$ as well as a concave shape of $U^P(t)$ for each $t$ which should be uniform in time; see \eqref{concave.weak.t} in Section \ref{sec.result}. In fact, due to the factor $|n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)}$ in \eqref{est.thm.semigroup.1} and the underlying derivative loss structure of \eqref{eq.perturb.intro}, even if we assume the strong concave condition \eqref{concave.strong} on $U^P(t)$ uniformly in time, the present approach does not provide a growth estimate of the order $e^{C|n|^\gamma (t-s)}$ with $\gamma=\frac23$ for $\mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s)$ in the the parameter regime $|n|^{1+\gamma}\nu \leq 1$.
Note that, as stated in Remark \ref{rem.thm.semigroup}, the value $\gamma=\frac23$ in the growth estimate is known to be optimal at least for the semigroup $e^{-t\mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}}$, and we have established this optimal growth bound in Theorem \ref{thm.semigroup} under the condition \eqref{concave.strong} for the time-independent profile $U^P(t)=U^P$.
The condition \eqref{concave.weak.t} is always satisfied when $U^P$ is the solution to \eqref{eq.heat} with $U^E(0)>0$, if the initial data $U_s\in BC^3 (\mathbb{R}_+)$ satisfies $\| U_s\|<\infty$, $Y\partial_Y^3 U\in L^\infty (\mathbb{R}_+)$, compatibility conditions on $Y=0,\infty$, and (ii) of \eqref{concave.strong}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm.evolution.middle} Assume that \eqref{concave.weak.t}, stated in Section \ref{sec.result}, holds for some $T>0$.
Then there exist $C, K_0>0$ such that the following estimates hold for all $f\in \mathcal{P}_n L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$ and $0\leq s<t\leq T$. Set
\begin{align}\label{est.thm.evolution.0}
\theta_{\gamma,n} \, = \, |n|^\gamma \big ( 1+ (1-\gamma)\log (1+|n|)\big )\,, \qquad \gamma \in [\frac23,1]\,.
\end{align}
\noindent
{\rm (i)} Let $\delta_0^{-1}\leq |n|\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$. If in addition $\gamma\in [\frac79,1]$ and $|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 <1$, then
\begin{align}
\| \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s) f \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq C n^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,, \label{est.thm.evolution.1}\\
\| \nabla \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s) f \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12} \big ( \frac{1}{(t-s)^\frac12} + |n|^{\frac12 + 3 (1-\gamma)} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} \big ) \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,.\label{est.thm.evolution.2}
\end{align}
\noindent
{\rm (ii)} If $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ and $|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 \geq 1$ then
\begin{align}
\| \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s) f \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq C n^{1-\gamma} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,, \label{est.thm.evolution.3}\\
\| \nabla \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s) f \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12} \big ( \frac{1}{(t-s)^\frac12} + |n|^{\frac12+\frac32 (1-\gamma)} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} \big ) \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,.\label{est.thm.evolution.4}
\end{align}
\end{thm}
\begin{proofx}{Theorem \ref{thm.evolution.middle}} It suffices to show the estimate for $\mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (T_0,0)$ with $0<T_0\leq T$. We split the time interval $[0,T_0]$ as $t_0=0<t_1<\cdots<t_{N-1}<t_N=T_0$, where $t_l=\frac{l}{N}T_0$ with $N$ determined later. Set $u_n(t) = \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,0) f$.
In the time interval $[t_l,t_{l+1}]$ the operator $\mathbb{A}_{\nu,n} (t)$ defined in \eqref{decompose.A} (recall also \eqref{def.A_t}) is expanded around $\mathbb{A}_{\nu,n} (t_l)$. Then by the Duhamel formula we have for $t\in (t_l,t_{l+1}]$,
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.evolution.1}
\begin{split}
u_n (t) = \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,t_l) u_n (t_l) & = e^{-(t-t_l) \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n} (t_l)} u_n (t_l) \\
& - \int_{t_l}^t e^{-(t-s) \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}(t_l)}\mathbb{P} \bigg ( in \big ( U^E (s) - U^E (t_l) \big ) u_n (s) \bigg ) \,{\rm d} s\\
& - \int_{t_l}^t e^{-(t-s) \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}(t_l)}\mathbb{P} \bigg ( u_{n,2} (s) \partial_y \big ( U^E (s) - U^E (t_l) \big ) {\bf e}_1 \bigg ) \,{\rm d} s \\
& - \int_{t_l}^t e^{-(t-s) \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}(t_l)}\mathbb{P} \bigg ( in \big ( U^P (s, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) - U^P (t_l, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) u_n (s) \bigg ) \,{\rm d} s\\
& - \int_{t_l}^t e^{-(t-s) \mathbb{A}_{\nu,n}(t_l)}\mathbb{P} \bigg ( u_{n,2} (s) \partial_y \big ( U^P (s, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) - U^P (t_l, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) {\bf e}_1 \bigg ) \,{\rm d} s\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
It is easy to see that
\begin{align*}
\| in \big ( U^E (s) - U^E (t_l) \big ) u_n (s) \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq |n| (s-t_l) \| \partial_t U^E \|_{L^\infty_{t,y}} \| u_n (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,,\\
\| in \big ( U^P (s, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) - U^P (t_l, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) u_n (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} &\leq |n| (s-t_l) \| \partial_t U^P \|_{L^\infty_{t,Y}} \| u_n (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,.
\end{align*}
On the other hand, the interpolation inequality yields
\begin{align*}
\| u_{n,2} (s) \partial_y \big ( U^E (s) - U^E (t_l) \big ) {\bf e}_1\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq C (s-t_l)^\frac12 \big ( \|\partial_t U^E \|_{L^\infty_{t,y}} + \| U^E \|_{L^\infty_t C^2_y}\big ) \| u_{n,2} (s) \|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,.
\end{align*}
Finally, the same computation as in \eqref{proof.prop.general.low.1} using the Hardy inequality implies that
\begin{align*}
\| u_{n,2} (s) \partial_y \big ( U^P (s, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) - U^P (t_l, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) {\bf e}_1\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq 2 |n| (s-t_l)\| Y \partial_t \partial_Y U^P \|_{L^\infty_{t,Y}} \| u_{n,1} (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,.
\end{align*}
\paragraph{Case (i) $\delta_0^{-1}\leq |n|\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$, $\gamma\in [\frac79,1]$, and $|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12<1$.}
In this case we apply Theorem \ref{thm.semigroup} (i) for the semigroup $e^{-t\mathbb{A}_{\nu,n} (t_l)}$,
which gives for $\gamma\in [\frac79,1]\subset [\frac57,1]$,
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\| u_n (t) \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq C |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}(t-t_l)} \| u_n (t_l) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\\
& \quad + C |n|^{1+\frac52 (1-\gamma)} \int_{t_l}^t e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}(t-s)} (s-t_l) \| u_n (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,{\rm d} s\\
& \qquad + C |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} \int_{t_l}^t e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} (t-s)} (s-t_l)^\frac12 \| u_n (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,{\rm d} s\,.
\end{split}
\end{align*}
Since $t_{l+1}-t_l=\frac{T_0}{N}$ this estimate implies
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\sup_{t_l < t\leq t_{l+1} } \| u_n (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq C |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}\frac{T_0}{N}} \| u_n (t_l) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\\
&\quad + C_1 |n|^{1+\frac52 (1-\gamma)} (\frac{T_0}{N})^2 e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} \frac{T_0}{N}} \sup_{t_l < t\leq t_{l+1} } \| u_n (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\\
& \qquad + C_1 |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} (\frac{T_0}{N})^\frac32 e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} \frac{T_0}{N}} \sup_{t_l < t\leq t_{l+1} } \| u_n (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,.
\end{split}
\end{align*}
Let us take
\begin{align}
N=\max \{ \tilde \delta^{-1} |n|^\gamma T_0\,, 1\} \,, \qquad \gamma\in [\frac79,1]\,,\label{proof.thm.evolution.2}
\end{align}
where $\tilde \delta\in (0,\delta]$ is a small number depending only on $C_1$ chosen so that, for $\gamma\in [\frac79,1]$,
\begin{align*}
C_1 |n|^{1+\frac52 (1-\gamma)} (\frac{T_0}{N})^2 e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} \frac{T_0}{N}}
+ C_1 |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} (\frac{T_0}{N})^\frac32 e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} \frac{T_0}{N}}
&\leq C_1 \tilde \delta^2 |n|^{\frac72-\frac92\gamma} e^{\frac{\tilde \delta}{\delta}} + C_1 \tilde \delta^\frac32 |n|^{\frac52-4\gamma} e^{\frac{\tilde \delta}{\delta}} \\
& \leq\frac12\,.
\end{align*}
Thus we have
\begin{align*}
\sup_{t_l < t\leq t_{l+1} } \| u_n (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \leq C |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}\frac{T_0}{N}} \| u_n (t_l) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,,
\end{align*}
and in particular,
\begin{align}
\| u_n (t_{l+1}) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \leq C_2 |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}\frac{T_0}{N}} \| u_n (t_l) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,.\label{proof.thm.evolution.3}
\end{align}
Here $C_2$ is independent of $n$, $N$, and $T_0$.
If $N=1$ then we obtain the desired estimate for $T_0\leq \tilde \delta_0 |n|^{-\gamma}$.
If $N\geq 2$ then the iteration leads to the estimate
\begin{align}
\| u_n (T_0)\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} = \| u_n (t_N) \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq \bigg ( C_2 |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}\frac{T_0}{N}} \bigg )^N \| u_n (t_0) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\nonumber \\
& = \big( C_2 |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} \big )^{\frac{|n|^\gamma T_0}{\tilde \delta}} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} T_0} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\nonumber \\
& \leq Ce^{K|n|^{\gamma} \big (1+ (1-\gamma)\log |n| \big ) T_0} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,,\label{proof.thm.evolution.4}
\end{align}
for some $K>0$ independent of $n$, $\gamma$, and $T_0$. Hence, \eqref{est.thm.evolution.1} holds.
Next we show the derivative estimate.
The above iteration argument does not work well due to the appearance of the singularity in a short time.
To overcome this difficulty, recalling \eqref{def.A_t}, we write $u_n(t)=\mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,0) f$ as, instead of \eqref{proof.thm.evolution.1},
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.evolution.5}
\begin{split}
u_n (t) & = e^{-\nu t \mathbb{A}_n} f \\
&- \int_0^t e^{-\nu (t-s) \mathbb{A}_n} \mathbb{P} \bigg ( i n \big ( U^E (s) + U^{BL} (s,\frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) u_n (s) + u_{n,2} \partial_y \big ( U^E (s) + U^{BL} (s, \frac{\cdot}{\sqrt{\nu}}) \big ) {\bf e}_1 \bigg ) \,{\rm d} s
\end{split}
\end{align}
Here $\mathbb{A}_n$ is the Stokes operator $\mathbb{A}=-\mathbb{P}\Delta$ restricted on the invariant space $\mathcal{P}_n L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$. It is well known that
\begin{align*}
\| \nabla e^{-\nu t\mathbb{A}} f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 t^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,, \qquad t>0\,.
\end{align*}
Then we have by using the estimate as in \eqref{proof.prop.general.low.1} and by applying \eqref{est.thm.evolution.1},
\begin{align}
\| \nabla u_n (T_0) \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 T_0^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} + \frac{C|n|}{\nu^\frac12} \int_0^{T_0} \frac{\| u_n (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}}{(T_0-s)^{\frac12}} \,{\rm d} s\nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 T_0^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} + \frac{C|n|^{1+\frac52(1-\gamma)}}{\nu^\frac12} \int_0^{T_0} \frac{e^{K|n|^\gamma \big (1+ (1-\gamma)\log |n|\big ) s}}{(T_0-s)^{\frac12}} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,{\rm d} s\nonumber\\
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12 T_0^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} + \frac{C|n|^{\frac12 + 3 (1-\gamma)} e^{K|n|^\gamma \big (1+ (1-\gamma)\log |n|\big ) T_0}}{\nu^\frac12} \| f\|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,.\label{proof.thm.evolution.6}
\end{align}
This implies \eqref{est.thm.evolution.2}.
\paragraph{Case (ii) $|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 \geq 1$, $\gamma \in [\frac23,1]$.}
The strategy is the same as in the case (i), and we apply Theorem \ref{thm.semigroup} (ii) instead of (i) in this case, which yields from \eqref{proof.thm.evolution.1},
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\| u_n (t) \|_{L^2(\Omega)} & \leq C |n|^{1-\gamma} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}(t-t_l)} \| u_n (t_l) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\\
& \quad + C |n|^{1+ 1-\gamma} \int_{t_l}^t e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}(t-s)} (s-t_l) \| u_n (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,{\rm d} s\\
& \qquad + C |n|^{1-\gamma} \int_{t_l}^t e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} (t-s)} (s-t_l)^\frac12 \| u_n (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,{\rm d} s\,.
\end{split}
\end{align*}
Thus we have
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\sup_{t_l < t\leq t_{l+1} } \| u_n (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq C |n|^{1-\gamma} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}\frac{T_0}{N}} \| u_n (t_l) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\\
&\quad + C_1 |n|^{1+1-\gamma} (\frac{T_0}{N})^2 e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} \frac{T_0}{N}} \sup_{t_l < t\leq t_{l+1} } \| u_n (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\\
& \qquad + C_1 |n|^{1-\gamma} (\frac{T_0}{N})^\frac32 e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} \frac{T_0}{N}} \sup_{t_l < t\leq t_{l+1} } \| u_n (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,.
\end{split}
\end{align*}
Setting $N$ as in \eqref{proof.thm.evolution.2}, and we see for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$,
\begin{align*}
C_1 |n|^{1+1-\gamma} (\frac{T_0}{N})^2 e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} \frac{T_0}{N}}
+ C_1 |n|^{1-\gamma} (\frac{T_0}{N})^\frac32 e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta} \frac{T_0}{N}}
&\leq C_1 \tilde \delta^2 |n|^{2-3\gamma} e^{\frac{\tilde \delta}{\delta}} + C_1 \tilde \delta^\frac32 |n|^{1-\frac52\gamma} e^{\frac{\tilde \delta}{\delta}} \\
& \leq\frac12\,,
\end{align*}
if $\tilde \delta$ is sufficiently small depending only on $C_1$. Hence we obtain
\begin{align}
\| u_n (t_{l+1}) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \leq C_2 |n|^{1-\gamma} e^{\frac{|n|^\gamma}{\delta}\frac{T_0}{N}} \| u_n (t_l) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,.\label{proof.thm.evolution.7}
\end{align}
Then \eqref{est.thm.evolution.3} and \eqref{est.thm.evolution.4} follow from \eqref{proof.thm.evolution.7} by the same argument as in the case (i).
The details are omitted here. The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
\section{Nonlinear stability in Gevrey class}\label{sec.nonlinear}
In this section we consider the full nonlinear problem \eqref{eq.perturb.intro}.
By the Duhamel formula the associated integral equations are given by
\begin{align}\label{eq.ns.integral}
u(t) = \mathbb{T}_\nu (t,0) a - \int_0^t \mathbb{T}_\nu (t,s) \mathbb{P} \big ( u \cdot \nabla u \big ) \,{\rm d} s\,, \qquad t>0\,.
\end{align}
For $\gamma\in (0,1]$, $d\geq 0$, and $K>0$ let us introduce the Banach space $X_{d,\gamma,K}$ as
\begin{align}
X_{d,\gamma, K} = \{ f\in L^2_\sigma (\Omega) ~|~ \| f \|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} = \sup_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} \, (1+|n|^d) e^{K\theta_{\gamma,n}} \| \mathcal{P}_n f \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} <\infty \}\,,
\end{align}
where $\theta_{\gamma,n}=|n|^\gamma \big ( 1+ (1-\gamma) \log (1+|n|) \big )$ as in \eqref{est.thm.evolution.0}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm.nonlinear} Assume that \eqref{concave.weak.t} holds for some $T>0$. For any $\gamma \in [\frac79,1)$, $d>\frac92-\frac72\gamma$, and $K>0$, there exist $T'\in (0,T]$ and $K'\in (0,K)$ such that the following statement holds for any sufficiently small $\nu>0$.
If $\| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} \leq \nu^{\frac12+\beta}$ with $\beta=\frac{2(1-\gamma)}{\gamma}$ then the system \eqref{eq.ns.integral} admits a unique solution $u\in C([0,T']; L^2_\sigma (\Omega))\cap L^2 (0,T'; W^{1,2}_0 (\Omega)^2)$ satisfying the estimate
\begin{align}\label{est.thm.nonlinear.1}
\sup_{0<t\leq T'} \big ( \| u (t) \|_{X_{d,\gamma,K'}} + (\nu t)^\frac14 \| u(t) \|_{L^\infty (\Omega)} + (\nu t)^\frac12 \| \nabla u (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \big ) \leq C \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} \,.
\end{align}
Here $C>0$ is independent of $\nu$.
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}{\rm (i) Since $a\in L^2_\sigma (\Omega)$ and the problem is a two-dimensional one, the unique existence of global solutions to \eqref{eq.ns.integral} in $C([0,\infty); L^2_\sigma (\Omega))\cap L^2_{loc} (0,\infty; W^{1,2}_0 (\Omega)^2)$ is classical for any $\nu>0$. The nontrivial part of Theorem \ref{thm.nonlinear} is the estimate \eqref{est.thm.nonlinear.1}, which is uniform with respect to sufficiently small $\nu>0$.
\noindent (ii) Theorem \ref{thm.nonlinear} holds also for $\gamma=1$ if $\|a\|_{X_{g,1,K}} \leq \kappa \nu^\frac12$ with sufficiently small (but independent of $\nu$) $\kappa>0$.
\noindent (iii) The requirement $\gamma\in [\frac79,1)$ comes form Theorem \ref{thm.evolution.middle}; the stability estimate for the evolution operator is obtained only for the exponent $\gamma\in [\frac79,1]$.
In other words, once Theorem \ref{thm.evolution.middle} is obtained for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1]$ (with the same estimates as in \eqref{est.thm.evolution.1} - \eqref{est.thm.evolution.4} ) then Theorem \ref{thm.nonlinear} holds for $\gamma\in [\frac23,1)$ without any change of the statement.
}
\end{rem}
\begin{proofx}{Theorem \ref{thm.nonlinear}} Set
\begin{align}
q=d-\frac72(1-\gamma) \in (1,d) \,, \qquad K(t) = K - 2 K_0 t\,,\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.1}
\end{align}
where $K_0>0$ is the number in Theorem \ref{thm.evolution.middle}.
We establish the a priori estimate of the solution to \eqref{eq.ns.integral} in the space
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.2}
\begin{split}
Y_{\gamma, K, T'} & = \{ f\in C([0, T']; L^2_\sigma (\Omega))~|~\\
& \qquad \|f\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}} = \sup_{0<t\leq T'} \big ( \| f (t) \|_{X_{q,\gamma, K(t)}} + \| (\nu t)^\frac12 \nabla f (t) \|_{X_{q,\gamma, K(t)}} \big ) <\infty \}\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
For each $n\in \mathbb{Z}$ we have
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.3}
\mathcal{P}_n u(t) = \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,0) \mathcal{P}_n a - \int_0^t \mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s) \mathbb{P} \mathcal{P}_n \big ( u \cdot \nabla u \big ) \,{\rm d} s\,, \qquad t>0\,.
\end{align}
For $1\leq |n|\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$ the evolution operator $\mathbb{T}_{\nu,n} (t,s)$ is estimated as in \eqref{est.thm.evolution.1} - \eqref{est.thm.evolution.4} in virtue of Proposition \ref{prop.general.low} for $|n|\leq \delta_0^{-1}$ and Theorem \ref{thm.evolution.middle} for $\delta_0^{-1}<|n|\leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$. The estimate for the case $n=0$ follows from Proposition \ref{prop.general.low} with $m_1=1$.
\paragraph{Case (i) $|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 < 1$.}
In this case we have from \eqref{est.thm.evolution.1},
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.4}
\begin{split}
\| \mathcal{P}_n u (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq C (1+ |n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} ) e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} t} \| \mathcal{P}_n a\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
&\quad + C (1+|n|^{\frac52(1-\gamma)} ) \int_0^t e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} \| \mathcal{P}_n (u \cdot \nabla u) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,{\rm d} s \,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
The nonlinear term is estimated as
\begin{align*}
\| \mathcal{P}_n ( u \cdot \nabla u ) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq \| \| \mathcal{P}_n ( u_1 \partial_x u ) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} + \| \mathcal{P}_n ( u_2 \partial_y u ) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \nonumber \\
& \leq \| \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} (e^{-i j x} \mathcal{P}_j u_1) \cdot (e^{-i (n-j) x} \partial_x \mathcal{P}_{n-j} u ) \|_{L^2_y (\mathbb{R}_+)} \nonumber \\
& \quad + \| \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} (e^{-i j x} \mathcal{P}_j u_2) \cdot (e^{-i (n-j) x} \partial_y \mathcal{P}_{n-j} u ) \|_{L^2_y (\mathbb{R}_+)}\,.
\end{align*}
From the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality we have
\begin{align*}
& \| \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} (e^{-i j x} \mathcal{P}_j u_1) \cdot (e^{-i (n-j) x} \partial_x \mathcal{P}_{n-j} u ) \|_{L^2_y (\mathbb{R}_+)}\\
& \leq \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} \| e^{-i j x} \mathcal{P}_j u_1 \|_{L^\infty_y (\mathbb{R}_+)} \| e^{-i (n-j) x} \mathcal{P}_{n-j} \partial_x u\|_{L^2_y (\mathbb{R}_+)}\\
& \leq C \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} \| e^{-ijx} \mathcal{P}_j u_1 \|_{L^2(\mathbb{R}_+)}^\frac12 \| \partial_y e^{-ijx} \mathcal{P}_j u_1 \|_{L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)}^\frac12 |n-j| ^\frac12 \| \mathcal{P}_{n-j} u \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}^\frac12 \| \mathcal{P}_{n-j} \partial_x u \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}^\frac12 \nonumber \\
& \leq C \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} \| \mathcal{P}_j u _1\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^\frac12 \| \nabla \mathcal{P}_j u_1 \|_{L^2(\Omega)}^\frac12 |n-j|^\frac12 \| \mathcal{P}_{n-j} u \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}^\frac12 \| \nabla \mathcal{P}_{n-j} u \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}^\frac12\,.
\end{align*}
On the other hand, the divergence free condition implies
\begin{align*}
& \| \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} (e^{-i j x} \mathcal{P}_j u_2) \cdot (e^{-i (n-j) x} \partial_y \mathcal{P}_{n-j} u ) \|_{L^2_y (\mathbb{R}_+)}\\
& \leq \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} \| e^{-i j x} \mathcal{P}_j u_2 \|_{L^\infty_y (\mathbb{R}_+)} \| e^{-i (n-j) x} \mathcal{P}_{n-j} \partial_y u\|_{L^2_y (\mathbb{R}_+)}\\
& \leq C \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} \| e^{-ijx} \mathcal{P}_j u_2 \|_{L^2(\mathbb{R}_+)}^\frac12 \| \partial_y e^{-ijx} \mathcal{P}_j u_2 \|_{L^2 (\mathbb{R}_+)}^\frac12 \| \mathcal{P}_{n-j} \partial_y u \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \nonumber \\
& \leq C \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} \| \mathcal{P}_j u _1\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^\frac12 \|\mathcal{P}_j \partial_x u_1 \|_{L^2(\Omega)}^\frac12 \| \nabla \mathcal{P}_{n-j} u \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\\
& \leq C \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} |j|^\frac12 \| \mathcal{P}_j u _1\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \| \nabla \mathcal{P}_{n-j} u \|_{L^2 (\Omega)}\,.
\end{align*}
Thus, for $u\in Y_{\gamma,K,T'}$ we have
\begin{align*}
& \| \mathcal{P}_n ( u \cdot \nabla u ) (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
& \leq \frac{C}{(\nu s)^\frac12} \sum_{j\in \mathbb{Z}} \big ( \frac{1}{(1+|j|^q)(1+|n-j|^{q-\frac12})} + \frac{1}{(1+|j|^{q-\frac12})(1+|n-j|^q)} \big ) \\
& \qquad \qquad \qquad \times e^{-K(s) \theta_{\gamma,j}-K(s) \theta_{\gamma,n-j}} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2
\end{align*}
Since the function $h(\tau) = \tau^\gamma \big ( 1+ (1-\gamma) \log (1+\tau)\big)$, $\gamma\in (0,1)$, is monotone increasing and concave for $\tau>0$ we have $\theta_{\gamma,j} + \theta_{\gamma,n-j}\geq \theta_{\gamma,n}$. Then we finally obtain
\begin{align}
\| \mathcal{P}_n ( u \cdot \nabla u ) (s) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{(\nu s)^\frac12} \frac{e^{-K(s) \theta_{\gamma,n}}}{1+|n|^{q-\frac12}} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2\,.\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.5}
\end{align}
Here we have also used the condition $q>1$. Note that \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.5} itself is valid for all $n\in \mathbb{Z}$. By the definition of $K(t)$ in \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.1}, we have for $|n|\geq 1$,
\begin{align}
\int_0^t e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} e^{-K(s)\theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12} \,{\rm d} s
& \, = \, e^{-(K -K_0 t) \theta_{\gamma,n}} \int_0^t e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} s} s^{-\frac12} \,{\rm d} s \nonumber \\
& \leq C e^{-(K-2K_0t)\theta_{\gamma,n}} \min\{ \frac{1}{(K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n})^\frac12}, t^\frac12 \} \,,\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.6}
\end{align}
Therefore, from \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.4}, \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.5}, and \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.6}, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\| \mathcal{P}_n u (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq C \frac{e^{-(K-K_0 t) \theta_{\gamma,n}}}{1+|n|^{d-\frac52(1-\gamma)}} \| a \|_{X_{d,\gamma, K}} \\
& \quad + \frac{C (1+ |n|)^{\frac12 + \frac52 (1-\gamma)} e^{-K(t) \theta_{\gamma,n}}}{\nu^\frac12 (1+|n|^q)} \min\{ \frac{1}{(K_0\theta_{\gamma,n})^\frac12}, t^\frac12\} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2\,,
\end{align*}
and hence, if $T' < \frac{K}{2K_0}$ then for $\beta=\frac{2(1-\gamma)}{\gamma}$,
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.8}
& \sup_{0<t\leq T'} \sup_{|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 < 1} (1+|n|^q) e^{K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}} \| \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \nonumber \\
& \qquad \leq C \bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 <1} (1+|n|)^{\frac12 + \frac52(1-\gamma)} \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}, {T'}^\frac12\} \bigg ) \nonumber \\
& \qquad \leq C \bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12-\beta} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 <1} (1+|n|)^{\frac12 + \frac52(1-\gamma)-2\beta\gamma} \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}, {T'}^\frac12\} \bigg ) \nonumber \\
& \qquad \leq C \bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12-\beta} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} \, (1+|n|)^{\frac12 - \frac32(1-\gamma)} \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}, {T'}^\frac12\} \bigg ) \,.
\end{align}
Since $\theta_{\gamma,n}=|n|^\gamma \big (1+ (1-\gamma) \log (1+|n|)\big )$ and $\gamma<1$ we see
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.8'}
\lim_{T'\rightarrow 0} \sup_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} \, (1+|n|)^{\frac12 - \frac32(1-\gamma)} \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}, {T'}^\frac12\} \, = \, 0 \,.
\end{align}
The derivative estimate is obtained similarly for $|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 < 1$.
Indeed, from Proposition \ref{prop.general.low} for $|n|\leq \delta_0^{-1}$ and Theorem \ref{thm.evolution.middle} for $\delta_0^{-1}<|n| < \nu^{-\frac{1}{2\gamma}}$, we have, instead of \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.4},
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.9}
\begin{split}
\| \nabla \mathcal{P}_n u (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12} \big ( \frac{1}{t^\frac12} + |n|^{\frac12+3(1-\gamma)} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} t} \big ) \| \mathcal{P}_n a\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
& \quad + \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12} \int_0^t \big ( \frac{1}{(t-s)^\frac12} + |n|^{\frac12+3(1-\gamma)} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} \big ) \| \mathcal{P}_n (u \cdot \nabla u) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,{\rm d} s\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Noe that the inequality $e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} t} \leq C (K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} t)^{-\frac12}e^{2 K_0|n|^\gamma t}$ holds. Then the first term of the right-hand side of \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.9} is bounded from above by
\begin{align*}
\frac{C}{(\nu t)^\frac12} \big (1 + |n|^{\frac72(1-\gamma)} e^{2 K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} t} \big ) \| \mathcal{P}_n a\|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \,.
\end{align*}
On the other hand, by using \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.5} the second term of the right-hand side of \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.9} is estimated as
\begin{align*}
& \frac{C(1+|n|^\frac12)}{\nu (1+|n|^q)} \int_0^t \big ( \frac{1}{(t-s)^\frac12} + |n|^{\frac12 + 3 (1-\gamma)} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} \big ) \frac{e^{- K(s)\theta_{\gamma,n}}}{s^\frac12} \,{\rm d} s \, \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \\
& \, = :\, I_{\nu,n} (t) \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2\,.
\end{align*}
Here we have to be careful about the derivative loss in $I_{\nu,n} (t)$ for large $n$.
We observe that, for $l\in (-1,1]$,
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.24}
\int_0^t (t-s)^{l} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s) -K(s)\theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12} \,{\rm d} s & \leq Ce^{-K(t) \theta_{\gamma,n}} \min\{ \frac{1}{\theta_{\gamma,n}^{1+l} t^\frac12}\,, ~t^{\frac{1+l}{2}} \}\,.
\end{align}
Then the term $I_{\nu,n}(t)$ is estimated as
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.11}
\begin{split}
I_{\nu,n} (t) & \leq \frac{C (1+|n|^\frac12) e^{-K(t) \theta_{\gamma,n}}}{\nu (1+|n^q)} \min\{ \frac{1}{(\theta_{\gamma,n}t)^\frac12}\,, ~ t^{\frac14}\} \\
& \quad + \frac{C(1+|n|)^{1+3(1-\gamma)} e^{-K (t) \theta_{\gamma,n}}}{\nu (1+|n|^q)} \min\{\frac{1}{ \theta_{\gamma,n} t^\frac12}\,, ~t^\frac12 \} \,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Thus we obtain for $T' < \frac{K}{2K_0}$,
\begin{align*}
& (\nu t )^\frac12\| \nabla \mathcal{P}_n u (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
& \leq \frac{Ce^{-K(t) \theta_{\gamma,n} \gamma} }{(1+|n|)^{d-\frac72(1-\gamma)}} \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K_0}} + \frac{C (1+|n|)^\frac12 e^{-K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}}}{\nu^\frac12 (1+|n|^q)} \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12} \,, ~ t^\frac34 \} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \nonumber \\
& \quad + \frac{C (1+|n|)^{1+3(1-\gamma)} e^{-K (t)\theta_{\gamma,n}}}{\nu^\frac12 (1+|n|^q)} \min \{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-1}\,, ~ t \} \, \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2\,.
\end{align*}
Recall that $q= d-\frac72 (1-\gamma)$ and $\beta = \frac{2(1-\gamma)}{\gamma}$.
Then we have
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.13}
& \sup_{0<t\leq T'} \sup_{|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 <1} (1+|n|^q) e^{K(t)|n|^\gamma} (\nu t )^\frac12\| \nabla \mathcal{P}_n u (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \nonumber \\
& \leq C\bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{|n|^\gamma\nu^\frac12<1} (1+|n|)^\frac12 \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}\,, ~{T'}^\frac34\} \nonumber \\
& \quad + \nu^{-\frac12} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{|n|^\gamma\nu^\frac12<1} \, (1+|n|)^{1+3 (1-\gamma)}\min \{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-1}\,, ~ {T'} \} \big ) \bigg ) \nonumber \\
& \leq C\bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12-\beta} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{|n|^\gamma\nu^\frac12<1} (1+|n|)^{\frac12-2\beta\gamma} \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}\,, ~{T'}^\frac34\} \nonumber \\
& \quad + \nu^{-\frac12-\beta} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{|n|^\gamma\nu^\frac12<1} \, (1+|n|)^{1+3 (1-\gamma)-2\beta \gamma}\min \{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-1}\,, ~ {T'} \} \bigg ) \nonumber \\
\begin{split}
& \leq C\bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12-\beta} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} (1+|n|)^{\frac12-4(1-\gamma)} \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}\,, ~{T'}^\frac34\} \\
& \quad + \nu^{-\frac12-\beta} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} \, (1+|n|)^{1 - (1-\gamma)}\min \{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-1}\,, ~ {T'} \} \bigg ) \,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Note that, since $\theta_{\gamma,n} = |n|^\gamma \big ( 1+ (1-\gamma) \log (1+|n|)\big)$ and $\gamma <1$, we see that
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.14}
\begin{split}
\lim_{T'\rightarrow 0} \sup_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} (1+|n|)^{\frac12-4(1-\gamma)} \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}\,, ~{T'}^\frac12\} & \, = \, 0\,,\\
\lim_{T'\rightarrow 0} \sup_{n\in \mathbb{Z}} \, (1+|n|)^{1 - (1-\gamma)}\min \{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-1}\,, ~ {T'} \} & \, =\, 0\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\paragraph{Case (ii) $|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 \geq 1$ and $|n|\leq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}$.}
The argument is the same as in the case (i), we simply apply the result of (ii) in Theorem \ref{thm.evolution.middle} in this case. From \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.3} combined with \eqref{est.thm.evolution.3} and \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.5} we have
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.15}
\| \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq C |n|^{1-\gamma} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} t} \| \mathcal{P}_n a \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \nonumber \\
& \quad + \frac{C(1+|n|)^\frac12}{\nu^\frac12 (1+|n|^q)} \int_0^t |n|^{1-\gamma} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} e^{- K(s)\theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12}\,{\rm d} s \, \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \nonumber \\
\begin{split}
& \leq \frac{C |n|^{1-\gamma} e^{-K(t) \theta_{\gamma,n}}}{(1+|n|^d)} \| \mathcal{P}_n a \|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} \\
& \quad + \frac{C|n|^{\frac12+1-\gamma}}{\nu^\frac12 (1+|n|^q)} \int_0^t e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} e^{- K(s)\theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12}\,{\rm d} s \, \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Using \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.6} and \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.6}, we obtain from the similar calculation as in \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.8},
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.16}
& \sup_{0<t\leq T'} \sup_{\nu^{-\frac{1}{2\gamma}} \leq |n| \leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}} (1+|n|^q) e^{K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}} \| \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \nonumber \\
& \qquad \leq C \bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{\nu^{-\frac{1}{2\gamma}} \leq |n| \leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}} (1+|n|)^{\frac12 + 1-\gamma} \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}, {T'}^\frac12\} \bigg ) \nonumber \\
& \qquad \leq C \bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{\nu^{-\frac{1}{2\gamma}} \leq |n| \leq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}} (1+|n|)^{\frac32(1-\gamma)} \bigg ) \nonumber \\
& \qquad \leq C \bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12-\frac98(1-\gamma)} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \bigg ) \,.
\end{align}
In the first line we have used the fact $d-q-1+\gamma\geq 0$ by the choice of $q$.
As for the derivative estimate, we have from \eqref{est.thm.evolution.4},
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.17}
\begin{split}
& \| \nabla \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
& \leq \frac{C}{\nu^\frac12} \big ( \frac{1}{t^\frac12} + |n|^{\frac12+\frac32(1-\gamma)} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} \big ) \| \mathcal{P}_n a \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
& \quad + \frac{C(1+|n|)^\frac12}{\nu (1+|n|^q)} \int_0^t \big ( \frac{1}{(t-s)^\frac12} + |n|^{\frac12 + \frac32 (1-\gamma)} e^{K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} (t-s)} \big ) e^{- K(s) \theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12}\,{\rm d} s \, \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Therefore, the similar computation as in \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.16} using \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.24} yields
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.18}
& \sup_{0<t\leq T'} \sup_{|n|^\gamma \nu^\frac12 <1} (1+|n|^q) e^{K(t)|n|^\gamma} (\nu t )^\frac12\| \nabla \mathcal{P}_n u (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \nonumber \\
& \leq C\bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{^\frac12} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{\nu^{-\frac{1}{2\gamma}}\leq |n| \leq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}} (1+|n|)^\frac12 \min\{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}\,, ~{T'}^\frac12\} \nonumber \\
& \quad + \nu^{-\frac12} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \sup_{\nu^{-\frac{1}{2\gamma}}\leq |n| \leq \delta_0^{-1} \nu^{-\frac34}} \, (1+|n|)^{1+\frac32 (1-\gamma)}\min \{ \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-1}\,, ~ {T'} \} \big ) \bigg ) \nonumber \\
\begin{split}
& \leq C\bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12-\frac{15}{8} (1-\gamma)} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \bigg ) \,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Note that $\frac{15}{8} (1-\gamma)<\beta=\frac{2}{\gamma}(1-\gamma)$ for $\gamma<1$.
\paragraph{Case (iii) $|n|>\delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$.}
In this case we apply Theorem \ref{prop.general.high}.
For the estimate of $\| \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2(\Omega)}$
we have from \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.3} combined with \eqref{est.prop.general.high.1} and\eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.5},
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.19}
\| \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} & \leq C \| \mathcal{P}_n a \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} + \frac{C(1+|n|)^\frac12}{\nu^\frac12 (1+|n|^q)} \int_0^t e^{-\frac14\nu |n|^2 (t-s)} e^{- K(s)\theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12}\,{\rm d} s \, \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2\,.
\end{align}
Then we see
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.20}
I = (1+|n|)^\frac12 \int_0^t e^{-\frac14\nu |n|^2 (t-s)} e^{- K(s)\theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12}\,{\rm d} s\leq \frac{C e^{-K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}}}{\nu^{\frac12 (1-\gamma)}}
\end{align}
for $|n|>\delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$. Indeed, when $\delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}\leq |n|\leq \nu^{-1}$ we have
\begin{align*}
I \leq C|n|^\frac12 \int_0^t e^{-K(s) \theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12} \,{\rm d} s \leq C |n|^\frac12 e^{-K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}} \theta_{\gamma,n}^{-\frac12}\leq C \nu^{-\frac12 (1-\gamma)} e^{-K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}}\,,
\end{align*}
while when $|n|\geq \nu^{-1}$ we use the factor $e^{-\frac14\nu n^2 (t-s)}$ in the integral of $I$, and then
\begin{align*}
I \leq C \int_0^t \frac{1}{\nu^\frac14 (t-s)^\frac14} e^{-K(s) \theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12} \,{\rm d} s \leq \frac{C e^{-K(t) \theta_{\gamma,n}}}{\nu^{\frac14} \theta_{\gamma,n}^\frac14} \leq C e^{-K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}} \nu^{-\frac14 (1-\gamma)}\,,
\end{align*}
which proves \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.20}. Then \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.19} and \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.20} give
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.21}
\sup_{0<t\leq T'} \sup_{|n|\geq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}} (1+|n|^q) e^{K(t) \theta_{\gamma,n}} \| \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq C \bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12-\frac12 (1-\gamma)} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma, K,T'}}^2\bigg ) \,.
\end{align}
The derivative of $\mathcal{P}_n u$ is estimated by using \eqref{est.prop.general.high.2}, and we obtain
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.22}
\begin{split}
& \| \nabla \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
& \leq \frac{C}{(\nu t)^\frac12} \big ( 1 + |n|t \big ) e^{-\frac14 \nu n^2 t} \| \mathcal{P}_n a \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \\
& \quad + \frac{C(1+|n|)^\frac12}{\nu (1+|n|^q)} \int_0^t \big ( \frac{1}{(t-s)^\frac12} + |n|(t-s)^\frac12 \big ) e^{-\frac14\nu |n|^2 (t-s)} e^{- K(s) \theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12}\,{\rm d} s \, \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
The last integral has to be computed carefully as in \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.20}.
Our aim is to show
\begin{align}
II & \, := \, (1+|n|)^\frac12 \int_0^t \big ( \frac{1}{(t-s)^\frac12} + |n|(t-s)^\frac12 \big ) e^{-\frac14\nu |n|^2 (t-s) - K(s) \theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12}\,{\rm d} s \nonumber \\
& \leq \frac{Ce^{-K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}}}{\nu^{\frac32(1-\gamma)} t^\frac12} \,,\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.23}
\end{align}
for $|n|\geq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}$. We first consider the case $\delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}\leq |n|\leq \nu^{-1}$. In this case we have from \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.24} and $\theta_{\gamma,n}=|n|^\gamma \big (1+ (1-\gamma)\log (1+|n|) \big )$,
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.25}
II \leq \frac{C e^{-K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}} }{t^\frac12} \big ( |n|^{\frac{1-\gamma}{2}} + |n|^{\frac32 (1-\gamma)} \big ) \leq \frac{Ce^{-K(t) \theta_{\gamma,n}} }{\nu^{\frac32 (1-\gamma)} t^\frac12} \,.
\end{align}
Next we consider the case $|n|\geq \nu^{-1}$. In this case we use the factor $e^{-\frac14\nu n^2 (t-s)}$ in the integral of $II$, and then
\begin{align*}
II \leq C\int_0^t \big ( \frac{1}{\nu^{\frac14} (t-s)^{\frac34}} + \frac{1}{\nu^\frac34 (t-s)^\frac14} \big ) e^{-K(s)\theta_{\gamma,n}} s^{-\frac12} \,{\rm d} s,
\end{align*}
which is bounded from above by, again from \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.24} and $|n|\geq \nu^{-1}$,
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.26}
C \big ( \frac{1}{\nu^\frac14 \theta_{\gamma,n}^\frac14} + \frac{1}{\nu^\frac34 \theta_{\gamma,n}^\frac34} \big ) t^{-\frac12} e^{-K(t) \theta_{\gamma,n}} \leq \frac{C e^{-K(t)\theta_{\gamma,n}}}{\nu^{\frac34 (1-\gamma)} t^\frac12}\,.
\end{align}
Collecting \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.25} and \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.26}, we obtain \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.23}. Then \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.19} and \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.23} yield
\begin{align*}
& (1+|n|^q) e^{K(t)|n|^\gamma}(\nu t)^\frac12 \| \nabla \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \nonumber \\
& \leq C \frac{(1+|n|t)}{1+|n|^{d-q}} e^{-2 K_0 \theta_{\gamma,n} t -\frac14\nu n^2 t} \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}}
+ C\nu^{-\frac12-\frac32(1-\gamma)} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2\nonumber \\
& \leq C \frac{(1+|n|^{1-\gamma})}{1+|n|^{d-q}} \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}}
+ C\nu^{-\frac12-\frac32(1-\gamma)} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \,.\nonumber
\end{align*}
Since $d-q-1+\gamma\geq 0$ by the choice of $q$, we obtain
\begin{align}
\sup_{|n|\geq \delta_0^{-1}\nu^{-\frac34}} (1+|n|^q) e^{K(t)|n|^\gamma}(\nu t)^\frac12 \| \nabla \mathcal{P}_n u(t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \leq C \big ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} + \nu^{-\frac12-\frac32(1-\gamma)} \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \big ) \,.\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.27}
\end{align}
Since $\beta=\frac{2(1-\gamma)}{\gamma}$ and $0<\gamma<1$ we have $\nu^{\beta-\frac32(1-\gamma)} \rightarrow 0$ as $\nu\rightarrow 0$.
Collecting \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.8}, \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.8'}, \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.13}, \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.14}, \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.16}, \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.18}, \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.21}, and \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.27}, we have arrived at, for $\gamma\in [\frac79,1)$ and $T'< \frac{K}{2K_0}$,
\begin{align}\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.28}
\begin{split}
\| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}} &\leq C' \bigg ( \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K_0}} + \kappa \nu^{-\frac12-\beta} \| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}^2 \bigg )\,.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Here $C'>0$ is independent of small $T'$ and $\nu$, while $\kappa=\kappa (T',\nu)>0$ is taken as small enough when $T'$ and $\nu$ are sufficiently small. Hence, we can close the estimate if $T'$ and $\nu$ are small enough as long as $\| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}\leq C \nu^{\frac12+\beta}$, which is consistent with the condition $\| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}}\leq \nu^{\frac12+\beta}$. Note that the number $T'$ is taken uniformly with respect to sufficiently small $\nu$.
In particular, we obtain
\begin{align}
\| u\|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}} \leq 2 C' \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} \,.\label{proof.thm.nonlinear.29}
\end{align}
The existence of solutions satisfying \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.29} is proved by the Banach fixed point theorem in the closed ball
$\{f \in Y_{\gamma,K,T'}~|~\| f \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}} \leq 2 C' \| a\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K}} \}$, based on exactly the same calculation as above.
Since the argument is standard we omit the details here.
Note that if $u\in Y_{\gamma,K,T'}$ and $T'\in (0, \frac{K}{4K_0})$ then $u(t), (\nu t)^\frac12 \nabla u(t) \in X_{q,\gamma,2K'}\subset X_{d,\gamma,K'}$ with $K'=\frac{K}{4}$ for all $t\in (0,T']$, and $\displaystyle \sup_{0 < t\leq T'} \big ( \| u(t)\|_{X_{d,\gamma,K'}} + (\nu t)^\frac12 \| \nabla u(t) \|_{X_{d,\gamma,K'}} \big ) \leq C \| u \|_{Y_{\gamma,K,T'}}$ holds. Hence, by using the embedding
$$(\nu t)^\frac14 \| u(t) \|_{L^\infty(\Omega)} + (\nu t)^\frac12 \| \nabla u (t) \|_{L^2 (\Omega)} \leq C \big ( \| u(t) \|_{X_{d,\gamma, K'}} + (\nu t)^\frac12 \|\nabla u(t) \|_{X_{d,\gamma,K'}}\big )\,,$$
the estimate \eqref{est.thm.nonlinear.1} follows from \eqref{proof.thm.nonlinear.29}. The proof is complete.
\end{proofx}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work is supported by JSPS Program for Advancing Strategic International Networks
to Accelerate the Circulation of Talented Researchers,
'Development of Concentrated Mathematical Center Linking to Wisdom of the Next Generation',
which is organized by the Mathematical Institute of Tohoku University.
The first author also acknowledges the support of ANR project Dyficolty ANR-13-BS01-0003-01 and the support of program ANR-11-IDEX-005 of Universit\'e Sorbonne Paris Cit\'e.
The second author is grateful to Universit\'e Paris Diderot
and Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences for their kind hospitality during his stay
from November 2015 to February 2016.
|
\section{Introduction}
Transits of Mercury and Venus across the solar disk are well-observed celestial
phenomena. Recently, the
transit of Mercury observed with \textit{Hinode}/X-Ray Telescope (XRT;
\citealt{Gol07}) has been used by \citet{Web07} to test the sharpness
of the instrument Point Spread Function (PSF). \citet{rea15} used
\textit{Hinode}/XRT observations of a Venus transit to measure the size of
Venus in the X-ray band thus inferring the extension and optical thickness
of Venus\rq\ atmosphere. The methods and implications of the latter work reach
into planetary physics and hint at similar methods to be potentially used,
in the future, for exoplanets.\\
In this
work we analyze the same set of observations to explore the residual
X-ray emission observed in Venus\rq\ shadow and find, with the help of
an updated version of the \textit{Hinode}/XRT PSF, that this emission is not
due to instrumental scattering and may have an origin more directly related
to Venus. Previous observations with Chandra
in 2001 and then in 2006/2007 confirmed the X-ray emission from
the sunlit side of the Venus (\citealt{Den02} and \citealt{den08}).\\
In Section 2 we present the observations of Mercury and Venus with a
brief summary of the satellites and their instruments; in Section 3 we
measure the residual flux in the shadow of Mercury in X-ray and of Venus
in X-Ray, EUV and UV bands, and its evolution as Venus crosses the solar disk. In Section
4 we deconvolve X-ray images using the updated PSF and different codes, and
again explore similarities and differences among the various observations;
in Section 5 we describe the XRT straylight contamination and present our results
taken with the Al-mesh filter. In Section 6 we show similar results
obtained in EUV and UV bands. Section 7 contains our discussion and
the conclusions.
\section{Observation: Transit of Mercury and Venus}
On 2006 Nov 08,
Mercury passed across the solar disk. Its transit lasted for almost
five hours and was observed with \textit{Hinode}/XRT in the X-ray band;
Fig.~\ref{transit} shows a selected image of this phenomenon.\\
A Venus transit was observed with \textit{Hinode}/XRT
in 2012 while it was crossing the northern hemisphere of the Sun; the
transit lasted over six hours. On the 5th of June 2012, the Venus transit began
at 22:09 UTC and finished on June 6th at 04:49 UTC. The Venus
transit was also observed with the \textit{Solar Dynamics
Observatory}/Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (SDO/AIA) \citep{Pes12}
in the Ultraviolet (UV) and Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) bands. Fig.~\ref{transit}
shows an image taken during this transit.\\
In the following we briefly discuss the
satellites and the instruments which took the data used in this work.\\
\begin{figure} [!t]
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\linewidth}
\includegraphics[trim={5cm 3cm 3cm 1cm},clip,width=\textwidth]{mercury.ps}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\end{minipage}%
\hspace{.05\linewidth}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.37\linewidth}
\includegraphics[trim={5cm 2cm 5.5cm 3.5cm},clip,width=\textwidth]{venus.ps}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\end{minipage}%
\caption{\small Left: Mercury transit across the Sun observed with \textit{Hinode}/XRT in the X-Ray band. \newline (Time of observation, 2006-11-08 23:51:04.571).\newline
Right: Venus (black circle) approaching the Sun, observed with \textit{Hinode}/XRT in the X-Ray band. \newline
(Time of observation 2012-06-05 21:57:39.893). }
\label{transit}
\end{figure}%
\subsection{Hinode/XRT}
The \textit{Hinode} satellite (formerly Solar-B) of the Japan Aerospace
Exploration Agency's Institute of Space and Astronautical Science
(ISAS/JAXA) was successfully launched in September 2006. There are three
instruments onboard: the Solar Optical Telescope (SOT), the EUV Imaging
Spectrometer (EIS), and the X-Ray Telescope (XRT). We used only data
from XRT.\\ XRT is a high-resolution grazing-incidence telescope with a
modified Wolter-I telescope design that uses grazing incidence optics
with an angular resolution consistent with 1.0286 arcsec per pixel at
the CCD \citep{Gol07}. \\ An improved version of the \textit{Hinode}/XRT PSF has been derived by
P. R. Jibben of the XRT instrument team. The Model PSF has 99\% of the encircled energy within a
100 arcsec diameter with the remaining 1\% scattered beyond\footnote{For
more information about the derivation of the PSF, the interested reader
can refer to Appendix A.}. The PSF model at 0.56 keV is:
\begin{doublespace}
\[
PSF=
\begin{cases}
a \frac{exp(-\frac{r^2}{\sigma^2})}{\gamma^2+r^2},& \text{if $ r \leq 3.4176 $}; \\
\frac{0.03}{r},& \text{if $3.4176 \leq r \leq 5 $}; \\
\frac{0.15}{r^2},& \text{if $5 \leq r \leq 11.1 $}; \\
\frac{(11.1)^2\times0.15}{r^4},& \text{if $ r \geq 11.1 $};
\end{cases}
\]
\normalsize
\end{doublespace}
Where r = radial distance in arc seconds, a = 1.31946, \(\sigma = 2.19256 \) and \(\gamma= 1.24891\).\\
This PSF is planned for distribution in the XRT branch of SolarSoft \citep{Fre00} \citep{Ben98}.\\
\subsection{SDO/AIA}
The \textit{Solar Dynamics Observatory} (SDO) was launched on February
11, 2010. The spacecraft includes three instruments: the Extreme Ultraviolet
Variability Experiment (EVE), the Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI),
and the Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA) \citep{Lem12}. We used only data
taken with AIA.\\ AIA, with an angular resolution of 0.6 arcsec per pixel,
provides narrow-band imaging in seven extreme ultraviolet (EUV) band
passes centered on specific lines: (94 {\AA}, 131 {\AA}, 171 {\AA},
193 {\AA}, 211 {\AA}, 304 {\AA} and 335 {\AA}) and in two UV
band-passes near 1600 {\AA} and 1700 {\AA} \citep{Lem12}.
\subsection{Data sets}
For Venus\rq\ shadow analysis, we used six different data sets in the X-ray
band, each with more than 300 images, and four data sets from AIA: at
1700 {\AA}, 335 {\AA}, 304 {\AA},
193 {\AA}, respectively with 114, 169, 118 and 119 images. For the Mercury
shadow analysis we used one
data set in the X-ray band. A summary of the data sets is presented in
Table 1.
The filters for all selected
images of Venus in the X-ray band are Ti-poly and Al-Mesh, and Al-poly
for Mercury images. (Ti-poly and Al-poly are metal foils on a polyimide
substrate, and Al-mesh is an Al foil mounted on a fine stainless steel mesh.)
The field of view is $384 \times 384$ pixels for Ti-poly and Al-poly images, and
is $192 \times 192$ pixels for the Al-mesh images (where each CCD pixel has been
summed $2 \times 2$). The AIA and
XRT plate scales are 0.6 arcsec per pixel and 1.0286 arcsec per pixel (.0572 arcsec per pixel for Al-mesh),
respectively.\\ \textit{Hinode}/XRT didn\rq t take any full solar
disk images of the Venus transit but only partial images of the disk where Venus
was. For the data analysis we used the standard instrumental calibration
routines provided through SolarSoft.
\begin{table}[htp!]
\caption {Summary of data sets of Venus and Mercury}
\begin{tabular}{ | >{\centering}m{3.5em} | >{\centering}m{1.8cm}| >{\centering}m{2.3cm} | >{\centering}m{5cm}| >{\centering}m{5cm} | }
\hline
Planet & Filter & Instrument & Start Time of observation (UTC Time) &
Final Time of observation (UTC Time) \tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & Ti-poly & \textit{Hinode}/XRT & 2012-06-05T20:03:00.615&
2012-06-05T21:58:33.335\tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & Ti-poly & \textit{Hinode}/XRT &2012-06-05T21:58:39.912&
2012-06-06T00:23:37.912\tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & Ti-poly & \textit{Hinode}/XRT &2012-06-06T00:23:57.272&
2012-06-06T02:06:39.223\tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & Ti-poly & \textit{Hinode}/XRT &2012-06-06T02:06:57.299&
2012-06-06T03:51:08.500 \tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & Ti-poly & \textit{Hinode}/XRT &2012-06-06T03:51:27.859&
2012-06-06T06:47:15.490\tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & 193{\AA}&SDO/AIA &2012-06-05T22:23:07.84&
2012-06-06T04:17:07.84 \tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & 304{\AA}&SDO/AIA &2012-06-05T22:23:08.13&
2012-06-06T04:17:08.12\tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & 335{\AA}&SDO/AIA &2012-06-05T22:25:03.62&
2012-06-06T04:01:03.62 \tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & 1700{\AA}&SDO/AIA &2012-06-05T22:32:07.71&
2012-06-06T04:11:19.71 \tabularnewline
\hline
Venus & Al-mesh & \textit{Hinode}/XRT & 2012-06-05T21:06:28.326&
2012-06-06T06:44:46.712\tabularnewline
\hline
Mercury & Al-poly & \textit{Hinode}/XRT & 2006-11-08T23:50:12.052&
2006-11-08T23:59:16.234.\tabularnewline \hline
\end{tabular}
\normalsize
\end{table}
\section{Data Analysis}
To analyze the features of Venus\rq\ and Mercury\rq s shadows in the X-Ray
band we have measured, in each image, the flux across the planetary disk and
in the nearby solar disk regions. To illustrate the features of such an
emission we show the average flux measured along strips 3 pixels wide
(in order to have a significant S/N ratio). We have considered strips
along the planet\rq s diameters, along both the N-S (vertical) and the E-W
(horizontal) directions.
\subsection{Venus Intensity Profile Analysis}
In Fig.~\ref{VenusXcross} we plot the Intensity Profile (IP) of Venus\rq\
shadow along both the horizontal and vertical directions in the X-Ray band, as
collected through the Ti-poly filter of XRT. Venus
casts a shadow with an angular diameter of $ \approx $ $60''$. The IP
of Venus\rq\ shadow consists of three parts: a shadow edge, a region of
steep descent on both sides and a residual flux.\\
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[]{0.25\linewidth}
\includegraphics[trim={5cm 2cm 5.5cm 3.5cm},clip,width=\textwidth]{venus_AC.ps}
\hspace{10cm}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[]{0.25\linewidth}
\includegraphics[trim={5cm 2cm 4cm 2cm},clip,width=\textwidth]{venus1.ps}
\hspace{10cm}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.43\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Vertical.ps}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\end{minipage}
%
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.43\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Horizontal.ps}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\small Top Left: Venus transit above the active region.\newline
Top Right: Schematic view of horizontal (E-W) and vertical (N-S) strips, green and blue,
respectively.\newline
Bottom Left: Vertical IP of Venus\rq\ shadow. Bottom Right: Horizontal IP of
Venus\rq\ shadow. }
\label{VenusXcross}
\end{figure}
The regions of steep descent have smooth corners on either side because
of the convolution of a step function with the PSF (\citealt{rea15};
\citealt{Web07}).\\ The X-Ray residual flux in Venus\rq\ shadow appears
too high to be compatible with background signal \citep{Kob14}. We have
superimposed in Fig.~\ref{VenusMnCrosses} the IPs taken at different times
and positions of Venus on the solar disk. We did not align the borders of
Venus, since the purpose here is only to show the level of residual flux
(albeit not sampling regularly the whole transit). \\
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[]{0.45\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{overplot-hor.ps}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[]{0.45\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{overplot-ver.ps}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\small IP of Venus\rq\ shadow in both horizontal (Left panel) and
vertical (Right panel) directions at different times of observations and
positions of Venus on solar disk.}
\label{VenusMnCrosses}
\end{figure}
As we can see the level of residual flux is high at any time; the
intensity at the shadow\rq s edge strongly depends on the nearby (along
the line of sight) solar emission near Venus at the time the specific
frame was taken \citep{rea15}.\\
To check the effect of possible instrumental
scattering in XRT across Venus\rq\ shadow, especially when close to active
regions, we took the average flux measured in three regions: in the Venus
disk and in two concentric annuli around the Venus disk. Annulus 1 has
inner radius $R_v$, namely the Venusian radius, and outer radius 2$R_v$,
as shown in Fig.~\ref{annulus}. Annulus 2
has inner and outer radii $R_v$ and 5$R_v$, respectively. We plotted
the evolution of the mean flux inside each of these annular regions versus the time
of observation ($T_{OBS}$) in Fig.~\ref{annulus}, along with the flux
measured in Venus\rq\ shadow. In order to have a comparable time series in
all light curves we chose $T_{OBS} =$ 2012-06-05T21:58:39.912 of one {\it
Hinode}/XRT image as the reference time. Also, the time of Venus\rq\ entrance
onto the solar disk is marked with a red vertical line. For each data point the
Poisson errors of DN (Digital Numbers) has been used as the error bars
in the light curves. This amounts to assume a DN-to-photon conversion factor of 1; according to
\cite{Nar11} such a factor applies to $T \sim 1.5 $ MK, typical of the average, or quiet,
corona. The conversion factor changes only slightly over the temperature range of interest for the
non-flaring corona; since, also, the error depends on the square root of the photon number, the
error bar determined is adequate even considering the multi-temperature corona\\
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[trim={4.5cm 2cm 2cm 1cm},clip,width=4cm]{ring.ps}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=12cm]{ALL_DATA-WITHOUT_DECONVOLUTION_Ti-poly.ps}}
\caption{\small Left: Central Black circle: Venus disk; Red annulus: annulus 1
around the Venus disk.\newline
Right: the evolution of mean X-ray flux inside Venus disk (Black), annulus 1
(Red) and annulus 2 (Blue) vs. T$_{OBS}$.\newline
Annulus 1 has inner and outer radii R$_v$ and 2R$_v$. Annulus 2 has
inner and outer radii R$_v$ and 5R$_v$. The vertical bar on the right shows the typical
error size. The red vertical line in the lower left marks the first contact.}
\label{annulus}
\end{figure}
The initial high annulus flux is due to limb brightening, crossed during
the initial phase of the Venus transit; then Venus gets close to a big active
region, during the central phase of transit, and the mean flux of both the
Venus disk and the annuli increases. (The maximum mean flux is measured in
this phase.) As Venus moves away from the active region the flux decreases
slowly. At the final stage, Venus completes the transit and
touches the other limb with a small increase in mean flux at the end of
all of the three curves. The blue curve does not cover the full data set:
for some images, the annulus with the outer radius 5$R_v$ extends beyond
the borders of the X-ray image.\\
\subsection{Mercury IP Analysis}
Since the
atmosphere of Venus may contribute to --- or be the cause of --- the residual
flux in IPs of Venus\rq\ shadow, we considered the shadows of other celestial
objects occulting the Sun but lacking an atmosphere, in order to remove the
possible effects of atmosphere.\\ As a first choice we selected Mercury,
already analyzed by \citet{Web07}. If some effect due to
PSF scattering is present in the case of Venus, it should be stronger in the case of the
smaller Mercury disk: Mercury casts a shadow with an angular diameter
of $\approx $ $10''$.\\
We have also made some analysis, not reported here, of the Moon's shadow
during solar eclipses observed with {\it Hinode}/XRT and found almost zero
signal coming from the Moon's X-ray shadow.
In Fig.~\ref{IPMercury} we have plotted the IP of Mercury\rq s shadow in the
X-Ray band, as taken through the Al-poly filter of XRT,
along both the horizontal and the vertical directions. The relevant
images were $384 \times 384$ pixels large.\\
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{vertical1.ps}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{horizontal1.ps}}
\caption{\small Left: Vertical IP of Mercury\rq s shadow. Right: Horizontal
IP of Mercury\rq s shadow. Images taken through the Al-poly filter of XRT.}
\label{IPMercury}
\end{figure}
\newline In the case of Mercury we initially find a residual flux, at a level
comparable to that in Venus\rq\ shadow, as well as a smooth profile. Therefore
the effect appears to be, at first sight, the same for Venus and
Mercury.\\
As a next step, in order to
remove possible instrumental effects due to the PSF, we deconvolved
Venus images using the \textit{Hinode}/XRT PSF and other codes,
and compared the relevant results. We also deconvolved Mercury images
with the same tools to cross-check the results.\\
\section{Deconvolution}
Among different indirect methods of deconvolution
such as least-squares fit, Maximum Entropy, Maximum likelihood
\citep{Sta02}, and Richardson-Lucy (\citealt{Ric72}; \citealt{Luc74}), we used
the codes based on Maximum Likelihood (M-L) and Richardson-Lucy (AIA
Richardson-Lucy; AIA) available in SolarSoft
IDL libraries. For a short description of the codes that we used, please
refer to Appendix B.\\
With the above codes and the \textit{Hinode}/XRT
PSF we performed deconvolution of the images, and then compared the results
to pinpoint similarities and differences; the Venus Ti-poly images were $
384 \times 384 $ pixels large. We repeated the cross section
analysis, presented before, for the deconvolved images.
\subsection{Deconvolution of Mercury shadows}
Mercury and Venus have been observed at different times, in 2006 and in
2012 respectively, and with different filters. However our aim here is
just to check the performance of the updated PSF in removing any emission
concerning the instrumental scattering. The cross sections of Mercury
shadow, before and after deconvolution, are presented in
Fig.~\ref{MercuryDecon}. After
deconvolution, the cross section of Mercury\rq s shadow has practically zero
residual flux with edges sharper than those of the original profiles.\\
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{Max_Likelihood.ps}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{compare.ps}}
\caption{\small Left: Mercury IP before (Black) and after deconvolution
with the M-L code (Red). \newline
Right: comparison between IP before (Black) and after deconvolution
with AIA (Blue) and M-L (Red). }
\label{MercuryDecon}
\end{figure}
\newline These results are very important since they not only confirm the accuracy
of the updated \textit{Hinode}/XRT PSF but show that, at least in the
case of Mercury, the residual flux is due to PSF scattering. An analogous
study was done by \citep{Web07}, with similar results, using a previous
version of the PSF of \textit{Hinode}/XRT.\\
\subsection{Deconvolution of Venus shadows}
Cross sections of Venus\rq\ shadow after deconvolution are shown in
Fig.~\ref{VenusIPdeconv}.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{MAX_venus.ps}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{compare_venus.ps}}
\caption{\small Left: Venus IP before (Black) and after deconvolution made with the M-L code (Red). \newline
Right: Comparison between IP before (Black) and after deconvolution made
with AIA (Blue) and M-L (Red).
}.
\label{VenusIPdeconv}
\end{figure}
\newline These cross sections of Venus images deconvolved with
the M-L and AIA codes show that:
\begin{description}
\item[$\bullet$]In some cases the cross sections of images deconvolved
with the M-L code have more fluctuations in comparison to those obtained with
the AIA code;
\item[$\bullet$]For Venus, similarly to the Mercury case, the borders seem to be sharper
after deconvolution;
\item[$\bullet$]Residual flux is present in Venus images even after
deconvolution; such a flux is significantly higher than the noise.
\end{description}
Residual flux present in Venus cross sections after deconvolution does not
appear to be due to the \textit{Hinode}/XRT PSF, since the accuracy of the PSF
has been confirmed in the Mercury analysis. Being that the angular size of
Mercury is
considerably smaller than that of Venus, any effect of PSF scattering
should manifest itself more in the Mercury cross sections. \\
Since both the M-L and AIA codes are iterative we changed the number of
iterations during the deconvolution process for some images in each dataset to
check the effect of iteration, especially to see whether increasing
the number of iterations led to the residual flux being further decreased or
removed. The
trend is that with increasing the number of iterations the residual
flux is still present and its mean value for any reasonable number of iterations
is very constant,
except that with increasing iterations the
fluctuations increase in the IPs. Generally the M-L code is more sensitive to
noise and the quality of the images. \\
So the presence of a significant residual flux in Venus\rq\ shadow is not due
to instrumental scattering but should be related to Venus; for instance,
it could originate from some effect occurring in Venus\rq\ atmosphere. \\
Comprehensive analysis of deconvolutions show that:
\begin{description}
\item[$\bullet$] The AIA code does not conserve the total flux, yielding
curves with 15\% of total flux, so for each image we readjusted the
amplitude to conserve the total flux;
\item[$\bullet$]Deconvolution causes artifacts and spurious ``spikes"
at the edge (borders), a common problem in deconvolution which, in the
case of Venus, are well identified and do not affect the evaluation
of the average flux in the shadow (cf.\ Fig.~\ref{VenusIPdeconv}).
\end{description}
We again followed the evolution of the flux in Venus\rq\ shadow and in two
reference annuli, as done in Section 2, after deconvolution. We plotted
the evolution of mean flux inside each of these three regions versus
T$_{OBS}$ in Fig.~\ref{LCTiDecon}.
The space-averaged fluxes obtained after deconvolution with the two
methods are virtually the same resulting in three light curves, each
being two superimposed.\\
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{ALL_DATA_Ti-poly.ps}
\caption{\small Evolution of mean Ti-poly flux after deconvolution: inside Venus disk
with AIA (Black) and M-L (Red) codes; inside
annulus 1
with AIA (Green) and M-L
(Red) codes; inside annulus 2
with AIA (Blue) and M-L (Red) codes. The bar on right shows typical
error sizes. The red vertical line in the lower left marks the first contact.}
\label{LCTiDecon}
\end{figure}
The most important points in Fig.~\ref{LCTiDecon} are:
\begin{description}
\item[$\bullet$]The amount of mean flux inside Venus\rq\ disk after
deconvolution has decreased slightly, especially where close to the active region,
therefore deconvolution appears to have removed just a small amount of X-ray
flux from Venus\rq\ shadow;
\item[$\bullet$]The mean fluxes inside the two annuli have not changed after
deconvolution (cf.\ also Fig.~\ref{VenusIPdeconv});
\item[$\bullet$]We see that the flux inside Venus\rq\ shadow and that inside
the two annuli gradually rise as Venus gets more and more inside the solar
disk and decreases thereafter; however the flux inside
Venus\rq\ shadow is not strictly correlated to that inside the two annuli.
\item[$\bullet$]There may be some relationship between the observed residual
flux and the high surrounding flux;
\item[$\bullet$]The mean flux value for both the AIA and M-L deconvolution codes
are virtually the same despite the fact that the profiles for the deconvolved images are
not the same.\\
As an additional test on the error, we have determined the standard deviation of
the residual flux values inside Venus disk
and found that it varies
between 0.4--1.0 DN s$ ^{-1} $, which is negligible in comparison to the observed residual
flux ($>$ 5 DN s$ ^{-1} $).\\
\end{description}
\section{Light Leak Contamination}
\subsection{ Light Leak Effect on XRT Filters}
An increase in XRT's straylight was detected on May 9th of 2012, shortly before the
Venus transit (5th--6th June 2012), which causes significant visible
light contributions to the X-Ray images in some filters. In addition, a sudden
increase of intensity by a factor of 2 was observed in the visible light
measurements
(i.e., in the G-band channel). At the same time, the XRT team recognized wood-grain like
stripes in daily images taken with the Ti-poly filter \citep{Tak16}. The team believes the increase of visible straylight to have been caused by a pinhole puncture in the entrance aperture filters. \\
The analysis showed that the light leak affects only some of the X-Ray
filters: a minor effect was detected for the Al-mesh and Al-poly filters but
it was very small ($\le ~5$ DN s$ ^{-1} $), while it strongly affected the Ti-poly and C-poly filters \citep{Tak16}.\\
In order to exclude the possibility that Venus residual
flux in Ti-poly could be due to the straylight, we used data collected
with the Al-mesh filter to repeat the analysis. Importantly, the light leak
has a very small effect on the Al-mesh filter, to such a level that it can be neglected
(\citealt{Tak16}).
\subsection{Al-mesh Filter Analysis}
In Fig.~\ref{IPAL} we present a typical IP of Venus\rq\ shadow in both
horizontal and vertical directions, taken in an image collected with the Al-mesh
filter.\\
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{IP_ver.ps}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{IP_hor.ps}}
\caption{\small Left: Vertical IP of Venus\rq\ shadow. Right: Horizontal IP of
Venus\rq\ shadow. (XRT Al-mesh filter)}.
\label{IPAL}
\end{figure}
\newline
As we can see:
\begin{description}
\item[$\bullet$]The residual flux is still present in all IP plots.
\item[$\bullet$]The intensity profiles of the Al-mesh filter appear
approximately 3-5 times higher than Ti-poly ones; the reason is that
Al-mesh images are binned $2 \times 2$ while Ti-poly data are binned $1
\times 1$ and the
filters have different transmissivity; the Al-mesh images are $ 192 \times
192$ pixels large.
\end{description}
Also for Al-mesh data we deconvolved images to remove any effect due to
the PSF scattering. Sample IP results, after deconvolution, are shown for the
vertical direction in Fig.~\ref{DeconIPAL}.\\
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{MAX_Al-mesh27-ver.ps}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{compare_MEsh-ver.ps}}
\caption{\small Left: Venus IP before (Black) and after deconvolution
with M-L code in the vertical direction (Al-mesh filter).\newline
Right: comparison of IP before (Black) and after deconvolution with AIA
(Blue) and M-L (Red) in vertical direction.}
\label{DeconIPAL}
\end{figure}
Deconvolution analysis shows that:
\begin{description}
\item[$\bullet$]Artifacts and spurious ``spikes" at the edges (borders)
of the IPs are much stronger in Al-mesh images in comparison to Ti-poly images.
\item[$\bullet$]The AIA code does not conserve the total flux, yielding curves
with 60\% of total flux (in Ti-poly, 15\%), so for each image
we rescaled the amplitude to conserve the total flux.
\item[$\bullet$]The most important fact is that even after deconvolution
residual flux is still present in all of the IPs and is significantly higher
than the noise.
\end{description}
We have also determined the evolution of the flux in Venus\rq\ shadow after
deconvolution for Al-mesh images and in two reference annuli,
similarly to what we have done for the Ti-poly data. Fig.~\ref{LCDeconAl} shows
the evolution of the mean flux inside each of these regions versus
T$_{OBS}$. \\
Also for Al-mesh data the DN to photon conversion factor of 1, used to derive the error bars,
is appropriate to $T \sim 1 $ MK and changes slowly over the T range of interest for the
non-flaring corona.\\
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{ALL_DATA_Al-mesh-0.56keV.ps}
\caption{\small Evolution of mean X-ray flux (as measured through Al-mesh
filter) inside Venus disk after deconvolution with AIA (Black) and M-L
(Red) codes, inside annulus 1 after deconvolution with AIA (Green) and
M-L (Red) codes, and inside annulus 2 after deconvolution with AIA
(Blue) and M-L (Red) codes. A typical error bar is shown on the
right. The red vertical line in the lower left marks the first contact.}
\label{LCDeconAl}
\end{figure}
The ratio of the maximum value of flux inside annulus 1 to the lowest
one for Al-mesh data
is slightly more than 5, on the average. The ratio is different from that of
Ti-poly ($\approx 3$) probably because the light leak effects (if any) are very small in the case of Al-mesh.\\
We can safely state that the flux detected in Venus' dark side
most likely is not due to PSF scattering, noise or light leak, but it
may originate from some phenomenon related to Venus.\\
\section{The EUV and UV Flux Analysis}
We have done a similar analysis of IPs of Venus\rq\ shadow in the UV and
EUV bands. An image of Venus transit and a sample cross section in the EUV
band, taken with SDO/AIA at {\bf 193} {\AA}, is shown in Fig.~\ref{EUVtrans}.\\
\begin{figure} [!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={4.7cm 2cm 3cm 1.2cm},clip,scale=.75]{venus-uv-low.ps}
\includegraphics[scale=.45]{UV_193.ps}
\caption{\small Image in the EUV band (193 \AA) of Venus transit
(Left) and its horizontal IP (Right). }
\label{EUVtrans}
\end{figure}
Similarly to what was done for the X-Ray band, we deconvolved the EUV
images to remove the effects of the PSF. Various works have been
dedicated to deriving the PSF of SDO/AIA. \cite{gri12}
derived the PSF using pre-flight and post-flight measurements and calibrations.
\cite{Pod13} derived the in-flight SDO/AIA PSF using several
observations, including some of the Moon's limb made during a solar
eclipse observed with SDO/AIA. \cite{Gon16} used observations
of both a solar eclipse and a Venus transit to derive the SDO/AIA
PSF. These authors assumed that there is no emission coming from
the dark side of Venus during the transit, but then discovered that they needed
to include a long range effect, otherwise the parametric PSF
they used would not be able to remove ``the apparent emission inside
the disk of Venus''.\\
Interestingly, in a similar but unrelated study, \cite{Def09} used the
2004 Venus transit to determine the TRACE in-flight PSF. They, too,
assumed that no EUV radiation comes from Venus\rq\ dark side, and then found that
``much more scattered light is found than can be accounted for merely
by diffraction'' and that half of the scattered light was due to some
other mechanism.\\
It is quite possible that both \cite{Gon16} and \cite{Def09} had discovered, and
were trying to account for, some real EUV emission of the kind we find.\\
For the above reasons we decided to adopt the PSF derived in \cite{gri12},
which is available in SSW and is a standard in deconvolving AIA EUV images. We
have also applied the \cite{Pod13} PSF, kindly provided
by the author, to test if results are different. This latter PSF is not
available for full disk images so we have compared the results obtained
with SSW and Poduval PSF only for partial disk images; we found that we
get in practice the same average flux with the standard deconvolution in
SSW and with the deconvolution which uses Poduval PSF. Being reassured
by this result, we resorted to the \cite{gri12} PSF to deconvolve full disk images.
We concentrated on full disk images (albeit their number is smaller)
because we are thereby certain to remove even possible long range effects.\\
We have, thus, deconvolved each full disk image with the PSF available
in SSW and derived the average flux in Venus shadow and in annulus
1. In Fig.~\ref{EUVLC} we show the evolution of the UV and EUV
average flux values as observed with SDO/AIA in the dark side of
Venus and in the smallest annulus (annulus 1) taken around Venus,
before and after deconvolution performed with the AIA routine and
with the Maximum Likelihood (M-L) routine.\\
The data in the 335 \AA\ band
show an unusual behaviour with deconvolution: the average flux
inside Venus\rq\ disk increases after deconvolution, just the opposite
of what one expects and which happens in any other band. The flux
in Venus\rq\ shadow is rather low before deconvolution, so
any signal that is present and not due to noise must be marginal. Indeed, the signal
after deconvolution is virtually constant. We are thus forced to
consider the results for 335 \AA\ images as unreliable; we present
all the relevant results just for completeness and as an additional
null test, but these results are of little relevance for our problem.\\
No PSF is available for the 1700 \AA\ band,
so we cannot deconvolve the relevant data; we simply used the non-deconvolved
data.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\includegraphics[scale=1]{venus_ring-UV-all.ps}
\caption{\small Mean flux evolution inside Venus disk and annulus
1, before and after deconvolution vs. time in UV and EUV bands.
Top Left: 1700 \AA; Top Right: 304 \AA; Bottom Left:193 \AA; Bottom
Right: 335 \AA. Black square: annulus average flux before
deconvolution, red X : annulus average flux after ML deconvolution,
blue cross: same as red X but after aia deconvolution,
black triangle: Venus disk average flux before deconvolution,
red star: Venus disk average flux after M-L deconvolution, blue diamond:
Venus disk average flux after aia deconvolution.}
\label{EUVLC}
\end{figure}
It is immediately apparent that the flux evolution in any EUV band has no
evident
correlation with that of the X-Ray flux; in the 1700 {\AA} band the flux
increases as Venus crosses the solar disk, and decreases thereafter. In the
335 {\AA} and 193 {\AA} bands the opposite occurs; few changes are
seen in the 304 {\AA} band. However it appears that also in these cases the
flux in the shadow clearly follows that in the surrounding ring, almost
(but not exactly) by a fixed factor. \\
This approximate proportionality of the flux in Venus\rq\ dark side
relative to the surrounding regions hints at a strong analogy between
the mechanisms generating Venus\rq\ dark side emission in X-ray,
EUV and UV bands.\\
Fig.~\ref{ratiosevolv} shows the evolution of the ratio between flux
values inside the annulus and in the Venusian disk, for the original data
and for the images deconvolved with both methods.
\begin{figure}[!hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Ratio-LOG.ps}
\caption{\small Evolution of (mean annulus 1 flux to mean Venus
disk flux) ratio before and after deconvolution in UV and EUV bands. Top
Left: 1700 \AA; Top Right: 304 \AA; Bottom Left:193 \AA; Bottom Right:
335 \AA. Black Triangle: Ratio before deconvolution; Blue cross: Ratio
after aia deconvolution; Red X: Ratio after ML deconvolution. }
\label{ratiosevolv}
\end{figure}\\
Fig.~\ref{ratios} shows the minimum, maximum and mean values of the
ratio between flux values inside the annulus and in the Venus disk
versus wavelength and versus temperature (of the plasma which would
be observed on the Sun). Since any possible deconvolution would slightly
decrease the flux in Venus disk also at 1700 A, we may expect that the
data points at 1700 are higher. There appears to be a slight increasing trend
with wavelength.
\begin{figure}[!hbt]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{MEAN_FLUX_RATIO_Wavelength.ps}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{MEAN_FLUX_RATIO_TEMPERATURE.ps}}
\caption{\small Minimum, maximum and mean values of the ratio between the average intensity on solar disk around Venus and
average flux inside Venus\rq\ shadow vs.\ wavelength (left panel) and vs.\ solar plasma
temperature (right panel).}
\label{ratios}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
We studied the Venus transit across the solar disk which occurred in 2012
and was observed with \textit{Hinode}/XRT in the X-Ray band and SDO/AIA in
the EUV and UV bands. We have measured a significant X-Ray residual
flux from Venus\rq\ dark side (i.e., from the Earth-facing side)
during the transit that was significantly above the estimated noise level
of 2 DN s$ ^{-1} $, as reported by \cite{Kob14}.\\ Let us discuss the
systematic uncertainties of XRT flux. According to \cite{Kob14} there
are two kinds of systematic uncertainties for XRT. The first are those
which have a reliable quantitative correction procedure such as: dark
current, Fourier, vignetting, and JPEG compression noise sources; their
correction procedures have been successfully embedded in xrt\_prep.pro
(the calibration reformatter). Since all of the data we have used for X-ray
analysis (both Ti-poly and Al-mesh filters) have been prepared with
xrt\_prep.pro, we expect that this class of uncertainties has been properly
corrected and does not explain the observed residual.\\
The second kind of systematic
uncertainties are model-dependent and are not included in xrt\_prep.pro;
among them are light scattering by the grazing-incidence mirror of XRT,
visible straylight leak and photon counting uncertainty \citep{Kob14}.
In this respect the error bars for each flux value have been computed as
follows. From the flux values, the exposure times, and the conversion
factor from DN to photons, we have computed the number of photons
collected and from them the statistical errors due to Poisson noise.
This statistical error has been converted to a flux error bar per
data point.
The resulting error bar is typically less than the 2 DN s$ ^{-1} $ mentioned
by \citep{Kob14}.
In sections 4 and 5 we comprehensively discuss the PSF scattering
and visible light leak effects.\\
To test the performance of the instrument's PSF (i.e., due to
instrumental X-ray scattering) and the possible effect of the atmosphere
on the residual flux, we studied a Mercury transit across the solar disk,
observed with the \textit{Hinode}/XRT in 2006. We measured an apparent
X-Ray residual flux in the case of Mercury before deconvolution.\\
For both Venus and Mercury we used a new version of the
\textit{Hinode}/XRT PSF, selected well illuminated images in the X-Ray band,
and deconvolved them. Even after deconvolution, flux from Venus\rq\ shadow
has remained significant, while in the Mercury case it has become negligible.
So it appears that the observed flux in Venus\rq\ shadow is real.\\
As for the Venus case, we have analyzed two X-ray datasets: a set collected with
Ti-poly filter and another collected with Al-mesh filter. While the
former is potentially strongly affected by a light leak that appeared a short time before
that Venus transit, the latter is not. Both datasets, however, clearly show
the presence of a significant flux from Venus\rq\ dark side, showing the
reality of this effect. Although we consider the results from the
Al-mesh data set to be a strong confirmation for the observed X-Ray residual
flux, the Ti-poly results also provide more confidence about the
observed residual flux and prove this effect in more than one filter. The
level of the residual flux is not constant: as Venus crosses the
solar disk it gradually grows, reaching a maximum roughly halfway through the
transit, and then gradually decreases as it approaches the solar limb. The
flux changes by an almost fixed factor of the flux of the surrounding
solar regions (i.e., along nearby lines of sight) as shown in
Figs.~\ref{LCTiDecon} and \ref{LCDeconAl}. On the other hand the use of
the PSF and the test on Mercury convincingly shows the removal of any PSF
effect. Furthermore, any light leak effect would instead be expected to
be almost uniform or constant in time.\\
The PSF of XRT has also been determined at 1.0 keV.
We find that deconvolving the images with this PSF
reduces by a factor of about 0.5, on average, the flux inside the Venusian disk. More
specifically,
the mean flux across the disk before deconvolution is about 24
DN s$ ^{-1} $. After deconvolution with the 0.56 keV PSF model it is about 20 DN s$ ^{-1} $, but after deconvolution with the
1.0 keV PSF model it is about 10 DN s$ ^{-1} $.
Therefore a significant flux level still remains,
even after deconvolution with the 1.0 keV PSF, showing the reality of the effect nonetheless.\\
In this respect, however, we believe that the PSF at 0.5 keV is more
appropriate to our study. In fact, we are detecting photons coming from
the corona and re-processed at Venus or in Venus\rq\ magnetotail (or
something related to Venus), a process which should not
raise photon energy. The corona is at a few MK (at most 3 or 5, and only
then in some places like active region cores), and no flare
appears during the Venus transit. So a relatively smaller fraction of
photons are expected even at 0.56 keV. We use the Al-mesh and Ti-poly
filters; so considering the coronal spectrum folded with the Al-mesh filter
response (Al-mesh data are the most reliable ones for Venus X-ray
observations), we may shift the average of the observed plasma
emission some 0.1 keVs closer to, but not at, 0.56 keV. On one
hand we are confident that the general result is robust against the
choice of PSF model, but the use of the 0.56 keV PSF can be
considered to be a conservative evaluation, and so we can use the relevant
results quite safely. \\
The analogous kind of analysis made in four EUV bands observed with
SDO/AIA has shown that there is also some flux in these bands coming
from Venus\rq\ night side, and that its evolution clearly follows that
of the flux inside an annulus surrounding Venus. The light curves
do not show, however, any trend
similar to that of the X-Ray flux.\\
Past X-ray observations of Venus were very different, in many respects.
In January 2001, Venus was observed for the first time with the Chandra X-ray
telescope. \citet{Den02} proposed that the fluorescent scattering of
solar X-rays from Venus\rq\ atmosphere was the primary source of the X-ray
emission they observed. Not only the morphology, but also the observed X-ray
luminosity was consistent with the scattering of solar X-rays \citep{Den02}. \\
In 2006 and 2007 again with Chandra, besides fluorescent scattering, Solar
Wind Charge eXchange (SWCX) emission was clearly detected.
Comparison of X-ray images taken in 2006 and 2007 with those obtained in 2001
(taken at a similar phase angle) showed that the limb brightening had
increased. This would be the case if the X-ray radiation from Venus was the
superposition of scattered solar X-rays and SWCX emission. The lack of
detection of any SWCX-induced X-ray halo in the first Venus observation
was explained by being during a high level of the solar X-ray cycle
\citep{den08}.\\
Previous X-ray observations, however, have shown X-ray emission from the
sunlit side of Venus. The low intensity we detect
in X-ray and EUV comes from the dark side of Venus, and appears to have
a totally different origin; it appears to evolve
during the transit remaining, at any time, approximately proportional to
the emission of the solar regions along nearby lines of sight.
This intensity cannot be due to scattering in the upper atmosphere of
Venus because we should detect a brighter inner rim in Venus\rq\ shadow.\\
The effect we are observing could be due to scattering or re-emission
occurring in the shadow or wake of Venus. One possibility is due to the very long magnetotail of Venus, ablated by the solar
wind and known to reach Earth's orbit \citep{Gru97}.
This magnetotail could be side-illuminated from the surrounding regions
and could scatter, or re-emit, the radiation; the cone of Venus
shadow reaches up to $ 9.6 \times 10^5$ km away from Venus, leaving ample
space ($\approx 4.5 \times 10^7 $ km) for side-illuminating the magnetotail.
The emission we observe would be the reemitted radiation integrated
along the magnetotail.\\
One wonders if such an effect is important for exoplanets, in particular
for those Jupiter-size planets orbiting very close to their stars; they
may have a very large ablated tail, especially if they do not have a
magnetic field. To some extent, the study of these tails may help to
understand, among other issues,
the presence (or lack thereof) of magnetic fields.\\
Future work will study in more detail this phenomenon: we plan to study
some faint structures present in the shadow and address
possible physical mechanisms involved in generating the residual
emission. \\
\acknowledgments{ \textbf{Acknowledgments} \newline
We thank an anonymous referee for suggestions and comments on EUV deconvolution.
M.A., G.P., A.P., F.R. acknowledge support from Italian Ministero
dell'Universit\`a e Ricerca; P.J. and M.W. were supported under contract
NNM07AB07C from MSFC/NASA to SAO. Some of the routines for the data
analysis and some early evaluations were kindly supplied by A. F.
Gambino. SDO data were supplied courtesy of the SDO/AIA consortia. SDO
is the first mission to be launched for NASA's Living With a Star
Program. Hinode is a Japanese mission developed and launched by ISAS/JAXA,
with NAOJ as domestic partner and NASA and STFC (UK) as international
partners. It is operated by these agencies in co-operation with ESA and
the NSC (Norway).}
\section*{APPENDIX A}
Metrology data and on-orbit observations are used to model the point spread
function of the X-Ray Telescope's (XRT; \citep{Gol07}) mirror assuming that XRT
is operated at the best on-axis focus. The metrology data estimate encircled
energy profiles for two energies, 0.56 keV and 1.0 keV. We develop a PSF for
both energies and find the function that returns the encircled energy data as a
piecewise continuous function composed of a Lorentzian core and a series of
power-law functions as its wings. The PSFs we develop do not consider other
sources of scattering such as the effects of changing the focus position, other
elements within the optical system, filters, and the CCD camera system, or
material
contamination on the XRT CCD. We do not incorporate any non-axisymmetric
structures although the system PSF is known to vary (see Fig.~4 in
\cite{Gol07}).\\
The XRT mirror is a Wolter Type-I grazing incident optic built by Goodrich. The
XRT has 9 broadband filters that sample plasma temperatures from 0.5--10 million
Kelvin and is equipped with a 2048x2048 CCD. The XRT has 1.02860 arcsec pixels
with a wide field of view of 34x34 arcmin \citep{Kan08}. The mirror manufacturer
provided encircled energy estimates based on the Power Spectral Density (PSD)
derived from measurements of the mirror surface roughness.\\
We construct two PSFs for the XRT mirror using a semi-empirical approach. We
model the core of the PSF by considering a variety of functions that could
reproduce the on-axis encircled energy data. We then estimate the wings of the
PSF based on scattering patterns observed in XRT data. The wings of the PSF are
modeled assuming a piecewise continuous power law of the form:
$$ P_{i}(r)=r^{-\alpha_{i}}, {\rm where\ } {\alpha_{i}} \geq 0, {\rm and\ }
{\alpha_{i+1}} \geq {\alpha_{i}}, $$
where $r$ is the radial distance from the optical axis. We assume the PSF is
spatially invariant and only depends on the radial distance from the scattering
source. Scattered light from XRT data are used to determine the breakpoints of
the function so that the following criteria are met:\\
\begin{enumerate}
\item The metrology data affirms that 81\% of the encircled energy lies within
5 arcsec for a 0.56 keV source and 77\% for a 1.00 keV source, meeting design
specifications.
\item The wings of the PSF match and extend the slope of the encircled energy in
a smooth and continuous way.
\item In the case when the PSF will be normalized, we assume that 100\% of the
light will be scattered within the XRT field of view.
\end{enumerate}
To gauge how light is scattered far from the source we use full frame images of
(a) limb flare data in which a bright flare occurs on the solar limb when the
Sun is centered in the field of view, and (b) solar eclipse data when the Moon
passes between XRT and the Sun. Because of Hinode's orbit, XRT experiences
either a partial or total solar eclipse twice a year and XRT takes full disk
data in several filters. We use the Moon as a way to measure scattered light
when it partially obscures an active region on the Sun. Scattered light from
these bright regions is easily visible across the Moon's shadow.\\
In addition to the scattered light from the mirror, there are at least two other
causes of scattered light. First is the scattering due to the entrance apertures
that is accentuated during a solar flare, and the second is a pattern of
scattered light that is pointing dependent and is always present. The left panel
of Fig.\ref{Appex_fig1} shows an example of solar eclipse data used in the analysis and
demonstrates both patterns of scattered light within the Moon's shadow.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Fig1-appendix.eps}
\caption{\emph{Left}: Hinode XRT C-Poly (log intensity) eclipse image taken 2008 February 7 at 5:17:53 UT. White arrows point to the shadow of the entrance filters and the gray arrow points to the azimuthal scattered light pattern. \emph{Right}: Plot of the mean relative normalized intensity as a function of distance from the intersection of the two lines within the region of interest (ROI). Within the ROI, the scattered light follows an inverse square law up through the gray arrow when the intensity increases again. This fit does not distinguish between the mirror scatter and the azimuthal scatter.}
\label{Appex_fig1}
\end{figure}
The image is scaled on a log scale with pixel values above a few DN s$ ^{-1} $ saturated to
white so that the low-level scatter can easily be seen. Dark bands that appear to emanate from the scattering source are the pattern created from the entrance
filters (white arrows). A gray arrow points to the second scattering pattern. It is a partial dark
ring followed by a region of bright light. They appear as partial bands around
the scattering source. This pattern is pointing dependent and changes location
depending on pointing and the location of the scattering source within the
field of view. \\
All XRT data are processed using the standard reduction routines provided by the
XRT team in SolarSoft. We use full resolution images. The exposure times of the
data vary between 0.5--16 seconds depending on the solar conditions. To estimate
the amount of scatter in an XRT image, the average normalized intensity along an
arc as a function of radial distance from the scattering source is fit to the
general power law function of the form:
$$ P(r)=\alpha(r-b)^{-c}+d, $$
where $a$, $b$, $c$, and $d$ are all free parameters. The intensity is
normalized to the maximum value set by the data reduction routine,
xrt$_{-}$prep.pro. This fitting method is not able to distinguish between the
different sources of scatter.\\
To mitigate the effects of the scattering due to the entrance filters, we select
a region between dark bands of scattered light. An example of a region is the
one between the two lines on the image on the left of Fig.\ref{Appex_fig1}. We attempt to
deal with the second source of scattered light by considering regions closer to
the scattering source rather than farther away. \\
The encircled energy data imply the wings of the PSF do not significantly
contribute to the encircled energy far from the center. At a radial distance of
4--5 arcsec there is little increase in the encircled energies. Therefore, we
expect that far from the source, the other scattering elements will dominate the
scattering. \\
We use Mathematica to calculate the encircled energy curves for both PSF models,
corresponding to the two energy channels, over a spatial grid that is
appropriate for the meteorology data and that oversamples the instrument plate
scale. Fig.\ref{Appex_fig2} shows the encircled energy measurements (squares) for 0.56 keV (a) and 1.0 keV (b).
\begin{figure*}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig2-appendix.eps}
\caption{Encircled energy plot of the manufacturer data (squares), the model PSF (dashed line) and the model discretized for XRT pixel size (solid line) for 0.56 keV, (a) and 1.0 keV (b).}
\label{Appex_fig2}
\end{figure*}
\newline
For each of the datasets, we find that a single function could not
reproduce the given encircled energies. The two energies have the same
functional form but have different parameter values and breakpoints; the relevant values are given in Table \ref{Tab PSF values}. We find the
inner portion of the PSF is best represented by a Lorentzian function out to an
inner radius, $r_{0}$. From $r_{0} $ to 5 arcsec, the $r^{-1}$ function
returns the correct encircled energy measurements.\\
We then use the assumption that the PSF will continue to follow the power law
trend and fit the following model:\\
\large
\[
P(r)=
\begin{cases}
a \frac{exp(-\frac{r^2}{\sigma^2})}{\gamma^2 \: + \:r^2} ,& r \leq r_{0} ; \\
br^{-1},& r_{0} \leq r \leq r_{1} ; \\
cr^{-2},& r_{1} \leq r \leq r_{2} ; \\
dr^{-4},& r_{2} \leq r \leq \infty .
\end{cases}
\]
\normalsize
\begin{table}[!htb]
\centering
\caption {Normalized PSF parameter values.\newline
* Denotes exact values and not approximations.}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
\textbf{Parameter Values} & \textbf{0.56 keV} & \textbf{1.0 keV} \\
\hline
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{$ \sigma $} & 2.19256 & 2.36982 \\
\textbf{$ \gamma$} & 1.24891 & 0.914686 \\
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{ a} & 1.31946 & 0.847955 \\
\textbf{ b} & 0.03* & 0.038* \\
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{ c} & 0.15* & 0.19* \\
\textbf{d} & 18.4815* r$ _{0} $ & 20.1571* r$ _{0} $ \\
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{r$ _{0} $} & 3.4167 & 3.22857 \\
\textbf{r$ _{1} $ }& 5* & 5* \\
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{r$ _{2} $ }& 11.1* & 10.3* \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{Tab PSF values}
\end{table}
A plot of the encircled energy (squares) for both channels is given in Figure 2 along with the model PSF (black lines). The models fit the data well. We also discretized the models to the XRT pixel size (solid line). \\
A simple calculation is applied to consider the relative applicability of the
two PSF models for a range of typical plasma temperatures in the corona. We make
use of the Astrophysical Plasma Emission Code (APEC, \cite{Smi01}) to model the
plasma emission as a function of wavelength and temperature. We fold this model
through the XRT's spectral response and convert the instrument spectral response
to a temperature response for each of XRT's filters. We create a spectral
response of several plasma temperatures and compare the amount of energy at or
below 0.75 keV to the amount of energy above 0.75 keV for a given temperature
plasma. Table \ref{Tab. XRT response} shows the relative spectral response for each of the XRT's
filters. \\
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\caption {Relative spectral response for each of the XRT's filters assuming the specified temperature.}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{c @{\extracolsep{\fill}} cccccccc}
\hline
& \textbf{1MK} & \textbf{1MK} & \textbf{3MK}& \textbf{3MK} & \textbf{5MK}& \textbf{5MK} & \textbf{10MK}& \textbf{10MK}\\
\hline
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{Filter} & \textbf{$ \leq $ 750ev} & \textbf{$ > $ 750ev} & \textbf{$ \leq $ 750ev} & \textbf{$ > $ 750ev} & \textbf{$ \leq $ 750ev} & \textbf{$ > $ 750ev}& \textbf{$ \leq $ 750ev} & \textbf{$ > $ 750ev}\\
Al-mesh &0.98 &0.02 &0.23 &0.77& 0.07& 0.93& 0.04& 0.96\\
\rowcolor{gray}
Al-poly \:& 0.95& 0.05&0.17 &0.83 &0.05 & 0.95&0.03 & 0.97\\
C-poly& 0.95& 0.05&0.13 &0.87 &0.03 &0.97 &0.01 & 0.99 \\
\rowcolor{gray}
Ti-poly\:& 0.96&0.04 &0.13 &0.87 & 0.03&0.97 &0.02 &0.98 \\
Be-thin &0.62 &0.38 & 0.02& 0.98 &0.00 &1.00 &0.00 & 1.00 \\
\rowcolor{gray}
Be-med\: \: &0.08 &0.92 &0.00 & 1.00 &0.00 &1.00 & 0.00& 1.00 \\
Al-med &0.04 &0.96 &0.00 & 1.00 & 0.00 &1.00 & 0.00& 1.00 \\
\rowcolor{gray}
Al-thick\: \: &0.00&1.00 &0.00 & 1.00 &0.00 &1.00 & 0.00& 1.00 \\
Be-thick & 0.00 &1.00 &0.00 & 1.00 & 0.00 &1.00 & 0.00& 1.00 \\
\hline
\end{tabular*}
\label{Tab. XRT response}
\end{table}
Table \ref{Tab. XRT response} shows that, for plasma temperatures above 1MK, a significant portion of
the signal will come from energies greater than 0.75 keV.\\
The PSFs provided above are designed with normalization in mind but this
condition is not necessary, and in fact it forces that 100\% of the energy is
scattered within the XRT field of view. With this condition relaxed, the PSF
will scatter light far from the field of view. Table \ref{Tab PSF} provides the PSF models
without normalization. The only difference between these and the normalized
models is the value of $r_{2} $. This causes the slope of the encircled energy
to essentially remain flat beyond 5 arcsec.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\caption {PSF model without Normalisation.\newline
* Denotes exact values and not approximations.}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
\hline
\textbf{Parameter Values} & \textbf{0.56 keV} & \textbf{1.0 keV} \\
\hline
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{$ \sigma $} & 2.19256 & 2.36982 \\
\textbf{$ \gamma$} & 1.24891 & 0.914686 \\
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{r$ _{0} $} & 3.4167 & 3.22857 \\
\textbf{ a} & 1.31946 & 0.847955 \\
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{r$ _{1} $} & 5* & 5* \\
\textbf{ b} & 0.03* & 0.038* \\
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{ c} & 0.15* & 0.19* \\
\textbf{ D} & 7.35* r$ _{0} $ & 10.1251* r$ _{0} $ \\
\rowcolor{gray}
\textbf{r$ _{2} $} & 7 & 7.3 \\
\textbf{EE at edge of FOV} & 93\% & 93\%\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{Tab PSF}
\end{table}
\section*{APPENDIX B}
Among different indirect methods of deconvolution available in SolarSoft IDL
libraries, we used codes based on the Maximum Likelihood and Richardson-Lucy
methods:
\begin{description}
\item[$\bullet$]
\textbf{AIA\_ DECONVOLVE\_ RICHARDSONLUCY.pro (AIA)} based on
Richardson-Lucy algorithm.\\
/darts.isas.jaxa.jp/pub/ssw/sdo/aia/idl/psf/PRO/aia\_deconvolve\_richardsonlucy.pro
The Richardson-Lucy algorithm in this code follows closely the algorithm
discussed by \cite{Jan97}.
\item[$\bullet$]\textbf{MAX\_LIKELIHOOD.pro (M-L)} based on Maximum likelihood algorithm.\\
idlastro.gsfc.nasa.gov/ftp/pro/image/max\_likelihood.pro\\
Based on papers by \cite{Ric72} and \cite{Luc74}.
\end{description}
|
\section{ Introduction}
In \cite{hap} the authors of the current work
presented a cosmological background in a spatially flat Friedmann - Lema\^{\i}tre - Robertson - Walker (FLRW)
universe whose dynamics was characterized by
the Raychauduri equation $\dot{H}=F(H)$ where $F (H)$ ($H$ is the Hubble rate of the FLRW universe) was a linear
function in $H$ before the phase transition and after the phase transition it became quadratic in $H$. In summary, the model realized three fold properties: (i) The linear part prevented the big bang singularity in finite cosmic time although it was geodesically past incomplete, (ii) the phase transition was essential to produce enough particles to reheat the
universe and the universe went through a deflationary period for a sufficient time, and finally (iii) the quadratic part had a fixed point that became responsible for the current acceleration of the universe.
What was worth interesting of that background is that it comes from a quintessential potential, whose inflationary part was a Higgs-style potential and the quintessential part reads an exponential potential. However, the model has some undesired features such as, it provides a reheating temperature in the MeV
regime, although it does not contradict the nucleosynthesis success since this needs a very low temperature, and the worse thing in the model is that,
since the theoretical value of the running is far from the corresponding observational mean value obtained by Planck's team, thus, comparing the theoretical results provided by this model with Planck 2013 and Planck 2015 observational data \cite{Ade, Planck} when the running is not allowed,
one can show that the model has to be disregarded.
However, we found that the existing disparities in \cite{hap} can be defeated in a family of models in this flat FLRW background which has the same feature as in \cite{hap} but in an improved manner. Hence, in this sequel we propose a family of backgrounds whose dynamics before the phase transition is governed by the Raychaudhuri equation $\dot{H}=-k^2 H^{\alpha}$ with $\alpha\in [0,1]$ and $k$ is any real number.
This family provides an inflationary quintessential potential whose inflationary part is basically a power law potential and the quintessential potential is governed by a cosmological constant. Further, the models of this family are nonsingular in nature. In other words, although the models are geodesically past incomplete but they do not encounter with any finite time past singularity, i.e. big bang. Also, the models provide a complete analytic background similar to \cite{hap}. Further, due to presence of the power law potential,
the models provide a greater reheating temperature in the GeV or TeV regime depending on the value of the parameter $\alpha$.
{Moreover, for some values of this parameter the models match correctly with Planck 2013 \cite{Ade} and Planck 2015 data \cite{Planck}
without allowing the running,
which indeed is an interesting and notable point in the present family of models.} \newline
The manuscript is organized as follows: In section \ref{model}, we introduce the family of backgrounds and discuss its properties. {{}In section \ref{scalar-field}, we establish
that the dynamics governed by the model} could be mimicked by a
single scalar field whose potential is a combination of a {power law potential}, and a {cosmological constant}. Section { 4} is devoted to the study of cosmological
perturbations showing that the
theoretical results provided by our models fit well with current observed data \cite{Ade,Planck}. The reheating process via gravitational particle production of heavy massive
particles is studied
in section {5}, where we show that our family of models provide a reheating temperature
in the GeV and TeV regime depending on the value of the parameter $\alpha$.
A detailed calculation of the number of $e$-fold is performed in section {6}. In section {7} we compare our new family of models with the
model proposed in our previous work \cite{hap}. Finally in section {8} we have summarized our results.
\vskip 0.3cm
We note that the units used throughout the paper are $\hbar=c=1$.
\section{The model}
\label{model}
We start with the following dynamical equation
\begin{eqnarray}\label{dynamics}
\dot{H}=\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}
(-3H_E^2+\Lambda)\left(\frac{H}{H_E} \right)^{\alpha}& \mbox{for}& H\geq H_E\\
-3H^2+\Lambda& \mbox{for}& H\leq H_E,
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where $H_E$ is a specific value of the Hubble parameter, $\Lambda\ll H_E^2$ is a positive cosmological constant and $\alpha\in [0,1]$ is the parameter which defines the family of models under consideration.
Now, equation (\ref{dynamics}) can analytically be solved leading to the following backgrounds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $\alpha=1$ the Hubble parameter is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
H(t)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
H_Ee^{\frac{(-3H^2_E+\Lambda)t}{H_E}} & t\leq 0\\
\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{3}}\frac{3H_E+\sqrt{3\Lambda}\tanh(\sqrt{3\Lambda} t)}{3H_E\tanh(\sqrt{3\Lambda} t)+\sqrt{3\Lambda}}& t\geq 0,
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
and thus, the scale factor can be solved as
\begin{eqnarray}
a(t)\cong \left\{\begin{array}{cc}
a_E e^{\frac{H_E^2}{-3H_E^2+\Lambda}\left[e^{\frac{(-3H_E^2+\Lambda)t}{H_E}}-1\right]} & t\leq 0\\
a_E \left(\frac{3H_E}{\sqrt{3\Lambda}}\sinh(\sqrt{3\Lambda} t)+\cosh(\sqrt{3\Lambda} t)\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}& t\geq 0.
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
\item For $0\leq \alpha<1$, the Hubble parameter has the following expression
\begin{eqnarray}
H(t)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
H_E\left((\alpha-1)\left(-3H_E+\frac{\Lambda}{H_E} \right)t +1\right)^{\frac{1}{1-\alpha}} & t\leq 0\\
\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{3}}\frac{3H_E+\sqrt{3\Lambda}\tanh(\sqrt{3\Lambda} t)}{3H_E\tanh(\sqrt{3\Lambda} t)+\sqrt{3\Lambda}} & t\geq 0,
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
and the corresponding scale factor is
\begin{eqnarray}
a(t)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
a_E e^{\frac{H_E}{\left(-3H_E+\frac{\Lambda}{H_E} \right)(2-\alpha)}\left[\left((\alpha-1)
\left(-3H_E+\frac{\Lambda}{H_E} \right)t +1\right)^{\frac{2-\alpha}{1-\alpha}} -1\right]} & t\leq 0\\
a_E \left(\frac{3H_E}{\sqrt{3\Lambda}}\sinh(\sqrt{3\Lambda} t)+\cosh(\sqrt{3\Lambda} t)\right)^{\frac{1}{3}} & t\geq 0.
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{enumerate}
In all cases ($0\leq \alpha\leq 1$), the family
depicts a nonsingular background in cosmic time
satisfying $H(-\infty)=\infty$, and $H(\infty)=\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{3}}$.
Moreover, for $\Lambda\cong 0$, one can have the following approximate forms of the Hubble parameter and the scale factor.
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $\alpha=1$:
\begin{eqnarray}
H(t)\cong\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
H_Ee^{-3H_Et} & t\leq 0\\
\frac{H_E}{3H_Et+1}& t\gtrsim 0,
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
a(t)\cong \left\{\begin{array}{cc}
a_E e^{-\frac{1}{3}[e^{-3H_Et}-1]} & t\leq 0\\
a_E (3H_Et+1)^{\frac{1}{3}}& t\gtrsim 0.
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
\item For $0\leq \alpha<1$:
\begin{eqnarray}
H(t)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
H_E\left(3(\alpha-1)H_Et +1\right)^{\frac{1}{1-\alpha}} & t\leq 0\\
\frac{H_E}{3H_Et+1}& t\gtrsim 0,
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
a(t)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
a_E e^{-\frac{1}{3(2-\alpha)}[\left(3(\alpha-1)H_Et +1\right)^{\frac{2-\alpha}{1-\alpha}} -1]} & t\leq 0\\
a_E (3H_Et+1)^{\frac{1}{3}}& t\gtrsim 0.
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{enumerate}
On the other hand,
the effective Equation of State (EoS) parameter, namely $w_{eff}$, which is defined as $w_{eff}=-1-\frac{2\dot{H}}{3H^2}$, for our family of models is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
w_{eff}=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
-1+2\left(1-\frac{\Lambda}{3H_E^2} \right) \left(\frac{H}{H_E} \right)^{\alpha-2} & H\geq H_E\\
1- \frac{2\Lambda}{3H^2}& H\leq H_E,
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
which shows that for $H\gg H_E$ one has
$w_{eff}(H)\cong -1$ (early quasi de Sitter period). When $H\cong H_E$, the EoS parameter satisfies
$w_{eff}(H)\cong 1$ (kination or deflationary period \cite{spokoiny,joyce}), and finally, for $H\cong \sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{3}}$ one also has $w_{eff}(H)\cong -1$ (late quasi
de Sitter period).
Moreover, when one considers the approximation $\Lambda=0$, the Equation of State becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
P=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
-\rho+2\left(\frac{\rho}{\rho_E} \right)^{\frac{\alpha-2}{2}}\rho & \rho\geq \rho_E\\
\rho& \rho\leq \rho_E .
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where {$\rho$, $P$ are respectively the energy density and the pressure of the cosmic fluid} and $\rho_E$ is the energy density of the universe at $H= H_E$. In particular,
\begin{enumerate}\item
For $\alpha=0$, the equation of state becomes
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eos1}
P=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
-\rho+2{\rho_E} & \rho\geq \rho_E\\
\rho& \rho\leq \rho_E .
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
\item
For $\alpha=1$, the equation of state takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eos2}
P=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
-\rho+2\sqrt{\rho\rho_E } & \rho\geq \rho_E\\
\rho& \rho\leq \rho_E .
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{enumerate}
\section{The scalar field}
\label{scalar-field}
{It is evident from equations (\ref{eos1}) and (\ref{eos2}) that
at early times, our family of backgrounds satisfies $P(\rho)\cong -\rho$, that means our universe was quasi de Sitter in nature. Since the dynamics of the early accelerating phase is well realized via a scalar field prescription, hence it is very natural to ask whether an equivalence between the family and the scalar field dynamics exists or not. If such an equivalence exists then we need to confirm their viability with the observational data, that means essentially we aim to check whether the family of models} could lead to a power spectrum of cosmological perturbations that fit well with the current observational data \cite{Ade, Planck}.
To do so, in the flat FLRW universe, if we represent the energy density and the pressure by the notations
$\rho_{\varphi}$, $p_{\varphi}$, respectively, then they assume the following simplest forms
{
\begin{align}\label{sf1}
\rho_{\varphi} & = \frac{\dot{\varphi}^2}{2}+ V (\varphi),~~~p_{\varphi}= \frac{\dot{\varphi}^2}{2}- V (\varphi)
\end{align}
}
Now, using Eq. (\ref{sf1}) and the Raychaudhuri equation {{} $\dot{H}=-\frac{\dot{\varphi}^2}{2M_{pl}^2} $} (where $M_{pl}^2= (8 \pi G)^{-1}$, is the reduced Planck's mass), we find
\begin{eqnarray}
\varphi=M_{pl}\int\sqrt{-2\dot{H}}\,\,dt=-M_{pl}\int\sqrt{-\,\,\frac{2}{\dot{H}}}\,\,dH.
\end{eqnarray}
Now, in our case the scalar field is solved as
\begin{eqnarray}
\varphi=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
\varphi_E\left(\frac{H}{H_E}\right)^{\frac{2-\alpha}{2}}
& H\geq H_E \\
-\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}M_{pl}\ln\left(\frac{\sqrt{H^2-\frac{\Lambda}{3}} +H }{ \sqrt{H_E^2-\frac{\Lambda}{3}} +H_E }\right) +\varphi_E& H \lesssim H_E,
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where $\varphi_E\equiv -\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{3}(2-\alpha)}\frac{H_E}{\sqrt{H_E^2-\frac{\Lambda}{3}}}M_{pl}
\cong -\frac{2\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{3}(2-\alpha)}M_{pl}$.
Conversely, one can express the Hubble rate in terms of the field as
\begin{eqnarray}
H=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
H_E\left(\frac{\varphi}{\varphi_E}\right)^{\frac{2}{2-\alpha}}& \varphi\leq \varphi_E \\
\frac{(\sqrt{H_E^2-\frac{\Lambda}{3}} +H_E )^2e^{-\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}(\varphi-\varphi_E)}+\frac{\Lambda}{3}e^{\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}(\varphi-\varphi_E)}
}{2(\sqrt{H_E^2-\frac{\Lambda}{3}} +H_E) }& \varphi \geq \varphi_E.
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
The potential is given by $V(H)=3H^2M_{pl}^2+\dot{H}M_{pl}^2\Longrightarrow V(\varphi)=3H^2(\varphi)M_{pl}^2+\dot{H}(\varphi)M_{pl}^2.$ Then, for our family one has
\begin{eqnarray}
V(H)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
3H^{\alpha}\left(H^{2-\alpha}-\frac{H_E^{2}-\frac{\Lambda}{3}}{H_E^{\alpha}}\right)M_{pl}^2& H\geq H_E\\
\Lambda M_{pl}^2& H\leq H_E.
\end{array} \right.
\end{eqnarray}
That is,
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi)=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
3\left(\frac{H_E M_{pl}}{\varphi_E} \right)^2\left( \frac{\varphi}{\varphi_E}\right)^{\frac{2\alpha}{2-\alpha}}
\left[\varphi^2-\varphi_E^2\left(1- \frac{\Lambda}{3H_E^2} \right)\right]& \varphi\leq \varphi_E\\
\Lambda M_{pl}^2 & \varphi\geq \varphi_E.
\end{array} \right.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that, for $\alpha=0$, the potential is quadratic, for $\alpha=\frac{2}{3}$, it is cubic and for $\alpha=1$, it is quartic.
\section{Cosmological perturbations}
Now, to study the cosmological perturbations, one needs to introduce the slow roll parameters \cite{btw}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{slowroll}
\epsilon=-\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}, \quad \eta=2\epsilon-\frac{\dot{\epsilon}}{2H\epsilon},
\end{eqnarray}
which allow us to calculate the associated inflationary parameters, such as, the spectral index ($n_s$), its running ($\alpha_s$), and the ratio of tensor to scalar perturbations ($r$) defined below
\begin{eqnarray}
n_s-1=-6\epsilon_*+2\eta_*, \quad \alpha_s=\frac{H\dot{n}_s}{H^2 +\dot{H}},\quad
r=16\epsilon_*
\end{eqnarray}
where the star ($*$) means that the quantities are evaluated when the pivot scale crosses the Hubble radius.
{{}
Now, for our family of models, the above inflationary parameters assume the following values
\begin{eqnarray}
n_s-1=(\alpha-4)\epsilon_*, \quad \alpha_s=\frac{(\alpha-4)(2-\alpha)\epsilon^2_*}{1-\epsilon_*},\quad
r=16\epsilon_*,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\epsilon_*=3\left(\frac{H_E}{H_*} \right)^{2-\alpha}$. Now, let us remark the following:
\begin{remark}
For potentials of the form $V(\varphi)=\lambda \varphi^{\frac{4}{2-\alpha}}$, and using that
$$\epsilon \cong \frac{M_{pl}^2}{2}\left( \frac{V_{\varphi}}{V} \right)^2, \qquad
\eta \cong {M_{pl}^2}\frac{V_{\varphi\varphi}}{V} $$
one also obtains that
$n_s-1\cong (\alpha-4)\epsilon_*$,
which means that our family of potentials, during the inflationary regime, are like power law potentials
\end{remark}
The number of $e$-folds is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
N=\int_{t_*}^{t_{end}} H dt=-\int_{H_{end}}^{H_*} \frac{H}{\dot{H}}dH=\frac{1}{2-\alpha}\left(\frac{1}{\epsilon_*}-1 \right).
\end{eqnarray}
Then, in terms of the number of $e$-folds one has
\begin{eqnarray}
n_s-1=\frac{\alpha-4}{1+(2-\alpha)N}, \quad
r= \frac{16}{1+(2-\alpha)N}, \quad
\alpha_s=\frac{\alpha-4}{N(1+(2-\alpha)N}.
\end{eqnarray}
{From this last formula and due to the large value of the number of $e$-folds, one can see that the running is of the same order as
$(n_s-1)^2$. Then, it is clear that its theoretical value is far smaller than the central value of the best fit obtained by Planck's team (see for instance Table 5 of \cite{Ade}),
and as a consequence to check the viability of our models we have to consider the 2-dimensional marginalized confidence level in the plane $(n_s,r)$ without the presence of running provided by
Planck's team. Moreover, it is important to realize that in quintessential inflation, the number
of $e$-folds is greater than the $e$-folds
for inflationary potentials with a deep well \cite{ll}. For this reason, here we have drawn the curves from $N=65$ to $N=75$. Taking into account these considerations, we have showed in
figure $1$ that the models allowed by Planck 2015 data at $2\sigma$ C.L. must satisfy $\alpha\in[0,\frac{1}{2})$.
}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[height=0.55\textwidth,angle=0]{pla_ns_r_Planck2015norunning_modelBenas.png}
\caption{Marginalized joint confidence contours for $(n_{\mathrm s} \,, r)$,
at the 68\,\% and 95\,\% CL, without the presence of running of the spectral indices. For the values $\alpha=0, \frac{1}{4}$ and $\frac{1}{2}$ we have drawn the curves from $65$
(small circle) to
$75$ (big circle) $e$-fols.
({Figure courtesy of the Planck2015 Collaboration}).
}
\label{fig:nsrr}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5cm}
Finally,
to determinate the value of $H_E$, one has to take into account the theoretical \cite{btw} and the observational \cite{bld} value of the power spectrum
\begin{eqnarray}\label{power1}
{\mathcal P}\cong \frac{H^2}{8\pi^2\epsilon_* M_{pl}^2}\cong 2\times 10^{-9}.
\end{eqnarray}
Using $H_*=\frac{H_E}{\left(\frac{\epsilon_*}{3} \right)^{\frac{1}{2-\alpha}}}$ and $\epsilon_*=\frac{1-n_s}{4-\alpha}$, one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
H_E \sim 7\times 10^{-4}
\left(\frac{1-n_s}{3(4-\alpha)} \right)^{\frac{4-\alpha}{2(2-\alpha)}} M_{pl}.
\end{eqnarray}
Taking, as usual, $n_s\cong 0.96$ one has the value of $H_E$ for each value of the parameter $\alpha$.
In particular:
For $\alpha=0$, one has $H_E\sim 2\times 10^{-6} M_{pl}\sim 5\times 10^{12}$ GeV,
and for $\alpha=1$, one has $H_E\sim 10^{-7} M_{pl}\sim 2\times 10^{11}$ GeV.
}
\section{The reheating process}
{
We devote this section on the production of heavy massive particles ($m\gg H_E$) which are conformally coupled to gravity due to a phase transition to a deflationary regime \cite{hap,he}. In this case, since the second derivative of the Hubble parameter is discontinuous,
during the adiabatic regimes,
we will use the first order WBK solution to define the approximate vacuum modes \cite{Haro}
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi_{1,k}^{WKB}(\tau)\equiv
\sqrt{\frac{1}{2W_{1,k}(\tau)}}e^{-{i}\int^{\tau}W_{1,k}(\eta)d\eta},
\end{eqnarray}
where $W_{1,k}$ can be calculated as
\begin{eqnarray}
W_{1,k}=
\omega_k-\frac{1}{4}\frac{\omega''_{k}}{\omega^2_{k}}+\frac{3}{8}\frac{(\omega'_{k})^2}{\omega^3_{k}} .
\end{eqnarray}
Now, before the phase transition the vacuum is depicted approximately by $\chi_{1,k}^{WKB}(\tau)$, but after the phase transition this mode becomes a mixture of
positive and negative frequencies of the form
$\alpha_k \chi_{1,k}^{WKB}(\tau)+\beta_k (\chi_{1,k}^{WKB})^*(\tau)$.
The $\beta_k$-Bogoliubov coefficient could be obtained, as usual, matching both expressions at the transition time $\tau_E$, obtaining
{\begin{eqnarray*}
\beta_k=\frac{{\mathcal W}[\chi_{1,k}^{WKB}(\tau_E^-),\chi_{1,k}^{WKB}(\tau_E^+)]}
{{\mathcal W}[(\chi_{1,k}^{WKB})^*(\tau_E^+),\chi_{1,k}^{WKB}(\tau_E^+)]},~~ \mbox{where}~{\mathcal W}~\mbox{is the Wronskian}.
\end{eqnarray*}}
The square modulus of the {}{$\beta_k$-Bogoliubov} coefficient will be given by
{\begin{eqnarray*}
|\beta_k|^2\cong \frac{m^4a_E^{10}\left(\ddot{H}_E^+-\ddot{H}_E^-\right)^2}{256(k^2+m^2a^2_E)^5}=
\frac{81 (2-\alpha)^2m^4a_E^{10}H_E^6}{256(k^2+m^2a^2_E)^5}.
\end{eqnarray*}}
The number and energy density are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
n_{\chi}\equiv \frac{1}{2\pi^2 a^3}\int_0^{\infty}k^2|\beta_k|^2dk,\quad
\rho_{\chi}\equiv \frac{1}{2\pi^2 a^4}\int_0^{\infty}k^2\omega_k|\beta_k|^2dk.
\end{eqnarray}
Then for our family one has
\begin{eqnarray}
n_{\chi}\sim 3\times 10^{-3}(2-\alpha)^2\frac{H_E^6}{m^3}\left(\frac{a_E}{a} \right)^3, \quad \rho_{\chi}\sim mn_{\chi}.
\end{eqnarray}
{We notice that at the beginning of reheating, the particles are far from being in thermal equilibrium,}
and at first their energy density scales
as $a^{-3}$, eventually they will decay into lighter
particles, which will interact through multiple scattering. At the end of this process, the universe becomes filled with a
relativistic plasma in thermal equilibrium whose energy density decays as $a^{-4}$. Now, since the energy density of the background decays as $a^{-4}$ (i.e. deflationary regime), eventually the
energy density of the relativistic plasma will dominate and the universe will become reheated.
Here, as in \cite{pv, 37}, we consider the thermalization process, where the cross section for $2\rightarrow 3$ scattering with gauge bosons exchange whose typical energy is $\rho_{\chi}^{\frac{1}{4}}(0) $,
is given by
$\sigma={\beta^3}\rho_{\chi}^{-\frac{1}{2}}(0)$, with $\beta^2\sim 10^{-3}$. The thermalization rate is
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Gamma=\sigma n_{\chi}(0)
\sim 5\times 10^{-2}(2-\alpha)\beta^3\left(\frac{H_E}{m}\right)^2H_E.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thermal equilibrium is reached when {}{$\Gamma\sim H(t_{eq})\cong H_E\left(\frac{a_E}{a_{eq}}\right)^3$}, which leads to the relation {}
{$\frac{a_E}{a_{eq}}\sim 4\times 10^{-1}(2-\alpha)^{1/3}\beta \left(\frac{H_E}{m}\right)^{2/3}$}. Then, at the equilibrium one has
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{\chi}(t_{eq})\sim 10^{-4}(2-\alpha)^3\beta^3\left(\frac{H_E}{m}\right)^{4}H_E^4,\qquad
\rho(t_{eq})\sim 7\times 10^{-3}(2-\alpha)^2\beta^6\left(\frac{H_E}{m}\right)^{4}H_E^2 M_{pl}^2.
\end{eqnarray}
After this thermalization, the relativistic plasma and the background evolve as {}
{\begin{eqnarray}\rho_{\chi}(t)=\rho_{\chi}(t_{eq})\left(\frac{a_{eq}}{a} \right)^4,
\quad \rho(t)=\rho(t_{eq})\left(\frac{a_{eq}}{a} \right)^6,\end{eqnarray}}
and the reheating is obtained when both energy densities are
of the same order, which happens when {}{$\frac{a_{eq}}{a_R}\sim \sqrt{\frac{\rho_{\chi}(t_{eq})}{\rho(t_{eq})}}$}, and thus,
one obtains a reheating temperature of the order
\begin{eqnarray*}
T_R\sim \rho_{\chi}^{\frac{1}{4}}(t_{eq})\sqrt{\frac{\rho_{\chi}(t_{eq})}{\rho(t_{eq})}} \sim
10^{-1}\left(\frac{H_E}{M_{pl}} \right)^2\left(\frac{H_E}{m}\right)M_{pl}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Since, $H_E\ll m$, if we consider masses of the order $10^2 H_E$ one has
$$T_R\sim 10^{-3}\left(\frac{H_E}{M_{pl}} \right)^2M_{pl}\sim 5\times 10^{-10} \left(\frac{1-n_s}{3(4-\alpha)} \right)^{\frac{4-\alpha}{2-\alpha}} M_{pl}. $$
As a particular cases we consider
\begin{enumerate}
\item The quadratic potential corresponding to $\alpha=0$, leads to the reheating temperature $T_R\sim 5\times 10^{-15}M_{pl}\sim 10^4$ GeV.
\item The cubic potential corresponding to $\alpha=\frac{2}{3}$, leads to the reheating temperature $T_R\sim 5\times10^{-16}M_{pl}\sim 10^3$ GeV.
\item The quartic potential corresponding to $\alpha=1$, leads to the reheating temperature $T_R\sim 4\times10^{-17}M_{pl}\sim 10^2$ GeV.
\end{enumerate}
}
\vspace{1cm}
Finally, to end this section, we study the evolution after reheating. Since after the phase transition the potential is constant one will have
\begin{eqnarray}
\ddot{\varphi}+3H\dot{\varphi}=0\Longleftrightarrow \dot{\varphi}(t)=\dot{\varphi}(t_R)e^{-3\int_{t_R}^tH(s)ds},
\end{eqnarray}
where $t_R$ is the reheating time.
On the other hand, during the radiation and the matter dominated phases, one will have
\begin{eqnarray}
H(t)=\frac{H_R}{1+2(t-t_R)H_R}, \quad \mbox{and} \quad H(t)=\frac{2H_M}{2+3(t-t_M)H_M},
\end{eqnarray}
where the subindices $R$, $M$ respectively denote the Hubble rate when radiation and matter domination will start to dominate. Then if we denote by $t_{\Lambda}$ the time when the cosmological constant starts to
dominate on, one will get
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\varphi}(t_{\Lambda})=\frac{\dot{\varphi}(t_R)}{(1+2(t_M-t_R)H_R)^{\frac{3}{2}}(2+3(t_{\Lambda}-t_M)H_M)^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Since nowadays the universe is accelerating one can take $\Lambda\sim H_0^2$, where $H_0$ is the current value of the Hubble parameter, and thus, one arrives at
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\varphi}^2(t_{\Lambda})\sim \dot{\varphi}^2(t_R)\frac{H_MH_0^2}{H_R^3}.
\end{eqnarray}
As a consequence, since at the beginning of the radiation domination, all the energy density is kinetic, the ratio between the kinetic and potential energy density ($\mathcal{R}$) when the cosmological constant starts to dominate satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{R}\cong \frac{\dot{\varphi}^2(t_{\Lambda})/2}{\Lambda M_{pl}^2}\sim \frac{H_M}{H_R}.
\end{eqnarray}
Now using that the value of the Hubble parameter at the beginning of the matter domination is of the order $H_M\sim 10^{-54}M_{pl}$ (see \cite{he}) and for
our models $H_R$ belongs between $10^{-30}M_{pl}$ and $10^{-34} M_{pl}$, one can calculate that
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{R}\leq 10^{-20},
\end{eqnarray}
which means that the kinetic part of the energy density is sub-dominant, and thus, in our model, it is the cosmological cosmological constant which drives the current evolution of the universe.
\section{Calculation of the number of $e$-folds}
{
We start with the main formula \cite{ll}
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{k_*}{a_0H_0}
=e^{-N_*}\frac{H_*}{H_0}\frac{a_{end}}{a_E}\frac{a_E}{a_R}\frac{a_R}{a_M}\frac{a_M}{a_0}
=e^{-N_*}\frac{H_*}{H_0}\frac{a_{end}}{a_E}
\frac{\rho_R^{-1/12}\rho_M^{1/4}}{\rho^{1/6}_E}\frac{a_M}{a_0},
\end{eqnarray}
where ``end'', $R$ and $M$ respectively symbolize the end of inflation, the beginning of radiation era, and the beginning of the matter domination era. Further, the subindex `$0$' at any quantity means its value at current time. Here we have used the relations
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\frac{a_{E}}{a_R}\right)^{6}=\frac{\rho_R}{\rho_{E}}, \quad
\left(\frac{a_R}{a_M}\right)^4=\frac{\rho_M}{\rho_R}.
\end{eqnarray}
Taking the pivot scale as $k_*=0.05$ $\mbox{Mpc}^{-1}$, and since the current horizon scale is
$a_0H_0\cong 2\times 10^{-4}$ $\mbox{Mpc}^{-1}$, one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
N_*=-5.52+\ln\left(\frac{H_*}{H_0} \right)+\ln\left(\frac{a_{end}}{a_E} \right)
+\frac{1}{4}\ln\left(\frac{\rho_M}{\rho_R} \right) +\frac{1}{6}\ln\left(\frac{\rho_R}{\rho_E} \right)
+\ln\left(\frac{a_M}{a_0} \right).
\end{eqnarray}
Since after reheating, the process becomes
adiabatic, i.e. $T_0=\frac{a_M}{a_0}T_M$, hence using the relations $\rho_M\cong \frac{\pi^2}{15}g_M T_M^4$
and $\rho_R\cong \frac{\pi^2}{30}g_R T_R^4$ {(where $g_i$'s, $i= R, M$ are the relativistic degrees of freedom\footnote{Specifically $g_M$ stands for the number of relativistic degrees of freedom at matter radiation equality and $g_R$ is the number of relativistic degrees of freedom at the end of reheating.} \cite{rg}.)}, one arrives at
\begin{eqnarray}
N_*=-5.52+\ln\left(\frac{H_*}{H_0} \right)+\ln\left(\frac{a_{end}}{a_E} \right)
+\frac{1}{4}\ln\left(\frac{2g_M}{g_R} \right) +\frac{1}{6}\ln\left(\frac{\rho_R}{\rho_E} \right)
+\ln\left(\frac{T_0}{T_R} \right).
\end{eqnarray}
Now, taking into account that $H_0\sim 6\times 10^{-61} M_{pl}$ and ${\mathcal P}=\frac{H_*^2}{8\pi^2\epsilon_*M_{pl}^2}\sim 2\times 10^{-9}$ one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
\ln\left(\frac{H_*}{H_0} \right)=131.38+\frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\frac{1-n_s}{3(4-\alpha)} \right).
\end{eqnarray}
Now using the current temperature of the universe $T_0\cong 2.73$ K $\cong 2\times 10^{-13}$ GeV and $g_M=3.36$ \cite{rg} one has
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{4}\ln\left(\frac{2g_M}{g_R} \right)+\ln\left(\frac{T_0}{T_R} \right)=-28.76-\ln\left(\frac{g_R^{\frac{1}{4}}T_R}{\mbox{GeV}} \right)
\end{eqnarray}
From the value of the Hubble parameter at the transition time, one will obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{6}\ln\left(\frac{\rho_R}{\rho_E} \right)=-26.16- \frac{4-\alpha}{6(2-\alpha)}\ln\left(\frac{1-n_s}{3(4-\alpha)} \right)
+\frac{2}{3}\ln\left(\frac{g_R^{\frac{1}{4}}T_R}{\mbox{GeV}} \right).
\end{eqnarray}
Collecting all the terms one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
N_*=70.94+\ln\left(\frac{a_{end}}{a_E} \right)
+\frac{1-\alpha}{3(2-\alpha)}\ln\left(\frac{1-n_s}{3(4-\alpha)} \right)-\frac{1}{3}\ln\left(\frac{g_R^{\frac{1}{4}}T_R}{\mbox{GeV}} \right)
\end{eqnarray}
On the other hand, a simple calculation leads to
\begin{eqnarray}
\ln\left(\frac{a_{end}}{a_E} \right)=\int_{H_E}^{H_{end}}\frac{H}{\dot{H}}dH=-\frac{2}{3(2-\alpha)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
N_*=70.94-\frac{1}{3(2-\alpha)}\left[2-
(1-\alpha)\ln\left(\frac{1-n_s}{3(4-\alpha)} \right)\right]-\frac{1}{3}\ln\left(\frac{g_R^{\frac{1}{4}}T_R}{\mbox{GeV}} \right)
\end{eqnarray}
Finally, since for our models
$T_R\sim 5\times 10^{-10} \left(\frac{1-n_s}{3(4-\alpha)} \right)^{\frac{4-\alpha}{2-\alpha}} M_{pl} \sim 10^{8}\left(\frac{1-n_s}{3(4-\alpha)} \right)^{\frac{4-\alpha}{2-\alpha}}$ GeV, hence
using the fact that $g_R=107$ for $T_R\geq 175$ GeV \cite{rg},
one gets
\begin{eqnarray}
N_*=64.41-\frac{1}{3(2-\alpha)}\left[2+3
\ln\left(\frac{1-n_s}{3(4-\alpha)} \right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
Taking as usual $n_s\cong 0.96$ we observe the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For the quadratic potential ($\alpha=0$), the number of $e$-folds is $N_*=67$.
\item For the cubic potential ($\alpha=\frac{2}{3}$), the number of $e$-folds is $N_*=68$.
\item For the quartic potential ($\alpha=1$), the number of $e$-folds is $N_*=69$.
\end{enumerate}
}
\section{Comparison with the previous model}
In section $7$ of our previous work \cite{hap}, we introduced the following dynamical system:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{background1}
\dot{H}=\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}
{-3H_e^2}(2H-H_e)& \mbox{for} & H>H_E\\
-3H^2+{\Lambda} & \mbox{for} & H\leq H_E,
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where $H_e$ is the model parameter and the phase transition occurs at $H_E=H_e+\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{3}}$. We note that this background originally comes from the following quintessential Higgs-style potential
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi)=\left\{\begin{array}{ccc}
\frac{27H_e^2M_{pl}^2}{16}\left(\frac{\varphi^2}{M_{pl}^2}-\frac{2}{3} \right)^2& \mbox{for} & \varphi<\varphi_E\\
{\Lambda}M_{pl}^2 & \mbox{for} & \varphi\geq \varphi_E,
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray}
in which $\varphi_E=-M_{pl}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\sqrt{1+\frac{2}{H_e}\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{3}}}\cong -M_{pl}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}.$
It has been shown in \cite{hap, he} that due to the gravitational production of heavy massive particles, the reheating temperature
belongs in the MeV regime. This is due to the fact that the second derivative of the Hubble parameter is continuous and the third
one is discontinuous at the transition time. However, for the family of models described by the sole parameter $\alpha \in [0, 1]$, the second derivative of the Hubble parameter is discontinuous at the
transition phase what leads to a reheating temperature in the GeV or TeV regime.
{Moreover, during the inflationary period, the Higgs-style potential has the same behavior as a quartic one (i.e. the model with $\alpha = 1$), which means that
it does not match with Planck 2015 data (see figure $1$).}
On the contrary, for our new family of models, if one takes $\alpha\in [0,\frac{1}{2})$, the corresponding models match at $2\sigma$ C.L. with Planck 2013 and Planck 2015 without allowing the running. {It is one of the main results of the present work which proves the potentiality of the current family of models in compared to our earlier work \cite{hap}.}
\section{Summary and Discussion}
\label{discuss}
The current work offers a sequel of our previous work \cite{hap} with a significant improvement in compared to its mathematical simplicity, and in agreement with the very latest observational data.
Let us demonstrate the main improvements by comparing the previous model \cite{hap} with the current one and finally the need of this sequel.\newline
In \cite{hap} a simple unified cosmological model was proposed having (i) an inflationary period described by a Higgs type potential, (ii) a sudden phase transition from the inflationary phase to the deflationary phase, which results in the production of massive particles, hence the universe begins to reheat, after that, it successively enters into the radiation and matter dominated eras, and finally, (iii) a quintessential stage explained by an exponential potential. Additionally, although the model was geodesically past incomplete, but it did not encounter any big bang singularity in the finite cosmic time. So, essentially, we realized a singularity free cosmological model unifying
the early inflationary epoch with the current cosmic acceleration by only a single scalar field whose potential is a combination of Higgs potential and an exponential one.
Also, the model provided an complete analytic background which thus was helpful to calculate the associated cosmological parameters.
We found that the model {only agrees with the Planck 2013 data \cite{Ade} in presence of running,
however, as we have already discussed,
the model does not match with the Planck's observational data without the presence of running}.\newline
But in the present work we provide an improved version of \cite{hap} which is potential and worthy for further discussions. Here we propose a family of new cosmological models described by a sole parameter $\alpha \in [0, 1]$ which provides a complete picture of our universe via a single scalar field as in \cite{hap}. The current family of models have (i) an inflationary phase described by a power law potential, (ii) a sudden phase transition from inflationary regime to the deflationary regime, hence beginning of reheating, consequently, successive radiation, matter dominated eras, and finally (iii) the models enter into the current accelerating phase responsible by the cosmological constant. In addition to that, the family of models are nonsingular in nature, i.e. they do not predict any finite cosmic time big bang singularity, but are geodesically past incomplete. That means similar to \cite{hap} the present family of models also unifies the inflationary epoch with the current accelerating phase by a combination of a power law potential and a cosmological constant. In particular, the inflationary power law potentials are recognized by the models with $\alpha = 0$, $\frac{2}{3}$, $1$, as quadratic, cubic and quartic potentials in which for the observable modes, the universe inflates respectively for a number of 67, 68, and 69 $e$-folds.
Another interesting point in the family of models is that the reheating temperature could reach the GeV or TeV regime depending on the value of the sole parameter ``$\alpha$'' unlike in the previous model \cite{hap} where the reheating temperature belongs in the MeV regime. {Finally, we found that a large number of models having $\alpha \in [0, \frac{1}{2})$ match both Planck 2013 and Planck 2015 data at 2$\sigma$ C.L. without the need of running, which does not happen with the model presented in \cite{hap}.} \newline
Summarizing, the current family of models describes a simple nonsingular inflationary quintessential analytic cosmological models, providing a greater reheating temperature in the GeV/TeV regime, and a large number of models belonging to this family are in excellent agreement with the Planck 2015 data without allowing the running, and hence it reports a significant improvement of \cite{hap}.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
{The authors would like to thank the anonymous referee for his/her valuable suggestions that have been very useful to improve the paper.}
This investigation has been supported in part by MINECO (Spain), projects MTM2014-52402-C3-1-P and MTM2012-38122-C03-01. Research of SP has been funded by the National Post-Doctoral Fellowship (File No: PDF/2015/000640) provided by the Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Govt. of India.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction_report}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{he} fifth generation (5G) of cellular networks is challenged to enhance users' experience, support new services, and satisfy the ever-increasing mobile user population and their traffic demands. Compared to the state-of-the-art 4G cellular systems, 5G networks are expected to achieve thousandfold capacity improvement with at least hundredfold increase in the peak data rate {\color{black}and one order of magnitude delay reduction}~\cite{Andrews_5G}. Researchers in both academia and industry almost agree that network densification, via base station deployment, is among the key solutions to achieve this ambitious performance goal \cite{Andrews_5G}. Therefore, it is expected that cellular network operators will significantly densify their networks infrastructures to fulfill the 5G performance requirements. In this case, network densification via deployments of small base stations (SBSs) is preferred over deployments of macro base stations (MBSs) due to lower cost and faster deployment.
Deploying more SBSs within the same geographical region reduces the footprint of each BS, and thus, decreases the number of users served by each BS. Reduced BS footprints shorten user-to-serving-BS distances and improve the spatial frequency reuse. Therefore, network densification is foreseen to improve spatial spectral efficiency and thus network capacity. However, narrowing BS footprints leads to higher handover rates and control overhead per unit area. The increased handover rate imposes a major challenge that may negate the foreseen densification gain if conventional network operation is preserved. In extreme cases, where high mobility exists in urban areas (e.g., monorails in city downtowns or the Shinkansen network of high-speed railway in Tokyo), a densely deployed cellular network may fail to support very fast moving users due to excessive handover rates. Particularly, the network cannot support mobile users with a cell dwell time that is comparable or less than the handover delay. Consequently, the undesirable effect of narrowing the BSs footprints requires solutions that reduce handover rate and control overhead in order to harvest the foreseen network densification gain.
Decoupling control plane (C-plane) and user plane (U-plane) for cellular networks, under a cloud radio access network (C-RAN) umbrella, is proposed as a potential solution to reduce handover rate and control burden \cite{split2012phantom}. Cellular network architecture with C-plane/U-plane (CP/UP) split is also referred to as ``{\em Lean Carrier}'' for LTE \cite{hoymann2013lean}. Fig.~\ref{split_and_no_split} illustrates {\color{black} cellular network architecture with CP/UP split}. In this architecture, user devices can receive data packets from a nearby SBS while being controlled via a farther MBS. {\color{black}It is shown in \cite{hoymann2013lean, split2012phantom} that implementing the control plane at the macro cell level and the data plane at the small cell level incurs less control overhead compared to the conventional architecture (i.e., both C-plane and U-plane are jointly served from each BS). The CP/UP split architecture imposes less control overhead because the cell specific control signals/channels for SBSs, which identify each SBS, are not broadcast.\footnote{Examples of cell specific control signals/channels are primary/secondary synchronization signals [PSS/SSS], cell-specific reference signals [CRS], master information blocks [MIB] and system information blocks [SIB] (see \cite{split2012phantom, hoymann2013lean} for details).} Consequently, the SBSs become transparent to the users and the MBSs take charge of managing the radio resource control (RRC) procedures between mobile devices and SBSs, such as session establishment and release. In the CP/UP split network, the SBSs are referred to as {\em phantom BSs} because their identities are hidden from the users.\footnote{The abbreviation SBS in this article refers to both a small BS and a phantom BS.}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.38}[0.38]{\includegraphics{Phantom_new_design}}
\end{center}
\caption{Conventional vs. CP/UP split network architecture: There are three types of links in the conventional network with three corresponding SINR values: ${\rm SINR}^{(C)}_1$ for macrocell users, ${\rm SINR}^{(C)}_2$ for non-biased users, and ${\rm SINR}^{(C)}_B$ for biased users. There are five types of links in the CP/UP split network with five corresponding SINR values: ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_1$ for macrocell users, ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{d2}$ for non-biased users' data, ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{c2}$ for non-biased users' control, ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{dB}$ for biased users' data and ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{cB}$ for biased users' control and service distances.}
\vspace{-.2cm}
\label{split_and_no_split}
\end{figure}
In addition to reducing the control overhead, the CP/UP split architecture can also be exploited to mitigate handover delays in dense cellular environments. Since the MBSs are in charge of the control signaling for the phantom cells including SBS selection, the MBSs can act as handover anchors and mange the handovers between underlying SBSs. In this case, the core network is only informed about inter-MBSs handovers. Compared to the conventional network architecture which informs the core network about MBSs and SBSs handovers. Hence, the CP/UP split architecture can significantly reduce handover delay by only reporting the less frequent inter-MBSs handovers, thanks to the larger coverage of macro cells. It is ought to be mentioned that the relative performance between the conventional and CP/UP split architectures highly depends on the availability of the direct X2 interfaces between the BSs. This is because the X2 interface also enables core network transparent handover procedure. However, the X2 interface does not provide signaling overhead reduction as in the CP/UP split case.
In this article, we use stochastic geometry to develop a tractable mobility-aware model that characterizes the performance of cellular networks with and without CP/UP split. In particular, we model downlink transmission in two-tier cellular networks with flexible cell association, in which the model takes into account the impact of the handover rate and control overhead on users throughput. Tractable expressions for per-user throughput in terms of the BSs intensity, users velocity, and handover delay are obtained to study the effect of mobility on throughput in dense cellular environments, in which the performances of conventional and CP/UP split architectures are compared. \textcolor{black}{To this end, we shed light on the handover delay problem in dense cellular environments and show the potential delay mitigation via the CP/UP split architecture. The developed model is also used to quantify the expected performance gain for the CP/UP split architecture, obtain design insights, and discuss the performance limits of the conventional and CP/UP split architectures. To the best of our knowledge, this article is the first to develop a theoretical and tractable mobility-aware modeling paradigm to study the handover problem in dense cellular environments and evaluate the performance of the CP/UP split network architecture. Based on the developed model, potential scenarios where CP/UP split is essential to support user mobility are highlighted and the feasibility of CP/UP split is also discussed}.
The remainder of the article is organized as follows. In Section \ref{related_work}, we provide an overview of the related work. In Section \ref{System_Model_and_Assumption}, we provide the system model and assumptions. Section~\ref{pectrum_Allocation_Control_Burden} presents the conventional and CP/UP split transmission rate models. Section \ref{Performance_Analysis} characterizes the coverage probability and spectral efficiencies of the conventional and CP/UP split architectures. Section \ref{mobility_analysis} presents mobility analysis and evaluate the handover costs incurred by mobile users. We validate the proposed model and discuss numerical results in Section \ref{validation_and_result}. Finally, Section \ref{conc_future} concludes the paper and outlines our future work.
\section{Related Work}\label{related_work}
Since modern cellular networks exhibit random topologies rather than idealized grids, stochastic geometry is widely accepted as a tool to model cellular networks \cite{elsawy2013survey}. The past five years have witnessed a plethora of stochastic geometry based models that tackles different aspects in cellular networking \cite{elsawy2013survey, Sarabjot2013partition,jo2011outage,jo2012heterogeneous, elsawy2014uplink,dhillon2012uplink, mimo2013Di_Renzo, modeling_MIMO_ASE_harpreet, cao2012optimal, mukherjee2013energy, zzz, Hazem2015}. However, the majority of these models do not account for mobility and focus on stationary users performance. For instance, coverage probability and rate performance are characterized for single-antenna downlink connections in \cite{Sarabjot2013partition,jo2011outage,jo2012heterogeneous}, for single-antenna uplink connections in \cite{elsawy2014uplink,dhillon2012uplink}, and for downlink connections with multiple antennas in \cite{mimo2013Di_Renzo, modeling_MIMO_ASE_harpreet}.
Stochastic geometry also helps characterizing the performance of CP/UP split architecture in cellular networks. For instance, the energy efficiency gains provided by the CP/UP split architecture are characterized by Zakrzewska et al. \cite{mukherjee2013energy}. The effect of vertical offloading and BS sleeping on the energy efficiency for CU/UP split architecture is studied by
Zhang et al. \cite{zzz}. In our pervious work \cite{Hazem2015}, the throughput of the CU/UP split cellular architecture is studied. However, none of the aforementioned studies incorporates the effect of mobility and handover into the analysis.
Surprisingly, few models can be found in the literature that exploit stochastic geometry to characterize mobility in cellular networks. The handover rate in cellular networks is first characterized by Lin et al. \cite{lin2013towards}, in which expressions for the handover rate are derived for random waypoint mobility model in a single-tier cellular network. The handover rate for multi-tier cellular networks is characterized by Bao and Liang \cite{bao2015stochastic} for arbitrary mobility model. However, neither \cite{lin2013towards} nor \cite{bao2015stochastic} investigates the effects of handover on important performance metrics such as coverage, rate, or delay. The handover effects on coverage and rate are investigated by Sadr and Adve \cite{sadr2015handoff} for random way point mobility model. The authors derive the probability of handover and use the coverage probability for stationary users multiplied by a handover cost factor to infer the coverage probability for users experiencing handovers. Note that the handover cost factor in \cite{sadr2015handoff} is considered as a network parameter that reflects the SINR degradation during handovers. Zhang et al. \cite{zhangdelay} investigate the effect of delay-reliability tradeoff in dense cellular networks for static and high mobility users under a time slotted transmission scheme. The authors show that high mobility users outperform static users because mobile users experience uncorrelated SINRs across different time slots. However, the results in \cite{zhangdelay} may be misleading because the model only captures the positive impact of mobility and overlooks the performance degradation that may occur due to handover signaling and delay. Finally, Ge et al. \cite{ge2015user} develop a social-activity aware mobility model, denoted as the individual mobility model, to represent the users clustering behavior in a two-tier cellular network. Assuming a single social community, located at the origin, which is covered by densely deployed SBSs, the coverage probability inside and outside the social community as well as the probabilities to arrive, depart, and stay in the social community are derived. However, the analysis in \cite{ge2015user} is only valid for finite networks where the social community inhabits a non-negligible portion of the total network and overlooks the effect of handovers. It is worth mentioning that, similar to \cite{sadr2015handoff}, the authors of \cite{zhangdelay} and \cite{ge2015user} use the stationary SINR analysis to infer the coverage probability of moving users.
Different from the existing literature, our proposed mobility-aware paradigm captures the handover effect on the users throughput in conventional and CP/UP network architectures. Different from \cite{sadr2015handoff}, the handover cost is not assumed and is rigorously derived from the system model. Also, different from \cite{zhangdelay} and \cite{ge2015user}, the developed model accounts for the handover effect and is not tailored to a specific mobility model. Furthermore, the developed model accounts for signaling overhead, flexible user association scheme via association biasing, the availability of X2 interface between BSs, and almost blank subframes (ABS) coordination between MBSs and SBSs.
\section{System Model and Assumptions}
\label{System_Model_and_Assumption}
In this section, we describe the network and mobility models and assumptions.
\subsection{Network Model}
\normalsize
We consider a two-tier downlink cellular network with BSs in each tier modeled via an independent two dimensional homogeneous Poisson point process (PPP) $\mathbf{\Phi}_k$ of density $\lambda_k$, where $k \in \{1,2\}$. The macro cell tier and small cell (phantom cell) tier are denoted by $k=1$ and $k=2$, respectively. Mobile users are spatially distributed according to an independent PPP $\mathbf{\Phi}_u$ with density $\lambda^{(u)}$. All BSs in the $k^{th}$ tier are equipped with single antennas, transmit with the same power $P_k$, and always have packets to transmit. We consider a general power law path loss model, with path loss exponent $\alpha_k$, for both desired and interference downlink signal powers. Furthermore, signal attenuation due to multi-path fading is modeled using an independent Rayleigh distribution such that the channel power gain $H_{x}\sim \exp(1)$. {\color{black}A list of the key mathematical notations used in this paper is given in Table \ref{Notation_Summary}}.
Due to the transmission power disparity between the two tiers, the BSs footprints are represented by a weighted Poisson Voronoi diagram \cite{ash1986generalized} as depicted in Fig. \ref{weighted_Voronoi}. To enable flexible cell association and fine-grained control of BS loads, we follow the model in \cite{jo2012heterogeneous} and introduce the bias factor $B$ to artificially encourages/discourages users to associate with the small cell tier.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{{\color{black} Mathematical Notations} }
\resizebox{0.45 \textwidth}{!}{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{Notation}&\textbf{Description}\\ \hline
$\mathbf{\Phi}_k$;$\mathbf{\Phi}_u$& PPP of BSs of $k^{th}$ tier; PPP of mobile users. \\ \hline
$\lambda_k$;$\lambda^{(u)}$& Density of BSs of $k^{th}$ tier; density of mobile users.\\ \hline
$P_k$&\shortstack{Transmit power of BSs of $k^{th}$ tier.}\\ \hline
B&\shortstack{Association bias for $2^{nd}$ tier.}\\ \hline
$\mathbf{\alpha}_k$&\shortstack{Path loss exponent of $k^{th}$ tier.}\\ \hline
$\mathcal{V}$&\shortstack{\footnotesize Mobile user velocity.}\\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$HO_{ij}^{(c)}$&\shortstack{ Mean number of handovers per unit length from \\tier $i$ to $j$, for conventional network.}\\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$MHO^{(s)}$&\shortstack{ Mean number of inter-anchor handovers per\\ unit length for CP/UP split network.}\\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$VHO^{(s)}$&\shortstack{ Mean number of intra-anchor handovers per\\ unit length for CP/UP split network.}\\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$\mathbf{\eta}$&\shortstack{ Fraction of time dedicated to serve biased mobile\\ users with no interference from the macro tier.}\\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$\mathbf{\mu_C}$&\shortstack{ Control data overhead fraction in \\overall network capacity. } \\ \hline
$\theta$&\shortstack{ Predefined threshold for correct signal reception.} \\ \hline
$D^{(c)}_{HO}$ &\shortstack{ Handover cost in conventional network.} \\ \hline
$D^{(s)}_{HO}$ &\shortstack{ Handover cost in CP/UP split network.} \\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$\mathcal{X};\mathcal{Z}$ &\shortstack{ Probability of having X2 interface in conventional;\\ and CP/UP split architecture handovers.} \\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$d^{(c)};\tilde{d}^{(c)}$&\shortstack{Delay per non X2 handover;delay\\per X2 handover in conventional network}. \\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$d^{(s)}_{m};\tilde{d}_m^{(s)}$& \shortstack{ Inter-anchor handover delay without X2 interface;Inter-anchor \\ handover delay with X2 handover in CP/UP split network.}\\ \hline
$d^{(s)}_{v}$& \shortstack{ Intra-anchor handover delay for CP/UP split network.} \\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_j$&$\shortstack{ Macro cell users \emph{j} = 1, small cell users\\ \emph{j} =2, biased small cell users \emph{j} = B}$.\\ \hline
$\gamma$ &\shortstack{ Control signaling reduction factor}\\ \hline
$AT^{(c)}$&\shortstack{ Average per-user throughput in the conventional network.} \\ \hline
$AT^{(s)}$&\shortstack{ Average per-user throughput in CP/UP split network.} \\ \hline
$\mathcal{A}_j$& Association probability of a typical user $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_j$ .\\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$\mathcal{T}^{(c)}_j$&\shortstack{ BS throughput in each association \\ state category for conventional network.} \\ \hline
\\ [-1.5em]
$\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_j$&\shortstack{ BS throughput in each association \\ state category for CP/UP split network.} \\ \hline
$\mathcal{SE}^{(c)}$&\shortstack{ Spectral efficiency for conventional network.}\\ \hline
$\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}$&\shortstack{ Spectral efficiency for CP/UP split network.}\\ \hline
\footnotesize$P_{12}$;$P_{21}$&\shortstack{ $P_{12}=\frac{P_{1}}{P_{2}}$; $P_{21}=\frac{1}{P_{12}}$.}\\ \hline
$\tilde{P}_{12}$;$\tilde{P}_{21}$&{ $\tilde{P}_{12}=\frac{P_{1}}{BP_{2}}$; $\tilde{P}_{21}=\frac{1}{\tilde{P}_{12}}$.}\\ \hline
$\rho(a,b)$&\shortstack{ $\rho(a,b)=a+\sqrt{b}\arctan{(\sqrt{b})}$.}\\ \hline
$\tilde{\lambda}_{k}$&\shortstack{ $\tilde{\lambda}_{k} = \frac{2 \pi \lambda_{k}}{\alpha_{k}-2}$.}\\ \hline
$ \text{ }_{2}F_{1}(\cdot,\cdot;\cdot;\cdot)$&\shortstack{ The hypergeometric function.}\\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{Notation_Summary}
\end{table}
\normalsize
Let $r_{k}$ denote the distance between an arbitrary mobile user and the nearest BS in the $k^{th}$ tier, then the biased association rule assigns a mobile user to the macro tier if $P_{1}r_{1}^{-\alpha_1} > P_{2}B r_{2}^{-\alpha_2}$, and to a small (phantom) cell otherwise. {\color{black}Based on the aforementioned association criterion and following the notation in \cite{Sarabjot2013partition},} the complete set of users is divided into the following three non-overlapping sets:
\begin{equation}\label{sets}
\hspace{-.5 cm} u \in \begin{cases}
\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_1& \mbox{if } P_{1}r_{1}^{-\alpha_1} \geq P_{2}Br_{2}^{-\alpha_2}\\
\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_{2}&\mbox{if } P_{2}r_{2}^{-\alpha_2} > P_{1}r_{1}^{-\alpha_1}\\
\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_B&\mbox{if } P_{2}r_{2}^{-\alpha_2} \leq P_{1}r_{1}^{-\alpha_1} < P_{2}Br_{2}^{-\alpha_2}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_1$ denotes the set of macrocell users, $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_{2} $ denotes the set of non-biased small cell users, and $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_B$ is the set of biased small cell users, where $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_1\cup \mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_{2} \cup \mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_B= \mathbf{\Phi}_u$ and $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_1\cap \mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_{2} \cap \mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_B= \phi$.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.36}[0.36]{\includegraphics{Two-tier-weighted-Possion-Voronoi.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{Two-tier weighted Possion Voronoi diagram representing a cellular network. The green squares and the red circles represent macro BSs and small BSs, respectively. The figure shows a user's trajectory (highlighted in orange), intra-anchor handover boundaries (in blue) and inter-anchor handover boundaries (in dotted black) for the CP/UP split architecture.}
\vspace{-.2cm}
\label{weighted_Voronoi}
\end{figure}
We consider two modes of operation, namely the conventional and CP/UP split, as shown in Fig.~\ref{split_and_no_split}. In the conventional network architecture, we assume that the control overhead consumes $\mu_c$ of the data rate and that each user gets the control and data from the same BS. We also assume universal frequency reuse scheme with almost blank sub-frames (ABS) interference management between macro cells and biased small cells \cite{Sarabjot2013partition}.\footnote{Universal frequency reuse is considered for the conventional network architecture because it always results in higher user throughput than dedicated spectrum access as shown in \cite{Hazem2015}.} That is, a fraction $\eta$ of time is dedicated to serving biased mobile users (i.e., $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_B$) with no interference from the macro tier (i.e., {\color{black}MBSs do not send or send with very low power during the ABSs interval}). In the CP/UP split network architecture, each small cell user (i.e., each user in $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_2$ and $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_{B}$) has double association in which the SBS transmit data only and the control signaling overhead is communicated via the MBS. Note that the control overhead for small cell users in the CP/UP split case consumes $\mu_c/\gamma$ of the data rate, where $\gamma \geq 1$ is offered control reduction factor~\cite{hoymann2013lean, split2012phantom}. It is worth noting that the decoupled, but simultaneous, data and control association of the CP/UP split architecture necessitates a dedicated spectrum assignment for each tier. To conduct a fair comparison, we assume both the conventional and CP/UP split architectures have the same available spectrum of $W$, however, the CP/UP architecture split $W$ into $W_1$ and $W_2 = W-W_1$ for the macro and small-cell tiers, respectively.
\subsection{User Mobility}
\label{Spectrum_Allocation_Control_Burden}
We assume that each user moves with an arbitrary trajectory and velocity, in which a handover occurs when a user crosses over a cell boundary. {However, we assume that the overall users mobility model preserves the spatial uniformity of users across the network.} We define a vertical handover as one made between two BSs in two different tiers, and a horizontal handover as one made between two BSs in the same tier.
Fig.~\ref{weighted_Voronoi} shows the handover boundaries for the conventional and CP/UP split network architectures. In the CP/UP split network architecture, {the black dotted Voronoi tessellation represents control handover boundaries and the blue weighted Voronoi tessellation represents the data handover boundaries. In the conventional network architecture, the blue weighted Voronoi tessellation represents both the data and control handover boundaries.
In the conventional network architecture, users change their association (i.e., control and data) upon each handover. All handovers are managed through mobility management entity (MME) in the core network if direct X2 interface is not available between the serving and target BSs. Otherwise, the handover signalling is performed via the X2 interface without involving the core network, which highly reduces the handover delay. The handovers that occurs in the conventional network architecture can be categorized into the following cases: (1) vertical handover from a MBS to a SBS, (2) vertical handover from a SBS to a MBS, (3) horizontal handover between two MBSs, and (4) horizontal handover between two SBSs. In the conventional network architecture, the mean number of handovers, from tier $i$ to tier $j$, that occurs per unit length of a user trajectory is denoted by $HO_{ij}^{(c)}$, where $i,j \in\{1,2\}$ and the superscript $(c)$ denotes the conventional network architecture.
In the CP/UP split network architecture, the MBSs function as mobility anchors for data handovers within macro-to-macro Voronoi tessellation (black dotted tessellation in Fig.~\ref{weighted_Voronoi}). That is, the weighted Voronoi tessellation constructed w.r.t. all BSs in all tiers determines the data plane association and the Voronoi tessellation constructed w.r.t. MBSs only determines the control signaling and handover support association as shown in Fig.~\ref{weighted_Voronoi}. Consequently, only two types of handover occurs in the CP/UP split architecture, namely, (1) intra-anchor handover, and (2) inter-anchor handover.
An inter-anchor handover occurs when a user crosses the boundary between two MBSs, and the handover is managed via the MME in the core network when there is no X2 interface between the engaged MBSs. In contrast, an intra-anchor handover is always transparent to the MME and is managed via the anchor BS, which reduces the handover delay because the MME is not notified. In the CP/UP split network architecture, we denote the mean number of inter-anchor and intra-anchor handovers per unit length of the user trajectory as $MHO^{(s)}$ and $VHO^{(s)}$, respectively, where the superscript (s) denotes the CP/UP split network. It is worth noting that users change their control association without changing their data association when crossing over a macro-boundary within the coverage of a SBS. This type of handover is treated as an inter-anchor handover because the MME is informed.
For tractability, we assume that users' trajectories are long enough to go through all three association states $j \in {1,2, B}$. We also use the spatially averaged signal-to-interference-plus-noise-ratio (SINR) for stationary users provided by a given tier to infer the average SINR experienced by a mobile device during the journey through that tier. {\color{black} This assumption is validated later in Section \ref{validation_and_result}}. In other words, we compute ${\rm SINR}_j$ provided by tier $j$ for a randomly selected stationary user and assume that mobile users will experience an average ${\rm SINR}_j$ during their trajectories in the $j^{th}$ tier.
It is worth noting that the average stationary SINR assumption is needed for model tractability and was used in \cite{sadr2015handoff, ge2015user, zhangdelay}. This assumption only ignores the spatial correlations between the SINR values along each trajectory. However, averages over all trajectories and all users under all network realization are still captured by the analysis.
\section{Conventional and CP/UP Split Transmission Rate Models}
\label{pectrum_Allocation_Control_Burden}
Using Shannon's formula to define the ergodic rate, the average throughput delivered by a MBS and SBS for non-biased and biased users in the conventional architecture can be expressed as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{T}^{(c)}_1&=(1-\mu_{C})(1-\eta) W \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(c)}_1)]
\label{throughput_conventional_1}, \\
\mathcal{T}^{(c)}_2&=(1-\mu_{C})(1-\eta) W \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(c)}_2)]
\label{throughput_conventional_2}, \\
\mathcal{T}^{(c)}_B&=(1-\mu_{C})\eta W \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(c)}_B)].
\label{throughput_conventional_B}
\end{align}
\noindent Note that MBSs are active only for $1-\eta$ fraction of the time due to the ABS interference management. On the other hand, small BSs are active all the time in which $1-\eta$ fraction of the time is dedicated for non-biased users $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_2$ and $\eta$ fraction of the time is dedicated for biased users $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_B$.
The decoupled data and control associations and dedicated spectrum access eliminate the inter-tier interference in the CP/UP split operation and changes the statistical nature of the ${\rm SINR}$ in the CP/UP split network architecture when compared to the conventional network architecture. In particular, in the CP/UP split network architecture as shown in Fig. \ref{split_and_no_split}, we have five different SINRs to consider, namely, ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_1$ for macrocell users, ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{d2}$ for non-biased users' data, ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{c2}$ for non-biased users' control signaling, ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{dB}$ for biased users' data and ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{cB}$ for biased users' control signaling. Let $W_1$ be the spectrum assigned to the macro tier and $W_2 = W - W_1$ be the spectrum assigned to the phantom cell tier. In this case, the average throughput of a small (phantom) cell users is given by:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_2&= (1-\eta) W_2 \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{d2})], \label{throughput_virtualized_2} \\
\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_B&= \eta W_2 \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{dB})].
\label{throughput_virtualized_B}
\end{align}
\noindent Although there is no cross-tier interference in the CP/UP split network architecture due to spectrum splitting, time sharing still exists in (\ref{throughput_virtualized_2}) and (\ref{throughput_virtualized_B}) because the phantom BSs dedicate a fraction $\eta$ of time to serve biased users. Note that the control overhead $\mu_c$ does not appear in the above throughput expressions because all control overhead is offloaded to the macro cells. The average throughput delivered to the macrocell users, after reserving the resources for phantom cell control signaling, is characterized via the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{rate_lemma}
Consider a two-tier cellular network with the CP/UP split architecture, PPP macro BSs with density $\lambda_1$, PPP phantom BSs with density $\lambda_2$, and a control reduction factor $\gamma$. Then the average throughput delivered to the macrocell users after resources for control signaling for phantom cell users have been reserved is expressed as:
\small
\begin{align}\label{macro_rate_lemma}
\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_1 &= (1-\mu_{C}) \mathcal{R}^{(s)}_1 \left( 1- \frac{\lambda_2 \mu_{C}}{\lambda_1\gamma} \left( \frac{\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_2}{\mathcal{R}_{c2}}+ \frac{ \mathcal{T}^{(s)}_B}{\mathcal{R}_{cB}}\right) \right),
\end{align}
\normalsize
\noindent where $\mathcal{R}^{(s)}_1 = W_1 \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(s)}_1)]$ is the ergodic rate for macrocell users, $\mathcal{R}_{c2}= W_1 \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{c2})]$ is the average rate at which the control data is delivered to non-biased phantom cell users, $\mathcal{R}_{cB}= W_1 \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{cB})]$ is the average rate at which the control data is delivered to biased phantom cell users, and $\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_2$ and $\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_B$ are the throughputs of non-biased and biased phantom cell users given in \eqref{throughput_virtualized_2} and \eqref{throughput_virtualized_B}, respectively.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix~\ref{rate_lemma_proof}
\end{proof}
It is worth mentioning that \eqref{macro_rate_lemma} implicitly assumes that the control overhead is always a fraction $\mu_c$ of the available data rate and is only reduced by a factor of $\gamma$ for phantom cell users. Eq. \eqref{macro_rate_lemma} also assumes that the user population is sufficiently dense so that each phantom BS always has non-biased and biased small cell users to serve.
A CP/UP split network is said to be {\em feasible} if the MBSs have sufficient bandwidth to serve macrocell users and to provide control signaling to phantom cell users. From Lemma~\ref{rate_lemma}, the feasibility of the CP/UP split architecture is given in the following corollary
\begin{corollary} \label{col}
The CP/UP split architecture is feasible if and only if
\small
\begin{align}\label{condition_col}
\frac{\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_2}{\mathcal{R}_{c2}}+ \frac{ \mathcal{T}^{(s)}_B}{\mathcal{R}_{cB}} & \leq \frac{\lambda_1\gamma}{ \lambda_2 \mu_{C}},
\end{align}
or equivalently
\begin{align}
(1- \eta) \frac{\mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{d2})]}{\mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{c2})]}+ \eta \frac{\mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{dB})]}{\mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{cB})]} & \leq \frac{W_1 \lambda_1\gamma}{W_2 \lambda_2 \mu_{C}}.
\end{align}
\end{corollary}
According to Corollary~\ref{col}, the feasibility of the CP/UP split architecture is mainly limited by the average SINR experienced by the phantom cell users in MBSs. Corollary~\ref{col} also suggests possible factors that can be manipulated to ensure the feasibility of the CP/UP split architecture are bandwidth assignment, relative BS densities, and/or control reduction factors.
\subsection{Per-user Mobility-aware Throughput Model}
\normalsize
The above expressions give the expected throughput for a typical user without capturing the main effects of network densifications. To have a realistic assessment to the densification gains, both throughput gains and the handover effects should be incorporated into the analysis. On one hand, network densification shrinks the BSs footprint, which reduces the number of users served by each BS and increases the share each user gets from his serving BS's throughput. On the other hand, network densification shrinks the BSs footprint, which increases the handover rate and overhead.
During handover execution, the user releases the serving BS session and establishes a new session with the target BS. We assume that no data is delivered during handover execution and only handover-related signaling is communicated to the user. To incorporate the handover delay into the throughput expressions, we first compute the handover cost\footnote{The handover cost is a dimensionless unit which is computed as delay $\left(\frac{\text{\emph{sec}}}{{\text{\emph{handover}}}}\right) \times \text{velocity} \left(\frac{\text{\emph{meter}}}{\text{\emph{sec}}}\right) \times \text{handover rate} \left(\frac{\text{\emph{handovers}}}{\text{\emph{meter}}}\right)$.} for the conventional and CP/UP split architectures, which is the average duration consumed in handovers per unit time. Then we eliminate the handover duration from the throughput expressions (\ref{throughput_conventional_1})-(\ref{macro_rate_lemma}). For the conventional network architecture, the handover cost is expressed as:
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}\label{conv_cost}
D^{(c)}_{HO} = \left(\left(1-\mathcal{X}\right)d^{(c)}+\mathcal{X}\tilde{d}^{(c)}\right) \mathcal{V} \sum_i \sum_j HO_{ij}^{(c)},
\end{equation}
\normalsize
\noindent where $d^{(c)}$ and $\tilde{d}^{(c)}$ are the delays incurred by non X2 interface handover and X2 interface handover, respectively. $\mathcal{X}$ is the probability that an X2 interface is available between the serving and target BSs. In the CP/UP split network architecture, the delay incurred by an inter-anchor handover is different from the delay incurred by an intra-anchor handover, because the intra-anchor handover is always transparent to the core network.\footnote{It is expected that removing the core network delay from a handover in the CP/UP split network (intra-anchor handover) reduces the handover delay by 50\% compared to a handover in the conventional network \cite{mahmoodiusing}.} On the other hand, all inter-anchor handovers are managed through the MME in the core network unless an X2 interface is available. Therefore, the handover cost for the CP/UP split architecture is given by:
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}\label{cpup_cost}
D^{(s)}_{HO} = \mathcal{V} \left( MHO^{(s)} \left(\left(1-\mathcal{Z}\right)d^{(s)}_m+\mathcal{Z}\tilde{d}_m^{(s)}\right) + VHO^{(s)} d^{(s)}_{v}\right),
\end{equation}
\normalsize
\noindent where $d^{(s)}_{m}$, $\tilde{d}_m^{(s)}$, and $d^{(s)}_{v}$ are the delays incurred by an inter-anchor handover without X2 interface, an inter-anchor handover with X2 interface, and an intra-anchor handover, respectively. $\mathcal{Z}$ is the probability that a direct X2 connectivity is available between the serving and target MBSs.
Incorporating the handover delay in to the throughput analysis, assuming that each BS uniformly distributes the resources across the users it serves, and using the law of total probability, the average per-user throughput along his trajectory for the conventional and CP/UP split architectures are, respectively, expressed as:
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}\label{watpu_c}
AT^{(c)}=\left(\frac{\mathcal{A}_{1}\mathcal{T}^{(c)}_1}{\mathcal{N}_1}+\frac{\mathcal{A}_{2}\mathcal{T}^{(c)}_2}{\mathcal{N}_2}+\frac{\mathcal{A}_{B}\mathcal{T}^{(c)}_B}{\mathcal{N}_B}\right)\left(1-\min\left(1,D^{(c)}_{HO}\right)\right),
\end{equation}
\normalsize
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}\label{watpu_v}
AT^{(s)}=\left(\frac{\mathcal{A}_{1}\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_1}{\mathcal{N}_1}+\frac{\mathcal{A}_{2}\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_2}{\mathcal{N}_2}+\frac{\mathcal{A}_{B}\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_B}{\mathcal{N}_B} \right)\left(1-\min\left(1,D^{(s)}_{HO}\right)\right),
\end{equation}
\normalsize
\noindent where $\mathcal{A}_j$ is the probability of being served by a BSs in $j \in \{1,2,B\}$ case and $\mathcal{N}_j$ is the expected number of users sharing the BS resources with the typical user in the $j \in \{1,2,B\}$ case. Note that $\mathcal{A}_j$ and $\mathcal{N}_j$ in \eqref{watpu_c} and \eqref{watpu_v} are independent from the network architecture and are calculated according to the association rule \eqref{sets}. The effect of control signaling offloaded to the MBSs in the CP/UP split is already captured by $\mathcal{T}_j^{(s)}$.
Eqs. \eqref{watpu_c} and \eqref{watpu_v} are the main performance metrics in this paper, which are the mobility aware per-user average throughput in the conventional and CP/UP split architectures. It is worth re-emphasizing that \eqref{watpu_c} and \eqref{watpu_v} assume that the users have long trajectories, that each user passes through all association states during their trajectories, and that the mobility model preserves the users spatial uniformity across the network. It is worth mentioning that when the average cell dwell time becomes less than the handover delay, the handover costs in \eqref{conv_cost} and \eqref{cpup_cost} are greater than unity. Consequently, the network fails to support users and the average throughputs in \eqref{watpu_c} and \eqref{watpu_v} are nullified.
Exploiting the long trajectories and users spatial uniformity, the association probabilities and BS loads can be obtained by following \cite{Sarabjot2013partition} and \cite{jo2012heterogeneous}, respectively. In particular, the association probabilities $\mathcal{A}_{1}$, $\mathcal{A}_{2}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{B}$ can be viewed as the percentages of the $\mathbb{R}^2$ domain served by the MBSs, the unbiased SBS, and the biased SBS, respectively. Consequently, the association probabilities are given by \cite{Sarabjot2013partition}:
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}\label{A1}
\mathcal{A}_{1}=2\pi\lambda_{1}\int_{0}^\infty r\mbox{ exp }\left(-\pi\left(\lambda_{1}r^{2}+\lambda_{2}\tilde{P}_{21} ^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{1}}{\alpha_{2}}} \right)\right)\mbox{d}r,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{A2}
\mathcal{A}_{2}=2\pi\lambda_{2}\int_{0}^\infty r\mbox{ exp }\left(-\pi\left(\lambda_{2}r^{2}+\lambda_{1}P_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{2}}{\alpha_{1}}} \right)\right)\mbox{d}r,
\end{equation}
\begin{multline}\label{A3}
\mathcal{A}_{B}=2\pi\lambda_{2}\int_{0}^\infty r\Bigg\{ \mbox{ exp }\left[-\pi\left( \lambda_{1}\left(\tilde{P}_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{2}}{\alpha_{1}}}+\lambda_{2}r^{2} \right)\right)\right] \\ - \mbox{ exp } \left[-\pi\left( \lambda_{1}\left(P_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{2}}{\alpha_{1}}}+\lambda_{2}r^{2} \right)\right)\right] \Bigg\}\mbox{d}r,
\end{multline}
\normalsize
\noindent {\color{black} where $P_{12}=\frac{P_{1}}{P_{2}}$, $P_{21}=\frac{1}{P_{12}}$, $\tilde{P}_{12}=\frac{P_{1}}{BP_{2}}$, and $\tilde{P}_{21}=\frac{1}{\tilde{P}_{12}}$}.
Since the user spatial uniformity is preserved, the average number of users sharing the resources with the typical user for each of the association cases is computed as follows \cite{Sarabjot2013partition}:
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}\label{load}
\mathcal{N}_{j}=\frac{1.28\lambda^{(u)}\mathcal{A}_{j}}{\lambda_{J(j)}}+1\notag,
\end{equation}
\normalsize
\noindent where $J(j)$ is a map from user set association index $j \in \{1,2,B\}$ to serving tier index $k \in \{1,2\}$ as follows: $J(1) = 1$, $J(2) = J(B) = 2$. Therefore,
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
\mathcal{N}_{1}&=1.28\left(2\pi\lambda^{(u)}\int_{0}^{\infty}r\mbox{ exp}\Bigg\{-\pi\left[\lambda_{1}r^{2}+\lambda_{2}\tilde{P}_{21}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{1}}{\alpha_{2}}}\right]\Bigg\}\mbox{d}r\right)+1,\notag \\
\mathcal{N}_{2}&=1.28\left(2\pi\lambda^{(u)}\int_{0}^{\infty}r\mbox{ exp}\Bigg\{-\pi\left[\lambda_{1}P_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{2}}{\alpha_{1}}}+\lambda_{2}r^{2}\right]\Bigg\}\mbox{d}r\right)+1,\notag\\
\mathcal{N}_{B}&=1.28\biggl(2\pi\lambda^{(u)}\int_{0}^{\infty}r\Bigg[\mbox{ exp}\left(-\pi\left(\lambda_{1}P_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{2}}{\alpha_{1}}}+\lambda_{2}r^{2}\right) \right) \notag \\&-\mbox{ exp}\left(-\pi \left(\lambda_{1}\tilde{P}_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{2}}{\alpha_{1}}}+\lambda_{2}r^{2} \right)\right)\Bigg]\mbox{d}r\biggr)+1\notag.
\end{align}
\normalsize
An important scenario of interest is the case of equal path-loss exponents ($\alpha_1=\alpha_2= 4$), which not only simplifies the analysis but also a practical value for outdoor cellular communications in urban environments \cite{elsawy2013survey, Sarabjot2013partition,jo2011outage,jo2012heterogeneous, elsawy2014uplink,dhillon2012uplink, mimo2013Di_Renzo, modeling_MIMO_ASE_harpreet, cao2012optimal, mukherjee2013energy, zzz, Hazem2015}. In this case, the association probabilities and BS loads reduce to:
\small
\begin{align}
\mathcal{A}_{1}&=\frac{\lambda_{1}}{\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2} \sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}},\notag
\mathcal{A}_{2}=\frac{\lambda_{2}}{\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}+\lambda_{2}},\notag\\ \mathcal{A}_{B}&=\frac{\lambda_{2}}{\lambda_{1}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{12}}+\lambda_{2}}-\frac{\lambda_{2}}{\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}+\lambda_{2}},
\label{assoc_spec}
\end{align}
\normalsize
and
\vspace{2mm}
\small
{$ \mathcal{N}_{1} =\frac{1.28\lambda^{(u)}}{\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}}+1$}, {$\mathcal{N}_{2} = \frac{1.28\lambda^{(u)}}{\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}+\lambda_{2}}+1$},
{$\mathcal{N}_{B} = 1.28\left(\frac{\lambda^{(u)}}{\lambda_{1}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{12}}+\lambda_{2}}-\frac{\lambda^{(u)}}{\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}+\lambda_{2}}\right)+1$}.
\normalsize
\vspace{2mm}
The missing components to calculate \eqref{watpu_c} and \eqref{watpu_v} are the spectral efficiencies (i.e., $\mathcal{SE} = \mathbb{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR})]$) and handover cost (i.e., $D_{HO}$), which are characterized in Section~\ref{Performance_Analysis} and Section~\ref{mobility_analysis}, respectively.
\section {SINR and Spectral Efficiency Characterization}
\label{Performance_Analysis}
As mentioned earlier, for tractability, we use the spatially averaged spectral efficiency for stationary users to infer the average spectral efficiency for mobile users. This assumption is validated later in Section \ref{validation_and_result} and shown to give accurate approximation for the SINR distribution.
To characterize the SINR, and hence the spectral efficiency, we first characterize the service distance distribution. Then, we characterize the {\rm SINR} and spectral efficiency for both the conventional and CP/UP split network architectures.
\subsection{Service Distances}
\label{distance_and_association}
As shown in Fig.~\ref{split_and_no_split}, we need to characterize five service distances, namely ${R_{1}}$, ${R_{2}}$, ${R_{B}}$, ${R_{c2}}$, and ${R_{cB}}$. The conventional service distances ${R_{1}}$, ${R_{2}}$, ${R_{B}}$, which are for users in $\Large\emph{u}_1$, $\Large\emph{u}_2$, and $\Large\emph{u}_B$ respectively, are characterized in \cite{Sarabjot2013partition}. Conditioned on the association, the probability density functions (PDFs) of the ${R_{1}}$, ${R_{2}}$, and ${R_{B}}$ are given by
\footnotesize
\begin{align} \label{pdf_distance}
\mathbf{f}_{R_{1}}(r)=&\frac{2\pi\lambda_{1}}{\mathcal{A}_{1}}r e^{-\pi\left(\lambda_{1}r^{2}+\lambda_{2}\tilde{P}_{21}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{1}}{\alpha_{2}}} \right)}, r \geq 0,
\end{align}
\begin{align} \label{r2}
&\mathbf{f}_{R_{2}}(r)=\frac{2\pi\lambda_{2}}{\mathcal{A}_{2}}r e^{-\pi\left(\lambda_{2}r^{2}+\lambda_{1}P_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{2}}{\alpha_{1}}} \right)}, r \geq 0,
\end{align}
\begin{multline} \label{rb}
\mathbf{f}_{R_{B}}(r)=\frac{-2\pi\lambda_{2}}{\mathcal{A}_{B}}r\Bigg[ e^{-\pi\left(\lambda_{1}P_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{2}}{\alpha_{1}}}+\lambda_{2}r^{2}\right)}-\\ e^{-\pi \left(\lambda_{1}\tilde{P}_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}r^{\frac{2\alpha_{2}}{\alpha_{1}}}+\lambda_{2}r^{2} \right)}\Bigg], r \geq 0.
\end{multline}
\normalsize
As shown in Fig.~\ref{split_and_no_split}, the association for $\Large\emph{u}_1$, and the data association for $\Large\emph{u}_2$ and $\Large\emph{u}_B$ in the CP/UP split case have similar distribution to ${R_{1}}$, ${R_{2}}$, and ${R_{B}}$ given in \eqref{pdf_distance}, \eqref{r2}, and \eqref{rb}, respectively. The distributions for control link distances of the CP/UP split architecture are given by the following lemma
\begin{lemma} \label{lem_distances}
Let $R_{c2}$ and $R_{cB}$ denote the distances from the MBS that provides the control signaling to $\Large\emph{u}_2$ and $\Large\emph{u}_B$, respectively, in a cellular network with the CP/UP split architecture. Then the distributions of $R_{c2}$ and $R_{cB}$ are given by
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
&\mathbf{f}_{R_{c2}}(r) = \frac{2 \pi \lambda_1 r}{\mathcal{A}_2} \left( e^{-\pi \lambda_1 r^2} - e^{-\pi \left(\lambda_1 r^2+ \lambda_2 P_{21}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_1}} r^{\frac{2 \alpha_2}{\alpha_1}} \right)} \right), r \geq 0,
\end{align}
\normalsize
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
& \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\mathbf{f}_{R_{cB}}(r)=\frac{2 \pi \lambda_1 r}{\mathcal{A}_B} \left( e^{-\pi \left(\lambda_1 r^2+ \lambda_2 P_{21}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_1}} r^{\frac{2 \alpha_2}{\alpha_1}} \right)}\right. \notag \\
& \left. \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad - e^{-\pi \left(\lambda_1 r^2+ \lambda_2 \tilde{P}_{21}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_1}} r^{\frac{2 \alpha_2}{\alpha_1}} \right)} \right), r \geq 0.
\end{align}
\normalsize
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{distances}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Coverage Probability Analysis}
\label{ATR_label}
The coverage probability is defined by the complementary cumulative distribution function (CCDF) of the SINR (i.e, $\mathbb{P}[{\rm SINR}>\theta]$, where $\theta$ denotes the predefined threshold for correct signal reception). Without loss of generality, the {\rm SINR} analysis is performed for a {\color{black} test mobile user} located at the origin. According to Slivnyak's theorem, all other users have statistical SINR properties equivalent to that of the test user located at the origin \cite{haenggi2009interference}. Therefore, the analysis holds for an arbitrary {\color{black}mobile user} located at any other location.
For the sake of exposition, we define four types of interferences caused by the BSs in $\Phi_1$ and $\Phi_2$ with respect to the origin, which are
\begin{itemize}
\item The interference from all MBSs $\mathcal{I}_1 = \sum\limits_{x\in\mathbf{\Phi_{1}}} P_{1}H_{x}x^{-\alpha_{1}}$.
\item The interference from all MBSs excluding the one nearest to the origin $\mathcal{I}^{o}_1 = \sum\limits_{x\in\mathbf{\Phi_{1}} \setminus x_o} P_{1}H_{x}x^{-\alpha_{1}}$.
\item The interference from all SBSs $\mathcal{I}_2 = \sum\limits_{x\in\mathbf{\Phi_{2}}} P_{2}H_{x}x^{-\alpha_{2}}$.
\item The interference from all SBSs excluding the one nearest to the origin $\mathcal{I}^{o}_2 = \sum\limits_{x\in\mathbf{\Phi_{2}} \setminus x_o} P_{2}H_{x}x^{-\alpha_{2}}$.
\end{itemize}
The SINR at the test user's location, the origin, can be defined as
\footnotesize
\begin{equation} \label{gen_sinr}
{\rm SINR} = \frac {P_{BS} H r_0^{-\alpha} }{\mathcal{I}_{agg}+\sigma^2},
\end{equation}
\normalsize
\noindent where $P_{BS}$ is the serving BS transmit power, $H$ is the random channel power gain, $r_o$ is the distance between the test user and the serving BS, $\mathcal{I}_{agg}$ is the aggregate interference, and $\sigma^2$ is the noise power. The parameters in \eqref{gen_sinr} to compute the SINR experienced by the users in $\mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_k$, $k \in \{1,2,B\}$ for the conventional and CP/UP split architectures are given in Table~\ref{SINR_Table}.
\footnotesize
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\small
\caption{{\color{black} SINR Parameters} }
\resizebox{0.45 \textwidth}{!}{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{k}& \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Conventional} & \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{CP/UP split} \\ \cline{2-9}
& \textbf{SINR} & $P_{BS}$ & $r_o$ &$\mathcal{I}_{agg}$ & \textbf{SINR} &$P_{BS}$ & $r_o$ &$\mathcal{I}_{agg}$ \\ \hline \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{1}& \multirow{2}{*}{ ${\rm SINR}^{(c)}_{1}$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$P_1$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$R_1$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\mathcal{I}^o_1 + \mathcal{I}_2$} & \multirow{2}{*}{${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{1}$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$P_1$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$R_1$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\mathcal{I}^o_1$} \\
& & & & & & & & \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{2}& \multirow{2}{*}{ ${\rm SINR}^{(c)}_{2}$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$P_2$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$R_2$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\mathcal{I}_1 + \mathcal{I}^o_2$} & ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{d2}$ &$P_2$ & $R_2$ & $ \mathcal{I}^{o}_2$ \\ \cline{6-9}
& & & & & ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{c2}$ &$P_1$ & $R_{c2}$ & $\mathcal{I}^o_1 $ \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{B}& \multirow{2}{*}{ ${\rm SINR}^{(c)}_{B}$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$P_2$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$R_B$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$ \mathcal{I}^{o}_2$} & ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{dB}$ &$P_2$ & $R_{B}$ & $\mathcal{I}^{o}_2$ \\ \cline{6-9}
& & & & & ${\rm SINR}^{(s)}_{cB}$ &$P_1$ & $R_{cB}$ & $\mathcal{I}^o_1 $ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{SINR_Table}
\end{table}
\normalsize
As shown in Table~\ref{SINR_Table}, in the conventional network architecture, the macro and non-biased small cells users experience inter-tier interference, which is due to the employed universal frequency reuse scheme. In contrast, the dedicated spectrum accesses employed by the CP/UP split architecture eliminates the inter-tier interference. Note that the biased users do not experience inter-tier interference in the conventional network architecture due to the ABS interference coordination employed by the MBSs. Table~\ref{SINR_Table} also shows the different SINR experienced by the data and control links in the CP/UP split architecture, which is due to the employed decoupled data and control associations.
For a predefined threshold reception $\theta$, the coverage probability $\mathcal{C}=\mathbb{P}[{\rm SINR}>\theta]$ of all users are characterized by the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}The {\rm SINR} coverage for the conventional network is given by
\label{average_trans_rate_three_types}
\footnotesize
{\color{black}
\begin{align}\label{macro_cell_coverage_general_11}
&\mathcal{C}^{(c)}_{1}=\int_{0}^\infty{\exp} \Bigg(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}\theta\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-\theta\right) \notag \\&-\frac{\tilde{\lambda}_{2}}{B}r^{2}\theta \tilde{P}_{21}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}}} \text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};\frac{-\theta}{B}\right)\Bigg) \mathbf{f}_{R_{1}}(r) \text{d}r,
\end{align}}
{\color{black}
\begin{align}\label{small_cell_rate_bias_general_11}
\mathcal{C}^{(c)}_{2}&=\int_{0}^\infty \exp\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}\theta P_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-\theta\right)\right. \notag \\
&\left. -\tilde{\lambda}_{2}r^{2}\theta\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};-\theta\right)
\right) \mathbf{f}_{R_{2}}(r) \text{d}r,
\end{align}
}
\footnotesize
{\color{black}
\begin{multline}\label{small_cell_rate_without_bias_general}
\mathcal{C}^{(c)}_{B} = \\\int_{0}^\infty\mbox{exp}\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{2}r^{2}\theta\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};-\theta\right)\right) \mathbf{f}_{R_{B}}(r) \mbox{d}r.
\end{multline}
}
\normalsize
The {\rm SINR} coverage for macrocell users in the CP/UP split network architecture is given by
\footnotesize
{\color{black}
\begin{align}\label{macro_cell_coverage_general}
\mathcal{C}^{(s)}_{1}&=\int_{0}^\infty{\exp}\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}\theta\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-\theta\right) \right) \mathbf{f}_{R_{1}}(r) \text{d}r.
\end{align}
}
\normalsize
The {\rm SINR} coverage for the data connections for non-biased phantom cell users is given by
\footnotesize
{\color{black}
\begin{align}\label{small_cell_rate_bias_general}
\mathcal{C}^{(s)}_{d2}&=\int_{0}^\infty \exp\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{2}r^{2}\theta\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};-\theta\right)\right) \mathbf{f}_{R_{2}}(r) \text{d}r, \end{align}
}
\normalsize
\noindent and the biased small cell users $\mathcal{C}^{(s)}_{dB} = \mathcal{C}^{(c)}_{B}$ given in \eqref{small_cell_rate_without_bias_general}. The SINR coverage probabilities for the control links of the non-biased and biased phantom cell users are given by
\footnotesize
\begin{align}\label{small_cell_rate_bias_general}
&\mathcal{C}^{(s)}_{c2} = \int_{0}^\infty \exp\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}\theta\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-\theta\right)\right) \mathbf{f}_{R_{c2}}(r) \text{d}r, \end{align}
\begin{multline}\label{small_cell_rate_without_bias_general_123}
\mathcal{C}^{(c)}_{cB}=\\\int_{0}^\infty\mbox{exp}\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}\theta\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-\theta\right)\right) \mathbf{f}_{R_{cB}}(r) \mbox{d}r,
\end{multline}
\normalsize
\normalsize
\noindent where {\color{black}$\tilde{\lambda}_{k} = \frac{2 \pi \lambda_{k}}{\alpha_{k}-2}$},$ \text{ }_{2}F_{1}(\cdot,\cdot;\cdot;\cdot)$ is the hypergeometric function, and $\mathbf{f}_{R_{1}}(r)$, $\mathbf{f}_{R_{2}}(r)$, $\mathbf{f}_{R_{B}}(r)$, $\mathbf{f}_{R_{c2}}(r)$, and $\mathbf{f}_{R_{cB}}(r)$ are given in Section \ref{distance_and_association}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{Average transmission rate_prof}.
\end{proof}
For the special case of equal path-loss exponents $\alpha_1=\alpha_2=4$, the coverage probabilities reduce to the simple closed-form expressions shown below:
\footnotesize
\begin{align}\label{simulation_snir_1}
\mathcal{C}^{(c)}_{1}=\frac{\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}}{\lambda_{1}\rho(1,\theta)+ \lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}\rho(1,\frac{\theta}{B})},
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{C}^{(c)}_{2}=\frac{1}{\rho(1,\theta)},
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{C}^{(s)}_{1}=\frac{\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}}{\lambda_{1}\rho(1,\theta)+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}},
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{C}^{(s)}_{d2}=\frac{ \lambda_{2}+\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}}{\lambda_{2}\rho(1,\theta)+\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}},
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{C}^{(s)}_{c2}=\frac{\bigg(1+\frac{\lambda_{1}}{\lambda_{2}}\sqrt{P_{12}} \bigg) \bigg( 1 - \frac{1}{1+\frac{\lambda_{2}}{\lambda_1} \sqrt{P_{21}} \rho(1,\theta)^{-1} }\bigg)}{\rho(1,\theta)},
\end{align}
\normalsize
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
\mathcal{C}^{(s)}_{dB} = \mathcal{C}^{(c)}_{B}&=\frac{\lambda_{2}}{\mathcal{A}_{B}} \left( \frac{\lambda_{1}\left(\sqrt{P_{12}}-\sqrt{ \tilde{P}_{12}}\right)}{\left(\lambda_{2} \rho(1,\theta)+\lambda_{1}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{12}}\right)\left(\lambda_{2} \rho(1,\theta)+\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}\right)}\right), \end{align}
\begin{align}\label{simulation_snir_2}
\mathcal{C}^{(s)}_{cB} &=\frac{\lambda_{1}}{\mathcal{A}_{B}} \left( \frac{\lambda_{2}\left(\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}-\sqrt{P_{21}}\right)}{\left(\lambda_{1} \rho(1,\theta)+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{P_{21}}\right)\left(\lambda_{1}\rho(1,\theta)+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}\right)}\right), \end{align}
\normalsize
\noindent{\color{black} where $\rho(a,b)=a+\sqrt{b}\arctan\left(\sqrt{b}\right)$}.
\subsection{Spectral Efficiency Analysis}
The spectral efficiency is one of the main parameters to calculate the throughput of the conventional and CP/UP split users throughputs as shown in Section~\ref{pectrum_Allocation_Control_Burden}. The spectral efficiency ($\mathcal{SE} = \mathbbm{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR})]$) can be directly derived from the coverage probability as follows
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
\mathcal{SE} = \mathbbm{E}[\ln(1+{\rm SINR})]&\stackrel{(a)}{=}\int_{0}^\infty\mathbb{P}[{\ln(1+ \rm{SINR})>\zeta}]\mbox{d}\zeta \notag \\
&=\int_{0}^\infty\mathbb{P}[{\rm SINR}>(e^\zeta-1)]\mbox{d}\zeta \notag \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=}\int_{0}^\infty\frac{\mathbb{P}[{\rm SINR}>t]}{t+1}\mbox{d}t,
\label{xdr}
\end{align}
\normalsize
\noindent where (a) follows because $\ln(1+{\rm SINR})$ is a strictly positive random variable, and (b) follows by substituting variable $t= e^\zeta-1$. For general path loss exponent, the spectral efficiencies for macro-cell and small-cell users in the shared spectrum access scheme in the conventional network are given by \eqref{new_spec1} and \eqref{new_spec2}, respectively. For the dedicated spectrum access scheme in the CP/UP split RAN, the spectral efficiencies are given by:
\begin{figure*}
\footnotesize
\begin{align} \label{new_spec1}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\mathcal{SE}^{(c)}_{1}=\int\limits_{0}^\infty \int\limits_{0}^\infty \frac{{\exp}\Bigg(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}t\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-t\right) -\tilde{\lambda}_{2} r^{2}tP_{21}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}}}B^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}}-1}\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};\frac{-t}{B}\right)\Bigg)}{t+1} \mathbf{f}_{R_{1}}(r) \text{d}r \text{d}t,
\end{align}
\hrule
\begin{align} \label{new_spec2}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\mathcal{SE}^{(c)}_{2}&=\int\limits_{0}^\infty \int\limits_{0}^\infty \frac{\exp\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}tP_{12}^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}}}\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-t\right) -\tilde{\lambda}_{2}r^{2}t\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};-t\right)\right)}{t+1} \mathbf{f}_{R_{2}}(r) \text{d}r \text{d}t.
\end{align}
\normalsize
\hrule
\end{figure*}
\footnotesize
{\color{black}
\begin{align} \label{new_spec3}
&\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{1} = \notag \\
&\int\limits_{0}^\infty \int\limits_{0}^\infty \frac{{\exp}\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}t\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-t\right) \right) }{t+1}\mathbf{f}_{R_{1}}(r) \text{d}r \text{d}t,
\end{align}
}
{\color{black}
\begin{align} \label{new_spec4}
&\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{d2} = \notag \\
& \int\limits_{0}^\infty \int\limits_{0}^\infty \frac{ \exp\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{2}r^{2}t\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};-t\right)\right)}{t+1} \mathbf{f}_{R_{2}}(r) \text{d}r \text{d}t, \end{align}
}
\normalsize
{\color{black}
\begin{align} \label{new_specd4}
&\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{c2} = \notag \\
& \int\limits_{0}^\infty \int\limits_{0}^\infty \frac{ \exp\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}t\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-t\right)\right)}{t+1} \mathbf{f}_{R_{c2}}(r) \text{d}r \text{d}t, \end{align}
}
\normalsize
\footnotesize
{\color{black}
\begin{align} \label{new_spec5}
&\mathcal{SE}^{(c)}_{B}=\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{dB} \notag \\
&=\int\limits_{0}^\infty \int\limits_{0}^\infty \frac{{\exp}\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{2}r^{2}t\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{2}};-t\right)\right)}{t+1} \mathbf{f}_{R_{B}}(r) \mbox{d}r \mbox{d}t,
\end{align}
}
\normalsize
\footnotesize
{\color{black}
\begin{align} \label{new_specc5}
\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{cB}=\int\limits_{0}^\infty \int\limits_{0}^\infty \frac{{\exp}\left(-\tilde{\lambda}_{1}r^{2}t\text{ }_{2}F_{1}\left(1,1-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};2-\frac{2}{\alpha_{1}};-t\right)\right)}{t+1} \mathbf{f}_{R_{cB}}(r) \mbox{d}r \mbox{d}t.
\end{align}
}
\normalsize
{As shown in equations \eqref{new_spec1}-\eqref{new_specc5}, two fold integrals are required to obtain the spectral efficiency for general path loss exponents, which is numerically complex to evaluate. For the special case of path loss exponents $\alpha_1=\alpha_2=4$}, the spectral efficiency for all types of users can be evaluated via single integral as follows:
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
\mathcal{SE}^{(c)}_{1}=\int_{0}^\infty \frac{1}{t+1}\frac{\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}}{\lambda_{1}\rho(1,t)+ \lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}\rho(1,\frac{t}{B})}\text{d}t,
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{SE}^{(c)}_{2}=\int_{0}^\infty\frac{1}{t+1}\frac{1}{\rho(1,t)}\text{d}t,
\end{align}
\normalsize
\footnotesize
\begin{multline}
\mathcal{SE}^{(c)}_{B}= \mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{dB}=\int_{0}^\infty\frac{1}{t+1}\left(\frac{(\lambda_{1} \sqrt{\tilde{P}_{12}}+\lambda_{2})(\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}+\lambda_{2})}{\lambda_{1}\left(\sqrt{P_{12}}-\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{12}}\right)}\right)\\ \left(\frac{\lambda_{1}\left(\sqrt{P_{12}}-\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{12}}\right)}{(\lambda_{2}\rho(1,t)+\lambda_{1}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{12}})(\lambda_{2}\rho(1,t)+\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}})}\right)\mbox{d}t,
\end{multline}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{1}=\int_{0}^\infty \frac{1}{t+1}\frac{\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}}{\lambda_{1}\rho(1,t)+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}}\text{d}t,
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{d2}=\int_{0}^\infty\frac{1}{t+1}\frac{\lambda_{2}+\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}}{\lambda_{2}\rho(1,t)+\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}} \text{d}t,
\end{align}
\begin{multline}
\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{c2}=\int\limits_0^\infty \frac{\bigg(1+\frac{\lambda_{1}}{\lambda_{2}}\sqrt{P_{12}} \bigg) \bigg( 1 - \frac{1}{1+\frac{\lambda_{2}}{\lambda_1} \sqrt{P_{21}}\rho(1,t)^{-1} }\bigg)}{(t+1)\rho(1,t)} dt,
\end{multline}
\begin{multline}
\mathcal{SE}^{(s)}_{cB}=\int_{0}^\infty\frac{1}{t+1}\left(\frac{(\lambda_{1}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{12}} +\lambda_{2})(\lambda_{1}\sqrt{P_{12}}+\lambda_{2})}{\lambda_{1}\left(\sqrt{P_{12}}- \sqrt{\tilde{P}_{12}}\right)}\right)\\ \left( \frac{\lambda_{2}\left(\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}-\sqrt{P_{21}}\right)}{\left( \lambda_{1}\rho(\sqrt{t},t)+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{P_{21}}\right)\left(\lambda_{1}\rho(\sqrt{t},t)+\lambda_{2}\sqrt{\tilde{P}_{21}}\right)} \right)\mbox{d}t.
\end{multline}
\normalsize
\section{Handover Analysis}
\label{mobility_analysis}
In this section, we take into account the effect of mobility on the system performance. In order to compute the average throughputs in Eq. \eqref{watpu_c} and \eqref{watpu_v}, we need to compute the handover cost for both the CP/UP split network and conventional network architectures. The handover cost is a function of the handover rate per unit length of users trajectories, which is calculated in this section.
We assume that users move according to an arbitrary mobility pattern with velocity $\mathcal{V}$. The handover rate is determined based on the model obtained by {\color{black}Bao and Liang \cite{bao2015stochastic}, which gives the handover rate per unit length for arbitrary trajectories in a PPP multi-tier network. Hence, the handover rate is independent of the underlying mobility pattern}. Following \cite{bao2015stochastic}, the tier-$i$-to-tier-$j$ handover rate per unit length of an arbitrary trajectory is given by
\begin{equation}\label{HOC}
HO_{ij}^{(c)}= \frac{\lambda_{i}\lambda_{j}\mathcal{F}(x_{ij})}{\pi \left(\lambda_{i}+\lambda_{j} x_{ij}^{2}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}},
\end{equation}
where $x_{12}=\left(\tilde{P}_{12}\right)^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}$, $x_{21}=\frac{1}{x_{12}}$, $x_{11}=x_{22}=1$, and
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{F}(x) = \frac{1}{x^{2}}\int_{0}^{\pi}\sqrt{(x^{2}+1)-2x\text{cos}(\theta)}d\theta.
\end{equation}
\noindent From Eq. (\ref{conv_cost}), the total handover cost per unit time in the conventional network is given by:
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}
D^{(c)}_{HO} = \left(d^{(c)}\left(1-\mathcal{X}\right)+\tilde{d}^{(c)}\mathcal{X}\right) \frac{\mathcal{V}}{\pi} \sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{j=1}^2 \frac{\lambda_{i}\lambda_{j}\mathcal{F}(x_{ij})}{ \left(\lambda_{i}+\lambda_{j} x_{ij}^{2}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}}.
\label{CHOD}
\end{equation}
\normalsize
In the CP/UP split network, an inter-anchor handover takes place when crossing a MBS-to-MBS cell boundary (see Fig.~\ref{weighted_Voronoi}); thus the inter-anchor handover rate is equivalent to the handover rate in the single-tier MBS case with density $\lambda_1$. Following \cite{bao2015stochastic}, we calculate the inter-anchor handover rate per unit length in the CP/UP split architecture network as follows:
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}\label{MHO}
MHO^{(s)}= \frac{4 \sqrt{\lambda_1}}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
\normalsize
\noindent As discussed earlier, intra-anchor handovers are defined as all types of handovers that do not require changing the anchor BS. Hence, the intra-anchor handover rate per unit length is given by:
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}\label{VHO}
VHO^{(s)}= \frac{2}{\pi}\left(\sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{j=1}^2 \frac{\lambda_{i}\lambda_{j}\mathcal{F}(x_{ij})}{2 \left(\lambda_{i}+\lambda_{j} x_{ij}^{2}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}} - 2 \sqrt{\lambda_1}\right).
\end{equation}
\normalsize
From Eq. (\ref{cpup_cost}), the total handover cost per unit time in the CP/UP split network is given by:
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!D^{(s)}_{HO} &= \frac{2 \mathcal{V} d^{(s)}_v }{\pi}\left(\sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{j=1}^2 \frac{\lambda_{i}\lambda_{j}\mathcal{F}(x_{ij})}{2 \left(\lambda_{i}+\lambda_{j} x_{ij}^{2}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}} - 2 \sqrt{\lambda_1}\right) \notag \\
& \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad+ \left(\left(1-\mathcal{Z}\right)d^{(s)}_m+\mathcal{Z}\tilde{d}_m^{(s)}\right)\mathcal{V} \frac{4 \sqrt{\lambda_1}}{\pi} \notag \\
&= \frac{ \mathcal{V} }{\pi} \Bigg( d^{(s)}_v \sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{j=1}^2 \frac{\lambda_{i}\lambda_{j}\mathcal{F}(x_{ij})}{ \left(\lambda_{i}+\lambda_{j} x_{ij}^{2}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}} \notag\\& \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad + {4 \sqrt{\lambda_1}} \left(\left(1-\mathcal{Z}\right)d^{(s)}_m+\mathcal{Z}\tilde{d}_m^{(s)}- d^{(s)}_v\right)\Bigg).
\label{VHOD}
\end{align}
\normalsize
\noindent Note that the inter-anchor handover delay is equal to the conventional handover delay (i.e., $d^{(s)}_m = d^{(c)}$ and $\tilde{d}^{(s)}_m = \tilde{d}^{(c)}$) because the handover procedure is the same. Thus we can infer from Eq. \eqref{CHOD} and \eqref{VHOD} that the handover cost depends on the relative values of $d^{(c)}$, $d^{(s)}_v$, $\lambda_2$, and $\lambda_1$. In fact, in an ultra dense small cell network with $\lambda_2 >> \lambda_1$, we can obtain a bound on the maximum gain in terms of the handover cost that the CP/UP split architecture can offer when $\mathcal{X}=\mathcal{Z}=0$ as follows:
\begin{align} \label{huh}
{\mathcal{G}} &= \underset{ \lambda_2 \rightarrow \infty }{\lim} \frac{D^{(c)}_{HO}-D^{(s)}_{HO}}{D^{(c)}_{HO}} = 1-\frac{d^{(s)}_v}{d^{(c)}}.
\end{align}
\noindent Note that the core network is mainly wired and the core network elements may be located far away from the network edge, and hence, core network signaling travels farther distances with lower speed\footnote{Wave propagation within any medium is less than the speed of electromagnetic waves in the air, which travels with the speed of light.}. Hence, the core network signaling may add significant delay to the handover procedure. For instance, if $d^{(c)} = 5 d^{(s)}_v$, Eq. \eqref{huh} shows that the CP/UP split architecture can offer $80\%$ reduction in the handover delay.
\section{Model Validation and Numerical Results}
\label{validation_and_result}
In this section, we first validate our results via simulations using MATLAB. We then use the developed analytical model to compare the performance of the conventional and CP/UP split RAN architectures and obtain design insights.
Unless otherwise stated, we use the following parameters in our simulations and analysis. The transmission powers are $P_{1}=50$ Watt and $P_{2}=5$ Watt. The bandwidth is $W=10$ MHz. The ABS factor is $\eta=0.3$. The percentage of control data in the available time/frequency resources is $\mu_{C}=0.3$ based on 3GPP Release 11 \cite{hoymann2013lean}. The biasing factor for the small BSs tier is $B=30$. The available air interface bandwidth for macro cells resource allocation is $W_{1}=2$ MHz, and for small cells resource allocation is $W_{2}=8$ MHz. We assume that the density of MBSs is $\lambda_{1}=2$ BS/km$^{2}$ and the density of mobile users is $\lambda^{u}=50$ users/km$^{2}$. The path loss exponent is $\alpha_{1}=\alpha_{2}=4$.
{\color{black} \subsection{Model Validation}\label{Model_Validation}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.5\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.36}[0.36]{\includegraphics{SINR_moving_stationary.eps}}\caption{ Conventional association \& CP/UP split data association.}
\label{coverage_probability_moving}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.5\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.36}[0.36]{\includegraphics{control_coverage_probability.eps}}\caption{ CP/UP split control association.}
\label{coverage_probability_moving_22}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\caption{Coverage probability as a function of the {\rm SINR} threshold $\theta$ for stationary users (analysis) and mobile users (simulation).}\label{validation}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
In each simulation run, the network is realized in $ 90\times90 \text{km}^{2}$ via two independent homogenous PPPs with densities $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$. A test user is then generated at the origin and moves along five consecutive straight trajectories, each with a random length (Rayleigh distributed with parameter $1/\sqrt{2\pi\lambda_{1}}$) and random angle (uniformly distributed on $[0,2\pi]$). The trajectories are then partitioned with a 100-point resolution and the user's association and SINR are recorded at each point. The association type is determined based on Eq. \eqref{sets}. According to the association, the SINR value at each point of the test user trajectory is saved in one of the eight cumulative vectors corresponding to the 8 link types listed in Fig.~\ref{split_and_no_split}. Then, the above process is repeated 1000 times. The empirical CCDF of the values recorded in the eight cumulative vectors are then compared to the respective CCDF in Eq. \eqref{simulation_snir_1} to \eqref{simulation_snir_2}.
Fig.~\ref{validation} plots the SINR CCDF obtained from the analysis (for stationary users) and the simulation (for mobile users). The figure shows that the analysis (for stationary users) closely captures the simulation result (for mobile users), confirming the validity of the proposed model for both stationary and mobile users. While the simulation result (for mobile users) considers the spatial correlation between SINR values across users' trajectories, the close match between the analysis and simulation result can be explained by the rapid spatial decay of the spatial correlation between the interference signal and the distance \cite{spatial_martin}. Hence, we can deduce that averaging over all locations in all network configurations closely captures the averaging over all trajectories in all network configurations. Fig.~\ref{coverage_probability_moving} shows that the CP/UP split architecture offers higher coverage probability, for tier-1 and tier-2 users data links, than the conventional RAN architecture due to the absence of cross-tier interference. Fig. \ref{coverage_probability_moving_22} shows that SINR coverage probability for the control signaling of the biased SBS users is better than that of the unbiased SBSs users. This is because the biased SBSs users are closer on average to the MBSs than the unbiased SBSs users.
\subsection{Handover Rate and Throughput}
Fig. \ref{simulation_analysis} visualizes the handover rates per unit length of an arbitrary trajectory as a function of the density of SBS in the conventional and CP/UP split networks. The graph shows that small cell densification linearly increases the total number of handovers in the conventional network architecture. Looking into the explicit handover types, we notice that $HO_{11}^{(c)}$ (handovers between MBSs) decreases as the density of small cells increases. The reason is that the boundaries of MBSs become more populated by SBSs when $\lambda_2$ increases. Hence, a MBS-to-MBS handover is replaced by MBS-to-SBS followed by SBS-to-MBS handover and possibly several SBS-to-SBS handovers inbetween. Also, $HO_{22}^{(c)}$ linearly increases and $HO_{12}^{(c)} = HO_{21}^{(c)}$ saturates. Hence, with high SBS densities, the handover rate is dominated by $HO_{22}^{(c)}$, which motivates the anchoring solution via CP/UP splitting to reduce the handover delay. As shown in the graph, in the CP/UP split network architecture, the inter-anchor handover rate is kept constant due to the constant density of the MBSs. However, the intra-anchor handover rate increases linearly with $\lambda_2$.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.35}[0.35]{\includegraphics{new.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{Handover rate per unit length}
\vspace{-.2cm}
\label{simulation_analysis}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.36}[0.36]{\includegraphics{AT_zero_speed.eps}}\caption{ Stationary $\mathcal{V}=0 \text{ } km/h$.}
\label{average_rate_three_cases}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.36}[0.36]{\includegraphics{AT_50_speed.eps}}\caption{Low speed $\mathcal{V}=50 \text{ } km/h$.}
\label{Effect_ATPU}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.36}[0.36]{\includegraphics{AT_108_speed.eps}}\caption{Medium speed $\mathcal{V}=108 \text{ } km/h$.}
\label{Effect_ATPU_2}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\scalebox{0.36}[0.36]{\includegraphics{AT_360_speed_gama_1_4.eps}}\caption{High speed $\mathcal{V}=360 \text{ } km/h$.}
\label{Effect_ATPU_3}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Average throughput with and without handover cost for mobile user with different velocities for $\gamma \in\{1, 3, 5\}$ and $\mathcal{X}=\mathcal{Z}=0$.}\label{E_ATPU}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
The next set of simulation results show the effect of mobility, control signaling reduction factor $\gamma$, the availability of X2 interface between BSs, and SBS density on the average user throughput. Unless otherwise stated, we assume that $d^{(c)}=0.7$ seconds and that $d^{(s)}_{v}=\tilde{d}^{(c)}=\tilde{d}_m^{(s)}=0.5d^{(c)}$~\cite{mahmoodiusing}. Fig.~\ref{E_ATPU} shows the effect of the handover delay on the average user throughput in the conventional and CP/UP split architectures for different mobility profiles: (a) stationary $\mathcal{V}=0\text{ } km/h$, (b) low velocity $\mathcal{V}=50\text{ } km/h$ (e.g., driving in the city), (c) medium velocity $\mathcal{V}=108\text{ } km/h$ (e.g., traveling on highways or in monorails in city downtowns), and (d) high velocity $\mathcal{V}=360\text{ } km/h$. (e.g., traveling on a high speed train {\color{black}such as Shinkansen when passing through downtown Tokyo, Japan}).
In the case of stationary users, Fig.~\ref{average_rate_three_cases} shows that a high control reduction factor $\gamma$ is required for the CP/UP split architecture to achieve an equivalent average throughout to the conventional network architecture. This result can be interpreted by the poor control rate provided by MBSs to the unbiased phantom cell users when compared to the rate they get from the SBSs (cf. Fig. \ref{coverage_probability_moving_22}). Hence, offloading the control signaling to the MBSs requires a high control reduction factor to compensate for such rate loss. Note that the per user rate for unbiased users of the SBSs increases with $\lambda_2$, and hence, offloading control to the MBSs incurs higher rate loss. Consequently, the CP/UP split architecture is not beneficial to networks with stationary users unless a high control reduction factor can be achieved.
For mobile users, Figs. \ref{Effect_ATPU}, \ref{Effect_ATPU_2} and \ref{Effect_ATPU_3} show that the CP/UP split architecture is beneficial especially for high speeds and $\mathcal{X}=\mathcal{Z}=0$; i.e., there is no X2 interface handovers on both conventional and CP/UP split architectures. Note that we show the ideal case; i.e, AT for stationary users, to clearly visualize the effect of mobility on the average throughput. Figs. \ref{Effect_ATPU} and \ref{Effect_ATPU_2} show that a control reduction factor of $\gamma =3$ is sufficient for the CP/UP split architecture to outperform the conventional network architecture when users move at low or medium speeds. When the mobility speed is high (Fig. \ref{Effect_ATPU_3}), the CP/UP split network outperforms the conventional network even without control reduction (i.e., $\gamma=1$). More importantly, only the CP/UP split network can support users moving at such high speeds while the conventional network cannot.
It is important to note that Fig. \ref{E_ATPU} is plotted for $d^{(s)}_{v}=0.5d^{(c)}$. The CP/UP split architecture can offer even higher throughput gains if the intra-anchor delay is lowered. Fig. \ref{Effect_ATPU_4} shows the additional gain that the CP/UP split network offers when $d^{(s)}_{v}=0.3d^{(c)}$ versus the case where $d^{(s)}_{v}=0.5d^{(c)}$. The graph demonstrates the importance of lowering the intra-anchor delay and minimizing the involvement of the core network during handovers. Therefore, the CP/UP split architecture can be used to increase the throughput of mobile users in dense small cell deployments by making the MBSs act as handover anchors instead of involving the core network in handovers.
Fig. \ref{AT_XZ} shows the effect of the direct X2 interface availability between BSs on the average throughput in the conventional and CP/UP splitting architectures. The figure shows that the X2 interfaces have more prominent effect on the conventional network architecture because it reduces the delay for all handover types. On the other hand, the X2 interference does not have a noticeable effect on in CP/UP split architecture because it only reduces the inter-anchor handover delay, which is considered a rare handover event. The figure also shows that the relative performance gains between the conventional and CP/UP splitting architectures highly depends on the X2 interface availability. Particularly, there are critical points at which the conventional network with sufficient X2 interface deployment outperforms the CP/UP split architecture in terms of average throughput. Such critical points are depicted in Fig. \ref{AT_XZ} at $\mathcal{X}=\mathcal{Z} = 0.5$, $\mathcal{X}=\mathcal{Z}= 0.8$, and $\mathcal{X}=\mathcal{Z}= 0.95$ for $\mathcal{V} = 50 \text{ } km/h$, $\mathcal{V} = 108 \text{ } km/h$. and $\mathcal{V} = 360 \text{ } km/h$, respectively.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.37}[0.37]{\includegraphics{AT_360_speed_different_delays_0_3_and_0_5.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{Average throughput with handover cost and intra-anchor handover delay values $d^{(s)}_{v}=0.5d^{(c)}$ and $d^{(s)}_{v}=0.3d^{(c)}$ ($\mathcal{V} = 360 \text{ } km/h$, $\gamma=3$, and $\mathcal{X}=\mathcal{Z}=0$).}
\vspace{-.2cm}
\label{Effect_ATPU_4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.35}[0.35]{\includegraphics{X2_effect.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{Average throughput with and without handover cost when $\gamma=3$, $\lambda_{2}=150$ BS/km$^{2}$, and $d^{(s)}_{v}=\tilde{d}^{(c)}=\tilde{d}_m^{(s)}=0.5d^{(c)}$. }
\vspace{-.2cm}
\label{AT_XZ}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Feasibility of the CP/UP Split Architecture }
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.34}[0.34]{\includegraphics{average_rate_after_splitting.eps}}
\end{center}
\vspace{-20pt}
\caption{Average throughput of small cell, macro cell and biased users as a function of small cell density ($\mathcal{V}=0$, $\gamma$ = 3 and $B=30$)}
\vspace{-.2cm}
\label{weighted_average}
\end{figure}
To examine the feasibility of the CP/UP split architecture as stated in Corollary~\ref{col}, we plot Fig.~\ref{weighted_average}, which shows the average throughputs for all types of users as functions of the SBS density, assuming $\mathcal{V}=0$, $\gamma=3$, and $B=30$. Note that we assume saturation conditions such that newly added SBSs always have users to serve. The graph shows the breaking point (point A in Fig.~\ref{weighted_average}) at which the MBSs fail to provide the control signaling required by phantom cell users. Point A is the point at which the inequality \eqref{condition_col} is violated. Note that the CP/UP split architecture can still be made feasible by allocating more spectrum to the MBSs or enhancing the control reduction factor $\gamma$ as shown in Corollary~\ref{col}.
\subsection{Design Insights}
From the above numerical results, several design insights can be drawn for the CP/UP split network architecture. First, the CP/UP architecture becomes more appealing for higher mobility profiles when the availability of direct X2 interface between the BSs is low, in which the control signaling reduction factor plays a key role in the throughput gains when compared to the conventional architecture. The amount of delay reduction provided by the intra-anchor handover also has a significant impact on the throughput gains provided by the CP/UP split networks. For instance, Fig. \ref{Effect_ATPU_4} shows a 60\% throughput improvement when the intra-anchor handover delay $d^{(s)}_{v}$ is reduced from $0.5d^{(c)}$ (point C in Fig. \ref{Effect_ATPU_4}) to $0.3d^{(c)}$ (point D in Fig. \ref{Effect_ATPU_4}).
Cellular operators can solve the excess handover problem, which is coupled with network densification, either by deploying more X2 interfaces between adjacent BSs or applying CP/UP splitting. While the former reduces the handover delay only, the latter reduces both the handover delay as well as the signaling overhead. {\color{black} Note that at higher SBSs densities and/or control reduction factors, the conventional network may not achieve the CP/UP split throughput even with $100\%$ X2 deployment}. Consequently, the CP/UP split architecture is more appealing in ultra dense environments with high mobility profiles.
Another noteworthy insight is that there is a tradeoff between traffic offloading via biasing and control offloading via the CP/UP architecture on macrocell users rate. As shown in Fig. \ref{weighted_average}, there is a turning point for the average throughput of macro cell users at $\lambda_{2} = 22$ (point B in Fig. \ref{weighted_average}). For the given network configuration, prior to point B, the positive impact of offloading users traffic to phantom cells (i.e., decreasing $\mathcal{N}_1$) dominates the negative impact of offloading control signaling from the phantom cells to MBSs. Then, the situation is reversed after point B and the negative impact of the control burden dominates the positive impact of traffic offloading until the infeasibility point is reached (point A). Such tradeoff can be used to optimize the biasing factor such that the macrocell users rate is maximized.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{conc_future}
We present a novel mobility-aware analytical paradigm for CP/UP split RAN network architecture with flexible user association. We derive tractable mathematical expressions for coverage probability and user throughput, which can be reduced to closed-form expressions in special cases. The analysis takes into account the control signaling overhead, spectrum allocation schemes, interference coordination via almost blank subframes, the availability of X2 interface between BSs, and delay incurred by handovers. We then use the developed model to quantify the performance gains offered by the CP/UP split RAN network architecture. In particular, we quantify the impacts of handover delay and mobility speed on the user throughput. We also examine the effects of small cell density, control reduction factor, and core network delay on the user throughput.
The developed model shows that the handovers impose a fundamental limit on the performance gain that can be obtained via densification. In moderate and high mobility profiles, the CP/UP split network architecture offers a potential solution to reduce the control overload and mitigate the handover delay, and hence, improve the network densification gain in networks with low availability of direct X2 interface
between BSs. It is also crucial to know the optimal small cell density for a specific network configuration in order to balance the trade-off between the offloading of user data traffic away from MBSs and control signaling towards MBSs in order to maximize the network throughput.
\appendices
\section{Proof of Lemma~\ref{rate_lemma}} \label{rate_lemma_proof}
The phantom cells dedicate $\eta$ and $(1-\eta)$ fraction of the time to serve biased and non-biased users, respectively. Consider a time interval of $t$ seconds. Then the numbers of data bits sent by each phantom BS to non-biased and biased users are $ (1-\eta) t \mathcal{R}_{d2}$ bits and $ \eta t \mathcal{R}_{dB}$ bits, respectively. On average, there are $\frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1}$ phantom BSs per MBS, and hence, the MBS should be able to convey control signaling amounts of $ \frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} (1-\eta) t \mathcal{R}_{d2}}{\gamma}$ bits and $ \frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} \eta t \mathcal{R}_{dB}}{\gamma}$ bits to non-biased and biased users, respectively, during time interval $t$. However, the MBS sends the control bits with the rates of $\mathcal{R}_{c2}$ and $\mathcal{R}_{cB}$ for non-biased and biased phantom cell users, respectively. Hence, the amount of time required to send the control signaling by the MBS is $\frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} (1-\eta) t \mathcal{R}_{d2}}{\gamma \mathcal{R}_{c2}}$ seconds and $\frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} \eta t \mathcal{R}_{dB}}{\gamma \mathcal{R}_{cB}}$ seconds for non-biased and biased phantom cell users, respectively. Consequently, the remaining time for the MBS to serve macrocell users is $\left(t- \frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} (1-\eta) t \mathcal{R}_{d2}}{\gamma \mathcal{R}_{c2}} - \frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} \eta t \mathcal{R}_{dB}}{\gamma \mathcal{R}_{cB}} \right)$ seconds. Hence, the average number of bits the MBS conveys to macrocell users during time interval $t$ is $\mathcal{R}^{(s)}_1 \left(t- \frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} (1-\eta) t \mathcal{R}_{d2}}{\gamma \mathcal{R}_{c2}} - \frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} \eta t \mathcal{R}_{dB}}{\gamma \mathcal{R}_{cB}}\right) $ bits. Dividing the above expression by $t$, we obtain the average rate at which data is delivered to macrocell users as $\mathcal{R}^{(s)}_1 \left(1- \frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} (1-\eta) \mathcal{R}_{d2}}{\gamma \mathcal{R}_{c2}} - \frac{\lambda_2}{\lambda_1} \frac{\mu_{C} \eta \mathcal{R}_{dB}}{\gamma \mathcal{R}_{cB}}\right) $. Then \eqref{macro_rate_lemma} is obtained by replacing $(1-\eta) \mathcal{R}_{d2}$ by $\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_2$, replacing $\eta \mathcal{R}_{dB}$ by $\mathcal{T}^{(s)}_B$ and multiplying the above expression by ($1-\mu_{C}$).
\normalsize
\section{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem_distances}} \label{distances}
From the independence of the PPPs of the macro and phantom BSs , the joint pdf of the distances between a generic user and his nearest phantom BS and nearest MBS is given by $f_{r_1,r_2}(x,y)= 4 \pi^2 x y\lambda_{1}\lambda_{2} e^{-\pi (\lambda_1 x^2 +\lambda_2 y^2)}$, $x,y >0$. The control link distributions are given by
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}\left\{ r_1 < x \vert \mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_2\right\} &= \frac{\mathbb{P}\left\{r_1 < x , \mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_2\right\} }{\mathbb{P}\left\{ \mathcal{\Large\emph{u}}_2\right\} } = \frac{\mathbb{P}\left\{r_1 < x , {P_1 r_1^{-\alpha_1}}<{P_2 r_2^{-\alpha_1}}\right\} }{\mathbb{P}\left\{ {P_1 r_1^{-\alpha_1}}<{P_2 r_2^{-\alpha_1}}\right\} } \notag \\
&= \frac{\mathbb{P}\left\{r_1 < x , r_2< \left(\frac{P_2}{P_1}\right)^\frac{1}{\alpha_2} r_1^\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha_2}\right\} }{\mathcal{A}_2 }.
\end{align}
\normalsize
Hence, the pdf of $R_{2c}$ is given by
\small
\begin{align}
f_{R_{c2}}(x) &= \frac{1}{\mathcal{A}_2}\frac{{\rm d}\mathbb{P}\left\{r_1 < x , r_2< \left(\frac{P_2}{P_1}\right)^\frac{1}{\alpha_2} r_1^\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha_2}\right\} }{{\rm d}x}
\notag \\
&= \frac{1}{\mathcal{A}_2}\int_{0}^{\left(\frac{P_2}{P_1}\right){^\frac{1}{\alpha_2}} x^{\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha_2}}} f_{r_1,r_2}(x,y) dy.
\end{align}
\normalsize
Similarly, the pdf of $R_{cB}$ is derived as follows.
\small
\begin{align}
& \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!f_{R_{cB}}(x) = \frac{1}{\mathcal{A}_B}\int_{\left(\frac{P_2}{P_1}\right){^\frac{1}{\alpha_2}} x^{\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha_2}}}^{\left(\frac{B P_2}{P_1}\right){^\frac{1}{\alpha_2}} x^{\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha_2}}} f_{r_1,r_2}(x,y) dy.
\end{align}
\normalsize
\section{Proof of Lemma \ref{average_trans_rate_three_types}}
\label{Average transmission rate_prof}
The coverage probability, which is the {\em ccdf} of the {\rm SINR}, can be expressed in terms of the Laplace transform (LT) of the aggregate interference. Using the general SINR model in \eqref{gen_sinr}, the coverage probability is given by
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}[{\rm SINR}>\theta]&=\mathbb{P}\left[\frac {P_{BS}H {r_o}^{-\alpha}}{\mathcal{I}_{agg}+\sigma^2}>\theta\right]\notag\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=}\int_{0}^\infty\mbox{exp}\left(-\frac{\sigma^{2} \theta r_{o}^{\alpha}}{P_{BS}} \right)\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I}_{agg}}(\theta \frac{r_{o}^{\alpha}}{P_{BS}})f_{r_o}(r),\label{atr_1}
\end{align}
\normalsize
where (a) follows from the exponential distribution of $H$ and the definition of the LT \cite{elsawy2013survey, dhillon2012modeling}, and the parameters in \eqref{atr_1} can be obtained for each user case from Table~\ref{SINR_Table}. In the case of shared spectrum access, $\mathcal{I}_{agg}$ is the superposition of two independent interferences from the two tiers $1$ and $2$, and hence, can be decomposed to the multiplications of the LTs of the interferences from each tier as
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I}_{agg}}(s) = \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I}_{1}}(s) \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I}_{2}}(s).
\label{ltss}
\end{align}
\noindent In the other cases, the aggregate interference is simply single-tier interference. The LT of the interference for a given network tier $k \in \{1,2\}$ is calculated as:
\footnotesize
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I}_k}(s)&=\mathbb{E}\left[e^{-sP_{k}\sum\limits_{x\in\mathbf{\Phi_{k}}\backslash b_o}H_{x} x^{-\alpha_{k}}}\right] =\mathbb{E}\left[\prod_{x\in\mathbf{\Phi_{1}}\backslash b_o} e^{-sP_{k}H_{x} x^{-\alpha_{k}}}\right]\notag\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=}\mbox{exp}\Bigg\{-2\pi \lambda_{k}\int_{\|b_o\|}^\infty \frac{sP_{k} x}{{x^{\alpha_{k}}}+sP_{k}} \mbox{d}x\Bigg\}.
\label{laplace_i1x}
\end{align}
\normalsize
\noindent where (b) follows by from the probability generating functional of the PPP and the i.i.d. exponential distribution of $H_x$, and $b_o$ is the location of the serving BS determined by the employed association criterion. The lemma is obtained by calculating the LT of the aggregate interference affecting the test user according to Table~\ref{SINR_Table} using \eqref{ltss} and \eqref{laplace_i1x}, in which the the location of the serving BS $b_o$ is obtained via the association criterion given in \eqref{sets}. Then, by substituting the LT of the interference in \eqref{atr_1} and integrating over the appropriate link distance given in Table~\ref{SINR_Table}, we obtain the coverage probabilities.
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
In recent years the present authors have reported a number of fixed-node DMC studies
using trial wavefunctions whose determinantal part is built with the CIPSI approach.
\cite{giner_2013,giner_phd_2014,scemama_jcp_2014,giner_jcp_2015,caffarel_jcp_2016}
The purpose of this paper is to review the present situation, to clarify
some important aspects of DMC-CIPSI, and to present some new illustrative results.
In section \ref{sci} we briefly recall what Configuration Interaction (CI) methods are about and
present the basic ideas of perturbatively selected CI approaches. We emphasize on the very high
efficiency of SCI in approaching the exact Full CI limit using only a {\it tiny} fraction
of the full Hilbert space of determinants.
Selecting important determinants being a natural idea,
it is no surprise that it has been introduced a long time ago and has been
rediscovered many times under various forms since then.
To the best of our knowledge selected CI appeared
for the first time in 1969 in two independent works by Bender and Davidson\cite{bender_pr_1969}
and Whitten and Hackmeyer.\cite{Whitten_1969}
In practice, the flavor of SCI we employ is the CIPSI approach introduced
by Malrieu and collaborators in 1973.\cite{huron_jcp_1973} CIPSI being our working algorithm
for generating CI expansions, a brief description is given here.
It is noted that the recent FCI-QMC
method of Alavi {\it et al.}\cite{booth_jcp_2009, cleland_jcp_2010} is essentially a SCI
approach, except that selection of determinants in FCI-QMC is done stochastically instead of
deterministically.
In section \ref{results} the performance of CIPSI is illustrated for the case of the
water molecule at equilibrium geometry using the cc-pCV$n$Z family of basis sets, with $n=2$ to 5
and for the whole set of 55 molecules and 9 atoms of the G1 standard
set.\cite{pople_jcp_1989,curtiss_jcp_1990} It is shown that in all cases the FCI limit
is closely approached.
In section \ref{dmc} the use of CIPSI nodes in DMC is discussed. We first present our
motivations and then comment on the key result observed, namely that in all applications
realized so far the fixed-node error associated with the approximate nodes of the CIPSI
expansion is found to
systematically decrease both as a function of the number of selected determinants
and as the size of the basis set. This remarkable property provides a convenient way of
controlling the fixed-node error. Let us emphasize that in contrast with common practice in QMC
the molecular orbitals are not stochastically re-optimized here.
An illustrative application to the water molecule is presented.\cite{caffarel_jcp_2016}
Of course, the main price to pay is the need of using much larger CI
expansions than usual. The main ideas of our recently proposed
approach\cite{preprint_multidets} to handle very large number of determinants in QMC are presented.
In practice, converged DMC calculations using trial wavefunctions
including up to a few millions of determinants are feasible. The computational increase with respect
to single-determinant calculations is roughly proportional to $\sim \sqrt{N_{dets}}$ with a
small prefactor.
In section \ref{pseudo} the implementation of effective core potentials (ECP)
in DMC using CIPSI trial wavefunctions is presented.
As already proposed some time ago,\cite{Hurley_1987,Hammond_1987}
CI expansions allow to calculate analytically the action of the nonlinear
pseudo-potential operator on the trial wavefunction.
In this way, the use of quadrature points to integrate the wavefunction over the sphere as usually
done\cite{mitas_jcp_1991}
is avoided and a gain in computational effort essentially proportional to the number of grid points is
achieved. The effectiveness of the approach
is illustrated in the case of the atomization energy of the C$_2$ molecule.
Finally, Sec. \ref{conclu} presents a detailed summary of the main features
of the DMC-CIPSI approach and some lines of research presently under investigation are mentioned.
\section{Selected Configuration Interaction}
\label{sci}
\subsection{Configuration Interaction methods}
In Configuration Interaction the wavefunction is written as a sum of Slater determinants
\begin{equation}
|\Psi\rangle = \sum_i c_i |D_i\rangle
\label{ciexp}
\end{equation}
where determinants are built over spin-orbitals. Let $\{ \phi_k \}$ be the set of $N_{\rm MO}$
orthonormal molecular orbitals used, the size of the full Hilbert space is given by the
number of ways of distributing the $N_{\uparrow}$ electrons among the orbitals times the
corresponding number for $N_{\downarrow}$ electrons.
The total size of the full CI space is then (no symmetries are considered)
$$
N_{FCI}= \binom{N_{\rm MO}}{N_{\uparrow}} \binom{N_{\rm MO}}{N_{\downarrow}}
$$
The CI eigenspectrum is obtained by diagonalizing the Hamiltonian matrix,
$H_{ij}= {\langle D_i|H|D_j\rangle}$ within the orthonormal basis of determinants.
In practice, the exponential increase of the FCI space restricts the use of FCI
to small systems including a small number of electrons and molecular orbitals ($N_{FCI}$
not greater than about $10^9$). To go beyond, the FCI expansion has to be truncated.
The most popular strategy consists in defining a subspace of determinants chosen {\it a priori}.
Typically, the Hartree-Fock determinant (or a few determinants)
is chosen as reference and all possible determinants built by promoting a given number of electrons
from the HF occupied orbitals to the virtual ones are considered.
In the CIS approach only single excitations are considered,
in CISD all single and double excitations, etc.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.\columnwidth]{exc.pdf}
\caption{N$_2$ in the cc-pVTZ basis set (R$_{N-N}$=1.0977 \AA). Variation of the number
of determinants with $n$-excitations with respect to the Hartree-Fock determinant
in the CIPSI expansion as a function of the number of selected determinants up to $5 \times 10^6$.
}
\label{n2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Now, numerical experience shows that among all possible determinants corresponding to
a given number of excitations, only a {\it tiny} fraction
plays a significant role in constructing the properties of the low-lying eigenstates. Furthermore,
the weight of a determinant in the CI expansion is not directly related
to its degree of excitation. For example, quadruply-excited
determinants may play a more important role than some doubly- or singly-excited determinants. However,
in practice, limiting the maximum number of excitations to about six is usually sufficient to
get chemical accuracy. To give some quantitative illustration of these statements, Figure \ref{n2}
presents the number of determinants per class of excitations $n$ as a function of the number of
determinants in the CIPSI wavefunction for the $N_2$ molecule
at equilibrium geometry (cc-pVTZ basis set). Without entering now into the details
of CIPSI presented below, let us just note that for 5$ \times 10^6$ determinants the CIPSI expansion
has almost converged to the FCI solution. Accordingly, results presented in the figure
for the distribution of excitations is essentially that of the FCI wavefunction.
As a consequence of the preceding remarks, it is clear that it is desirable to find a way
of selecting only the most important determinants of the FCI expansion without considering all
those of negligible weight (the vast majority). This is the purpose
of selected configuration interaction approaches.
\subsection{Selected CI and CIPSI algorithm}
To the best of our knowledge Bender and Davidson\cite{bender_pr_1969} and
Whitten and Hackmeyer\cite{Whitten_1969} were the first in 1969 to
introduce and exploit the idea of selecting determinants in CI approaches.
In their work Bender and Davison proposed to select space configuration using an energy
contribution criterion.
Denoting $|\phi_0\rangle$ the restricted HF CSF-configuration,
$|\phi_i^l \rangle$ all possible spin configurations issued from the
space configuration,
and
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_i^{(2)} = \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=1}^k \frac{ {|\langle \phi_i^l |H|\phi_0 \rangle |}^2 }
{ \langle \phi_0 |H|\phi_0 \rangle - \langle \phi_i^l |H|\phi_i^l \rangle }
\end{equation}
the ``average'' perturbative energy contribution, the space configurations were ordered according
to this contribution and those determinants contributing the most selected.
The CI wavefunction was then constructed
by using the selected configurations, $|\phi_0\rangle$, and
all single excitations. A few months later, a similar idea using the very same perturbative criterion
was introduced independently by Whitten and Hackmeyer.\cite{Whitten_1969} In addition, they
proposed to improve step-by-step the CI expansion by iterating the selection step to reach
the most important determinants beyond
double-excitations.
In 1973 Malrieu and collaborators\cite{huron_jcp_1973} presented the CIPSI method (and later on
an improved version of it\cite{cipsi_1983}). In CIPSI the construction of the multirefence
variational space is essentially identical to that of Whiten and Hackmeyer.
However, in order to better describe the dynamical correlation effects poorly reproduced by
the multireference space, a perturbational calculation of the remaining
correlation contributions was proposed. In applications the perturbational part is usually important
from both a qualitative and quantitative point of view.\\
The CIPSI algorithm being our practical scheme for generating selected CI expansions,
let us now present its main steps.\\
$\bullet$ Step 0: Start from a given determinant ({\it e.g.} the Hartree-Fock determinant) or set of determinants, thus defining
an initial reference subspace: $S_0=\{|D_0\rangle,...\}$. Diagonalize $H$ within $S_0$ and get the ground-state energy $ E_0^{(0)}$ and eigenvector:
\begin{equation}
|\Psi_0^{(0)}\rangle= \sum_{i \in S_0} c_i^{(0)} |D_i \rangle
\end{equation}
Here and in what follows, a superscript on various quantities is used to
indicate the iteration number.\\
Then, do iteratively ($n=0,...$):\\
{$\bullet$ Step 1}: Collect all {\it different} determinants $|D_{k}\rangle$ connected by
$H$ to $|\Psi_0^{(n)}\rangle$, that is
\begin{equation}
\langle \Psi_0^{(n)}|H|D_{k}\rangle \ne 0
\end{equation}
and not belonging to the reference space $S_{n}$.\\
{$\bullet$ Step 2}: Compute the small energy change of the total energy due to each connected
determinant as evaluated at second-order perturbation theory
\begin{equation}
\delta e(|D_{k}\rangle)=-\frac{{|\langle \Psi_0^{(n)}|H|D_{k}\rangle|}^2}{H_{kk}-E_0^{(n)}}
\label{e2pert}
\end{equation}
{$\bullet$ Step 3}: Add the determinant $|D_{k^*}\rangle$ associated with the largest $|\delta e|$ to the reference subspace:
$$S_{n} \rightarrow S_{n+1}= S_{n} \cup \{|D_{k*} \rangle\}$$\\
Of course, instead of adding only one determinant a group of determinants can be selected using
a threshold. This is what is actually done in practice.\\
{$\bullet$ Step 4}: Diagonalize $H$ within $S_{n+1}$ to get:
\begin{equation}
|\Psi_0^{(n+1)}\rangle= \sum_{i \in S_{n+1}} c_i^{(n+1)} |D_i\rangle \;\;\; {\rm with}\;\;\; E_0^{(n+1)}
\label{psi_cip}
\end{equation}
{$\bullet$} Go to step 1 or stop if the target size for the reference subspace has been reached.\\
Denoting $N_{\rm dets}$ the final number of determinants, the resulting ground-state
$|\Psi_0(N_{\rm dets})\rangle$ is the variational CIPSI solution. It is the expansion
used in DMC to contruct the determinantal part of the trial wavefunction.
A second step in CIPSI is the calculation of a perturbational estimate of the correlation energy left
between the variational CIPSI energy and the exact FCI one. At second order, this
contribution writes
\begin{equation}
E_{PT2}= - \sum_{k \in \mathcal{M}} \frac{ { {|\langle \Psi_0(N_{\rm dets})|H|D_k} \rangle|}^2}{H_{kk}- E_0(N_{\rm dets})}
\label{pt2}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{M}$ denotes the set of all determinants not belonging to the reference space
and connected to the CIPSI expansion $|\Psi_0(N_{\rm dets})\rangle$
by $H$ (single and double excitations only) and $E_0(N_{\rm dets})$ the variational CIPSI
energy. In practice, this contribution allows to recover a major part of the remaining correlation
energy.\\
At this point a number of remarks are in order:\\
i.) Although the selection scheme is presented here for computing the ground-state eigenvector only, no special difficulties
arise when generalizing the scheme to a finite number of states (see, {\it e.g.}\cite{cipsi_1983})\\
ii.) The decomposition of the Hamiltonian $H$ underlying
the perturbative second-order expression introduced in step 2 is
known as the Epstein-Nesbet
partition.\cite{en1,en2} This decomposition is not unique, other possible choices are the M{\o}ller-Plesset partition\cite{mp} or the barycentric one,\cite{huron_jcp_1973}
see discussion in \cite{cipsi_1983}.\\
iii.) Instead of calculating the energetic change perturbatively, expression (\ref{e2pert}), it can be preferable to employ
the non-perturbative expression resulting from the diagonalization of $H$ into the two-dimensional basis consisting of
the vectors $|\Psi_0^{(n)}\rangle$ and $|D_{k}\rangle$. Simple algebra shows that the energetic change is given by
\begin{equation}
\delta e(|D_k\rangle)=
\frac{1}{2} \left[H_{kk} - E_0(N_{\rm dets})\right]
\left[1-\sqrt{1 + \frac{4 {|\langle \Psi_0^{(n)}|H|D_k \rangle|}^2}{{[H_{kk}-E_0(N_{\rm dets})]}^2}}\right]
\label{e2ex}
\end{equation}
In the limit of small transition matrix elements, $\langle \Psi_0^{(n)}|H|D_k \rangle$, both expressions (\ref{e2pert}) and (\ref{e2ex}) coincide.
The non-perturbative formula is used in our applications.\\
iv.) The implementation of this algorithm can be performed using limited amount of central memory. On the other hand, the CPU time required
is essentially proportional to $N_{\rm dets} N_{\rm occ}^2 N_{\rm virt}^2$ where $N_{\rm occ}$ is the number of occupied molecular
orbitals and $N_{\rm virt}$ the number of virtual orbitals.
\subsection{Selected CI variants}
As already pointed out selecting the most important determinants of the FCI
expansion is a so natural idea that, since the pioneering work of Bender and
Davidson\cite{bender_pr_1969} and Whitten
and Hackmeyer,\cite{Whitten_1969} several variants of SCI approaches have been proposed.
In practice, the actual differences
between approaches are usually rather minor and most ideas and technical aspects seem to have
been re-discovered several times by independent groups. To give a fair account of the subject
and an exhaustive list of references is thus difficult. Here, we limit ourselves to
the references we are aware of, namely
\cite{bender_pr_1969,Whitten_1969,Hackmeyer_1971,langhoff_ijqc_1973,huron_jcp_1973,
buenker_1974,buenker_1975,buenker_1978,bruna_1980,buenker_1981,cipsi_1983,cimiraglia_jcp_1985,
cimiraglia_jcc_1987,harrison_1991,cimiraglia_ijqc_1996,Angeli_1997_I,Angeli_1997_II,Angeli_2001,Bunge_2006,Roth_2007,Roth_2009,mcci,evangelista_jcp_2014,tubman_2016,tubman_cyrus_2016}.
Regarding more specifically CIPSI, there has been a sustained research activity
conducted during the 80's and 90's by research groups in Toulouse (Malrieu and coll.),
Pisa (Angeli, Persico, Cimiraglia and coll.), and then Ferrara (Angeli, Cimiraglia) including the
development at Pisa of a very efficient CIPSI code
using diagrammatic techniques\cite{cipsi_code,cimiraglia_jcp_1985,cimiraglia_ijqc_1996}.
Thanks to all this,
CIPSI has been extensively applied for years by several groups to a variety of
accurate studies of ground and excited states and potential energy
surfaces (see, for example
\cite{Povill_1992,Illas_1991a,Illas_1991,Millie_1986,Persico_1991,Illas_1988,Cabrol_1996,Cabrol_1996,
Angeli_1996,Milli__2000,M_dl_1997,Cattaneo_1999,Li_2011,Mennucci_2001,Novoa_1988,Aymar_2006,Aymar_2005})
Finally, note that in the last years our group has developped its own CIPSI code,
Quantum Package. This code has been designed to be
particularly easy to install, run and modify; it can be freely downloaded at \cite{quantum_package}.
\subsection{FCI-QMC as a stochastic selected CI approach}
Full Configuration Interaction Quantum Monte Carlo (FCI-QMC) is a method for solving stochastically
the FCI equations.\cite{booth_jcp_2009, cleland_jcp_2010} Introducing as in DMC an imaginary time $t$ the coefficients $c_i$ of
the CI expansion, Eq.(\ref{ciexp}), are evolved in time using the operator $[1-\tau (H-E)]$ as small-time propagator
\begin{equation}
{\bf c}(t+\tau) =[1-\tau(H-E)] {\bf c}(t)
\label{ele}
\end{equation}
${\bf c}$ being the vector of coefficients, $E$ some reference energy, and $\tau$ the time step.
After $n$ steps the coefficients are given by
\begin{equation}
{\bf c}(t) = [1-\tau(H-E)]^n {\bf c}(t=0).
\label{eqFCI}
\end{equation}
In the long-time limit ($t=n\tau$ large) the vector ${\bf c}$ converges
to the exact CI vector (independently on initial conditions ${\bf c}$(t=0) provided that
$\langle {\bf c}$(t=0)$|{\bf c}\rangle \ne 0$
and for a sufficiently small time step).
As in all QMC methods, a set of walkers is introduced for sampling coefficients and
a few simple stochastic rules realizing {\it in average} the action of $H$ according to
Eq.(\ref{ele}) are introduced (spawning, death/cloning and annihilation).
Note that equations of evolution (\ref{eqFCI}) are similar to those of continuous DMC
(electrons moving in ordinary space) where a small-time expression of operator
$e^{-\tau (H-E)}$ is used, and are essentially identical to the equations of lattice DMC
(see {\it e.g.},\cite{van_Bemmel_1994})
The two main differences of FCIQMC with other QMC approaches are
the fact that no trial vector is introduced (thus, avoiding the fixed-node error)
and that the stochastic rules used are particularly efficient in attenuating
the sign instability inherent to all stochastic simulations of fermionic systems
(annihilation at each MC step of walkers of opposite sign on occupied determinants
and use of the initiator approximation).
At a given time $t$ the CI expansion is stochastically realized by the distribution
of walkers as
$$
|\Psi\rangle = \sum_i n_i |D_i\rangle
$$
where $n_i$ is the sum of the signed weight of walkers on Slater determinant $|D_i\rangle$
($M=\sum_i |n_i|$= total number of walkers).
This wavefunction is the counterpart of the CIPSI expansion at iteration $n$, Eq.(\ref{psi_cip}).
As in CIPSI at the next step $t+\tau$ (next iteration $n+1$) new determinants will appear.
In FCI-QMC it is realized through spawning.
Some determinants may also disappear through the action
of the diagonal part of the Hamiltonian $[1-\tau (H_{ii}-E)]$ (death/cloning step). These two
steps are designed to reproduce in average the action of the propagator on determinant $D_i$
$$
[1-\tau (H-E)]|D_i\rangle = [1-\tau (H_{ii}-E)]|D_i\rangle -\tau \sum_{k \ne i}
H_{ik}|D_k\rangle.
$$
In CIPSI a given determinant $|D_i\rangle$ is selected only once during
iterations via Eq.(\ref{e2pert}).
In latter iterations it is included in the reference space and does not participate
anymore to the selection. Starting from some initial determinant (usually the HF determinant)
the probability of selecting $|D_i\rangle$ at some given iteration $n$ is related to the
existence of a series of $(n-1)$ intermediate determinants $(|D_{i_1}\rangle,|D_{i_2}\rangle,
...,|D_{i_k}\rangle,...)$ different from $|D_i\rangle$
and connecting it to the initial determinant so that the product
$$
\prod_k \frac{|H_{i_{k+1}i_k}|^2}{H_{i_{k+1}i_k}-E_0}
$$
is large compared to products corresponding to other series of intermediate determinants.
In FCI-QMC a determinant $|D_i\rangle$ is spawned (selected) from $|D_j\rangle$
according to the magnitude of $H_{ii}$ and -in contrast with CIPSI- with no direct
dependence on the inverse of $(H_{ii}-E_0)$.
However, during MC iterations the number of walkers on a given determinant evolves in time
according to the death/cloning step and leads to a weighted contribution of
determinants to spawning. After integration in time the weight of the determinants $|D_i\rangle$
can be estimated to be
about $\int dt e^{-t(H_{ii}-E_0)}$ that is,
$\sim \frac{1}{H_{ii}-E_0}$ for large enough time.
As seen, FCI-QMC and CIPSI are in close connection.
\section{Applications of CIPSI}
\label{results}
\subsection{The water molecule}
\label{cipsi_water}
To exemplify CIPSI all-electron calculations for the water molecule
using basis sets of various sizes are presented. In our first example we propose to reproduce
the density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) calculation of Chan and Head-Gordon\cite{Chan_2003}
at geometry ($R_{OH}=1 \AA,\theta_{OH}=104.5^{\circ}$) and using the
``Roos Augmented Double Zeta ANO''
basis set consisting of 41 orbitals\cite{Schuchardt_2007,JCC:JCC9}. The
full CI Hilbert space contains about $5.6\;10^{11}$ determinants (no spin or space symmetries
taken into account).
Calculations have been carried out using our perturbatively selected CI program
Quantum Package.\cite{quantum_package}
The energy convergence as a function of the number of selected determinants in
different situations is presented in Figure \ref{chan}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=0.9\columnwidth]{cano_nat.pdf}
\caption{Energy convergence of the variational and full CIPSI energies as a function
of the number of selected determinants using canonical and natural orbitals. Energy in a.u.}
\label{chan}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Four different curves are shown together with the DMRG energy value of -76.31471(1)
of Chan and Head-Gordon\cite{Chan_2003} (solid horizontal line).
The two upper curves represent the CIPSI variational energy
as a function of the number of selected determinants up to
750 000 using either canonical or natural molecular orbitals.
Natural orbitals have been obtained by
diagonalizing the first-order density matrix built with the largest expansion
obtained using canonical orbitals.
As seen the convergence of both variational energies is very rapid. Using canonical orbitals
an energy of -76.31239 a.u. is obtained with 750 000 determinants, a value differing from the
FCI one by only 2.3 millihartree (about 1.4 kcal/mol).
As known the accuracy of CI calculations is significantly enhanced
when using natural orbitals.\cite{Davidson1972235} Here, it is clearly the case and
the lowest energy reached is now -76.31436 a.u. with an error of 0.35 millihartree (about
0.2 kcal/mol). When adding the second-order energy correction $E_{PT2}$, Eq.(\ref{pt2}),
the energy convergence is much improved (two lower curves of Figure \ref{chan}).
The kcal/mol (chemical) accuracy is reached
with only 1000 and 4000 determinants using canonical and natural orbitals, respectively.
The best CIPSI energy including second-order correction and obtained with canonical orbitals
is -76.31452 a.u. When using natural orbitals
the energy is found to converge with five decimal places to the value of -76.31471 a.u.,
in perfect agreement with the DMRG result of Chan and Head-Gordon, -76.31471(1) a.u.
Let us emphasize that approaching the FCI limit with such a level of accuracy and so few
determinants (compared to the
total number of $5.6\;10^{11}$) is particularly striking and is one of the most remarkable
features of SCI approaches.
To illustrate the possibility of making calculations with much larger basis sets,
results obtained with
the correlation-consistent polarized core-valence basis sets, cc-pCV$n$Z,
with $n$ going from 2 to 5 are presented. The geometry chosen is now the experimental
equilibrium geometry, $R_{OH}=0.9572$ \AA {} and $\theta_{OH}=104.52^{\circ}$.
The number of basis set functions are 28, 71, 174
and 255 for cc-pCVDZ, cc-pCVTZ,cc-pCVQZ, and cc-pCV5Z, respectively.
The total number of determinants of the FCI
Hilbert space with such basis sets are
about $1\,10^{10}$,$1.7\,10^{14}$,$1.6\,10^{18}$, and $7.5\,10^{19}$,
respectively.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.\columnwidth]{e_h2o_cipsi.pdf}
\caption{Convergence of the energy with the number of selected determinants
(logarithmic scale). The graph on the left displays the variational energy,
and the graph on the right shows the energy with the perturbative correction, Eq.(\ref{pt2}).}
\label{ecipsi}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
On the left part of Figure \ref{ecipsi} the convergence of the ground-state variational energy
obtained for each basis set is shown.
As seen, the convergence is still possible with such larger basis sets.
On the right part,
the full CIPSI energy curves $(E_{var} + E_{PT2})$ are presented; each curve is found to converge with a good accuracy
to the full CI limit.
\subsection{Generalization: The G1 set}
In contrast with the exact Full-CI approach which takes into account
the entire set of determinants and is thus rapidly unfeasible,
CIPSI can be used for much larger systems. The exact limits depend of course on the size
of the basis set used, the number of electrons, and also on the level of convergence asked for when
approaching the full CI limit. To illustrate the feasibility of CIPSI for larger systems
we present systematic all-electron calculations for the G1 benchmark set of Pople
and collaborators.\cite{g2} The set is composed of 55 molecules and 9 different atoms.
The cc-pVDZ and cc-pVTZ basis sets have been used. For all systems and both basis sets a quasi-FCI
convergence has been reached.
In Figure \ref{g1_1} the number of selected determinants needed
to recover 99\% of the correlation energy at CIPSI variational level (cc-pVDZ basis set) is
plotted for each molecule or atom. For each system results are given either for
canonical or natural orbitals.
Depending on the importance of the multiconfigurational character of the system,
this number may vary considerably (from a few tens to about 10$^7$).
As expected, the number of determinants needed using natural orbitals is most of the times smaller
and sometimes comparable. Figure \ref{g1_2} is similar to the preceding figure, except that numbers
are given now for a full CIPSI calculation including the second-order energy correction and that
a much greater accuracy corresponding to 99.9\% of the correlation energy is targeted.
As seen, it is remarkable that such a high precision can be reached for all systems with a number of
determinants not exceeding $\sim 10^7$. In contrast with variational
calculations, it should be noted that the use of natural orbitals does not systematically
improve the convergence.
Finally, some comparison with accurate CCSD(T)
calculations performed using the same basis sets and geometries are presented. In Figure \ref{ccsdt}
the distribution of errors in atomization energies calculated with both CCSD(T) and CIPSI methods are
plotted. For the cc-pVDZ basis set, CCSD(T) and CIPSI curves are very similar, indicating that
CCSD(T) calculations have also reached the quasi full CI limit. For the larger cc-pVTZ basis set,
the two curves remain similar but some significant differences show up with
CIPSI results more distributed toward small errors due to a better description of multireference
systems.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.1\columnwidth]{g2_Variational.pdf}
\caption{Number of selected determinants required to recover 99\%
of the total correlation energy at CIPSI/cc-pVDZ variational level. Results for canonical and natural orbitals
are given.}
\label{g1_1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.1\columnwidth]{g2_Perturbative.pdf}
\caption{Number of selected determinants required to recover 99.9\%
of the total correlation energy at full CIPSI/cc-pVDZ level $(E_{var} + E_{PT2})$.
Results for canonical and natural orbitals
are given.}
\label{g1_2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.\columnwidth]{g2.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of errors in atomization energies for the whole G1 set of atomic and molecular
systems calculated with CIPSI and CCSD(T). Results shown for cc-pVDZ and cc-pVTZ basis sets.}
\label{ccsdt}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Using CIPSI nodes in DMC}
\label{dmc}
\subsection{Motivations}
In DMC the standard practice is to introduce compact trial wavefunctions
reproducing as much as possible the mathematical and physical properties of
the exact wave function. Next, the ``best'' nodes are determined through optimization
of the parameters of the trial wavefunction in a preliminary variational Monte Carlo (VMC) run.
The objective function to minimize is either
the variational energy associated with the trial wavefunction or the variance of
the Hamiltonian (or a combination of both). A number of algorithms have been
elaborated to perform this important practical step as
efficiently as possible.\cite{Filippi_2000,Schautz_2002,Umrigar_2005,Scemama_2006,Toulouse_2007,Toulouse_2008}
No limitations existing in QMC for the choice of
the functional form of the trial wavefunction, many different expressions have been
introduced (see, {\it e.g.} \cite{mosko,sorella,mitas,rios,goddard,fili_vb,braida,bouabca}).
However, the most popular one is certainly the Jastrow-Slater trial wavefunction
expressed as a short expansion over a set of Slater determinants
multiplied by a global Jastrow factor describing explicitly the
electron-electron and electron-electron-nucleus interactions and,
in particular, imposing the electron-electron cusp conditions
associated with the zero-interelectronic distance limit of the true wavefunction.
In the DMC-CIPSI approach the determinantal part of the trial wavefunction
is built using systematic CIPSI expansions.
The main motivation is that CI approaches provide a simple, deterministic, and systematic way
of constructing wavefunctions of controllable quality. In a given one-particle basis set,
the wavefunction is improved by increasing the number of determinants, up to the Full
CI (FCI) limit. Then, by increasing the basis set, the wavefunction can be further improved,
up to the complete basis set (CBS) limit where the exact solution of the continuous
electronic Schr{\"o}dinger equation is reached. The CI nodes, which are defined as the zeroes of
the expansion, are also expected to follow such a systematic improvement, thus
facilitating the control of the fixed-node error. A second important motivation is that
the stochastic optimization step can be avoided since a systematic way of improving
the wavefunction is now at our disposal. The optimal CI coefficients
are obtained by the (deterministic) diagonalization of the Hamiltonian matrix
in the basis set of Slater determinants. It is a simple and robust step which
leads to a unique set of coefficients. Furthermore, it can be made automatic,
an important feature in the perspective of designing a fully black-box QMC code.
Finally, using {\it deterministically} constructed nodal structures greatly facilitates
the use of nodes evolving {\it smoothly} as a function of any parameter of the Hamiltonian.
It is important when calculating potential energy surfaces (see, our application to the
F$_2$ molecule,\cite{giner_jcp_2015}) or
response properties under external fields.
The main price to pay for such advantages is of course the need of
considering much larger multideterminant expansions (from tens of thousands up to a few millions)
than in standard DMC implementations where compactness of the trial wavefunction is searched for.
However, efficient algorithms
have been proposed to perform such calculations\cite{Nukala_2009,Clark_2011,Weerasinghe_2014}.
Very recently, we have also presented an efficient algorithm
for computing very large CI expansions. Its main ideas
are briefly summarized in section \ref{largedets} below.
\subsection{Toward a better control of the fixed-node approximation}
A remarkable property systematically observed so far in our DMC applications using
large CIPSI expansions\cite{giner_2013,scemama_jcp_2014,giner_jcp_2015} is that,
except for a possible transient regime at small number of determinants,\cite{note2} the fixed-node
error resulting from the use of CIPSI nodes is found to decrease monotonically,
both as a function of the number of selected determinants, $N_{dets}$, and of the basis set size, $M$.
This result is illustrated here in the case of the water
molecule at equilibrium geometry. Results shown here complement our recent
benchmark study on water.\cite{caffarel_jcp_2016}.
In Figure \ref{fig:h2o_dmc} all-electron fixed-node
energies obtained with DMC-CIPSI as a function of the number of selected determinants for the first
four cc-pCVnZ basis set (n=2-5) are reported. Calculations have been performed using the
variational CIPSI expansions of the preceding
subsection. In practice, DMC simulations have been realized using our general-purpose
QMC program QMC=Chem (downloadable at \cite{qmcchem}). A minimal Jastrow
prefactor taking care of the electron-electron cusp condition is employed and molecular orbitals
are slightly modified at very short electron-nucleus distances to impose exact
electron-nucleus cusp conditions. The time step used, $\tau= 2 \times 10^{-4}$ a.u.,
has been chosen small enough to make the finite time step error not observable
with statistical fluctuations. As seen on the figure the convergence of DMC energies both
as a function of the number of determinants and of the basis set are almost reached.
The value of $-76.43744(18)$ a.u. obtained with the largest basis set and 1 423 377 determinants
is, to the best of our knowledge, the lowest upper bound reported so far,
the experimentally derived estimate of the exact nonrelativistic energy
being -76.4389(1) a.u.\cite{klopper_mp_2001}
Thanks to our recent algorithm for calculating very large number
of determinants in DMC\cite{preprint_multidets} (see, section \ref{largedets} below),
the increase of CPU time
for the largest calculation including more than 1.4 million of determinants
compared to the same calculation limited to the Hartree-Fock determinant
is only $\sim 235$.
In practice, the possibility of calculating fixed-node energies displaying such a regular behavior
as a function of the number of determinants and molecular orbitals
is clearly attractive in terms of
control of the fixed-node error. For example, in our benchmark study of the water
molecule\cite{caffarel_jcp_2016}
it was possible to extrapolate the DMC energies obtained with each cc-pCVnZ basis set
as a function of the cardinal number $n$, as routinely
done in deterministic CI calculations. Using a standard $1/n^3$ law a very accurate
DMC-CIPSI energy value of -76.43894(12) a.u. was obtained, in full agreement with the estimate
exact value of -76.4389(1) a.u.\cite{caffarel_jcp_2016}
At this point, we emphasize that the observed property of systematic decrease of the energy
as a function of the number of determinants is known
not to be systematically true for a general CI expansion (see,
{\it e.g.} \cite{flad_book_1997}). Here, its validity may probably be attributed to the fact that
determinants are selected in a hierarchical way (the most important ones first),
so that the wavefunctions quality increases step by step, and so the quality of nodes.
However, from a mathematical point of view, such a property
is far from being trivial. There is no simple argument why the FCI nodes obtained from
minimization of the {\it variational} energy with respect to the multideterminant coefficients
would lead to the best nodal structure
(minimum of the {\it fixed-node} energy with respect to such coefficients). In a general
space (not necessarily a Hilbert space of determinants)
it is easy to construct a wavefunction of poor quality having a high variational
energy but exact nodes and, then, to exhibit a wavefunction with a much lower energy but wrong nodes.
To demonstrate the validity or not of the observed property in a finite space of determinants
built with molecular orbitals expanded in a finite basis set remains to be done.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{e_h2o_dmc.pdf}
\caption{DMC energy of the water molecule as a function of the number of determinants in the trial wave function (logarithmic scale). The horizontal solid line indicates the experimentally derived
estimate of
the exact nonrelativistic energy.\cite{klopper_mp_2001}}
\label{fig:h2o_dmc}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Evaluating very large number of determinants in QMC}
\label{largedets}
The algorithm we use to run DMC calculations with a very large number of determinants
(presently up to a few millions) has been presented in detail in \cite{preprint_multidets}.
Its efficiency is sufficiently high to
perform converged DMC calculations with a number of determinants up to a few millions
of determinants. In the case of the chlorine atom discussed in \cite{preprint_multidets}
a trial wavefunction including about 750 000 determinants has been used with a computational
increase of about 400 compared to a single-determinant calculation. As already mentioned above,
in the benchmark calculation of the water molecule\cite{caffarel_jcp_2016}
up to 1 423 377 determinants have been used for a computational increase of only $\sim$ 235.\\
The main ideas of the algorithm are as follows.\\
$\bullet$ {\it O($\sqrt{N_{dets}}$)-scaling}. A first observation is that the determinantal
part of trial wavefunctions built
with $N_{dets}$ determinants can be rewritten as a function of a set of {\it different}
{\it spin}-specific
determinants $D^\sigma_i({\bf R}_\sigma)$ ($\sigma=\uparrow,\downarrow$)
as follows
\begin{equation} \label{eq:main}
\Psi_{Det}({\bf R}) = \sum_{i=1}^{N_{\rm dets}^\uparrow} \sum_{j=1}^{N_{\rm dets}^\downarrow} C_{ij}
D^\uparrow_i({\bf R}_\uparrow) D^\downarrow_j({\bf R}_\downarrow)
\end{equation}
where ${\bf C}$ is a matrix of
coefficients of size $N_{\rm dets}^\uparrow \times N_{\rm dets}^\downarrow$,
${\bf R}=({\bf r}_1,...,{\bf r}_N)$ denotes the full set of
electron space coordinates, and ${\bf R}_\uparrow$ and ${\bf R}_\downarrow$ the
two subsets of coordinates associated with $\uparrow$ and $\downarrow$ electrons.
In standard CI expansions the number of unique
spin-specific determinants is much smaller than $N_{dets}$ and typically scales as $\sqrt{N_{dets}}$.
It is true for FCI expansions where all possible determinants are considered.
Indeed, $N_{\rm dets}^\sigma$ attains its maximal value of $\binom {N_{\rm MO}}{N_\sigma}$
and since $N_{\rm dets}$ is given as $N_{\rm dets}^\uparrow \times N_{\rm dets}^\downarrow$,
the number of unique spin-specific determinants $D^\sigma({\bf R})$
is of order $\sqrt{N_{\rm dets}}$. However, it is in general also true
for the usual truncated expansions (CASSCF, CISD, etc.) essentially because the
numerous excitations implying multiple excitations of spin-like electrons plays a marginal role
and have a vanishing weight.\\
$\bullet$ {\it Optimized Sherman-Morrison updates}. As proposed in a number of works,\cite{Nukala_2009,Clark_2011,Weerasinghe_2014}
we calculate the determinants and their derivatives
using the Sherman-Morrison (SM) formula for updating the inverse Slater matrices.
However, in contrast with other implementations, we have found more efficient
not to compare the Slater matrix to a common reference (typically, the Hartree-Fock determinant)
but instead to perform the Sherman-Morrison updates with respect to the
previously computed determinant $D_{i-1}^\sigma$.
To reduce the prefactor associated with this step
the list of determinants is sorted with a suitably chosen order
so that with high probability
successive determinants in the list differ only by one- or two-column substitution, thus
decreasing the average number of substitution performed.\\
$\bullet$ {\it Exploiting high-performance capabilities of present-day processors}.
This very practical aspect -- which is in general too much underestimated --
is far from being anecdotal since it allows us to gain important computational savings.
A number of important features include
the use of vector fused-multiply add (FMA)
instructions (that is, the calculation of \texttt{a=a+b*c} in one CPU cycle) for the innermost loops.
It is extremely
efficient and should be systematically searched for. Using such instructions (present in general-purpose processors),
up to eight FMA per CPU cycle can be performed in double precision. While computing loops, overheads
are also very costly and should be reduced/eliminated.
By taking care separately of the various parts of the loop
(peeling loop, scalar loop, vector loop, and tail loop) through size-specific and/or
hard-coded subroutines, a level of 100\% vectorized loops is reached in our code.
Another crucial point is to properly manage the data flow arriving to the processing unit.
As known, to be able to move data from the memory to the CPU with a sufficiently high data transfer to
keep the CPU busy is a major concern of modern calculations.
Then, it is not only important to make maximum use of the low-latency cache memories to
store intermediate data but also to maximize prefetching allowing
the processor to anticipate the use of the right data and instructions in advance.
To enhance prefetching the algorithm should allow the predictability
of the data arrival in the CPU (that is, avoid random access as much as possible).
It is this important aspect that has motivated us to use Sherman-Morrison updates,
despite the fact that a method like the Table method\cite{Clark_2011}
has formally a better scaling. Indeed, massive calculations of scalar products
at the heart of repeated uses of SM updates are so ideally adapted to
present-day processors that very high performances can
be obtained.\\
$\bullet$ {\it Improved truncation scheme.}
Instead of truncating the CI expansion according to the magnitude of the multideterminant
coefficients as usual done, we propose instead to remove spin-specific determinants
according to their total contribution to the norm
of the expansion. In this way, more determinants can be handled for a price corresponding to shorter
expansions.
To be more precise, we first observe that truncating the wavefunction according to the magnitude
of coefficients has the effect of removing elements of the sparse matrix ${\bf C}$
of Eq.(\ref{eq:main}). A reduction of the computational cost occurs
only when a full line ($\uparrow$) or a full column ($\downarrow$) of ${\bf C}$
contains only zeroes, in that case
the determinant ${\bf D}_\sigma$ can be removed from the calculation.
Now, by expressing the norm of the wave function as
\begin{equation}
{\cal N} = \sum_{i=1}^{N_{\rm dets}^\uparrow} \sum_{j=1}^{N_{\rm dets}^\downarrow} C_{ij}^2 =
\sum_{i=1}^{N_{\rm dets}^\uparrow} {\cal N}_i^\uparrow = \sum_{j=1}^{N_{\rm dets}^\downarrow} {\cal N}_j^\downarrow.
\label{eq:norm}
\end{equation}
it is possible to assign a contribution to the norm to each determinant. Then, all determinants
whose contribution to the norm is below some threshold
will be removed from the expansion.
This truncation scheme allows to eliminate the smallest number of coefficients needed to
obtain some computational gain. Moreover, the size-consistence property
of the wave function is expected to be approximately preserved by such
a truncation : when a $\sigma$-determinant is removed, it is
equivalent to removing the product of ${\bf D}_\sigma$ with
all the ${\bar \sigma}$-determinants of the wave function.
\section{Pseudopotentials for DMC using CIPSI}
\label{pseudo}
When using pseudopotentials a valence Hamiltonian is defined
\begin{equation}
H_{val} = H_{\rm loc} + V_{\rm ECP}
\end{equation}
where $H_{\rm loc}$ is the local part describing the kinetic energy, the Coulombic repulsion and the local
part of the effective core potentials (ECP).
\begin{equation}
H_{\rm loc} = -\frac{1}{2} \sum_i \nabla_i^2 + \sum_{i,\alpha} v_{\rm loc}(r_{i\alpha}) + \sum_{i<j}
\frac{1}{r_{ij}}
\end{equation}
and $V_{\rm ECP}$ the non-local part written as
\begin{equation}
V_{\rm ECP}= \sum_{i,\alpha} \sum_l v_l (r_{i \alpha}) \sum_{m=-l}^l Y_{lm}(\Omega_{i \alpha}) \int
d{\Omega^\prime_{i \alpha}} Y^*_{lm} ( \Omega^\prime_{i \alpha})
\end{equation}
where $v_l$ is a radial pseudopotential, $Y_{lm}$ is the spherical harmonic, $\alpha$
labels pseudo-ions.
The action of a non-local operator being difficult to sample in DMC,
$V_{\rm ECP}$ is ``localized'' by projecting
it on the trial wavefunction. The localized form of the pseudo-potential is thus defined as
\begin{equation}
V^{\rm loc}_{\rm ECP}= \frac{V_{\rm ECP}\Psi_T}{\Psi_T}
\end{equation}
and we are led back to standard DMC simulations using only local operators
at the price of introducing a new ``localization
approximation''. This error is usually minimized by
optimization of the trial wavefunction, see ref.\cite{casula}.
In practice, the necessity of numerically evaluating the localized potential is the main difference
with standard DMC calculations.
For each nucleus $\alpha$ and electron $i$, the two-dimensional angular integrals of the product of
each $Y_{lm}$ and the trial wavefunction (all electrons fixed except the $i$th-electron moved
over the sphere centered on nucleus $\alpha$ and of radius $r_{i \alpha}$) must be performed.
By choosing the axes oriented
such that the $i$th electron is on the $z$ axis, the contribution coming from the pair $(i,\alpha)$
is given by\cite{mitas_jcp_1991}
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i,\alpha} \sum_l \frac{2l+1}{4\pi} v_l (r_{i \alpha})
\int d{\Omega^\prime_{i \alpha}} P_l( cos \theta^\prime) \frac{ \psi_T ({\bf r}_1, ...{\bf r}^\prime_i,...,{\bf r}_N)}
{\psi_T({\bf r}_1,..{\bf r}_i,.. {\bf r}_N)}
\end{equation}
where $P_l$ denotes a Legendre polynomial. Because of the Jastrow factor,
the integrals involved cannot be computed analytically.
The standard solution is to evaluate them numerically using some quadrature for the sphere.
Here, the CI form allows to perform the integration exactly, as already proposed
some time ago.\cite{Hurley_1987,Hammond_1987}
Note that although no Jastrow prefactor is used here when localizing
the pseudo-potential operator, such a prefactor can still be used for the DMC simulation itself.
A first advantage is that the calculation is significantly faster: in
practice, the computational cost is the same as evaluating the Laplacian of the wave function
and a gain proportional to the number of
quadrature points is obtained. A second advantage is the possibility of a better
control of the localization error by increasing the number of determinants.
To illustrate these statements, we have chosen to calculate the atomization energy of the
C$_2$ molecule at the Hartree-Fock, CIPSI, DMC-HF and DMC-CIPSI levels with and without
pseudopotentials. All-electron HF or CIPSI calculations have been performed with
the cc-pVTZ basis set. To allow meaningful comparisons, $1s$ molecular orbitals have been kept
frozen in all-electron CIPSI calculations.
Pseudopotential calculations were done using the pseudopotentials of Burkatzki
\textit{et al.}\cite{burkatzki} with the corresponding VTZ basis set.
The electron-nucleus cusps of all the wave functions were
imposed,\cite{maCusp,Kussmann_cusp,per:cusp} and no Jastrow factor was used.
For the sake of comparison, the same time step ($5 \times 10^{-4}$ au) was used for all-electron and
pseudopotential calculations, although a much larger time step could have been
taken with pseudopotentials.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lccccc}
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{Energy} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Number of determinants} \\
& C (a.u.) & C$_2$ (a.u.) & AE (kcal/mol) & C & C$_2$ \\
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{l}{Hartree-Fock} \\
all-$e$ & -37.6867 & -75.4015 & 17.6 & 1 & 1 \\
pseudo- & -5.3290 & -10.6880 & 18.8 & 1 & 1 \\
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{l}{CIPSI} \\
all-$e$ & -37.7810 & -75.7852 & 140.1 & 3796 & $10^6$ \\
pseudo- & -5.4280 & -11.0800 & 140.6 & 3882 & $10^6$ \\
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{l}{DMC-HF} \\
all-$e$ & -37.8293(1) & -75.8597(3) & 126.3(2) & 1 & 1 \\
pseudo- & -5.4167(1) & -11.0362(3) & 127.2(2) & 1 & 1 \\
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{l}{DMC-CIPSI, $\epsilon = 10^{-6}$} \\
all-$e$ & -37.8431(2) & -75.9166(2) & 144.6(2) & 3497 & 173553 \\
pseudo- & -5.4334(1) & -11.0969(3) & 144.3(2) & 3532 & 231991 \\
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{l}{Estimated exact AE \cite{Gingerich_1994,zpe_2007}} & 147$\pm$2 & & \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\caption{Comparison of all-electron (cc-pVTZ) and pseudopotential (BFD-VTZ) calculations of the atomization energy of C$_2$ with CIPSI wave functions. A threshold $\epsilon=10^{-6}$ was applied to the CIPSI wave functions as explained in text.}
\label{tab:pseudo}
\end{table}
The results presented in Table~\ref{tab:pseudo} show that all the atomization energies
obtained using pseudopotentials are in very good agreement with those obtained
with all-electron calculations at the same level of theory.
The DMC energies obtained with CIPSI trial wave functions are always below those
obtained with Hartree-Fock trial wave functions, and the error in the atomization energy
is reduced from 20 kcal/mol with HF nodes down to 3 kcal/mol with CIPSI nodes.
Calculations were performed on Intel Xeon E5-2680v3 processors.
Timings are given in Table~\ref{tab:timing}. For the carbon
atom the computational time needed for one walker to perform one complete Monte
Carlo step (all electrons moved) is the same with or without pseudopotentials.
For the C$_2$ molecule, the calculation is even faster with
pseudopotentials: A factor of about $1.5$ is gained with respect to the
all-electron calculation. This can be explained by the
computational effort saved due to the reduced size of Slater matrices
in the pseudopotential case (from $6\times6$ to $4\times4$) but, more importantly, by the fact
that the additional cost related to the calculation of the contributions
due to the pseudopotential is not enough important to reverse the situation.
In all-electron calculations, the variance is only slightly reduced when going from
the Hartree-Fock trial wave function to the CIPSI wave function (with frozen core).
Indeed, the largest part of the fluctuations comes from the lack of correlation of the core electrons.
In the calculations involving pseudopotentials, the decrease of the variance is
significant: a reduction by a factor of 2.4 and 3.2 is observed.
From a more general perspective, comparisons between all-electron and pseudopotential calculations
must take into account both the computational effort required in each case and the level
of fluctuations resulting from
the quality of the trial wavefunction. To quantify this,
we have reported in the table the number of CPU hours
required to obtain an error bar of 1 kcal/mol.
Using pseudopotentials for the C$_2$ molecule, it is found that the reduction of the variance due
to the improvement of the wave function with the multideterminant expansion
almost compensates the cost of the computation due to the additional 230~000
determinants : the CPU time needed to obtain a desired accuracy is only $1.2\times$
more than the single determinant calculation.
\begin{table}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
&\multicolumn{2}{c}{CPU time per DMC step}
&\multicolumn{2}{c}{CPU time to get a 1 kcal/mol} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Variance} \\
&\multicolumn{2}{c}{(milliseconds)} &\multicolumn{2}{c}{error (hours)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(a.u.)} \\
\cline{2-3} \cline{4-5} \cline{6-7}
& all-$e$ & pseudo- & all-$e$ & pseudo- & all-$e$ & pseudo- \\
\hline
DMC-HF & &&&&&\\
C & 0.0076 & 0.0078 & 1.54 & 1.18 & 7.858(3) & 0.3471(2) \\
C$_2$ & 0.0286 & 0.0186 & 14.95 & 10.35 & 16.208(7) & 1.1372(6) \\
\hline
DMC-CIPSI & &&&&& \\
C & 0.193 & 0.201 & 5.61 & 0.70 & 7.620(8) & 0.1084(4) \\
C$_2$ & 10.1 & 8.12 & 91.05 & 12.72 & 15.61(3) & 0.460(1) \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\caption{CPU time for one complete Monte Carlo step (one walker, all electrons moved), CPU time needed to reach an error on 1 kcal/mol, and variances associated with the HF and CIPSI trial wave functions (electron-nucleus cusp corrected).}
\label{tab:timing}
\end{table}
\section{Summary and some perspectives}
\label{conclu}
Let us first summarize the most important ideas and results presented in this work.\\
\\
i.) Selected Configuration Interaction approaches such as CIPSI are very efficient methods
for approaching the full CI limit with a number of determinants representing only a
tiny fraction of the full determinantal space. This is so because only the most important
determinants of the FCI expansion are perturbatively selected at each step of the iterative process.
We note that the recent FCI-QMC method of Alavi {\it et al.}\cite{booth_jcp_2009,
cleland_jcp_2010} uses essentially the same idea, except that in CIPSI the selection is done
deterministically instead of stochastically.
\\
\\
ii.) In constrast with exact FCI which becomes rapidly prohibitively expensive, CIPSI
allows to treat larger systems, while maintaining results of near-Full CI quality.
The exact practical limits depend of course on the size of the basis set used,
the number of active electrons, and also on the level of convergence asked for when
approaching the full CI limit. In this work, the CIPSI approach has been exemplified with
near-FCI quality all-electron calculations for the water molecule using a series of basis sets
of increasing size up to the cc-pCV5Z basis set and for the whole set of 55 molecules and 9 atoms
of the benchmark G1 set (cc-pVDZ basis set). In each case, the huge size of the FCI space forbids
exact FCI calculations. CIPSI has been applied to larger systems,
for example for calculating accurate total energies for the atoms of the $3d$
series,\cite{scemama_jcp_2014}
and for obtaining near-FCI quality results for the CuCl$_2$ molecule
(calculations including 63 electrons
and 25 active valence electrons).\cite{Caffarel_2014}
Note that by using Effective Core Potentials as described in section \ref{pseudo} even
larger systems can be treated.
\\
\\
iii.) We emphasize that the idea of selecting determinants is not limited
to the entire space of determinants but can be used to make CI expansion to converge
in a subset of determinants chosen {\it a priori}. For example, efficient and accurate
selected CASCI, CISD, or even MRCC\cite{mrcc_jcp_2016} calculations can be performed. Note that going beyond CASCI
and implementing a selected CASSCF approach (CASCI with optimization of molecular orbitals)
is also possible; this is let for further work.
However, note that a stochastic version of CASSCF within FCI-QMC framework has already been
implemented by Alavi {\it et al.}\cite{Thomas_jctc_2015}
\\
\\
iv.) CIPSI expansions can be used as determinantal part of the trial wavefunctions employed in
DMC calculations. In others words, we propose to use selected CI
nodes as approximation of the unknown exact nodes.
The basic motivation is
that CI approaches provide a simple,
deterministic, and systematic way to build wavefunctions
of controllable quality. In a given one-particle basis set,
the wavefunction is improved by increasing the number of
determinants, up to the FCI limit. Then, by increasing
the basis set, the wavefunction can be further improved,
up to the CBS limit where the exact
solution of the continuous electronic Schr\"odinger equation is reached. CI
nodes, defined as the zeroes of the CI expansions, are also
expected to display such a systematic improvement.
\\
\\
v.) The main result giving substance to the use of selected CIPSI nodes is that
in all applications realized so far the fixed-node error is found to decrease both
as a function of the number of selected determinants and of the size of the basis set.
Mathematically speaking, such a result is far from being trivial.
In practice, such a property is particularly useful in terms of
control of the fixed-node error.
\\
\\
vi.) From a practical point of view, the price to pay is the need of
considering much larger multideterminant expansions (from tens of thousands up to a few millions)
than in standard DMC where compactness of the trial wavefunction is usually searched for.
Indeed, computing at each of Monte Carlo step
the first and second derivatives of the trial wavefunction
(drift vector and local energy) is the hot spot of DMC.
However, efficient algorithms
have been proposed to perform such calculations\cite{Nukala_2009,Clark_2011,Weerasinghe_2014}. Here,
we have briefly summarized our recently introduced algorithm allowing to
compute $N$-determinant expansions issued from selected CI calculations
with a computational cost roughly proportional to $\sqrt{N}$ (with a small prefactor).
\\
\\
vii.) One key advantage of using CIPSI nodes is that their construction can be made
fully automatic. Coefficients of the CI expansion are obtained in a simple and deterministic
way by diagonalizing the Hamiltonian matrix and the solution is unique.
Furthermore, when approaching the FCI limit the resulting expansion becomes independent
on the type of molecular orbitals used (canonical, natural, Kohn-Sham, see Figure 8
of ref.\cite{Caffarel_2014}).
Another attractive feature is that the nodes built are reproducible and thus ``DMC models''
can be defined in the spirit of WFT or DFT {\it ab initio} approaches (HF/cc-pVnZ, MP2/6-31G, CCSD(T), DFT/B3LYP etc.)
Indeed, once the basis set has been specified, the nodes are unambiguously
defined at convergence of the DMC energy as a function of the number of selected determinants.
Furthermore, in this limit the nodal surfaces vary continuously as a function of the parameters of the
Hamiltonian. A particularly important example is the possibility of obtaining regular
potential energy surface (PES). This idea has been illustrated in a previous work on the
potential energy curve of the F$_2$ molecule.\cite{giner_jcp_2015} Furthermore,
it is also possible to reduce the ``non-parallelism'' error resulting from the use
of a trial wavefunction of non-uniform quality across the PES. This can be done for example
by using a variable number of selected determinants depending on the geometry
and chosen to lead to a constant second-order estimate of the remaining
correlation energy (constant-PT2 approach,\cite{giner_jcp_2015} ).
\\
\\
viii.) As in standard DMC approaches a Jastrow prefactor can be used to reduce statistical
fluctuations. However, in contrast with what is usually done, we do not propose
to re-optimize the determinantal CIPSI part
in presence of this Jastrow term. The main reason for that is not to lose
the advantages of using deterministically constructed nodal structures: Systematic
improvement of nodes as a function of the number of determinants and of the size of
the basis set, simplicity of construction of nodes and reproductibility, possibility of
optimizing a very large number of small coefficients in the CI expansion (no noise limiting
in practice the magnitude of optimizable coefficients), smooth evolution of nodes
under variation of an external parameter (geometry, external field), etc.
\\
\\
ix.) The price to pay for not re-optimizing the determinantal part in the presence of a Jastrow
is that for small basis sets larger fixed-node errors are usually obtained. However,
when increasing sufficiently the quality of basis set, it is no longer true as
illustrated for example in the case of the oxygen atom,\cite{giner_2013} the water
molecule,\cite{caffarel_jcp_2016} and the $3d$-transition
metal atoms\cite{scemama_jcp_2014} for which benchmark total energies have been obtained.
\\
\\
x.) CIPSI wavefunctions are particularly attractive when using non-local Effective Core
Potentials (ECP). Indeed, as already proposed some time ago,\cite{Hurley_1987,Hammond_1987}
CI expansions allow the analytical calculation of the action of the non-linear part
of the pseudo-potential operator on the trial wavefunction.
In this way, the use of a numerical grid defined over the sphere is avoided
and a gain in computational effort
essentially proportional to the number of grid points is obtained.
Here, this idea has been illustrated in the case of the C$_2$ molecule.
\\
\\
Finally, let us briefly mention a number of topics presently under investigation.
\\
\\
xi.) The slow part of the CI convergence is known to result from
the absence of electron-electron cusp. In standard QMC approaches,
the short distance electron-electron behavior is introduced into the Jastrow prefactor
and its impact on nodes is taken into account by optimization of the full
trial wavefunction.
Under re-optimization, molecular orbitals are changed and the distribution of
multideterminant coefficients is modified with
a re-inforcement of coefficients associated with chemically meaningful determinants and
a reduction of the numerous small coefficients associated with the absence of cusp.
To keep the CIPSI as compact as possible and to eliminate this unphysical
and uncoherent background of small coefficients
a R12/F12 version of CIPSI is called for. We emphasize that
such an analytical and deterministic construction of the R12/F12 expansion is necessary
if we want to keep the advantages related to the deterministic
construction of nodes.
\\
\\
xii.) To treat even larger systems, the increase of the number of determinants in the CIPSI
expansion must be kept under control.
Instead of targeting the near full CI limit, simpler models
can be used in the spirit of what is
done in MRCC approaches\cite{mrcc_jcp_2016}
or by defining effective Hamiltonians in the reference space
modelling the effect of the external space
(so-called internally decontracted approaches).
\\
\\
xiii.) Finally, it is clear that systematic studies on difficult systems of various types are
needed to explore the potential and limits of the DMC-CIPSI approach.
\\
\\
{\it Acknowledgments.}
We would like to thank C. Angeli and P-F. Loos for their useful comments on the manuscript.
AS and MC thank the Agence Nationale pour la Recherche (ANR) for support through
Grant No ANR 2011 BS08 004 01.
This work was performed using HPC resources from CALMIP
(Toulouse) under allocation 2016-0510 and from GENCI-TGCC
(Grant 2016-08s015).
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
Two decades ago, the first large format bolometer cameras on single-dish submm telescopes discovered a population of galaxies that were forming stars at tremendous rates, the so-called submm galaxies \citep[SMGs,][]{Smail1997ApJ...490L...5S, Barger1998Natur.394..248B, Hughes1998Natur.394..241H, Blain2002PhR...369..111B}. Later, it was reported that these starbursts were predominantly at high redshift, $z \sim 1 - 3$ \citep{Chapman2005ApJ...622..772C, Simpson2014ApJ...788..125S}. One of the main problems of these single-dish submm observations is their large beams, typically $>10''$. This complicates the multi-wavelength counterpart identification in the absence of higher-resolution (sub)mm follow-up and prevents us from studying the morphology of dust emission, needed to help interpret the properties of the ISM in dusty starbursts.
Interferometric observations at arcsec and sub-arcsec resolution revealed that most SMGs are major mergers, both from morphological and kinematics arguments \citep[e.g.][]{Tacconi2008ApJ...680..246T,Engel2010ApJ...724..233E}. Building on early indications from radio imaging \citep{Ivison2007MNRAS.380..199I}, ALMA revealed that single-dish submm sources are normally resolved into several distinct components \citep{Karim2013MNRAS.432....2K,Hodge2013ApJ...768...91H}, although it is not clear that all of them are at the same redshift and, therefore, physically associated. Based on limited ALMA data, \cite{Ikarashi2015ApJ...810..133I} reported that the dust in SMGs at $z > 3$ is confined to a relatively compact region, with a FWHM size of $\sim 0.2''$ or $\sim 1.5\,{\rm kpc}$. This average value is compatible with the size of SMGs at slightly lower redshifts reported in \cite{Simpson2015ApJ...799...81S}. Due to the still modest spatial resolution in those works, it was not possible to explore any sub-galactic structure within the SMGs. Using observations at higher spatial resolution ($\sim 0.1''$), \cite{Oteo2016arXiv160107549O} studied the morphology of two interacting starbursts at $z \sim 4.4$. The small beam size resolved the internal structure of the two sources, and revealed that the dust emission is smoothly distributed on $\sim {\rm kpc}$ scales, in contrast with the more irregular [CII] emission.
Analysing strongly lensed sources offers an alternative to high-spatial-resolution observations \citep{Swinbank2010Natur.464..733S,Negrello2010Sci...330..800N,Bussmann2013ApJ...779...25B,Bussmann2015ApJ...812...43B}. Arguably, the best example is the ALMA study for SDP.81 \citep{Vlahakis2015ApJ...808L...4A}, a strongly lensed starburst at $z \sim 3$ \citep{Negrello2014MNRAS.440.1999N,Dye2014MNRAS.440.2013D,Frayer2011ApJ...726L..22F} selected from the {\it Herschel}-ATLAS \citep{Eales2010PASP..122..499E}. \cite{Dye2015MNRAS.452.2258D} modelled the lensed dust and CO emission of SDP.81 \citep[see also][]{Rybak2015MNRAS.451L..40R,Rybak2015MNRAS.453L..26R} and the dynamical analysis presented in \cite{Swinbank2015ApJ...806L..17S} revealed that SDP.81 comprises at least five star-forming clumps, which are rotating with a disk-like velocity field. However, with lensed galaxies the results (specially those lensed by galaxy-scale potential wells) must rely on accurate lens modeling ensuring that all the recovered source-plane emission is real and not an artifact of the modeling itself. Furthermore, and importantly, even relatively bright intrinsic emission can lie below the detection threshold if the geometry is not favourable, giving a misleading picture.
Thanks to the unique sensitivity and long-baseline capabilities of ALMA, ultra-high-spatial resolution observations can be carried out, for the first time, in unlensed FIR-bright sources. In this work we present ultra-high-spatial resolution observations ($\sim 20 \, {\rm mas}$) in a pair of submm galaxies (SMGs) at $z = 3.442$ selected from {\sc ALMACAL} \citep{Oteo2016ApJ...822...36O}. The main difference between our and previous work \citep{Simpson2015ApJ...799...81S,Ikarashi2015ApJ...810..133I} is the use of a significant number of very long baselines, providing $\sim 10\times$ better spatial resolution. Furthermore, our in-field calibrator and subsequent self-calibration ensures near-perfect phase stability on the longest baselines. Additionally, we have two independent datasets in ALMA band 6 (B6) and band 7 (B7), which prove the reliability of the structure we see.
The paper is structured as follows: \S \ref{data_set_ALMACAL} presents the data set used in this work. \S \ref{section_redshift_confirmation_J1058} presents the redshift confirmation of our two sources and their FIR SED. In \S \ref{section_morphology_pc_scales} we discuss the morphology of the dust emission in our sources at $0.02''$ or $\sim 150\,{\rm pc}$ resolution. Finally, \S \ref{concluuuuu} summarizes the main conclusions of the paper. A \cite{Salpeter1955} IMF is assumed to derive star-formation rates (SFRs). assume a flat universe with $(\Omega_m, \Omega_\Lambda, h_0)=(0.3, 0.7, 0.7)$. For this cosmology, the angular scale is $\sim 7.3\,{\rm kpc}$ per arcsec at $z = 3.442$, the redshift of the sources under study.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{./figs/calibrator_map.eps}
\caption{Continuum map ($870 \, {\rm \mu m}$) of the two dusty starbursts at $z = 3.442$ (ALMACAL--1 and ALMACAL--2) discovered around the calibrator J1058+0133 at $z = 0.88$. The coordinates of the two sources can be found in Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}. The calibrator has been subtracted from the data in the $uv$ plane by using a point--source model and is located at the position marked by the red cross. Orange contours represent the jet emanating from J1058+0133, revealed by $3 \, {\rm mm}$ imaging. The image is $16''$ on each side, and the beam of the $870 \, {\rm \mu m}$ continuum observations is shown on the bottom left.
}
\vspace{5mm}
\label{fig_map_calibrator}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO65_spec_SMG1.eps}
\hspace{-11mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO65_spec_SMG2.eps}\\
\vspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO98_spec_SMG1.eps}
\hspace{-11mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO98_spec_SMG2.eps}\\
\vspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO109_spec_SMG1.eps}
\hspace{-11mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO109_spec_SMG2.eps}\\
\vspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO1110_spec_SMG1.eps}
\hspace{-11mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO1110_spec_SMG2.eps}\\
\vspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO1312_spec_SMG1.eps}
\hspace{-11mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO1312_spec_SMG2.eps}\\
\vspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO1413_spec_SMG1.eps}
\hspace{-11mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/CO1413_spec_SMG2.eps}\\
\vspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/H2O312303_spec_SMG1.eps}
\hspace{-11mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/H2O312303_spec_SMG2.eps}\\
\vspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/H2O422413_spec_SMG1.eps}
\hspace{-11mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/H2O422413_spec_SMG2.eps}\\
\vspace{-4mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/H2O2111_spec_SMG1.eps}
\hspace{-11mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{./figs/H2O2111_spec_SMG2.eps}\\
\caption{Continuum-substracted spectra showing the coverage of emission lines in our two SMGs, ALMACAL--1 ({\it left}) and ALMACAL--2 ({\it right}). Up to nine emission lines are detected in each source, unambiguously confirming that their redshift is $z = 3.442$. The detected emission lines (except $^{12}$CO(10-9) which is only half covered) are fitted with Gaussian profiles (plotted as the red curves) in order to calculate their observed fluxes. The absence of a Gaussian fit in a given panel means that the corresponding line has not been detected. The vertical dashed lines indicate $v = 0 \, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}$ for a redshift $z = 3.442$. It should be pointed out that the redshift confirmation has been obtained from high-$J$ CO and ${\rm H_2O}$ lines, not usual for FIR-bright sources, where redshift confirmation is normally achieved using spectral scans in the 3mm band \citep{Weiss2009ApJ...705L..45W_CO,Weiss2013ApJ...767...88W,Asboth2016arXiv160102665A,Oteo2016arXiv160107549O,Strandet2016arXiv160305094S}.
}
\label{detected_lines_SMGs}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{./figs/SEDS_for_paper.eps}
\caption{FIR SED of A--1 (red) and A--2 (orange). All photometric points come from the multi-band observations in ALMA bands 6, 7, 8 and 9. Since there are available data on each side of B6 and B7 we have split the data for those bands in two sub-bands. With this, we have six photometric points for each source (and two $5 \sigma$ upper limits in ALMA bands 4 and 3 indicated by the grey arrows). It should be noted that the error bars on the photometric points are smaller than the size of the filled dots. The FIR SEDs have been fitted assuming optically thin models with dust emissivity $\beta = 2.0$ (dashed curves) to derive their dust temperature, and total IR luminosities (see Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}). For a reference, we have included the templates associated to the average FIR SED of ALESS SMGs \citep{Swinbank2014MNRAS.438.1267S} and Arp 220, redshifted to $z = 3.442$ and re-scaled using the observed $460 \, {\rm \mu m}$ flux density of each source.
}
\vspace{5mm}
\label{figure_TDLIR_components}
\end{figure}
\section{Data set: ALMACAL}\label{data_set_ALMACAL}
Using ALMA calibration data we are carrying out a wide and deep (sub)mm survey, ALMACAL. The strategy of the survey and the details of data calibration and source extraction can be found in \cite{Oteo2016ApJ...822...36O}. Briefly, our survey takes advantages of the huge amount of ALMA calibration data, which are routinely acquired during the execution of ALMA science projects. Combining compatible data for different calibrators it is possible to cover areas large enough and r.m.s. levels low enough to enable the detection of faint SMGs.
At the present stage of the survey we are reaching noise levels down to ${\rm \sim 15 \mu Jy \, beam^{-1}}$ at sub-arc resolution in more than 250 calibrator fields, representing an area of more than 20 sq arcmin (Oteo et al. in prep). We focus this paper on the two SMGs found around the calibrator J1058+0133: ALMACAL--1 (A--1) and ALMACAL--2 (A--2), see Figure \ref{fig_map_calibrator}), which are the brightest SMGs found so far in ALMACAL.
The ALMACAL data used in this work can be classified in two different groups according to the spatial resolution they provide. On one hand we use mid--spatial--resolution data (beam sizes typically larger than $0.3''$) which are part of the automated ALMACAL data extraction and calibration and are used to measure the unresolved dust continuum emission in our two SMGs and to look for emission lines to confirm their redshift (see \S \ref{section_redshift_confirmation_J1058}). Due to their compact nature, A--1 and A--2 remain unresolved in the mid-resolution data.
In addition, and with the aim of studying the morphology of the dust emission in our two SMGs (\S \ref{section_morphology_pc_scales}), we also use ultra--high--spatial--resolution data especially extracted from the ALMA archive for the analysis presented in this work. Since no bright emission lines are covered by the spectral setup of the ultra--high--spatial--resolution observations, we focus on the continuum dust emission. There are ultra--high--spatial--resolution observations in B3, B6 and B7. No continuum emission is detected in B3 due to the lack of depth. We thus focus our analysis on B6 and B7.
The extraction and calibration of the ultra-high resolution data is done in exactly the same way as for the mid-resolution data, including self-calibration to improve image quality. Using Briggs weighting with a \verb+robust+ parameter equal to 0.5 we obtain a beam size of $25 \, {\rm mas} \times 18 \, {\rm mas}$ at $\sim 920 \, {\rm \mu m}$ (B7), meaning a spatial resolution of $180 \, {\rm pc} \times 130 \, {\rm pc}$ at the redshift of the two sources. The continuum sensitivity is $\sigma_{\rm B7} = 30 \, {\rm \mu Jy} \, {\rm beam}^{-1}$. The spatial resolution of the B6 observations is $29 \, {\rm mas} \times 25 \, {\rm mas}$, with a r.m.s. level of $\sigma_{\rm B6} = 40 \, {\rm \mu Jy} \, {\rm beam}^{-1}$. The spatial resolution provided by these observations is about 10$\times$ times better than those reported so far in any previous unlensed, high-redshift starburst, and close to the typical size of giant molecular clouds ($\sim 50 \, {\rm pc}$).
\section{A pair of SMGs at $z = 3.442$}\label{section_redshift_confirmation_J1058}
As pointed out in \cite{Oteo2016ApJ...822...36O}, one of the key advantages of using ALMA calibrators to study the submm galaxy population is that they are typically observed in multiple ALMA bands. This allows us to: (1) have a good sampling of the FIR SED of the detected galaxies; (2) find redshifts by carrying out blind searches of (sub)mm emission lines (including CO, ${\rm H_2O}$, [CI], [CII], etc). The two SMGs found around calibrator J1058+0133 perfectly exemplify these two points. They were initially discovered in B6 and B7 as two bright sources near J1058+0133, a bright blazar at $z \sim 0.88$ used routinely as an ALMA calibrator \citep{Oteo2016ApJ...822...36O}. We thought initially that they were part of a jet emanating from the calibrator. However, ALMA B3 data revealed that J1058+0133 does have a strong jet, but not in the direction from the calibrator to either of the two SMGs (see Figure \ref{fig_map_calibrator}). The flux density ratio between $870 \, {\rm \mu m}$ and $1.2 \, {\rm mm}$ of each source (in addition to the lack of continuum detection in B3 and B4) was compatible with them being high-redshift SMGs, although it could still be compatible with the two sources being companions of the bright calibrator, located at its redshift.
We then searched for emission lines from the two SMGs assuming that they were at the same redshift of the calibrator. Nothing was found. However, a blind search for emission lines in their (sub)mm spectrum revealed two emission lines in each component, unambiguously confirming a redshift of $z \sim 3.442$. Further data for this calibrator was then extracted from the ALMA archive, and up to nine potential emission lines were identified in each component, as shown in Figure \ref{detected_lines_SMGs}. We have detected $^{12}$CO(14--13), $^{12}$CO(13--12), $^{12}$CO(11--10), $^{12}$CO(10--9), $^{12}$CO(9--8), $^{12}$CO(6--5), H$_2$O(3$_{12}$--3$_{03})$ and weak H$_2$O(4$_{22}$--4$_{13})$ and H$_2$O(2$_{02}$--1$_{11})$ transitions in one or both sources. The median line width of the lines in A--1 and A--2 are $520$ and $417\,{\rm km \, s^{-1}}$, respectively, and there is evidence that our measured water lines are slightly wider than the CO transitions; this will be reassessed as more data for J1058+0133 become available. For a given source, the velocity shifts can be as large as $\sim 100 \, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}$. These are lower than those found in other bright starbursts such as SGP38326 \citep{Oteo2016arXiv160107549O} or HATLAS J084933 \citep{Ivison2013ApJ...772..137I}.
The CO SLED of A--1 and A--2, including data for lower-$J$ transitions from other facilities where J1058+0133 has also been used as a calibrator (for example the JVLA), will be presented in a subsequent paper. However, it is important to point out here that A--1 is warmer (see \S \ref{section_FIR_SEDs} and Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}), has relatively bright $^{12}$CO(13--12), $^{12}$CO(14--13) and ${\rm H_2O}(4_{22}-4_{13})$ lines, and its CO SLED seems to plateau at $J = 10-13$, suggesting an influential AGN in A--1 and less so in A--2, for which the upper limits in the high-$J$ CO lines suggest a less excited CO SLED. Despite the possible influence of an AGN on the molecular line properties, with the data in hand it is not possible to estimate the contribution of the possible AGN to the total IR luminosity of the source.
The redshift of A--1 and A--2 (see Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}) clearly indicates that they are not related to the calibrator (at $z \sim 0.88$). It might be argued that the two SMGs are lensed components of the same background galaxy, as is suggested by the apparent symmetry of the two SMGs with respect to the calibrator. However, despite the high signal to noise of the multi-band continuum detections, there is no sign of an Einstein ring or extended emission connecting the two sources, sometimes seen in the lensed dust emission of high-redshift SMGs \citep[see for example][]{Vlahakis2015ApJ...808L...4A,Dye2015MNRAS.452.2258D,Bussmann2013ApJ...779...25B,Bussmann2015ApJ...812...43B}. Also, $^{12}$CO(13--12) and $^{12}$CO(14-13) are not detected in A--2 despite the low r.m.s. of the spectra would have allowed detections if the CO SLEDs of A--1 and A--2 were the same, as expected if they A--1 and A--2 were lensed components of the same background source. Furthermore, the FIR SED of the two sources are different (see \S \ref{section_FIR_SEDs}), and this is not compatible with them being lensed by the blazar host galaxy. Despite the arguments supporting the idea that A--1 and A--2 are not lensed, we will explore the consequences of possible lensing in the conclusions of this paper in \S \ref{lensing_section_discussion}.
A--1 and A--2 are separated by 28 kpc in projection, suggesting tidal interaction may have triggered star formation in both systems. If observed with a single-dish submm telescope, our two SMGs would have appeared in the image as a single unresolved blob. The separation between A--1 and A--2 is about 2$\times$ times the projected separation between the two interacting components of SGP38326 at $z = 4.425$ \citep{Oteo2016arXiv160107549O} and comparable to the separation between merging the HyLIRGs at $z \sim 2.4$ in \cite{Ivison2013ApJ...772..137I}. The $3.8''$ separation is compatible with the distance between the multiple components that SMGs are normally resolved into, as revealed by high-resolution radio or ALMA observations \citep{Ivison2007MNRAS.380..199I,Karim2013MNRAS.432....2K,Hodge2013ApJ...768...91H,Simpson2015ApJ...799...81S}.
\subsection{The far-IR SEDs}\label{section_FIR_SEDs}
In order to determine the dust temperature of A--1 and A--2 we have fitted their FIR SED (using all available photometry in B6, B7, B8 and B9) with optically thin models (see Figure \ref{figure_TDLIR_components}). Uniquely, we have performed FIR SED fits with sub-arcsec resolution photometry, unlike all previous work on high-redshift SMGs where the large beams of the single-dish observations prevents accurate deblending of the multiple components which SMGs are typically resolved into \citep{Karim2013MNRAS.432....2K,Hodge2013ApJ...768...91H,Simpson2015ApJ...799...81S}. It should be noted that we assume here that the total IR luminosity is due to star formation rather than AGN activity.
Since observations are available in almost all frequencies covering B6 and B7, we have split the observations in each band into two sub-bands corresponding to the two halves of each band. In this way, we have six photometric points in total (see values in Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}), and a finer coverage of the FIR SED. Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs} quotes the dust temperature derived for A--1 and A--2 by assuming a dust emissivity of $\beta = 2.0$. It should be noted that lower $\beta$ values would give higher dust temperatures (for example, A--1 would have $T_{\rm D} = 48.0 \pm 1.4 \, {\rm K}$ for $\beta = 1.5$). However, the $\chi^2$ of the fits would not be significantly different and additional photometric information is required to distinguish between different values of $\beta$. The observed FIR SEDs suggests that A--1 is warmer than A--2.
In order to derive the total IR luminosity of each source (see Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}) we have fitted their FIR SEDs using optically thin models (with a dust emissivity of $\beta = 2.0$), including a mid-IR power law with a slope of $\alpha = 2.25$. This provides a mid-IR SED similar to the one found for the average SMG population. The SFR of A--1 and A--2 has been then derived from the total IR luminosity assuming the classical \cite{Kennicutt1998} calibration and a Salpeter IMF (see Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}). As expected from their brightness, the SFR of our two SMGs is very high, revealing extreme star formation and placing A--1 and A--2 among the most luminous starbursts at $z \sim 3-4$. The $T_{\rm D}$ and $L_{\rm IR}$ (see Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}) of A--1 and A--2 are compatible to those found for the classical population of single-dish-submm-detected SMGs \citep{Swinbank2014MNRAS.438.1267S,Simpson2014ApJ...788..125S}, and they would have been selected individually as SMGs is they had been located in cosmological fields where FIR/(sub)mm surveys have been carried out.
Figure \ref{figure_TDLIR_components} compares the FIR SED of A--1 and A--2 with the ones for the average population of SMGs in the ALESS survey \citep{Swinbank2014MNRAS.438.1267S} and Arp 220. These two templates have been shifted to $z = 3.442$ and scaled to the $460 \, {\rm \mu m}$ flux density of A--1 and A--2. It can be seen that the observed FIR SED of A--1 and A--2 are fainter at mm wavelengths for the same FIR flux density than Arp 220 and ALESS, suggesting that A--1 and A--2 are warmer than the average SMG (but still comparable with the spread of the $T_{\rm dust} - L_{\rm IR}$ relation).
\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{\label{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}Observed properties of the two SMGs detected around calibrator J1058+0133}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
& A--1 & A--2 \\
\hline
RA & 10:58:29.7 & 10:58:29.5 \\
Dec & +1:33:57.2 & +1:33:59.7 \\
$z$ & $3.4433 \pm 0.0005$ & $3.4431 \pm 0.0005$\\
$S_{\rm 460\mu m}$ [mJy] & $23.3 \pm 1.3$ & $12.8 \pm 0.8$ \\
$S_{\rm 750\mu m}$ [mJy] & $10.5 \pm 0.6$ & $ 6.9 \pm 0.3$ \\
$S_{\rm 870\mu m}$ [mJy] & $6.5 \pm 0.2$ & $ 4.4 \pm 0.2$ \\
$S_{\rm 1000\mu m}$ [mJy] & $3.8 \pm 0.2$ & $ 2.7 \pm 0.2$ \\
$S_{\rm 1225\mu m}$ [mJy] & $2.0 \pm 0.1$ & $ 1.5 \pm 0.1$ \\
$S_{\rm 1350\mu m}$ [mJy] & $1.8 \pm 0.2$ & $ 0.9 \pm 0.1$ \\
$T_{\rm dust}$ [K] ($\beta = 2.0$) & $39.2 \pm 1.5$ & $ 34.8\pm 1.2$\\
$\log{\left(L_{\rm IR} / L_\odot\right)}$ & $12.7 \pm 0.1$ & $12.5 \pm 0.1$\\
${\rm SFR \, [M_\odot \, yr^{-1}]}$ & $\sim 900$ & $\sim 600$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Dust morphology on 150 pc scales}\label{section_morphology_pc_scales}
\begin{table*}[!t]
\caption{\label{properties_SF_clumps} Observed properties of the star-forming clumps found in A--1 and A--2}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cccccccc}
\hline
Clump & $S_{\rm 920 \, \mu m}$ & $\log{\left(L_{\rm IR} / L_\odot\right)}$\tablenotemark{a} & SFR & $A_{\rm d} \tablenotemark{b}$ & $A_{\rm d} \tablenotemark{b}$ & $\Sigma_{\rm IR}\tablenotemark{c}$ & $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ \\
& [mJy] & & [${\rm M}_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1}$] & [${\rm mas} \times {\rm mas}$] & [${\rm pc} \times {\rm pc}$] & [$L_\odot \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$] & [${\rm M}_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$]\\
\hline\hline
A--1A & $2.0 \pm 0.1$ &$12.2 \pm 0.2$ & $\sim 310$ & $49 \pm 5 \times 25 \pm 3$ & $360 \pm 40 \times 180 \pm 20$ & $\sim 1.7 \times 10^{13}$ & $\sim 3015$\\
A--1B & $0.9 \pm 0.1$ &$11.9 \pm 0.2$ & $\sim 140$ & $57 \pm 9 \times 25 \pm 9$ & $420 \pm 70 \times 180 \pm 70$ & $\sim 0.7 \times 10^{13}$ & $\sim 1180$\\
A--2A & $2.1 \pm 0.2$ &$12.3 \pm 0.2$ & $\sim 330$ & $57 \pm 5 \times 34 \pm 4$ & $420 \pm 40 \times 250 \pm 30$ & $\sim 1.2 \times 10^{13}$ & $\sim 2035$\\
\hline
\hline
\tablenotetext{1}{The total IR luminosities have been calculated from the observed flux density at $920 \, {\rm \mu m}$ assuming the best-fit FIR SEDs obtained from the mid-resolution data (see Figure \ref{figure_TDLIR_components}). Furthermore, we assume that all IR luminosity is due to star formation rather than AGN activity.}
\tablenotetext{2}{The sizes reported in the table correspond to the beam--deconvolved FWHM of a 2D elliptical Gaussian fit. We only report the size of the clumps detected at ${\rm SNR > 10}$.}
\tablenotetext{3}{The surface densities have been calculated assuming that the size of the sources is $\pi R_{\rm a} \times R_{\rm b}$, where $R_{\rm a}$ and $R_{\rm b}$ are the semi-axis of the best-fit elliptical Gaussian of each component.}
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
We focus in this section on the analysis of the dust continuum emission detected in B7 ($\sim 920 \, {\rm \mu m}$) and B6 ($\sim 1.23 \, {\rm mm}$) in our two dusty starbursts. A--1, the most luminous component of the pair (Figure \ref{hires_imaging_ALMA} -- left), is resolved into three star-forming clumps, A--1A, A--1B, and A--1C, with A--1A being more than 2$\times$ times brighter than the other two components. Only one star-forming clump (A--2A) is detected in A--2 with the r.m.s. of our data. We have measured the primary-beam corrected flux density at $920 \, {\rm \mu m}$ and beam--deconvolved size of each component with the task {\sc imfit} within {\sc casa}. The derived values are quoted in Table \ref{properties_SF_clumps}, where we only include the three clumps which are detected at $> 10\sigma$, since sizes cannot be reliably measured at lower signal to noise. We see that components A--1A and A--2A dominate the dust emission in A--1 and A--2, respectively, and appear very compact, with FWHM sizes of $\sim 300 \, {\rm pc}$.
Figure \ref{hires_imaging_ALMA} also shows the ultra--high--spatial--resolution $1.2 \, {\rm mm}$ emission in our pair of SMGs. At $z = 3.442$, this wavelength probes the emission at rest-frame $\sim 280 \, {\rm \mu m}$. The spatial resolution of the B6 observations ($29 \, {\rm mas} \times 25 \,{\rm mas}$) is slightly worse than the resolution of the $920 \, {\rm \mu m}$ observations, but still comparable. The maximum of the $1.23 \, {\rm mm}$ emission (detected in components A--1A and A--2A only due to the sensitivity of the $1.23 \, {\rm mm}$ observations) is coincident with the maximum of the $920 \, {\rm \mu m}$ emission. However, there seems to be an elongation of the $1.23 \, {\rm mm}$ emission in A--1A which is not seen in the $920 \, {\rm \mu m}$ map. The origin of this extended emission is currently unknown, although further data on this source providing higher signal to noise detections or better $uv$ coverage will help to explore this issue further. In any case, the similarity between the B6 and B7 emission in A--1A and A--2A confirm that the dust emission in those two components is truly compact. Using the best-fit FIR SEDs of A--1 and A--2 (see Figure \ref{figure_TDLIR_components}) we estimate that their flux densities at $920 \, {\rm \mu m}$ are $S_{\rm 920 \, \mu m} = 5.3 \pm 0.2\, {\rm mJy}$ and $S_{\rm 920 \, \mu m} = 3.5 \pm 0.2 \, {\rm mJy}$, respectively. Considering the observed flux densities in our ultra-high-resolution data (see Table \ref{properties_SF_clumps}), we estimate that we resolve out about 40\% of the observed flux in both A--1 and A--2. This suggests that a significant fraction of the dust emission in our two dusty starbursts is relatively diffuse and/or extended, but that $\sim 60\%$ of the dust emission in A--1 and A--2 is extremely compact.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{./figs/DSFG1.eps}
\hspace{-5mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{./figs/DSFG2.eps}
\caption{Ultra-high-resolution imaging of ALMACAL--1 (A--1: {\it left}) and ALMACAL--2 (A--2: {\it right}). The background images and blue contours represent the ${\rm 920 \, \mu m}$ emission, while red contours are ${\rm 1.2 \, mm}$ emission. The synthesized beam and its size, both in sky and physical units, are indicated on each panel. All contours are represented from $5\sigma$, in steps of $1 \sigma$. It should be noted that the spatial resolution of our observations are about 10$\times$ times better than previous observations of high-redshift unlensed starbursts, and only comparable with the source-plane resolution of the ALMA long-baseline observations of SDP.81 \citep{Vlahakis2015ApJ...808L...4A} and the Eyelash \citep{Swinbank2010Natur.464..733S}. The dust emission in A--1 ({\it left}) is resolved into three different star-forming clumps (A--1A, A--1B, A--1C) while A--2 is resolved into two (A--2A and A--2B). The flux density of each clump in combination with their sizes reveal SFR surface densities significantly higher than those reported so far in high-redshift starbursts. Note that the size of each image is only $0.2''$ on each side.
}
\vspace{8mm}
\label{hires_imaging_ALMA}
\end{figure*}
The total IR luminosity of each clump has been obtained by re-scaling the best-fit mid-IR power law plus the optically thin dust emission to A--1 and A--2 to their observed $920 \, {\rm \mu m}$ flux density. The uncertainties of the total IR luminosities are the same for all clumps and reflect the errors in the extrapolation from a single--band photometry to the total IR luminosity (changes in dust temperature, dust emissivity, power law of the mid-IR SED, etc). The associated SFRs have been derived using the classical \cite{Kennicutt1998} calibration and assuming a Salpeter IMF. The SFR of our star-forming clumps range from $80$ to $300 \, {\rm M}_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1}$. It is notable that the high SFR in A--1 and A--2 (especially in A--1A and A--2A) is taking place in extremely small star-forming clumps, with average FWHM sizes of about $300\, {\rm pc}$. This means that the SFR surface density, $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$, of the clumps is as high as $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} \sim 3000 \, {\rm M}_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$ (see Table \ref{properties_SF_clumps}). Such high values of the SFR surface densities have not been reported so far in any high-redshift dust starburst, and exceed the maximum value predicted by \cite{Andrews2011ApJ...727...97A}, $\sim 1000 \, {\rm M}_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$.
\cite{Simpson2015ApJ...799...81S} reported a median value of $90 \pm 30 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$ for their SMGs, with only two galaxies above $500 \, {\rm M}_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$. In SGP38326, the most luminous, unlensed starburst found at $z > 4$, the star formation is taking place in two interacting disks, with the SFR rate density of the most luminous component of the merger being $\sim 840 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$ \citep{Oteo2016arXiv160107549O}. For the Eyelash, a strongly lensed starburst at $z \sim 2.3$ whose star formation is occurring in four distinct clumps (${\rm FWHM \sim 100 - 300\,{\rm pc}}$), \cite{Thomson2015MNRAS.448.1874T} derived values as high as $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} \sim 1650 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$. Other extreme dusty starbursts at high redshift have high SFR surface densities, such as HFLS3 ($\sim 600 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$) or AzTEC-3 ($\sim 850 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$) but none of them comparable to the values found in A--1 and A--2. Relatively low values of the SFR surface density are also found in extreme high-redshift galaxies, such as HDF\,850.1, with $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} \sim 35 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$. It is clear that there is a significant variety of $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ values in high-redshift galaxies, or more likely that most data do not resolve the small star-forming clumps.
The reason for all previous $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ at high-redshift being significantly lower than in the star-forming clumps of A--1 and A--2 is likely a combination of their brightness and the availability of ultra--high--spatial--resolution observations revealing that the strong star formation is occurring in very small scales. Most previous work on unlensed SMGs employ observations with a linear resolution around 10$\times$ times worse than the resolution of our ALMA data. To highlight the importance of ultra--high--spatial--resolution observations in the analysis of the ISM of dusty starbursts we have determined the size of the dust emission and the derived value of $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ in A--1 and A--2 by using our mid-resolution observations (see Figure \ref{fig_map_calibrator} and \S \ref{data_set_ALMACAL}). The smaller beam is provided by the B9 observations, $0.50'' \times 0.30''$. With this, A--1 has a beam-deconvolved size of $345 \, {\rm mas} \times 194 \, {\rm mas}$, or $2.5 \, {\rm kpc} \times 1.4 \, {\rm kpc}$. This would imply $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} \sim 165 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$, compatible with the values found by \cite{Simpson2015ApJ...799...81S} but more than one order of magnitude lower than the $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ of any of the three components A--1 is resolved into when observed at ultra--high--spatial resolution.
\cite{Wilson2014ApJ...789L..36W} reported high-resolution observations of the two nuclei of Arp 220 at $\sim 0.3'' \times 0.2''$. In physical scale, their spatial resolution ($\sim 130 \,{\rm pc} \times 70 \, {\rm pc}$) is matching our ultra--high--spatial resolution. \cite{Wilson2014ApJ...789L..36W} obtained IR surface density of $\Sigma_{\rm IR} = 2.1 \times 10^{14} \, {\rm L_\odot} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$ and $\Sigma_{\rm IR} = 5.8 \times 10^{12} \, {\rm L_\odot} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$ for the western and eastern nuclei, respectively. These values are similarly high to the values we find for A--1 and A--2 and were obtained at similar physical spatial resolution, highlighting again that ultra-high-spatial resolution plays a key role in the understanding the properties and nature of dusty starbursts.
It is possible that some of the observed $L_{\rm IR}$ in our two SMGs might be due to dust heated by an AGN in the center of the galaxies instead of star formation. In fact, \citep{Wilson2014ApJ...789L..36W} discussed that the extremely high luminosity surface densities found in the western nucleus of Arp 220 could be, in part, due to the presence of an AGN. If there is AGN contribution to the luminosity of the brightest clumps in A--1 and A--2, their SFRs would be overestimated, and so the associated SFR surface densities. It could be expected that, if there is AGN contribution in our two SMGs, the AGN is located in the two brightest clumps, but not in the fainter ones. Therefore, even if the SFR surface density of the brightest clumps might be overestimated, this is less likely to happen in the fainter clumps, and these still have high SFR surface densities. This assumes that the possible AGN heat the dust locally over a scale of less than $200 \, {\rm pc}$, not reaching the other star-forming clumps.
\subsection{Exploring possible lensing}\label{lensing_section_discussion}
As commented in \S \ref{section_redshift_confirmation_J1058}, the fact that the flux ratio (both line and continuum) between A--1 and A--2 depends on wavelength indicates that these sources are not two gravitationally amplified components of a galaxy at $z = 3.442$ close to the line of sight of the blazar host. Despite this, and in order to investigate what the consequences of lensing would be, we consider in this section the possibility that A--1/A--2 is actually a lensed system. If this is the case, we need to calculate the flux and size of the source in the source plane. To do this we have used the code \verb+uvmcmcfit+, which models the lensed emission of galaxies observed with interferometers in the $uv$ plane \citep{Bussmann2013ApJ...779...25B,Bussmann2015ApJ...812...43B}. In \verb+uvmcmcfit+ the background source is assumed to have an elliptical Gaussian profile, whereas the lens mass profile is represented by a singular isothermal ellipsoid.
We have first modeled the possible lensed emission in the mid-resolution maps (see Figure \ref{fig_map_calibrator}) with the aim to explore whether the spatial configuration of A--1 and A--2 with respect to the lens can be successfully modeled. We have modeled the lensed emission in all bands where A--1 and A--2 are detected (see Table \ref{table_properties_J1058_SMGs}). The result is that the positions and flux ratios of the two sources are well recovered in all bands. It should be noted that we have not modeled the multi-band emission simultaneously since this is not possible to do with publicly available codes working in the $uv$ plane. The magnification factor is derived from the ratio between the total flux density in the lensed image of the model to the total flux density in the unlensed, intrinsic source model. We have derived $\mu_{\rm dust} = 7.44 +/- 0.04$ at $870 \, {\rm \mu m}$, and similar values are obtained in the other bands (expected due to the similar spatial configuration of the system in the different bands). The effective radius of the source in the source plane is $R_{\rm eff} \sim 340 \, {\rm pc}$. We then used the best-fit model obtained from the mid-resolution data as an initial condition to model the possible lensed emission in the ultra-high-resolution observations. If they were lensed, the observed emission in A--1 and A--2 (see Figure \ref{hires_imaging_ALMA}) is compatible with a single, extremely compact background source, whose effective radius is only $R_{\rm eff} \sim 40 \, {\rm pc}$.
The total observed SFR of A--1 and A--2 in the ultra-high-resolution observations is $ {\rm SFR} \sim 870 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr^{-1}}$, which means a source-plane, de-magnified SFR of $\sim 120 \, {\rm M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1}}$. Together with the effective radius in the source plane, the de-magnified SFR surface density is $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} \sim 10,000 M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$. This value is considerably higher than the values obtained considering that A--1 and A--2 are not lensed, and therefore, much higher than in any previous high-redshift source and very close to the value found in the eastern nucleus of Arp 220.
\section{Conclusions}\label{concluuuuu}
In this paper we have presented ultra-high spatial resolution ($\sim 20 \, {\rm mas}$) dust continuum ($870 \, {\rm \mu m}$ and $1.2 \, {\rm mm}$) observations of two dusty starbursts, the brightest SMGs detected so far in our survey of serendipitous sources in the fields of ALMA calibrators: A--1 ($S_{\rm 870 \mu m} = 6.5 \pm 0.2 \, {\rm mJy}$) and A--2 ($S_{\rm 870 \mu m} = 4.4 \pm 0.2 \, {\rm mJy}$). The main conclusions of our work are the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We have determined the spectroscopic redshift of our two dusty starbursts to be $z = 3.442$ via detection of up to nine $^{12}$CO and ${\rm H_2O}$ emission lines in ALMA bands 4, 6, and 7. The maximum velocity shift found between the emission lines of A--1 and A--2 (which are separated on the sky by $28 \, {\rm kpc}$) is less than $100 \, {\rm km \, s^{-1}}$, significantly lower than in other high-redshift interacting starbursts.
\item Using flux densities measured in ALMA band 6, 7, 8, and 9 we have determined the dust temperature and total IR luminosity of each of the two dusty starbursts. These values are compatible with those found for the classical population of SMGs (with A--1 being warmer than A--2), and they would have been selected as SMGs in single-dish submm surveys. Uniquely, the FIR SEDs of our two dusty starbursts have been constrained with sub-arcsec resolution observations, unlike in previous work based on single-dish FIR/submm observations, which suffer from large beam sizes and source confusion problems.
\item Our ALMA ultra-high-resolution imaging reveals that about half of the dust emission in A--1 and A--2 is arising in compact components (with FWHM sizes of $\sim 350 \, {\rm pc}$). Two additional, fainter star-forming clumps are found in A--1. We recall that our in-field calibrator and subsequent self-calibration ensures near-perfect phase stability on the longest baselines, ensuring great image quality. Actually, we have two independent datasets in ALMA B6 and B7 at similar spatial resolution which prove the reliability of the reported structures.
\item The high SFR and the compact size of all the star-forming clumps in A--1 and A--2 indicate extremely high SFR surface densities of up to $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} \sim 6,000 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$. These values are significantly higher than those previously obtained in high-redshift dusty starbursts, and only comparable to the values found in the nuclei of Arp 220 with observations at similar (physical) spatial resolution. It should be noted that the SFR is obtained assuming that the IR luminosity is due to star formation, since with the current data we cannot study what the contribution of a possible AGN to the SFR could be.
\item We argue that the extremely high SFR surface densities of the star-forming clumps in A--1 and A--2 might be common in high redshift dusty starbursts but are only visible thanks to the availability of ultra-high spatial resolution data. This highlights the importance of long-baseline observations for the study of the ISM of dusty-starburst in the early Universe.
\item There is a small probability that this system is lensed, in the sense that the two SMGs around J1058+0133 are actually the lensed emission of a source gravitationally amplified by the blazar host. If this is actually the case, the resolution of the observations would increase to $\sim 50 \, {\rm pc}$ and we would be resolving sizes comparable to individual giant molecular clouds. The galaxy in the source plane would have an effective radius of $R_{\rm eff} \sim 40 \, {\rm pc}$, implying a de-magnified SFR surface density of $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} \sim 10,000 \, M_\odot \, {\rm yr}^{-1} \, {\rm kpc}^{-2}$, only comparable with the value found in the eastern nucleus of Arp 220.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{acknowledgements}
IO and RJI acknowledge support from the European Research Council in the form of the Advanced Investigator Programme, 321302, {\sc cosmicism}. We acknowledge stimulating discussions with Zhi-Yu Zhang. IRS acknowledges support from STFC (ST/L00075X/1), the ERC Advanced Investigator programme DUSTYGAL 321334 and a Royal Society/Wolfson Merit Award. This paper makes use of the following ALMA data: ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2015.1.01518.S, ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2015.1.00695.S, ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2015.1.00686.S, ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2015.1.01302.S, ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2015.1.01345.S, ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2015.1.00607.S, ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2015.1.00597.S, ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2015.1.00928.S, ADS/JAO.ALMA\#2015.1.00665.S. ALMA is a partnership of ESO (representing its member states), NSF (USA) and NINS (Japan), together with NRC (Canada) and NSC and ASIAA (Taiwan) and KASI (Republic of Korea), in cooperation with the Republic of Chile. The Joint ALMA Observatory is operated by ESO, AUI/NRAO and NAOJ.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{mn2e}
|
\section{Introduction}
Evolutionary Algorithms (EA) have been widely used in both continuous and discrete domains~\cite{muhlenbein1992genetic,droste2002analysis,arnold2006general}.
Resampling\footnote{In this paper, ``resampling'' refers to the multiple re-evalutions of a solution.} has proved to be a powerful tool in improving
the local performance of EAs in noisy optimisation
~\cite{arnold2006general,beyer2013theory,astete2016simple},
and different resampling rules have been applied to a variety of EAs in continuous noisy optimisation, as studied in \cite{astete2013log,liu2015portfolio}.
Akimoto et al.~\cite{akimoto2015analysis} concluded that the running time for an adapted algorithm using resampling to solve a problem with additive Gaussian noise is similar to the runtime in the noise-free case when multiplying by
a factor $\log{n}$, where $n$ is the problem dimension.
Previous work on solving the OneMax problem~\cite{schaffer1991crossover}
has concentrated on using a (1+1)-Evolution Algorithm (EA)~\cite{droste2004analysis,qian2014effectiveness}. The OneMax problem
with \emph{One-bit} noise (exactly one uniformly selected bit changes with probability $p \in (0,1)$ due to the noise) has been studied previously by Droste~\cite{droste2004analysis}.
Qian et al.~\cite{qian2014effectiveness} claimed that resampling wasn't beneficial in optimising OneMax with additive Gaussian noise using (1+1)-EA.
Recently, Liu et al.~\cite{liu2016bandit,liu2017bandit} applied a bandit-based RMHC to the noisy
OneMax proble
, and showed that it was important to choose an optimal resampling number, so as to compromise
the reduction in sampling noise against the cost of doing so.
The main contribution of this work is the analysis of the optimal resampling number in the OneMax problem,
in the presence of additive Gaussian noise. We show that the optimal resampling number increases with the problem dimension.
The paper is structured as follows.
Section \ref{sec:bg} provides a brief review of the related work and describes our noisy OneMax problem.
Section \ref{sec:rmhcr} explains the modified Random Mutation Hill-Climbing algorithm used in the noisy context.
Section \ref{sec:analysis} analyses the optimal resampling number in the defined noisy OneMax problem.
Experimental results are presented and discussed in Section \ref{sec:xp}.
Finally, Section \ref{sec:conc} concludes the work.
\section{Background}\label{sec:bg}
This section is organised as follows. Section \ref{sec:rmhc} presents the original Random Mutation Hill-Climbing algorithm and its relation to (1+1)-EA. Section \ref{sec:onemax} recalls the OneMax problem, then a noisy variant of OneMax problem is defined in Section \ref{sec:nonemax}. More related literatures in solving different noisy variants of OneMax problems are discussed in Section \ref{sec:rw}
\subsection{Random Mutation Hill-Climbing}\label{sec:rmhc}
The Random Mutation Hill-Climbing (RMHC), also called Stochastic Hill Climbing, is a derivative-free optimisation method mostly used
in discrete domains~\cite{lucas2003learning,lucas2005learning}.
RMHC can also be seen as an evolutionary algorithm in which there is a population of just one individual, and at each generation a child genome is formed from the current (best-so-far) individual by mutating exactly one gene, chosen uniformly at random.
After mutation, the mutated child genome replaces its parent if its fitness value is improved or equivalent. In other words, RMHC randomly selects a neighbour candidate in the search space (where \emph{neighbour} means it differs in exactly one gene) and updates its current candidate using a fitness-comparison-based
method.
Borisovsky and Eremeev \cite{borisovsky2008comparing} proved that under some condition
, RMHC outperforms other EAs in terms of the probability of finding an \emph{anytime} solution on several problems including OneMax.
(1+1)-EA
is a variant of RMHC, the only difference being that \emph{every} gene of the current individual's genome mutates with a certain probability at each generation.\footnote{However note that some communities refer to RMHC as ``(1+1)-Evolutionary Algorithm (EA)'', but we will avoid that description.} (1+1)-EA has been widely used in both discrete and continuous optimisation problems \cite{borisovsky2008comparing}. A variant of (1+1)-EA is the closely related ``(1+1)-Evolutionary Strategy (ES)''~\cite{Beyer1995Toward},
which uses a self-adaptive mutation step-size and is applicable to real-valued search spaces.
Despite its simplicity, RMHC often competes surprisingly well with
more complex algorithms~\cite{mitchell1993will}, especially when deployed with random restarts.
For instance, Lucas and Reynolds evolved Deterministic Finite Automata (DFA)~\cite{lucas2003learning,lucas2005learning}
using a multi-start RMHC algorithm with very competitive results, outperforming more complex evolutionary algorithms, and for some classes of problems also outperforming the state of the art Evidence-Driven State Merging (EDSM)~\cite{cicchello2002beyond} algorithms.
\subsection{OneMax problem}\label{sec:onemax}
The OneMax problem~\cite{schaffer1991crossover} is a standard benchmark optimisation problem for a binary search space and has been deeply studied in the previous literatures~\cite{droste2002analysis,doerr2012memory,Doerr2016}. The objective is to maximise the number of $1$s occurring in a binary string, i.e., for a given $n$-bit string $\mathbf{x}$, the fitness function to maximise for that string is given by
\begin{equation}
f(\mathbf{x})=\sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i, \label{eqn:NoiseFreeFitnessFunction}
\end{equation}
where $x_i$ denotes the $i^{th}$ bit in the string $\mathbf{x}$, and is either 1 or 0.
\subsection{Noisy OneMax}\label{sec:nonemax}
In this work, we study a noisy variant of the
OneMax problem, where the fitness function is corrupted by some additive unbiased normally distributed noise with constant variance, formalised in \eqref{eqn:noisyFitnessValue}.
\begin{equation}
f'(\mathbf{x})=f(\mathbf{x})+ {\cal N}(0,\sigma^2),\label{eqn:noisyFitnessValue}
\end{equation}
with ${\cal N}(0,\sigma^2)$ denoting a Gaussian noise, with mean $0$ and variance $\sigma^2$.
From now on, we will
use $f'^{(i)}(\mathbf{x})$ to denote the $i^{th}$ call to noisy fitness function on $\mathbf{x}$.
At each call, the noise is independently sampled from ${\cal N}(0,\sigma^2)$ and takes effect after the true fitness is evaluated.
There is a variety of noise models for the
OneMax problem, as described in the next section. To avoid confusion, the term ``noisy OneMax'' refers to \eqref{eqn:noisyFitnessValue}, the noisy variant used in this paper. Also, the ``noisy'' refers to the noise in the fitness function's ability to read the true fitness of the genome; not the mutations which are deliberately applied to the genome, which could be interpreted as a second kind of ``noise''.
\subsection{Related work}\label{sec:rw}
Different noise models for the
OneMax problem have been studied before.
\paragraph{Proportionate selection is noise invariant}
Our noise model is the same as the one used in~\cite{miller1996genetic}. Miller and Goldberg~\cite{miller1996genetic} used a GA with $\mu$ parents and $\lambda$ offsprings,
and proved that increasing noise level did not affect selection pressure for Genetic Algorithms (GA) using \emph{fitness-proportionate selection}, in which each individual survives with a probability proportional to its fitness divided by the average fitness in the population~\cite{miller1996genetic,mitchell1998introduction}.
\paragraph{Resampling does not add benefit in low dimension}
Qian et al.~\cite{qian2014effectiveness} applied (1+1)-EA using mutation probability $p=\frac{1}{10}$ and at most $100$ resamplings to a $10$-bit noisy OneMax problem corrupted by additive Gaussian noise with variance $100$ (\eqref{eqn:noisyFitnessValue} with $\sigma^2=100$), and concluded that resampling wasn't beneficial for the (1+1)-EA
in optimising the noisy OneMax problem.
In their model, resampling had the effect of lowering the variance of the noise to $1$, which is exactly as big as the lower bound of the differences between distinct noise-free fitness values. With that level of resampling and problem dimension, the problem is still difficult to solve. We present, later in this paper, our application of RMHC using larger resampling numbers in noisy OneMax, with noise variance $\sigma^2=1$ and do observe that resampling adds a significant benefit when the dimension is above $10$ (Section \ref{sec:xp}).
\paragraph{Solving high dimension noisy OneMax}
Sastry et al.~\cite{sastry2007towards} designed a fully parallelised, highly-efficient compact Genetic Algorithm (cGA) to solve very high dimension problems, and compared it to RMHC on a noisy OneMax problem using noise variance depending linearly on the length of string, to allow for more difficult problems, for the reason that a randomly initiated $n$-bit string has fitness variance $\frac{n}{4}$. RMHC \emph{without} resampling performed poorly when the problem dimension is higher than $10,000$.
\paragraph{Noise takes effect before the evaluation}
Droste~\cite{droste2004analysis} defined a \emph{One-bit noise} model for the
OneMax problem, in which during every fitness evaluation of the bit-string $\mathbf{x}$, there was exactly one uniformly-chosen random bit mis-read with probability $p'$.
Hence the measured noisy fitness values are equivalent to replacing the Gaussian noise term in \eqref{eqn:noisyFitnessValue} by an appropriate discrete random variable taking values from $\{-1,0,1\}$.
Under this scheme, Droste showed that (1+1)-EA with mutation probability $p=\frac1n$ could optimise a $n$-bit OneMax problem corrupted by \emph{One-bit noise}, with high probability, in polynomial time if $p'$ is $O(\frac{\log(n)}{n})$.
\section{Random Mutation Hill-Climbing in noisy context}\label{sec:rmhcr}
When RMHC is applied to the noisy OneMax fitness function \eqref{eqn:noisyFitnessValue}, a mutation of the $k^{th}$ gene refers to flipping the $k^{th}$ bit of the string. The standard deviation of the second term in \eqref{eqn:noisyFitnessValue} (the explicit noise term) is of the same order of magnitude as the noise in the first term of \eqref{eqn:noisyFitnessValue} (the OneMax fitness term) introduced by mutations from the RMHC algorithm. This extremely poor signal-to-noise ratio would cause major problems for hill-climbing strategies such as RMHC. Hence,
we use RMHC with resampling, applied to the noisy OneMax proble
, so as to try to reduce the unwanted variance, and to allow the hill climber to work.
\subsection{Noise-free case}
Algorithm \ref{algo:noisefree} recalls the generic RMHC, without any resampling. This is suitable for noise-free problems.
\defTo solve a noise-free problem, no resampling is necessary. The variable $N$ counts the number of fitness evaluations made. Since line 6 makes two fitness evaluations (i.e. two calls to $f$), $N$ is incremented by 2 each generation. In some situations it is possible to modify the code to store the current best fitness value $f(\mathbf{x})$ instead of repeatedly reevaluating it. % and thus reduce the rate at which $N$ is increased.{To solve a noise-free problem, no resampling is necessary. The variable $N$ counts the number of fitness evaluations made. Since line 6 makes two fitness evaluations (i.e. two calls to $f$), $N$ is incremented by 2 each generation. In some situations it is possible to modify the code to store the current best fitness value $f(\mathbf{x})$ instead of repeatedly reevaluating it.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{\label{algo:noisefree}Random Mutation Hill-Climbing algorithm (RMHC).}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{$n \in {\mathbb N}^*$: genome length (problem dimension)}
\Require{$\mathcal{X}$: search space}
\Require{$f: \mathcal{X} \mapsto {\mathbb R}$: fitness function}
\State{Randomly initialise a genome $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{X}$}
\State{$N \gets 0$} \Comment{Total evaluation count so far}
\While{time not elapsed}
\State{Uniformly randomly select $k \in \{1,\dots,n\}$}
\State{$\mathbf{y} \gets$ new genome by mutating the $k^{th}$ gene of $\mathbf{x}$}
\If{$f(\mathbf{y}) \geq f(\mathbf{x})$}
\State{$\mathbf{x} \gets \mathbf{y}$} \Comment{Update the best-so-far genome}
\EndIf
\State{$N \gets N + 2$}\Comment{Update evaluation count}
\EndWhile
\State{\Return{$\mathbf{x}$}}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
}
Here we have assumed the fitness value of the best-so-far genome could be stored after each cycle. If, alternatively, no space was allocated to store that fitness value, or if fitness evaluations can only be made by directly comparing two individuals, then the best-so-far genome's fitness would need to be re-evaluated at each generation, thus raising the algorithm's ``evaluation count'', $N$, by a factor of approximately 2.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{\label{algo:noisefree}Random Mutation Hill-Climbing algorithm (RMHC). No resampling is performed}.
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{$n \in {\mathbb N}^*$: genome length (problem dimension)}
\Require{$\mathcal{X}$: search space}
\Require{$f: \mathcal{X} \mapsto {\mathbb R}$: fitness function}
\State{Randomly initialise a genome $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{X}$}
\State{$bestFitSoFar \gets f(\mathbf{x})$}
\State{$N \gets 1$} \Comment{Total evaluation count so far}
\While{time not elapsed}
\State{Uniformly randomly select $k \in \{1,\dots,n\}$}
\State{$\mathbf{y} \gets$ new genome by mutating the $k^{th}$ gene of $\mathbf{x}$}
\State{$Fit_{\mathbf{y}} \gets f(\mathbf{y})$}
\State{$N \gets N + 1$}\Comment{Update evaluation count}
\If{$Fit_{\mathbf{y}} \geq bestFitSoFar$}
\State{$\mathbf{x} \gets \mathbf{y}$} \Comment{Update the best-so-far genome}
\State{$bestFitSoFar \gets Fit_{\mathbf{y}}$}
\EndIf
\EndWhile
\State{\Return{$\mathbf{x}$}}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Noisy case}\label{sec:noisy}
The previous RMHC algorithm (Algorithm \ref{algo:noisefree}) was applicable to deterministic fitness functions.
Algorithm \ref{algo:noisy} extends this RMHC algorithm to be applicable to noisy fitness functions. It achieves this extension by using \emph{resampling}, so that each genome is evaluated multiple times, so as to reduce the effect of noise which might interfere with hill climbing.
Additionally, if the statistics of the best-so-far genome can be stored, instead of comparing directly the fitness values of the offspring to the fitness of the parent (the best-so-far genome), the average fitness value of the best-so-far genome in the history is compared at each generation (line 11 of Algorithm \ref{algo:noisy}).
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{\label{algo:noisy}RMHC modified to include resampling, suitable for the noisy case. $f'^{(i)}(\mathbf{x})$ denotes the $i^{th}$ call to the noisy fitness function on search point $\mathbf{x}$.}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{$n \in {\mathbb N}^*$: genome length (problem dimension)}
\Require{$\mathcal{X}$: search space}
\Require{$f: \mathcal{X} \mapsto {\mathbb R}$: fitness function}
\Require{$r \in {\mathbb N}^*$: Resampling number}
\State{Randomly initialise a genome $\mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{X}$}
\State{$bestFitSoFar \gets 0$}
\State{$M \gets 0$} \Comment{Evaluation count for the latest best-so-far genome}
\State{$N \gets 0$} \Comment{Total evaluation count so far}
\While{time not elapsed}
\State{Uniformly randomly select $k \in \{1,\dots,n\}$}
\State{$\mathbf{y} \gets$ new genome by mutating the $k^{th}$ gene of $\mathbf{x}$}
\State{$Fit_{\mathbf{x}} \gets \frac{1}{r}\sum _{i=1}^{r} f'^{(i)}(\mathbf{x})$}
\State{$Fit_{\mathbf{y}} \gets \frac{1}{r}\sum _{i=1}^{r} f'^{(i)}(\mathbf{y})$}
\State{$N \gets N + 2r$} \Comment{Update evaluation count}
\State{$averageFitness_{\mathbf{x}} \gets \frac{bestFitSoFar\times M+Fit_{\mathbf{x}}\times r}{M+r}$}
\If{$Fit_{\mathbf{y}} \geq averageFitness_{\mathbf{x}}$}
\State{$\mathbf{x} \gets \mathbf{y}$} \Comment{Update the best-so-far genome}
\State{$bestFitSoFar \gets Fit_{\mathbf{y}}$}
\State{$M \gets r$}
\Else
\State{$bestFitSoFar \gets averageFitness_{\mathbf{x}}$}
\State{$M \gets M + r$}
\EndIf
\EndWhile
\State{\Return{$\mathbf{x}$}}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Analysis of optimal resampling number in noisy OneMax problem}\label{sec:analysis}
This section analyses the application of the modified RMHC algorithm (Algorithm \ref{algo:noisy}) to the noisy OneMax problem, with fixed noise level, by describing it as a Markov process. Several variants of Algorithm \ref{algo:noisy} are considered in Section \ref{sec:benefit}, including analysis of varying the resampling number, and of the effect of storing a statistic of the best-so-far genome versus not storing it. The benefit of storing the statistics of the best-so-far genome is illustrated in Section \ref{sec:benefit}. Section \ref{sec:optimalr} derives an expression for the length of Markov chain that represents the learning algorithm, and the optimal level of resampling is calculated and displayed, in Section \ref{sec:theoreticalResults}.
We restrict the analysis in this section to a fixed noise level $\sigma^2=1$. This noise level is a significant challenge for RMHC, as the difference between the parent's fitness and the one of the offspring is always $1$ in our model. This motivates resampling, since resampling a candidate solution $r$ times can reduce the variance of the noise by a factor of $\frac1r$. The extension of this analysis to the general $\sigma$ would be straightforward.
\subsection{Markov chain description for noisy OneMax}\label{sec:markovChainDescription}
We consider a $n$-bit OneMax problem with constant variance Gaussian noise, $\sigma^2=1$. Throughout this section, we summarise the n-bit OneMax state vector by a single scalar number, $i$, equal to the number of ones in the n-bit string. As the RMHC algorithm makes mutations to the full bit string, the compressed state-representation, $i$, will change by $\pm 1$. The transition probabilities for the change in $i$ are dependent only on the scalar $i$. Hence the evolution of the variable $i$ is modeled by a Markov process.
After each mutation is initially made by the RMHC algorithm, the fitness of that mutated bit string is evaluated using \eqref{eqn:noisyFitnessValue}, and the RMHC algorithm will either accept or reject that mutation.
Let $p_{TA}$, $p_{FA}$, $p_{TR}$ and $p_{FR}$ denote the probability of true acceptance, false acceptance, true rejection and false rejection, respectively, for the RMHC algorithm to accept or reject any given mutation. These four probabilities depend on the resampling strategy employed by the RMHC algorithm, and are derived in Section \ref{sec:acceptanceProabilities}. However, since complementary probability pairs must sum to one, we do generally have that,
\begin{eqnarray}
p_{FA} &=& 1-p_{TA},\label{eq:fa}\\
p_{FR} &=& 1-p_{TR}.\label{eq:fr}
\end{eqnarray}
Assuming these acceptance and rejection probabilities are known, we can then derive the Markov state transition probabilities as follows:
For any state scalar $i \in \{0,1,\dots,n-1\}$, the corresponding OneMax bit string has $i$ ones and $(n-i)$ zeros. Therefore the probability of uniformly randomly choosing a zero bit is $\frac{n-i}{n}$. Hence, for RMHC to make an improvement to the genome, it must randomly choose one of these zero bits and that mutation must be accepted. Therefore the transition probability from state $i$ to state $i+1$ in one generation is:
\begin{equation}
{\mathbb P}[S_{t+1}=i+1 | S_{t}=i] = \frac{n-i}{n}p_{TA}.\label{eqn:probabilityTransitionImprovement}
\end{equation}
Similarly, for RMHC to make the genome worse, it must choose a one bit (with probability $\frac{i}{n}$) and flip it to a zero, and that mutation must be accepted, with probability $p_{FA}$. Hence we obtain
\begin{equation}
{\mathbb P}[S_{t+1}=i-1 | S_{t}=i] = \frac{i}{n}p_{FA}.
\end{equation}
For an
RMHC mutation to make no progress in the genome, the mutation must be rejected. This could mean a one bit is chosen (with probability $\frac{i}{n}$) and rejected (with probability $p_{TR}$), or it could be that a zero bit is chosen (with probability $\frac{n-i}{n}$) and rejected (with probability $p_{FR}$). Hence we obtain
\begin{equation}
{\mathbb P}[S_{t+1}=i | S_{t}=i] = \frac{i}{n}p_{TR}+\frac{n-i}{n}p_{FR}.\label{eqn:probabilityTransitionNoChange}
\end{equation}
The probabilities given by \eqref{eqn:probabilityTransitionImprovement}-\eqref{eqn:probabilityTransitionNoChange} appear on the three arrows emanating from the central node ``$i$'' in the Markov chain shown in \figurename \ref{fig:state}. The Markov chain's absorption state is state $n$, since the OneMax problem is solved and terminates as soon as $i=n$ is reached.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{onemax-pics-crop.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:state}Markov states and transitions in a noisy OneMax proble
. Markov state
``$i$'' refers to a OneMax bit-string with $i$ ones and $n-i$ zeros in the string.}
\end{figure*}
\defTo solve a noise-free problem, no resampling is necessary. The variable $N$ counts the number of fitness evaluations made. Since line 6 makes two fitness evaluations (i.e. two calls to $f$), $N$ is incremented by 2 each generation. In some situations it is possible to modify the code to store the current best fitness value $f(\mathbf{x})$ instead of repeatedly reevaluating it. % and thus reduce the rate at which $N$ is increased.{
{\color{red} Together with Equations \ref{eq:tr}, \ref{eq:fa} and \ref{eq:fr}, $\forall i \in \{1,2,\dots,n-1\}$ the transition probability matrix of two adjacent states is:
\[ B= \left[ \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{i}{n}p_{TA} + \frac{n-i}{n}(1-p_{TA}) & \frac{n-i}{n}p_{TA} \\
\frac{i+1}{n}(1-p_{TA}) & \frac{i+1}{n}p_{TA} + \frac{n-i-1}{n}(1-p_{TA}) \end{array} \right].\] Let's delete this red paragraph - it's not justified why it's 2 by 2 matrix, nor where the elements come from, and it's not used in any analysis AFAIK}}
\subsection{Rejection and acceptance probabilities for noisy OneMax problem with RMHC}\label{sec:benefit} \label{sec:acceptanceProabilities}
The Markov Process described in the previous subsection relied upon knowledge of the acceptance and rejection probabilities $p_{TR}$ and $p_{TA}$, which are dependent on the RMHC resampling method chosen.
We discuss three RMHC resampling cases here, and calculate the corresponding acceptance/rejection probabilities. We consider three separate cases:
\subsubsection{No resampling, no statistic of the best-so-far genome is stored}\label{sec:case1}
If no statistic of the best-so-far genome is stored, the best-so-far one needs to be re-evaluated once at each generation in the case without resampling.
First we assume that the newly generated genome $\mathbf{y}$ is better than the current genome $\mathbf{x}$, i.e. $f(\mathbf{y}) > f(\mathbf{x})$, where this fitness function is the noise-free version given by \eqref{eqn:NoiseFreeFitnessFunction}. Since $f(\mathbf{x})$ is the true fitness of string $\mathbf{x}$, we have $f(\mathbf{x})=i$, the number of ones in string $\mathbf{x}$. Since the two genomes $\mathbf{x}$ and $\mathbf{y}$ are evaluated using the noisy fitness function \eqref{eqn:noisyFitnessValue}, and since we are comparing $\mathbf{x}$ and $\mathbf{y}$ without resampling or storing the statistics of the best-so-far genome, the probability of true acceptance is
\begin{eqnarray*}
p_{TA} &=& {\mathbb P}(f'(\mathbf{y}) > f'(\mathbf{x}) | f(\mathbf{y})=i+1, f(\mathbf{x})=i)\\
&=& {\mathbb P}(\omega_y + 1 > \omega_x)={\mathbb P}(\omega_y - \omega_x > -1).
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\omega_y$ and $\omega_x$ are
independent samples from ${\cal N}(0,1)$, thus $\omega_y - \omega_x$ $\sim {\cal N}(0,2)$. Then,
\begin{eqnarray}
p_{TA} &=& {\mathbb P}(\omega_y - \omega_x > -1) = {\mathbb P}(\omega_y - \omega_x \leq 1)\nonumber \\
&=& CDF_{Gaussian(0,2)}(1) = \frac12 + \frac12 erf(\frac12). \label{eqn:ptaCase1}
\end{eqnarray}
Respectively, if the newly generated genome $\mathbf{y}$ is worse than the current genome $\mathbf{x}$, i.e. $f(\mathbf{y}) < f(\mathbf{x})$, when comparing two genomes without resampling or storing the statistics of the best-so-far genome, the probability of true rejection is
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:tatr}
p_{TR} &=& {\mathbb P}(f'(\mathbf{y}) < f'(\mathbf{x}) | f(\mathbf{y})=i-1, f(\mathbf{x})=i)\nonumber\\
&=& {\mathbb P}(\omega_y - 1 < \omega_x)= {\mathbb P}(\omega_y - \omega_x < 1) = p_{TA}.
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore, for this situation of RMHC with no resampling and no storage of the best-so-far fitness, we can for example find the probability of transferring from state $i$ to state $i+1$, as follows:
\begin{align*}
{\mathbb P}[S_{t+1}=i+1 | S_{t}=i] &= \frac{n-i}{n}p_{TA} &\text{(by \eqref{eqn:probabilityTransitionImprovement})}\\
&=\frac{n-i}{n}\left(\frac12 + \frac12 erf(\frac12)\right)&\text{(by \eqref{eqn:ptaCase1}).}
\end{align*}
\subsubsection{When comparing two genomes using $r$ resamplings without storing the statistics of the best-so-far genome}\label{sec:case2}
If each genome can be re-evaluated $r>1$ times, i.e., $r$ resamplings are used, but still no statistic of the best-so-far genome is stored, $Fit_{\mathbf{x}}$ and $Fit_{\mathbf{y}}$ are compared at each generation (lines 8 and 9 of Algorithm \ref{algo:noisy}). Therefore, the variance of $Fit_{\mathbf{x}}$ and $Fit_{\mathbf{y}}$, given $\mathbf{x}$ and $\mathbf{y}$, are $\frac{1}{r}$. Then,
\begin{eqnarray*}
p_{TA} &=& {\mathbb P}(Fit_{\mathbf{y}} > Fit_{\mathbf{x}} | f(\mathbf{y})=i+1, f(\mathbf{x})=i)\\
&=& {\mathbb P}(\omega'_y + 1 > \omega'_x)={\mathbb P}(\omega'_y - \omega'_x > -1).
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\omega'_y$ and $\omega'_x$ are
independent samples from ${\cal N}(0,\frac{1}{r})$, thus $\omega_y - \omega_x$ $\sim {\cal N}(0,\frac{2}{r})$. Then,
\begin{eqnarray}
p_{TA} &=& {\mathbb P}(\omega'_y - \omega'_x > -1)={\mathbb P}(\omega'_y - \omega'_x \leq 1)\nonumber \\
&=& CDF_{Gaussian(0,\frac{2}{r})}(1) = \frac12 + \frac12 erf(\frac{\sqrt{r}}{2}). \label{eqn:ptaCase2}
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly, $p_{TR}=p_{TA}$ holds in this case.
The probability of transferring from state $i$ to state $i+1$ in one generation is $\frac{n-i}{n}(\frac12 + \frac12 erf(\frac{\sqrt{r}}{2}))$, larger than the probability
in the previous
case without resampling (Section \ref{sec:case1}).
Therefore, the probability of true acceptance is improved by resampling genomes.
\subsubsection{When comparing two genomes using $r>1$ resamplings and the statistics of the best-so-far genome}\label{sec:case3}
Additionally, if one has access to $averageFitness$, the average fitness value of the best-so-far genome, and $M$, the number of times that the best-so-far genome has been evaluated, by line 11 of Algorithm \ref{algo:noisy}
\begin{equation}
averageFitness_{\mathbf{x}} \gets \frac{bestFitSoFar\times M+Fit_{\mathbf{x}}\times r}{M+r},
\end{equation}
with $r>1$. Therefore, the variance of $averageFitness_{\mathbf{x}}$, given $\mathbf{x}$, is $\frac{1}{M+r}$. The variance of $Fit_{\mathbf{y}}$, given $\mathbf{y}$, is $\frac{1}{r}$.
The probability of true acceptance is
\begin{align*}
p_{TA} &= {\mathbb P}( Fit_{\mathbf{y}} > averageFitness_{\mathbf{x}} | f(y)=i+1, f(x)=i)\\
&= {\mathbb P}(\omega'_y + 1 > \omega''_x)= {\mathbb P}(\omega'_y - \omega''_x > -1).
\end{align*}
where $\omega'_y$ and $\omega''_x$ are independent samples from ${\cal N}(0,\frac{1}{r})$ and ${\cal N}(0,\frac{1}{M+r})$, respectively. Thus, $\omega'_y - \omega''_x$ $\sim {\cal N}(0, \frac{M+2r}{r(M+r)})$. Then,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:pta3}
p_{TA} &=& {\mathbb P}(\omega'_y - \omega''_x > -1)\nonumber \\
&=& {\mathbb P}(\omega'_y - \omega''_x \leq 1)\nonumber \\
&=& CDF_{Gaussian(0,\frac{M+2r}{r(M+r)})}(1)\nonumber \\
&=& \frac12 + \frac12 erf(\sqrt{\frac{r(M+r)}{2(M+2r)}})
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly, $p_{TR}=p_{TA}$ holds in this case.
The probability of transferring from state $i$ to state $i+1$ in one generation is $\frac{n-i}{n}(\frac12 + \frac12 erf(\sqrt{\frac{r(M+r)}{2(M+2r)}}))$ with $M \geq r >1$, larger than the probabilities
in the previous cases (Sections \ref{sec:case1} and \ref{sec:case2}).
Therefore, the probability of true acceptance is improved by resampling genomes and storing the statistics of the best-so-far genome.
However,
the trade-off between the total evaluations and the accuracy needs to be considered.
\subsection{Markov chain analysis}\label{sec:optimalr}
Now that we have described the Markov chain in Section \ref{sec:markovChainDescription}, and derived the acceptance and rejection probabilities for the noisy OneMax problem in Section \ref{sec:acceptanceProabilities}, we next derive an analytical expectation for the full trajectory length for solving the noisy
OneMax problem, using RMHC with resamplings, starting from a bit string full of zeros. To simplify analysis, no stored statistic is considered ($M=0$), thus we consider the second case discussed previously in Section \ref{sec:case2}.
The Markov chain length can be found by defining the notation $\et{m}{l}$ to mean the expectation of the number of generations required to get from a Markov state with value $i=l$ to a Markov state with value $i=m$.
By considering the three arrows that emanate from the central $i$ node in \figurename \ref{fig:state}, we can form an algebraic expression for $\et{i+1}{i}$, as follows:
\begin{align}
\et{i+1}{i}=& \frac{n-i}{n}p_{TA}\nonumber \\
&+ \left(\frac{i}{n}p_{TR} + \frac{n-i}{n}p_{FR}\right)\left(1+\et{i+1}{i}\right)\nonumber\\
&+ \frac{i}{n}p_{FA}\left(1+\et{i+1}{i-1}\right). \label{eqn:markovRecursion1}
\end{align}
The three terms in \eqref{eqn:markovRecursion1} correspond to the three arrows from node $i$ in \figurename \ref{fig:state}, pointing to nodes $i+1$, $i$ and $i-1$, respectively.
Since it is always necessary to go from state $i-1$ to $i+1$ via their middle state $i$, we can form the relationship
\begin{align*}
\et{i+1}{i-1} &\equiv \et{i}{i-1}+\et{i+1}{i}.
\end{align*}
Furthermore, reusing \eqref{eq:fa} and \eqref{eq:fr}, i.e. $p_{FA}=(1-p_{TA})$, $p_{FR}=(1-p_{TR})$, together with $p_{TR}=p_{TA}$ from Section \ref{sec:acceptanceProabilities}, we get:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:expN}
&&\et{i+1}{i}= \frac{n-i}{n}p_{TA}\nonumber \\
&+& \left(\frac{i}{n}p_{TA} + \frac{n-i}{n}(1-p_{TA})\right)\left(1+\et{i+1}{i}\right)\nonumber\\
&+& \frac{i}{n}(1-p_{TA})\left(1+\et{i}{i-1}+\et{i+1}{i}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
Solving \ref{eq:expN} for $\et{i+1}{i}$, which appears three times in that equation, we get:
\begin{equation}
\et{i+1}{i} = \frac{i(1-p_{TA})}{(n-i)p_{TA}} \et{i}{i-1}+ \frac{n}{(n-i)p_{TA}}. \label{eqn:markovRecursion3}
\end{equation}
This is a recursive equation that defines the $i^{th}$ term in terms of the $(i-1)^{th}$ term. To terminate this recursion, an explicit expression for $\et{1}{0}$ can be found by considering the number of generations required to get from $i=0$ (i.e. a string with all zeros in it) to $i=1$ (i.e. a string with exactly one 1 in it). This is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:zeros}
\et{1}{0}=\frac{1}{p_{TA}}.
\end{eqnarray}
\eqref{eqn:markovRecursion3} and \eqref{eq:zeros} form a recursion that easily can be unrolled computationally, and it gives us the exact theoretical number of transitions to traverse from one Markov state $i$ to the adjacent Markov state $i+1$. Therefore to calculate the total number of generations required to solve the noisy OneMax problem from an initial Markov state $i=0$, we need to calculate $\et{n}{0}$. This can be expanded by adding all of the intermediate state transitions to get
\begin{equation}
\et{n}{0}=\et{1}{0} + \cdots + \et{n}{n-1} \label{eqn:totalMarkovTrajectoryLength}
\end{equation}
\eqref{eqn:totalMarkovTrajectoryLength} completes the theoretical analysis of the number of steps required by RMHC to solve the noisy
OneMax problem, from an initial bit string of zeros. Note that each term of this sum needs a solution to the recursive equations given by \eqref{eqn:markovRecursion3} and \eqref{eq:zeros}, but with careful caching, the whole sum can be evaluated in $O(n)$ steps.
It's notable that even though the above Markov chain analysis was aimed at Case 2
(Section \ref{sec:case2}, i.e. with resampling and no statistic stored), it also holds when there is no resampling, i.e., $r=1$ (the first case detailed in Section \ref{sec:case1}). In both cases, $p_{TA}$ is deterministic given the resampling number $r$. However, Case 3 (Section \ref{sec:case3}) is not as straightforward to analyse, because in that case that the average fitness value ($averageFitness_{\mathbf{x}}$) depends on the evaluation number ($M$), and $M$ is stochastic. Hence, $p_{TA}=\frac12 + \frac12 erf(\sqrt{\frac{r(M+r)}{2(M+2r)}})$ \eqref{eq:pta3}
changes at each generation of RMHC.
Case 3 has not been analysed in this paper, but it
would be interesting to do so in the future.
\subsection{Analytical results of RMHC in noisy OneMax problem} \label{sec:theoreticalResults}
At each generation of the actual RMHC algorithm, $2r$ fitness-function evaluations are required, so that the total number of fitness evaluations required to solve the noisy
OneMax problem is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sum}
2r\et{n}{0}.
\end{equation}
This result is shown graphically in \figurename \ref{fig:expE}, with various number of resamplings ($r$) and problem dimension ($n$), under the assumption that no statistic is stored for the fitness of the best-so-far genome (case 2 described in Section \ref{sec:case2}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{expE}
\caption{\label{fig:expE}Exact expectation of the number of fitness evaluations required by RMHC to solve the noisy
OneMax problem, using different resampling numbers. The initial OneMax strings were all zeros, and the RMHC algorithm did not store the fitness of the best-so-far genome (case 2 described in Section \ref{sec:case2}). These curves were computed using \eqref{eqn:markovRecursion3}-\eqref{eq:sum}, and $p_{TA}$ defined by \eqref{eqn:ptaCase2}.
The grey circle on each curve indicates the optimal resampling number, which increases with the problem dimension.}
\end{figure}
As can be seen from the location of the minima in \figurename \ref{fig:expE}, indicated by the small grey circles, the optimal resampling number increases with the problem dimension. The exact optimal number of resamplings to make in different dimensions is displayed in \figurename \ref{fig:op}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{D_optimalR}
\caption{\label{fig:op}Exact theoretical optimal resampling number required by RMHC, to solve the noisy OneMax problem, without storing a statistic of the fitness of the best-so-far genome (case 2 described in Section \ref{sec:case2}).}
\end{figure}
\section{Experimental results}\label{sec:xp}
To supplement the theoretical results of the previous and to prove the benefit of storing statistics of the best-so-far genome at each generation, we apply first RMHC on the OneMax problem in a noise-free case (\figurename \ref{fig:rmhc}), then evaluate the performance of RMHC on the OneMax problem with the presence of constant variance Gaussian noise (\figurename \ref{fig:rf}).
Each experiment was repeated $100$ times, initialised by an all zeros string.
The following may be observed from the figures:
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{empE_noisefree}
\caption{\label{fig:rmhc}Empirical number of evaluations consumed by RMHC in the noise-free OneMax problem. No resampling is required in the noise-free case. Each experiment is repeated $100$ times initialised by an all zeros string. The standard error is too tiny to be seen.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{empE_nohist}
\caption{\label{fig:rfrmhc2}Empirical number of evaluations consumed by RMHC in the noisy OneMax problem, across different resampling numbers, without storing a statistic of the best-so-far genome. This empirically-obtained data is equivalent to the theoretical
results shown in \figurename \ref{fig:expE}.}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{empE_hist}
\caption{\label{fig:rfrmhc3}Empirical number of evaluations consumed by RMHC in the noisy OneMax problem, across different resampling numbers, using the \emph{stored statistic} method. Fewer
fitness evaluations are consumed compared to the case without stored statistic (shown in the above figure). Here the $n=1000$ curve is truncated on the left, showing missing data points, because in those cases an optimum was not reached within $10^7$ fitness evaluations, when using low resampling numbers ($r=1,2,3,4,5$).}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{\label{fig:rf}Performance of RMHC in the noisy OneMax problem with different numbers of resamplings. The maximal budget is $10^7$ fitness evaluations.
Note that the y-axis is the
logarithm of the evaluation number. Each experiment was repeated $100$ times, initialised by an all-zeros string. The standard error is too tiny to be seen.
In the noisy case, the optimal resampling number increases with the problem dimension.}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item due to the noise, far more fitness evaluations are required to find the optimum in the noisy case than in the noise-free context;
\item the
higher dimension problem required more fitness evaluations to reach the optimum;
\item in dimensions $\leq$ 10, no resampling leads to a reduction in the number of required fitness evaluations;
\item in higher dimensions ($n>10$), the optimal amount of resampling required increases with the problem dimension;
\item in higher dimensions ($n\gg10$), the evaluation number is significantly reduced by using the stored statistic.
\end{itemize}
Additionally, \figurename \ref{fig:rf} clearly shows the benefit of storing the average fitness value and the current evaluation number of the best-so-far genome at the end of each generation (case 3 described in Section \ref{sec:case3}).
\subsection{Validation of Theoretical results} \label{sec:validationTheoretical}
To validate the theoretical results and equations of Section \ref{sec:analysis}, Table \ref{tab} demonstrates a very close match between the theoretically obtained number of evaluations (derived from \eqref{eqn:markovRecursion3}-\eqref{eq:sum}) and the equivalent empirically calculated numbers (i.e. those found by actually running the RMHC algorithm repeatedly and averaging). This table hopefully validates the accuracy of our theoretical derivations
and our numerical implementation.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{\label{tab}The expectation of fitness evaluation number required to reach the optimum (\eqref{eqn:markovRecursion3} and \eqref{eq:zeros}) in the noisy OneMax problem on dimension $10$ and the empirical average fitness evaluations consumed in $10,000$ trials.}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
$r$ & Expected \#evaluations & Empirical \#evaluations\\
\hline
1 &205.8283 & 205.1998\\
2 &238.5264 & 239.7504\\
3 &276.3340 & 274.9920\\
4 &317.9576 & 317.8848\\
5 &362.4065 & 363.2520\\
10 &612.2250 & 611.0060\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
A further confirmation is shown by the equivalence of the curves shown in \figurename \ref{fig:rfrmhc2} to those shown in \figurename \ref{fig:expE}.
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conc}
This paper presents a noisy OneMax problem with additive constant variance Gaussian noise and analyses the optimal resampling number required by the Random Mutation Hill Climber (RMHC) to handle the noise.
The number of fitness evaluations required by RMHC to find the optimal solution in the noisy OneMax problem varies with the resampling number. In a very low-dimensional noisy OneMax problem (dimension 10, hence the string only has $1024$ possible values), the optimal value may be found by a random walk, and resampling can be counterproductive in these cases (it leads to the remarkable growth of the number of evaluations required to find the optimum as shown in \figurename \ref{fig:rf}).
However, in higher dimensions, resampling to reduce the noise is of critical importance, and makes the difference between success and failure. The optimal level of resampling increases with the dimension in the search space (as shown empirically in \figurename \ref{fig:expE}, and analytically in \figurename \ref{fig:op}). This is an interesting result, which for this particular benchmark problem, is in conflict with the observation by Qian et al. in \cite{qian2014effectiveness} that resampling was not beneficial.
RMHC is simple but efficient. The success of ($\mu$-$\lambda$)-GA, of which (1+1)-EA can be seen as a variant, depends on one or more parameters, such as the size of the population, $\lambda$, the number of parents, $\mu$, and the crossover and mutation operators. RMHC does not have such details to adjust and is therefore simpler to apply.
Due to its efficiency and simplicity RMHC should be considered as a
useful tool for expensive optimisation tasks.
\balance
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
When releasing microdata to the public, methods of statistical disclosure control (SDC) are used to protect confidential data, that is ``data which allow statistical units to be identified, either directly or indirectly, thereby disclosing individual information'' \cite{REG},
while enabling valid statistical inference to be drawn on the relevant population. SDC methods include data swapping, additive and multiplicative noise, top and bottom coding, and also the creation of synthetic data. In this paper, the authors provide inferential tools for the statistical analysis of a singly imputed synthetic dataset when the real dataset cannot be released. The multiple imputation case is also addressed, using a new adapted method of generating synthetic data, which the authors call Fixed-Posterior Predictive Sampling (FPPS).
The use of synthetic data for SDC started with Little \cite{little93} and Rubin \cite{rubin93} using multiple imputation \cite{rubin87}. Reiter \cite{reiter03} was the first to present methods for drawing inference based on partially synthetic data. Moura et al. \cite{moura16} complemented this work with the development of likelihood-based exact inference methods for both single and multiple imputation, that is, inferential procedures developed based on exact distributions, and not on asymptotic results, in the case where synthetic datasets were generated via Plug-in Sampling. The procedures of Reiter \cite{reiter03} are general in that they can be applied to a variety of estimators and statistical models, but these procedures are only applicable in the multiple imputation case, and are based on large sample approximations.
There are two major objectives in the present research. First, to make available likelihood-based exact inference for singly imputed synthetic data via Posterior Predictive Sampling (PPS) where the usual available procedures are not applicable, therefore extending the work of Klein and Sinha \cite{Klein2015}, under the multivariate linear regression (MLR) model. Second, to propose a different approach for release of multiple synthetic datasets, FPPS, which can use a similar way of gathering information from the synthetic datasets to that used in \cite{moura16}, when these synthetic datasets are generated via the Plug-in Sampling method. This second objective arises from the fact that when using the classical PPS it is too hard to construct an exact joint probability density function (pdf) for the estimators, under the MLR model, since one would face the problem of deriving the distribution of a sum of variables that follow Wishart distributions with different parameter matrices. It is with this problem in mind, that we propose an adapted method that we will call the FPPS method. We show that this method offers a higher level of confidentiality than the Plug-in Sampling method, and it still allows one to draw inference for the unknown parameters using a joint pdf of the proposed estimators.
A brief description of the PPS and FPPS methods follows. Suppose that
$\mathbf{Y}=(\mathbf{y}_1,...,\mathbf{y}_n)$ are
the original data which are jointly distributed according to the pdf
$f_{\boldsymbol\theta}(\mathbf{Y})$, where $\boldsymbol\theta$ is the unknown (scalar, vector or matrix) parameter. A prior $\pi(\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\theta}})$ for $\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ is assumed and then the posterior distribution of $\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\theta}}$ is obtained as $\pi(\boldsymbol{\theta}|Y)\propto \pi(\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\theta}})f_{\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\theta}}(x)}$, and used to draw a replication $\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\theta}}_f^\bullet$ of $\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\theta}}$, when applying the FPPS, or draw $M \geq 1$ independent replications $\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\theta}}_1^\bullet,...,\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\theta}}_M^\bullet$ of $\boldsymbol{\theta}$, when applying the PPS.
In the case of FPPS, we generate $M$ replicates of $\mathbf{Y}$, namely, $\mathbf{W}_j=(\mathbf{w}_{j1},...,\mathbf{w}_{jn})$, $j=1,...,M$ drawn all independently from the same $f_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_f^\bullet}$, where $f_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_f^\bullet}$ is the joint pdf of the original $\mathbf{Y}$ with $\boldsymbol{\theta}_f^\bullet$ replacing the unknown $\boldsymbol{\theta}$. In the case of the usual PPS method for each $j$-th generated synthetic dataset we would use the corresponding $j$-th posterior draw $\boldsymbol{\theta}_j^\bullet$ and corresponding $j$-th joint pdf's $f_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_j^\bullet}$, for $j=1,...,M$. In either case, these synthetic datasets $\mathbf{W}_1, \hdots, \mathbf{W}_M$ will be the datasets available to the general public. One may observe that, for $M=1$, the Posterior Predictive Sampling and Fixed-Posterior Predictive Sampling methods concur.
Regarding the MLR model, in our context, we consider the \textit{sensitive} response variables $y_j$ $(j=1,...,m)$ forming the vector of response variables $\mathbf{y}={(y_1,...,y_m)'}$, and a set of p non-\textit{sensitive} explanatory variables $\mathbf{x}=(x_1,...,x_p)'$. It is assumed that $\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{x}\sim N_m(\mathbf{B'}\mathbf{x},\mathbf{\Sigma})$, with $\mathbf{B}$ and $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ unknown, and the original data consist of $\mathcal{Y}=\linebreak\lbrace(y_{1i},...,y_{mi},x_{1i},...,x_{pi}),i=1,...,n\rbrace$, where $n$ will be the sample size. Let us consider $\mathbf{Y}=(\mathbf{y}_1,...,\mathbf{y}_n)$ with $\mathbf{y}_i=(y_{1i},...,y_{mi})'$ and $\mathbf{X}=(\mathbf{x}_1,...,\mathbf{x}_n)$ with $\mathbf{x}_i=(x_{1i},...,x_{pi})'$. We assume $rank(\mathbf{X}:p \times n) = p < n$ and $n\geq m+p$. Therefore the following regression model is considered
\begin{equation}\label{eq:model}
\mathbf{Y}_{m\times n}=\mathbf{B}'_{m\times p} \mathbf{X}_{p\times n} + \mathbb{E}_{m\times n},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\mathbb{E}_{m\times n}$ is distributed as $N_{mn}(\mathbf{0},\mathbf{I}_n\otimes \mathbf{\Sigma})$. Based on the
original data,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:orB}
\mathbf{\hat{B}}=(\mathbf{XX}')^{-1}\mathbf{XY'}
\end{equation}
is the Maximum Likelihood Estimator (MLE) and the Uniformly Minimum-Variance Unbiased Estimator (UMVUE) of $\mathbf{B}$, distributed as
$N_{pm}(\mathbf{B},\mathbf{\Sigma}\otimes(\mathbf{XX'})^{-1})$, independent of
$\mathbf{\hat{\Sigma}}=\frac{1}{n}(\mathbf{Y}-\mathbf{\hat{B}'}\mathbf{X})(\mathbf{Y}-\mathbf{\hat{B}'}\mathbf{X})'$ which is the MLE
of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$, with $n \mathbf{\hat{\Sigma}}\sim W_m(\mathbf{\Sigma},n-p)$. Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{eq:orS}
\mathbf{S}=\frac{n\mathbf{\hat{\Sigma}}}{n-p}
\end{equation}
will be the UMVUE of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$.
The organization of the paper is as follows. In Section \ref{sec:post}, based on singly and multiply imputed synthetic datasets generated via Fixed-Posterior Predictive Sampling, two procedures are proposed to draw inference for the matrix of regression coefficients. Under the single imputation case, we recall that the FPPS and the PPS methods coincide. The test statistics proposed will be pivot statistics, different from the classical test statistics for $\mathbf{B}$ under the MLR model (see \cite[Secs 8.3 and 8.6]{anderson84}) since it is shown that these classical test statistics are not pivotal in the present context. Section \ref{sec:sim} presents some simulations in order to check the accuracy of theoretically derived results. Also in this section, the authors use a measure for the \textit{radius} (distance between the center and the edge) of the confidence sets for the regression coefficients adapted from \cite{moura16}, computed for the original data and also for the synthetic data generated via FPPS. These \textit{radius} measures are compared with the ones obtained when synthetic datasets are generated via Plug-in Sampling. Section \ref{sec:app} presents data analyses under the proposed methods in the context of public use data from the U.S. Current Population Survey comparing with the same data analysis given by \cite{moura16} under the Plug-in Sampling method. In Section \ref{sec:pri}, we compare the level of privacy protection obtained via our FPPS method and via Plug-in Sampling method. Some concluding remarks are added in Section \ref{sec:con}. Proofs of the theorems, and other technical derivations are presented in Appendices \ref{App:A} and \ref{App:last}.
\section{ANALYSIS FOR SINGLE AND MULTIPLE IMPUTATION}
\label{sec:post}
In this section, we present two new exact likelihood-based procedures for the analysis of synthetic data generated using Fixed-Posterior Predictive Sampling method, under the MLR model in (\ref{eq:model}). For the single imputation case, the two new procedures developed also offer the possibility of drawing inference for a single synthetic dataset generated via Posterior Predictive Sampling.
\subsection{A FIRST NEW PROCEDURE}
\label{ssec:mul1}
In this subsection, the synthetic data will consist of $M$ synthetic versions of $\mathbf{Y}$ generated based on the FPPS method.
Consider the joint prior distribution $\pi(\mathbf{B},\mathbf{\Sigma})\propto |\mathbf{\Sigma}|^{-\alpha/2},$ leading to the posterior distributions for $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ and $\mathbf{B}$
%
\begin{equation}\label{eq:postSigma}
\mathbf{\Sigma}|_{\mathcal{Y},\mathbf{S}}\sim W^{-1}_m ((n-p)\mathbf{S},n+\alpha-p)
\end{equation} and
%
\begin{equation}\label{eq:postB}
\mathbf{B}|_{\mathcal{Y},\mathbf{\Sigma}}\sim N_{pm}(\mathbf{\hat{B},\Sigma\otimes(XX')^{-1}}),
\end{equation}
where we assume that $n+\alpha>p+m+1$ (see proof in Appendix \ref{Aapp:last0}). Consequently, we draw $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}$ from (\ref{eq:postSigma}) and $\mathbf{\tilde{B}}$ from (\ref{eq:postB}), upon replacing $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ by $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}$ in this latter expression. We then generate the $M$ synthetic datasets, denoted as $\mathbf{W}_j=(\mathbf{w}_{j1},...,\mathbf{w}_{jn})$, for $j=1,...,M$, where $\mathbf{w}_{ji}=(w_{1ji},...,w_{mji})'$, are independently distributed as
%
\begin{equation}\label{eq:synt}
\mathbf{w}_{ji}|_{\mathbf{\tilde{B}},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}}\sim N_m(\mathbf{\tilde{B}'x_i},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}),~~ i=1,...,n, j=1,...,M.
\end{equation}
%
For $i=1,...,n$ and $j=1,...,M$, let $\mathbf{B}_j^{\bullet}=(\mathbf{XX'})^{-1}\mathbf{XW}'_j $ and $\mathbf{S}_j^{\bullet}=\frac{1}{n-p}(\mathbf{W}_j-\mathbf{B}_j^{\bullet'}\mathbf{X})(\mathbf{W}_j-\mathbf{B}_j^{\bullet'}\mathbf{X})'$
be the estimators of $\mathbf{B}$ and $\mathbf{\Sigma}$, based on the synthetic data ${(w_{1ji},...,w_{mji},x_{1i},...,x_{pi})}$, which by Lemma 1.1 in \cite{moura16} are jointly sufficient. Conditional on $(\mathbf{\tilde{B}},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}})$, for every $j=1,...,M$, $\mathbf{B}_j^{\bullet}$ is independent of $\mathbf{S}_j^{\bullet}$ and $\left\{(\mathbf{B}_1^{\bullet},\mathbf{S}_1^{\bullet}),...,(\mathbf{B}_M^{\bullet},\mathbf{S}_M^{\bullet})\right\}$ are jointly sufficient estimators for $\mathbf{B}$ and $\mathbf{\Sigma}$. Define then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:parameters1st}
\overline{\mathbf{B}}^\bullet_M=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{j=1}^M \mathbf{B}_j^{\bullet}~~~{\rm and}~~~\overline{\mathbf{S}}^\bullet_M=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{j=1}^M \mathbf{S}_j^{\bullet},
\end{equation}
which are also mutually independent, given $\tilde{\mathbf{B}}$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}$.
For $p\geq m$ and
$n+\alpha>p+2m+2$, we derive the following main results.
\vspace{-10pt}
\begin{enumerate}
\item The MLE of $\mathbf{B}$ is $\overline{\mathbf{B}}^\bullet_M$, which is unbiased for $\mathbf{B}$, with $Var(\overline{\mathbf{B}}^\bullet_M)\!$\linebreak$=\!N_{M,n,m,p,\alpha}\mathbf{\Sigma}\!\otimes\!(\mathbf{\!XX'})^{-1}$, where
$N_{M,n,m,p,\alpha}=\frac{2M(n+\frac{\alpha}{2}-p-m-1)+n-p}{M(n+\alpha-p-2m-2)}$
(see Theorem \ref{thm:pdf} and Appendix \ref{Aapp:last3}).
\item An unbiased estimator (UE) of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ will be $\mathbf{\hat{S}}_M=\frac{n+\alpha-p-2m-2}{n-p}\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M$ (see Theorem \ref{thm:pdf} and Appendix \ref{Aapp:last3}); for $\alpha=2m+2$, $\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M$ will also be an UE for $\mathbf{\Sigma}$,
\item In Theorem \ref{thm:dist} (see below), we prove that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:T1st}
T^\bullet_M=\frac{|(\overline{\mathbf{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'(\mathbf{XX}')(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B)}|}{|M(n-p)\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M|}\,,
\end{equation}
a statistic somewhat related with the Hotelling $T^2$, this one built to make inference on a matrix parameter, is a pivotal quantity, and that for $\mathbf{A}_1\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m,n+\alpha-p-m-1)$, $\mathbf{A}_2\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m,n-p)$ and $F_i\sim F_{p-i+1,M(n-p)-i+1}$\linebreak $(i=1,...,m)$, all independent random variables,
$$T^\bullet_M|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\stackrel{st}{\sim}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\frac{p-i+1}{M(n-p)-i+1}F_{i}\right\}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|,$$
where $\mathbf{\Omega}$ has the same distribution as $\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathbf{A}_2^{-1}\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}$ and where $\stackrel{st}{\sim}$ means `stochastic equivalent to'.
\item If one wants to test a linear combination of the parameters in $\mathbf{B}$, namely, $\mathbf{C = A B}$ where $\mathbf{A}$ is a $k\times p$ matrix with $rank(\mathbf{A})=k\leq p$ and $k\geq m$, one defines
$$T^\bullet_{M,\mathbf{C}}=\linebreak\frac{|(\mathbf{A \overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{C})'(\mathbf{A(XX')^{-1}A'})^{-1}(\mathbf{A\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{C})|}{|M(n-p)\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M|}$$and proceeds by noting that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:TC1}
T^\bullet_{M,\mathbf{C}}|_\mathbf{W}\stackrel{st}{\sim}\left\{ \prod_{i=1}^{m}\frac{k-i+1}{M(n-p)-i+1}F_{k,i}\right\}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|,
\end{equation}
with $F_{k,i}\sim F_{k-i+1,M(n-p)-i+1}$ being independent random variables and $\mathbf{\Omega}$ defined as in the previous item.
(i)\textit{Test for the significance of $\mathbf{C}$:} in order to test $H_0:\mathbf{C}=\mathbf{C}_0$ versus
$H_1:\mathbf{C}\neq\mathbf{C}_0$, we reject $H_0$ whenever $T^\bullet_{M,\mathbf{C}_0}$ exceeds $\delta_{M,k,m,p,n;\gamma}$ where
$\delta_{M,k,m,p,n;\gamma}$ satisfies $(1-\gamma)= Pr(T^\bullet_{M,\mathbf{C}_0}\leq\delta_{M,k,m,p,n;\gamma})$ when $H_0$ is true. To perform a test for $\mathbf{B=B}_0$ one has to take $\mathbf{A=I}_p$.
(ii)\textit{Confidence set for $\mathbf{C}$:} a $(1-\gamma)$ level confidence set for $\mathbf{C}$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:elipsoidAB}
\Delta_M(\mathbf{C})=\lbrace\mathbf{C}:T^\bullet_{M,\mathbf{C}}\leq\delta_{M,k,m,n,p;\gamma}\rbrace,
\end{equation}
where the value of $\delta_{M,k,m,n,p;\gamma}$ can be obtained by simulating the distribution in (\ref{eq:TC1}).
\end{enumerate}
Results in 1-4 are derived based on Theorems \ref{thm:pdf} and \ref{thm:dist} below.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:pdf}
The joint pdf of $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M$ and $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}$, for $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M$ and $\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M$ defined in (\ref{eq:parameters1st}), is proportional to
\[\begin{array}{l}
e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace\mathbf{(\frac{M+1}{M}\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)}^{-1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})+M(n-p)\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M\rbrace}\\
~~~~~\times \frac{\vert\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)-m-1}{2}}}{\vert\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)+n+\alpha}{2}-m-1}}\vert\mathbf{\Sigma}\vert^{-\frac{n}{2}} |\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}+\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}|^{-p/2} |\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}+\Sigma^{-1}}|^{-\frac{2n+\alpha-2p-m-1}{2}},
\end{array}\]
so that $\overline{\mathbf{B}}^\bullet_M$ and $\overline{\mathbf{S}}^\bullet_M$, given $\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}$, are independent, with $$\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M|_{\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}}\sim N_{pm}\left(\mathbf{B},\left(\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma}\right)\otimes(\mathbf{XX}')^{-1}\right)$$
and
$$\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M|_{\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}}\sim W_m\left(\frac{1}{M(n-p)}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},M(n-p)\right).$$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{App:A}.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:dist}
The distribution of the statistic $T^\bullet_M$ defined in (\ref{eq:T1st}) can be obtained from the decomposition
$$T^\bullet_M|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\stackrel{st}{\sim}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\frac{p-i+1}{M(n-p)-i+1}F_{i}\right\}\left\vert\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right\vert$$
where $F_i\sim F_{p-i+1,M(n-p)-i+1}$ are independent random variables, themselves independent of $\mathbf{\Omega}$, which has the same distribution as $\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathbf{A}_2^{-1}\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}$ with $\mathbf{A}_1\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m,n+\alpha-p-m-1)$ and $\mathbf{A}_2\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m,n-p)$, two independent random variables.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{App:A}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
\indent When $m=1$ and $M=1$, the statistic in (\ref{eq:T1st}) reduces to the statistic $T^2$ used in \cite{Klein2015} whose pdf is obtained by noting that
$$T^2|_{\Omega=\omega}\sim \frac{p}{n-p}(2+\omega)F_{p,n-p} ~~~{\rm where}~~~ f_{\Omega}(\omega)\propto\frac{\omega^{\frac{n+\alpha-p-4}{2}}}{(1+\omega)^{\frac{2n+\alpha-2p-2}{2}}}.$$
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
We remark that the statistic $T^\bullet_M$ in (\ref{eq:T1st}) degenerates towards zero when $n\rightarrow\infty$ or $M\rightarrow\infty$, but
$$
(M(n-p))^m\,T^\bullet_M|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\xrightarrow[n\rightarrow\infty]{d}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{p-i+1}\right\}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|
$$
and
$$
(M(n-p))^m\,T^\bullet_M|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\xrightarrow[M\rightarrow\infty]{d}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{p-i+1}\right\}\left|\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|,
$$
where $\xrightarrow{~~d~~}$ represents convergence in distribution.
Consequently, if instead of using $T^\bullet_M$ one uses $T^\bullet_{M2}=(M(n-p))^m\,T^\bullet_M=\frac{|(\overline{\mathbf{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'(XX')(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B)}|}{|\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M|}$
one would have
$$
T^\bullet_{M2}|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\xrightarrow[n\rightarrow\infty]{d}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{p-i+1}\right\}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|
$$
and
$$
T^\bullet_{M2}|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\xrightarrow[M\rightarrow\infty]{d}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{p-i+1}\right\}\left|\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|,
$$
which corresponds to the use of a simple scale change.
\end{rem}
In Table 1, we list the simulated $0.05$ cut-off points for $T^\bullet_M$, for $M=1$ for some values of $p$, $m$ and $n$.
\begin{table}[h!]
\footnotesize
\caption{\footnotesize{Cut-off points of the 95\% confidence set for the regression coefficient $\mathbf{B}$}}
\vspace{-15pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\begin{tabular}{ | r | l | l | l | l | }
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{$n$} & \multicolumn{4}{| c |}{$p=3$}\\[-2pt]
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{$m=1$} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{$m=3$}\\[-2pt]
& \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\alpha=2$} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\alpha=4$} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\alpha=4$} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\alpha=6$} \\ \cline{1-5}
10 & 6.568 & 7.433 & 20.11 & 29.08\\
50 & 5.502E-01 & 5.581E-01 & 9.277E-03 & 9.691E-03\\
100 & 2.518E-01 & 2.542E-01 & 9.212E-04 & 9.443E-04\\
200 & 1.207E-01 & 1.208E-01 & 1.049E-04 & 1.064E-04\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\
\begin{tabular}{ | r | l | l | l | l |}
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{$n$} &\multicolumn{4}{| c |}{$p=4$}\\[-2pt]
&\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$m=1$} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{$m=3$}\\[-2pt]
&\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$\alpha=2$} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\alpha=4$} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\alpha=4$} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$\alpha=6$} \\ \cline{1-5}
10 & 11.08 & 12.69 & 239.2 & 372.7 \\
50 & 6.884E-01 & 6.984E-01 & 3.550E-02 & 3.697E-02\\
100 & 3.108E-01 & 3.128E-01 & 3.487E-03 & 3.564E-03\\
200 & 1.487E-01 & 1.490E-01 & 3.674E-04 & 3.723E-04 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-8pt}
\end{table}
Similar to what was done in \cite{moura16}, one could suggest the following adaptations of the classical test criterion for the multivariate regression model (see \cite[Secs 8.3 and 8.6]{anderson84} for the classical criteria):
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $T^\bullet_{1,M}=|\mathbf{\overline{S}}_M^{\bullet}||\mathbf{\overline{S}}_M^{\bullet}+(\mathbf{\overline{B}}_M^{\bullet}-\mathbf{B})'(XX')(\mathbf{\overline{B}}_M^{\bullet}-\mathbf{B})|^{-1}$ (Wilks' Lambda
Criterion),
\item[(b)] $T^\bullet_{2,M}=tr\left[(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'(\mathbf{XX'})(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}-\mathbf{B})(\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M)^{-1}\right]$ (Pillai's Trace Criterion),
\item[(c)]
$T^\bullet_{3,M}=tr\left[(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\!-\!\mathbf{B})'(\mathbf{XX'})(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\!-\!\mathbf{B})[(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\!-\!\mathbf{B})'(\mathbf{XX'})(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\!-\!\mathbf{B})+\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M]^{-1}\!\right]$ (Hotelling-Lawley Trace Criterion),
\item[(d)] $T^\bullet_{4,M}=\lambda_1$ where $\lambda_1$ denotes the largest eigenvalue of $(\mathbf{\overline{B}}_M^{\bullet}-\mathbf{B})'(\mathbf{XX'})(\mathbf{\overline{B}}_M^{\bullet}-\mathbf{B})(\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M)^{-1}$ (Roy's
Largest Root Criterion).
\end{itemize}
However, these statistics are non-pivotal, since their distributions are function of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ (see Appendix \ref{Aapp:last3}).
\subsection{A SECOND NEW PROCEDURE}
\label{ssec:mul2}
We propose yet another likelihood-based approach for exact inference about $\mathbf{B}$ where one may gather more information from the released synthetic data, following a somewhat similar procedure to the one used in \cite{moura16}. Let us start by recalling that $\mathbf{W_j}\;(j=1,...,M)$ are $m\times n$ matrices formed by the vectors $(\mathbf{w}_{j1},...,\mathbf{w}_{jn})$ as columns, generated from $\mathbf{w}_{ji}|_{\mathbf{\tilde{B}},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}}\sim N_m(\mathbf{\tilde{B}'x_i},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}})$ $(i=1,...,n)$.
Note that, conditionally on $\mathbf{\tilde{B}}$ and $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}$, $(\mathbf{w}_{1i},...,\mathbf{w}_{Mi})$ is a random sample from $N_m(\mathbf{\tilde{B}'x}_i,\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}})$, for $i=1,...,n$. Consider $\mathbf{\overline{w}}_i=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{j=1}^M\mathbf{w}_{ji}$ and $\mathbf{S}_{\mathbf{w}i}=\sum_{j=1}^M (\mathbf{w}_{ji}-\mathbf{\overline{w}}_i)(\mathbf{w}_{ji}-\mathbf{\overline{w}}_i)'$ which are sufficient statistics for $\mathbf{\Sigma}$, based on the i-th covariate vector. Defining $\mathbf{S}_\mathbf{w}=\sum_{i=1}^n \mathbf{S}_{\mathbf{w}i}$, we have $(\mathbf{\overline{w}}_1,...,\mathbf{\overline{w}}_n,\mathbf{S}_\mathbf{w})$ as the joint sufficient statistics for $(\mathbf{B,\Sigma})$.
Conditionally on $\mathbf{\tilde{B}}$ and $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}$, we have $\mathbf{\overline{w}}_i\sim N_m(\mathbf{\tilde{B}'x}_i,\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}})$ and $\mathbf{S}_{\mathbf{w}i}\sim W_m(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},M-1)$.
From the $M$ released synthetic data matrices $\mathbf{W}_j\; (j=1,...,M)$, we may define $\mathbf{\overline{W}}_M=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{j=1}^M\mathbf{W}_j$ and define for $\mathbf{B}$ its estimator
\begin{equation}\label{eq:par2nd1}
\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M=(\mathbf{XX')^{-1}X\overline{W}}_M',
\end{equation}
and for $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ its estimator
\begin{equation}\label{eq:par2nd2}
\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_{comb}=\frac{\mathbf{S}_\mathbf{w}+M\times\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{mean}}{Mn-p},
\end{equation}
where we define ${\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{mean}}= (\mathbf{\overline{W}}_M-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{X})(\mathbf{\overline{W}}_M-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{X})'$.
In fact, if the $M$ synthetic datasets are treated as a single synthetic dataset of size $nM$, the estimators obtained for $\mathbf B$ and $\mathbf\Sigma$
will be exactly the same as the ones obtained in (\ref{eq:par2nd1}) and (\ref{eq:par2nd2}). The proof of this fact may be analyzed in Appendix C.
Analogous to what was done in the previous subsection, one can derive the following inferential results, for $p\geq m$ and $n+\alpha>p+2m+2$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item An UE of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ will be $\mathbf{\hat{S}}_M=\frac{n+\alpha-p-2m-2}{n-p}\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_{comb}$ (see Corollary \ref{cor:pdf} Appendix \ref{Aapp:last5}), and for $\alpha=2m+2$, $\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_{comb}$ will also be an UE for $\mathbf{\Sigma}$.
\item In Corollary \ref{cor:pdf} (see below), we prove that
\vspace{.2cm}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:T2nd}
T^\bullet_{comb}=\frac{|(\overline{\mathbf{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'(XX')(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B)}|}{|(Mn-p)\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_{comb}|}
\vspace{.2cm}
\end{equation}
is a pivotal quantity, and that for $\mathbf{A}_1\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m,n+\alpha-p-m-1)$, $\mathbf{A}_2\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m,n-p)$ and $F_i\sim F_{p-i+1,Mn-p-i+1}\; (i=1,...,m)$, all independent random variables,
\vspace{.2cm} $$T^\bullet_{comb}|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\stackrel{st}{\sim}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\frac{p-i+1}{Mn-p-i+1}F_{i}\right\}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|,
\vspace{.1cm}
$$
where $\mathbf{\Omega}$ has the same distribution as $\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathbf{A}_2^{-1}\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}$.
\item If one wants to test a linear combination of the parameters in $\mathbf{B}$, namely, $\mathbf{C = A B }$ where $\mathbf{A}$ is a $k\times p$ matrix with $rank(\mathbf{A})=k\leq p$ and $k\geq m$, one may define
\vspace{.2cm}
$$T^\bullet_{comb,\mathbf{C}} =\linebreak {\frac{|(\mathbf{A \overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{C})'(\mathbf{A(XX')^{-1}A'})^{-1}(\mathbf{A\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{C})|}{|(Mn-p)\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_{comb}|}},
\vspace{.2cm}
$$
and proceed by noting that
\vspace{.2cm}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:TC2}
T^\bullet_{comb,\mathbf{C}}|\mathbf{W}\stackrel{st}{\sim} \left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\frac{k-i+1}{Mn-p-i+1}F_{k,i}\right\}\Bigl|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\Bigr|,
\vspace{.2cm}
\end{equation}
with $F_{k,i}\sim F_{k-i+1,Mn-p-i+1}$ being independent random variables and $\mathbf{\Omega}$ defined as in the previous item.
(i)\textit{Test for the significance of $\mathbf{C}$:} in order to test $H_0:\mathbf{C}=\mathbf{C}_0$ versus
$H_1:\mathbf{C}\neq\mathbf{C}_0$, we reject $H_0$ whenever $T^\bullet_{comb,\mathbf{C}_0}$ exceeds $\delta_{comb,k,m,p,n;\gamma}$ where
$\delta_{comb,k,m,p,n;\gamma}$ satisfies $(1-\gamma)= Pr(T^\bullet_{comb,\mathbf{C}_0}\leq\delta_{comb,k,m,p,n;\gamma})$ when $H_0$ is true. To perform a test for $\mathbf{B=B}_0$ one has to take $\mathbf{A=I}_p$.
(ii)\textit{Confidence set for $\mathbf{C}$:} a $(1-\gamma)$ level confidence set for $\mathbf{C}$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:elipsoidAB2}
\Delta_{comb}(\mathbf{C})=\lbrace\mathbf{C}:T^\bullet_{comb,\mathbf{C}}\leq\delta_{comb,k,m,n,p;\gamma}\rbrace,
\end{equation}
where the value of $\delta_{comb,k,m,n,p;\gamma}$ can be obtained by simulating the distribution in (\ref{eq:TC2}).
\end{enumerate}
Results in 1-3 are derived based on the following Corollaries \ref{cor:pdf} and \ref{cor:dist}, of Theorems \ref{thm:pdf} and \ref{thm:dist}, respectively.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:pdf}
The joint pdf of $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{S}_{comb}^\bullet$ and $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}$, for $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M$ and $\mathbf{S}_{comb}^\bullet$ defined in (\ref{eq:par2nd1}) and (\ref{eq:par2nd2}), is proportional to
\[\begin{array}{l}
e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace\mathbf{(\frac{M+1}{M}\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)}^{-1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})+(Mn-p)\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_{comb}\rbrace}\\
~~~~~~~\times \frac{\vert\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_{comb}\vert^{\frac{Mn-p-m-1}{2}}}{\vert\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\vert^{\frac{Mn-p+n+\alpha}{2}-m-1}}\vert\mathbf{\Sigma}\vert^{-\frac{n}{2}} |\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}+\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}|^{-p/2} |\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}+\Sigma^{-1}}|^{-\frac{2n+\alpha-2p-m-1}{2}}\,,
\end{array}\]
so that $\overline{\mathbf{B}}^\bullet_M$ and $\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}$, given $\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}$, are independent, with $$\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M|_{\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}}\sim N_{pm}\left(\mathbf{B},\left(\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma}\right)\otimes(\mathbf{XX}')^{-1}\right)$$
and
$$\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_{comb}|_{\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}}\sim W_m\left(\frac{1}{Mn-p}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},M(n-p)\right).$$
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{App:A}.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:dist}
The distribution of the statistic $T^\bullet_{comb}$ defined in (\ref{eq:T2nd}) can be obtained from the decomposition
$$T^\bullet_{comb}|_\mathbf{\Omega}\stackrel{st}{\sim}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\frac{p-i+1}{Mn-p-i+1}F_{i}\right\}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|$$
where $F_i\sim F_{p-i+1,Mn-p-i+1}$ are independent random variables, themselves independent of $\mathbf{\Omega}$, which has the same distribution as $\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathbf{A}_2^{-1}\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}$ with $\mathbf{A}_1\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m, n+\alpha-p-m-1)$ and $\mathbf{A}_2\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m, n-p)$, two independent random variables.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{App:A}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Similar to what happens with the statistic $T^\bullet_M$ in (\ref{eq:T1st}), the statistic $T^\bullet_{comb}$ in (\ref{eq:T2nd}) also degenerates towards zero when $n\rightarrow\infty$ or $M\rightarrow\infty$, and similarly to what happens with $T^\bullet_M$,
$$
(Mn-p)^m\,T^\bullet_{comb}|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\xrightarrow[n\rightarrow\infty]{d}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{p-i+1}\right\}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|
$$
and
$$
(Mn-p)^m\,T^\bullet_{comb}|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\xrightarrow[M\rightarrow\infty]{d}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{p-i+1}\right\}\left|\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|.
$$
Using the simple scale change $T^\bullet_{comb2}=(Mn-p)^m\,T^\bullet_{comb}=\frac{|(\overline{\mathbf{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'(XX')(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B)}|}{|\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_{comb}|}$
one would have
$$
T^\bullet_{comb2}|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\xrightarrow[n\rightarrow\infty]{d}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{p-i+1}\right\}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|
$$
and
$$
T^\bullet_{comb2}|_{\mathbf{\Omega}}\xrightarrow[M\rightarrow\infty]{d}\left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{p-i+1}\right\}\left|\mathbf{I}_{m}+\mathbf{\Omega}\right|,
$$
similar to what happens with $T^\bullet_M$.
\end{rem}
\section{SIMULATION STUDIES}
\label{sec:sim}
In order to compare the PPS and the FPPS methods with the Plug-in Sampling method we present the results of some simulations analogous to the ones presented in \cite{moura16}. The objectives of these simulations are: (i) to show that the inference methods developed in Section \ref{sec:post} perform as predicted, and (ii) to compare the measures (\textit{radius}) obtained from our methods with the ones from the Plug-in method. All simulations were carried out using the software Mathematica$^\circledR$. To conduct the simulation, we take the population distribution as a multivariate normal distribution with expected value given by the right hand side of (\ref{eq:model}), for $m=2$ and $p=3$, with matrix of regressor coefficients
$$\mathbf{B}=\left(
\begin{matrix}
1 & 2 \\
3 & 2 \\
1 & 1
\end{matrix}
\right)$$
and covariance matrix
$$\mathbf{\Sigma}=\left(
\begin{matrix}
1 & 0.5 \\
0.5 & 1 \\ \end{matrix} \right).$$
We set $\alpha=6$ in order to have both $\mathbf{\bar{S}}^\bullet_M$ and $\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}$ as the unbiased estimators of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$. The regressor variables $x_{1i},x_{2i}, x_{3i}, i=1,...,n$ are generated as i.i.d. $N(1,1)$
and held fixed for the entire simulation. Based on Monte Carlo simulation with $10^5$ iterations,
we compute an estimate of the coverage probability of the confidence regions for $\mathbf{B}$ and $\mathbf{C=AB}$ given by (\ref{eq:elipsoidAB}) and (\ref{eq:elipsoidAB2}), defined as percentage of observed values of the statistics smaller than the respective theoretical cut-off points, with $\mathbf{A}=\left(\begin{smallmatrix} 0 & 1 & 0\\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{smallmatrix}\right)$, using the methodologies described in Section \ref{sec:post}. For $M=1$, $M=2$ and $M=5$, the estimated coverage probabilities of the confidence sets are shown in Table 2 under the columns $\mathbf{B}(1)$ and $\mathbf{AB}(1)$ for the first new procedure in Subsection \ref{ssec:mul1}, and under the columns $\mathbf{B}(2)$ and $\mathbf{AB}(2)$ for the second new procedure in Subsection \ref{ssec:mul2}. For $M=1$, a single column is shown for each confidence region since the two new procedures are the same.
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{\footnotesize{Average coverage for $\mathbf{B}$ and $\mathbf{AB}$}}
\footnotesize
\vspace{-10pt}
\begin{center}
\footnotesize{
\begin{tabular}{| r | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | }\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{$n$} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{$M=1$} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{$M=2$} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{$M=5$} \\ \cline{2-11}
& \multirow{2}{*}{$\mathbf{B}$} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\mathbf{AB}$} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{1st Approach} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{2nd Approach} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{1st Approach} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{2nd Approach} \\
& & & $\mathbf{B} (1)$ & $\mathbf{AB} (1)$ & $\mathbf{B} (2)$ & $\mathbf{AB} (2)$ & $\mathbf{B} (1)$ & $\mathbf{AB} (1)$ & $\mathbf{B} (2)$ & $\mathbf{AB} (2)$\\ \hline
10 & 0.949 & 0.951 & 0.949 & 0.949 & 0.951 & 0.949 & 0.951 & 0.950 & 0.949 & 0.951 \\[-1pt]
50 & 0.949 & 0.950 & 0.951 & 0.951 & 0.950 & 0.951 & 0.951 & 0.950 & 0.949 & 0.948 \\[-1pt]
100 & 0.949 & 0.949 & 0.951 & 0.950 & 0.949 & 0.951 & 0.949 & 0.951 & 0.951 & 0.950 \\[-1pt]
200 & 0.951 & 0.951 & 0.949 & 0.951 & 0.951 & 0.949 & 0.950 & 0.951 & 0.950 & 0.951 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\vspace{-20pt}
\end{table}
The results reported in Table 2 for samples of size $n=10, 50, 100, 200$, show that, based on singly and multiply imputed synthetic data, the 0.95 confidence sets for
$\mathbf{B}$ and $\mathbf{AB}$ have an estimated coverage probability approximately equal to 0.95, confirming that the confidence sets perform as predicted.
In order to measure the {\it radius} (distance between the center and the edge) of the confidence sets, we use the same measure proposed in \cite{moura16}, which is
$$\Upsilon_M=d^*_{M,m,n,p,\gamma}\times |\tilde{\mathbf{S}}^\bullet_M|,$$
where $d^*_{M,m,n,p,\gamma}$ is the cut-off point in (\ref{eq:elipsoidAB}) or (\ref{eq:elipsoidAB2}). Here we take $M=0$ for the original data, with
$\tilde{\mathbf{S}}^\bullet_0=(n-p)\mathbf{S}$, $M=1$ for the singly imputed synthetic data and $M=2,5$ for the multiply imputed synthetic data, with
$\tilde{\mathbf{S}}^\bullet_M=M(n-p)\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M$ for the first new procedure,
and $\tilde{\mathbf{S}}^\bullet_M=(Mn-p)\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}$ for the second new procedure.
The expected value of this measure will be
$$E(\Upsilon_M)=d^*_{M,m,n,p,\gamma}\times\frac{(n-p)!}{(n-p-m)!}\times K_{M,n,p,m} |\mathbf{\Sigma}|$$
where $K_{0,n,p,m}=1$ for the original data, $$K_{M,n,p,m}=\frac{(-2+\kappa_{n,p,\alpha,m}-m)!}{(-2+\kappa_{n,p,\alpha,m})!}\frac{(Mn-Mp)!}{(Mn-Mp-m)!}$$
for the procedure in Subsection \ref{ssec:mul1} and $$K_{M,n,p,m}=\frac{(-2+\kappa_{n,p,\alpha,m}-m)!}{(-2+\kappa_{n,p,\alpha,m})!}\frac{(Mn-p)!}{(Mn-p-m)!}$$
for the procedure in Subsection \ref{ssec:mul2}, where $\kappa_{n,\alpha,p,m}=n+\alpha-p-m-1$, assuming $n+\alpha>p+2m+2$.
For more details about these expected values we refer to Appendix \ref{Aapp:last6}.
We present in Table 3 the average of the simulated values of the \textit{radius} $\Upsilon_M$ and its expected value $E(\Upsilon_M)$ for the confidence sets $\Delta_M(\mathbf{B})$ (first procedure) and $\Delta_{comb}(\mathbf{B})$ (second procedure), and in Table 4 the same values for the confidence sets $\Delta_M(\mathbf{C})$ (first procedure) and $\Delta_{comb}(\mathbf{C})$ (second procedure), for
$M=0,1,2,5$ and $n=10,50,200$. These values may be compared with the values obtained in \cite{moura16} for the Plug-in Sampling.
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Average values of $\Upsilon_M$ and the values of $E(\Upsilon_M)$ for the confidence set for $\mathbf{B}$.}
\footnotesize
\vspace{-10pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\begin{tabular}{| r | c || c | c || c | c | c | c | }\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{$n$} & \multirow{3}{*}{Orig} & \multicolumn{2}{c||}{$M=1$} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{$M=2$} \\\cline{3-8}
& & \multirow{2}{*}{avg} & \multirow{2}{*}{exp} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{1st Procedure} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{2nd Procedure} \\
& & & & avg & exp & avg & exp \\ \hline
10 & 36.97 & 507.25 & 512.19 & 251.55 & 252.55 & 237.64 & 238.68 \\
50 & 19.11 & 176.36 & 176.53 & 121.23 & 121.52 & 121.23 & 121.48 \\
200 & 17.52 & 154.93 & 156.06 & 105.81 & 106.61 & 105.90 & 106.72 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\
\vspace{-5pt}
\\
\begin{tabular}{| r | r | r | r | r | }\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{$n$} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{$M=5$} \\\cline{2-5}
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{1st Procedure} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{2nd Procedure} \\
& avg & exp & avg & exp \\ \hline
10 &175.34 & 176.18 & 163.82 & 168.92 \\
50 &92.25 & 92.80 & 92.28 & 92.84 \\
200 & 81.89 & 82.39 & 81.91 & 82.40 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Average values of $\Upsilon_M$ and the values of $E(\Upsilon_M)$ for the confidence set for $\mathbf{C=AB}$.}
\footnotesize
\vspace{-10pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\begin{tabular}{| r | r || r | r || r | r | r | r | }\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{$n$} & \multirow{3}{*}{Orig} & \multicolumn{2}{c||}{$M=1$} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{$M=2$} \\\cline{3-8}
& & \multirow{2}{*}{avg} & \multirow{2}{*}{exp} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{1st Procedure} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{2nd Procedure} \\
& & & & avg & exp & avg & exp \\ \hline
10 & 13.43 & 172.64 & 172.32 & 92.23 & 92.44 & 86.24 & 86.61 \\
50 & 7.33 & 68.93 & 68.99 & 47.75 & 47.86 & 47.45 & 47.55 \\
200 & 7.10 & 60.65 & 61.09 & 41.74 & 42.05 & 41.74 & 42.05 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\
\vspace{-5pt}
\\
\begin{tabular}{| r | c | c | c | c | }\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{$n$} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{$M=5$} \\\cline{2-5}
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{1st Procedure} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{2nd Procedure} \\
& avg & exp & avg & exp \\ \hline
10 & 63.07 & 63.38 & 61.34 & 61.74 \\
50 & 35.32 & 35.52 & 35.08 & 35.27 \\
200 & 32.47 & 32.51 & 32.54 & 32.53 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{table}
Observing Tables 3 and 4 and comparing the entries in these tables with the results in \cite{moura16} for Plug-in Sampling, we may see that when synthetic data are generated under FPPS, larger \textit{radius} are obtained. In the singly imputed case, one can observe that the PPS synthetic datasets will lead to a \textit{radius} that is approximately two and half times that of the \textit{radius} under Plug-in Sampling. As the number $M$ of released synthetic datasets increases, $\Upsilon_M$ slowly decreases, increasing however the difference of the \textit{radius} between the FPPS and the Plug-in methods.
Eventually, one may need very large values of $M$, in order to have values of $\Upsilon_M$ close to the value of $\Upsilon_0$. As in \cite{moura16} we also observe that the values of $\Upsilon_M\; (M>1)$, for both new FPPS procedures become identical for larger sample sizes.
\section{AN APPLICATION USING CURRENT POPULATION\\ SURVEY DATA}
\label{sec:app}
In this section, we provide an application based on the same real data used in \cite{moura16} to compare the original data inference with the one obtained via PPS, for the single imputation case, and via FPPS, for the multiple imputation case. The data are from the U.S. 2000 Current Population Survey (CPS) March supplement, available online at http://www.census.gov.cps/. Further details on the data may be found in \cite{moura16}.
In this application, $\mathbf{x}$, the vector of regressor variables, is defined as
\[
\begin{array}{l}
\mathbf{x}= \Big(1,N,L,A,I(E=34),...,I(E=37),I(E=39),...,I(E=46), \medskip \\
\hskip1.5cm I(M=3),...,I(M=7),I(R=2),I(R=4),I(S=2)\Big)',
\end{array}
\]
where N, L, A, are respectively, the number of people in household, the number of people in the household who are less than 18 years old and the age for the head of household, E, M, R and S, are respectively, the education level for the head of the household (coded to take values 31, 34-37, 39-46), the marital status for the head of the household (coded to take values 1,3-7), the race of the head of the household (coded to take values 1,2,4) and the sex of the head of the household (coded to take values 1,2). $\rm I(E=34)$ is the indicator variable for $E=34$, $\rm I(E=35)$ is the indicator variable for $E=35$, and so on, and where the indicator variable for the first code present in the sample for each variable is taken out in order to make the model matrix full rank.
The vector $\mathbf{y}$ of response variables will be formed by the same three numerical variables used in \cite{moura16}, namely, \textit{total household income}, \textit{household alimony payment} and \textit{household property tax}. After deleting all entries where at least one of these variables are reported as 0, we were left with a sample size of 141, and as such the model matrix $\mathbf{X}=[\mathbf{x}_1\cdots \mathbf{x}_n]$ has thus $p=24$ rows, $n=141$ columns, with rank equal to 24. Throughout this section we will assume $\alpha=8$ in order to have $\mathbf{S}^\bullet_M$ and $\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}$ as unbiased estimators of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$. Via PPS method we generate a single synthetic dataset and show in expression (\ref{exp:S}) the realizations of the unbiased estimator $\mathbf{S}^\bullet$ for $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ and of the estimator $\mathbf{S}$ for the original data, respectively denoted by $\widetilde{\mathbf{S}}^\bullet_1$ and $\mathbf{\widetilde{S}}$
\begin{equation}\footnotesize\label{exp:S}
\mathbf{\widetilde{S}^{\bullet}}_1=\left(\!
\begin{array}{rrr}
1.58572 & -0.20443 & 0.27981 \\
-0.20443 & 1.61395 & 0.16089 \\
0.27981 & 0.16089 & 0.34648 \\
\end{array}
\right),
\;\;
\mathbf{\widetilde{S}}=\left(\!
\begin{array}{rrr}
1.1980 & -0.0375 & 0.2970 \\[-2pt]
-0.0375 & 1.0699 & 0.1175 \\[-2pt]
0.2970 & 0.1175 & 0.4045 \\
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation}
In Table 5 we show the realizations of the unbiased estimator $\mathbf{B}^\bullet_1$ of $\mathbf{B}$ and of the estimator $\hat{\mathbf{B}}$ of the original data, respectively denoted by $\widetilde{\mathbf{B}}^\bullet_1$ and $\mathbf{\widetilde{\hat{B}}}$.
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Estimates of the regressor coefficients from the FPPS synthetic data ($\mathbf{\widetilde{B}}^{\bullet}$), Plug-in synthetic data ($\mathbf{\widetilde{B}}^*$) and from the original data.}
\scriptsize
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\begin{center}$\begin{array}{c||rrr||rrr|||rrr}
& \multicolumn{3}{c||}{FPPS} &\multicolumn{3}{c|||}{Plug-in} & \\ [-3pt]
\multirow{2}{*}{regressor} & \multicolumn{3}{c||}{Synthetic Data\; (\mathbf{\widetilde{B}}^{\bullet})} &\multicolumn{3}{c|||}{Synthetic Data\; (\mathbf{\widetilde{B}}^{*})} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Original Data \;(\mathbf{\widetilde{\hat{B}}})} \\
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{\rm I} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\rm AP} & \multicolumn{1}{c||}{\rm PT} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\rm I} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\rm AP} & \multicolumn{1}{c|||}{\rm PT} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\rm I} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\rm AP} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\rm PT}\\ \hline
\text{Intercept} & 11.4996 & 3.3381 & 8.1713 & 10.1829 & 3.7094 & 10.9787 & 9.8339 & 4.6663 & 10.1095 \\[0pt]
\text{N} & 0.2801 & -0.2562 & 0.6317 &-0.0938 & 0.1435 & 0.6189 & 0.0457 & 0.0375 & 0.4585 \\[0pt]
\text{L} &-0.3996 & 0.4960 & -0.6017 & 0.0812 & 0.0163 & -0.5932 & 0.0186 & 0.1310 & -0.3851 \\[0pt]
\text{A} & -0.0061 & 0.0223 & 0.0018 & 0.0075 & 0.0285 & -0.0097 & 0.0118 & 0.0181 & -0.0020 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=34)} & -4.7732 & 0.3476 & -0.4662 & -6.6680 & 1.2055 & -2.0664 & -4.4348 & 0.5944 & -1.2291 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=35)} & -5.5990 & 2.8081 & 1.9914 & -1.2231 & -0.0154 & -0.7091 & -1.4060 & 0.9188 & -0.1468 \\ [0pt]
\text{I(E=36)} & -4.2467 & 2.2712 & 0.6907 & -0.4478 & 2.1718 & -0.9172 & -2.3100 & 1.0416 & -0.5002 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=37)} & -3.5281 & 0.7339 & 1.4653 & -1.1547 & 1.3009 & -1.0659 & -2.0490 & 0.7410 & 0.2335 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=39)} & -3.3369 & 1.5590 & 1.0109 & -2.5737 & 0.7234 & -1.1346 & -2.2208 & 0.4054 & -0.4136 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=40)} & -2.8766 & 1.7608 & 1.2350 & -1.8032 & 1.0617 & -0.6940 & -1.8834 & 0.8519 & 0.0852 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=41)} & -2.8266 & 2.7954 & 2.3165 & -1.5615 & 1.6881 & -0.0291 & -1.9468 & 1.4222 & 0.1094 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=42)} & -3.5901 & 2.3990 & 0.7908 & -2.4543 & 2.0378 & -1.1494 & -2.3381 & 1.3840 & -0.0808 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=43)} &-1.9852 & 2.1149 & 1.9765& -1.7090 & 1.1722 & -0.4341 & -1.5057 & 1.0766 & 0.5309 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=44)} & -3.2012 & 2.0495 & 1.7665 & -2.2668 & 1.5629 & -0.2140 & -1.8082 & 1.1301 & 0.4936 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=45)} & 0.1813 & 1.1103 & 1.7535 & -1.8984 & 2.1024 & -0.4636 & -0.9893 & 0.7958 & 0.3057 \\[0pt]
\text{I(E=46)} & 0.5791 & 2.3091 & 3.5534 & 0.4558 & 1.4836 & 1.1497 & -0.6198 & 1.0766 & 1.0624 \\[0pt]
\text{I(M=3)} &-2.3691 & 0.8545 & -0.3594 & -1.9077 & -0.4988 & -0.4836 & -2.7258 & 0.0964 & -0.2156 \\[0pt]
\text{I(M=4)} & -4.4234 & 2.2640 & -1.2282 & -0.0088 & 0.5609 & -0.2349 & -0.0134 & 0.5887 & 0.3864 \\[0pt]
\text{I(M=5)} & -1.0787 & 1.5611 & 0.1170 & 0.3767 & 0.6729 & 0.1184 & 0.1455 & 0.4770 & 0.1558 \\[0pt]
\text{I(M=6)} & -0.8300 & -0.2358 & -0.2713 & 0.3948 & -0.3092 & -0.1046 & -0.7122 & -0.4448 & -0.4025 \\[0pt]
\text{I(M=7)} & -2.8242 & 2.9533 & 0.5456 & 1.0576 & 0.5476 & 0.5187 & -0.1990 & 1.1750 & 0.6685 \\[0pt]
\text{I(R=2)} & 0.3378 & 3.8443 & 1.4196 & -1.0805 & 3.0078 & -0.1619 & -0.9205 & 1.3432 & 0.4696 \\[0pt]
\text{I(R=4)} & 0.0340 & 1.9168 & -0.4519 & 0.6883 & -0.3211 & 0.3639 & -0.7040 & 0.0975 & -0.1618 \\[0pt]
\text{I(S=2)} &1.3582 & -0.4793 & -0.1588 & 0.0564 & -0.2309 & -0.2849 & 0.1236 & -0.1355 & -0.4025 \\[0pt]
\end{array}$
\end{center}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{table}
At a first glance the estimates originated via Plug-in Sampling (see \cite{moura16}) seem to be more in agreement with the original data estimates than the ones drawn from PPS. Nevertheless, this is only one draw and it could be a question of chance to originate `better' or `worse' data. Therefore, one must conduct inferences on the regression coefficients based on multiple draws.
Inferences on regression coefficients are obtained by applying the methodologies in Subsections \ref{ssec:mul1} and \ref{ssec:mul2}, to analyze the
singly imputed synthetic dataset and multiply imputed synthetic datasets, considering $M=1$, $M=2$ and $M=5$, using the statistics $T^\bullet_M$ and $T^\bullet_{comb}$ and their empirical distributions based on simulations with $10^4$ iterations, to test the fit of the model and the significance of some regressors for $\gamma=0.05$. Regarding the test of fit of the model one will find, for all values of $M$, results equivalent to the ones obtained for the case when synthetic data are generated via Plug-in Sampling, i.e., concluding that the explanatory variables in $\mathbf{x}$ have a significant role in determining the values of the response variables in $ \mathbf{y} $ since the obtained p-values, computed as the fraction of values of the empirical distribution of the corresponding statistic that are larger than the computed value of the statistic, were all approximately zero.
The cut-off points obtained from the empirical distributions of $T^\bullet_M$ and $T^\bullet_{comb}$ (respectively associated with the first and second procedures in Subsections \ref{ssec:mul1} and \ref{ssec:mul2}) are approximately equal to $0.50357$, for $M=1$ (where first and second procedures coincide), to $0.03460$ and $0.02569$, for $M=2$, and to $0.00149$ and $0.00094$, for $M=5$. In Figure 1, one can see a histogram associated with the empirical distributions of both $T^\bullet_M$ and $T^\bullet_{comb}$ for $M=1,2$ and $5$ (for $m=3$, $p=24$, $n=141$, $\alpha=8$ and $10^4$ simulation sizes), recalling that for $M=1$ these two statistics are the same.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\vspace{0.25cm}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.33\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Histogram_Single_Posterior_G1}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=1$}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.33\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Histogram_Single_Posterior_G21}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=2$ (first procedure)}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.33\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Histogram_Single_Posterior_G22}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=2$ (second procedure)}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.33\textwidth}
\vspace{10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Histogram_Single_Posterior_G51}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=5$ (first procedure)}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.33\textwidth}
\vspace{10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Histogram_Single_Posterior_G52}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=5$ (second procedure)}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption
Histograms (all with same vertical scale) of the empirical distributions of both $T^\bullet_M$ and $T^\bullet_{comb}$ for $M=1,2$ and $5$ (for $m=3$, $p=24$, $n=141$, $\alpha=8$ and $10^4$ simulation sizes)}\label{fig:dist}
\end{figure}
In order to test the significance of some regressors, we propose to study two different cases, using in each case the same sets of regressors as in \cite{moura16}. Therefore, we will test the significance of regressor variables R and S, for the first case, and regressor variables A and E, for the second case. As such, in the first case, we will consider a $3\times 24$ matrix
$$\mathbf{A}=\left( \begin{array}{c|c}
\textbf{\Large 0}_{3\times21} & \textbf{\Large I}_3 \end{array} \right)$$
and we will be interested in testing the hypothesis $H_0: \mathbf{AB=C_0}$, where $\mathbf{C}_0$ is a $3\times 3$ matrix consisting of only zeros. We now generate 100 draws of $M=1$, $M=2$ and $M=5$ synthetic datasets and gather the different p-values obtained when using the statistics in (\ref{eq:T1st}) and (\ref{eq:T2nd}). In Figure \ref{fig:box1}, one may analyze the box-plots of the p-values obtained for each procedure together with the ones obtained in \cite{moura16} for the same sets of variables, where under Single, 1st and 2nd, one has the box-plots associated with the new procedures developed in this paper and under SingleP, 1stP and 2ndP, the box-plots associated to the Plug-in Sampling method.
The existing line in the box-plots marks the original data p-value 0.249, obtained using the $T_{O,\mathbf{C}}$ statistic in (3) of \cite{moura16}.
It is important to note that in the case of single imputation ($M=1$) the FPPS method reduces to the usual PPS method.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{BoxM2k3.eps}
\label{fig:3boxM21}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=2$}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{BoxM5k3}
\label{fig:3boxM5}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=5$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{BoxSinglek3}
\label{fig:3boxSingle}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=1$}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption
Box-plots of p-values obtained, when testing the joint significance of I(R=2), I(R=4) and I(S=2), from 100 draws of synthetic datasets using procedures in Section \ref{sec:post} and using Plug-in Sampling method from \cite{moura16}, for $M=1$, $M=2$ and $M=5$ .}\label{fig:box1}
\end{figure}
In general, from Figure \ref{fig:box1}, we may note in both new procedures a larger spread of the p-values when compared with the p-values gathered from Plug-in Sampling, presenting a distribution of p-values with larger values than the original, nonetheless with the majority of these p-values leading to similar conclusions as those obtained from the original data for $\gamma=0.05$, that is, to not reject the null hypothesis that variables R and S do not have significant influence on the response variables.
We may note that in general, in cases where the p-value obtained from the original data is rather low, we expect to obtain larger p-values for the synthetic data, given the inherent variability of these synthetic data and the ``need'' of the inferential exact methods to preserve the $1-\gamma$ coverage level, and impossibility of compressing the synthetic data p-values towards zero.
For the second case, we are interested in testing the hypothesis $H_0: \mathbf{AB=C_0}$, where $\mathbf{C_0}$ is a $13\times 13$ matrix consisting of only zeros, with
$$\mathbf{A}=\left( \begin{array}{c|c|c}
\textbf{\Large 0}_{13\times 3} & \textbf{\Large I}_{13} & \textbf{\Large 0}_{13\times 8} \\
\end{array} \right),$$
corresponding to the test of joint significance of variables A and E. The p-value obtained for the original data, based on (3) in \cite{moura16}, was $0.033$, thus rejecting their non-significance for $\gamma=0.05$. In Figure \ref{fig:box2}, we can compare the box-plots obtained for the FPPS and Plug-in Sampling methods obtained by generating 100 draws of synthetic datasets, for $M=1$, $M=2$ and $M=5$. The vertical line represents again the original data's p-value.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{BoxM2k13.eps}
\label{fig:13boxM21}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=2$}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{BoxM5k13}
\label{fig:13boxM5}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=5$}
\vspace{10pt}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{BoxSinglek13}
\label{fig:13boxSingle}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{$M=1$}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Box-plots of p-values obtained, when testing the joint significance of A and E, from 100 draws of synthetic datasets using procedures in Section \ref{sec:post} and using Plug-in Sampling method from \cite{moura16}, for $M=1$, $M=2$ and $M=5$ .}\label{fig:box2}
\end{figure}
From Figure \ref{fig:box2}, we note that the spread of p-values is again larger for our new procedures based on FPPS than the ones from the Plug-in method, majorly leading to a different conclusion from the inference obtained from the original data.
For the single imputation case, even if the spread of the p-values gathered from the PPS is larger than the ones from the Plug-in Sampling, the distributions of p-values are not that different for the two methods.
For the two cases studied, the two new FPPS multiple imputation procedures presented have very similar p-values.
As $M$ increases the spread of the p-values from FPPS becomes smaller and closer to the original data's p-value but at a smaller rate than the p-values from the Plug-in Sampling.
Nevertheless, this larger spread of the p-values from FPPS will be compensated by an increase of the level of confidentiality, as it can be seen in the next section.
Next, we present the power for the tests
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Tests}
\ba{l}\displaystyle H_0:\mathbf{B=B_0(\neq 0)}\; vs\;\;
H_1:\mathbf{B=B_1}~~~ \rm{and}\\
\displaystyle H_0:\mathbf{AB=C_0(\neq 0)}\; vs\;\; H_1:\mathbf{AB=C_1}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
for $\mathbf{B_0}$ equal to $\mathbf{\tilde{\hat{B}}}$, rounded to two decimal places,
$$\mathbf{A}=\left( \begin{array}{c|c|c}
\textbf{\Large 0}_{12\times 4} & \textbf{\Large I}_{12} & \textbf{\Large 0}_{12\times 8} \\
\end{array} \right),$$
a $12\times 12$ matrix defined appropriately in order to isolate the indicator variables associated with the variable
$E$, and $\mathbf{C}_1=\mathbf{AB}_1$ where $\mathbf{B}_1$ takes different values, found in Table 6, with $\mathbf{D}$ a $p\times m$ matrix of $1$'s.
The power for the synthetic data obtained via FPPS was then simulated as well as the power for the case when these synthetic datasets are treated as if they were the original data. We also simulated the power from the original data and refer to \cite{moura16} for the power values for the synthetic data generated via Plug-in Sampling.
\begin{table}[h!]
\footnotesize
\caption{Power for the tests to the hypothesis (\ref{eq:Tests}), with $\mathbf{B}(1)$, $\mathbf{C}(1)$ and $\mathbf{B}(2)$ and $\mathbf{C}(2)$ denoting the first and second procedures proposed by the authors in Subsections \ref{ssec:mul1} and \ref{ssec:mul2} for FPPS and in \cite{moura16} for Plug-in method.}
\vspace{-15pt}
\begin{center}
\footnotesize\label{ta:power}
\begin{tabular}{ | l | c | l | c | c | l | c | c | c | l}
\hline
Power for & {orig data} &\multirow{2}{*}{Methods} & {M=1} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{M=2} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{M=5} & synt as orig \\
$\mathbf{B}_1=$ & $\mathbf{B}$ & & $\mathbf{B}$ & $\mathbf{B}(1)$ & $\mathbf{B}(2)$ & $\mathbf{B}(1)$ & $\mathbf{B}(2)$ & $\mathbf{B}$ \\ \hline \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$\mathbf{B}_0+0.005\mathbf{D}$} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.537} & FPPS & 0.215 & 0.252 & 0.253 & 0.275 & 0.279 & 1.000 \\
& & Plug-in & 0.279 & 0.382 & 0.385 & 0.471 & 0.472 & 1.000 \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$\mathbf{B}_0*0.95$} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.945} & FPPS & 0.535 & 0.634 & 0.637 & 0.700 & 0.700 & 1.000 \\
& & Plug-in & 0.679 & 0.840 & 0.841 & 0.906 & 0.909 & 1.000 \\
\hline
\hline \hline
Power for & {orig data} & \multirow{2}{*}{Methods} & {M=1} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{M=2} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{M=5} & synt as orig \\
$\mathbf{C}_1=$ & $\mathbf{C}$ & & $\mathbf{C}$ & $\mathbf{C}(1)$ & $\mathbf{C}(2)$ & $\mathbf{C}(1)$ & $\mathbf{C}(2)$ & $\mathbf{C}$ \\ \hline \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$\mathbf{A(B}_0+3\mathbf{D})$} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.465} & FPPS & 0.185 & 0.202 & 0.207 & 0.245 & 0.246 & 0.996 \\
& & Plug-in & 0.284 & 0.334 & 0.343 & 0.416 & 0.418 & 0.975 \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$\mathbf{A(B}_0*0.5)$} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.393} & FPPS & 0.136 & 0.160 & 0.161 & 0.179 & 0.181 & 0.996 \\
& & Plug-in & 0.197 & 0.271 & 0.279 & 0.326 & 0.327 & 0.959 \\
\hline \end{tabular}
\vspace{-2pt}
\end{center}
\end{table}
From the power values in Table 6 we may see that tests based on the synthetic data via FPPS show lower values for its power than the ones based in Plug-in generation, as expected, since we are using a method which is supposed to give more confidentiality by generating more perturbed datasets. We may see that these values increase along with the value of $M$, but with a smaller rate than that for Plug-in Sampling, leading to the conclusion that one will need larger values of $M$ to obtain a closer power value to the one registered when testing using the original data. If synthetic data is treated as original, we obtain a larger power than the one obtained for the original data, which is obviously misleading, since the estimated coverage probability will be in fact much smaller than the desired $0.95$.
\section{PRIVACY PROTECTION OF SINGLY VERSUS MULTIPLY IMPUTED SYNTHETIC DATA}
\label{sec:pri}
In order to evaluate the level of protection and at the same time compare it with the level obtained from synthetic data generated via Plug-in Sampling, we perform, in this section, a similar evaluation as in \cite{moura16} using CPS data. Let us consider $\mathbf{W}_l=(\mathbf{w}_{1l},...,\mathbf{w}_{nl})$, $l=1,...,M$, $M$ synthetic datasets generated via FPPS, where $\mathbf{w}_{il}=(w_{1il},...,w_{mil})', i=1,...,n$. The estimate of the original values $\mathbf{y}_i=(y_{1i},...,y_{mi})'$ will be $\hat{\mathbf{y}}_i=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{l=1}^M \mathbf{w}_{il}$. Let us recall the three criteria used in \cite{moura16} as measures of the level of privacy protection:
%
\begin{equation}\label{eq:conf}
\begin{array}{c}\displaystyle
\Gamma_{1,\epsilon}=\frac{1}{m n}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{i=1}^n
Pr\left[\,\left|\frac{\hat{y_{ji}}-y_{ji}}{y_{ji}}\right|<\epsilon\,\Bigl|\,\mathbf{Y}\right];\medskip\\
\displaystyle
\Gamma_{2,\epsilon}=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
Pr\left[\sqrt{\frac{1}{m}\sum_{j=1}^m\frac{(\hat{y_{ji}}-y_{ji})^2}{y_{ji}^2}}<\epsilon\,\Bigl|\,\mathbf{Y}\right];\medskip\\
\displaystyle
\Gamma_{3,\epsilon}=Pr\left[\frac{1}{m
n}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{i=1}^n\left|\frac{\hat{y_{ji}}-y_{ji}}{y_{ji}}\right|<\epsilon\,\Bigl|\,\mathbf{Y}\right].
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Let us also consider, from $\Gamma_{1,\epsilon}$, the following quantity, for $i=1,...n$ and $j=1,..,m$,
%
$$D_{1,\epsilon,ji}=Pr\left[\left|\frac{\hat{y_{ji}}-y_{ji}}{y_{ji}}\right|<\epsilon\,\Bigl|\,\mathbf{Y}\right]$$
and, from $\Gamma_{3,\epsilon}$,
%
$$D_3=\frac{1}{m n}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{i=1}^n\left|\frac{\hat{y_{ji}}-y_{ji}}{y_{ji}}\right|.$$ We use a Monte Carlo simulation with
$10^4$ iterations to estimate all three measures in (\ref{eq:conf}) based on the $n=141$ households in the CPS data. In Table 7, we show the
values of $\Gamma_{1,0.01}$, $\Gamma_{2,0.01}$ and the minimum, 1st quartile ($Q_1$), median, 3rd quartile ($Q_3$) and maximum of
$D_{1,\epsilon}$, displaying also the values gathered when using Plug-in Sampling. In Table 8, we show the values of $\Gamma_{3,0.1}$ and the minimum, $Q_1$, median, $Q_3$ and maximum of $D_3$ also displaying the values gathered when using Plug-in Sampling.
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Values of $\Gamma_{1,0.01}$, $\Gamma_{2,0.01}$ and a summary of the distribution of $D_{1,0.01}$.}
\footnotesize \label{table:t12}
\vspace{-20pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ | c | l | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | }\hline
$M$ & Method & $\Gamma_{1,0.01}$ & $\Gamma_{2,0.01}$ & Min & $Q_1$ & Median & $Q_3$ & Max \\ \hline \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$M=1$} & FPPS & 0.0602 & 0.0005 & 0 & 0.0385 & 0.0507 & 0.0784 & 0.1455 \\
& Plug-in & 0.0631 & 0.0006 & 0 & 0.0398 & 0.0552 & 0.0854 & 0.1491 \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$M=2$} & FPPS & 0.0702 & 0.0009 & 0 & 0.0357 & 0.0624 & 0.0910 & 0.1945 \\
&Plug-in & 0.0754 & 0.0010 & 0 & 0.0331 & 0.0697 & 0.0954 & 0.2134 \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$M=5$} & FPPS & 0.0797 & 0.0012 & 0 & 0.0214 & 0.0711 & 0.1136 & 0.2785 \\
&Plug-in & 0.0879 & 0.0018 & 0 & 0.0110 & 0.0792 & 0.1284 & 0.3279 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Values of $\Gamma_{3,0.1}$ and a summary of the distribution of $D_3$.}
\footnotesize\label{table:t3}
\vspace{-20pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| c | l | c | c | c | c | c | c | }\hline
$M$ & Method &$\Gamma_{3,0.1}$& Min & $Q_1$ & Median & $Q_3$ & Max \\ \hline \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$M=1$} & FPPS & 0.0000 & 0.1091 & 0.1248 & 0.1287 & 0.1325 & 0.1544 \\ [0pt]
&Plug-in &0.0000 & 0.1050 & 0.1202 & 0.1233 & 0.1264 & 0.1379 \\ [0pt] \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$M=2$} & FPPS & 0.0021 & 0.0960 & 0.1088 & 0.1116 & 0.1145 & 0.1324 \\ [0pt]
&Plug-in & 0.0694 & 0.0948 & 0.1026 & 0.1051 & 0.1072 & 0.1159 \\ [0pt] \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$M=5$} & FPPS &0.5008 & 0.0896 & 0.0980 & 0.1000 & 0.1020 & 0.1131 \\
&Plug-in & 1.0000 & 0.0846 & 0.0905 & 0.0920 & 0.0936 & 0.0992 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Looking at Tables \ref{table:t12} and \ref{table:t3}, we observe that the values of the privacy measures in (\ref{eq:conf}) increase for increasing values of $M$ for both procedures developed in Subsections \ref{ssec:mul1} and \ref{ssec:mul2}, showing that the disclosure risk increases with the increase in the number of released synthetic datasets. Compared with the measures obtained under Plug-in Sampling, we may observe a smaller disclosure risk in all cases, leading to the conclusion that the proposed FPPS procedures have an overall higher level of confidentiality. Regarding measures $\Gamma_{2,\epsilon}$ and $\Gamma_{3,\epsilon}$ this increase reaches in some cases an increase of 50\% or more in confidentiality. In the single imputation case, under the PPS we also register an increase of confidentiality when comparing the same measure under Plug-in Sampling, nevertheless this increase is relatively small.
\section{CONCLUDING REMARKS}
\label{sec:con}
In this paper the authors derive likelihood-based exact inference for single and multiple imputation cases where synthetic datasets are generated via Fixed-Posterior Predictive Sampling (FPPS). If only one synthetic dataset is released, then FPPS is equivalent to the usual Posterior Predictive Sampling (PPS) method. Thus the proposed methodology can be used to analyze a singly imputed synthetic data set generated via PPS under the multivariate linear regression (MLR) model. Therefore this work fills a gap in the literature because the state of the art methods apply only to multiply imputed synthetic data. Under the MLR model, the authors derived two different exact inference procedures for the matrix of regression coefficients, when multiply imputed synthetic datasets are released. It is shown that the methodologies proposed lead to confidence sets matching the expected level of confidence, for all sample sizes.
Furthermore, while the second proposed procedure displays a better precision for smaller samples and/or smaller values of $M$ by yielding smaller confidence sets, the two procedures concur for larger sample sizes and larger values of $M$, as it is corroborated in theory by remarks 2.2 and 2.3.
When compared with inference procedures for Plug-in Sampling, the procedures proposed based on FPPS lead to synthetic datasets that give respondents a higher level of confidentiality, that is, a reduced disclosure risk, nevertheless at the expense of accuracy, since the confidence sets are larger, as illustrated in the application with the CPS data. Once likelihood-based exact inferential methods are now made available both for FPPS/PPS and Plug-in Sampling, it is therefore the responsibility of those in charge of releasing the data to decide which method to use in order to better respect the demands and objectives of their institution.
\begin{acknowledgments}
Ricardo Moura's research is supported by a Fulbright Research Grant, and he sincerely thanks the faculty of Mathematics and Statistics at UMBC for their support and encouragement. Ricardo Moura and Carlos A. Coelho also thank FCT (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology) project UID/MAT/00297/2013 awarded through CMA/UNL. Martin Klein and Bimal Sinha thank Laura McKenna, Eric Slud, William Winkler, and
Tommy Wright at the U.S. Census Bureau for their support.
The authors would also like to thank the referees for the helpful comments and suggestions leading to the improvement of the paper.
\end{acknowledgments}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\begin{appendices}
\section{Proof of Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 and Corollaries \ref{cor:pdf} and \ref{cor:dist}} \label{App:A}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:pdf}]
Given $(\mathbf{\tilde{B}},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}})$, from (\ref{eq:synt}) we have that, for every $j=1,...,M$,
$$\mathbf{W}_j'|_{\mathbf{\tilde{B},\tilde{\Sigma}}}\sim N_{nm}(\mathbf{X'\tilde{B}},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}\otimes I}_n)\implies
\mathbf{B}^{\bullet}_j|_{\mathbf{\tilde{B},\tilde{\Sigma}}}\sim N_{pm}(\mathbf{\tilde{B}},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}
\otimes (\mathbf{XX'})^{-1})$$
and
$$(n-p)\mathbf{S}_j^{\bullet}|_{\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}}\sim W_m(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},n-p).$$
Therefore, we have for $\mathbf{\overline{B}}_M^\bullet$ and $\mathbf{\overline{S}}_M^\bullet$ in (\ref{eq:parameters1st}),
$$\mathbf{\overline{B}}_M^\bullet|_{\mathbf{\tilde{B},\tilde{\Sigma}}}=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{j=1}^M \mathbf{B}^\bullet_j|_{\mathbf{\tilde{B},\tilde{\Sigma}}}\sim N_{pm}\left(\tilde{\mathbf{B}},\frac{1}{M}\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}\otimes (\mathbf{XX'})^{-1}\right)$$
and
$$M(n-p)\mathbf{\overline{S}}^\bullet_M|_{\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}}=(n-p)\sum_{j=1}^M\mathbf{\overline{S}}^\bullet_j|_{\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}}\sim W_m(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},M(n-p)).$$
Since $\mathbf{\overline{B}}_M^\bullet$ and $\mathbf{\overline{S}}_M^\bullet$ are independent, the conditional joint pdf of $(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M)$, given $\tilde{\mathbf{B}}$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}$, is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:syntjoint}
\ba{l}
\small f(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M\vert \mathbf{\tilde{B}},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}) \propto \\
\hskip 1.55cm
e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace M\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}\left[(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\tilde{B}})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\tilde{B}})+M(n-p)\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M\right]\rbrace}\times
\frac{\vert\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)-m-1}{2}}}{\vert\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)+p}{2}}},
\ea
\end{equation}
while, due to the independence of $ \mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}} $ and $ \mathbf{\tilde{B}} $, generated from (\ref{eq:postSigma}) and (\ref{eq:postB}), respectively, the joint pdf of $(\mathbf{\tilde{B}},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}})$, given $\mathbf{S}$, is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:postdist}
f(\mathbf{\tilde{B}},\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}|\mathbf{S})\propto |\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}|^{-p/2} e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}\left[(\mathbf{\tilde{B}-\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\tilde{B}-\hat{B}})+(n-p)\mathbf{S}\right]\rbrace}\frac{\vert \mathbf{S}\vert^{\frac{n+\alpha-p-m-1}{2}}}{\vert\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\vert^{\frac{n+\alpha-p}{2}-m-1}}.\!\!\!
\end{equation}
%
On the other hand, given the independence of $\mathbf{\hat{B}}$ and $\mathbf{S}$, defined in (\ref{eq:orB}) and (\ref{eq:orS}), the joint pdf of $(\mathbf{\hat{B}},\mathbf{S})$ is given by
%
\begin{equation}\label{eq:origjoint} f(\mathbf{\hat{B}},\mathbf{S})\propto
e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}\left[(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})+(n-p)\mathbf{S}\right]\rbrace}\frac{\vert
\mathbf{S}\vert^{\frac{n-p-m-1}{2}}}{\vert\mathbf{\Sigma}\vert^{\frac{n}{2}}}. \end{equation}
Thus, by multiplying the three pdf's in (\ref{eq:syntjoint}), (\ref{eq:postdist}) and (\ref{eq:origjoint}), we obtain the joint pdf of
$(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\tilde{B},\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1},\hat{B},S})$.
Since
$$tr\lbrace M(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\tilde{B}})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\tilde{B}})\rbrace=tr\lbrace M(\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M)'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M)\rbrace,$$
and since from Appendix \ref{Aapp:last2} we may write
%
$$\hspace{-100pt}M(\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M)'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M)+(\mathbf{\tilde{B}-\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\tilde{B}-\hat{B}})=$$
$$\hspace{-50pt}=\!(M+1)\!\left[\mathbf{\tilde{B}}\!-\!\frac{1}{M+1}\mathbf{(B^{\bullet}+\hat{B})}\right]'\!\mathbf{XX'}\left[\mathbf{\tilde{B}}\!-\!\frac{1}{M+1}\mathbf{(B^{\bullet}+\hat{B})}\right]\!$$
$$\hspace{220pt}+\frac{M}{M+1}(\mathbf{B^{\bullet}\!-\!\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX}'(\mathbf{B^{\bullet}\!-\!\hat{B}}),$$
%
by integrating out $\mathbf{\tilde{B}}$, we obtain the joint pdf of $(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1},\hat{B},S})$ proportional to
\begin{flalign} \nonumber
e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}\left[\frac{M}{M+1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})+(n-p)(M\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M+\mathbf{S})\right]+\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}\left[(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})+(n-p)\mathbf{S}\right]\rbrace}\\
\nonumber \times \frac{\vert\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)-m-1}{2}}}{\vert\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)+n-\alpha}{2}-m-1}}\frac{\vert \mathbf{S}\vert^{n+\frac{\alpha}{2}-p-m-1}}{\vert\mathbf{\Sigma}\vert^{\frac{n}{2}}}.
\end{flalign}
Since
\begin{align*}
tr\left\{\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})'(\mathbf{XX'})(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})+\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})'(\mathbf{XX'})(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})\right\}=\\
tr\left\{\mathbf{XX'}\left[\frac{M}{M+1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})'+(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})'\right]\right\}
\end{align*}
and since from the identities in 1.-3. in Appendix B1 in \cite{moura16} we may write
%
\begin{align*} &
\frac{M}{M+1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})'+(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}(\mathbf{\hat{B}-B})'=\\
&=\left[\mathbf{\hat{B}}-\left(\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}+\mathbf{B}\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}\right)\left(\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}+\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}\right)^{-1}\right]\\
&\left(\!\frac{M}{M+1}\!\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\!+\!\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}\right)\left[\mathbf{\hat{B}}\!-\!\left(\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\!+\!\mathbf{B}\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}\right)\left(\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\!+\!\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}\right)^{-1}\right]'\\
&\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;+(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})\left(\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}+\mathbf{\Sigma}\right)^{-1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})', \end{align*}
%
integrating out $\mathbf{\hat{B}}$ we will have the joint pdf of $(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1},S})$ proportional to
\begin{flalign*} \nonumber
& e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace(\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)}^{-1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})+(n-p)\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}(M\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M+\mathbf{S})+(n-p)\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}\mathbf{S}\rbrace}\nonumber\\
&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\times \frac{\vert\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)-m-1}{2}}}{\vert\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)+n-\alpha}{2}-m-1}}\frac{\vert \mathbf{S}\vert^{n+\frac{\alpha}{2}-p-m-1}}{\vert\mathbf{\Sigma}\vert^{\frac{n}{2}}} \left|\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}+\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}\right|^{-p/2}.
\end{flalign*} Consequently, if we integrate out $\mathbf{S}$ we will end up with the joint pdf of \linebreak $(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}})$ proportional to
\begin{flalign}\label{eq:likelihood}
& e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace(\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)}^{-1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})+M(n-p)\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M\rbrace}\\
&{\small \times \frac{\vert\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)-m-1}{2}}}{\vert\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)+n-\alpha}{2}-m-1}}\vert\mathbf{\Sigma}\vert^{-\frac{n}{2}} \left|\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}+\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}\right|^{-p/2} |\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}+\Sigma^{-1}}|^{-\frac{2n+\alpha-2p-m-1}{2}}}\nonumber
\end{flalign}
as we wanted to prove. It is easy to see that in (\ref{eq:likelihood}), $\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M$ and
$\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M$, given $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}$, are separable, with the distributions in the body of the Theorem.\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:dist}]
From the distributions of $\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M$ and $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M$ in Theorem \ref{thm:pdf},
and by Theorem 2.4.1 in \cite{kollo05} we have
that, for $p\geq m,$
$$(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'(XX')(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})|\mathbf{_{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}}\sim W_m\left(\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma},p\right).$$
From Theorem 2.4.2 in \cite{kollo05} and Subsection 7.3.3 in \cite{anderson84} we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:H}\small
\mathbf{H}=\left(\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}\!+\!\Sigma}\right)^{\!\!-\frac{1}{2}}\!(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\!-\!\mathbf{B)'(XX')}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\!-\!\mathbf{B)}\left(\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}\!+\!\Sigma}\right)^{\!\!\prime -\frac{1}{2}}
\sim W_m(\mathbf{I},p)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:G}\mathbf{G}=M(n-p)\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}'^{-\frac{1}{2}}
\sim W_m(\mathbf{I},M(n-p)).
\end{equation}
We may thus write $T^\bullet_M$ in (\ref{eq:T1st}) as
$$T^\bullet_M=\frac{|(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})'(XX')(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{B})|}{|M(n-p)\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M|}=\frac{\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma}\right|}{|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}|}\times\frac{|\mathbf{H}|}{|\mathbf{G}|},$$
%
where,
$|\mathbf{G}|\sim
\prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{n-p-i+1}$ and $|\mathbf{H}| \sim \prod_{i=1}^{m}\chi^2_{p-i+1}$, with independent chi-square random variables in each product, we end up with a product of independent F-distributions, due to the independence of $\mathbf{H}$ and $\mathbf{G}$, inherited from the independence of $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M$ and $\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M$. So, conditionally on $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}$, we have
$$T^\bullet_M|_\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\sim \left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\frac{p-i+1}{M(n-p)-i+1} F_{p-i+1,n-p-i+1}\right\}\times \left|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}\left( \frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma }\right)\right|,$$
where
$$\left|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\left(\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}+\mathbf{\Sigma}\right)\right|=\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I+\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}\Sigma}}\right|=\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}+\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}}\right||\mathbf{\Sigma}|$$
$$~~~~~~~~~=\left|\mathbf{\Sigma}^{1/2}\right|\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}+\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}}\right|\left|\mathbf{\Sigma}^{1/2}\right|=\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I+\Sigma^{1/2}\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}\Sigma^{1/2}}\right|.$$
As such, from (\ref{eq:likelihood}), integrating out $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M$ and $\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M$, we end up with the pdf of $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}$ proportional to
\begin{flalign*}
&|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}|^{\frac{M(n-p)}{2}}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma}\right|^{\frac{p}{2}}\frac{1}{\vert\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\vert^{\frac{M(n-p)+n-\alpha}{2}-m-1}}\vert\mathbf{\Sigma}\vert^{-\frac{n}{2}}\medskip\\
& ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\times \left|\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}+\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}\right|^{-p/2} |\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}+\Sigma^{-1}}|^{-\frac{2n+\alpha-2p-m-1}{2}}\medskip\\[10pt]
&=|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}|^{\frac{n+\alpha-2m-2}{2}}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma}\right|^{\frac{p}{2}}\vert\mathbf{\Sigma}\vert^{-\frac{n}{2}}\\
& ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\times \left|\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}+\mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}}\right|^{-p/2} |\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}+\Sigma^{-1}}|^{-\frac{2n+\alpha-2p-m-1}{2}}.
\end{flalign*}
Making the transformation $\mathbf{\Omega}\!=\!\mathbf{\Sigma^{\frac{1}{2}}\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}\Sigma^{\frac{1}{2}}}$, which implies $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\!=\!\mathbf{\Sigma^{-\frac{1}{2}} \Omega \Sigma^{-\frac{1}{2}}}$, with the Jacobian of the transformation from $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}$ to $\mathbf{\Omega}$ being $|\mathbf{\Sigma}|^{-\frac{m+1}{2}}$, we have the pdf of $\mathbf{\Omega}$ proportional to
\begin{flalign*}
|\mathbf{\Omega}|^{\frac{n+\alpha-2m-2}{2}}\left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\Omega^{-1}+I_m}\right|^{\frac{p}{2}}\left|\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\Omega}+\mathbf{I_m}\right|^{-p/2} |\mathbf{\Omega+I_m}|^{-\frac{2n+\alpha-2p-m-1}{2}}.
\end{flalign*}
Since $|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{\Omega^{-1}+I_m}|^{\frac{p}{2}}=\left(\frac{M+1}{M}\right)^{p/2}|\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\Omega+I_m}|^{\frac{p}{2}}|\mathbf{\Omega}|^{-\frac{p}{2}}$ we end up with
\begin{flalign*}
f(\mathbf{\Omega})\propto|\mathbf{\Omega}|^{\frac{n+\alpha-p-2m-2}{2}}\times |\mathbf{\Omega+I_m}|^{-\frac{2n+\alpha-2p-m-1}{2}}
\end{flalign*}
independent of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$. Therefore, we may conclude that
$$T^\bullet_M|_\mathbf{\Omega}\sim \left\{\prod_{i=1}^{m}\frac{p-i+1}{n-p-i+1} F_{p-i+1,M(n-p)-i+1}\right\} \left|\frac{M+1}{M}\mathbf{I_m+\Omega}\right|$$
where from \cite[Theorem 8.2.8.]{muirhead05} $\mathbf{\Omega}$ has the same distribution as $\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathbf{A}_2^{-1}\mathbf{A}_1^{\frac{1}{2}}$ with $\mathbf{A}_1\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m, n+\alpha-p-m-1)$ and $\mathbf{A}_2\sim W_m(\mathbf{I}_m, n-p)$, two independent random variables.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary \ref{cor:pdf}]
The proof is identical to the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:pdf} replacing the
joint pdf of $(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M)$ by the joint pdf of $(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M,\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb})$, noting that we
have
\[(Mn-p)\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}|_{\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}}\sim W_m(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},Mn-p).\vspace{-.7cm}\]
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary \ref{cor:dist}]
The proof is identical to that
of Theorem \ref{thm:dist} replacing $\overline{\mathbf{S}}^{\bullet}_M$ by $\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}$, noting that from Corollary
\ref{cor:pdf}, conditional on $\tilde{\mathbf{\Sigma}}$, $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M$ is $N_{pm}(\mathbf{B,(\Sigma+\frac{1}{M}\tilde{\Sigma})\otimes(XX')^{-1}})$
and $(Mn-p)\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}$ is $W_m(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},Mn-p)$, independent of $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M$.
\end{proof}
\section{Details on several results}\label{App:last}
\subsection{The posterior distributions for $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ and $\mathbf{B}$}\label{Aapp:last0}
Let us start by observing that $\mathbf{Y|_{B,\Sigma}}\sim N_{mn}(\mathbf{B'X,I_n\otimes \Sigma})$ and that the likelihood function for $\mathbf{Y}$ will be
$$l(\mathbf{B,\Sigma}|_{\mathcal{Y}})\propto |\mathbf{\Sigma}|^{-n/2} e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}(\mathbf{Y-B'X})(\mathbf{Y-B'X})'\rbrace}.$$
We may then get the joint posterior distribution of $(\mathbf{B,\Sigma})$ from the product of the prior and likelihood functions as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:posterior}
\pi(\mathbf{B,\Sigma}|_{\mathcal{Y}})\propto |\mathbf{\Sigma}|^{-\frac{n+\alpha}{2}} e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}(\mathbf{Y-B'X})(\mathbf{Y-B'X})'\rbrace}.
\end{equation}
The exponent in (\ref{eq:posterior}) may be written as
{\small \begin{align*}
&tr\lbrace\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}(\mathbf{Y-B'X})(\mathbf{Y-B'X})'\rbrace=tr\big\{\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X+\hat{B}'X-B'X})\\
&\hspace{240pt}\times(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X+\hat{B}'X-B'X})'\big\}\\
&=tr\left\{\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}\left[(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X})(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X})'\right]\right\}\\
&\hspace{40pt}+tr\Big\{\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}\big[(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X})(\mathbf{\hat{B}'X-B'X})'+(\mathbf{\hat{B}'X-B'X})(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X})'\\
&\hspace{230pt}+(\mathbf{\hat{B}'X-B'X})(\mathbf{\hat{B}'X-B'X})'\big]\Big\}\\
&=tr\left\{\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}\left[(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X})(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X})'\right]+(\mathbf{B}-\mathbf{\hat{B}})'(\mathbf{XX'})(\mathbf{B}-\mathbf{\hat{B}})\right\}\\
& \hspace{190pt}+2 tr\left\{{\mathbf{\Sigma}}^{-1}\left[(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X})(\mathbf{\hat{B}'X-B'X})'\right]\right\},
\end{align*}}
where, using $\mathbf{\hat{B}}'=\left[(\mathbf{XX'})^{-1}\mathbf{XY'}\right]'=\mathbf{YX'(XX')^{-1}}$,
\begin{align*}
(\mathbf{Y-\hat{B}'X})(\mathbf{\hat{B}'X-B'X})' & =\mathbf{YX'\hat{B}-YX'B+\hat{B}XX'\hat{B}+\hat{B}XX'B}\\
&= \mathbf{YX'\hat{B}-YX'B+\mathbf{YX'(XX')}^{-1}}\mathbf{XX'\hat{B}}\\
&\hspace{120pt} +\mathbf{YX'(XX')}^{-1}\mathbf{XX'B} \\
&=\mathbf{YX'\hat{B}-YX'B}-\mathbf{YX'\hat{B}+YX'B}=0.
\end{align*}
Therefore, the joint posterior distribution of $(\mathbf{B},\mathbf{\Sigma})$ is proportional to
\begin{flalign*}
|\mathbf{\Sigma}|^{-\frac{n+\alpha-p}{2}} e^{-\frac{n-p}{2}tr\lbrace\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}\mathbf{S}\rbrace}\times|\mathbf{\Sigma}|^{-\frac{p}{2}} e^{-\frac{1}{2}tr\lbrace\mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}(\mathbf{B}-\mathbf{\hat{B}})'(\mathbf{XX'})(\mathbf{B}-\mathbf{\hat{B}})\rbrace}
\end{flalign*}
In conclusion, by Corollary 2.4.6.2. in \cite{kollo05}, the posterior distribution for $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ is
$$\mathbf{\Sigma}|_{\mathbf{S}}\sim W_m^{-1} \left((n\!-\!p)\mathbf{S},\!n+\!\alpha\!-p\right)\implies \mathbf{\Sigma}^{-1}|_{\mathbf{S}}\sim W_m \left(\frac{1}{n\!-\!p}\mathbf{S}^{-1},n\!+\!\alpha\!-\!p\!-\!m\!-\!1\right)$$
and the posterior distribution for $\mathbf{B}$ is
$$\mathbf{B}|_{\hat{\mathbf{B}},\mathbf{\Sigma}}\sim N_{pm}(\mathbf{\hat{B},\Sigma\otimes(XX')^{-1}}),$$
assuming $n+\alpha>p+m+1$.
\vspace{.35cm}
\subsection{Matrix calculations required in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:pdf}}\label{Aapp:last2}
For $\mathbf{\tilde{B}}$, $\mathbf{B}$ and $\mathbf{X}$ defined as in Section \ref{sec:post} we have
\begin{align*} M(\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M)'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M)+(\mathbf{\tilde{B}-\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\tilde{B}-\hat{B}}) = & \\
& \hspace{-250pt}= (M+1)\mathbf{\tilde{B'}}\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-M\mathbf{\tilde{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M +M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M\\
& \hspace{-60pt} -\mathbf{\hat{B}'}\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\tilde{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}}+\mathbf{\hat{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}}\\
&\hspace{-250pt}= (M+1)\mathbf{\tilde{B'}}\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\tilde{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B})}-(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B})}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\tilde{B}}\\
& \hspace{-40pt}
+M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}}\\
& \hspace{-250pt}= (M+1)\left[\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\frac{1}{M+1}(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B})}\right]'\mathbf{XX'}\left[\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\frac{1}{M+1}(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B})}\right]\\
& \hspace{-250pt} ~~~~~~~~+M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}}-\frac{1}{M+1}(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX}'(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}}).
\end{align*}
Since,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}}-\frac{1}{M+1}(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX}'(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}}) &\\
& \hspace{-310pt}=M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}} \\
& \hspace{-220pt} -\frac{M^2}{M+1}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\frac{1}{M+1}\mathbf{\hat{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}}\\
&\hspace{-140pt} -\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}}-\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\hat{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M \\
& \hspace{-310pt} =\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M+\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\hat{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}}-\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet'}_M\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\hat{B}}\\
&\hspace{-45pt}
-\frac{M}{M+1}\mathbf{\hat{B}}'\mathbf{XX'}\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M\\
& \hspace{-310pt}=\frac{M}{M+1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX}'(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
%
we may write
\begin{align*}
&M(\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M)'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M)+(\mathbf{\tilde{B}-\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX'}(\mathbf{\tilde{B}-\hat{B}})=\\ &=(M+1)\left[\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\frac{1}{M+1}(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}})\right]'\mathbf{XX'}\left[\mathbf{\tilde{B}}-\frac{1}{M+1}(M\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M+\mathbf{\hat{B}})\right] &\\
& \hspace{200pt} +\frac{M}{M+1}(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})'\mathbf{XX}'(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^\bullet_M-\mathbf{\hat{B}})
\end{align*}
\subsection{Details about the derivations of results 1, 2 and 5 in Section \ref{ssec:mul1}}\label{Aapp:last3}
\noindent\textit{Details on Result 1}
From (\ref{eq:likelihood}) we may immediately conclude that the MLE of $\mathbf{B}$ based on the synthetic data will be $\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M$ with
$$E(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M)=(\mathbf{XX}')^{-1}\mathbf{X}\frac{1}{M}\sum_{j=1}^{M}E(\mathbf{W}'_j)=(\mathbf{XX}')^{-1}\mathbf{XX'}E(\mathbf{\tilde{B}})=E(\mathbf{\hat{B}})=\mathbf{B}$$
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:var1}
Var(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M)=Var[E(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M|\mathbf{\tilde{B},\tilde{\Sigma}})]+E[Var(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M|\mathbf{\tilde{B},\tilde{\Sigma}})].
\end{equation}
For the first term in (\ref{eq:var1}), we have
$$Var[E(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M|\mathbf{\tilde{B},\tilde{\Sigma}})]=Var[\mathbf{\tilde{B}}]=Var[E(\mathbf{\tilde{B}|\hat{B},\tilde{\Sigma}})]+E[Var(\mathbf{\tilde{B}|\hat{B},\tilde{\Sigma}})]=$$
$$=Var(\mathbf{\hat{B}})+E[\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}\otimes (XX')^{-1}}]=\mathbf{\Sigma\otimes (XX')^{-1}}+\frac{n-p}{n+\alpha-p-2m-2}\mathbf{\Sigma\otimes (XX')^{-1}}$$
and for the second term, we have
$$E[Var(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M|\mathbf{\tilde{B},\tilde{\Sigma}})]=E\left[\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}\otimes (XX')^{-1}}\right]=\frac{1}{M}\frac{n-p}{n+\alpha-p-2m-2}\mathbf{\Sigma\otimes (XX')^{-1}},$$
so that
$$Var(\mathbf{\overline{B}}^{\bullet}_M)=\frac{2M(n-p-m-1)+n-p+M\alpha}{M(n+\alpha-p-2m-2)}\mathbf{\Sigma\otimes (XX')^{-1}}$$
under the condition that $n+\alpha>p+2m+2$.
\noindent \textit{Details on Result 2} $$E(\mathbf{\overline{S}}^{\bullet}_M)=E(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}})=E\left(\frac{n-p}{n+\alpha-p-2m-2}\mathbf{S}\right)=\frac{n-p}{n+\alpha-p-2m-2}\mathbf{\Sigma}.$$
\pagebreak
\noindent \textit{Details on Result 5}
Let us consider $\mathbf{H}$ and $\mathbf{G}$ given by (\ref{eq:H}) and (\ref{eq:G}). We will begin by rewriting all four classical statistics $T_{1,M}^\bullet$, $T_{2,M}^\bullet$, $T_{3,M}^\bullet$ and $T_{4,M}^\bullet$ in Subsection \ref{ssec:mul1}, in order to make them assume the same kind of form and then we will prove why all of them are non-pivotal, without loss of generality considering $M=1$. The first statistic, $T_{1,M}^\bullet\,$may be rewritten as
\begin{flalign*}
T^\bullet_{1,1} & = \frac{|\mathbf{G}|}{|\mathbf{G}+(n-p)\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2}(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{1/2}H(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{1/2}\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2}}|}.
\end{flalign*}
while $T_{2,M}^\bullet$ and $T_{3,M}^\bullet$ may be rewritten as
\begin{flalign*}
T^\bullet_{2,1} & =(n-p)tr\left[\mathbf{H(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{1/2}\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2}}\mathbf{G}^{-1}\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2}(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{1/2}}\right],
\end{flalign*}
\begin{flalign*}
T^\bullet_{3,1} &=tr\lbrace\mathbf{ H \times [H+(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{-1/2}\tilde{\Sigma}^{1/2}}\times(n-p)\mathbf{G\times \tilde{\Sigma}^{1/2}(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{-1/2}]^{-1}}\rbrace.
\end{flalign*}
Concerning $T^\bullet_{4,1}$, we have $T^\bullet_{4,1}=\lambda_1$ where $\lambda_1$ denotes the largest eigenvalue of
\begin{flalign*}
&(n-p)\mathbf{H\times(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{1/2}\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2}\times G^{-1}\times \tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2}(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{1/2}}.
\end{flalign*}
We can observe that a term in the denominator of the expression $T^\bullet_{1,1}$ is
$$\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2}(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{1/2}H(2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma)^{1/2}\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2}}|_\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1}}\sim W_m(\mathbf{(2I+\tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2}\Sigma \tilde{\Sigma}^{-1/2})},p),$$
while in the expressions for the other statistics there are similar terms. These terms involve a product similar to $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1/2}(\mathbf{2\tilde{\Sigma}+\Sigma})^{1/2}$ that cannot be simplified to an expression which is not a function of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$, therefore making these statistics non-pivotal.
\noindent
Thus, in order to illustrate how these statistics are dependent on $\mathbf{\Sigma}$, we can analyze in Figure \ref{fig:fig} the empirical distributions of $T^\bullet_{1,1}$, $T^\bullet_{2,1}$, $T^\bullet_{3,1}$ and $T^\bullet_{4,1}$ when we consider a simple case where $m=2$, $p=3$, $\alpha=4$, $n=100$ and $\Sigma=\left( \begin{smallmatrix} 1&\rho\\ \rho&1 \end{smallmatrix} \right)$ with $\rho=\lbrace0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8\rbrace$ for a simulation size of 1000.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth]{Wilks1000bwf}\includegraphics[width=.15\linewidth]{legend_bw_rho}
\label{fig:wilks}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Wilks}
\end{subfigure}%
\vspace{-6pt}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth]{Lawley1000bwf}\includegraphics[width=.15\linewidth]{legend_bw_rho}
\label{fig:lawley}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Lawley}
\end{subfigure}%
\vspace{-6pt}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth]{Pillai1000bwf}\includegraphics[width=.15\linewidth]{legend_bw_rho}
\label{fig:pillai}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Pillai}
\end{subfigure}%
\vspace{-6pt}
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth]{Roy1000bwf}\includegraphics[width=.15\linewidth]{legend_bw_rho}
\label{fig:roy}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Roy}
\end{subfigure}%
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{Smoothed empirical\! distributions\! and\! cut-off\! points (${\gamma\!=\!0.05}$) of $T^\bullet_{1,1}$, $T^\bullet_{2,1}$, $T^\bullet_{3,1}$ and $T^\bullet_{4,1}$ for $\rho=\lbrace\!0.2,\! 0.4,\! 0.6,\! 0.8\rbrace$.}\label{fig:fig}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Details about the derivation of result 1 in Subsection \ref{ssec:mul2}}\label{Aapp:last5}
Recalling that $(Mn-p) \mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}|_\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}\sim W_m(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},Mn-p)$ and
that $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}|_{\mathbf{S}}\sim W_m (\frac{1}{n-p}\mathbf{S}^{-1},n+\alpha-p-m-1)$ we immediately obtain
$$E(\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_{comb})=E(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}})=E\left(\frac{n-p}{n+\alpha-p-2m-2}\mathbf{S}\right)=\frac{n-p}{n+\alpha-p-2m-2}\mathbf{\Sigma}.$$
\subsection{Details about the derivations of the results in Section \ref{sec:sim}}\label{Aapp:last6}
\noindent \textit{Details on the Expected Values in Section \ref{sec:sim}}
Recall that $(n-p)\mathbf{S}\sim W_m(\mathbf{\Sigma},n-p)$,
thus implying that $$E(|(n-p)\mathbf{S}|)=|\mathbf{\Sigma}|E(\prod_{i=1}^m\chi^2_{n-p-i+1})=\frac{(n-p)!}{(n-p-m)!}|\mathbf{\Sigma}|,$$ and recall that
$$\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}|_\mathbf{S}\sim W^{-1}_m((n-p)\mathbf{S},n+\alpha-p)\implies \mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}|_\mathbf{S}\sim W_m\left(\frac{1}{n-p}\mathbf{S}^{-1},n\!+\!\alpha\!-\!p\!-\!m\!-\!1\right)$$
thus implying that, making $\kappa_{n,\alpha,p,m}=n+\alpha-p-m-1$, given $\mathbf{S}$,
\begin{flalign*}
E(|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}|) & =E(|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}^{-1}|^{-1})=|(n-p)\mathbf{S}|E\left(\frac{1}{\prod_{i=1}^m \chi^2_{\kappa_{n,\alpha,p,m}-i+1}}\right)\\
&=|(n-p)\mathbf{S}|\frac{(-2+\kappa_{n,\alpha,p,m}-m)!}{(-2+\kappa_{n,\alpha,p,m})!},
\end{flalign*}
since $\prod_{i=1}^m \chi^2_{\kappa_{n,\alpha,p,m}-i+1}$ is a product of independent $\chi^2$ variables. Also recalling that, given $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}$, we have $M(n-p)\mathbf{\overline{S}^{\bullet}}_M\sim W_m(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},M(n-p))$
and $(Mn-p)\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}\sim W_m(\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}},Mn-p)$, we may conclude that, given $\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}$,
$$E(|M(n-p)\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_M|)=\frac{(Mn-Mp)!}{(Mn-Mp-m)!}\times|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}|$$ and
$$E(|(Mn-p)\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}|)=\frac{(Mn-p)!}{(Mn-p-m)!}\times|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}|.$$
Combining the results for $E(|(n-p)\mathbf{S}|)$ and $E(|\mathbf{\tilde{\Sigma}}|)|_\mathbf{S}$ with each of the expected values for $|M(n-p)\mathbf{S}^{\bullet}_M|$ and $|(Mn-p)\mathbf{S}^\bullet_{comb}|$, we end up with the expression
for $E(\!\Upsilon_M\!)$ found in Section \ref{sec:sim}.
\section{Joining multiple datasets into a single dataset}\label{App:C}
Let us consider the $M$ synthetic datasets as one only dataset of size $nM$
$$
\left(\ba{c}
{\mathbf W}_a\\
{\mathbf X}_a
\ea\right)=
\left(~~\begin{array}{c|c|c|c}
\mathbf{W}_1 & \mathbf{W}_2 & \dots & \mathbf{W}_M \\
\hline
\mathbf{X} &\mathbf{X} & \dots &\mathbf{X}
\end{array}~~\right),
$$
where $\mathbf{W}_a=(\mathbf{W}_1| ... | \mathbf{W}_M)$ is the $m\times nM$ matrix of the synthesized data under FPPS and $\mathbf{X}_a=(\mathbf{X}|...|\mathbf{X})$ the $p\times nM$ matrix of the $M$ repeated `fixed' sets of covariates, from the original data.
Let
$$
\mathbf{B}_a=(\mathbf{X}_a \mathbf{X}_a')^{-1}\mathbf{X}_a \mathbf{W}_a'
$$
be the estimator for $\mathbf{B}$, based on the dataset of size $nM$, obtained by joining the $M$ synthetic datasets in one only dataset. Consequently one has that
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
\mathbf{B}_a & = & \ds (\mathbf{X}_a \mathbf{X}_a')^{-1}\mathbf{X}_a \mathbf{W}_a'=(M (\mathbf{X} \mathbf{X}'))^{-1}\mathbf{X}_a \mathbf{W}_a'=\frac{1}{M}( \mathbf{X} \mathbf{X}')^{-1}\mathbf{X}_a \mathbf{W}_a'\ms\\
& = & \ds \frac{1}{M}(\mathbf{X} \mathbf{X}')^{-1} \Bigl(\underbrace{\mathbf{X}| ~\dots~ |\mathbf{X}}_{M\; times}\Bigr) \mathbf{W}_a'=\frac{1}{M}\left(( \mathbf{X} \mathbf{X}')^{-1} \mathbf{X} \mathbf{W}_1 \!+\!\dots\!+\! ( \mathbf{X} \mathbf{X}')^{-1} \mathbf{X}\mathbf{W}_M\right)\ms\\
& = & \ds \frac{1}{M}(\mathbf{X} \mathbf{X}')^{-1} \mathbf{X} \left( \mathbf{W}_1 +...+\mathbf{W}_M\right)=(\mathbf{X} \mathbf{X}')^{-1} \mathbf{X}\mathbf{\overline{W}}_{M} =\mathbf{\overline{B}}_M^\bullet\,,
\ea
$$
which is same estimator for $\mathbf{B}$ as in (\ref{eq:par2nd1}).
Now let
%
$$
\mathbf{S}_a=\frac{1}{nM-p}(\mathbf{W}_a-\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a)(\mathbf{W}_a-\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a)'
$$
be the estimator for $\mathbf{\Sigma}$, based on the dataset of size $nM$, obtained by joining the $M$ synthetic datasets in one only dataset.
Observe that $\mathbf{\overline{W}}_{M}=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{j=1}^{M}\mathbf{W}_j$, defined before expression (\ref{eq:par2nd1}), can be written as
$$
\mathbf{\overline{W}}_{M}=\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a \mathbf{R}
$$
with $\mathbf{R}=\left(\overrightarrow{\mathbf{1}}_M\otimes \mathbf{I}_n\right)$ where $\overrightarrow{\mathbf{1}}_M$ is a vector of $1$'s of size $M$.
Now let us consider the estimator $\mathbf{S}_\mathbf{w}$ of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$, defined in the text, before expression (\ref{eq:par2nd1}). This estimator may be written as
$$
\mathbf{S}_\mathbf{w}=\sum_{i=1}^n\sum_{j=1}^M (\mathbf{w}_{ji}-\mathbf{\overline{w}}_i)(\mathbf{w}_{ji}-\mathbf{\overline{w}}_i)',
$$
where $\mathbf{w}_{ji}$ is the $i$-th column of $\mathbf W_j$ $(i=1,\dots,n;j=1,\dots,M)$. We may thus write
$$
\ba{rcl}
\mathbf{S}_\mathbf{w} & = & \ds \left(\mathbf{W}_a-\overrightarrow{\mathbf{1}}_M'\otimes\mathbf{\overline{W}}_{M}\right)\left(\mathbf{W}_a-\overrightarrow{\mathbf{1}}_M'\otimes\mathbf{\overline{W}}_{M}\right)'\ms\\
& = & \ds \left(\mathbf{W}_a-\frac{1}{M}\overrightarrow{\mathbf{1}}_M'\otimes(\mathbf{W}_a \mathbf{R})\right)\left(\mathbf{W}_a-\frac{1}{M}\overrightarrow{\mathbf{1}}_M'\otimes(\mathbf{W}_a \mathbf{R})\right)'\ms\\
& = & \ds \left(\mathbf{W}_a-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\right)\left(\mathbf{W}_a-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\right)'
\ea
$$
and the estimator $\mathbf{S}_{mean}$ of $\mathbf{\Sigma}$, defined right after expression (\ref{eq:par2nd2}) as
$$
\mathbf{S}_{mean}=\left(\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{R}\right)\left(\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{R}\right)'.$$
We may therefore write the combination estimator $\mathbf{S}_{comb}$ defined in (\ref{eq:par2nd2}) as
$$
\ba{l} \ds \mathbf{S}_{comb}=\frac{1}{nM-p}\left[\left(\mathbf{W}_a-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\right)\left(\mathbf{W}_a-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\right)'\right]\ms\\
\hskip 1.5cm \ds+\frac{1}{nM-p}\left[M\times \left(\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{R}\right)\left(\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{R}\right)'\right]
\ea
$$
To prove that $\mathbf{S}_{comb}$ is equal to $\mathbf{S}_a$ it will only be necessary to focus on
$$
\ba{l}\ds
\left(\mathbf{W}_a-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\right)\left(\mathbf{W}_a-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\right)'\ms\\
\hskip3.1cm \ds +M\times \left(\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{R}\right)\left(\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{R}\right)'\ms\\
\hskip .5cm \ds =\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{W}_a'-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{W}_a'-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{W}_a' +\frac{1}{M^2}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{W}_a'\ms\\
\hskip6.1cm \ds +\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{W}_a'-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{W}_a'\\
\hskip6.3cm \ds -\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{X}_a'\mathbf{B}_a+\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{X}_a'\mathbf{B}_a\,,
\ea
$$
which, using the fact that $\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'=\mathbf{X}_a$ and $\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'=\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'$, may be written as
$$
\ba{l}
\ds \mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{W}_a'-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{W}_a'-\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{W}_a' +\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{W}_a'\ms\\
\hskip 3cm \ds +\frac{1}{M}\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{R}\mathbf{R}'\mathbf{W}_a'-\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{W}_a'-\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{X}_a'\mathbf{B}_a+\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{X}_a'\mathbf{B}_a\ms\\
\hskip 1.5cm \ds =\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{W}_a'-\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{W}_a'-\mathbf{W}_a\mathbf{X}_a'\mathbf{B}_a+\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a\mathbf{X}_a'\mathbf{B}_a\ms\\
\hskip 1.5cm \ds =(\mathbf{W}_a-\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a)(\mathbf{W}_a-\mathbf{B}_a'\mathbf{X}_a)'=(nM-p)\mathbf{S}_a\,.
\ea
$$
\end{appendices}
|
\subsection{Nilpotent Groups}
Recall that finite nilpotent groups are the finite groups that are isomorphic to the direct product of their Sylow subgroups. It immediately follows that all abelian groups are nilpotent. The next proposition generalizes the result for abelian groups found in~\cite{ErnstSieben}.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:nilpotent}
If $G$ is a nontrivial finite nilpotent group, then
\[
\text{\sf DNG}(G)=
\begin{dcases}
*1, & |G|=2 \text{ or } G \text{ is odd}\\
*3, & G\cong \mathbb{Z}_2 \times \mathbb{Z}_{2k+1}, k\ge 1 \\
*0, & \text{otherwise}.
\end{dcases}
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If $|G|=2$ or $G$ is odd, then $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*1$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:DNGClassification}. If $G \cong \mathbb{Z}_2 \times \mathbb{Z}_{2k+1}$ for some $k$, then it follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:CyclicGroups} that $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*3$.
Lastly, we assume we are not in the first two cases; then either $4$ divides $|G|$ or $G$ is non-cyclic of even order. We know $G \cong \prod_p Q_p$, where $Q_p$ is the Sylow $p$-subgroup of $G$ for the prime $p$.
If $4$ divides $|G|$, then every maximal subgroup is even by Proposition~\ref{prop:4DirectProduct}, and hence $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*0$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:DNGCriteria}.
So, suppose that $|Q_2|=2$ and $G$ is non-cyclic; then $\prod_{p\not=2} Q_p$ is not cyclic. Let $g \in G$ have odd order. Then $\langle g \rangle$ is a proper subgroup
of $\prod Q_p$, so $Q_2 \times \langle g \rangle$ is a proper subgroup of $G$. Thus, every element of odd order is contained in an even subgroup, so $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*0$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:0iffCovering}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Generalized Dihedral Groups}
A group $G$ is said to be a generalized dihedral group if $G\cong A \rtimes \mathbb{Z}_2$ for some finite abelian $A$, where the action of the semidirect product is inversion. In this case, we write $G=\operatorname{Dih}(A)$ and we identify $A$ with the corresponding subgroup of $G$. Note that $A$ has index $2$ in $G$, so $A$ is maximal in $G$. The proof of the following is a trivial exercise.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:dihElements}
Every element of $\operatorname{Dih}(A)$ that is not in $A$ has order $2$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:dihMaximals}
Every maximal subgroup of $\operatorname{Dih}(A)$ is even except possibly $A$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $M$ be a maximal subgroup of $\operatorname{Dih}(A)$ that is not equal to $A$. Then $M$ contains an element of $\operatorname{Dih}(A)$ that is not contained in $A$. By Proposition~\ref{prop:dihElements}, this element has order $2$, so $M$ is even.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:gendih}
The avoidance games on the generalized dihedral groups satisfy:
\[
\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Dih}(A)) =\begin{dcases}
*3, & A \text{ is odd and cyclic} \\
*0, & \text{otherwise}.
\end{dcases}
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If $A$ is even, then all maximal subgroups of $\operatorname{Dih}(A)$ are even by Proposition~\ref{prop:dihMaximals}. Then $\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Dih}(A))=*0$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:DNGCriteria}, so we may assume that $A$ is odd.
If $A=\langle a \rangle$ for some $a \in A$, then $\langle L, a \rangle =G$ for all even maximal subgroups $L$. Then $a$ is not in the union of the even maximal subgroups, and we conclude that $\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Dih}(A))=*3$ by Theorem~\ref{thm:DNGClassification}.
If $A$ is non-cyclic, let $g \in \operatorname{Dih}(A)$ have odd order; then $g \in A$ by Proposition~\ref{prop:dihElements}. Let $t \in \operatorname{Dih}(A)$ be any element of order $2$. Then $\langle g,t \rangle = \operatorname{Dih}(\langle g \rangle) < \operatorname{Dih}(A)$ since $A$ is not cyclic, so $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*0$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:0iffCovering}.
\end{proof}
Note that $\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Dih}(A))$ can only be $*3$ if $\operatorname{Dih}(A)$ is a dihedral group. An alternative proof for Proposition~\ref{prop:gendih} is to determine the simplified structure diagrams shown in Figure~\ref{fig:gendih} for
$\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Dih}(A))$ in terms of the minimum number of generators $d(A)$ of $A$ and the parities of $A$ and $\Phi(A)$.
\subsection{Generalized Quaternion Groups}
Recall that a group $G$ is a generalized quaternion group (or dicyclic group) if $G \cong \langle x,y \mid x^{2n}=y^4=1, x^n=y^2,x^y=x^{-1}\rangle$ for some $n \geq 2$. The quaternion group of order $8$ is the $n=2$ case.
\begin{proposition}
If $G$ is a generalized quaternion group, then $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $g \in G$ have odd order. Using notation from the presentation above, one can easily verify that $G=X \cup Xy$, where $X=\langle x\rangle$. It is easy to check that every element of $Xy$ has order $4$ and so $g \in X$. Since $X$ is even, $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*0$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:0iffCovering}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Groups with Real Elements}
Recall~\cite{Rose} that an element $g$ of a group $G$ is \emph{real} if there is a $t \in G$ such that $g^t=g^{-1}$. Note that $t$ induces an automorphism of order $2$ on $\langle g \rangle$, so $G$ must be even if it has a real element.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:RealElements}
If $G$ is a finite group such that $|G| > 2$ and $g \in G$ is a real element of odd order, then $g$ is contained in a proper even subgroup or $G \cong \operatorname{Dih}(\langle g \rangle)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $K=\langle g \rangle$. Because $g$ is real, there is a $t \in G$ such that $g^t=g^{-1}$. Then conjugation by $t$ in $G$ induces an automorphism of $K$ of order $2$, so the order of $t$ is even. Since $t$ normalizes $K$, we may define a subgroup $L= K\langle t \rangle$. If $L < G$, then $g \in L < G$ and we are done since $L$ must be even.
So assume that $G=L$ with $K$ normal in $G$. Let $u$ be an involution in $G$, and let $M=K\langle u \rangle$. If $M < G$, then $g \in M < G$ and we are done since $M$ is even. So assume that $G=K\langle u \rangle=\langle g,u \rangle$ with $|G|=2|\langle g \rangle|$. Since $g$ is real and $G=K \cup Ku$, $u$ must invert $g$ and we have $G \cong \operatorname{Dih}(\langle g \rangle)$.
\end{proof}
The next corollary immediately follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:CyclicGroups},~Corollary~\ref{cor:0iffCovering} and Propositions~\ref{prop:gendih} and~\ref{prop:RealElements}.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:RealGroups}
If $G$ is a finite group such that every element of $G$ of odd order is real, then
\[
\text{\sf DNG}(G) =\begin{dcases}
*1, & |G|=2\\
*3, & \text{$G\cong\operatorname{Dih}(A)$ for some odd cyclic $A$}\\
*0, & \text{otherwise}.
\end{dcases}
\]
\end{corollary}
\begin{exam}
If $G$ is any of the groups listed below, then $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*0$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:RealGroups} since every element of $G$ is real by~\cite{TiepZalesski}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\Omega_{2n+1}(q)$ with $q \equiv_4 1$ and $n \geq 3$
\item $\Omega_{9}^+(q)$ with $q \equiv_4 3$
\item P$\Omega_{4n}^+(q)$ with $q \not\equiv_4 3$ and $n \geq 3$
\item $\Omega_{4n}^+(q)$ with $q \not\equiv_4 3$ and $n \geq 3$
\item $\prescript{3}{}{\operatorname{D}}_4(q)$
\item any quotient of $\operatorname{Spin}_{4n}^-(q)'$ with $n \geq 2$
\item any quotient of $\operatorname{Sp}_{2n}(q)'$ with $q \not\equiv_4 3$ and $n \geq 1$
\end{enumerate}
\end{exam}
Proposition~\ref{prop:RealElements} implies that $\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Sym}(n))=*0$ for all $n \geq 4$ since every element in $\operatorname{Sym}(n)$ is conjugate to other elements with the same cycle structure, including the element's inverse. This is generalized in the following corollary for Coxeter groups. Recall that the Coxeter groups of types $A_n$ and $I_2(m)$ are isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sym}(n+1)$ and the dihedral group of order $2m$, respectively~\cite{Humphreys1990}.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:Coxeter}
If $G$ is a finite irreducible Coxeter group, then
\[
\text{\sf DNG}(G) =\begin{dcases}
*1, & \text{$G$ is of type $A_1$}\\
*3, & \text{$G$ is of type $I_2(m)$ for some odd $m$}\\
*0, & \text{otherwise}.
\end{dcases}
\]
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
If $G$ is of type $A_1$, then $G$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}_2$ and $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*1$ by Proposition~\ref{thm:DNGClassification}. If $G$ is of type $I_2(m)$ for some odd $m$ (which includes type $A_2$), then $G$ is dihedral of order $2m$, and hence $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*3$ by Proposition~\ref{prop:gendih}. Every element of every other Coxeter group is real by~\cite[Corollary~3.2.14]{MR1778802}, so the result follows from Corollary~\ref{cor:RealGroups}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Alternating Groups}
Let $\operatorname{Alt}(n)$ denote the alternating group on $n$ letters. The last two authors proved in~\cite{ErnstSieben} that $\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Alt}(3))=*3=\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Alt}(4))$. Barnes proved in \cite{Barnes} that $\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Alt}(n))=*0$ if $n$ is greater than $5$ and not a prime that is congruent to $3$ modulo $4$. The full characterization of $\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Alt}(n))$ can be found in \cite{BeneshErnstSiebenSymAlt}, which uses the O'Nan--Scott Theorem~\cite{AschbacherScott} to show
\[
\text{\sf DNG}(\operatorname{Alt}(n)) =\begin{dcases}
*3, & n\in\{3,4\} \text{ or } n \text{ is in a certain family of primes} \\
*0, & \text{otherwise}.
\end{dcases}
\]
\noindent
The smallest number in this family of primes is $19$.
\subsection{Sporadic Groups}
The sporadic groups are the finite simple groups that do not belong to any infinite family of simple groups.
\begin{proposition}
Let $M_{23}$ denote the Mathieu group that permutes $23$ objects and $B$ denote the Baby Monster. If $G$ is a sporadic group, then
\[
\text{\sf DNG}(G) =\begin{dcases}
*3, & G \cong M_{23} \text{ or } G \cong B\\
*0, & \text{otherwise.}
\end{dcases}
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $G \cong M_{23}$. Then $23$ divides $|G|$, so $G$ has an element of order $23$. The Atlas of Finite Groups~\cite{Atlas} states that no even maximal subgroup of $G$ has order divisible by $23$, so we conclude that elements of order $23$ are not in any even maximal subgroup and the set of even maximal subgroups does not cover $G$. Then $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*3$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:DNGCriteria}. If $G \cong B$, then similarly elements of order $47$ are not contained in any even maximal subgroup, since no even maximal subgroup is divisible by $47$~\cite{wilson1999maximal}. So $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*3$ in this case, too.
Now suppose that $G$ is isomorphic to the Thompson group $Th$. There is only one class of maximal subgroups of $G$ that is odd~\cite{linton1989maximal}, and these odd maximal subgroups are isomorphic to $31.15$. Thus, we only need to consider elements of order dividing $31 \cdot 15$, since all other elements are contained in some even maximal subgroup. By the character table in~\cite{Atlas}, it suffices to consider elements of order $3$, $5$, $15$, and $31$. Again by the character table, all elements of orders $3$, $5$, and $15$ are contained in centralizers of even order. Therefore, all elements of $G$ are contained in an even maximal subgroup except possibly for elements of order $31$.
So let $M$ be a maximal subgroup of $G$ isomorphic to $31.15$, and let $g \in M$ have order $31$. By the character table, there are exactly two conjugacy classes $C_1$ and $C_2$ of elements of order $31$, and any element of order $31$ is contained in one and its inverse is contained in the other. By~\cite{Atlas}, there is a maximal subgroup $H$ of $G$ that is isomorphic to $2^5.L_5(2)$, so $31$ divides $|H|$ and $H$ has an element $h$ of order $31$. Then $g$ is conjugate to either $h$ or $h^{-1}$; without loss of generality, assume that there is an $x \in G$ such that $h^x=g$. Then $g = h^x \in H^x$, so $g$ is contained in an even maximal subgroup. Therefore, the maximal subgroups of $G$ cover $G$, so $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*0$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:DNGCriteria}.
The remaining cases contain only even maximal subgroups, and therefore have nim-number $0$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:DNGCriteria}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The group $J_4$ has only even maximal subgroups by~\cite{kleidman1988maximal}.
\item The group $Fi_{23}$ has only even maximal subgroups by~\cite{kleidman1989maximal}.
\item The group $Fi_{24}'$ has only even maximal subgroups by~\cite{linton1991maximal}.
\item The group $M$ has only even maximal subgroups by~\cite{norton1998anatomy},~\cite{norton2002anatomy},~\cite{norton2013correction},~\cite{wilson1999maximal}, and~\cite{wilson2006new}.
\end{enumerate}
Every maximal subgroup is even for every sporadic group not already mentioned~\cite{Atlas}, so they also have nim-number $0$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Rubik's Cube Groups}
We can use our classification results together with a computer algebra system to handle some fairly large groups. There are $8$ and $20$ conjugacy classes of maximal subgroups of the $2\times2\times 2$ and $3\times3\times 3$ Rubik's Cube groups, respectively. A simple GAP calculation~\cite{WEB2} shows that all these maximal subgroups are even. Hence, the avoidance games on these groups are all $*0$.
\end{section}
\begin{section}{Groups with Odd Order Frattini Subgroup}
If the Frattini subgroup of a group $G$ is even, then $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=*0$ by Corollary \ref{cor:evenFrattini}.
If the Frattini subgroup is odd, then factoring out by the Frattini subgroup does not change the nim-number of $\text{\sf DNG}(G)$.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:FrattiniQuotients}
Let $G$ be a finite group, and let $N$ be a normal subgroup of $G$ such that $N$ is odd and $N \leq \Phi(G)$. Then $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=\text{\sf DNG}(G/N)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The result follows trivially if $|G|=2$ and follows from Corollary~\ref{cor:finiteOdd} if $G$ is odd, so assume that $G$ is even of order greater than $2$. If $G$ is cyclic, then $4$ divides $|G|$ if and only if $4$ divides $|G/N|$, since $N$ is odd; the result follows by Proposition~\ref{prop:CyclicGroups}. So, suppose that $G$ is non-cyclic.
Let $x \in G$. If $M$ is a maximal subgroup of $G$, then $N \leq \Phi(G) \leq M$ by the definition of $\Phi(G)$. By the Correspondence Theorem~\cite[Theorem~3.7]{Isaacs1994}, the maximal subgroups of $G/N$ that contain $Nx$ are exactly the set of subgroups of the form $M/N$, where $M$ is a maximal subgroup of $G$ containing $x$. Additionally, $|(MN)/N|=|M/N|=|M|/|N| \equiv_2 |M|$ since $N$ is odd.
Therefore, the parities of the orders of maximal subgroups of $G/N$ that contain $Nx$ are exactly the same as the parities of orders of maximal subgroups of $G$ that contain $x$, so the set of even maximal subgroups of $G/N$ covers $G/N$ if and only if the set of even maximal subgroups of $G$ covers $G$. The result follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:DNGClassification}.
\end{proof}
It is well-known that the Frattini quotient of a nilpotent group is abelian. Since the avoidance games for abelian groups were classified in~\cite{ErnstSieben}, we could have used Proposition~\ref{prop:FrattiniQuotients} to prove Proposition~\ref{prop:nilpotent}.
\begin{exam}
The Frattini subgroup of $G=\mathbb{Z}_{18}\times \mathbb{Z}_2$ is $\Phi(G)\cong\mathbb{Z}_3$. Hence, $\text{\sf DNG}(G)=\text{\sf DNG}(G/\Phi(G))=\text{\sf DNG}(\mathbb{Z}_6\times \mathbb{Z}_2)=*0$, where the last equality follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:nilpotent}. Figure~\ref{fig:C18xC2} shows how the subgroup lattice
changes in the factoring process while the structure diagrams remain the same.
Notice that there are three arrows in Figure~\ref{fig:C18xC2}(c) joining the structure classes corresponding to the intersection subgroups
$\mathbb{Z}_1$ and $3\cdot\mathbb{Z}_6$ in the structure diagram of $\text{\sf DNG}(\mathbb{Z}_6\times \mathbb{Z}_2)$, even though there is no edge joining $\mathbb{Z}_1$ to any copy of $\mathbb{Z}_6$ in Figure ~\ref{fig:C18xC2}(b). A similar relationship holds between the structure classes corresponding to the intersection subgroups $\mathbb{Z}_3$ and $3\cdot\mathbb{Z}_{18}$ for $\text{\sf DNG}(\mathbb{Z}_{18}\times \mathbb{Z}_2)$.
\end{exam}
Factoring out by the Frattini subgroup can reduce the size of the group to make it more manageable for computer calculation.
\begin{exam}
The Frattini subgroup of the special linear group $SL(3,7)$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}_3$. The Frattini quotient is isomorphic to the projective special linear group $PSL(3,7)$.
A GAP calculation shows that the Frattini quotient has $69008$ even and $32928$ odd maximal subgroups.
The set of even maximal subgroups does not cover $PSL(3,7)$, so $\text{\sf DNG}(SL(3,7))=\text{\sf DNG}(PSL(3,7))=*3$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:DNGCriteria}(3)(b).
\end{exam}
\end{section}
\begin{section}{Further Questions}\label{sec:questions}
Below we outline a few open problems related to $\text{\sf DNG}(G)$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The nim-number of the avoidance game is determined by the structure diagram, which is determined by the structure digraph and the parity of the intersection subgroups.
Is it possible to determine the structure diagram from the abstract subgroup lattice structure without using any information about the subgroups?
\item Can we characterize $\text{\sf DNG}(G\times H)$, or even $\text{\sf DNG}(G\rtimes H)$, in terms of $\text{\sf DNG}(G)$ and $\text{\sf DNG}(H)$?
\item Let $N$ be a normal subgroup of $G$ such that $N\le \Phi(G)$. Are the structure digraphs of $\text{\sf DNG}(G)$ and $\text{\sf DNG}(G/N)$ isomorphic?
\item Can we characterize the nim-numbers of the achievement games from~\cite{ErnstSieben} in terms of covering conditions by maximal subgroups similar to Corollary~\ref{cor:DNGCriteria} for avoidance games?
\item Is it possible to determine nim-numbers for avoidance games played on algebraic structures having maximal sub-structures, such as quasigroups, semigroups, monoids, and loops?
\item The nim-number of a game position $P$ can be determined using the type of the structure class containing $P$. The type of the structure class requires a recursive computation using the minimal excludant.
Is it possible to avoid this computation and determine the nim-value of $P$ in terms of a simple condition using only the maximal subgroups?
\item What are the nim-values of avoidance games played on the remaining classical and simple groups?
\end{enumerate}
\end{section}
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
A classical result of Erd\H{o}s and Hajnal \cite{erd66}, Corollary 13.4, claims that for any integers $k, r, g \geq 2$ there is an $r$-uniform hypergraph of girth at least $g$ with chromatic number at least $k$. This implies that there are sparse hypergraphs such that in any coloring of their vertices with at most $k-1$ colors there is a monochromatic hyperedge. The original proof was probabilistic. Other probabilistic constructions were given by Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il and R\"odl \cite{nese78}, Duffus et al. \cite{duffus}, Kostochka and R\"odl \cite{kost10}, and, in case of graphs only, by Erd\H{o}s \cite{erd59}.
Several explicit constructions were found later, see Lov\'asz \cite{lov68}, Erd\H{o}s and Lov\'asz \cite{erd75},
Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il and R\"odl \cite{nese79}, Duffus et al. \cite{duffus}, Alon et al. \cite{alon}, K\v{r}\'i\v{z} \cite{kriz89}, Kostochka and Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il \cite{kost99}.
Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il \cite{nese13} as well as
Raigorodskii and Shabanov \cite{raig11} gave surveys on the topic. Some interesting generalizations were treated by Feder and Vardi \cite{feder98},
Kun \cite{kun}, M\"uller \cite{muller75} , \cite{muller79}, as well as by Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il \cite{nese13}.
When the number of colors used on the vertices of a hypergraph is not restricted, the monochromatic hyperedges could easily be avoided by simply using a lot of different colors. Then, however, so-called rainbow (totally multicolored) hyperedges could appear. The notion of a proper coloring when both rainbow and monochromatic hyperedges are forbidden was introduced by Voloshin in a concept called bihypergraphs, \cite{V}, see also Karrer \cite{karrer}.
Here, we show that there are sparse hypergraphs in which monochromatic or rainbow hyperedges are unavoidable.
{\it A cycle} of length $g$ in a hypergraph is a subhypergraph consisting of $g\geq 2$ distinct hyperedges $E_0, \ldots, E_{g-1}$ and containing distinct vertices $x_0, \ldots, x_{g-1}$, such that $x_i \in E_i\cap E_{i+1}$, $i=0, \ldots, g-1$, addition of indices modulo $g$. The {\it girth} of a hypergraph is the length of a shortest cycle if such exists, and infinity otherwise. Next is our main result.
\begin{theorem}\label{main}
For any integers $r, g\geq 2$ there is an $r$-uniform hypergraph of girth at least $g$ such that in any coloring of its vertices there is either a monochromatic or a rainbow (totally multicolored) edge.
\end{theorem}
We shall give a probabilistic proof and an explicit construction of a desired hypergraph. Our proofs are inspired by amalgamation and probabilistic techniques of Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il and R\"odl.
To shorten the presentation, we shall say that a hypergraph is {\it rm-unavoidable} if any coloring of its vertices has either a rainbow or a
monochromatic edge.
We give an explicit construction and use it to prove the main theorem in Section \ref{explicit}. The probabilistic proof is given in Section \ref{probabilistic}. The proofs of a few standard results we use are presented in Appendix.
\section{Explicit Construction of rm-unavoidable Hypergraphs}\label{explicit}
The goal of this section is to construct, for each $r\geq 2$ and $g\geq 2$, an rm-unavoidable hypergraph, that we shall call $H(r,g)$, of uniformity $r$ and girth $g$.
The three main concepts we use are amalgamation, special partite hypergraphs forcing rainbow edges, and so-called complete partite factors. All of these notions are defined for partite hypergraphs. A hypergraph is {\it $a$-partite} if its vertex set can be partitioned in at most $a$ parts such that each hyperedge contains at most one vertex from each part. We shall first define a part-rainbow-forced hypergraph as a hypergraph having some special coloring properties and give an explicit construction of
such a hypergraph $PR(r,g)$. Then we incorporate this hypergraph into a more involved construction of an rm-unavoidable hypergraph $H(r,g)$. Both of these constructions use amalgamation.\\
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{Amalgamation2_newformat.pdf}
\caption{Amalgamation of $F$ and $H$ along the $4^{{\rm th}}$ part.
Here $F$ is a $3$-uniform cycle on $3$ edges, $H$ is $5$-uniform, $5$-partite with $4$ edges.
The resulting graph is $5$-partite, $5$-uniform, with curves indicating hyperedges and colors indicating distinct copies of $H$, corresponding to the edges of $F$.} \label{amalgamation}
\end{figure}
\begin{description}
\item[Amalgamation]
Given an $a$-partite hypergraph $H$ with the $i^{{\rm th}}$ part of size $r_i$ and given an $r_i$-uniform hypergraph $F=(V, \mathcal{E})$,
{\it an amalgamation} of $H$ and $F$ along the $i ^{{\rm th}}$ part, denoted by $H\star_i F$ is an $a$-partite hypergraph obtained by taking $|\mathcal{E}|$ vertex-disjoint copies of $H$ and identifying the $i$th part of each such copy with a hyperedge of $F$ such that distinct copies get identified with distinct hyperedges.
Moreover, the $j^{\rm th}$ part of $H\star_i F$ is a pairwise disjoint union of the $j^{{\rm th}}$ parts from the copies of $H$, for $j\in \{1, \ldots, a\} \setminus \{i\}$, see Figure \ref{amalgamation}. We shall sometimes say that $H\star_i F$ is obtained by amalgamating copies of $H$ along the part $i$ using $F$.\\
\item[Part-rainbow-forced hypergraph]
A vertex coloring of an $a$-partite hypergraph with parts $X_1, \ldots, X_a$ that
assign $|X_i|$ colors to part $i$, $i=1, \ldots, a$ is called {\it part rainbow}.
We say that an $a$-partite hypergraph is {\it part-rainbow-forced} if in any part-rainbow coloring there is a rainbow edge.\\
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{Partite-F-factor.pdf}
\caption{An example of a complete $4$-partite $F$-factor, where $F$ is a $3$-partite $3$-uniform hypergraph with two edges.}\label{partite-factor}
\end{figure}
\item[Partite factor]
Let $F$ be an $r$-uniform $r$-partite hypergraph. A {\it complete $a$-partite $F$-factor} is an $a$-partite $r$-uniform hypergraph $G$ that is a union of pairwise vertex-disjoint copies $F_1, \ldots, F_{\binom{a}{r}}$ of $F$, such that each part of $F_i$ is contained in some part of $G$, $i = 1, \ldots, \binom{a}{r}$ and such that
the union of any $r$ parts of $G$ contains the vertex set of $F_i$, for some $i=1, \ldots, \binom{a}{r}$, see Figure \ref{partite-factor}.\\
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{Extension_figure_entwurf5.pdf}
\caption{Extension of an $r$-partite $r$-uniform hypergraph $H_r$ to an $(r+1)$-partite $(r+1)$-uniform hypergraph $\widetilde{H}_{r}$.} \label{extension}
\end{figure}
\item[Construction of a hypergraph \textbf{\textit{PR(r,g)}}] ~~
Let $r, g \geq 2$, $g\geq 2$ be fixed.
Let $g\geq 2$, let $PR(2, g)$ be a bipartite graph on vertices $x,y,z$ and edges $xy$, $yz$.
Assume now that $PR(r,g)$ has been constructed and it is an $r$-uniform, $r$-partite hypergraph.
Let $F' $ be an $\ell$-uniform hypergraph of girth at least $g$ and minimum degree $\ell (r+1)$, where $\ell = |E(H_r)|$. We show the existence of $F'$ in Appendix.
For an $r$-uniform $r$-partite hypergraph $H$, let $\widetilde{H}$ be an $(r+1)$-partite $(r+1)$-uniform hypergraph that is obtained from $H$ by expanding each of its edges by a vertex in a new, $(r+1)^{{\rm st} }$ part such that
each edge is extended by an own vertex, i.e., the size of the $(r+1)^{{\rm st} }$ part is equal to the number of edges in $H$, see Figure \ref{extension}.
Let $PR(r+1, g) = \widetilde{PR(r, g)} \star _{r+1} F'$, i.e., it is an amalgamation of copies of $\widetilde{PR(r,g)}$ along the $(r+1)^{{\rm st}}$ part using $F'$, see Figure \ref{part-rainbow}.
\end{description}
~\\
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[scale=0.85]{Cycle_newformat.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of a part-rainbow-forced $(r+1)$-uniform hypergraph and a cycle of length $3$ in the amalgamated hypergraph $F'$. The bold hyperedges form a cycle of length $11$ in the resulted hypergraph.}\label{part-rainbow}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem2}
For any integers $r, g\geq 2$, $PR(r,g)$ is a part-rainbow-forced $r$-uniform hypergraph of girth $g$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By construction, $PR(r,g)$ is an $r$-uniform $r$-partite hypergraph, $r\geq 2$.
We shall prove by induction on $r$ that $PR(r,g)$ is part-rainbow-forced hypergraph of girth at least $g$.
When $r=2$, we see that a part-rainbow coloring assigns distinct colors to $x$ and $z$.
Thus, no matter how $y$ is colored, $xy$ or $yz$ is rainbow. Moreover this graph is acyclic, so it has infinite girth.
Assume that $PR(r,g)$ is part-rainbow-forced hypergraph of girth at least $g$.
Let's prove that $H_{r+1} = PR(r+1,g)$ is also part-rainbow-forced hypergraph of girth at least $g$. Let $H_r= PR(r, g)$.
Recall that $H_{r+1}$ is an amalgamation of copies $\widetilde{H}_r^1$, $\widetilde{H}_r^1$, \ldots, $\widetilde{H}_r^{e'}$ of $\widetilde{H_r}$ along the $(r+1)^{{\rm st}}$ part using $F'$, where $F' $ is an $\ell$-uniform hypergraph of girth at least $g$, minimum degree $\ell (r+1)$, $\ell = |E(H_r)|$, and $e' = |E(F')|$.
Recall further, that $\widetilde{H}_r^i$ is obtained by an extension operation tilde from $H_r^i$, a copy of $H_r$.
First we shall verify that any part-rainbow coloring $c$ of $H_{r+1}$ results in a rainbow edge.
For any $i=1, \ldots, e'$, consider a restriction of $c$ to the vertex set of $H_r^i$. Since it is a copy of $H_r = PR(r,g)$, it is again part-rainbow, so there is a rainbow edge $E'_i$ in that copy. Let $ E'_i\cup \{v_i\}$ be a corresponding uniquely defined edge of $\widetilde{H}^i_{r}$.
The vertices $v_1, \ldots, v_{e'}$ are vertices of $F'$.
Since the minimum degree of $F'$ is at least $\ell (r+1)$, then $e'=|E(F')|\geq |V(F')| \ell(r+1) / \ell = |V(F')| (r+1)$.
Thus there are at least $r+1$ repeated vertices in the list $v_1, \ldots, v_{e'}$, i.e., w.l.o.g. $v=v_1= \ldots = v_{r+1}$.
Thus $v$ extends rainbow edges $E'_1, E_2', \ldots, E_{r+1}'$ in $H_r^1, H_r^2, \ldots, H_r^{r+1}$.
We claim that at least one of the extended edges $E'_1\cup \{v\}, E_2'\cup \{v\}, \ldots, E_{r+1}'\cup\{v\}$ is rainbow.
Assume not, then $c(v)$ is present in each of $E'_1, E_2', \ldots, E_{r+1}'$. However, there are at most $r$ vertices of each given color in the first $r$ parts. Since $E'_1, E_2', \ldots, E_{r+1}'$ are pairwise disjoint, we have a contradiction.
To see that the girth of $H_{r+1}$ is at least $g$, consider a cycle $C$ in $H_{r+1}$, see bold edges in Figure \ref{part-rainbow}. If the edges of $C$ come from one copy of $\widetilde{H}_r$, then the length of $C$ is at least $g$ as the girth of $\widetilde{H}_r$ is the same as girth of $H_r$. If the edges of $C$ come from at least two distinct copies of $\widetilde{H}_r$, then $C$ is a union of hyperpaths $P_0, P_1, \ldots, P_{m-1}$ from different copies of $\widetilde{H}_r$, such that the consecutive paths share a vertex in the last $(r+1)^{\rm st}$ part, i.e., $V(P_i)\cap V(P_{i+1}) = \{u_i\}$,
$u_0, \ldots, u_{m-1}$ are distinct vertices from $V_{r+1}$, addition modulo $m$.
Thus $u_{i}$ and $u_{i+1}$ belong to the same copy of $\widetilde{H}_r$ and thus the same edge of $F'$, $i=0, \ldots, m-1$, addition modulo $m$.
We see that these edges of $F'$ form a cycle in $F'$ of length at most the length of $C$.
On the other hand, we know that any cycle in $F'$ has length at least $g$, implying that $C$ has length at least $g$. This concludes the proof that $PR(r+1, g)$ is part-rainbow-forced of girth at least~$g$. \end{proof}
Now we construct an rm-unavoidable hypergraph $H(r,g)$ of uniformty $r$ and girth at least~$g$.\\
\begin{description}
\item[Construction of a hypergraph \textbf{\textit{H(r, g)}}] ~~
For $g=2$ and any $r\geq 2$, let $H(r, 2)$ be a complete $r$-uniform hypergraph on $(r-1)^2+1$ vertices.
Assume that for any $r\geq 2$, $H(r,g-1)$ has been constructed.
Let $F= PR(r, g)$ be as given in the previous construction. Let $a= (r-1)^2 +r$ and let $\mathcal{M}_1$ be a complete $a$-partite $F$-factor.
For any partite hypergraph $G$, let $|G|_i$ denote the size of the $i^{{\rm th}}$ part of $G$.\\
Let $\mathcal{M}_2 = \mathcal{M}_1 \star_1 \mathcal{H}_1$, where $\mathcal{H}_1= H(|\mathcal{M}_1|_1, g-1)$.
Let $\mathcal{M}_3= \mathcal{M}_2 \star_2 \mathcal{H}_2$, where $\mathcal{H}_2=H(|\mathcal{M}_2|_2, g-1)$.
In general, let $\mathcal{M}_{j+1}= \mathcal{M}_j \star_j \mathcal{H}_j$, where $\mathcal{H}_j=H(|\mathcal{M}_j|_j,g-1)$.
We see that the $j^{\rm th}$ part of $\mathcal{M}_{j+1}$ corresponds to the vertex set of $\mathcal{H}_j$.
Let $H(r,g)=\mathcal{M}_{a+1}$.
\end{description}
\noindent
Now, we shall prove that this construction gives an rm-unavoidable hypergraph that is $r$-uniform and has girth $g$. This will give a proof of Theorem \ref{main}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{main}]
We shall show that $H(r, g)$ is an rm-unavoidable hypergraph of girth at least $g$, by induction on $g$.
When $g=2$, $H(r, 2)$ is a compete $r$-uniform hypergraph on $(r-1)^2 +1$ edges. It has girth $2$ and in any vertex coloring there are either $r$ vertices of the same color, forming a monochromatic edge, or $r$ vertices of distinct colors, forming a rainbow edge.
Assume that for any $r\geq 2$, $H(r, g-1)$ is an rm-unavoidable hypergraph of girth at least $g-1$.
Consider $H(r, g) = \mathcal{M} = \mathcal{M}_{a+1}$ given in the construction.
Let $c$ be a vertex coloring of $ \mathcal{M} $. Consider the $a^{\rm th}$ part of $\mathcal{M}=\mathcal{M}_{a+1}$.
This part corresponds to the vertex set of $\mathcal{H}_a = H(|\mathcal{M}_a|_a, g-1)$, an rm-unavoidable hypergraph.
Thus, there is a monochromatic or rainbow subset $X_a$ in the $a^{\rm th}$ part of $\mathcal{M}$ of size equal to the uniformity of $\mathcal{H}_a$, i.e., of size $|\mathcal{M}_a|_a$.
Since $X_{a}\in \mathcal{E}(\mathcal{H}_{a})$, $X_a$ is the $a^{\rm th}$ part of a copy of $\mathcal{M}_a$.
Consider $(a-1)^{\rm st}$ part of this copy of $\mathcal{M}_a$. Similarly to the above, there is a monochromatic or rainbow subset $X_{a-1}$ of this part
of size equal to the uniformity of $\mathcal{H}_{a-1}= H(|\mathcal{M}_{a-1}|_{a-1}, g-1)$, i.e., of size $|\mathcal{M}_{a-1}|_{a-1}$.
Since $X_{a-1}\in \mathcal{E}(\mathcal{H}_{a-1})$, $X_{a-1}$ is the $(a-1)^{\rm st}$ part of a copy of $\mathcal{M}_{a-1}$ such that the $a^{\rm th}$ part of this copy is a subset of $X_a$.
Continuing in this manner we see that there is a monochromatic or a rainbow subset $X_{j}$ of $j^{\rm th}$ part of $\mathcal{M}_{j+1}$
of size equal to the uniformity of $\mathcal{H}_{j}$, i.e., of size $|\mathcal{M}_{j}|_{j}$.
We have that $X_{j}$ is the $j^{\rm th}$ part of a copy of $\mathcal{M}_{j}$ such that the $(j+t)^{\rm th}$ part of this copy is a subset of $X_{j+t}$,
$j+t \in \{j+1, j+2, \ldots, a\}$.
Thus $X_1, X_2, \ldots, X_a$ form parts of an $a$-uniform sub-hypergraph of $\mathcal{M}$ containing a copy of $\mathcal{M}_1$. Recall that $\mathcal{M}_1$ is a complete $a$-partite $F$-factor.
Each of these parts is monochromatic or rainbow. Since $a= (r-1)^2 + r$, there are
either at least $r$ parts that are rainbow or at least $(r-1)^2+1$ parts that are monochromatic.
If there are $r$ rainbow parts, the copy of $F$ on these parts contains a rainbow edge as $F$ is part-rainbow-forced.
So, assume that there are at least $(r-1)^2+1$ monochromatic parts. If there are $r$ of those that are of the same color, any edge in a copy of $F$ on these parts is monochromatic. Otherwise there are at most $(r-1)$ parts of each given color, so there are $r$ monochromatic parts of distinct colors. These
$r$ parts in turn contain an edge of $F$, and since an edge has at most one vertex from each part, this edge is rainbow.\\
Now, we verify that the girth of $\mathcal{M}$ is at least $g$ by an argument similar to one of Lemma~\ref{Lem2}.
To do that, we shall prove by induction on $j$, that $\mathcal{M}_j$ has girth at least $g$, $j=1, \ldots, a$.
Since $\mathcal{M}_1$ is a complete $a$-partite $F$ factor, it has girth equal to the girth of $F$, that is at least $g$.
Assume that $\mathcal{M}_j$ has girth at least $g$. Let's prove that $\mathcal{M}_{j+1}$ has girth at least $g$.
Recall that $\mathcal{M}_{j+1} = \mathcal{M}_j \star_j \mathcal{H}_j$, i.e., $\mathcal{M}_{j+1}$ is obtained
by amalgamating copies of $\mathcal{M}_j$ along $\mathcal{H}_j = H(|\mathcal{M}_j|_j, g-1)$. Let $X$ be the $j^{\rm th}$ part of $\mathcal{M}_{j+1}$, i.e., the vertex set of $\mathcal{H}_j$.
Consider a shortest cycle $C$ in $\mathcal{M}_{j+1}$. If $C$ is a subgraph of one of these copies of $\mathcal{M}_j$, then by induction $C$ has length at least $g$.
If the edges of $C$ come from at least two distinct copies of $\mathcal{M}_j$, then $C$ is an edge-disjoint union of hyperpaths $P_0, P_1, \ldots, P_{m-1}$, each with at least $2$ edges, from different copies of $\mathcal{M}_j$, such that the consecutive paths share a vertex in $X$, i.e., $V(P_i)\cap V(P_{i+1}) = \{u_i\}$, $i=0, \ldots, m-1$, and
$u_0, \ldots, u_{m-1}$ are distinct vertices from $X$, addition modulo $m$.
Thus $u_{i}$ and $u_{i+1}$ belong to the same copy of $\mathcal{M}_j$ and thus correspond to the vertices from the same edge of $\mathcal{H}_j$, $i=0, \ldots, m-1$, addition modulo $m$.
We see that these edges of $\mathcal{H}_j$ form a cycle in $\mathcal{H}_j$ of length at most half the length of $C$.
On the other hand, we know that any cycle in $\mathcal{H}_j$ has length at least $g-1$, implying that $C$ has length at least $2(g-1)\geq g$.
This concludes the proof of Theorem \ref{main} using an explicit construction.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{main} - Probabilistic Construction}\label{probabilistic}
This proof is just a slight generalization of the probabilistic construction for high-girth, high-chromatic-number hypergraphs by Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il and R\"odl.
Let an $\ell$-cycle be a cycle of length $\ell$.
Let $r, g$ be fixed, put $R = (r-1)^2+1$ and consider an $R$-uniform hypergraph $\mathcal{H}= \mathcal{H}(n,R,g) =(X, \mathcal{E})$ with $n$ vertices, girth at least $ g$, and with $|\mathcal{E}|=\lceil n^{1+\frac{1}{g}}\rceil$. Such a graph exists, if $n$ is large enough by Lemma \ref{girth-edges}, see Appendix.
Let's order the hyperedges of $\mathcal{H}$ as $E_1, E_2, \ldots, E_m$.
Let $\mathcal{M}_n$ be the family of all sequences $(E_1',\ldots, E_m')$ such that $|E_i'|=r$ and $E_i'\subseteq E_i$, $i=1, \ldots, m$. For a given sequence $Q \in \mathcal{M}_n$, let $\mathcal{H}_Q$ be a hypergraph whose hyperedges are elements of $Q$. We say that a coloring of $X$ is {\it good} for $Q$ if there are no monochromatic and no rainbow edges under this coloring of $\mathcal{H}_Q$. We say that $Q$ is colorable if there is a coloring of $X$ that is good for $Q$. We shall count the number of colorable sequences and shall show that it is strictly less than the number of all sequences in $\mathcal{M}_n$. This will imply that there is a non-colorable sequence corresponding to an rm-unavoidable hypergraph.
Each hypergraph $\mathcal{H}_Q$, $Q\in \mathcal{M}_n$ has girth at least $ g$ since $\mathcal{H}$ has this property. In addition $|\mathcal{M}_n|\ge a^{n^{1+\frac{1}{g}}}$, where $a = \binom{R}{r}$, since there are $a$ ways to choose an $r$-element subset from an edge of $\mathcal{H}$ and $m\geq n^{1+\frac{1}{g}}$.
Now we consider a coloring of $X$ with arbitrary number of colors. Each edge $E$ of $\mathcal{H}$ is colored with at least $r$ or less than $r$ colors.
If $E$ is colored with less than $r$ colors, there are $r$ vertices in $E$ of the same color since $E$ has $R = (r-1)^{2}+1$ elements and $\frac{R}{(r-1)}>(r-1)$.
If $E$ is colored with at least $r$ colors, there are $r$ vertices with pairwise distinct colors. Thus each edge $E$ of $\mathcal{H}$ contains a "bad" subset that is either monochromatic or rainbow, and only at most $\binom{|E|}{r} -1 = \binom{R}{r}-1 = a-1$ of all $r$-element subsets of $E$ could be "good". Therefore each coloring $c$ of $X$ is good for at most $(a-1)^{\lceil n^{1+\frac{1}{g}}\rceil} \leq (a-1)^{ 1+n^{1+\frac{1}{g} }} $ members of $\mathcal{M}_n$. Since the total number of colors in $X$ is at most $n$ in any coloring, it is enough to consider colorings with colors ${1,\dots,n}$. Since there are $n^n$ colorings with $n$ colors we have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
|\{Q \in \mathcal{M}_n| ~Q \text{ is colorable} \}|
&=&|\bigcup_{c:X\rightarrow [n]}{\bigcup_{Q \in \mathcal{M}_n} \{Q |~ c \text{ is good for } Q\}}| \\
&\le& \sum_{c:X\rightarrow [n]}{|\bigcup_{Q \in \mathcal{M}_n} \{Q |~ c \text{ is good for } Q\}|} \\
&\le& n^n \cdot (a-1)^{1+ n^{1+\frac{1}{g}}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Next we shall show that $n^n \cdot (a-1)^{1+ n^{1+\frac{1}{g}}}< a^{ n^{1+\frac{1}{g}}}$ for all sufficiently large $n$.
Indeed, $n^n (a-1)^{1+ n^{1+\frac{1}{g}}}< a^{ n^{1+\frac{1}{g}}} ~\Leftrightarrow~
n \ln(n) + \ln(a-1) < n^{1+\frac{1}{g}} \ln \left( {\frac{a}{a-1}} \right).$
The last inequality holds since $\ln({\frac{a}{a-1}})>0$.
Therefore the number of colorable members from $\mathcal{M}_n$ is less than the total number of members in $\mathcal{M}_n$ and thus there is an non-colorable $Q\in \mathcal{M}_n$ that gives $\mathcal{H}_Q$, an $r$-uniform hypergraph of girth at least $g$ that is rm-unavoidable. \qed
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
The fast increase of computing resources needed to analyse the data
collected in modern hadron-collider experiments, and the lower cost
of processing units with respect to storage, pushes High-Energy Physics (HEP)
experiments to explore new techniques and technologies to move as much
as possible of the data analysis at the time of the data acquisition
(\textit{online}) in order to select candidates to be stored on disk,
with maximal, reasonably achievable, background rejection.
Besides, research on multivariate algorithms, active both within and
outside of the HEP community, is approaching the challenge of operating
in distributed computing environments, which represents a further motivation for studies of
new classes of algorithms.
Statistical inference of probability density functions underlying
experimental datasets is common in \emph{High Energy Physics}.
\emph{Fitting} is an example of \emph{parametric}
density estimation. When possible, defining a parametric form of
the underlying distribution and choose the values for the parameters
maximizing the likelihood is usually the best approach.
In multivariate problems with a large number of variables and important
correlation, however, fitting may become unpractical, and \emph{non-parametric
density estimation} becomes a valid, largely employed, solution.
In HEP, the most common non-parametric density estimation, beyond the histogram, is probably
\emph {kernel density estimation} \cite{Cranmer:2000du}, based on the sum of
normalized kernel functions centered on each data-entry.
In this write-up, I discuss \emph{Density Estimation Trees}, algorithms
based on a \emph{multivariate, binary tree} structure,
oriented to \emph{non-parametric density estimation}.
Density Estimation Trees are less accurate than kernel density estimation,
but much faster.
Integrating Density Estimation Trees is also trivial and fast, making
iterative search algorithms convenient.
Finally, storing a Density Estimation Trees and propagate it through
the computing nodes of a distributed system is relatively cheap, offering a
reasonable solutions for compressing the statistical information
of large datasets.
An implementation of the algorithm in ROOT/RooFit is available through
CERN GitLab\footnote{\href{https://gitlab.cern.ch/landerli/density-estimation-trees}{gitlab.cern.ch/landerli/density-estimation-trees}}.
\section{The algorithm}\label{sec:algorithm}
The idea of iteratively splitting a data sample, making the density
estimation to coincide with the average density in each portion of the data
space is not new.
However, the technique had little room for applications in analyses
of datasets up to a few thousands of entries described by small sets
of correlated variables.
Recently, $kd$-trees \cite{kdtrees} have been used to split large samples
into sub-sets consisting of equal fractions of the data entries.
The idea underlying $kd$-trees is the iterative splitting of the data-sample
using as threshold the median of a given projection.
While powerful to solve a vast range of problems,
including notably nearest-neighbour searches,
the lack of appropriateness of $kd$-trees to estimate probability densities
is evident considering samples including multiple
data-entries.
Ideally, the density estimation $\hat f(\mathbf{x})$ approximating the underlying
density function $f(\mathbf{x})$ should minimize the quantity
\mathcal R = \int \big( \hat f(\mathbf {x}) - f(\mathbf {x}) \big)^2 \mathrm{d}\mathbf{x}.
$
It can be shown \cite{dets} that, exploiting the Monte~Carlo approximation
\begin{equation}
\lim_{N \to + \infty} \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^{N} g(x_i) = \int g(x)h(x) \mathrm d x \qquad \mbox{where } x_1, x_2, ..., x_N \mbox{ distribute as } h(x),
\end{equation}
the minimization of $\mathcal R$ is equivalent to growing a
Density Estimation Tree iteratively splitting the node $\ell$,
into the two sub nodes $\ell_R$ and $\ell_L$
minimizing the \emph{Gini} index,
$ G(\ell) = R(\ell) - R(\ell_R) - R(\ell_L)$.
Here, $R(\ell)$ represents the \emph{replacement error}, defined by
\begin{equation}
R(\ell) \equiv - \frac{N_\ell^2}{N^2_\mathrm{tot} V_\ell},
\end{equation}
where $V_\ell$ is the hyper-volume of the portion of the data-space
associated to the node $\ell$, and $N_\ell$ the number of data
entries it includes;
$N_\mathrm{tot}$ is the number of data entries in the whole dataset.
Figure \ref{fig:training} shows an example of how the training is performed.
\begin{figure}
\begin{minipage}{0.5\textwidth}{}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{img/det-simpleexample.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:training} Schematic representation of the training
and the evaluation
procedures of a Density Estimation Tree.}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}{}
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{img/ex2D/det2D-overtrained.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{img/ex2D/vary-overtrained}
\caption{\label{fig:overtraining} Top, an example of an overtrained
Density Estimation Tree. The random alignment of data-entries
with respect to one of the variables describing the problem
is misinterpreted as a spike in the density estimation, as
evident in the projection onto the vertical axis shown on the bottom.
}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Overtraining}
As in the case of Classification algorithms, overtraining is the
misinterpretation of statistical fluctuations of the dataset as
relevant features to be reproduced by the model.
An example of overtraining of Density Estimation Trees is presented
in Figure \ref{fig:overtraining}. In the presented dataset, the
alignment of data-entries in one of the input variables is interpreted
as narrow spikes. To compensate spikes, in terms of absolute normalization,
the density is underestimated in all of the other points of the
parameter space.
Overtraining in decision trees is controlled through an iterative approach
consisting in \emph{pruning} and \emph{cross-validation}: finding and
removing the branches increasing the complexity of the
tree without enhancing the statistical agreement with a set of test
samples.
Cross-validation is very expensive in terms of computing power
and often fails to identify problems of over-training arising close to
the root of the decision tree.
Overtraining in density estimation is fought, instead, by defining
\emph{a priori} an expected resolution width, neglecting fluctuations
under that resolution while building the statistical model.
For example, kernel density estimation algorithms require
a parameter, named \emph{bandwidth} as an input.
The bandwidth is related to the width
of the kernel function. Abundant literature exists on techniques
to optimise the bandwidth for a certain dataset,
most of them represent a preliminary step of the density estimation algorithm.
Growing a Density Estimation Tree with a minimal leaf width is
fast, doesn't require post-processing and it is found to result in
better-quality estimations with respect to cross-validation
procedures.
The same techniques used to compute the optimal
bandwidth parameter for kernel density estimation algorithms can
be used to define the optimal minimal leaf width
of the Density Estimation Tree.
\subsection{Integration}
As mentioned in the introduction, fast integration of the statistical
model built using Density Estimation Trees is one of the strengths of
the algorithm.
Integration usually responds to two different needs: \emph{normalization}
and \emph{slicing} (or \emph{projecting}, or \emph{marginalizing}).
Integrals to compute the overall normalization of the density estimation,
or the contribution in a large fraction of the data-space,
gain little from exploiting the tree
structure of the density estimator. A sum over the contributions of each
leaf represents the best strategy.
Instead, integrals over a narrow subset of the data-space should
profit of the tree structure of the density estimation to exclude
from the integration domain as many leaves as possible, as early
as possible. Exploiting the tree structure when performing integrals
of slices
can drastically reduce the computing time in
large density estimation trees.
\subsection{Operations with Density Estimation Trees}
Combining weighted Density Estimation Trees can be useful
to model data samples composed of two or more components.
Combination is achieved implementing both scalar and binary
operations. There is not much to discuss about scalar operations,
where the scalar operation is applied to each leaf independently.
Instead, binary operations require the combination of two different Density Estimation
Trees, which is not trivial because the
boundaries are \emph{a priori} different. The algorithm to combine two
Density Estimation Trees consists of the iterative splitting of the terminal
nodes of the first tree, following the boundaries of the terminal
nodes of the second one.
Once the combination is done, the first tree is compatible with the second one
and the binary operation can be performed
node per node.
The resulting tree may have several additional
layers with respect to the originating trees, therefore a final step
removing division between negligibly different nodes
is advisable.
\section{Discussion of possible applications}\label{sec:applications}
Density Estimation Trees are useful to approach problems defined by
many variables and for which huge statistical samples are available.
To give a context to the following examples of applications, I consider
the calibration samples for the Particle IDentification (PID) algorithms at
the LHCb experiment.
PID calibration samples are sets of decay candidates reconstructed and
selected relying on kinematic variables only, to distinguish between
different types of long-lived particles: electrons, muons, pions, kaons,
and protons.
The PID strategy of the LHCb detector relies on the combined response
of several detectors: two ring Cherenkov detectors, an electromagnetic
calorimeter, a hadronic calorimeter and a muon system \cite{lhcb}.
The response of the single detectors are combined into likelihoods used
at analysis level to define the tightness of the PID requirements.
Calibration samples count millions of background-subtracted candidates,
each candidate is defined by a set of kinematic variables, for example
momentum and pseudorapidity, and a set of PID likelihoods, one per
particle type.
The correlation between all variables is important and not always
linear.
\subsection{Efficiency tables}
The first application considered is the construction of tables defining
the probability that the PID likelihood of
a candidate, defined by a set of kinematic
variables, satisfies a particular requirement.
Building two Density Estimation Trees with the kinematic variables
defining the data-space, one with the full data sample
(tree $t_\mathrm{all}$), and one
with the portion of data sample passing the PID criteria
(tree $t_\mathrm{pass}$), allows to compute the efficiency for
each combination of the kinematic variables by evaluating the
Density Estimation Tree obtained taking the ratio $t_\mathrm{pass}/t_\mathrm{all}$.
For frequently-changing criteria a dynamic determination of the efficiency can
be envisaged. For simplicity, consider the generic univariate PID criterion $y > 0$.
In this case a single Density Estimation Tree $d (x_1, x_2, y)$
defined by the kinematic variables
$(x_1, x_2)$, and one PID variable $y$, has to be trained on the calibration sample.
The dynamic representation of the efficiency for a candidate
having kinematic variables $(\hat x_1, \hat x_2)$ is the ratio
\begin{equation}
\epsilon (x_1, x_2; y > 0) = {\displaystyle \int_{y>0} d ( \hat x_1, \hat x_2 , y ) \mathrm dy }\Bigg/{\displaystyle \int_{\mathrm{any\ }y} d ( \hat x_1, \hat x_2 , y ) \mathrm dy}.
\end{equation}
Thanks to the fast slice-integration algorithm, the computation of this ratio
can be included in an iterative optimization procedure aiming at
an optimization of the threshold on $y$.
\subsection{Sampling as fast simulation technique}
Another important application is related to fast simulation of HEP events.
Full simulation, including interaction of the particles with matter,
is becoming so expensive to be expected
exceeding the experiments' budgets in the next few years.
Parametric simulation is seen as a viable solution, as proved by the
great interest raised by the DELPHES project \cite{deFavereau:2013fsa}.
However, parametrizing a simulation presents the same pitfalls as parametrizing
a density estimation: when correlation among different variables becomes
relevant, the mathematical form of the parametrization increases in
complexity up to the point it becomes unmanageable.
Density Estimation Trees are an interesting candidate for non-parametric
fast simulation. Let $d(x_1, ..., x_N, y_1, ..., y_n)$ be a Density
Estimation Tree trained on a set
of candidates defined by \emph{generator} variables $\mathbf x \equiv (x_1, ..., x_N)$, and
by variables $\mathbf y \equiv (y_1, ..., y_n)$ obtained through full simulation.
For example, $\mathbf x$ could represent the kinematic variables of a track and
$\mathbf y$ the PID likelihoods.
The aim of fast non-parametric simulation is, given a new set of values
$(\hat x_1, ..., \hat x_N)$ for $\mathbf x$, to compute a set of values for
$\mathbf y$ distributed according to the conditional probability density function
$d(y_1, ..., y_n|\hat x_1, ..., \hat x_N)$.
Once the DET is trained,
the tree structure of the density estimator is used to compute for each leaf $\ell$
the hyper-volume $V_{\ell \cap \hat \mathbf{x}}$ of the intersection between $\ell$
and hyper-plane defined by
$\mathbf x = (\hat x_1, ..., \hat x_N)$.
A random leaf $L \in \{\ell\}$ is then chosen with probability proportional
to $V_{L \cap \hat \mathbf{x}}$, and variables $\mathbf y$ are generated
following a flat distribution bounded within $L$.
A set of \emph{generator} variables $\mathbf{x}$ can then be completed by
the corresponding $\mathbf{y}$ variables without full simulation, but
relying on the joint multivariate distribution learnt
by the Density Estimation Tree.
\section{Summary and outlook}\label{sec:summary}
I discussed Density Estimation Tree algorithms as fast modelling tools for
high statistics problems characterized by a large number of correlated variables
and for which an approximated model is acceptable.
The fast training and integration capabilities make these algorithms of interest
for the high-demanding future of the High-Energy Physics experiments.
The examples discussed, which benefited from an active discussion within the
Particle Identification Group of the LHCb collaboration, explore cases where
the statistical features of huge samples have to be assessed in a time shorter than what
standard estimators would require.
In future, Density Estimation Trees could be sampled to train Regression Multivariate
Algorithms, such as Neural Networks, in order to smooth the response and
further speed up the query time,
at the cost of loosing its fast-integration properties.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
I thank Alberto Cassese, Anton Poluektov, and Marco Cattaneo
for the encouragements in developing this work and for the useful discussions
we had.
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
HTTP with TLS encryption prevents attacks that inspect HTTP payload and signaling. HTTP response size analysis is a well-known side-channel attack~\cite{hintz_fingerprinting_2002} that overcomes encrypted payload inspection by using eavesdropped sizes of web objects to identify web applications. Up to HTTP/1.1, the web client typically waits for the response to the current HTTP request before issuing the next request, making it straightforward to find the size of HTTP responses by tapping into the TCP/IP connection. With the deployment of HTTP/2.0~\cite{varvello_is_2016} and its pipelining and multiplexing mechanisms, most authors assume HTTP response size analysis attacks can be prevented. With request pipelining, clients no longer need to wait for the response to the current HTTP request to issue the next request. With response multiplexing, servers no longer need to wait for the current response to be finished to send the next response. Distinguishing web object sizes by eavesdropping TLS record sizes should thus be unfeasible.
Yet the extent to which pipelining and multiplexing actually hide HTTP response sizes on the Web has not been adequately investigated. The fact that these mechanisms exist and are deployed does not mean that they are used and that they are effective in hiding response sizes. Web content from a web page is often not pulled from the server at once and, if it is, HTTP signaling information may leak through TLS to help the attacker. This means that the privacy of regular web site users who will not have any particular reason for using anonymity tools like Tor~\cite{he_novel_2014} may be more at risk than what is believed and that the transition to HTTP/2.0 alone may not fully prevent this risk. This is especially relevant for the growing amount of traffic that goes through proxies and content delivery networks that share IP addresses between applications and for which a simple IP database lookup would not suffice for identifying web sites and applications.
In this paper we set out to help understand the effect of pipelining in hiding the size of web objects. The basis for this work is a set of HTTPS requests to the first 5k of Alexa's top 1M web site pages \cite{durumeric_analysis_2013}. For each web site page we collect a tcpdump capture for all incoming and outgoing traffic through the client's Ethernet interface and the HAR~\cite{odvarko2012http} log of HTTP requests and their responses as recorded by the browser. We use tcpdump 4.5.1, tshark 14.04, and Firefox 45.0.1 on Ubuntu 14.04 desktop Linux with Selenium python webdriver 2.53.1 and haralyzer 1.4.10 suites. We then extract TLS record sizes and estimate HTTP response sizes assuming 1) keep-alive, persistent TCP connections and 2) pipelining and multiplexing with unique TLS size response separator and distinct TLS record sizes for HTTP/2.0 response headers. Finally we match the estimated response sizes to the browser HAR response sizes and obtain HAR-TLS response size match results.
In the rest of this paper we start by characterizing the HAR data set that resulted from our Alexa's web site page requests. Then we describe in more detail our approach to estimate HTTP/2.0 response sizes from TLS records. HTTP/2.0 web servers pack HTTP responses differently and choose to focus on the type of web servers with most TCP connections. For these web servers we characterize our estimated HTTP/2.0 response sizes, describe the HAR-TLS estimated response size match results, and show the impact of pipelining in these results.
\section{Collected data set}
Each of the 5k Alexa's web site names was prepended with the "https://" prefix and this URL loaded into Firefox using Selenium's webdriver suite. The browser was only able to open 72\% of the web site URLs. The remaining web sites were either not active or not responding to HTTPS requests. Each web page site that responded with HTML and browser-side scripts triggers the browser to issue additional requests that are then rendered on the browser along side the main web site content. We analyzed HAR logs and found that we had recorded 328k responses: 51\% HTTPS and 18\% HTTP/2.0. We also found that less than 17\% web sites received only HTTPS additional responses, which means that for 83\% web sites part of the content that is rendered to the user is vulnerable to payload inspection attacks. Less then 7\% web sites received only HTTP/2.0 additional responses, which means that for 10\% we sites part of the content that is rendered to the user is vulnerable to directly observable response size side-channel attacks.
These numbers tell us that we should be concerned firstly about the 83\% web sites for which part of their rendered content is vulnerable to payload inspection, and secondly about the 10\% web sites for which part of their rendered content is vulnerable to directly observable response size side-channel attacks. In this paper we assume that the trend of increased use of HTTPS and HTTP/2.0 will continue~\cite{varvello_is_2016} and that this will address the two concerns above. Consequently we focus on HTTP/2.0 and its ability to deter response size side-channel attacks.
Additional web site requests in our data set are often served by the same web server. It is thus possible to characterize individual web servers according to their use of HTTPS and HTTP/2.0. Here we define a web server as a 3-tuple \texttt{(IP, port number, protocol)} where \texttt{IP} is the web server IP address, \texttt{port} is the TCP/IP port number (80 or 443), and \texttt{protocol} is either HTTP/1.1 or HTTP/2.0. We have responses from 20k web servers, 46\% of which are \texttt{(*, 443, HTTP/1.1)} and 6\% \texttt{(*, 443, HTTP/2.0)}. The top 10 web server response is at 5\% for responses from \texttt{(*, 443, HTTP/1.1)} web servers and at 34\% for \texttt{(*, 443, HTTP/2.0)} web servers. Top 7 HTTP/2.0 web server names by HTTP request count as reported by the web servers and logged in HAR is 'sffe': 16\%, '': 15\%, 'cloudflare-nginx': 14\%, 'cafe': 14\%, 'Golfe2': 8\%, 'adclick\_server': 6\%, 'nginx': 5\%.
\section{Estimating HTTP response sizes }
Our approach to estimate HTTP response sizes from TLS records has two parts. In the first part we address the feature in HTTP/1.1 and beyond that allows a TCP connection to be reused for multiple requests. We segment the TLS records of each TCP connection into sets of HTTP request-response sequences that are contained entirely in each segment. Our assumption in segmenting TCP connections is that the TLS records of ready-to-send HTTP responses are sent back-to-back. We look for gaps in the sequence of timestamps of these records and use these gaps to segment the TCP connections. In HTTP/1.1 a gap will exist between the timestamp of the last TLS record of the current response and the timestampt of the first TLS record of the next response. This gap is at least one round trip time, as the client has to wait until the the current response is completely received before sending the next request. More generically in order to include pipelining and response multiplexing are included, we take a gap in the back-to-back TLS record sequences from the server as indication that all requests sent by from the client and received by the server up to that point have been served. We declare a gap in the TCP connection when the difference between the timestamps of consecutive TLS records from the server is 1) larger than 0.5 seconds or 2) larger than 20 times the average back-to-back response gap from the server, normalized to a 1500 byte TLS record size.
In the second part of our approach we analyze the sets of HTTP request-response of the segmented TCP connections to compute response sizes. The basic keep-alive model does not consider pipelining and multiplexing and simply takes the sum of all TLS record sizes from the server on each segment of the TCP connection as an estimate of HTTP response size. model that considers pipelining and multiplexing to estimate HTTP response sizes relies on our intuition on the following three side-channel information that leak from TLS. 1) HTTP/2.0 signaling is visible through small-sized TLS records (less than 60 bytes) that indicate the beginning of an HTTPS connection or the beginning or end of an HTTP response. 2) Large HTTP responses generate back-to-back TLS records with either network ($\sim$ 1.5 kB) or TLS ($\sim$ 16 kB) MTUs. 3) Request and response headers are sent in their own TLS records, typically yielding record sizes smaller than the MTU. We use this information to estimate the start and finish times for HTTP requests and responses. With start and finish times it is possible to identify segments in the TLS record size sequences that contain entire responses that are not multiplexed and others that are entirely or only partially multiplexed. We sum all TLS record sizes to get an estimate of non-multiplexed responses and ignore multiplexed responses.
What are the specific TLS record sizes that can be used to determine start and finish times for requests and responses? After manually inspecting the sequence of TLS record sizes of the connections for the first few web site pages on Alexa's top web sites it is clear that the HTTP/2.0 data and signaling is encapsulated differently for different web server implementations. We would like to group web servers in types according to how they encapsulate HTTP/2.0 data and signaling. In order to do so, we use the first one to three small (<100 bytes) TLS record sizes sent by the server at the beginning of each HTTP/2.0 TCP connection and call this the web server type sequence. We found 21k HTTP/2.0 TCP connections and 1252 unique HTTP/2.0 web server IP addresses in our dataset. TLS handshaking has an application-layer protocol negotiation (ALNP) extension in which the type of application data is sent in clear text. We use this to establish if a TCP connection is being used for HTTP/2.0 or not. We define HTTP/2.0 web servers as a web server for which we can observe at least one HTTP/2.0 TCP connection.
The first observation regarding types of web servers is that all the connections to a given web server have the same initial type sequence. The second observation is that the top five type sequences account for more than 99\% of the HTTP/2.0 TCP connections and over 89\% of the HTTP/2.0 web servers. Figure \ref{webserver-types} shows the percentage of TCP connections and web servers for the first five type sequences. For each web server IP address found in the packet capture logs we find the server reported names on the HAR logs. We also report this information in Figure \ref{webserver-types} together with a whois lookup for the web servers IP addresses.
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\small
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.9]
\begin{axis}[
ybar,
ytick={0,20,40,60,80,100},
ymax = 100,
ymajorgrids=true,
xmajorgrids=true,
enlargelimits=0.10,
legend style={at={(1.33,0.3)},
anchor=north,legend columns=1, font=\footnotesize},
ylabel={Percentage},
symbolic x coords={Type 1,Type 2,Type 3, Type 4, Type 5},
xtick=data,
nodes near coords align={vertical},
]
\addplot [black, fill=gray] coordinates {(Type 1,69.5) (Type 2,16.2) (Type 3,8.4) (Type 4,2.9) (Type 5,2.9)};
\addplot [black, fill=lightgray] coordinates {(Type 1,18.0) (Type 2,1.8) (Type 3,68.0) (Type 4,1.0) (Type 5,0.9)};
\legend {TCP Connections,Web servers}
\end{axis}
\node [font=\small, anchor=west] (top) at (5.5,4) {Type 1: [51,37,33]};
\node [font=\small, anchor=west] (middle) at (5.5,3.5) {Type 2: [76,33,37]};
\node [font=\small, anchor=west] (middle) at (5.5,3) {Type 3: [64,33]};
\node [font=\small, anchor=west] (middle) at (5.5,2.5) {Type 4: [39,33,37]};
\node [font=\small, anchor=west] (middle) at (5.5,2) {Type 5: [76,33,41]};
\end{tikzpicture}
\vspace{1pt}
\small
\begin{tabular}{ | c | c | c | }
\hline
& whois & Reported names \\ \hline \hline
Type 1 & Google & "ssfe", "", "HTTP server (unknown)", \\ & & "safe", "Golfe2", "cafe", "xbfe", \\ & & "GSE", "gws", ... \\ \hline
Type 2 & Facebook & "", "proxygen" \\ \hline
Type 3 & Cloudflare, & "cloudfare-nginx", "nginx", "", \\ & Taobao, ... & "Tengine", ... \\ \hline
Type 4 & Twitter & "tsa\_f", "" \\ \hline
Type 5 & Facebook & "", "proxygen" \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{5pt}
\caption{Percentage of HTTP/2.0 TCP connections and web servers per type (top). Web server IP address whois lookup and web server names as reported to by server to browser (bottom).}
\label{webserver-types}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In this paper we focus on Type 1 servers that are responsible for most of the HTTP/2.0 TCP connections in our data set. Manual inspection of data from these servers allowed us to define the following assumptions for our model.
\begin{itemize}
\item HTTP request and response headers are sent in TLS records with sizes ranging from 70 to 350 bytes.
\item 41 byte-length TLS records from the server indicate that a response has finished.
\end{itemize}
The output of the estimation process is a list of sizes of estimated responses from each web server per web page site visited.
\section{Methodology}
The algorithm that allows us to determined the number of matched bytes and requests for each web server and each visited web page site is as follows. First we define a matrix with the byte difference between every estimated response and every HAR response. We attempt to match smaller positive entries in the matrix first. By requiring a positive entry we are making sure that the estimated response is larger than the HAR response. HAR response size is the size of the compressed HTTP response, which should be equal to the response size estimated from the TLS records or smaller if any padding occurs at the TLS layer. For the smallest positive entry we find at each iteration, we declare a match between the estimated response corresponding to the entry's row and to the HAR response corresponding to the entry's column, push that match into a list, and set all entries in that row and column of the matrix to 'NAN'. After the last iteration all entries in the matrix should be 'NAN'. We then remove matches whose difference between estimated response size and HAR response size are 1) 15\% or larger or 2) larger than 200 bytes.
The number of matched bytes and requests per web server and per web page site is then used to compute two performance metrics. These performance metrics are the ratio of matched bytes to bytes in the HAR logs and the ratio of matched responses to number of responses in the HAR logs. We measure the performance of our estimation over the set of requests that each HTTP/2.0 web server responds to when each web site page is visited. We compare the performance of our type 1 server model with that of the simple keep-alive model using empirical cumulative distributions over the set of $<$web server, web page site$>$ tuples.
\section{Results}
We obtained over 30k estimated HTTP/2.0 responses from type 1 servers with an average of 2 HTTP/2.0 requests per TCP connection. Over 9k out of the 30k estimated responses were pipelined and not multiplexed. We also found 1.5k sets of multiplexed responses corresponding to 4k out of 30k HTTP/2.0 responses.
We observed 218 type 1 web servers in our estimated HTTP/2.0 responses, out of which 140 provided more than one pipelined response and 83 at least one set of multiplexed responses. Figure \ref{per-ws-pipel-mux} shows the per web server distribution of responses normalized to the maximum response count for total, pipelined, and multiplexed responses. The similarity in the shape of these distributions suggests that although less frequent, pipelining and multiplexing occurs in the same proportion throughout the servers.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45 \textwidth]{results-pl-mux.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparing total, pipelined, and multiplexed per web server response distribution.}
\label{per-ws-pipel-mux}
\end{figure}
We found 143 type 1 web servers in the HAR records of our data set. These servers generated over 16.9k HTTP2/.0 responses. Out of these 16.9k responses, we found a match for 8.8k responses with the basic keep-alive model and for 12.0k with type 1 server model. This corresponds to an overall matching improvement of 3.3k responses. Regarding matched bytes the results are similar: matched 240 MB with the keep-alive model and 330 MB with the type 1 server model, corresponding to a 90 MB improvement. Out of the 16.9k responses, we have an improvement roughly from 50\% to 70\% matched responses with less than 15\% and 200 bytes TLS overhead.
What is the impact of pipelining in these improvements? We found that 1) 3.9k type 1 matched responses were pipelined, 2) 3.7k pipelined responses had a match with type 1 model and no match using the simple keep-alive model. This means that 94\% of the pipelined responses are new matches brought in by the type 1 server model. The impact of multiplexing is more difficult to ascertain as we do not estimate the size of the responses only how many. A statistical dependency study or a model for estimating multiplexed response sizes would be required to understand such an impact.
Figure \ref{results-ka-vs-type1} shows an overall improvement in matched bytes and requests for type 1 web server model compared to the keep-alive model. In particular we observe a 21.6\% to 3.8\% reduction of no matched bytes and no matched requests and a 22.4\% to 44.1\% increase of all matched bytes and all matched requests when comparing the type 1 web server model to the keep-alive model.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45 \textwidth]{results.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of keep-alive and type 1 server models.}
\label{results-ka-vs-type1}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
Our conclusions from this experiment are as follows: 1) the amount of pipelining observed is moderate ($\sim$ 30\%); 2) the amount of multiplexing is small ($\sim$ 13\%); 3) the use of TLS side-channel markers improves response matching; and 4) almost all pipelined responses could not be matched under simple model and can be matched with improved model.
Our recommendation is to engage into effectively using pipelining and request multiplexing, by limiting the effect of TLS side-channel information and increasing response multiplexing.
The main caveats of this work is whether these results hold for more extensive web page site data set and for other types of HTTP/2.0 web sites.
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
Liquid crystal phases have been studied extensively\cite{Onsager1949}, and have been found to have multiple technological applications. Their internal configuration can be easily manipulated with external fields or confining surfaces \cite{Lowe2012}, leading to uses as varied as in displays or sensors. Experiments by Jákli \textit{et al.}\cite{Jakli2003} and, more recently, by Cheng \textit{et al}.\cite{Chen2013}, show that in contrast to calamitic mesogens, bent-core liquid crystals can form long, stable fibers. These fibers, whose internal configuration consists of a spiral of smectic layers with well-aligned molecular dipoles, can be used as waveguides \cite{Fontana2009}.
Bailey \textit{et al.}\cite{Bailey2007} proposed a free energy model for such fibers as a function of the director orientation. By assuming a constant director orientation, these authors found the corresponding equilibrium states. Their model comprises three bulk contributions (Frank elasticity, layer-compression and electrostatic energies) and two surface terms (surface tension and divergence of molecular dipole orientation). P\'erez-Ortiz \textit{et al.}\cite{Perez-Ortiz2011} revisited this model using a variational approach and found that, in order to satisfy the boundary conditions inherent to such a system, there must exist a boundary layer with inhomogeneous director orientation. By assuming that the electrostatic contribution is small compared with the other energies, they linearized the Euler-Lagrange equations and solved them analytically, thereby showing that the boundary layer is about 100 nanometers thick.
Bauman \textit{et al.}\cite{Bauman2009} analyzed the stability of liquid-crystal fibers formed by bent-core mesogens using a generalization of a free energy model proposed by Bailey \textit{et al.} \cite{Bailey2007}: the fiber is described by concentric smectic layers, and the free energy is represented with a Landau expansion with orientational and strain elasticity, electric self interaction and dipolar divergence contributions, as well as surface tension. Assuming that the width of the smectic layers is small compared with the fiber radius, they proposed a criterion for the stability of the fibers: if the Frank energy is comparable to the energy for bending the smectic layer, then a circular fiber is stable.
To the best of our knowledge, however, past work has not considered the case when the electrostatic energy is of the same order of magnitude as other terms in the free energy, particularly when the director orientation is position dependent. This case is important because bent-core liquid crystals have relatively large spontaneous polarization $P_0$, as reported as early as 1991 by Niori et al.,\cite{Niori1996, Hird2005} and therefore large values of electrostatic energy density.
As we show in Section \ref{freeEnergyModel}, the ratio of the free energy densities associated to spontaneous polarization and Frank elasticity is of the order of $P_0^2 L_B^2/(\epsilon_0 K)$, where $L_B$ is a characteristic length for changes in the director, $\epsilon_0$ is the permittivity of vacuum and $K$ is a Frank elastic constant. Assuming the values $P_0$= 50 nC cm$^{-2}$ reported by Niori et al.,\cite{Niori1996} $L_B$ = 100 nm reported for the boundary layer by Pérez-Ortiz et al.,\cite{Perez-Ortiz2011} and a typical value $K = 10^{-11}$ N,\cite{Bailey2007} we find that the electrostatic energy density associated with $P_0$ is about thirty times larger than the elastic energy density. Even larger values of spontaneous polarization may be obtained using recently reported mesogens with polarized metallorganic complexes at the tip of their bent cores: Ohtani and coworkers reported a value $P_0$ = 1.08 $\mu$C cm$^{-2}$ for a bent-core liquid crystal synthetized with oxovanadium complexes.\cite{Ohtani2015}
In this work, we propose a field-theory Monte Carlo simulation where the degrees of freedom are provided by the director field. Using the fully nonlinear free energy model of {P\'erez-Ortiz} \textit{et al.}, we study the case when the electrostatic contribution cannot be neglected in comparison with the elastic or the layer compression terms.
We search for the equilibrium states, and find that they have boundary layers of widths comparable to those predicted by {P\'erez-Ortiz} \textit{et al.}
Building on that finding, Monte Carlo simulations are also used to identify the equilibrium states that occur for configurations where the free energy model is non-differentiable. Such configurations are necessarily missed by the Euler-Lagrange equation formulation. We find first-order transitions between metastable and stable equilibria of differentiable and non-differentiable character.
Finally, using values for the material parameters reported previously \cite{Bailey2007,Perez-Ortiz2011}, our simulations are used to predict the radii of fibers in equilibrium in the same range as those observed experimentally. These radii are highly sensitive to the coefficient of the electrostatic energy, $c'$, in the sense that doubling the value of this parameter leads to an increment of one order of magnitude of the equilibrium radius.
\section{Free energy model}
\label{freeEnergyModel}
From the experiments of Chen \textit{et al.} \cite{Chen2013}, we take the structure of the LC fiber to be that of a rolled smectic layer. Thus, we model the fiber as a cylinder having an internal spiral arrangement (see Fig.~\ref{Fig1}~a). The fiber has an external radius $R_f$ and the topological defect at the center is taken to have a radius $R_c \ll R_f$ (see Fig~\ref{Fig1}~b). By following a radial trajectory from the center to the surface of the fiber, we encounter a series of smectic layers. Making the approximation that the director orientation changes very slowly with the azimuthal coordinate ($\phi$) in comparison with the radial one ($r$), we take the director's orientation $\theta$ to be a function of $r$ alone, just as proposed by Perez-Ortiz \textit{et al.} \cite{Perez-Ortiz2011}.
Our model for the free energy is similar to that of Bailey \textit{et al.} \cite{Bailey2007} but without the assumption of a uniform orientation field. We describe our free energy model in terms of the orientation field of the liquid crystal through three orthonormal vectors: $\pmb{n}$ is the director, $\pmb{p}$ is the molecular dipole vector and $\pmb{m}= \pmb{n} \times \pmb{p}$. This orthonormal basis is defined by the following parameterization:
\begin{eqnarray}
\pmb{n} &=& \cos {\theta} \ \hat{\pmb{R}} \ + \ \sin{\theta} \ \hat{\pmb{\phi}}, \nonumber \\
\pmb{p} &=& \sin{\theta} \ \sin{\alpha} \ \hat{\pmb{R}} \ - \ \cos{\theta} \ \sin{\alpha} \ \hat{\pmb{\phi}} \ + \ \cos{\alpha} \ \hat{\pmb{z}
}, \\
\pmb{m} &=& \sin{\theta} \ \cos{\alpha} \ \hat{\pmb{R}} \ - \ \cos{\theta} \ \cos{\alpha} \ \hat{\pmb{\phi}} \ - \ \sin{\alpha} \ \hat{\pmb{z}}, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\hat{\pmb{R}}$, $\hat{\pmb{\phi}},$and $\hat{\pmb{z}}$ are the cylindrical-coordinates orthonormal basis. These vectors are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig1}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig1}
\end{center}
\caption{ (a) We describe the structure of a liquid crystal fiber using a cylindrical coordinate system. (b) A cross section of the fiber shows the external and core radii and the spiral smectic layer. (c) At each position within the fiber, the orientation of mesogens is defined by the director $\pmb{n}$ and the polarization vector $\pmb{p}$ (parametrized by angles $\theta$ and $\alpha$, respectively).}
\label{Fig1}
\end{figure}
As mentioned above, we model the liquid crystal fiber in a field-theory framework, using the director $\theta(r)$. The fiber is described through the interplay of three bulk free energy contributions plus two surface terms:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{F} = \int_\Omega f_\text{N} + f_\text{L} + f_\text{E} \ \text{d}V + \int_{\partial\Omega} f_\text{S} + f_\text{D} \ \text{d}S,
\end{equation}
where the volumetric free-energy densities $f_\text{N}$, $f_\text{L}$ and $f_\text{E}$ correspond to orientational elasticity, layer compression elasticity, and dielectric contributions, respectively. The surface free-energy densities $f_\text{S}$ and $f_\text{D}$ model the effect of anisotropic surface tension and a contribution associated with inhomogeneities of polarization direction of the LC. These terms have been discussed by Bailey \textit{et al}. \cite{Bailey2007} and P\'{e}rez-Ortiz \textit{et al.} \cite{Perez-Ortiz2011} and only a brief account is included in what follows.
\subsection{Bulk free-energy densities}
Since we do not assume that the orientation of the LC is homogeneous inside the fiber, we have to consider the effect of distortions in the orientation. For this, we use the Frank-Oseen expression for liquid crystal elasticity, in terms of spatial derivatives of the director \cite{deGennes1993,Yokoyama1997},
\begin{equation}
f_\text{N}= {K_{11}\over 2} \left( \pmb{\nabla} \cdot \pmb{n} \right)^2 + {K_{22} \over 2} \left[ \left( \pmb{\nabla} \times \pmb{n} \right) \cdot \pmb{n} \right]^2 + {K_{33}\over 2} \left[ \pmb{n} \times \left( \pmb{\nabla} \times \pmb{n} \right) \right]^2.
\end{equation}
These terms consider splay, twist and bend modes and the coefficients $K_{ii}$ are the respective elastic constants. Using the one-constant approximation, $K_{11}=K_{22}=K_{33}=K$, in cylindrical coordinates the Frank-Oseen density simplifies to
\begin{equation}
f_\text{N}= {K\over 2} \left[ {1 \over R^2} + \left( {\text{d} \theta \over \text{d} R } \right)^2 \right].
\end{equation}
We follow Bailey \textit{et al.} and P\'{e}rez-Ortiz \textit{et al.} and study the bulk free-energy of the fiber by neglecting the contribution from the defect-core region \cite{Bailey2007}, which has a size of the order of the coherence length $\delta=\sqrt{K/B}$ (for our system, $\delta=10$~nm) \cite{Perez-Ortiz2011}.
As the mesogens in a given layer change orientation, the layer width will also change. We model the layer-compression free energy density through the layer's strain ($\gamma$) produced when the width changes from its value $L_0$ in the flat-layer smectic to a value $L$ inside the fiber,
\begin{eqnarray}
f_\text{L} = {B \gamma^2 \over 2} = {B \over 2} \left( L- L_0 \over L_0 \right)^2,
\end{eqnarray}
where $B$ is the layer compression modulus. The orientation dependent width $L(\theta,\alpha)$ has been estimated by Bailey \textit{et al}. in terms of the local orthonormal vectors $\mathbf{n}, \mathbf{p}$ and $\mathbf{m}$ for the liquid crystal \cite{Bailey2007}:
\begin{eqnarray}
L\left(\theta, \alpha \right) = L_3 |\cos \theta | + L_2 | \cos \alpha \sin \theta | + L_1 | \sin \alpha \sin \theta |.
\label{LayerWidth}
\end{eqnarray}
The constants $L_1$, $L_2$ and $L_3$ correspond to the width, depth and height of a rectangular box encasing a bent-core mesogen, as shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig2}.
For the flat-layer width, we introduce the flat-layer orientation angles $\Theta_0$ and $\alpha_0$ and substitute them in Eq.(\ref{LayerWidth}):
\begin{eqnarray}
L_0= L(\Theta_0, \alpha_0)= L_3 | \cos \Theta_0| + L_2 | \cos \alpha_0 \sin\Theta_0| + L_1 | \sin \alpha_0 \sin\Theta_0|.
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig2}
\end{center}
\caption{The layer-compression free energy is determined by the orientation of the liquid crystal in the fiber. It has been parametrized by Bailey \textit{et al}.\cite{Bailey2007} in terms of the width ($L_1$), depth ($L_2$) and height ($L_3$) of a box enclosing the bent-core mesogens.}
\label{Fig2}
\end{figure}
When mesogens pack parallel to each other inside the layers, a spontaneous polarization $\pmb{P}_s$ is produced in addition to the polarization proportional to the electric field. Then, the constitutive relation for the electric displacement is
\begin{eqnarray}
\pmb{D} = \pmb{P}_s + \epsilon_0 \; \mbox{\sf\straightepsilon} \cdot \pmb{E},
\end{eqnarray}
where
$ \mbox{\sf\straightepsilon} = \mbox{\straightepsilon}_1\; \pmb{n} \pmb{n} + \mbox{\straightepsilon}_2\; \pmb{m} \pmb{m} + \mbox{\straightepsilon}_3 \; \pmb{p} \pmb{p}$ is the dielectric tensor of the LC.
The free energy density for such a dielectric has been discussed by Landau \textit{et al}.\cite{Landau1984} and (at constant charge) it is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
f_\text{E} = {1\over 2} \epsilon_0 \; \pmb{E} \cdot \mbox{\sf\straightepsilon} \cdot \pmb{E}.
\label{DielectricFreeEnergyDensityFromE}
\end{eqnarray}
From $\pmb{\nabla} \cdot \pmb{D}=0$ and $\pmb{\nabla} \times \pmb{E} = 0$, and assuming that the spontaneous polarization is parallel to the molecular dipole vector $\pmb{p}$,
\begin{equation}
\pmb{P}_s = P_0 \; \pmb{p},
\end{equation}
one can find the electric field as \cite{Perez-Ortiz2011}:
\begin{eqnarray}
E = - {P_0 \sin{\alpha} \over R \ \epsilon_0 \; \epsilon_{rr} } \int_{R_c}^{R_f} \left[ {\partial \over \partial R}\left(R \sin{\theta} \right) \right] \; \text{d}R = - {P_0 \sin{\alpha} \over \epsilon_0 \epsilon_{rr} } \sin{\theta},
\label{ElectricField}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\epsilon_{rr}$ is a component of the dielectric tensor in cylindrical coordinates,
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon_{rr} = \epsilon_1 \cos^2{\theta} + \left( \epsilon_2 \cos^2{\alpha} + \epsilon_3 \sin^2{\alpha} \right) \sin^2{\theta},
\end{eqnarray}
written in terms of the eigenvalues $\epsilon_i$ of that tensor. In Eq.(\ref{ElectricField}) we have assumed that the contribution to the electrostatic free energy in the core region ($R_c$ in Fig \ref{Fig1} b) is so small that we can extend the integration down to zero (i.e., $R_c \rightarrow 0$).
Substitution of Eq.(\ref{ElectricField}) into Eq.(\ref{DielectricFreeEnergyDensityFromE}) yields the final expression for the electrostatic free-energy density of the dielectric as a function of the LC orientation:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_\text{E}(\theta,\alpha) = {1 \over 2} {P_0^2 \sin^2{\alpha} \over \epsilon_0 \epsilon_{rr}} \sin^2{\theta}.
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Surface free-energy densities}
We include in our model the energy due to the interfacial tension at the surface of the fiber,
\begin{eqnarray}
f_\text{S} = \pmb {R} \cdot \mbox{\sf\textsigma} \cdot \pmb{R}.
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $\mbox{\sf\textsigma}$ is the biaxial surface-tension tensor:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{\sf\textsigma} = \sigma_1 \pmb{n} \pmb{n} + \sigma_2 \pmb{m} \pmb{m} + \sigma_3 \pmb{p} \pmb{p},
\end{eqnarray}
so the surface free-energy due to interfacial tension is
\begin{eqnarray}
f_\text{S}\left(\theta(R_f), \alpha \right) = \sigma_1 \cos^2 \theta + \left( \sigma_2 \cos^2 \alpha + \sigma_3 \sin^2 \alpha \right) \sin^2 \theta.
\end{eqnarray}
Inhomogeneities in the polarization direction give rise to a bulk free energy with two contributions: the first one is of elastic origin and is due to packing effects of the mesogens. The second arises from electrostatic energy due to inhomogeneous spontaneous polarization \cite{Bailey2007}:
\begin{eqnarray}
f^\text{bulk}_\text{D}(\theta, \alpha) = c'\left( \pmb{\nabla} \cdot \pmb{p} \right) + c'' \left( \pmb{\nabla} \cdot \pmb{P}_s \right).
\end{eqnarray}
The constants $c'$ and $c''$ correspond to the elastic and electrostatic contributions, respectively. Again, by assuming that $\pmb{P}_s$ is parallel to $\pmb{p}$, one can integrate this bulk density over the volume of the fiber to obtain a surface density free-energy term \cite{Perez-Ortiz2011}:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_\text{D}\left(\theta(R_f), \alpha \right)= \left( c' +c'' \ P_0 \right) \sin{\alpha} \sin{\theta(R_f)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Monte Carlo simulation}
For the simulation, we write the free energy in non-dimensional form:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{F}^*= {\mathcal{F}\over 2 \pi L_z \ K}&=& \int_{r_c}^{1} \left[ f^*_\text{N} +A_\text{L} f^*_\text{L} +A_\text{E} f^*_\text{E} \right] \text{d}r + A_\text{S}f^*_\text{S} +A_\text{D} f^*_\text{D} ,
\label{IntEneAdi}
\end{eqnarray}
where $L_z$ is the fiber length, $r= R/R_f$, four constants are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
A_\text{L}&=& B R^2_f / K\\
A_\text{E}&=& P_0^2 R_f^2/(\epsilon_0 K)\\
A_\text{S}&=& \sigma_1 R_f /K \\
A_\text{D}&=& \left( c'+c''P_0 \right) R_f/K ,
\end{eqnarray}
and the free energy densities by
\begin{eqnarray}
f^*_\text{N}(\theta)&=& {1 \over 2} \left( \left( { \text{d} \; \theta\over \text{d} \; r}\right)^2 + {1 \over r^2} \right) \\
f^*_\text{L}(\theta)&=& {1 \over 2} \left( {L\left(\theta,\alpha\right)\over L_0} -1 \right)^2 \\
f^*_\text{E}(\theta)&=& {1 \over 2} {\sin^2{\alpha} \over \epsilon_{rr}} \sin^2{\theta} \\
f^*_\text{S}&=& \cos^2{\theta} + \left({\sigma_2 \over \sigma_1} \cos^2{\alpha} + {\sigma_3 \over \sigma_1} \sin^2{\alpha} \right) \sin^2{\theta}\\
f^*_\text{D}&=& \sin{\alpha} \sin{\theta}.
\end{eqnarray}
By assuming cylindrical symmetry, we solve for $\theta(r)$ on a one-dimensional mesh with $N= 61$ or $N=81$ nodes along the radial coordinate. The mesh starts one coherence length away from the center and ends at the surface of the fiber. Since we anticipate that $\theta(r)$ varies slowly away from the fiber surface, we place half of the nodes equidistantly between the surface and 15 coherence lengths below it. The other half is distributed equidistantly in the last 15 coherence lengths. We then estimate numerically the integral in (\ref{IntEneAdi}) by the sum
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{F}^* \approx \sum_{i=1}^N \left( f^*_\text{N}(\theta_i) +A_\text{L} f^*_\text{L}(\theta_i) +A_\text{E} f^*_\text{E} \right) r_i \Delta r_i + A_S f^*_S + A_D f^*_D,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\theta_i = \theta(r_i)$ and $r_i$ is the location of the $i$-th node.
The simulations were started by setting all $\theta_i$ to a single value, as described below. We then iterate Metropolis Monte Carlo steps as follows: from the old configuration, $\theta^o$, we select with uniform probability the value at the $j$-th node, $\theta_j^n$. An update is then proposed to a new value:
\begin{equation}
\theta_j^n = \theta_j^o + \Delta \left( \xi - 0.5 \right),
\end{equation}
where $\xi$ is a random number (distributed uniformly between zero and one) and $\Delta$ is a parameter that controls the maximum increment to $\theta_j^o$. The new value is accepted with probability\cite{Metropolis1953}
\begin{equation}
P_\text{acc} = \text{min} \left(1, e^{-\beta^* \Delta \mathcal{F^*}} \right),
\end{equation}
where $\Delta \mathcal{F}^*$ is the difference of free energies between the new and original configurations:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta \mathcal{F}^* = \mathcal{F}^*\left[ \theta^n \right] - \mathcal{F}^*\left[ \theta^o \right],
\end{eqnarray}
For each simulation, constant $\Delta$ was chosen so that acceptance of the proposed configuration was between 20\% and 50\% \cite{Frenkel2001}. By changing the value of Metropolis parameter $\beta^*$, we implemented a simulated annealing method \cite{Kirkpatrick1983,Londono-Hurtado2015}. In a typical simulation, we iterate the Metropolis MC steps, and every 10 million of them we anneal the system. The results were analyzed with Mathematica 8.0 \cite{Wolfram2010}.
\section{Structural transition from an homogeneous-bulk estimate}
Prior to our simulations, we studied the behavior of the non-dimensional bulk free energy as a function of the constant value of a uniform orientation field, $\theta(r)= \theta_\text{bulk}$, for two cases: first, by changing the parameter $\Theta_0$ of flat-layer orientation at fixed external radius $R_f$, and then by changing $R_f$ at fixed $\Theta_0$.
Figure~\ref{EneTheAnalytic} shows the bulk free energy for several values of the flat-layer orientation $\Theta_0 = 0.000,\; 0.628,\; 0.726,\; 0.785$, for constant external radius $R_f= 1.0 \; \mu$m. For small values of $\Theta_0$, there exists only a minimum at $\theta_\text{bulk}=0$. This minimum is non-differentiable, due to the absolute value in the layer compression term. Since the derivative is not defined at the origin, it cannot be found by setting it to zero. As one increases the value of $\Theta_0$, the bulk free energy acquires two additional minima. They are metastable with respect to the non-differentiable minimum until $\Theta_0$ reaches the transition value 0.726. For larger values of $\Theta_0$, the stable minimum is the one with $\theta_\text{bulk} > 0$. Since the change in the value of the stable minimum at the transition is discontinuous, this model predicts a first-order transition.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig3}
\end{center}
\caption{The volumetric free energy $F^*_\text{Vol}$ of a liquid crystal fiber as a function of the bulk orientation $\theta_\text{bulk}$ displays a first-order transition, depending on the angle $\Theta_0$ corresponding to the flat-layer orientation of the LC. For $\Theta_0$=0 (solid line) the free energy has a single minimum at $\theta_\text{bulk}$=0 but for larger values other minima appear. At $\Theta_0=0.628$ (dashed line) the origin is a stable minimum, but there is a first-order transition at $\Theta_0 = 0.726$ (dot-dashed line). At $\Theta_0 = 0.785$ (dotted line), the state with $\theta_\text{bulk} > 0$ is the stable one.
For clarity, the curves have been shifted up by 250, 500 and 750 for the three larger values of $\Theta_0$, respectively.}
\label{EneTheAnalytic}
\end{figure}\
There is also a first-order transition that depends on the external radius of the fiber; in our simulations, we are able to set specific values of the fiber radius, even if this may be difficult to achieve experimentally. In order to show the transition, Fig.~\ref{EneRadAnalytic} displays the behavior of the bulk free energy (at fixed flat-layer orientation $\Theta_0= 0.691$) for the external radii $R_f= 170, \; 672, \; 900$ nm. As before, we observe three minima and the bulk free energy is non-differentiable at $\theta_\text{bulk}=0$. When the radius is small, the stable minimum is that for $\theta_\text{bulk} > 0$, but there is a transition when $R_f= $ 789~nm and, for larger values, the stable minimum is that with $\theta_\text{bulk} = 0$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig4}
\end{center}
\caption{ The volumetric free energy $\mathcal{F}^*_\text{vol.}$ of the fiber, as a function of the bulk orientation $\theta_\text{bulk}$, shows another first-order transition when one changes the external radius $R_f$ while keeping $\Theta_0=0.691$ fixed. For small radii, such as $R_\text{f}=200$~nm (solid line) the stable minimum occurs at positive $\theta_\text{bulk}$; for larger values (e.g. $R_\text{f}=900$ nm, dashed line) the stable minimum is at the origin. The transition is located at $R_f= 789$ (dot-dashed line).
}
\label{EneRadAnalytic}
\end{figure}\
\section{Structural transition from Monte Carlo simulation }
In our Monte Carlo simulations we allow for non-uniform fields $\theta(r)$ and take into account both the bulk and surface terms in the free energy. We set the material parameters to the values given in Table~\ref{Tabla1}, taken from Bailey et al.\cite{Bailey2007} and P\'erez-Ortiz et al.\cite{Perez-Ortiz2011}.
\begin{table}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c c l }
\hline \hline
\ \ \ \ Symbol \ \ \ \ & \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Value \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ & Parameter \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \hline
$\Theta_0$ & $0\le\Theta_0 \le \pi/4$ & Flat-layer orientation \\
$\alpha_0$ & $0$ & Flat-layer polarization angle \\
$\alpha$ & $-\pi/2$ & Polarization angle \\
$R_c$ & $5.0$ nm & Core radius \\
$K$ & $10^{-11}$ N & Elastic constant \\
$B$ & $10^{5}$ Pa & Layer compression modulus \\
$L_1$ & $1.5$ nm & Medium axis of mesogens \\
$L_2$ & $0.5$ nm & Short axis of mesogens \\
$L_3$ & $5.0$ nm & Long axis of mesogens \\
$P_0$ & $10^{-3}$ C m$^{-2}$ & Spontaneous polarization \\
$c'$ & $0.017$ N/m & Elastic Inh. of dipole direction constant \\
$c''$ & $11.2$ N m C$^{-1}$ & Electric Inh. of dipole direction constant \\
$\epsilon_1$ & $7$ & Dielectric constant in direction $\pmb{n}$ \\
$\epsilon_2$ & $10$ & Dielectric constant in direction $\pmb{m}$ \\
$\epsilon_3$ & $12$ & Dielectric constant in direction $\pmb{p}$ \\
$\sigma_1$ & $0.026$ N m$^{-1}$ & Surface tension in direction $\pmb{n}$ \\
$\sigma_2$ & $0.024$ N m$^{-1}$ & Surface tension in direction $\pmb{m}$ \\
$\sigma_3$ & $0.025$ N m$^{-1}$ & Surface tension in direction $\pmb{p}$ \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{The parameters for the liquid crystal used in our simulations are taken from the works of Bailey et al.\cite{Bailey2007} and P\'erez-Ortiz et al.\cite{Perez-Ortiz2011}.}
\label{Tabla1}
\end{table}
\subsection{Structural transition with the flat-layer orientation $\Theta_0$}
In order to test for the first transition, we run simulations at constant radius $R_f=1.0 \mu$m and vary $\Theta_0$. At $\Theta_0= 0.785$, we had originally expected a stable state with $\theta(r) >0$ and a metastable state with $\theta(r) =0$. Therefore, we initialized the system to the uniform field $\theta(r)=0$ and tracked the total free energy of the system.
We observed that indeed the system adopts one of two configurations: the first one tends to $\theta_\text{bulk} = 0.000 \pm 0.001$ as $r \rightarrow 0$, the other tends to $\theta_\text{bulk}=0.977 \pm 0.001$ (see Fig.~\ref{EneThe25}a). Both configurations display boundary layers. The first configuration has higher free energy than the second, as shown in Fig.~\ref{EneThe25}b, and therefore it is confirmed to be metastable with respect to the latter.
At first, since the system was initialized to $\theta(r)=0$ and $\beta^*= 2\times 10^3$, the system adopted the metastable configuration. The stable configuration was obtained through an annealing procedure, by temporarily decreasing the Metropolis parameter ($\beta^*=2$) until the system abandoned the metastable state, and then resetting it to its original value. The long-dashed and solid lines in Fig.~\ref{EneThe25}b are averages over the metastable and stable states, respectively, over the corresponding plateaus displayed in Fig.~\ref{EneThe25}b.
There is an additional indication of the presence of the stable state in the bulk free energy: when the system is in the metastable state with $\theta_\text{bulk} = 0.000 \pm 0.001$, the boundary layer that goes continuously from zero to $\pi/2$ shows a kink as it passes through the stable-mimimum value $0.977$. This is because the mesh nodes with values close to the stable minimum are less likely to change when subjected to the Metropolis criterion.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig5a}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig5b}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig5c}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig5d}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig5e}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig5f}
\end{center}
\caption{Monte Carlo simulations of the LC fiber show a first-order transition with the flat-layer orientation angle $\Theta_0$ between orientational structures with zero and positive $\theta_\text{bulk}$: (a) at $\Theta_0 = 0.785$, the configuration with $\theta_\text{bulk}=0$ is metastable and that with $\theta_\text{bulk} > 0$ is stable (see b); (c) at $\Theta_0 = 0.760$ both states are stable, since they have the same free energy (see d); and (e) at $\Theta_0 = 0.628$, the first state has become stable and the second metastable (see f). The radius of the fiber was kept fixed at $R_f = 1 \mu$m. In (a) and (c) the boundary layer of the metastable states display a kink as a stable value of $\theta_\text{bulk}$ is crossed, but no kink is visible in (e) since no stable value is crossed.
}
\label{EneThe25}
\end{figure}\
We next simulated the case with $\Theta_0 =0.628$, where a stable state was expected with $\theta(r) =0 $ and a metastable state with $\theta(r) > 0 $. Initializing the system to the uniform field $\theta(r)=1.0$ and $\beta^*=5 \times 10^3$, we observed again two different equilibrium configurations: the first one tends to $\theta_\text{bulk}=0.000 \pm 0.001$ away from the surface, the second tends to $\theta_\text{bulk} = 0.726 \pm 0.001$ (see Fig.~\ref{EneThe25}e). These values are close to the minima estimated solely from the bulk free energy: 0 and $0.776$, respectively. Despite the presence of boundary layers, $\theta_\text{bulk}$ in the simulation differs less than 7\% from the value predicted from the homogeneous-bulk approximation. This indicates that the surface effects are very short ranged and they do not affect the fiber interior too much.
Since the simulation was initialized to $\theta(r)=1.0$, the system adopted the metastable configuration first. Again, the stable configuration was obtained with an annealing procedure, by temporarily decreasing $\beta^*=1.5 \times 10^2$ until the system abandoned the metastable state, and then resetting it to its original value. In Fig.~\ref{EneThe25}e we show a snapshot of the orientation field as it transits from the metastable state to the stable one; since the MC simulation is based on local changes to the values of the orientation field, we observe that some nodes in the simulation mesh overcome the energy barrier and then the transition propagates as a wave.
We located the transition point in the MC simulations by requiring that the free energies of the coexisting minima be equal. We found the value $\Theta_0=0.760$, which is near to the homogenous-bulk estimate $\Theta_0=0.726$. Figure~\ref{EneThe25}c shows the two coexisting states at $\Theta_0=0.760$ and $\beta^*=5 \times 10^3$: the first one starts close to zero and then develops a boundary layer. The second state was found by initializing with the uniform field $\theta(r)=1.0$; it tends to the bulk value $0.942 \pm 0.001$ away from its boundary layer. Only the boundary layer of the first state shows a kink, since it is the only one that has to pass through the other minimum to reach its value at the surface.
\subsection{Structural transition with the external radius $R_f$}
Figure~\ref{SimRad020} shows the configurations obtained by Monte Carlo simulations (at constant flat-layer orientation $\Theta_0 = 0.691$) confirming the presence of stable and metastable states on both sides of the first-order transition, as a function of the external radius of the fiber.
For the larger radius $R_f = 900$~nm, we started the simulation with a uniform field $\theta(r) = 1.0$ and $\beta^*=5 \times 10^3$. At first, the system stayed in a metastable state with $\theta_\text{bulk}=0.873 \pm 0.001$ but after annealing (with $\beta^*=2$) it reached the stable configuration with $\theta_\text{bulk}= 0.000 \pm 0.001$.
For the smallest radius, 200 nm, we initialized to the uniform field $\theta(r)=0.0$ and $\beta^*=1 \times 10^4$ and found a state with $\theta_\text{bulk} = 0$. Then, by temporarily decreasing $\beta^*$ to $2\times 10^2$ in the annealing procedure, the system changed to the stable state with $\theta_\text{bulk} = 0.873 \pm 0.001$. Analysis of the free energies of both states shows that the first one is only metastable.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig6a}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig6b}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig6c}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig6d}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig6e}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig6f}
\end{center}
\caption{
Monte Carlo simulations of the LC fiber also show a first-order transition with the fiber radius $R_f$ between orientational structures with zero and positive $\theta_\text{bulk}$: (a) at $R_f = 900$~nm, the configuration with $\theta_\text{bulk}=0$ is stable and that with $\theta_\text{bulk} > 0$ is metastable (see b); (b) at $R_f = 0.789$~nm both states have the same free energy; and (c) at $R_f = 200$~nm, the first state has become metastable and the second stable (see f). The flat-layer orientation angle $\Theta_0 = 0.691$ was kept fixed. Again, in (b) and (c) the boundary layers display a kink as a stable value of $\theta_\text{bulk}$ is crossed, but no kink is visible in (a) since no stable value is crossed.
}
\label{SimRad020}
\end{figure}
We located the transition in the simulations at $R_f=255$ nm, which is far from the value $R_f=789$ nm obtained by neglecting the surface contribution. This is because the surface contribution becomes increasingly important for small radii, as is the case at the transition. The two coexisting states were found by initializing to two different conditions: $\theta(r)=0.0$ and $\beta^*= 1\times 10^4$ for the state with $\theta_\text{bulk}=0.000 \pm 0.001$; $\theta(r)=1.0$ and $\beta^*= 1\times 10^4$ for the configuration with $\theta_\text{bulk}=0.873 \pm 0.001$.
Finally, we found the equilibrium radius that corresponds to a fixed value of the flat-layer orientation $\Theta_0$, by tracking the stable states of a succession of simulations with increasing radii, using the material parameters previously used by P\'erez-Ortiz et al.\cite{Perez-Ortiz2011} and Bailey et al.\cite{Bailey2007} Figure~\ref{Fig7} shows that the total free energy of the stable states displays a definite minimum as a function of the external radius $R_f$, corresponding to an equilibrium radius of 2.37~$\mu$m. This value is within the the range of reported experimental observations \cite{Jakli2003,Chen2013}.
By repeating the sequence of simulations with a different value of the parameter $c'$, we found that the equilibrium radius is particularly sensitive to the surface free energy due to inhomogeneities in the polarization. A doubling of $c'$ yields a tenfold increment of the equilibrium radius: specifically, going from $c'= 0.017$ N/m to 0.040 N/m results in a change of $R_f$ from 2.37 $\mu$m to 22 $\mu$m. From these observations, we predict that changes in the surface tension may also affect greatly the equilibrium radius.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,height=!]{Fig7}
\end{center}
\caption{The free energy of the stable equilibrium states from our simulations, as a function of the external radius $R_f$, show a minimum at $R_f~=~2.37~\mu$m, when the physical parameters of the liquid crystal are assumed within their experimental ranges \cite{Bailey2007,Perez-Ortiz2011} (see Table \ref{Tabla1}). Thus, we can recover the experimentally observed size of the LC fibers. Error bars indicate the standard error of the free energy in each simulation.}
\label{Fig7}
\end{figure}\
\section{Conclusion}
In this work we presented field-theory Monte Carlo simulations using a free energy model with both bulk and surface contributions. We confirmed that the equilibrium configurations display a boundary layer of about 15 coherence lengths as well as a largely constant plateau, as predicted by {P\'erez-Ortiz} \textit{et al.}\cite{Perez-Ortiz2011}.
We analyzed the bulk free energy and found that it predicts a first-order transition for the director orientation, both as a function of the flat-layer angle
$\Theta_0$ and the fiber radius $R_f$. We confirmed this with our Monte Carlo method and identified a perturbing effect of the stable minima on the boundary layers of coexisting or metastable configurations.
Both stable and metastable equilibrium configurations can be used as inputs for models of the propagation of light along the LC fibers.
A straightforward generalization of our Monte Carlo methodology is to introduce a second orientation field, $\alpha(r)$ so that the director no longer is confined to planes perpendicular to the fiber axis. This would enable one to address escaped configurations \cite{deGennes1993} that lack central defects.
Regarding defects, our present model cannot describe the behavior of the LC at their core because of the divergence of Frank elasticity. However, it would be possible to include the defects by expressing the bulk free energy in terms of the tensor order parameter ({\bf Q}), as in the model proposed by Mukherjee \cite{Mukherjee2004} for bent-core smectics in the bulk and proposing the corresponding surface energy terms.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
N. Atzin acknowledges the support from Universidad Aut\'{o}noma Metropolitana for a Ph.D. scholarship.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.